All right, good morning, everyone.

Um, today is February 4th, 2026, and I call the Lake County Public Works and Transportation Committee to meeting at to order at 8:30 a.m.

In addition to being able to attend in person, remote attendance has been made available to the public via Zoom at the link on the agenda.

This meeting is being recorded through Zoom.

Per county board rules and the open meetings act, attendance via remote means is permitted for qualifying reasons as long as the majority of the committee members are physically present.

We've been notified in advance by member Roberts that she is requested to participate electronically due to a family emergency.

I think it's a family emergency or sickness.

Um a physical quorum is present, so she may be marked as present and is eligible to vote on matters before the committee today.

As a reminder to members attending remotely, please ensure your camera is on at all times.

All right, can you please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance?

And I'd like to lead to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it states one nation under God with liberty and justice for all.

Can I have a roll call, please?

Member Cassman here.

Uh Chair Clark here.

Member Hewitt?

Yeah.

Member Hunter?

Vice Chair Maine.

Present.

Member Roberts.

I see her there.

Here.

And can I clarify?

I'm here.

I'm I'm not there because of work.

Oh, for work.

That's right.

I'm sorry.

Thank you.

Member Wasick.

All right.

We have a quorum.

Is there any public comment today?

There is none.

All right.

I have no chairs remarks, no unfinished business.

New business is the consent agitum.

Uh consent agenda item 8.1.

Can I get a motion in a second?

Motion by Wasick, second by Casbin.

All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

Onto our regular agenda of public works.

Item 8.2 is a joint resolution authorizing a contract with Buckeye Power Sales Co.

Inc.

of Romeoville, Illinois in the amount of 94,965 for generator replacement and installation services for the Lake County Public Works Remington LRSD lift station.

Can I get a motion?

A second motion by Hunter, second by Hewitt.

Good morning, Director McFarland.

Good morning, Chair, committee members, Austin McFarland, Lake County Public Works Director.

This is a replacement for a generator at our Reminton List station.

We own a number of list stations and a aid in the delivery of sanitary sewer to the treatment plant for treatment.

This generator, um, you know, our generators are are placed in selective areas.

And primarily those areas that are critical and have eye flows.

And so the generators are placed there as a source of backup supply, uh power supply.

This generator at this site has reached its useful life.

And uh we were able to take advantage of a um corporate purchasing contract with Bokai Power as the vendor.

And so they will provide the installation and a replacement of this unit, and so I recommend approval for this.

Thank you.

And what happens with the old generator?

Those we work with the vendor to see what can be salvaged from it.

Okay, good.

Yeah.

So we do that.

All right, and it's natural gas.

So does it that mean it's just hooked up right to the natural gas line?

Okay, perfect.

Member Hewitt.

Good morning.

Good morning.

What is the average life span of equipment like this?

I mean, we say end of life, but what is actually end of life?

Well, I would imagine it would vary from based on the different sizes of these generators that we have.

We have some that are very small, some are very large.

This is a mid-sized unit.

And it would also depend on the usage.

Generally, we're seeing maybe about 10 to 15 years in somebody's units.

I don't have the exact age of this one.

What we generally do is have our asset manager goes through and identify all the generators that we have in the system and just identify the ones that are critical based on the number of replacement that we and repairs that we have done to it over the years.

And so this one that came up on the critical list for replacement.

All right, thank you.

Sure.

Member Wasick.

Morning, Austin.

Good morning.

I'm assuming that the newest um iteration of natural gas generators has a lower emissions footprint and is more efficient than what you had there.

Do you have some idea of like, you know, if you have to turn this on what the footprint looks like, or I'm not not in raw numbers, but just is it more efficient?

And I'm guessing that it is, but I just wanted to see what you yeah, I would I would concur that there is a little um more efficiency with these, but just the exact numbers for comparison.

I would have to get back to you on the don't worry about the numbers.

It will make anything anyway.

So I just it's yeah, when you get these newer um equipment, they tend to have just a little more baked inefficiency in them, but we'll just have to get those numbers to you as to what those and I think the general you know sort of concurrence with our strategic plan is that when we do replace this infrastructure that it is has a lower carbon footprint than what we're replacing it with.

Sure.

Thank you.

I agree.

All right, any other questions?

All right, all in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

Item 8.3 is director's report.

Just wanted to give committee a follow-up on the Pacura water system.

Of course, this has been a um a wonderful surprise to all us all of us that we were able to move um these the system off wells and convert the system to Lake Michigan water.

We did have a delay.

The other delay was caused by some new EPA regulations that caught us by surprise, but we were able to meet those demands.

Um the operating permit was issued um by the EPA, and we do have the green light to move forward uh with Lake Michigan water to the system.

So as of December 19th, the folks in the peculiar water system are receiving Lake Michigan water.

So we're excited about that.

Um, no major issue so far with the system and working with Buffalo Grove.

Um, only a couple of complaints about the elevated residual chlorine, and that was just in place as we were going through and making the conversion.

But our operators are getting familiar with the system and working and they've made necessary adjustments and they continue to make adjustments so that we can make sure that the system is at its best performance.

We did do some initial flushing on the system to clean those lines out and to remove the old well water.

Um we'll continue to do that, especially in the spring.

We'll ramp that up again to make sure the system is flushed and clean, and folks are truly receiving 100% lay Michigan water.

So we're working through that.

Um, we did get um some additional testing requirement from the agency um for lead and copper.

Those are gonna probably last maybe over a year and a half, additional monitoring, and that's fine.

We're um ready for that.

So, all in all, it's been a good start.

Everything is working fine.

And my my my thanks to our staff for really putting the push on to get this to the finish line and to our customers for their patience.

So just wanted to bring you up to date as to where we are with this project.

Well, that is great to hear, and thank you and all your staff and everyone working on this project because I think this is part of our you know, strategic plan is to move our residents to more sustainable resilient water systems.

I know this was a long time in the making, and a really great example of how we used our ARPA funds.

I believe this was ARPA funded for critical infrared long-term infrastructure improvements.

I mean, this will be I mean for generations.

So um well done.

So thank you.

And I know at the end there there was a lot of regulation.

So very exciting and a very good project.

Yes, member Wasick.

Uh Austin, I was hoping you could update us on the the wild wood water main work going on.

Is that project actually going to cross 120 at all?

Uh, as you know, we correspond a little bit about some surveyors who've been out there.

Just wanted to get some more details on where that's going to be and uh believe it's on cost uh to where the water main is running, right?

It's on the what side of the street it's on, but um assuming it we're not that's gonna go all the way down to Arbor Vista.

Um we have a main that's coming through that's been there for years.

It supplied that community with water.

It's it's age, we really don't know the condition of it.

We're concerned.

So this new main, the secondary main will feed that system, provide water to that system, and it will allow us to shut the old main down and do some investigation and determine the the um get assessment of it as to the condition.

So is this system mainly on a pump or is this Lake Michigan water?

I'm just trying to get it.

Oh, it's on Lake Michigan water.

It's all Lake Michigan.

Yes.

So you just kind of extending it.

No, we're just running a secondary main, secondary feeder main to the system because we're unsure of the condition of the current main.

There's just one main going through the system right now.

And how old is that roughly?

It's been there for quite a while.

Yeah, it's probably in the mid-70s.

So it's like preventive updating.

Correct.

I don't know.

That's not terminating.

If it breaks, not only we're we'll we'll lose water to Arbater and Liberty Acres.

And so we're we're just concerned about that.

Okay.

I had some constituent questions about it.

Sure.

Thank you.

That shows how we're investing in a resilient network to make sure that this is very good for the future.

Yes.

All right.

Okay.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Great news about the water.

All right.

Item 8.4 is a joint resolution authorizing a contract with USIC locating services, LLC, Indianapolis, Indiana, in the amount of 165,204 for the joint utility locating information for excavators inc, Julie, ticket screening and locating of Lake County Division of Transportation Storm Sewers for excavator dig requests along various county highways and appropriating 218,800 of the quarter percent sales tax for transportation funds.

Can I get a motion?

A second motion by Hewitt, second by Kasbin.

Good morning.

Good morning, committee member.

Shane Schneider, DOT director and county engineer.

So this is a contract for a vendor, USIC to complete utility locates every time a Julie call comes in.

So by state law, anytime someone digs, they have to call 811 for a Julie locate, and then the utility owner has to go out and mark our our our line.

So we outsource this to this vendor so they locate all of our storm sewers.

Uh just for awareness, last year we got around 17,000 tickets.

We have to process every single one of those.

We pay Julie a dollar 25 per ticket is kind of their handling fee.

So that's that 20,600 you see in the fourth bullet.

And then the the rest of the appropriation is for the fee that we pay USIC.

Yeah.

I mean, it makes a lot of sense very uh efficient to do it this way.

Yes, member Hunter.

Thanks, Chair.

Were you surprised at the bid, the difference between the two companies?

Um it was two to one.

Yeah.

Um I think you know, USIC we've been using for a while.

So they're they've kind of got their foothold in the market here locally.

Um that's pretty consistent with past pricing that we received from them.

Okay.

So but yeah, it I think it does show that we're getting a pretty good good price.

The other better bidder in that bid tab is over twice the cost of what this is being asked for.

So all right, thanks.

Number Wassock.

And Shane, just for clarification, when you say ticket, is that a request for utility location?

Yes.

So, like, say someone's going to, I'll make a the example simple, like someone's gonna put a new fence in their backyard, they're gonna dig a hole.

So they have to call Julie for that one excavation, and that's one ticket.

So last year we got about 17,000 of those that we had to process determine if we needed to respond to, and then we um direct this company to go out and do the locate of our facility.

So Julie comes to you and says we got a ticket and do you have anything over here?

And correct.

So they have it's it's a like a pretty major mapping system all through GIS.

So when a ticket comes in, there's coordinates on there, a latitude and longitude, and then um they know because we provided them GIS records of where our facilities are, they know if something's within a certain radius of that ticket.

Okay, and then they'll notify all the utility owners within about a 300 foot radius of that ticket location.

So it could be us, it could be comed, could be NICOR, it could be public works, you know, could be a village.

So Julie's like the clearing house that contacts the utilities.

That's correct.

Hey, we think you have a line out here and mark it out.

Correct.

For the Julian in my backyard this summer.

So I'm like, how's this work?

Yep, that's how it works.

Okay.

Yep.

Great.

Thank you.

Thanks, Jeremy.

Thank you.

I was just wondering, do you get a lot of things damaged?

Because I'm thinking I could easily see myself going, oh, I'm just putting a fence, a new fence post in the backyard and might not think to call.

You know, I'm not trying to hide anything, but it just I wouldn't think about it.

Do we get much damage because of other people?

Perhaps we don't get a ton of damage because our stuff is so and it's all within the public right-of-cause we're not getting a lot of private activity happening.

And everyone should be getting a permit from us before they go on our right-of-way.

So when they get a permit, we're issuing them drawings showing where our facilities are.

But sometimes you get contractors that go out there and maybe dig where they're not supposed to, but it's pretty rare.

Okay.

Yeah, and I know um it's a very, I mean, it's really important.

And I don't know what if we do like outreach in our newsletters, but letting people know about this, because sometimes you might, for example, be planting a tree and you don't really think about it.

And then it turns out the electric line is right there while you're digging.

And electric lines, I learned are not that deep.

Or I didn't learn, but you might learn that it's not that deep.

A friend, exactly.

My friend learned that the electric lines are kind of right there when you're digging, you know, to put in your tree.

And so, like, you know, maybe I don't know what we do, but like if outreach um, like in our newsletters or talk about it, because it is a free service, so all our residents can know it is free.

And they come out so fast.

Because I did learn, I mean, my friend learned that you just call and they come out, so it's free, and then they mark everything up.

Um, and so maybe just making sure, like all for all of us too to know about it and let people know that this free service, it's so much better if you just have them come and do it before you plant your tree or things like that.

So I don't know if our communications, but we can yeah, we could check in with our communications team.

I mean, Julie does push a lot of information out on their websites.

Maybe we could grab something from from them and just as a reminder as spring approaches, construction taking off.

I think that would be good.

Yep, yeah.

I'm sure they have graphics that we could put out there, but I think the more people learn about it because yeah, the better.

It's prevention is definitely easier than moving that tree.

Actually, it might kill the tree.

I learned too.

So having the electric line there.

All right, but yeah, if we could just make sure like our residents know it's a really good service, and it's obviously very much efficient because it's way cheaper to prevent this from happening than fixing it.

So I'm gonna all right.

Any other questions?

All right, all in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

All right, item 8.6 is a joint resolution authorizing an agreement with Stanley Consultants Inc.

Chicago, Illinois for phase one professional engineering services for intersection improvements at Rollins Road and Wilson Road at a maximum cost of 1,773,869 and appropriating 2,130,000 of the quarter percent sales tax for transportation funds.

Can I get a motion or second motion by Hunter, second by Casbin?

So phase one engineering study to look at this intersection.

Uh, why are we looking at it?

Um intersection was constructed about 30 years ago.

So traffic signal equipment's end of life, pavements getting near end of life.

There's some um drainage facilities in the area, culverts and storm sewer, that's uh end of life and needs to be repaired.

Um, our long-range transportation plan shows uh bike path north south on Wilson Road.

Uh so this phase one study will look at what are the uh various alternatives for the intersection to do an improvement.

Um, should we modify and upgrade the traffic signal equipment?

We'll look at turn lanes and through lanes.

We'll look at a roundabout, we'll look at ways to connect uh more bike path facilities to the Channel Lakes bike path that goes east-west there along Rowlands.

Um, and then we'll do uh our normal public outreach to collect feedback from the public on any known issues and then get their feedback on potential solutions as well.

So um the phase one will take um typically between 18 and 24 months.

And if there's a viable improvement, we'll advance that into phase two engineering at that time.

Sounds exciting.

Member Hunter.

Thanks, Jerry.

This intersection's uh half a mile from my house.

I go through it many times in a day.

Excuse me.

Um this kind of it really doesn't apply to you as more as it applies to Austin.

That vault is underneath there that we've had issues with right on the southbound or on the excuse me, the westbound lanes of Rollins Road right there at that intersection.

I that's a major interceptor going down Rollins Road to that plant and in Fox Lake.

So we got to be really careful there.

I mean, it looks really as a benign intersection.

There's a lot going on underneath that road.

Yep, we are aware of those facilities.

So we'll be obviously coordinating very closely with with public works on that.

And we'll call Julie.

I know it was talked, it was talked about around about 15 years ago when the when the intersection was when that hill was knocked down because it used to be really high.

And then there's um there was at that time they were saying the property on the south east side was an Indian burial ground, which I found out later on was false.

So if that gets in the way again, just keep that aware.

I and I fill you in on the people on how that that all went down.

Okay, it's interesting.

Yeah, Lake County DOT does own kind of a decent sized parcel on the southeast corner of that intersection.

That's where the bike path is.

Yep.

Okay, great.

Thanks.

Yeah.

Sounds like it's gonna be quite a plan and improvement.

All right, any questions?

All right, any more?

Uh all in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

Okay.

And then item 8.6 is our presentation on the long-range transportation plan update envision 2050.

Okay, so I'm gonna invite Kevin Currier, assistant county engineer, Mike Clemens, manager of planning backup.

Um, you'll recall that we were here in December at PWT, presented a vision and goals.

Uh, we got some feedback from committee.

Uh Mike and the team went back and revisited that, and we're gonna present that for uh your consideration again today.

Um, Mike, I think there was a few questions about um how this plan in vision and goals compared to our current one, our 2040.

So Mike did a good job kind of putting some of that information in there so you can see how the plans are changing.

Excuse me.

Uh good morning, Mike Clemens, uh, manager of transportation planning.

Um sorry, Kevin Carrier, assistant county engineer, Lake County DOT.

So um as Shane mentioned, um, I do have um a couple slides on the the uh goals from the past uh two plans actually, because our 2040 plan included um a goal statement um and also restated the goals from the 2020 plan.

Um so I have both of those uh in there, and then I have um updated vision statements and goals um for your consideration today, just by way of a refresher.

Um our planning process here is to um once once you're comfortable with these vision and goals, um, we are uh developing strategies, a series of strategies to then help us prioritize projects to meet these vision and goals as we're evaluating potential future projects for the long range plan.

We'll be going out to the public and our stakeholders to uh get their feedback on those strategies to um meet these vision and goals um for the plan um uh in this current phase, and then in the next phases of the plan, we'll have draft um projects with coming out of our travel demand model.

But we're at the front end um trying to uh update our vision and goals here.

So can I ask really quickly for that?

When you say um strategies, strategies mean projects, or is it like ideas for how we want projects?

Like sure, strategies are are are um uh sort of well, uh some of the feedback we got from member Wazik last time, like uh transit-oriented development.

We've that's a strategy to meet the goal or roundabout speed control, okay, um, traffic calming, those kind of things are strategies, operational strategies, um, different ways that we um manage our system and operate our system.

Those are strategies to implement these goals.

So not specific project locations, but the the sort of methods for achieving these.

And that's what you'll be reaching out for because for the public outreach is like, okay, that so those kind of like ideas about that versus like like this area or whatever.

Okay, thank you.

If I can jump into and then the projects come, I guess below that.

I don't want to make it sound like they're but it's the vision and goals that'll set some strategies, and then we'll take those strategies and then turn those into a map and a list of projects and stuff like that.

Thank you.

Yep.

So um just by way of background, in our 2040 plan, there was a transportation goal that basically restated um the transportation goal from the board's strategic plan that had been adopted in 2009 and updated in 2013, which basically stated to uh the transportation goal was to reduce congestion and improve transportation systems in Lake County.

Um the strategic statement, promote the development of state county and municipal transportation systems that provide for efficient, flexible and uncongested movement through an integrated network, um, both road, rail, public transit, and non-motorized modes of travel.

Um, the 2040 plan also then restated the goals, both the roadway goals and the non-motorized goals from the 2020 long range plan.

Um, and I know these are small, um, there's there's quite a lot, and they're they're pretty technical, they're very uh congestion focused.

Um, so maintain level of service D on desired optimal roadway and intersection performance, consider roadway and intersection improvements that increase capacity and reduce peak travel congestion.

Um, promote projects that mitigate circuitous travel and reduce local roads as shortcuts, basically.

Um for planned roadway improvements, coordinate roadway classifications among state, county, and municipal jurisdictions to make tame consistency of arterial and major roadway collector.

And the last one under the roadway is reducing critical accident locations.

And then on the non-motorized, where possible, include bicycle and pedestrian facilities on projects, develop a regional system of bike regional bikeway system, use that regional bikeway system to provide connections to other uh bikeway systems and incorporate more bike-friendly facilities.

So is this are these plan goals like still what we're using today?

This is what was stated in the 2040 plan.

So both this transportation goal and these restated 2020 goals were um what was listed in the 2040 plan, which is our current long range plan that was adopted in 2014.

Apparently there was problems with shortcuts.

So have it be a like specific goal.

We don't want people shortcutting, apparently.

It's interesting.

And like these main team service levels, it is very specific.

Congestion focus very much so um, you know, uh a very strong focus on congestion when you look, you know, through the language throughout these.

Um kind of turning back to our vision and goals.

So what we presented back in December was a vision statement um that um we envision a transportation system that is safe, reliable, innovative, and adaptive by connecting people, places, and opportunities.

It will serve all users and link communities to daily needs and future possibilities.

So we've taken that based on your feedback from December, and we have two um revised vision statements that I think um both of them say similar things.

Um option two maybe says it in a more forceful way.

Um, but um interested in your feedback on either of these.

So option one, we envision a sustainable, resilient transportation system that meets today's needs and prepares for tomorrow's.

It connects people, places, and opportunities, drives prosperity for all, and strengthens communities against climate challenges built on safety, reliability, inclusivity, and innovation.

And our second option is we envision a seamless sustainable transportation network where mobility is a right, safety is absolute, and reliability is guaranteed.

By prioritizing connectivity, we will erase barriers to access, steward a resilient environment, and catalyze thriving communities that elevates the quality of life in every zip code.

Wow, as a teacher, like I can see you got some big words in there.

Um, so are we do we like us to talk about these now or like decide so that's up to you?

I also have revised goals.

So we can pause here and discuss the vision statements, or I can I can go through the revised goals as well.

Um, let's go through the rise goals, then we can come back to this.

We see the goals, then we can decide which statement.

Sure.

So uh we have four sets of four goals.

Um the safety goal did not change, um, but we did try to incorporate um climate resilience throughout the goals.

So there is no change in the safety goal um that that is the same top and bottom, but just for formatting, we kept it.

I I have a original and a revised on the slide.

Um excuse me.

Uh under reliability, um, we do uh have a revision here to really try to emphasize climate reliability here.

So under the first uh bullet um maintaining existing infrastructure to keep it in a state of good repair, promoting a resilient system that can adapt to future climate conditions, uh was added uh the second half of that sentence.

Um so um again, this is uh trying to incorporate the the feedback that we heard uh in December throughout the uh the set of goals.

Goal number three is to innovate and adapt.

Um we added again more resilience and reliability throughout this.

So we included uh in the first bullet um explicitly stating to modernize the transportation network to be more sustainable, resilient, and reliable, able to serve the public through future climate impacts and disruptions, uh, meet the needs of all residents, uh all users, residents, business, and visitors, regardless of age, ability, or income.

This also has previously stated, uh, new and emerging technologies and applications, um, which uh mirrors some of the uh board's strategic plan uh goals for transportation.

And then goal number four is connections and mobility.

Um again, we incorporated uh some feedback uh and really it's in the third bullet uh really trying to uh integrate transportation with natural and built environment, respecting context and promoting sustainability and resilience.

So trying to incorporate that uh sustainability and climate uh resilience throughout um these goals.

Um those are the the updates to the goals.

Um happy to hear any feedback you have on any of these uh goals and the the vision statements.

Yeah, I'm happy.

Thank you for yeah, I think you know, incorporating or about resiliency and climate change.

Obviously, transportation networks can have a huge impact on on climate change with um or could help mitigate for it for things like you know, with our asphalt can like reflect the sun more.

I mean, as the world is heating.

So I would think that we that would that way we could like think about those things more about the the effect on like heat islands or things with these kind of goals, right?

When we are planning projects.

I know I saw something where they could change the color of asphalt, and that way, like they put an addition, and that way it reflected differently, which actually let less heat be, you know, into the ground.

So things like that, then we could be incorporated those kind of new ideas or ways to mitigate with these new visions, correct?

Okay, that's great.

All right, thanks, Jeremy.

I guess I thank you.

Um so if we look at the vision statements.

Uh sorry, first sentence have to be grammar police.

You have plural for tomorrow, so it's really a possessive today's needs, today, commas needs, and prepare for tomorrow's its implied need.

So it should be a possessive, not a plural there.

Um, so comparing the two.

So getting to the the language there.

Um, I think there are good things in two, but I feel like there's so much thrown in there that it's uh it's a little difficult.

Like too many things in there.

And um I don't have a solution at the moment.

Um, but it seems like some of those ideas could be moved into option one.

Yeah, I no, I totally do see yeah.

It's it's just it's a little there's a lot in there to um, and I'm concerned, I understand the reason, but I'm concerned, well you say the quality of life in every zip code.

I mean, that's like I mean, there's places where there are no county roads, right?

Like down in Highland Park.

So, and that used to be um a bigger, um, we used to hear about it a lot, um, and saying, hey, but we don't have any county roads down there, and this isn't fair, you know, with money.

So I think you need to be cautious of thinking about what are the implications when you put something in there.

Does that mean to say, well, every zip code, so therefore money needs to come here?

Now there are there is some McClurry path or there's other things, but that is very definitive.

And I appreciate the ideas behind it, but I'm concerned as to how when people come back to that, how that might limit you or drive you in directions that weren't the original intention.

So that's for that.

Um broadly on the goals.

If we could go to let I guess two since one.

So it was really helpful to hear um the chair's comments about you know, color of asphalt and stuff, because a little bit with the resilience with climate change, I know that as we have gone through and um rebuilt roads, done additions and things like that.

We have elevated a number of roads so that when we get those flooding situations, we are actually not hitting those dollar cost amounts for impact of flooding, because we've taken care of a lot of that already.

So I bring that up first of all, so that people understand that this department division has been looking at some of those impacts for a very long time and is taking care of it.

So it's it's looking ahead, and the impacts of that are not something new.

Um, of course, there's always new things that can be done.

For me, with some of these goals, it it goes a little bit to what I was just saying with the vision.

Not necessarily now, but hey, we changed this wording and and what that means in terms of implementation or strategies.

Like putting this phrase in here now means that we need to do this.

Because maybe then we'll go, ooh, is that really what we meant?

Or we'll be like, hey, that's fantastic.

That's exactly the direction we want to go.

Because again, a lot of it sounds good, but you know, the the devil is in those details.

And if we have these as our goals, what is that going to mean for how things are done?

Because with that for me, without understanding what changes are going to be made, because there could be good changes, and there could be ones that you know are not good, doesn't mean you don't still change the goal.

It's it's a little bit hard for me to look at some of that because I I feel again going back to the vision.

There's a lot of um buzzwords in there, which could be good, but they could be overloaded.

So those are my general comments.

Yeah.

Member Wasick.

Sure.

And and gentlemen, this this is a really seminal start to what I think we need to do overall.

And I I agree with um Commissioner Main that the statement uh number two in the vision was it's a bit dense.

And it was, I think if you broke them up into separate, you know, aligned ideas, like have a sentence for starting a resilient environment.

Generally, I have a problem with resiliency and sustainability.

And you should say what you mean.

What do we mean?

We want to reduce the overall carbon emissions, we want to reduce the overall salt we put on our roads, uh, nitrogen dioxide, which contributes to smog.

I mean, and that really kind of interlaces with the idea of reducing congestion, because if you're doing that, you're addressing these other issues.

But I think trying to throw that all into one sentence is is a bit uh difficult to kind of digest in what it's sitting.

Although I I agree with the ideas, I just think that um you could kind of parse it out a little bit.

I love the phrase catalyze thriving communities that elevates the quality of life in every zip code.

I love the way it sounds, but for the purposes of transportation, I think we need to say we're trying to create a transportation network that's going to contribute to overall well-being.

That's you know, that would kind of caps, you know, encapsulate a lot of that stuff.

But you know, I think in general, it's it's heading in the right direction, uh, drives prosperity for all.

I yeah, in general, sure.

I mean, if we have an efficient transportation network that's multimodal, and I love that you included that in um some of the breakdown statements.

Um, I I think we're all kind of in agreement on that.

It's just like, well, in terms of a vision, I think we need to look at the umbrella and not just the raindrops.

And you know, I think that would that help quite a bit.

Um, and the other point I saw is that you know, reliability is really important.

You know, reducing congestion is is really important, but overall, you know, we can't escape the fact that transportation contributes almost a third of carbon emissions globally.

And that's overall, you know, in addition to quality of life safety is number one, of course.

You know, that's something, you know, that's how we should keep our eye on the ball.

It's like I think that needs to be in there more specifically.

We are talking about reducing carbon emissions.

We are talking about doing that by reducing congestion by getting people through intersection safely and more efficiently.

And it's like I like to see a little bit more integration in the language.

Thank you.

Um I really appreciate the ability to having the ability to weigh in um and and help shape this.

Um, I'm excited about it.

Um with number one, I I worry about um a kind of overstatement or like and strengthens communities against climate challenges.

I'm not sure.

That's a very broad thing to say.

I mean, if we could because we we only have a limited scope to help.

I I think I prefer the um steward a resilient environment or a you know, a clean environment, whatever it is.

Um but it I I like the directness of option too.

I like that if you're a normal person looking at it, it doesn't read like government word salad at all.

Um and that's I mean, that's always like because we make them and we are all up in the, you know, the understanding of of these uh of what happens.

And so we, but we're these are outward sort of facing things.

They they mean something inward, but they're they're also communicated outward.

Um I worry about overpromising where like safety is absolute, because I don't think that's something we can guarantee.

Um there's a way to be um as strong without it being absolute, which is like 100%.

I think you could um then um reliability, I don't know if we can guarantee it 100%.

Like I just I I well, I I understand and I and I love the um because it's a vision statement, it's aspirational.

Um what I don't want is to be that, you know, so then if something happens, an act of nature, right?

Like we can't that we can't we can't like a flood that hasn't happened for 200 years, then we could you know what I mean?

Um by prioritizing connectivity revived.

Um, so I think a way we could get beyond um every zip code is all communities countywide, because and I think I'll push back a little bit because if there are clearer um roads and they're connected bike paths in one part of the county, it very well could affect someone in Highland Park or um Waukegan where there's fewer county roads.

So I think um I think it I think we we are all it's is if a project happens here, it's not the the effects aren't don't just happen here, which is why we take you know local consideration deeply into account, but when it comes to the idea of whether we're gonna do something, we look at a more regional, you know, we take a more regional approach.

So I think um, you know, I think all communities countywide is is is an okay way to say it.

Um I I also um the only thing I'm missing from the vision statement as far as ideas is um you're very proactive.

And I think you um are willing to look at the data and and and make changes and innovate.

And I I don't see that ref reflected here.

Um so I think I would love for you to incorporate that idea.

Thank you.

I'm just I'm gonna chime in.

Like I I sit on this board with this committee with two teachers, an author.

Um we've heard a lot, I I know enough to be dangerous about building roads and water and sewer, so have at it whatever way they want to do it.

Yeah, and I think I know for me, one of the things that member mean brought up and I've been thinking about too is one thing I've learned on this board is sometimes these these uh pro these um like policies have a huge ramifications, right?

Like in the and that's what I think like finding out like if we do, you know, if we do like let's just say, for example, we picked vision statement two.

So it's a safety is absolute, reliability is guaranteed, mobility is a right, you know, we're yeah, it's all the zip codes.

Well, what does that really mean?

Does that mean suddenly like someone's like, well, now we have to make sure we we can only do project where safety is absolute and reliability is guaranteed?

Like to me, it's like thinking about like what would be examples by doing these changes, how would that change how we plan our road, like our projects?

Because, you know, if we do pick that, and then it really then it could, does that change exact everything we're doing with or with our you know how we pick the projects?

Because I, you know, words do matter, and these are very strong words.

And so if you know, you two years from now, we're like, why are we doing this project?

Or why aren't we doing a project?

And it's like, well, you pass this vision statement that said safety's absolute and this project might make it go a little bit faster, so we can't have that project or you know, make the traffic go faster or something.

And so I think finding out maybe some examples of with incorporating these changes, how would that change it before we go ahead and just say yes, like this would be that?

And also I do worry, you know, I'm for for like the second one.

Um, you know, it's got a lot of words that are very, very strong.

I can't imagine that we're gonna say, I mean, I love I mean safety is great, and we have our whole safe streets initiative and the whole like project zero.

But like if we literally say our vision is safety is absolute and reliability is guaranteed and mobility is a right, then if people are like, well, I have a right to a bike trail that's accessible in my district because you're saying mobility is an absolute right.

So I just I want us to be thoughtful about the words we use.

I like being direct about the words we use, but I would just like to know before we would vote on this, like what would this effect have, like on our long range transportation plan.

Um many times we've sat here and we're like, why is this happening?

And you're like, oh, there was this policy that was passed 10 years ago, and we're following that.

And we're like, oh, I didn't know that would do that.

So I think at least for me, it would be nice to have some examples of how this would go.

And um I don't know, maybe there is like a happy medium between this, you know, you couldn't throw it in and be like, was there a happy medium between these statements that are maybe um a little less guaranteeing a whole bunch of stuff?

At least that's my my thought.

But I really would like to know what would adopt this, how would this change us going forward?

What we do.

Thanks, Jeff.

Thanks.

You know, as as I look at this some more.

I really think the first one is pretty darn good.

It it gets it gets what we want, built on safety, reliability, inclusivity, and innovation.

And that's what you're doing now.

So you've got that in there without making these absolutes and and possibly these higher hoops to to jump through.

I do think, you know, sometimes with um, you know, you guys are put um folks are put, you know, on the defense of we have people coming here say, well, we don't know if that's safe, you know.

Are you really designing a safe road?

And we're all like, of course they're designing.

There's all these things like that.

But safety is absolute concerns me.

I think building on what the others have said and kind of going back to my earlier comment.

I think you could if you feel that some of these things give you the ability to go in some directions, important directions that you haven't been able to do before.

I wonder if a better place for that is under some of the goals.

And then, as I said, and we just said, and then you could give us uh for description purposes, like what would be some of the examples?

Because your vision statement it's it's big, right?

It's your big thing.

And really that meets today's needs and prepares for tomorrow's.

And hey, if I missed that grammatical thing before, shame on me.

But anyway, uh, I think that I think I think that captures a lot.

Because you're saying that we are always looking to the future.

And as somebody who served on this committee for 24 years under a variety, a number of different directors, there's I've seen that.

I've seen that we had a commitment to bike pass back when we had Marty Bueller, we've updated those things.

I mean, this division of transportation has done all those things under different directors with different boards, have always been innovative, looking to see what's out there.

So I I think that to actually, if I think about it, well, frighteningly, a quarter of a century, this has served us very well.

And I think if there's new things, I'm getting repetitive, of course, but maybe maybe those new things go into the goals.

Member Casm, I took your time.

Um I think another idea to incorporate is um yours are very responsive to community input, and you I think go to great lengths to attain it.

So I think something, something along, you know, that includes that would be good, and I think reflective of the ethos of the division.

Yeah, I think um, you know, when I first, when I read this before our meeting, when I was looking at the vision statements, to me, vision when I also thought was like like kind of fine, um, except for the apostrophe S, which keep looking at.

Um but you know, except for the and also the dash as a teacher, dashes aren't my favorite.

Um, but we will live with that.

But it does give us, and it adds the resiliency, it adds the climate challenges, it adds, you know, our inclusivity and innovation.

And I agree, I think the the bullet points on the other part could be where we are like more specific about different product, you know, different could be more specific on things because you know, it does it does incorporate the things, you know, things that matter to us most.

But you know, if we're really a transportation system, and this, you know, shows that it's like we're thinking about now in the future, and um, you know, built on safety, reliability, inclusivity, and innovation, I think is where we really want to go with that, but maybe without a dash.

But if you want to include the dash.

Um, but anyway, so that's my two cents.

I do think um, but in any case, so for right now, what do you need from us?

Like, do you feel like you've gotten the feedback?

Maybe you can think about you know, whatever vision statement you think, but then also maybe we could hear more a little bit about how this might like just a couple examples of how adopting this might change or um, or just an example of how like this project maybe would be we would do because it incorporates some of this that were the changes, if that so we could kind of better understand what adopting this uh uh plan will do for the county.

Does that mean I I guess it's it's um really from my perspective, it's it's the committee's preference.

If you would like us to, you know, I I'm hearing kind of at the end of this discussion, it seems like statement one, there seems to be a little bit more preference for moving forward with or a little bit more comfort for potentially moving forward with that.

Um if you would like us to take, you know, some of this feedback and sort of combine some of the things of statement two into statement one and and um try to try to incorporate and bring something else back.

We can do that.

Um if you're comfortable with statement one and moving forward with that, um, we can, you know, that's that's up to to your, you know.

Yeah, like what do we think community?

I mean, I'm oh I'm sorry, remember Frank.

I didn't see that.

Thank you, Chair.

Um I I agree with what you said.

I think I think the the first option is is really good um and encompasses you know what what you're trying to uh capture.

My question for you, or the department is where in the in the process of as you said, you know, the mission drives a lot of decisions at the front end, and then sometimes it comes to us and it's like, okay, here's this project, right?

Where in that process or in the mission um in the vision statement is um you know, evaluating of the cost of a project, because you know, not every project is the same cost per per mile.

And sometimes it's a have to, it's a safety improvement, sometimes it's a nice to, it's a want to, and and that differential and cost per mile for various projects is you know, maybe it's ultimately something that it just gets considered here at the committee level.

But I'm just curious, like process wise, where does that come into the evaluation when you're when you're planning?

Yeah, so I can talk to that.

Um in general, we look at that when we are evaluating projects.

So phase one studies, we'll look at a bunch of alternatives and cost as a consideration there.

So we look at hey, this is a really good transportation improvement for X amount of dollars.

This one's also really good, and it's half the cost, you know what I mean.

We'll kind of factor that kind of stuff in along with impacts and things.

So that happens regardless, I guess, of um, you know, the vision, the goals that's just kind of baked into the process that we do.

But if we wanted to factor something like that in, um you know try I'm struggling with the word here too, but if we want to incorporate that into like vision savement one, you know, fiscal responsibility or things like that, we can certainly put some language in there to hit on that if that was in some ways.

I also view sustainable, resilient transportation as part of that, just in the way we we prioritize projects, because we prioritize preservation and maintaining our existing system above monetization and expansion, and so those lower cost treatments of resurfacing, maintaining and keeping our existing system in good condition, which is resiliency and making sure that our existing system is going to be there and working, um, is our top priority.

Um that I view that as a resiliency practice.

Um, that that's you know, in my I'm not I'm not an engineer, I'm a planner, but that's you know, my my view on it.

Well, and when we look at the bullet points, um is there I mean, like things about like efficient networks and you know, things like that.

I don't know, like when you go through the different parts because yeah.

Because I know that is part of every factor, right?

Because we have to factor in the cost, but also all the other um things around it to the result.

The first bullet point under reliability, maintaining existing infrastructure, keeping it in a state of good repair.

Um we also have um innovation and adaptation, implementing new and emerging technologies and applications that enhance capability resiliency and safety.

We can we can perhaps add um to that as well.

Some um but like yeah, like some kind of like like that it's uh efficient or you know, strategic strategic and efficient use of funding.

Yeah.

But I think it yeah, I think in it should be yeah, maybe in a goal.

I think we all hear about it, we just kind of assume we're doing that.

So it's probably good to like we could spell it out maybe in one of the revised goals.

I mean, in the I think it would be a good bullet point.

Yeah.

If that works the committee.

So for I guess for going forward then, you know, I'm I am comfortable with the first statement with the apostrophe.

Yes.

Um, and um, but is there any let's look, let's go around and get consensus.

Like let's what do we what do we think?

These people that are like, are you yes, member?

I've been sitting here listening to what everybody's had to say, and I have to admit I like option one more than option two.

Um sometimes less is more, and it gets to the point much easier than throwing in a lot of different thoughts.

So for me, I would stick with um option one.

Yeah.

I agree with member Hewlett.

Member Catherine.

I think you we could get rid of that dash that I don't like either.

Um, if we if we were to say it is built on safety, reliability, reliability, inclusivity, and innovation and connects with people, places, and opportunity.

Yeah.

Driving and then driving prosperity or another sentence.

Um I still like the idea of putting something in about being responsive.

Um, because I think you are, and I think that's an important thing for us to keep continue as we move forward.

But other than that, yeah, I I like that too.

Do you think meets today's needs?

I'm a little wordsmithing it and prepares for tomorrow is kind of incorporates that, or do you want to say like meets today's or like um like you're looking for more like specific like uh talking to communities more, like or could that be in a goal?

Like make sure like a goal of more like making sure we're doing public outreach.

Think about it.

We'll come back.

I'll come back to you.

Yeah.

Yeah.

My one concern about the responsiveness, which they already do have, and you're right, you should get credit for what you have, is you don't want to imply, and we've had that many times.

Hey, we all came, we don't want this project.

You say you're responsive to the community.

Yeah.

That that would be that would be my concern.

Um, I think we could have a goal or you know, continuing to have community outreach or something like that, but I would be a little cautious.

I do also just want to say that we probably, if you had just come with vision statement one, we would have said, you know, here's some grammatical things.

That's fine, but what else could you come up with?

I don't want you to feel that we went to all this work to come up with number two.

And maybe you like number one, you're like, well, put two out here, and then they'll come back to what.

So there was method in your bad.

Yeah, I think it's true.

Look at how yeah, yeah, we did exactly.

Just try to try to look for some different ways.

But it says, I mean, in every zip code and above, it says for all users, right?

I mean, it's got some of the same language just kind of said in a different way, but yeah.

What are you thinking?

My editor gene is being engaged right now.

But um you could tighten it up a bit.

One of the first rules we learn is like, why use two words when one will do?

It's just like a cardinal rule of of editing.

I I actually taught a class on this, so it's kind of stuck in my head.

So you could say, you know, we start that first sentence that meets current and future needs, and you're done rather than all that, you know, other verbiage.

And then you could break up that second sentence.

And I like what um Commissioner Kasman said, uh built on safety, reliability, inclusivity, and innovation, uh, strengthens communities against climate challenges and drives prosperity.

Um the other, you know, connects people, places, and opportunities.

I think we know that.

It's just I would I would just like in terms of making that sentence more concise, I would kind of break it down a little bit.

But that's that's just editing.

I think, you know, of the two statements.

I think number one is the strongest and and more direct.

And I think we get into the weeds a little bit on two.

Uh, but I think one if you have a second draft, and I'm you know, I'm just editing it my head right now.

So um I think we could do that one too.

So you're good with number one with maybe less of dash and maybe just sort of making sure it's more straightforward.

Okay.

Member Caswell, I said come back to you.

We're you still good with number one with a little bit of tweaking.

All right.

All right.

Well, this is a really good discussion.

Um, so I really want to thank everyone and you all.

I think this was a really good discussion.

Cause I I do, you know, these things we really do need to be very thoughtful about because for the next what 20 years, we're gonna be coming back to this document and saying, here's why we're doing these projects.

It's because of this.

Um, so for you, then maybe going ahead with these statement, the vision one.

Um, you know, maybe I know we had a couple of suggestions maybe for some bullet points.

Yes.

Adding that in.

And then, and I still would at the maybe the next time we talk about this, it would just be nice to hear, like, okay, with this incorporated, here's an example of something that a project that we would look at a little differently now.

Um, I think for so as to really understand it.

So then what happens next after absolutely.

So let me get to the the last slide here.

Um so we're uh we had a strategy session uh internally to to sort of come up with a list of of possible strategies where uh setting up uh meetings with our stakeholder groups.

So we have um uh both uh a stakeholder group made up of um uh advocacy groups, municipalities, um law enforcement, uh communities uh from or groups from all over the county.

Uh we also have a uh non-motorized task force uh and we have a local government task force where we've invited all the municipalities and townships.

So we are setting up uh meetings for early March um for all of them to kind of um go through oh to show them uh vision and goals and um really but to to start the process of um showing some some potential strategies to get some feedback on the on the those strategies and see what people react to um so that as we start to get results out of our travel demand model and see what projects may be coming out, we can start to prioritize projects to that meet these vision and goals.

Um we are also in the process uh really just getting underway of updating our non-motorized policy.

So uh to members member main's point, we met with the consultant uh yesterday, and as they pointed out uh to us yesterday, when that policy was done in 2010, it was um innovative.

Um and they made mention of that yesterday to us.

So um it's a good time to update it.

Um a lot has changed since it was first drafted.

Um, and they have some good suggestions for us.

So we'll be bringing those to you uh as well for um for your input.

Um so that that work is is really just getting started.

I mentioned the stakeholder meetings and engagement.

Um, and then public engagement is ongoing.

We have uh student advisory council getting put together with high school students to help weigh uh weigh in on the plan.

Uh and we're also setting up uh both in-person and virtual public meetings to um weigh in on these strategies.

Um and then later on, late spring, summertime, we'll have um probably summer, I think uh realistically we'll have uh draft plan um with projects and we'll have uh much more engagement um with the public and uh public meetings and um a whole engagement strategy for that as well.

So and you all have projects like specific projects that will be part of it.

Project list will that'll all be part of the plan and a financial plan out to 2050 with available revenues.

That's all still to come as part of part of the the long range plan development.

Yeah, that is great.

And the non-motorized transportation policy update.

So that is a separate, that's the policy we already have, right?

So that's like a different this is that's not part of this, or it's like adjacent kind of, is that correct?

It'll feed in, yeah.

So we have our existing non-motorized policy.

We're looking to to update it as part of this.

We've had this discussion at committee of what are the things we should do.

So this consultant that that's doing our long range plan is just getting underway with that work.

Um, and then that'll help feed into um what is the non-motorized plan that gets put into the long range plans.

Excellent.

That is good to hear.

Member Wasson.

Thank you, Chair.

And I just noticed this, Mike, that um you might want to consider changing the title of the non-motorized transportation policy update, because of course, in a lot of our trails, we have e-bikes now.

So they definitely have motors.

And I'm thinking, are we gonna confuse people by that?

Do we mean multimodal?

Maybe it's more generic.

Just throwing that out there.

Ooh, John, that's a big change.

If we stop saying non-motorized, but that is like, yeah, that's something definitely to think about.

And I wonder what it's going to happen like nationally, too.

Um, but I think it's like officially called the non-motorized policy, but I see your point.

So something definitely for us to think about long run, long range.

Yeah.

Because there's a lot of motorized things I've heard out there.

Remember, Casmin.

Um, and maybe this is covered in in different areas.

So forgive me if this is, but I I wonder if there, if it if we incorporate an element of um interconnection with public transportation.

Um, I think that might be helpful.

Um, particularly to if we're wanting to make things better for communities all over the county.

There are more communities that rely on public transportation more.

Um, I think if we uh envision it as a whole system, getting people and um where we connect with other entities that that that that connection is smooth and and and we work with whether it's pace or a township highway commissioner, where we're all on the same page.

Thanks.

Absolutely.

And and yeah, I uh I didn't state it, but um both Pace and Metra um and IDOT are all on our stakeholder and non-motorized task forces, and um we will have a public transit component of it, which will be amplifying their long range plans.

Um, so yeah, so it is included.

Yes, it is so fast.

Excellent.

All right.

Well, thank you, everyone.

Good.

All right, well, thank you very much.

I know this is been a huge undertaking, all the outreach, but I know this is really important for the whole entire strategy for roads and infrastructure improvements for the next um 20 years.

So thank you.

And thank you, everybody on the committee.

I think we had a really good discussion today and held it.

All right.

Thank you.

Okay, do we have a county administrators report?

We do not.

And there's no executive session.

All right, any members' remarks?

All right, well, except for we had a great discussion today, and everyone have a good day.

Stay warm.

And our next declare this meeting injured.

Our next meeting is February 25th, 2026.

Have a good day, everyone.