NEW ITEMS
Meeting of the
County Board Room,
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * *
PROPOSED ORDINANCE
ITEM #1
BOBBIE L. STEELE and ROBERTO MALDONADO,
Co-Sponsored by
JERRY BUTLER, EARLEAN COLLINS, ELIZABETH ANN DOODY
GORMAN, GREGG GOSLIN,
CARL R. HANSEN, JOSEPH MARIO
ANTHONY J. PERAICA, MIKE QUIGLEY, PETER N.
SILVESTRI, DEBORAH SIMS
and LARRY SUFFREDIN,
PROPOSED ORDINANCE
AN ORDINANCE CREATING AN EMPLOYMENT
DEMONSTRATION
PILOT PROJECT FOR FIRST TIME NONVIOLENT
OFFENDERS ENTITLED
“THE
WHEREAS,
there are now more than 11,000 persons incarcerated in the
WHEREAS, the majority of individuals currently incarcerated
have committed nonviolent offenses; and
WHEREAS, the majority of these individuals upon release return
to communities within
WHEREAS, there are currently 425,000 formerly incarcerated
individuals former offenders in
WHEREAS, there are approximately 30,000 inmates scheduled to be
released from IDOC institutions this year with more than 60% returning to Cook
County; and
WHEREAS, currently there is a 44% recidivism rate for former
offenders released from state correctional facilities in
WHEREAS, access to livable wage employment has proven to be a
key factor in reducing the re-commission of crime and the rate of recidivism;
and
WHEREAS, the unemployment rate among former incarcerated
individuals who are county residents is higher than the general population in
large part due to the social stigma of being an ex-offender, unfair employment
discrimination, and the lack of access to legal employment opportunities,
education and vocational training within sectors of government and private
industry due to current policies; and
WHEREAS, government should be an exemplar to private industry
in regards to providing equal opportunity for qualified individuals seeking
employment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, that the Cook County Board of
Commissioners shall enact the following ordinance to establish and implement a
Re-entry Employment Demonstration Pilot Program for 150 adults and 50 youth who
are former offenders and residents of the County to facilitate more access to
Cook County government employment opportunities and positions with private
sector employers who secure contracts from Cook County as a strategy for
increasing public safety and reducing recidivism.
PROPOSED ORDINANCE continued
ITEM #1 cont’d
Section 1-1 This Ordinance shall be known as the “Cook
County Re-entry Employment Project Ordinance.”
Applicability
Section 1-2 (a) This
Ordinance shall establish the provision for and control of the issuance of
Certificates of Good Conduct and Rehabilitation by first time nonviolent
offenders by the Cook County Board of Commissioners.
(b) This
Ordinance shall direct the Review Panel and the Cook County Board of
Commissioners on how to provide access to employment within Cook County
government and private sector employers who secure contracts from Cook County
government for program participants who are nonviolent first time former offenders.
Severability
Section 1-3 If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence or
clause of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person is for any
reason deemed to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not
affect, impair or invalidate any remaining section, subsection, paragraph,
sentence or clause hereof or the application of this Ordinance to any other
person.
Effective Date
Section 1-4 (a) This
Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its passage and publication.
(b) Within
6 months after the implementation of this Pilot Project, the Review Panel shall
report to the Cook County Board of Commissioners regarding the use, costs,
effectiveness, and future viability of the Program as related to employability
of first time nonviolent offenders.
ARTICLE II. DEFINITIONS
Definitions
Section 2-1 As used in the Cook County Re-entry Employment Project
Ordinance:
(a) "Eligible
offender" means a person who has been convicted of a crime or of an
offense that is not a crime of violence as defined in Section 2 of the Crime
Victims Compensation Act, a Class X or a non-probationable offense, or a
violation of Article 11 or Article 12 of the Criminal Code of 1961, but who has
not been convicted more than once of a felony.
(b) "Felony"
means a conviction of a felony in this State, or of an offense in any other
jurisdiction for which a sentence to a term of imprisonment in excess of one
year was authorized.
(c) “Conviction”
means a plea or a verdict of guilty upon which a sentence of probation,
conditional discharge, or supervision has been imposed shall be deemed to be a
conviction.
(i) two or more convictions of felonies charged
in separate counts of one indictment or information shall be deemed to be one
conviction.
(d) The
minimum period of good conduct by the individual referred to in paragraph (1)
of subsection (a) of this Section, shall be as follows: if the most serious crime of which the
individual was convicted is a misdemeanor, the minimum period of good conduct
shall be six (6) months; if the most serious crime of which the individual was
convicted is a Class 1, 2, 3 or 4 felony, the minimum period of good conduct
shall be one (1) year. Criminal acts
committed outside the State shall be classified as acts committed within the
State based on the maximum sentence that could have been imposed based upon the
conviction under the laws of the foreign jurisdiction. The minimum period of good conduct by the
individual shall be measured either from the date of the payment of any fine
imposed upon him or her, or from the date of his or her release from custody by
parole, mandatory supervised release or commutation or termination of his or
her sentence. The Review Panel shall
have power and it shall be its duty to review all applications when the
application is presented and to grant or deny the same within a reasonable time
after the making of their recommendation.
PROPOSED ORDINANCE continued
ITEM #1 cont’d
ARTICLE
III. THE POWERS AND DUTIES OF REVIEW
PANEL
Section 3-1 Establishment
of Review Panel
(a) In order to facilitate the implementation of
this Ordinance, the Board shall establish a Review Panel consisting of seven
(7) members.
(b) The members of the Review Panel shall be
appointed as follows: the Clerk to the
Circuit Court appoints one (1) member; the Chief Judge appoints one (1) member;
and the President of the Cook County Board of Commissioners appoints five (5)
members.
(c) The
Panel shall keep records of all of its official actions and shall make them
accessible in accordance with law and the rules of the Panel.
(d) Each
member of the Panel and any hearing officer designated by the Panel shall have
the power to administer oaths and to take the testimony of persons under oath.
(e) Any written report submitted to the Review
Panel under this Section is confidential and may not be made available to any
person or public or private agency except if specifically required or permitted
by authorization of the court. In its
discretion, the court may except from disclosure a part or parts of the report
that are not relevant to the granting of a certificate, or sources of
information which have been obtained on a promise of confidentiality, or any
other portion of their report, disclosure of which would not be in the interest
of justice.
(f) The Review Panel shall interview each
applicant and review each application for a County issued Certificate of Good
Conduct and Rehabilitation. After the Panel has decided an applicant is
eligible for a Certificate of Good Conduct and Rehabilitation, the Panel shall
make their recommendation to the Cook County Board of Commissioners.
(g) In making such a determination, the Review
Panel shall consider the following factors:
(1) the
public policy of
(2) the
specific duties and responsibilities necessarily related to the position being
sought; and
(3) the
bearing, if any, the criminal offense for which the person was previously
convicted will have on his or her fitness or ability to perform one or more such
duties and responsibilities; and
(4) the time which has elapsed since the
occurrence of the criminal offense; and
(5) the age of the person at the time of
occurrence of the criminal offense; and
(6) the
seriousness of the offense; and
(7) any
information produced by the person or produced on their behalf in regard to
their good conduct and rehabilitation, including a State issued Certificate of
Relief from Disabilities and/or Good Conduct, which certificates shall create a
presumption of rehabilitation in regard to the offense(s)
specified in the certificates; and
(8) the
legitimate interest of
PROPOSED ORDINANCE continued
ITEM #1 cont’d
(h) The
Review Panel shall report to the Cook County Board of Commissioners by November
30 of each year, for each Certificate of Good Conduct and Rehabilitation
issued, the number of applicants with felony convictions, the number of
applicants with misdemeanor convictions, the number of applicants with State
issued Certificates of Relief from Disabilities and/or Good Conduct, the number
of applicants with felony convictions denied Certificates of Good Conduct and
Rehabilitation and the number of applicants with Certificates of Good Conduct
and Rehabilitation employed in County government jobs.
ARTICLE
IV. COOK
Section
4.1 Issuance of Certificate of Good
Conduct and Rehabilitation
(a) The
Cook County Board of Commissioners shall have the power to issue a Certificate
of Good Conduct and Rehabilitation to any eligible offender who resides within
this State and whose judgment of conviction was rendered by court in this or
any other jurisdiction.
(b) Upon
entry of approval, the Cook County Commission shall issue to the person
applying, a certificate stating that their behavior after conviction has
warranted the issuance of the Certificate of Good Conduct and Rehabilitation as
a prerequisite to employment within Cook County Government or with a designated
County contractor.
(c) The
Cook County Board of Commissioners may, in its discretion, issue a Certificate
of Good Conduct and Rehabilitation to an eligible former offender. The Certificate may not be issued earlier
than six (6) months to formerly incarcerated individuals with misdemeanor
convictions or one (1) year to those with one felony conviction subsequent to
their release from County or State incarceration or supervision.
(d) The
Certificate may not issued by the Cook County Board of Commissioners unless the
Board of Commissioners is satisfied that:
(1) the
person to whom it is to be granted is an eligible former offender, as defined
in Section 2-1(a).
(2) the
access to employment to be granted by the Certificate is consistent with the
guidelines of the Pilot Project for the eligible former offender; and
(3) the
access to employment to be granted by the Certificate is consistent with the
public interest.
(e) The
Cook County Board of Commissioners by majority vote of a quorum, shall have the
power to issue a Certificate of Good Conduct and Rehabilitation to any eligible
former offender previously convicted of a crime in this State, when the Board
is satisfied that:
(1) the
applicant has conducted him or herself in a manner warranting the issuance for
the required minimum period and has successfully completed the designated
employment readiness training; and
(2) the access to employment to be granted by the
Certificate is consistent with the Pilot Project of the County; and
(3) the access to employment to be granted is
consistent with the public interest.
(f) The
Cook County Board of Commissioners shall have the power to issue a Certificate of Good Conduct and
Rehabilitation to any person previously convicted of a crime in any other
jurisdiction, when the Board is satisfied that the provisions of paragraphs
(1), (2) and (3) are met.
PROPOSED ORDINANCE continued
ITEM #1 cont’d
(g) No
application for any employment specified in Article V, Section 1 granted under
the authority of this County shall be denied by reason of an eligible former
offender who has obtained a Certificate of Good Conduct and Rehabilitation, as
defined in this Ordinance, having been previously convicted of one criminal offense,
or by reason of a finding of lack of "good moral character" when the
finding is based upon the fact that the applicant has previously been convicted
of one criminal offense unless:
(1) there
is a direct relationship between the previous criminal offense and the specific
job sought; or
(2) the
employment of the person would involve an unreasonable risk to property or to
the safety or welfare of specific individuals or the general public.
In
order for formerly incarcerated individuals who are first time nonviolent
offenders and residents of the County to be issued a Certificate of Good
Conduct and Rehabilitation and apply for employment within the designated Job
Classifications of the County and/or with companies serving as contractors,
they must have successfully completed a Board approved employment readiness training, a twelve (12) month County Internship
Program, and be in receipt of documentation to that effect which is to be
submitted as the primary evidence of their good conduct and rehabilitation to
the Review Panel for consideration of certificate issuance. Other documents may also be submitted to
further support the participant’s status of rehabilitation as related to
education, vocational training, employment and/or volunteer experience. Participants
with State issued Certificates of Good Conduct, Certificates of Relief from Disabilities or State
professional/occupational licenses shall be awarded additional preference when
applying for participation in the Project as well as for employment.
Section 5-3
Ex-Offender Job Readiness Program
As the first phase for
an individual to become eligible for a
Such a training
program shall provide intake and screening services to identify needs of each
participant and develop a specific employability training plan. All training plans shall include core modules
to address, in a holistic approach, the special needs of former offenders
seeking employment within the County and/or with designated County
contractors. The modules shall include
information/education, skill building and behavioral modification techniques in
the areas of cognitive restructuring, resume preparation, interviewing, alcohol
and substance abuse prevention, anger management and conflict resolution, and
relationships in the work place.
The designated
training provider shall also have referral agreements in place with educational
institutions and social service agencies for participants to access supportive
services for assistance with food, clothing, housing, substance abuse
counseling, GED classes, vocational training, and family reunification
services. The work readiness program
shall also include an aftercare component which will serve as an on-going
support system for candidates who have successfully completed the core training
modules.
PROPOSED ORDINANCE continued
ITEM #1 cont’d
Eligibility criteria
for admission to the former offender work readiness training program shall be established by the
community based organizations that are operating such programs with the
specific inclusion of the following:
Participants must be screened for motivation to participate in the
program, history of drug and alcohol use/abuse, mental health history, type of
offense committed, criminal record, current immediate support needs (housing, food, clothing, temporary
emergency financial assistance, etc.), employment history, educational
background, and willingness to change their thinking and behavior. All participants must be drug free prior to
entering the program. Drug test will be given randomly throughout the work
readiness program.
Section-5-4 Pre-Employment/ Internship Program
Upon successful
completion of the Job Readiness Training program, participants shall become
eligible for a twelve (12) month Pre-Employment Internship Program to prepare
them for full time employment within
ARTICLE VI. LEGAL IMPACT OF COUNTY ISSUED
CERTIFICATE OF GOOD CONDUCT AND
REHABILITATION
Section 6-1 This Section shall not affect the right of a
person to collaterally attack his conviction or to rely on it in bar of
subsequent proceedings for the same offense.
(a) A
Certificate of Good Conduct and Rehabilitation does not, however, in any way
prevent any judicial proceeding, administrative, licensing, or other body,
board, or authority from relying upon the conviction specified in the
certificate as the basis for the exercise of its discretionary power to
suspend, revoke, or refuse to issue or refuse to renew any license, permit, or
other authority or privilege.
(b) A
Cook County issued Certificate of Good Conduct and Rehabilitation shall not
limit or prevent the introduction of evidence of a prior conviction for
purposes of impeachment of a witness in a judicial or other proceeding where
otherwise authorized by the applicable rules of evidence.
(c) A
Certificate of Good Conduct and Rehabilitation may be granted as provided in
this Section to an eligible offender as defined in Article II this Ordinance
who has demonstrated that s/he has been a law-abiding citizen.
(d) A
Certificate of Good Conduct and Rehabilitation may not, however, in any way
prevent any judicial proceeding, administrative, licensing, or other body,
board, or authority from considering the conviction specified in the
certificate.
(e) A
Certificate of Good Conduct and Rehabilitation shall not limit or prevent the
introduction of evidence of a prior conviction for purposes of impeachment of a
witness in a judicial or other proceeding where otherwise authorized by the
applicable rules of evidence.
(f) Certificate
is not to be deemed to be a pardon.
Nothing contained in this Article shall be deemed to alter or limit or
affect the manner of applying for pardons to the Governor, and no certificate
issued under this Article shall be deemed or construed to be a Pardon.
Section 6-2 Grievance
Process
It is not the
intention of this Ordinance or the actions of the Review Panel or the Board of
Cook County Commissioners to replace or substitute any employee grievance
process that currently exists in County government. This Ordinance does not preclude a
participant from exercising their due process rights that may be available to
them within the scope of their employment.
PROPOSED ORDINANCE continued
ITEM #1 cont’d
(a) If
an employee is subject to an adverse action by their employer/supervisor and
they have a grievance procedure to address the employee’s issue, the employee
must exhaust the process for redress.
(b) This
Ordinance does not create a separate or alternative grievance process for
employees to seek redress from an adverse action taken against them.
ARTICLE VII. REVOCATION OF CERTIFICATE
OF GOOD CONDUCT AND REHABILITATION
Section 7.1 In revoking a Certificate of Good Conduct and
Rehabilitation, the action of the Cook County Board of Commissioners shall be
by majority vote of the members authorized to revoke the Certificate.
(a) Revocation
shall be upon notice to the person, who shall be accorded an opportunity to
contest the grounds of revocation prior to a decision to revoke the Certificate
of Good Conduct and Rehabilitation.
(b) Any
such person possessing a Cook County issued Certificate of Good Conduct and
Rehabilitation, shall upon receipt of the determination of revocation,
surrender the certificate to the Cook County Board of Commissioners or their
designee.
(c) A
person who knowingly uses or attempts to use a revoked Certificate of Good
Conduct and Rehabilitation in order to obtain or to exercise any right or
privilege that they would not be entitled to obtain or to exercise without a
valid certificate is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.
(d) If
the program participant is terminated from their employment with
ARTICLE VIII. FORMS AND FILING
Section 8-1 (a) All
applications, certificates, and orders of revocation necessary for the purposes
of this Article shall be upon forms prescribed under an agreement among the
Review Panel, the Clerk of the Circuit Court and the Cook County Board of
Commissioners or their designees. The
forms relating to Certificates of Good Conduct and Rehabilitation shall be
distributed by the Clerk of the Circuit Court.
(b) Any court or board issuing or revoking Certificate
under this Article shall immediately file a copy of the Certificate of Good
Conduct and Rehabilitation or a copy of the order of revocation with the Clerk
of the Circuit Court.
_________________________
Commissioner Steele, seconded by Commissioner
Maldonado, moved to suspend the rules so that this matter may be
considered. The motion carried
unanimously.
Commissioner Steele, seconded by Commissioner
Silvestri, moved that the Proposed Ordinance be referred to the Committee on
Law Enforcement and Corrections Department of Corrections Subcommittee. (Comm.
No. 263772). The motion carried
unanimously.
COUNTY PURCHASING AGENT
ITEM #2
Transmitting a Communication,
dated
RAYMOND C. ROBIN, Purchasing
Agent
Re:
Contracts and Bonds Letter
Please be advised that on the
COUNTY PURCHASING AGENT continued
ITEM #2 cont’d
_________________________
Commissioner Hansen, seconded by Commissioner Butler,
moved to suspend the rules so that this matter may be considered. The motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner Silvestri, seconded by Commissioner Sims,
moved that the request of the County Purchasing Agent be approved. The
motion carried unanimously.
ITEM #3
Transmitting a Communication,
dated
PATRICK T. DRISCOLL, JR.,
Respectfully
request permission to discuss the following cases with the Board or the
appropriate committee thereof:
1. James Guidone v. Weres, et al.,
Case No. 01-L-9044
(Comm. No. 263773)
2.
Yale Brevda v.
3.
Jerry Milam v.
4.
Raul Aquirre
v. Board of Review, Case No. 02-L-6793
(Comm.
No. 263776)
_________________________
Commissioner Hansen, seconded by Commissioner Butler,
moved to suspend the rules so that this matter may be considered. The motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner Silvestri, seconded by Commissioner Sims,
moved that the communications be referred to the Committee on Finance
Litigation Subcommittee. The motion carried unanimously.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
ITEM #4
Transmitting
a Communication, dated
RUTH
M. ROTHSTEIN, Chief, Bureau of Health Services
Re: Intergovernmental
Agreement
This
is to request authorization for the President to execute Amendment No. 4 to the
Intergovernmental Agreement originally dated
Following
the amendment to this Agreement, the County will make increased quarterly
intergovernmental transfers to the State of
This
amendment should result in increased Medicaid revenues to
_________________________
Commissioner Hansen, seconded by Commissioner Butler,
moved to suspend the rules so that this matter may be considered. The motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner Silvestri, seconded by Commissioner Sims,
moved that the request of the Chief of the Bureau of Health Services be
approved. The motion carried
unanimously.
APPROVAL
OF PAYMENT
ITEM #5
Transmitting
a Communication, dated
JOHNNY
C. BROWN, Chief Operating Officer,
requesting
authorization for the Cook County Board of Commissioners to approve payment for
nursing registry services received in Fiscal Year 2003 for the Department of
Nursing at Stroger Hospital of Cook County, to the vendors listed below as
follows:
|
VENDOR |
AMOUNT |
|
|
|
|
LMR
Nursing Services, Incorporated |
$355,990.29 |
|
|
|
|
Gareda
Diversified Business Services |
$169,544.63 |
|
|
|
|
|
$107,965.22 |
|
|
|
|
Nurse
Agency, Incorporated |
$
67,071.75 |
|
|
|
|
Reason: |
This
unauthorized purchase was a result of the department’s error in not
reconciling and submitting the invoices for payment on time. In order to ensure that this does not occur
again monitoring procedures are now in place. |
Estimated
Fiscal Impact: $700,571.89. (897-275 Account).
_________________________
Commissioner Hansen, seconded by Commissioner Butler,
moved to suspend the rules so that this matter may be considered. The motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner Silvestri, seconded by Commissioner Sims,
moved that the payment to the above vendors be made. The motion carried unanimously.
PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS
ITEM #6
Submitting
a Proposed Resolution sponsored by
JOHN H. STROGER, JR., President,
PROPOSED RESOLUTION
RECOGNIZING THE UPCOMING 50TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE
BROWN V. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF
WHEREAS, May 17, 2004, will mark the
50th Anniversary of the landmark Supreme Court decision, Brown, et al. v. Board of Education of Topeka, et al.; and
WHEREAS, this historic unanimous
decision ended federally sanctioned racial segregation in the nation's public
schools, overturning Plessy v. Ferguson and ruling that "separate
educational facilities are inherently unequal". This decision had the added benefit of
serving as the impetus to the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s and
spearheading tangible integration in public facilities and accommodations; and
WHEREAS, the "spark" that
ignited the movement was Linda Brown, who was denied admission to her local
elementary school in Topeka, Kansas, because she was black; when her case was combined
with several other cases, the collective body of cases ultimately reach the
U.S. Supreme Court; and
WHEREAS, prior to the 1954 ruling,
de jure segregation (legally imposed) was a fact of life in the majority of
Southern school systems, with institutions charged with educating
African-Americans routinely spending a mere fraction of the amount allocated to
educate white children; and
PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS continued
ITEM #6 cont’d
WHEREAS, the disparity between the
educational facilities was great, with black students forced to endure
overcrowded classrooms, inadequate libraries, undertrained teachers and even a
lack of indoor plumbing in the schools; and
WHEREAS, even though the Supreme
Court ruling ushered in a feeling of optimism, actual desegregation was not
immediate or easily implemented; to use the words "strong societal
resistance" would be a gross understatement. In fact, a second decision, commonly referred
to as "Brown II", established guidelines for ending segregation, but
without specific timetables, instead using the vague language, "with all
deliberate speed"; and
WHEREAS, even though the major
changes that occurred during the 1950s, 60s and 70s were tumultuous, this case
is considered by many legal scholars to be perhaps the most significant of the
last century; and
WHEREAS, although great strides have
been made in our nation since the Brown decision, far too many individuals take
their freedoms and educational opportunities for granted, with little regard
for the countless lives that were lost over the span of the civil rights
movement; and
WHEREAS, the County remains
committed to protecting the diverse population of those who live, work and
recreate in
NOW,
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Cook County Board of Commissioners that Cook County Government
does hereby acknowledge the upcoming 50th Anniversary of the Supreme Court's
Brown v. Board of Education ruling and urge all residents to take cognizance of
the events leading up to and transpiring after this groundbreaking decision.
_________________________
Commissioner Hansen, seconded by Commissioner Butler,
moved to suspend the rules so that this matter may be considered. The motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner Silvestri, seconded by Commissioner Sims,
moved that the Resolution be approved and adopted. The motion carried unanimously.
*
* * * *
ITEM #7
Transmitting
a Communication, dated
GWENDOLYN D. CLEMONS,
Director, Department of Planning and Development
Re: Midway
Industries, Inc.
Resolution
Approving Class 6b Special Exception to Abandonment
Respectfully submitting this Resolution regarding the
Company’s application for Class 6b property tax incentive for your
consideration.
Midway Industries, Inc. requests approval of the
special exception to the twenty-four (24) month abandonment rule under the
Class 6b Ordinance. This Resolution is
required so that the company can complete its application the Assessor of Cook
County within the 90 day period from purchase.
Submitting the company application for Class 6b, the
Resolution of the Village of Bedford Park and a Department of Planning and
Development staff report for you information.
PROPOSED RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the Cook County Board of Commissioners has adopted a
Real Property Assessment Classification 6b that provides an applicant a
reduction in the assessment level for an industrial facility; and
WHEREAS, the County Board of Commissioners has received and
reviewed an application from Midway Industries, Inc. and the Resolution from
Bedford Park for an abandoned industrial facility located at 6750 South Belt
Circle, Bedford Park, Cook County, Illinois, Property Index Numbers
19-19-301-006-0000, 19-19-301-007-0000, 19-19-116-057-0000 and 19-19-116-058-0000;
and
PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS continued
ITEM #7 cont’d
WHEREAS, Class 6b requires the validation by the County Board
of the shortened period of qualifying abandonment in cases where the industrial
facility has been abandoned for less than 24 consecutive months upon purchase;
and
WHEREAS, the Cook County Board of Commissioners has determined
that the building was abandoned for 11 months at the time of purchase and that
special circumstances are present.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the President and Board of Commissioners of the
County of Cook, State of Illinois, that the President and Board of
Commissioners indicate their approval for the filing of an application for a
Cook County Real Estate Classification 6b abatement incentive to the company
for an abandoned industrial facility located at 6750 South Belt Circle, Bedford
Park, Cook County, Illinois, under the provision for abandonment of less than
24 months; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the
_________________________
Commissioner Hansen, seconded by Commissioner Butler,
moved to suspend the rules so that this matter may be considered. The motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner Collins, seconded by Commissioner
Silvestri, moved that the Proposed Resolution be referred to the Committee on
Business and Economic Development. (Comm.
No. 263777). The motion carried
unanimously.
APPROVAL OF PAYMENT
ITEM #8
Transmitting
a Communication, dated
STEPHANIE WRIGHT-GRIGGS,
Chief Operating Officer, Provident Hospital of
requesting approval of payment in the amount of
$483,131.22 to Digby’s Detective and Security Agency, Inc., Chicago, Illinois, for
partial payments for Contract No. 02-53-946 for security services for Provident
Hospital of Cook County for the months of October, November and December of
2003.
Contract No. 02-53-976 was approved by the Cook County
Board of Commissioners on September 5, 2002, Bids Report Section ID, Page 11.
Estimated
Fiscal Impact: $483,131.22. (891-249 Account).
_________________________
Commissioner Hansen, seconded by Commissioner Butler,
moved to suspend the rules so that this matter may be considered. The motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner Butler, seconded by Commissioner Moreno,
moved that the payment to Digby’s Detective and Security Agency, Inc. be
made. The motion carried unanimously.
REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON CONSTRUCTION
ITEM #9
The
Honorable,
The
Board of Commissioners of
ATTENDANCE
|
Present: |
Chairman
Sims, Vice Chairman Butler, Commissioners Gorman, Hansen, |
|
Absent: |
Commissioner
Collins (1) |
|
Also
Present: |
Commissioner
Peraica (1), Michael E. LaMont - Director, Office of Capital Planning &
Policy |
REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON
CONSTRUCTION continued
ITEM #9 cont’d
Ladies
and Gentlemen:
Your
Committee on Construction of the Board of Commissioners of Cook County met
pursuant to notice on
Your
Committee has considered the following items and upon adoption of this report,
the recommendations are as follows:
|
263530 |
OFFICE
OF CAPITAL PLANNING AND POLICY, by Michael E. LaMont, Director, transmitting
a Communication, dated Transmitted
herewith for your approval is Change Order No. 3, payable to G.F. STRUCTURES CORPORATION, for the
Rockwell Warehouse Phase II Interior Project at the Rockwell Warehouse. This change order is for work necessary to
complete the project. It is
respectfully requested that this honorable body approve this request. Reason: This change order will relocate the switchboard equipment
from the basement to the 1st floor, which is necessary to avoid excessive
Commonwealth Edison construction costs and increased monthly service charges
by ComEd. During the construction
phase, problems arose with the scheduling, coordinating, and pricing of
Commonwealth Edison’s portion of the work.
This new relocation will allow us to complete construction without the
need to coordinate and schedule work with Com Ed and will not affect current
monthly service fees. This also
provides for a 105 day contract extension. Contract No. 01-53-1169 Original
Contract Sum: $2,854,994.00 Total
Changes to-date: 21,594.00 Adjusted
Contract to-date: 2,876,588.00 Amount
of this Modification: 142,094.00 Adjusted
Contract Sum: $3,018,682.00 Estimated Fiscal Impact:
$142,094.00. Bond Issue (20000 Account). Sufficient
funds have been appropriated to cover this request. |
Commissioner Silvestri, seconded by Vice
Chairman Butler, moved the approval of Communication No. 263530. The motion
carried.
263531 OFFICE
OF CAPITAL PLANNING AND POLICY, by Michael E. LaMont, Director, transmitting a
Communication, dated
Transmitted herewith for your approval is Change Order
No. 7, a credit in the amount of ($130,266.00) to the contract with BROADWAY CONSOLIDATED COMPANIES,
contractor for the Department of Corrections – Division I, IV and VII Plumbing
Renovation Project. It is respectfully requested that this honorable body approve
this request.
Reason: This
change order provides for removal of existing plumbing fixtures and deletion
from the contract, installation of new plumbing fixtures and related work in
Division I, for a net credit. This also
provides for a 265 day contract extension.
REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON
CONSTRUCTION continued
ITEM #9 cont’d
Contract No. 00-53-369 Rebid
Original
Contract Sum: $2,147,000.00
Total
Changes to-date: 222,539.00
Adjusted
Contract to-date: 2,369539.7700
Amount
of this Modification:
(130,266.00)
Adjusted
Contract Sum: $2,239,273.7700
Estimated Fiscal Impact:
($130,266.00). Bond Issue (39000 Account).
Commissioner Silvestri, seconded by Vice
Chairman Butler, moved to defer Communication No. 263531. The motion carried.
PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT –
Commissioner
Hansen asked when the computer server consolidation will be completed in the 69
West
Mr.
LaMont stated that in the next report he will project a time frame.
Commissioner
Hansen asked Mr. LaMont if he would bring the Commissioners up-to-date on the
69
Mr.
LaMont gave the committee a general overview of what has been occurring at the
69 West
Mr.
LaMont stated that while the sprinklers are being installed the ceilings are
also being replaced in most areas, because most of the building had what is
termed a “spline” ceiling. Such a
ceiling is made of one-by-one tiles which are now being replaced by a
two-by-two drop-in ceiling with new lighting.
Chairman
Sims asked whether the light fixtures and ceilings are covered under insurance.
Mr.
LaMont stated that floors that were damaged by smoke, soot, fire or by water
from below are covered. The floors that
did not suffer that type of damage will be covered and paid for by capital
bonds.
Commissioner
Hansen asked the estimated cost of the sprinkler system.
Mr.
LaMont stated that $15 million was put into the capital program after the
fire. The estimated cost of the
sprinklers and ceilings is $8.5 million.
Mr.
LaMont stated that there are two other major projects. The first is a door unlocking system, which
is currently being installed and is expected to be completed in two weeks. At this time the doors are unlocked; also there
is extra security in the building walking on various floors and up staircases.
Commissioner
Hansen asked the cost for the door unlocking system.
Mr.
LaMont stated that the cost is about $350,000.00.
Commissioner
Hansen requested a memorandum showing the current estimates for the projects at
69 West
REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON
CONSTRUCTION continued
ITEM #9 cont’d
Mr.
LaMont responded that he will get the information to the commissioners.
Commissioner
Hansen asked who unlocks the doors in the instance of a fire.
Mr.
LaMont stated that the doors are unlocked automatically or manually. Smoke detectors or sprinkler flow trigger the
automatic system; the manual system is operated from the front console located
on the first floor.
Mr.
LaMont stated that the other major project is putting in a visual detection
system, which is termed “occupant notification.” He further stated that there
may be other upgrades to the fire alarm system.
Mr. LaMont concluded by saying with all the above mentioned projects,
the cost is still below $15 million.
Commissioner
Hansen asked if the ground floor escalators at 69
Mr.
LaMont stated that one of the escalators is undergoing renovation, which is
partly due to the water damage and the fact that it needed to be upgraded. He stated that this was a good opportunity to
renovate the escalator because the building has fewer occupants. The work will be completed in mid March.
Mr.
LaMont stated that there is a project to install an elevator and an escalator
on the west end of the building. He
stated that there is also a freight elevator that travels the length of the
entire building.
Commissioner
Hansen requested a cost estimate regarding the old nurses building.
Mr.
LaMont replied that approximately $7 million has been spent on the building
during the past eight years, specifically for a new electrical system,
switch-gear, chiller, elevator modernization, wiring and continuous air
conditioning.
Commissioner
Hansen inquired what the cost estimate would be to build a new nurse’s building
versus renovating the existing building.
Mr.
LaMont stated that a report done by McDonough Associates which dated back to
the late 80’s or early 90’s indicated a price of $50 million.
Commissioner
Hansen asked Mr. LaMont to find out if the $50 million was for a new building.
Mr.
LaMont stated that he will provide the commissioners with the figures.
Commissioner Hansen moved to adjourn the
meeting, seconded by Commissioner Gorman.
The motion carried and the meeting was adjourned.
Respectfully
submitted,
COMMITTEE
ON CONSTRUCTION
DEBORAH SIMS, Chairman
ATTEST: MICHELLE HARRIS, Secretary
_________________________
Commissioner Hansen, seconded by Commissioner Butler,
moved to suspend the rules so that this matter may be considered. The motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner
Sims, seconded by Commissioner Silvestri, moved that the Report of the
Committee on Construction be approved and adopted. The
motion carried.
Commissioner Daley voted “present” on
Comm. No. 263530 regarding G.F. Structures Corporation.
PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS
ITEM #10
Submitting
a Proposed Resolution sponsored by
EARLEAN
COLLINS,
PROPOSED RESOLUTION
TO INCLUDE QUALIFIED EX-OFFENDERS FOR EMPLOYMENT
WHEREAS, Cook County is a home rule unit of local government
pursuant to Article 7, Section 6a of the Illinois Constitution of 1970 with
power to regulate those matters which pertain to its government and affairs;
and
WHEREAS,
WHEREAS, the Cook County Bureau of Human Resources (BHR) has
within its rules a clause to reject or disqualify any applicant or disqualify
any eligible person at any time prior to appointment or disqualify any employee
prior to the completion of his/her probationary period when certain conditions
apply; and
WHEREAS, under the Bureau of Human Resources Rule 3
Recruitment and Application paragraph (3.03 (b) 1.), the above cited
disqualifying event apply to an individual who, “Has been convicted of a
felony, or a misdemeanor under certain circumstances or for applicants for
positions in certain County facilities”; and
WHEREAS, paragraph (3.03 (b) 1.) of BHR Rule 3 is punitive and
denies employment opportunities to Cook County residents who are otherwise
qualified but have been convicted of a felony, or misdemeanor under certain
circumstances or for positions in certain County facilities.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Cook
County BHR Rule 3 be amended to reject or disqualify any applicant or
disqualify any eligible person at any time prior to appointment or disqualify
any employee prior to the completion of his/her probationary period if he/she
is employed in an area or Cook County facility in which his/her felony
conviction, or misdemeanor under certain circumstances occurred (e.g.,
conviction of a crime involving a child would disqualify ex-offender from
working in any County facility or program that serves children); and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that any
contractor that bids on County Contracts, and where that contractor employs or
will employ ex-offenders, be granted a 3% dollar reduction preference where
such contractor’s bid for a County Contract exceeds the lowest bid by 3% or
less of the lowest bid dollar amount.
_________________________
Commissioner Hansen, seconded by Commissioner Butler,
moved to suspend the rules so that this matter may be considered. The motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner Collins, seconded by Commissioner Murphy,
moved that the Proposed Resolution be referred to the Committee on Business and
Economic Development. (Comm. No.
263778). The motion carried
unanimously.
*
* * * *
ITEM #11
Submitting
a Proposed Resolution sponsored by
JOHN H. STROGER, JR., President,
Co-Sponsored by
JERRY BUTLER, FORREST CLAYPOOL, EARLEAN COLLINS,
JOHN P. DALEY,
ELIZABETH ANN DOODY GORMAN, GREGG GOSLIN, CARL R.
HANSEN,
ROBERTO MALDONADO, JOSEPH MARIO
ANTHONY J. PERAICA, MIKE QUIGLEY, PETER N.
SILVESTRI, DEBORAH SIMS,
BOBBIE L. STEELE and LARRY SUFFREDIN,
PROPOSED RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, Almighty God in His
infinite wisdom has called Cook County Forest Preserve's Deputy Chief of Police
Emmett J. Burke from our midst; and
PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS continued
ITEM #11 cont’d
WHEREAS, Emmett J. Burke began
working for the Cook County Forest Preserve Police Department on
WHEREAS, over eight years of service
Mr. Burke demonstrated a great enthusiasm for the rigors of law enforcement;
and
WHEREAS, recognizing this
dedication, the Cook County Forest Preserve Police Department promoted Mr.
Burke to the position of Deputy Chief of Police on March 22, 2002; and
WHEREAS, Deputy Chief Burke provided
an exceptional example for all of the Districts' officers through his diligence
and commitment to protecting the missions of visitors to the District's vast
holdings each year; and
WHEREAS, Deputy Chief Burke having
worked with local, state and federal law enforcement agencies, was widely
recognized as an outstanding law enforcement official; and
WHEREAS, Deputy Chief Burke was the
loving fiancé of Kathleen Marie Chlebek, devoted son of the Honorable Anne M.
and the Honorable Edward M. Burke, and dear brother to Jennifer, Edward, Sarah
and Travis, and a cherished coworker and friend to many.
NOW,
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Cook County Board of Commissioners on behalf of the more than
five million residents of Cook County, does hereby express its deepest
condolences and most heartfelt sympathy to the family as well as the many
friends and loved ones of Deputy Chief Emmett J. Burke; and
BE
IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a suitable copy of this Resolution be tendered to the family of
Deputy Chief Emmett J. Burke so that his legacy of commitment to the Forest
Preserve District of Cook County may ever be remembered.
_________________________
Commissioner Hansen, seconded by Commissioner Butler,
moved to suspend the rules so that this matter may be considered. The motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner Maldonado, seconded by Commissioner
Moreno, moved that the Resolution be approved and adopted. President Stroger called for a rising
vote. The motion carried unanimously.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY
ITEM #12
Pursuant
to Rule 4-30, George Blakemore, addressed the President and Members of the Cook
County Board of Commissioners. Mr.
Blakemore spoke concerning several issues regarding