RECEIVED
    CLERK’S OFFICE
    BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    DEQ
    1 12033
    sTArE OF ILLINOIS
    ROCHELLE WASTE DISPOSAL, L.L.C.
    )
    Pollution Control Board
    )
    Petitioner,
    )
    )
    vs.
    )
    Case No. PCB 03-218
    CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
    )
    ROCHELLE, ILLINOIS
    )
    )
    Respondent.
    )
    TRIAL
    BRIEF
    NOW COMES the Respondent, CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROCHELLE, by
    and through its attorney, RICHARD S. PORTER of HINSHAW & CULBERTSON, and for its
    Trial Brief, states as follows
    This
    Board should prohibit Petitioner from delving into the mental processes of the
    City Council members.
    As has been repeatedly held by this Board, it is inappropriate to delve into the mental
    processes of the County Board members.
    See Village of LaGrange v. McCook Cogeneration
    Station, L.L.C.,
    PCB 96-41
    (1995); Land and Lakes Co. v. Village of Romeoville,
    PCB
    92-25
    (June 4, 1992);
    Dimaggio v. Solid Waste Agency ofNorthern Cook County,
    PCB 89-138 (Jan. 11,
    1990);
    City of Rockford v. Winnebago County Board,
    PCB 88-107 (Nov. 17, 1988);
    Town of St.
    Charles v. Kane County Board and Elgin Sanitary
    Dist.,
    PCB 83-228, 229, 230 (May 18, 1984).
    This Board has specifically held that the “integrity of the decision-making process”
    requires that “inquiry not extend into the mental processes of the decision-maker.”
    Town of St.
    charles v. Kane County Board and Elgin Sanitary
    Dist.,
    PCB 83-228, 229, 230 (May 18, 1984).
    This Board in
    Dimaggio
    explained: “In their adjudicative role, the decisionmakers are
    entitled to protection of their internal thought processes.’ PCB 89-138. The principle that the
    minds of administrative decision makers should not be invaded is deeply rooted in decisions of
    7O3~7635v
    the United States Supreme Court.
    See Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe,
    401 U.S.
    402 (1971);
    United States v. Morgan,
    313 U.S. 409 (1941). Based on this well-settled principle
    that it is improper to delve into the thought processes of decisionmakers, this Board must not
    allow Petitioner to do so.
    This Board has held that “an applicant can probe facts relevant to fundamental fairness.
    However, an applicant cannot elicit testimony from the decisionmaker which probes the mental
    processes behind a decision, where, as here, a formal written decision exists.”
    Land and Lakes
    Co. v. Village of Romeoville,
    PCB
    92-25
    (June 4, 1992). Furthermore, this Board “cannot
    inquire as to how and the extent to which” each city councilmember fulfilled the obligation to
    familiarize himself or herselfwith the record;
    City of Rockford v. Winnebago County Board,
    PCB 88-107 (Nov. 17, 1988). Therefore, any effort by Petitioner to delve into the thought
    processes of the City Council members and determine the bases of the City Council members’
    decisions must be rejected by this Board as clearly inappropriate.
    The Illinois Supreme Court has affirmed a decision by the Second District, finding that it
    is inappropriate to delve into the mental processes of local decision makers in determining
    whether a pollution control facility met the criteria set forth in 415 ILCS 5/39.2(a).
    See E & E
    Hauling, Inc. v. Pollution Control Board,
    116 Ill.App.3d
    586,
    451 N.E.2d
    555
    (2d Dist. 1983),
    afj’d
    107 Ill.2d 33, 481 N.E.2d 664 (1985). The Second District in
    E & E Hauling
    explained:
    “Although the statute does require the County Board to make written decisions which specify the
    reasons for its decision, ‘such reasons to be in conformance with subsection (a) of this Section,’
    nothing in the statute would require a detailed examination of each bit of evidence or a thorough
    going exposition of the County Board’s mental processes.” 116 1l1.App.3d at 616, 451 N.E.2d at
    577.
    70387(,35v1 879983
    As set forth by the authorities above, it is clearly inappropriate for this Board or any party
    to delve into the thought processes of local decisionmakers, and this Board should so hold and
    prohibit any and all questions relating to the mental processes of the City Council members.
    CONCLUSION
    For the reasons set forth herein, Respondent, CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
    ROCHELLE, respectfully requests that this Board prohibition Petitioner from delving into the
    thought processes ofthe City Council members.
    Dated:
    /1~7(~~
    7
    Respectfully Submifted,
    On behalfofthe City Council ofthe City of
    Rochelle, Illinois, Respondent
    By: Hinshaw &
    HINSHAW AND CULBERTSON
    100 Park Avenue
    P.O. Box 1389
    Rockford, IL 61105-1389
    815-490-4900
    One
    This document utilized 100
    recycled paper products

    Back to top