Board of Trustees Minutes

Acting President Packham called the Meeting to Order at 7:35 P.M.

PRESENT: Trustees Rodney Craig, Lori Kaiser, Joseph Nicolosi, Wesley Eby, William Manton, and Acting President
Robert Packham

ABSENT: None

ALSO PRESENT: Village Manager Marc Hummel and Corporation Counsel Norman E. Samelson

Everyone joined in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Motion by Trustee Manton and seconded to Accept the Agenda. VOICE Vote: ALL AYES.

Motion carried – Accepted the Agenda.

No one signed up for Townhall Session.

Motion by Trustee Nicolosi and seconded to go to Executive Session to discuss Land Acquisition – Section 2(C)(5) following the meeting and not return for action. Roll call:

AYES: Craig, Kaiser, Nicolosi, Eby, Manton, Packham NAYS: None

ABSENT: None
Motion carried – Approved Executive Session

Mr. Hummel stated this request was to purchase a hazmat trailer to store materials used in local hazmat events. He noted it was a budgeted item. Mr. Hummel also stated competitive quotes were received. It was questioned how many quotes were requested, and Mr. Killian stated 4-5 requests went out and only 2 were received. It was also questioned how the quote process differed from an open bid process. Mr. Killian stated Bob O’Brien worked with the Fire Department staff to work out specifications for size and weights, etc. He stated they then sent it out to several trailer firms in the area asking for quotes. Mr. Killian stated these were custom built. It was questioned if this went through the open bid process, perhaps more bids would be returned, and Mr. Killian commented that he doubted any would come in at a lower price, noting this quote was even lower than their barricade trailer. He also stated a generator, 12-volt lighting, and regular 110-volt light were included and it really was not a standard stock trailer.

Motion by Trustee Nicolosi and seconded to Award the Contract for the Purchase of a 2007 Advantage 24 Foot Enclosed Trailer to Advantage Trailer in an Amount Not to Exceed $13,254.000 and Authorize the Village Manager to Execute the Contract Documents. Roll call:

AYES: Craig, Kaiser, Nicolosi, Eby, Manton, Packham NAYS: None

ABSENT: None
Motion carried – Awarded the Contract for the Purchase of a 2007 Advantage 24 Foot Enclosed Trailer to Advantage Trailer in an Amount Not to Exceed $13,254.000 and Authorized the Village Manager to Execute the Contract Documents

Mr. Hummel stated this was a request for a retail analysis of two areas within the Village, the Irving Park Road Corridor and the Lake Street Corridor. He stated the intent of the retail analysis was to identify businesses that fit the general neighborhood, general demographics, and general business demand for those areas. He noted Ms. Carol Gies of 4 Insights was present to answer any questions. He further stated the project would take approximately 8 weeks. It was questioned if the consultant already on retainer assisted with businesses. Mr. Hummel stated MRH & Associates, Mr. Rand Haas, was not directly skilled in the critical analysis with the demographics and types of businesses. He also noted the work product obtained from this would then be given to MRH & Associates for follow-up contacts. It was then asked if an RFP was sent out with requirements. Mr. Grill stated they did not because this is an instance where you go to the individual with the expertise in that field. Mr. Hummel interjected that this was a professional service and that they did look at another nationally known firm that was significantly more costly. He continued that they looked at those qualified in the field in the Chicagoland area, and 4 Insights had extensive experience in the area, including Naperville. A grant was mentioned in the Lake Street area, and Mr. Hummel stated that was a planning grant, more of a visual, i.e., rights-of-way, landscaping, banners, etc. He stated this was targeted precisely at vacant parcels within the two areas to determine what types of businesses would match.

Ms. Carol Gies stated her firm, 4 Insights, was named because it was started by four senior management executives, who came out of the shopping center, retail, restaurant, and commercial development industry. She stated the reason it was started was because they had great budgets but no one could ever tell them what to lease. She continued when they did go to brokers, they usually recommended their clientele, which was not necessarily an unbiased view of what would work in those environments. She stated they continued to develop a market analysis system that did not just use data, but their forte was two things competitive analysis, commonly referred to as psychographics, taking demographics and grinding it down to tell you what type of lifestyle people live in in your trade area and what they were likely to purchase. She stated one thing they’ve learned in the last five years

was setting up mixed used developments. She noted because of the mixed use developments, they need to know office areas, residential areas, and non-commercials uses, such as libraries, and post offices. She continued that they put puzzles together that had many elements, and the product was not just data, but it told a story, and was very pictorial. She stated it was very easy to use, taking this to a prospective tenant and saying this was really who we were, these were the numbers, the personality, the competitive study, and the synergy of this site.

It was noted we definitely needed some kind of study and plan, and that the board had no strategic plan. It was questioned if 4 Insights would look to other areas in compiling their data, going into Bartlett or Streamwood, etc. and answered in their analysis, city boundaries were not used, because that was not how people shopped. Ms. Geis also stated they used two things, first they started with a radius giving them a baseline, and then they went to drive time, because in congested suburbs, you would find the drive time did not look at all like the radius. She stated what needed to be done was what affect the drive times had on who you were going to draw from where. She stated using drive time and psychographics mapped the location of the segments that were the highest potential for the Village.

It was also questioned what we would get from this study such as demographics, how much our people made, shopping habits, people going through our town, etc. Ms. Geis noted psychographics was lifestyle, with a picture showing what type of people were coming, such as who was on the road, would they pull over, who was at adjacent uses, community colleges, churches, schools. She noted they were not doing an office study; however, it was important to know office history. She also commented with mixed use developments, residential history was also important, because they needed to project who was going to be in the mixed use development, and if there was a transit station, it shifted again. It was questioned where they had done work and Ms. Geis stated they had worked in Naperville, St. Louis, in Fairfax County, VA, in senior housing, and retail. She did note they did not do hotels. She also stated she would be happy to provide a list of projects they had worked on.

It was also questioned how long they had been in business and answered they were 5 years old, but all 5 partners had over 25 years of experience. Ms. Gies stated they would leave us with all the data that backed up to a merchandise plan, a site plan of the various areas they were working on, and they would give information sufficient to turn over to a broker. She continued it would be done by category and with examples of stores that were feasible. She noted that was as far as they could go because they were not brokers. She stated they were not licensed as brokers, but they could give 2-3 examples. She stated they were in the logic business and then there was leasing…theoretical vs. mechanic. She stated they looked at the stock market of what was moving in and out, they followed the market, the consumers, the spending power, the competition and the base.

It was questioned if they recommended change to what was presently there and answered they worked with what was there. They worked with easy access on and off the streets and visibility.

She stated there were five parts to the study: 1) they looked at the market and analyzed the market, who was there, what spending power did they have, where did they live, what were their lifestyles; 2) competition, picking target customer segments, these were the people most likely to support this development, where did they live, and where was the competition in relation to them; 3) road access and premises audit, walking the sites and looking at site plans; 4) the integration of uses, office, residential, non-commercial uses, transit, what affected people coming to shop; and 5) the last thing they did was they recommended retailers, but did not look for them. That was where they stopped and turned it over to a broker.

It was asked if 4 Insights recommended brokers and answered they could. It was questioned if Ms. Geis was the person we would be working with on this project and she stated she would, for market analysis and strategy (the market position) and Linda Reynolds, who was a retailer. She stated they had worked together for 11 years, and her background was in the shopping center retail industry. The third person was the head of research at DePaul Real Estate School, Suzanne Fogel.

It was questioned if the direct consumer research portion of the project was an integral part to get this accomplished, how was it determined if that was needed, and how this study could be done without it. She gave an example and stated she did not necessarily believe in survey statistics, because the samples were not always accurate, but it could be directional, depending upon the site. It was a decision they had to make if they wanted to know what audiences they wanted to know more about, where they were, and would their opinion matter.

It was requested that the CONECT Committee be informed on what the plan was, since they were the businesses in the Village.

Motion by Trustee Manton and seconded to Award the Contract for the Development of a Retail Analysis with 4 Insights in an Amount Not to Exceed $25,000.00 and Authorize the Acting Village President to Execute the Contract Documents. Roll call:

AYES: Craig, Kaiser, Nicolosi, Eby, Manton, Packham NAYS: None

ABSENT: None

Acting President Packham fielded questions on the warrant. Motion by Trustee Manton and seconded to Approve Warrant W579 in the Amount of $321, 249.52. Roll call:

AYES: Craig, Kaiser, Nicolosi, Eby, Manton, Packham NAYS: None

ABSENT: None
Motion carried – Approved Warrant W579 in the Amount of $321,249.52

Mr. Hummel had no report but reminded the Board of a budget workshop next Monday night at 7:30 with the Fire Department making their presentation.

Motion by Trustee Manton and seconded to Waive the Reading and Approve the Minutes of the Regular Board of Trustees’ Meeting of January 18, 2007, as Published. VOICE Vote: ALL AYES.

Motion carried – Waived the Reading and Approved the Minutes of the Regular Board of Trustees’ Meeting of January 18, 2007, as Published

Mr. Samelson had no report.

Trustee Craig asked what the time frame was for the hiring of an Assistant Fire Chief. Mr. Hummel stated that would be addressed within the next few weeks with the Board.

Trustee Kaiser requested that the Executive Session minutes be placed on the February 15 agenda under Executive Session.

Trustee Nicolosi had no report.

Trustee Eby had no report.

Trustee Manton had no report.

Acting President Packham reminded the Board of a Post Board Workshop following the meeting tonight as well as an Executive Session following the Workshop.

Sherry L. Craig
Village Clerk