Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hinsdale board moves to authorize up to $92,000 for interim community development services
Summary
Trustees introduced and moved to place on consent an authorization of up to $92,000 to MGT Impact Solutions to fund an interim community development director and plan review services through July 2026; staff said permit fees will offset plan-review costs.
Get email alerts on the Personnel Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Hinsdale Village Board on May 5 advanced a proposal to authorize up to $92,000 for professional services from MGT Impact Solutions to provide an interim community development director and plan review services through July 2026.
Trustee Postma, who introduced the first-reading item, said the proposal would fund interim director Ellen Weber for up to 32 hours per week at $130.50 an hour and cover plan review work by Jose Torres at $141.88 per hour for up to 20 hours per week. "This proposal would pay for her for up to 32 hours a week...and this is, at a $130.50 an hour, which would be just a little over $54,000 through the July," Postma said. He added the plan-review portion would be just under $34,000 through July.
Staff told the board that plan-review fees can be passed through to permit applicants, reducing net budget impact. Postma also noted that if a permanent community development director is hired before July, the village would not need the full scope of the MGT engagement; staff estimated roughly $52,000 in salary and benefits would otherwise have been incurred during the vacancy period.
A trustee remarked that the community development department carries a significant backlog and welcomed the temporary support. Postma asked that, if appropriate, the board place the item on the consent agenda.
The item was presented as a first reading; trustees discussed the staffing rationale and financial pass-through for plan-review fees. No final separate vote on this individual first-reading item was recorded apart from its placement on the consent calendar in the subsequent consent process.

