Quincy Reporter

Adams County Board Executive Committee met April 5

Here is the minutes provided by the committee:

The Adams County Board Executive Committee held the regularly scheduled meeting in the ROE Conference room. The meeting was moved to the County Board room to accommodate additional visitors.

The following members were present:

R. Kent Snider

Bret Austin

Barney Bier

Dave Bellis

Becky Weed

Others present:

Gary Farha

Todd Eyler

Sue Hester

Anthony Foster

Erica Scott

Jessica Douglas

David Hochgraber

Terry Bower

Rich Wagner

John Simon

Cindy Barbera (Zoom)

The meeting was called to order at 5:34 p.m. by Chairman Snider.

Mr. Austin made a motion to approve the March 1, 2021 meeting minutes. Mr. Bier stated he did not get a copy. Mr. Bellis seconded the motion. Mr. Snider stated that the minutes were emailed out and he got them. No discussion. The meeting minutes were approved.

Mr. Snider began the meeting out of order to discuss new business so that they could discuss the agenda item of moving the 911 backup center into the sub-basement of the Courthouse. Mr. Snider stated that everyone got a letter from Tom Bentley and Chief Copley. Mr. Bellis asked Mr. Chairman what letters he was referring to. Mr. Snider replied that they emailed a letter and a copy was given to him on the table. Mr. Snider continued that in the next few months since the County has all this money coming to them, the 5.5 million, the plan is to do a lot of improvements in the IT room which is going to require a lot more room. The board would like to move 911 to where the public defender was and where 911 used to be in the sub basement because that server room is going to be full of more IT equipment. If the backup center stays in that room and the County server room has to move its roughly going to cost the County between $65,000 - $100,000 to move the County’s stuff in addition to the equipment. So that is why the County is asking 911 to move their stuff to the sub-basement. The County is going to spend a minimum of $200,000 in the next 90 days, and it could be upwards of $300,000. Mr. Snider then asked if Mrs. Douglas would like to address the group.

Mrs. Douglas stated that the two letters really embody what her concerns are really first and foremost her most profound concern is just working conditions. 911 had occupied that space back in the 90s, before her time when they were basic 911. At that point it was determined that the space was not suitable for their needs even at the basic 911 level, which led to them moving to the current location in the basement. And of course now they are an enhanced 911 center and with being an enhanced 911 center comes different codes with ETSA including different security needs with the enhanced 911 center that need to be taken into consideration. And that’s not even touching anything with ADA code regulations so she wants to make sure that before she agrees to move any staff to occupy that space (sub-basement) she knows it’s going to be safe. She mentioned there should be another item that came to them from the radio technician and that is relocating just radio equipment, talking console. His professional opinion that the radio racks need to move too for ease of access, less points of failure, easier to troubleshoot stuff, and that’s just one small piece. That doesn’t take into consideration her phone equipment that needs to be moved, the next generation 911 phone system along with the cabling and stuff. You can’t look at it as just moving those consoles because there’s a lot that goes with that. In fact we had to move the backup center in February because they had some furtniture changes at the primary center, because it’s very involved taking any pieces of those consoles down it takes a lot of people and a lot of stuff that goes with those. It’s not just moving compujters, and that’s why she attended the meeting to make sure those things are taken into consideration. But I do know that our board, many of them had conflicts and could not be at the meeting tonight.

Mr. Bellis stated that he talked to Mike Farha several weeks ago when they were discussing this and he did not have a problem with it, and Duane Venvertloh at that point did not either.

Mr. Bier mentioned that he did not speak to Duane Venvertloh but he did speak to Mike Farha, and it’s a matter of terminology. If you put it that if he had a problem with it, if you asked Mike Farha if he was in favor of the move he would definitely say no, it’s his position that he doesn’t have any control over the move so he’s not going to say anything. But to characterize that he is for this would not be accurate.

Mr. Bellis stated that since he (Mike) wasn’t at the meeting it’s Barney’s word against Dave’s, and he’s just repeating what he told Bellis. He also mentioned that this was for information only, we’re not asking, we have to do it.

Mr. Bier stated he was opposed to it, from a historical perspective it goes back to 90-93 when the 911 center was in the sub basement it moved in part because of the ADA. And it also coincided with the renovation of the courthouse so it worked out, but the ADA was certainly part of the motivation behind that. That is still going to apply today, and the fire codes he’s not aware of, but the ADA he is.

Mr. Bellis stated that they are not changing any walls. Mr. Bier stated that he asked for a legal opinion and he hasn’t received one, but based upon his looking at the statute it doesn’t matter. It even says if it was there now, they’d have to move it because it is not in compliance with the ADA. So his opinion is that it’s a real problem to put it in perspective. And he doesn’t know all the personnel, it very well may be that everyone right now can walk down the steps, he doesn’t know, but it’s not just a matter of somebody being in a wheel chair, or a knee replacement, or heart problems, hard of breathing, their ability to get up and down without a lot of stress, it certainly comes into play. So if you move them down there, it may be good in 2021, or 2022, but between now and 2030 it’s going to be a problem.

Mr. Bellis stated asked for other options. Mr. Bier stated that a move somewhere else could be a consideration, he isn’t sure what kind of room is needed down there. When he took a tour there was some discussion about using the breakroom, it was his impression that was about how much room they needed in the space, that was what he was told was how much room they needed. Mrs. Hester asked who told him that. Mr. Bier stated when he went down there with Mrs. Hester and Mr. Hochgraber. Mrs. Hester stated that’s not true, and that she told him that kitchen space would not be big enough. She had a diagram to share to show that actually that whole space where the consoles are would be necessary. Mr. Bier stated that he is just giving his impression from their meeting that day. Mr. Bier continued that there is plenty of room in the basement, and files could be moved, in addition he was told to move that equipment would cost $60,000-$80,000. The quotes that the committee has in front of them today is to move 911 to the sub-basement would be about $115,000. So there’s a cost involved. Based upon his experience with the funds if they were to move it could be paid out of the surcharge in part, but other than that you are looking for a definite contribution from the City and County. In addition to that, the fact that the public defenders were down there, two wrongs don’t make a right, and that was definitely a temporary space. Moving them to the sub-basement you’re going to be moving them again some time in the near future and that’s going to be an additional expense. Also, Jessica mentioned there were two days in February that the backup center was in use, in 2019 911 was in the backup center for a period of 6 weeks. To put it into perspective this is a volatile time of year weather wise, if you have recollection the last big storm in 2014 was in July. If we’re going to mess with moving in that 3 week period, we’re not going to have a 911. Is there a good answer, no. It’s bad in the short run because it’s going to cost a lot of money up front, and it’s bad in the distant future because if they move down there you’re going to see another move to a different facility whether it be city hall or somewhere downtown or maybe out in Mendon. In addition, if you are thinking of this as a permanent position we’re looking for trouble, he can envision them hiring someone who has a disability vs. someone who doesn’t have a disability, and hiring the person without a disability and the person with the disability making a claim because they were not able to access the sub-basement, or the reason they didn’t get a promotion is because they could not supervise in the sub-basement. Maybe the States Attorneys office can help out, is the sub-basement in compliance with the ADA?

Mr. Bellis stated we can ‘what if’ it to death.

Mr. Bier stated he is not ‘what if’ing’ it. He definitely thinks it is reasonable in the future, and he also thinks it is not in compliance with federal law.

Gary Farha asked Barney if he had asked his office for an opinion.

Mr. Bier replied yes, he sent an email. He sent it to Todd and somebody else. Speaking to Todd, he stated, remember I sent it to you regarding that meeting, I meant to say David and Sue, but he said Todd and Sue, and Todd responded to the email that he was not on the tour.

Mr. Eyler stated that he remembers that e-mail.

Mr. Bier said that was the email where he asked for a legal opinion.

Mr. Austin asked how many years the public defenders office was in the sub-basement. Mr. Snider replied he thought it was four. Mr. Bier stated three or four years.

Mr. Austin asked if this was ever an issue. So we’re going under the two wrongs don’t make a right, as Mr. Bier stated. So this wasn’t an issue for 4 years in a staffed every day office, full department of the County. But now it’s an issue in a once in a while used, 3 weeks out of every 3 years place.

Mr. Bier stated he really does think it’s an issue. The reason it was moved there from where it was had to do with the federal statute. There are certain things, like knowing the public defender’s office was going to be only temporary placement. From what he understands the move for 911 is permanent. Also, if you look at the nature of the jobs which are different, you still have the egress and ingress to get down there, but as opposed to the public defenders who can meet clients elsewhere that’s a lot different than being under a stressful situation having to be at that desk for 8 hour shifts. Couple with that the cost of $100,000 to place it somewhere else it is worthy of consideration.

Mr. Austin asked if we could get a quote to make the sub-basement ADA accessible. Is it a chair lift going down 5 steps?

Mr. Bier stated we would probably have to get someone to come out and take a look at it. And five stairs? He asked if Mr. Austin had ever been there.

Mr. Farha replied that he thinks it is three levels. Mr. Bier stated it’s way down there and offered to give Mr. Austin a tour.

Mr. Austin was just asking, what would it take to be ADA accessible. Mr. Bier said even with that, he feels fairly confident that as it is now won’t be ADA compliant. Mr. Austin agreed that now it is not, but asked what would it take to retrofit it. Mr. Bier said we could table this until they get a quote.

Mr. Austin asked what space is available on the basement level that would be ADA compliant, that is storage only or file cabinets, that would be enough space, and maybe put file storage in the sub-basement. Or do we need file storage to be ADA compliant too?

Mrs. Hester stated that she would have to talk to Terry about ADA compliance. Mr. Bower stated there is no file storage available downstairs. Mr. Austin asked about the third floor, instead of having file storage up there is there any space up there, that’s got an elevator. Mr. Bower stated there is space on the third floor.

Mr. Austin stated that what we’re going for is bunching stuff together for efficiency. Bunching the IT stuff together, and keeping the 911 stuff together. Mr. Bellis stated also to separate them. Mrs. Hester stated that her request for space is brand new, server room racks that we need to build out for the infrastructure of their data storage. Mr. Austin asked Mrs. Hester if she is going to use the sub-basement for anything. Mrs. Hester stated that they would be in the same predicament with ADA. Mr. Austin said not to have people down there, but to have equipment down there. She replied that they probably could but it would take an electrician about $50,000 just to move the wiring potentially, and then they would have to get some type of HVAC system down there for all of the equipment, and then the IT staff would have to be able to go up and down the stairs every day. Mr. Austin was just talking about the backups and the stuff that doesn’t get touched every day, because the 911 would not be going down there every day. Mr. Austin stated that he understands that two wrongs don’t make a right, and why go backwards, he gets that. Mr. Bellis stated that we’re all on the same team and want to make this work.

Mr. Bier said he understands that and is why he is asking for an alternative.

Mr. Austin asked Terry if there is any logistical way to make it work on the basement or first floor. Mr. Bower confirmed that the basement level, his level, is ADA compliance now. Mr. Austin asked if there is any other space on the basement floor that could be used, and Mr. Bower stated no, not for the size of space that she needs. First floor and second floor is out. Mr. Austin asked about the third floor. Mr. Bower replied that the old investigations room is free that is right outside of the elevator. Mr. Austin asked if that was big enough. Mr. Bower stated that it is smaller. Mr. Austin asked if that was big enough for 911. Mr. Bower stated that would be tight and the space is chopped up, but the walls could be knocked out.

Mr. Bier stated that one of the alternatives may be to move the backup 911 center out of the courthouse, but it is not feasible to do that in 2 months. Mr. Austin asked what other locations have been talked about. Mrs. Hester replied that this hasn’t been brought to the proper committee yet, it is on the agenda for Building & Grounds next Tuesday. Mr. Snider stated that it’s obvious we have to do something. They have to move that out, or we have to move our IT out because we are going to order stuff in the next 90-120 days that space will be transformed.

Mr. Bier asked Mrs. Douglass when the 911 board meets. She replied April 21st. Mr. Bier stated that he is sure it will be a subject of conversation.

Mr. Snider stated if they move 911 out its $100K, if they move IT it’s between $60-100k. Mrs. Douglas stated that does not include other expenses. Mr. Bier referred to Copley’s letter, where he states that if we’re looking at moving equipment, now might be the time to look at purchasing new equipment, which would also be consistent. Mrs. Douglas pointed out that the technicians had some concerns with the radio consoles, they’ve been ok using them in the backup center, but he is not certain how well it would sustain a move.

Mrs. Hester stated if they re-wired the entire IT network room the network will be down for a sustained amount of time, and we will all be out of service including 911.

Mr. Farha wasn’t sure if there was an inter-governmental agreement that touches this, because the initial IGA was certainly before they ever moved out to the new center. He thinks at one time the County was to provide a backup center. Mr. Bier stated it is not mentioned in this one, the County is under no obligation to provide the space pursuant to the agreement.

Mrs. Hester asked is she could speak, as she hasn’t had the chance yet to voice the reason why she is asking to move forward with this infrastructure upgrade. The County is at 98% capacity, and asked Mr. Hochgraber to confirm which he did. She stated we have no data storage and the County will start losing data very quickly. The IT department bandaided that by moving forward with the Office 365 migration so users have One Drive to be able to move some data off the network, but our servers are moving data over and saving what they can, but the County is going to lose data and it will happen soon. Time is of the essence, and she apologized for not being able to give a lot of time to everyone to consider but it has to be done very quickly.

Mr. Farha stated that some of that data is something that we are legally required to keep. Mrs. Weed asked if we have any control over what data can be stored vs. not. Mrs. Hester replied that they do not.

Mrs. Hester replied that she can throw good money at bad, and buy a black box server for $20,000, or try to keep building on this infrastructure plan that we’ve been working on for six months and get something built in the courthouse. Mr. Snider stated that they might need to do both. Might need to do that as a bandaid because we cannot figure this out quickly, but put a timeline on this like 60-90 days to figure out.

Mr. Austin stated no one that is a Director of a department that sits in this room right now should take this as criticizing to them, but this is the same reactive bull shit that we do all the time, when do we stop doing this. He pointed to Mrs. Hester, Mrs. Douglas and Mr. Foster and told them they are not long enough here, when do we stop. We’re looking at $400,000 worth of stuff and you are going to rip half of it up in six months. Let’s be honest, $100,000 quote…bull, more like $150,000; you don’t have a panel that supports power, another $200,000.

Mr. Bellis stated that we just replaced a panel.

Mr. Austin stated that its disappointing, and to take his frustration as let’s not keep doing this. From a financial side it’s dumb. $68,000 generators and whatever else, we should have been keeping up with this equipment. He would put a book mark in the 911 chapter, and stated that it is an interesting letter from Chief Copley, maybe Mrs. Douglas should find out what it costs to order all the new equipment now, because Steve talked about that for years and nobody ever pulled the trigger.

Mrs. Douglas stated the consoles themselves are about $10,000 a pop, and they are looking at four of them.

Mr. Austin stated that the letter from Copley is valid…why move it, if it’s 1990s equipment and it’s so brittle it’s going to break.

Mr. Simon stated that there’s a lot of issues, that particular Motorola model is probably 10 years outdated. There could be efficiencies in pursuing a new console system that is at the primary that uses the network as a brain in one spot and the consoles in another, or in their house.

Mr. Austin stated but in theory you have to stand up the new room with this in order to make it work. Mr. Simon agreed.

Mr. Bier stated that in addition to whatever money we get and how we want to allocate it, moving 911 center, there are various ways to finance this over time. His only problem is he doesn’t think it can be done in 2 months. Maybe if we talked about this 6 months ago since you’ve been working on this for the past 6 months instead of the last 2 weeks then we’d be in a different spot.

Mr. Snider stated that if we knew what we were doing in 60 days, not that they had to be out in 60 days. If we knew where they were going to go, that would help. Out of that COVID money they could buy that $20,000 black box to store data, a $20,000 bandaid.

Mrs. Hester stated that the issue that Mr. Foster is having will not be resolved with this bandaid and will have to wait longer until the infrastructure upgrade…the entire thing is a trickle down effect. It impacts so many other people besides just one department.

Mr. Snider suggested Mrs. Douglas find out if they can move somewhere in this building or go to a different building.

Mrs. Hester stated, for the record, she just hired David 6 months ago, so it’s taken him a couple of months to learn what infrastructure the County had before he could develop a plan, and she apologized to Mr. Bier that she didn’t get the plan to him sooner.

Mr. Snider recommended Mrs. Douglas talk to her board, mentioned that two of them are at this meeting, and get back to us.

Mrs. Douglas stated one thing she should mention is that if they relocate the backup center, that would modify the enhanced 911 application that she submitted to the statewide, at that time it was the Illinois Commerce Commission, but prior to us becoming an enhanced 911 county. This will modify that plan, so that’s going to require some coordination with Statewide 911, the level of which she’s going to need to approve to move the location, but it’s possible. That’s how it was written, our primary being on 48th street and the backup being in the basement of the Courthouse; and it’s specifically written in the basement of the Courthouse. So by statute she is required to coordinate with her if they have to submit an entirely new plan if they move out of the building, or if it’s just simple.

Mr. Bellis stated so it’s more b.s. paperwork for the government. That’s her deal.

Mr. Farha stated that they replaced the antenna last year, would there be problems if the 911 site left. Mr. Simon replied it could be mutually beneficial or it can separate. The RF infrastructure for the radio project needs to stay from the perspective that it was positioned to have in building coverage particularly in the downtown area. Whether 911 backup would move within the building or an entirely different facility there would need to be some sort of back hole connection from the backup into this site, as well as all the other site. Mr. Farha was asking about moving it from the facility. Mr. Simon stated for it to operate as designed, it should not move. Mr. Simon and Mrs. Douglas had a brief discussion that was inaudible.

Mr. Austin asked Mrs. Hester if she has room to put a bandaid backup in the County’s area. Mrs. Hester stated that she could buy a black box. Mr. Bellis asked how long that would last. Mrs. Hester replied that she was not sure, and mentioned that the ambulances will not have any video downloaded; and the dashcams for the officers won’t be able to handle that. Knowing that’s coming down the pike, but she cannot answer for the things she doesn’t know is coming. Black box will buy us a little bit of time so we don’t completely crash. Mr. Austin stated that she should start planning for that.

Mr. Snider stated again that Mrs. Douglas should talk to her board. He stated that he would rather move 911 than the County’s IT. Mr. Austin stated that it’s the 1/100th of the time that they are staffing the space that is what it gets down to. He’s frustrated from the constant reactivity than proactivity for an organization this size and a lot of smart people here we should be doing a better job. Being proactive would be getting a budget together for the new equipment. Being proactive would be finding a room in this Courthouse that never needs to be moved again, that you’re there for life. Being proactive would be seeing if the sub-basement would work for the equipment that you touch the least and just move it all down there and free up space for you that is ADA compliant. Being proactive would be what walls can be removed, going up there, going through the whole plan, finding out what walls are load bearing and doing some back of the napkin sketch for the 911 board and say hey, this room is actually 22x16, whatever, see what I mean. These are the things that would move us forward and not be buying 6 month bandaid servers for $20,000. So let’s work on that.

Mr. Bellis stated that part of the problem was that before Sue and David got here, we didn’t realize what we had or didn’t have. These guys brought it to our attention, and now we’re dealing with it. Mr. Austin stated he would reiterate that it looks like right now what is this IT department doing, but I would hazard to guess that we should have had these discussions 5-6 years ago at least. Mr. Bellis said yes, but we didn’t.

Mr. Snider said so they won’t bring it up at Buildings and Grounds, but Mr. Bellis said he will so they know what’s going on, but they won’t take a vote or anything. Mr. Snider said ok, but make it informational only.

Mr. Snider brought to the floor Resolution #2021-04-001-009 – Approving and Authorizing the IGA for the Quincy Bay Area Restoration. Mr. Austin moved to approve, Mr. Bier seconded the motion. Mr. Austin stated this is the QBAR, Corps of Engineers decided they cannot give the money directly to Qdera, unless the governmental agencies involved in the direct area meaning the county and somewhat the City, it’s important to have the City on board because there is overlap, and to have the Park District. The final stew out of is, the Corps of Engineer cannot cut a check directly to Qdera, so we will act as the intergovernmental agent to receive the money on their behalf even though it will go into an account set up for Qdera. This was a direct request from the Corps of Engineers, so all of the entities involved felt that they needed to get it in writing that they approved of it as well as would oversight the money. It’s at least $20M up to $25M for bay dredging, shore reclamation, close the cut through, wetlands mitigation, and this may only be the first round, there may be another round coming. This agreement would cover it into the second phase. Work to be started within next 1.5-2 years, will probably take 2 years to complete it all. It’s a great project, they are just asking us to be fiduciary overseers. Mr. Snider asked for all in favor, all voted aye. The motion carries.

Mr. Snider moved to the next agenda item to discuss the Illinois Housing Development Board. Mr. Austin stated there is a program coming up in April that is a rental relief program, it needs to be administered by someone locally. It can be County but we would probably default to Two Rivers. The City may have some of their own programs, but right now it appears to be a County only program. It is a rental relief program through IDA, its COVID money that came in block grants through the state and can be used for housing assistance, rental assistance, utility assistance. There is nothing to be done right now, he is just giving information. The program doesn’t start until April. Mr. Bellis asked if that was April 1. Mr. Austin stated April 12th, or something like that. Mr. Bellis asked if it is for landlords and tenants. Mr. Austin stated it is redesigned so that the landlords provide the info, and the tenants verify the information, meaning it is probably a reaction to the first program where the tenants provide the info and the landlords verified the information, and their success rate on that program was abysmal. We just need to be on the lookout that this is coming and to what degree we want our involvement to be. Mr. Bellis asked if Two Rivers would cover this too. Mr. Austin felt like it would be fair to ask for an administrative fee of a couple percent and it’s in line with their program. It might happen before the May meeting, the County can handle it in Finance. Mrs. Weed asked if this was discussed with Two Rivers first, and Mr. Austin stated that they know about it, they are the ones that brought it up that the County would need to be the fiduciary.

Mr. Snider brought up the next agenda item Infill Housing Initiative Update. Mr. Austin stated that they had a really good meeting on that. The citizens of Quincy and Adams County is more aware of housing stock falling down, and lack of qualify affordable housing for people who need affordability. Infill housing has fallen through the cracks for a long time. It’s probably the next biggest item to pivot to as far as county-wide, and this means developing layers to working together on an IGA for a County Trustee program that is woefully antiquated. We take control as a county trustee but have no oversight, that goes to the city, and the city needs to know that they are going to get the deed to the properties like that (insert snapping of fingers). Mr. Austin wants to talk more about this to Mr. Bellis as this will likely go to his committee because County towns have this problem too, not just the city, and that the County would allow and possibly pay a trustee, probably a lawyer, and we would pay to have that off our books. Mr. Bellis mentioned no county building codes. Mr. Austin stated that’s why it has to be only in the incorporated areas. He did have a meeting on it today, the City is going to tear down a building without even having the deed yet because it’s that much of a life safety issue. So if we can work with our County Treasurer it could be $5000-10,000/year in our budget and we become a partner in getting the trustee paid off and we can make this go quicker. Next layer is land bank and those properties can be salvageable. Landbank can’t survive off those properties. Next component assisted build housing (low interest rates, property tax reimbursement, incentivize building), above that developers building retail housing.

Mr. Bier stated that he hopes he is wrong, but based on his limited experience, if there is an expectation that it’s going to be a money maker for us as a trustee it’s not going to be. It’s something we’ll have to invest in continually over, say you put down $200,000 for a $500,000 stroke, his expectation is going to be 3 years, 5 years, 6 years we’ll be doing the same thing. Mr. Austin agrees, he is just wanting to get these moved through the process quicker and they aren’t worth much. But at least it’s not a fire hazard, or a drug or squatter place. He thinks the board should start to get a committee together, maybe the riverfront people because they are idea people.

The next topic is the Supplement Employee Handbook. Mr. Bier stated that he wants to address the sick time and he bets he can do it in seven minutes or less. He handed out visuals (Mrs. Hester did not receive one). The first page is the signature page of the Circuit Clerk’s contract. The reason he got that first is that negotiations are going to start on or after August 1 of this year and these issues are coming. As far as the sick leave policy, historically it goes back to January of 2020 or December of 2019. He does know that members of the Circuit Clerk’s office have our personnel policy and they are going to pick and choose what they want in their contract. Christa’s got it and she’s got it highlighted, so she’s going to pick what she wants and she’s going to try to get it in there. The reason he put the front page on there is that he wants everyone to notice who signs it, it’s Lori Geschwandner and the union, so as far as language in the contract, although we’re invited to the table, as far as what goes into that contract it’s going to be largely up to them, so I think whatever language we have in the employee handbook its subject that they are going to try to make it circuit wide. The second page and he’s using this for illustration juvenile detention and he’ll come back to that, notice the signature page on that is Judge McCartney and the Machinest Union again, so I think we’re invited to the table, and maybe one year we weren’t, but the point being that they get to decide and basically we get to fund and the reason I mention that and Anthony’s back there, is that not in a union contract it’s his understanding that with probation officers they are pretty much governed by AOIC, so regardless of whatever you have in your handbook, unless you got Frank McCartney’s signature on it and Anthony’s signature on it, and for that matter probably the Supreme Court, the guts of that contract in regard to what applied the handbook isn’t going to apply and is probably going to confuse your employees. He goes back to say he likes the handbook and the work that went into it, it incorporates a lot of statues that we need to abide by in terms of uniformity, but there are problems with it. The third item is the union contract with Gary, there are three signatures there, the union, Gary and the County Board. With Gary’s office we are co-employers, so what that means is that people are covered by the union contract, meaning the legal secretaries and you got the attorneys. Gary is very much like Frank McCartney, whatever you got in that handbook may or may not apply only if Gary wants it to apply, and he’ll get back to that. He is trying to address donation of sick time. Gary can have donation of sick time for his attorneys, or he could not. What Gary can do if Todd’s sick he can have everyone donate to Todd for 3-4 months, regardless of the handbook, this is just for illustrative purposes. The problem we have with the current language in the sick leave policy, and what he did was print out a page from the internet and went down through all of the agreements with respect to donation of sick time and if you’ll notice you have donation of sick time basically in FOP contracts which are going to be correctional seargents officers, security officers, deputy sergeants. The difference in their donation of sick time vs. ours is that there is a cap of 5 days per year in the aggregate, the way that reads is the members of that bargaining unit collectively can donate a total of 5 days and that’s the cap. With ours there is no cap, the employee can receive as much as they want, and the County is giving money away that we don’t need to be giving away, and also you got IMRF. The other parts of the contract that talks about the JDC, the event the employee has exhausted their sick time the employee shall be able to donate up to 5 days per year in the aggregate for all employees, so that’s your ceiling. In our policy you don’t have a ceiling. The machinest tried to get the donation of sick time in their contract and the County said no. The point being the machinest are going to come back at the County and ask for it again. And it’s not just the donation of sick time it’s going to be lots of different things. Also you’ll notice on the last page of the handbook you’ll notice that when you accumulate sick time in regard to the handbook, the employee can use that for any family member for any length of time. If you look at the contracts the ceiling is 10 days, if you look at the law, the law is 5 days. He brought another illustration where he had highlighted in blue the first paragraph, it says 5 or 10 days in blue. Our current employee handbook doesn’t have a cap on it. The reason he put 5 or 10 is that under the statute we have to allow a minimum of 5 days, which is one of the reasons why he thinks the handbook is great is because you’re alerting your employees and office heads that there’s a lot that we have to comply with. The reason he has 10 is that consistently in the union contracts, 10 days is what we’re allowing and that’s the cap. Under our current language you can either construe it to be 5 days or unlimited but there should be an amount. And if you look at the last portion of that page, that’s in regards to the donation of sick time, if part of the reason to have an employee handbook is to have some kind of uniformity, then this particular language is not accomplishing that because its contrary to what is in the contracts. He doesn’t think it should be there because it causes confusion and it’s not enforceable, just because it’s in the handbook doesn’t mean that Gary is going to or has to follow it, or Anthony has to follow it. He thinks it’s over micro-managing that we don’t need to engage in. So he would recommend that the cap as far as what can be used for families be what everyone has and consistent across the board, have it be 10 days, the statue is a minimum of 5, and then delete the donation of sick time. It’s his understanding that no other office holders were doing that, but he is basing that off of years and years ago when he was in office, you’re providing something that didn’t exist prior to January 2020 for non-union employees. For what it’s worth there’s lots of other stuff but he’s over his seven minutes, that he thinks needs to be, but coming down the trek these will come up in union negotiations and might as well be prepared to adopt it for everybody.

Mr. Austin stated this is only one of several things that come up, so what is his position or what does he think is going to happen when Gary says he doesn’t want to follow the health insurance policy. Mr. Bier stated that he doesn’t have control over that, and that is entirely a benefit provided. What he could do is reduce the hours, or go out and purchase his own health insurance, but he would have to go to the Board to ask for money. But if Gary doesn’t follow your personnel policy as to how people are hired, how people are disciplined, or how sick leave is dolled out, those things are not reason to reduce his budget because he has been elected to run his office as he sees fit, and we shouldn’t micro manage it. For what it’s worth, there’s a lot of frustration with office holders in regard to how this is may or may not apply to them.

Mr. Austin stated that he agrees there is a lot of frustration with office holders, but one of the reasons and frustrations, there’s a lot of no’s to them. They are on the front line, they want to make those employees happy, I’m not saying they aren’t doing a good job, but without some backbone and commonality to what we’re doing here, what are we doing. This may be one that seems across the board, and thank you for doing the leg work, but from a larger sense, what about overtime, what about vacation hours, what about health insurance policy, all this stuff that I’ve been on the County Board for 4 years and the number one thing that I’ve tried to bring to the table is to reduce the idiosyncrycies of all these departments. He said in every union negotiation that he could, he was in at least every department’s union at least once, Sue sat in all of them. He feels like they are creating some drama where we don’t need to because he’s like to see them as consistent as possible. The ramifications are, if Gary wants to go off the reservation and offer 7 weeks of vacation time, what is our.

Mr. Bier replied it’s two-fold when it comes to budgetary time and they ask for money, he can say you know what you are giving your people 7 weeks you don’t need it, that’s your hammer at budget time. In regard to health insurance that doesn’t really apply because you’re always going to provide that, nobody will be able to go off the reservation with that. Mr. Bier replied that what he is trying to do is make it more consistent with everything else, and that’s what he’d like to do with this personnel policy is not add something new, and that’s what he’s trying to do. The handbook is a really good idea, as he read through it that he was not aware of that employees have certain rights to, and when he looked them up they were there and now everybody knows about it.

Mr. Austin stated that he feels like we keep getting caught in this catch 22 like let’s write this great handbook but as an elected office holder they don’t want to do that. Mr. Bier replied that that’s the way our government is set up. Missouri doesn’t have to do what Illinois does, that’s the country we live in. As far as the County passing something, the internal operation of the office holders, you have to have their name, their signatures. And you don’t have that in your employee handbook. So now you’ve got in your employee handbook, the office holders may or may not agree, and the union saying I like this and this and this, so your uniformity will be giving away more benefits than not.

Mr. Austin stated that we have the elected official on the same side of the union bargaining table as us, so we got that going for us. But what if we had a condition of signing off by department heads in the employee handbook.

Mrs. Hester stated that she did work with the department heads on the handbook. Mr. Austin said but they didn’t sign it. Mrs. Hester said they met for a year, had meetings and discussed all the policies in it. Mr. Austin demanded that they did not sign it or make an oath to it. Mrs. Hester stated that they signed it that they received it because it was sent out to all employees. Mr. Austin stated that they didn’t sign it though stating that they will abide to all of the terminology. Mr. Bier reminded us that Anthony works for Judge McCartney, and if Judge McCartney doesn’t sign off on it and you can’t make him. Mr. Austin said that Anthony’s department is probably the most off the reservation anyway because they have virtually no control over them, how it’s legally structured. Mr. Bier said as for supervisor of assessments there is probably more play involved because that’s somebody you appoint.

Mr. Autin stated that he wants this board, this committee that deals with this, to deal in uniformity, efficiency, not back track. We literally wasted hundreds of thousands of dollars in tax payer dollars by not tracking vacation, sick time, by having 17 different systems not tracking that, by department heads not even knowing what employees had in their bank.

Mr. Bier said one of the things the County can do, their main job is the audit function, as far as keeping track of their vacation and sick time, that’s our job. If he goes off the reservation you really can’t stop him. Mr. Austin said it would be a bad position for a department head to put that many benefits out there that’s a check they can’t cash the next year, and that’s what we’ve been talking about with salaries. Mr. Bier said that’s what he’s trying to propose is to make it more uniform. Mr. Austin said he’s expanding the one detail into a global argument. Mr. Bier said he gets it and he can work on that, and there’s certain things he can make uniform but there’s certain things you can’t.

Mr. Bier made a motion to pass the supplement, meals and period policy, page 4 and 5, as presented with the final changes on page 4 under sick pay that employees can use up to a maximum of 10 days for the illness of family, and at the bottom of page 5 in red. Mr. Austin asked if he was advocating for 10 days, Mr. Bier said in every contract it is 10 days. Mr. Austin said isn’t that going to make the FOP want 10 days, and Mr. Bier said that they already have 10 days. He’s asking for the donation for 5 days. Mr. Austin stated he will second the motion only to discuss it. Mr. Austin said you realize there were some desired effects to doing this which was to have people use up sick time that would put us in IMRF considerations. If we get rid of this then we’re saying they will go on short term disability or what will happen. Mrs. Hester replied that Mr. Bier is trying to minimize the amount of time an employee can use if a family member is sick. Mr. Bier said no, he is trying to maximize it. Mrs. Hester clarified that he is putting a maximum in there but there isn’t one in there now, so he is adding a maximum, and stated that we did that intentionally because if an employee has a child that is sick and on FMLA an employee is going to want to use all their banked time, but now Mr. Bier is trying to put a limit on that. Mr. Bier stated yes which is consistent with what is in every union contract. Mrs. Hester stated that she would not recommend that from an HR perspective but it is completely up to the board. She does not believe that any department has ever enforced that in the past or if they have. Mrs. Austin asked if they would go on FMLA. Mrs. Hester confirmed they would go on unpaid FMLA with a lot of sick time on the books. Mr. Bier said no, they maybe have a lot of sick time, maybe not. Mrs. Hester stated that the FOP contracts allow accumulating 90 days of sick time and everybody else can accumulate up to 240 days, so they can have 240 days on the books and now you are limited them to using only 10 days if a family member is sick and they are on FMLA. Mr. Austin asked if they are unpaid after that. Mrs. Hester reiterated that if they pass what Mr. Bier is recommending, they will only be able to use 10 days paid sick time, they could potentially use any other banked time, but only 10 days of sick time even if they have more on the books. Mr. Austin asked if their sick time would stay the way it was. Mrs. Hester confirmed their sick time would just sit there, so every employee would be very ticked off if they can’t used their banked sick time to take care of their sick child. Mr. Bier said he disagrees, first of all when he says every employee, the union contracts say 10 days. Mrs. Hester said that nobody enforces that. Mr. Austin stated that is a different problem. Mrs. Hester agreed that is a different problem. Mr. Austin stated that if it’s in writing they could enforce that, and Mrs. Hester agreed. Mr. Austin asked why is no one enforcing that. Mrs. Hester said she should not have said no one is enforcing that, however she would assume that if an employee has time on the books and is trying to take care of a sick family member, you would want to let them burn up their sick time.

Mr. Bellis said if you have 29 sick days banked and you go on FMLA, he thought you got to use your sick time until it’s over, and then it’s unpaid. Mr. Bier said the definition of what’s available for employees and family members would be 10 days. Mr. Austin said but what if they have 39 days. Mr. Bellis asked what business is it of ours whether its them or a family member, what does FMLA stand for…Family Medical Leave Act. Mr. Bier said which means they get their job when they come back. Mr. Bellis said yes, paid or unpaid, they got the time coming to them. Mr. Bier said right, they would get the 10 days. Mr. Bellis asked what about the other 19 if they got 29 days. Mr. Bier said under the union contracts they wouldn’t get that. Mr. Bellis asked if that’s the law or a union thing, and asked if we could negotiate that in every union contract, and Mr. Bier replied yes. Mr. Bellis stated he does not agree with that. Mrs. Hester stated that the law states the employer has to allow the employee to use half of their earned sick time to take care of a sick family member which is where Mr. Bier is coming up with the number 5, so the law says we at least have to allow them to use 5 days to take care of a sick family member but we’re being more generous in the contract by saying they can use 10, but in the supplement we’re saying you can use whatever you need to use to take care of a family member while on leave.

Mr. Austin stated that his head hurts, Mr. Bellis agreed. Mr. Bier said they can table it. Mr. Bellis would like to table it for a month. Mr. Austin agreed, because he wants to understand it. He thinks there is a rub for a longer period of time to take off for a family member, I think even though it’s in writing in the union contract its probably been allowed for a long time. Mr. Bier asked if there are any specific examples. Mrs. Hester stated that she does not track the time outside of a department, the departments track how they use sick time, she knows that they use sick time because that’s what they send for payroll but she doesn’t know if they used it for a family member, they do that at the department level. Mrs. Weed asked if we offer short term and long term disability, and Mrs. Hester affirmed that we do but not to take care of a sick family member. Mr. Bellis made a motion to table this for a month. Mr. Austin seconded the motion. The motion carries to table it for 30 days.

Mr. Bellis asked if this is something that he wants to change now or later. Mr. Bier said he wants to change it now before negotiations. Mr. Bier thanked the committee for his seven minutes.

Mr. Snider moved on to talk about the COVID relief money. Mr. Austin said we’re going to get a bunch of money. We’re under a global mandate to spend the money by 2024, he said that’s not too hard, he’s sure this county has a history of repeating itself can find some way to spend money, as evident by tonight alone. But what do we spend it on. There’s going to be a lot of interpretation to this, we can push the boundaries on what you can and can’t use the money for. But he would like to have some mechanism of go no go over what we think the money can be used for and he doesn’t think have 21 people in the room all the time is going to work. So he’s advocating that either the Executive Committee is the dispursement of some sort of go no go bid, a way to formulate that, because we can’t get everyone in a room that often to go over all of these things. Passing it, of course, all 21 people voting on whether we spend the money on something, he’s just talking about the framework of the ideas. Some of it’s going to go pretty quick, some of it will be a year or two down the road, and the County will get another check. They don’t have a very good template of how they choose what to do with the money.

Mr. Snider said he thinks they need to get requests first, put a list together and then sit down and hash it out. And the requests need to come with a bid, some sort of estimate. We’re already working on some bids for 3 elevators, so we’ll have all the elevators. Jerrod is working on bids for new HVAC for the health department building. IT is going to come up with at least $200K if not $300K worth of stuff fairly quick. We’ve got estimates for dryvet on the rest of the building, that’s $500K.

Mr. Austin said that’s all infrastructure stuff, which is all well and good but the intent of the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 is to churn and burn some money in your community for economic development, personal citizen relief are probably the two primary things. If you just took the table of contents as your outline, vaccine distribution is at the top, support for Medicaid, testing, public health support, behavior and mental health, long term care facilities. Then go to emergency relief for direct financial assistance which I don’t think we have enough money for that. Housing and utility assistance, food and nutrition assistance, support for workers and aging services. Economic services, child care assistance, support for small businesses, economic development, then you go to transportation and emergency response, FEMA resources, EPA grants. So the table of contents is an outline, whether consciously or subconsciously in order, he doesn’t know, those are the programs they want you to churn and burn your money on. So infrastructure, is great, he agrees with some portion of that. But we do have to have some, we owe it to our constituents to have some component of these things. We might be getting money that covers testing and vaccine, but emergency relief we haven’t done a ton of that, it wasn’t even very well used the loan program that they did, but that was on COVID, and now people have a longer lookback period. We’ve done very little economic assistance when you get down to it. We did one of the most important things as a city/county by maximum economic assistance is we didn’t shudder our doors as a county or city, stayed into walking that line between COVID safety and keeping the economy going. But this is more about direct money, and then transportation and emergency response, we’ve got some money from emergency response stuff. So he’s asking what’s the template, what’s the outline, what’s the go no go for what we are spending this money on, what’s the structure, otherwise we’ll just have a crap ton of money in a pile and no plan, and would hate to see us go back and forth and don’t do anything that matters to people. Let’s be honest, by 2022 the politics could be very different and what’s to say there won’t be a clawback with no second payment. We can only plan for the money that’s in the bank at that time. Mr. Austin would advocate for direct assistance, every non for profit in Adams County and Quincy is down by 40% in collections over the past year, CASA, Quanada, United Way, they are better agents at distributing money then we are. They are the people that can spread the money out better than we can.

Mr. Bellis asked if Finance would oversee it, or the whole board. Mr. Austin said it’s too broad for the Finance Committee to do it, he isn’t sure if he’s willing to take it on the shoulders of the Finance Committee. He’s happy to set up accounts, the budgeting of it, the money they actually get, tracking money spent, he’ll do all the nuts and bolts of the Finance Committee because that’s the job he’s supposed to have, but it’s too broad to put on the Finance Committee because there are judicial, public health components that could benefit from the money. So he thinks they all need to come forward with their best ideas, so right now he wants to advocate for one, United Way, pick any organization that distributes money and he’s guessing there is a huge reduction. We need to develop some framework to spend $12M dollars, we’re getting half in about 90 days. It can’t go to pensions, it can’t go to reducing debt to lower the tax rate. It can go to making up money that we didn’t receive in taxes but what he’s looked at we haven’t missed a tax dollar last year, we’re not down. Mr. Bier said we may be down this June. Mr. Austin said maybe but we’d have to prove up on that.

Mrs. Weed asked if we could do some funding for Two Rivers to help with housing, etc. Mr. Austin stated that’s exactly what he’s talking about. Mrs. Weed said Two Rivers has been a good partner and they are skilled in that. Mr. Snider said that he and Bret had lunch and talked about writing a check to United Way and have them pass

the money on to CASA and other organizations. Mr. Autin said he doesn’t want them to break down into their little kingdoms of hey this is what I want to see, but there should be a broad stress test of what works. Mr. Bellis said even if they don’t give it to the non profit that is not on that list, they could still get some. Mr. Austin and Mr. Snider said yes, and they could get a percentage for administration fees. Mr. Austin said he can see using it for anything building related, IT, 911, EMS, ambulances, health department, those things are specifically mentioned. Mr. Austin said there could be a third or fourth round of money that they don’t even know about yet, they are talking about a whole other infrastructure bill, what if they get another $18M for just transportation stuff.

Mr. Farha asked if it would be opening up a can of worms to ask each board member to come up with three projects that they think would be near and dear to the people they represent so they have county participation in some of those. Mr. Austin said sure as long as nobody gets their feelings hurt. Mr. Austin said he is big on economic development in this community, everybody knows that, he’d like to do projects like riverfront development and infill housing, but his feelings aren’t going to get hurt if it doesn’t go that way. Be prepared to not get your thing funded.

Mr. Snider said he would like to see a check go to the riverfront. Mr. Austin agreed. Tourism and economic development are in there, so it’s feasible. Before the final vote they need to run it up the flagpole to the governor’s office or LaHood’s office. Mr. Snider said he already took the bids for the dryvit for the whole building, $550,000 to finish it, already sent that to LaHood’s office and they sent it to Washington and their legal team is looking at it before we spend a dime. IT is a no brainer, we already know we can do that.

Mr. Austin said to Mrs. Weed, you worked on a lot of programs like Two Rivers, she should bring those ideas. What are we going to advocate for that gives the money directly, direct assistance. Can we send out 5 $20 gift certificates to every household in Adams County, $100 but you got to spend it in Adams County business. Micro stimulus check, but going to businesses, not buying gas in West Quincy, ideas welcome.

IT Asset Management policy, Mrs. Hester brought this in draft form. Putting on paper what we are doing in practice, we had not had an asset management tagging procedure, somebody had a label maker and put “CBO-shester” on something and that’s how we tracked it. There are various versions of spreadsheets in the IT department they are not all tracking the same data fields. Decided to put some commonality between the department and what we’re tracking. When a department wants to buy a new computer, IT accepts it, puts a label on it, adds the appropriate data points into the system. The system will cost about $1 per asset, she does not have an exact number for cost because they are still asset tagging, guessing about $1,000/year. The output from the tracking system, will be able to run depreciable values for the board and for departments, print reports before they go into budget to show them what we recommend they replace as far as equipment, whether or not they do that is up to their budget, but it will give them a better picture and better prepare them before they go into meetings at least from an IT perspective. They will also asset tag new devices that come in so we can track network equipment and build out a 5-10 year plan, and this helps get us in the mindframe to track switches and replacing them every 3-5 years, etc. This policy puts some language around that. The policy draft plans to track assets of $25 or more, but they want to be flexible with that dollar figure as it could potentially change, it’s a starting point. Before anything leaves the IT department they will make sure it has a tag on it. The tag has a barcode, they can scan it and everything pops up in the system.

Mr. Austin asked if it will keep maintenance reports and stuff like that on the bigger items, and the actual data fields tracked are written in the policy document, i.e. serial number, brand, cost, date received, etc. Everything can be filtered by department. Mr. Austin said he hope to personally never see an IT Asset Management report but he is glad Mrs. Hester is doing it. Mrs. Hester said she thinks it will help the department heads plan, and she has talked to all of them about this idea and they mostly seem to like the idea, especially come to budget time. IT can help suggest the replacement plan so they don’t fall into the black hole of their equipment aging out and not working.

Mr. Austin asked if he felt Mrs. Hester had good people in place to start this project and keep up with it. Mrs. Hester stated she has two temporary employees in the office now; one of them is paid for out of COVID money, he is primarily the COVID Helpdesk at the OLC, when he’s not needed there he comes to the County to help with this and other related projects. Mrs. Hester also has a temp employee from COVID that they have kept on to help asset tagging and tracking purchases. This project will take a lot of man power on the upfront because the existing equipment has to be asset tagged. Mr. Austin said from the Finance Committee perspective he would like to see this developed into a plan for upcoming years budget for equipment, and like we already talked about no more of this getting paid into from departments, that’s all a shell game and never comes out in the favor of the equipment needed. It’s just “the budget” and the requests come in and filters in through the IT department.

Mrs. Hester stated that this is part of the overall infrastructure plan that she brought just in case the committee needed it, but was not prepared to show it to them yet because she wants it to go through the appropriate committee first, but part of the upgrade plan also includes that 5-year plan.

Mr. Austin said that to him, this is all he needed to see and his only ask from his committee is that a number shoots out that says this is the amount planning to spend next year so that there are real dialed in numbers, maybe within 5%, and then it’s just a line item and we’re not talking about each department line items. First there is waste because departments don’t always know what they are buying, and second the non-uniformity of

the equipment is wasteful. So if you get a request for 13 laptops, let’s buy 13 of the same laptops unless there is some specific reason like software or something.

Mrs. Hester stated that she has started to do this and is getting some push back from departments because they see it as Sue Hester having to buy everything and that is not what we’re doing, we’re just trying to come up with common equipment so that when the IT department has to service it, they are servicing the same type of equipment and not having to do extensive research 3 different brands of printers. If we all have Dell computers, or Microsoft Surface Pros, or HP printers, it makes managing the assets in the IT department much more efficient. Can’t expect to have a small IT department like the County’s to service anything that anybody buys.

Mr. Austin said that there is some proprietary software that is what it is, there’s some of those things, but definitely as a goal upgrading technology should be in a uniform way. From Finance he’s worried about some type of planning tool out of this. It’s going to be a lot like what happened with payroll where people thought you would have all of the control, and now they can just say Sue’s department handles that now. Three years ago you thought the world was falling apart and now they can say they just have to do a little time tracking, and this could be the same way. Mr. Bellis said this is like the same problem they had with the equipment a couple of months ago, this would keep track of the date they bought it and when they need to get new. Mr. Austin said the problem is we’re buying all of this at the same time. Mrs. Hester said she is trying to step it out so that doesn’t happen. Mr. Autin said it is good management of the department, keep using the people that she’s got, and the rest of the way it’s Mr. Bellis’ baby and just tell all the other committees what’s going on.

Mr. Farha asked from an office holder is Mrs. Hester married to the $25 limit. Mrs. Hester said she is not, they are having an internal debate within the IT department as to what value to put on that. They are asset tagging the web cams, and they are about $30, some of them say it’s worth the asset tag and some say it isn’t, so as they go through this that number could change. Mr. Farha said he could see employees getting upset if there is too much constraint. Mrs. Hester said essentially if it plugs into the network, it gets tagged, and a web cam plugs into the network. Mr. Austin said fair enough. Mrs. Hester said it’s a security thing. Mr. Farha said it’s good for IT to know what’s out there. Mr. Bellis said it’s not to keep track of the employees and what they have. Mrs. Hester reiterated that they buy whatever they want, but putting that tag on it that gives them an idea of what’s there and the ability to pull up data on it quickly. Mr. Farha is concerned about the disruption to the office. Mr. Austin said they could just create an IT request form. Mrs. Hester said they already do have that in place, an ordering system where employees go to Helpdesk and request a new printer, for example, and they came up with a form that have options and work with them. Most department heads do not know the exact specs that they need and that form helps guide them with the standard equipment, and once its ordered and received they can tag it before it leaves IT, so hopefully it won’t be very disruptive.

Mr. Austin made a motion to go into executive session to discuss personnel and legal matters. Mr. Bellis seconded the motion. The motion carries.

Mr. Austin made a motion to come out of executive session and go back into regular session. Mrs. Weed seconded the motion. The motion carries.

Mr. Bellis made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Austin seconded the motion. Chairman Snider adjourned the meeting at 8:45 p.m.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rS5OeBZfazDSUC2s87KfJsUWQXkk7G9R9xdGV_EgmaA/edit