An item on the consent calendar at the June 15 village board meeting, amending the contract for the parking consultants Buckhurst, Fish & Jacquemart, to allot an additional $11,500 for the study, raised questions from several residential and commercial property owners.

Mort Yuter questioned the additional amount and asked how much the original contract allotted. Village Clerk Joan Gallaer informed him that the original contract was for $18,500 and the additional amount was for meetings that went beyond the scope of the original contract. This amount was also questioned by Eastern Property Owners' Association President Jon Segerdahl.

Mayor Harold Hecken noted that there were quite a few additional public meetings and those meetings and additional studies were detailed in a letter from the consultant, and requested a copy of that letter be given to Segerdahl. Gallaer then highlighted the letter and what the additional money was for.

EPOA Vice President Nick Episcopia asked the board to explain how a job of this sort was put out to bid on an hourly basis. He pointed out that with the additional moneys, the scope of the study had in effect doubled. He went on to question the idea that much of the money was allotted for additional data gathering, which according to Episcopia, was just counting parking spaces and studying the amount of square footage in the office buildings. Episcopia stated that he would have liked to see some data gathered regarding how many people come and go through each of the buildings throughout the day, which might present a more accurate view of how much parking is actually needed. He also noted that the house that is for sale was ignored by the consultants and a different piece of property where another house is located was suggested for parking.

Trustee Bruce Torino, who at the time of the study was the board's liaison to the planning commission, stated that it was realized very early on that the money allotted for the study was not enough, but that by having the consultants and planning commission have to come back to the board for additional expenditures, the board was able to maintain control over the amount that was spent. In addition, said Torino, the scope of the project expanded and more time was spent on additional studies, such as the study of a parking lot that was not originally included in the plan but residents asked for a study of at the first public meeting after the parking study draft report was issued. Torino said the scope of the project was enlarged so that there would be no criticism that a truncated study was done. "The fact that the full and complete project came in at approximately $30,000 was not a surprise to me and would not have been a surprise to the planning commission members who were present while the work was done and receiving the reports and the repeated updates as well as in consideration of the scope of the project, making certain all the work was done as it needed to be done," said Torino, noting that any question about the methodology of the study should be brought to the planning commission.

Other additional studies, were done at the request of the planning commission, said Trustee John Mauk, who at the time of the study was a member of the planning commission. He noted that the planning commission presented the consultant with numerous questions and asked for several clarifications and modifications of the data which added to the scope of the project. The planning commission, according to Mauk, also wanted to be sure that there were adequate exhibits and presentations made to the village by the consultants. Other consultations were requested with Buckhurst, Fish & Jacquemart for the planning commission's own analysis. Mauk went on to note that in order for the consultants to study the issue of how many people went in an out of each of the buildings, the scope of the study would have had to been expanded even further.

Russell Matthews, executive vice president of the Albanese Development Corp., stated that it is not just $30,000 that they were talking about. He said that the delay, on the village's part, in making a decision regarding a solution to the parking problems in the village, was costing business in the community millions of dollars because they are having trouble renting space in buildings on Franklin Avenue because of the parking shortages. According to Matthews, hiring yet another consultant, after others have already reported on the parking in the past, just delayed the process of finding a solution for another year and cost the village unnecessary money. "People should be outraged," said Matthews.

Mauk argued that the study done by Buckhurst, Fish & Jacquemart was not merely a duplication of what had been done previously and again said that the village board was not the appropriate place for this discussion.

Mayor Hecken noted that the planning commission will most likely spend the summer reviewing at the consultants' recommendations and then make their recommendations to the village board who will ultimately make the decision on what will be done, to increase parking in the village. He stressed that the consultants' recommendations are not the final report.

Despite the questions on the additional allotment of funds for the consultant, the consent calendar was approved as presented.