ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    December 7,
    1995
    COUNTY OF WILL,
    )
    )
    Complainant,
    )
    v.
    )
    AC 94—98
    AC 95—1
    CDT
    LANDFILL
    CORP.,
    )
    AC 95-2
    (Administrative Citation)
    Respondent.
    )
    (WC 94AC2, WC
    94AC3,
    WC 94AC5)
    DISSENTING OPINION (by J. Theodore Meyer):
    I dissent from today’s opinion and order because I disagree
    with the Board’s reliance on the Miller case.
    There, the
    Appellate Court found that attorney fees and ordinary expenses of
    litigation cannot be recovered by the prevailing party of an
    administrative citation, absent a statute or contract to the
    contrary.
    (Miller v. Pollution Control Board,
    267 Ill.App.3d
    160,
    642 N.E.2d 475
    (4th Dist.
    1994).)
    The Court reasoned that
    “no specific language appears in section 42(b)
    (4)
    of the
    ~Il1tnois Environmental Protection) Act authorizing the award of
    attorney fees”, therefore a county’s attorney’s fees cannot be
    included as hearing costs.
    (~
    at 173,
    642 N.E.2d at 485.)
    In fact, Section 42(f) does allow the Board to assess
    attorney’s fees and costs incurred by the State’s Attorney of the
    county in which the violation occurred.
    (415 ILCS
    5/42(f)(1994).)
    Contrary to the Court’s dicta in Miller,
    I
    believe this section should be construed broadly,
    and that a
    violator reimburse the Illinois taxpayer for all costs incurred
    by the county,
    including indirect expenses such as travel time,
    administrative support,
    printing, copying and overhead.
    After
    all, the time spent by complainant’s attorney in prosecuting this
    matter certainly could have been used to handle other cases.
    The same reasoning should be applied to hearing costs so
    that all costs incurred by the Board and the county in which the
    hearing was held can be recovered.
    The now common practice by
    state and local governments of charging a “user
    fee”
    to those
    who
    use a service
    (such as paying for photocopies)
    is certainly a
    method of imposing costs that should be employed in
    administrative citations.
    For these reasons,
    I respectfully dissent.
    J
    Theodore Meyer
    Bo rd Member
    I, Dorothy N. Gunn,
    Clerk of the Illinois Pollution Control
    Board,
    hereby certify that
    above dissenting opinion was filed
    on the
    ________
    day of
    1996.
    I
    Control Board

    Back to top