HomeMy WebLinkAboutEXECUTIVE SESSION - 05/26/1992 - PERSONNEL/RELEASED RES NO 9-94A Date 5-26-92
Time 8:45 p.m.
TCPIC: Li ti ca ti on Personnel XLand „ceui s:ti cn
Villaoe Board Villaoe Board
MFF.'BPPS PPHN: B!£.''BSPS dBSS'!T S•"'='. ,orar
C. Zettek, D. Gallitano, G. Parrin ,
Village President Village Trustee Assistant
Village Manager
M. Tosto, N. Czarnik,
Village Trustee Village Trustee R. Rummel ,
J. Petri , Administrative
Village Trustee Assistant
R. Chernick,
Village Trustee G. Knickerbocker,
J. Bosslet, Village Attorney
Village Trustee
Pursuant to a duly .made and approved motion and a majoritj vote at a
regularly scheduled meec_ng of the Village President and Board of Trustees
on 5-26-92 th_s Executive Session was called to consider a
Personnel r,att::r.
,'lumber of '7a0es actac' c-j:
DJte(s) of for rele=ce: July 1992
DdtC- of apnrc•:a1 for ralaa sc•:
PERSONNEL
The Assistant Village Manager informed the Village
Board that the Village entered into an agreement with the
Village of Bensenville in 1984 for wastewater treatment for
industrial customers in Ou Page County. Under that agreement
Elk Grove was considered a single user.
The agreement allowed Bensenville to collect user rates
for sewage treatment, operation, maintenance , replacement,
and capital outlay. In 1985, the Agreement was amended to
enable Bensenville to also assess surcharges against users.
In 1987, the Village was invoiced for surcharges, which were
paid under the premise that the Village was a single user,
and the amendment did not change the definition of a user,
but only to add surcharges to the agreement.
In 1988, Elk Grove adopted an ordinance allowing the
surcharges to be levied against the industrial properties
serviced by Bensenville. The Village, however, continued
paying the surcharges to Bensenville.
The Assistant Village Manager noted that he had spoken
with the current Finance Director and Public Works Director
to ascertain why the surcharges were not passed along to
the individual companies. The former Director of Finance,
George Coney, was not contacted. It appears the Village
may not have passed along the surcharges because it was to
be considered as part of an in-house rate study, to be
conducted in 1988, but was never done: or the specific
violators were not known and therefore could not be invoiced.
. . . .please continue. . . .
-2-
It was the consensus of the Committee to perform the
following:
1. Begin charging the $0.35 basic user rate (maintenance)
which was adopted by the Village in 1988;
2. Do not pay any further customer surcharges, but assist
the Village of Bensenville in collecting •the surcharge from
the individual customers;
3. Do not seek reimbursement from Bensenville for customer
surcharges already paid by Elk Grove Village; and
4. Implement an additional charge of $0. 35 Per $1 ,000
gallons to fund capital outlay undertaken by the Village
of Bensenville but billed to the Village as part of the
Village' s proportionate share. An ordinance doing so will
be placed on the next Agenda.
The meeting was adjourned at 9 p.m.
mw
c: President and Board of Trustees
Village Manager
Assistant Village Manager
Administrative Assistant
Village Clerk
Village Attorney