Saying he believes “very strongly” in a one-week waiting period before voting on certain Consent Agenda items, Commissioner William Waldack requested at Tuesday’s village council meeting that four items be moved to the Active Agenda as a prelude to putting them to a Feb. 16 vote.

The items were duly removed from the Consent Agenda, but Waldack’s subsequent motions to get the items considered on next week’s Consent Agenda not only failed to gain the support of  his council colleagues, but also led Mayor Ron Sandack to suggest a rule change may be necessary to prevent a single commissioner from exercising the long-held prerogative. In a typical year, less than a dozen items might be requested moved from the Consent to the Active Agenda.

Waldack said the one-week waiting period, which was standard operating procedure until the council agreed to change its meeting format last month, allows for residents to respond and council members to obtain additional information.

Some of the items in question at Tuesday’s meeting “cost more than what some households make in a year,” Waldack said. “I do not consider them routine.”

The four Consent Agenda items in question were:

B RES 00-04034 A resolution authorizing a fifth addendum to a software maintenance agreement with Crowe Horwath, LLP, in the amount of $24,750.

C MOT 00-04039 A motion awarding 2010 traffic signal maintenance contract to Lyons Electric Company, LaGrange, IL, not to exceed $47,000.

D RES 00-04042 A resolution authorizing an agreement for prosecution services with Linda S. Pieczynski, Attorney at Law, P.C., in the amount of $35,000.

E RES 00-04040 A resolution of intent to continue participation in the Suburban Tree Consortium and to authorize certain purchases for FY 2010 in the amount of  $123,000.

The items had been added to the Consent Agenda on Friday, Feb. 5, and answers to council questions were provided only two or three hours before the meeting, he said. “What we consider routine deserves more consideration than a business day and a half.”

Council rules allow a commissioner to request any item be removed from the Consent Agenda for separate approval. However, in the interest of making meetings more efficient, the council agreed to waive the customary one-week waiting period for routine matters.

Referencing a Consent Agenda item for prosecutorial services, “we want to get it done sooner rather than later and not have to wait one week,” Sandack said.

Waldack, in making his motions to postpone action on the items, had asked village staff whether economic considerations, time constraints or other concerns made it necessary to approve the items immediately. The answer in each case was, “no.”

In his comments at the end of the meeting, Sandack said  he hopes ” it isn’t going to happen that one member of this council is going to use his prerogative to change what we did collectively and what Commissioner Waldack agreed to do because of what he believes isn’t routine.”

“If that’s the case, I’m going to ask my colleagues to consider a rule change because the one-person objecting rule was when we had five council members. We have seven now and I don’t think one person should hold up a Consent Agenda if everyone else thinks it’s a routine matter,” he said.

“This isn’t a threat, its a legitimate request for a rule change if we can’t live up to the rules we just changed,” Sandack said. “We agreed routine items would be on the Consent Agenda and now, a couple weeks into the rule change, it’s being gutted.”

Waldack noted that he expressed concerns about the matter when the meeting format change was being discussed. He also proposed a solution that would place items on the Consent Agenda one week in advance of council action to allow for discussion.

“I have a solution that would maintain efficiency and give adequate public notice and solve the problem,” he said. “There is more upside than the prospect of efficiency. If I need to go home that early, maybe I shouldn’t be here.

Waldack’s request to remove the items from the Consent Agenda came only one week after a similar request from Commissioner Bob Barnett at the Feb. 2 council meeting.

Barnett asked that approval of the Comprehensive Plan Ad Hoc Committee be removed from the Consent Agenda despite the fact that the item had been previously discussed at the Jan. 12 council meeting.

“Absolutely,” Sandack said in response to Barnett’s request.

Barnett went on to propose an amendment that would expand the committee from nine to 11 members, including four at-large members.

The amendment was approved by the council over the objections of Waldack, who felt an 11-member committee would be unwieldy.

Sandack announced Tuesday that he had made the additional two appointments, although he wouldn’t reveal the names publicly. The two members are expected to attend tonight’s Comprehensive Plan Ad Hoc Committee meeting, although they won’t be formally approved by the council until next week.