U4/JU/~U’J.O U~Jb 1~AA
~Li.55JJ~I
1th1\!Nf~1h A L1~kth1N
~_I
002
~Tt~TN~
~
Q~Ll~JT,~OW
CONTROL BOARD
RECEiVED
~
n~ It IA\ ii
CLERK’S OFFICE
j R~ ~
APR 302003
STATE OF ILLINOIS
Pollution Control Board
Petitioner,
)
POP
03—125
(Third—Party Pollution Control
Facil~.ty
Siting
Appeal)
(Third-Party Pollution Control
COUNT~’ CF
KANKAKEE,
COUNTY BOARD OF
ANKAI~ES,
and WASTE MANAGEMENT OF
ILLINOIS, INC.
Respondents
-
MICHAEL WATSON,
vs.
Petitioner,
COUNTY OF
KANKAKEE,
ILLINOIS,
KANKAKEE,
and WASTE
INC.
COUNTY BOARD OF
MANAGEMENT OF
Respondents
-
Petitioner,
COUNTY OF KANKAKEE, COUNTY BOARD OF
KANKAKEE,
and
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF
ILLINOIS, INC.
Respondents.
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF ILLINOIS, INC.,
Petitioner,
CITY OF
KANKAKEE,
~vs
COUNT1’ OF
KANKAKEE,
COUNTY BOARD OF
KANK.AEEE,
and WASTE MANAGEMENT OF
ILLILICIS, INC.
Respondents.
Petitioner,
MERLII’) IARLOCK,
PCB
03—133
KEITH RUNYON,
vs.
Facility Siting Appeal)
POE 03—134
(Third-Party Pollution Control
Facility Siting Appeal)
POB 03—135
(Third—Party Pollution Control
Facility Siting Appeal)
POE 03—144
(Pollution Control Facility
Siting Appeal)
ITS.
COUNTY OF KANKAKEE,
Respondent.
~1~3:33z597
KENNETH A LESHEN
I~OO3
NOTICE OF
FILING
TO:
Ocrothy N. Gunn, Clerk
Illinois Pollution Control Board
James R.
ThorrLpson Center
100 flest Randolph Street, Suite 11—500
Chicago, IL 60601-3218
BradLey Halloran
Hearing Officer
Illinois
Pollution Control Board
100 t~7est Randolph,
11t:~
Floor
Chicago, IL 60601
FAX 312/814—3669
DonaLd J. Moran, Esq.
Pederson & 1-loupt
:61 North Clark, Suite 3100
Chicago, IL 60601—3242
FAX 312/261—1149
Charles F. I4elsten, Esq.
Richard S. Porter, Esq~
1-linshaw & Culbertson
P. 0. Box 1389
Rockford, IL 61105—1389
FAX
815/963—9989
Jennifer J. Sackett Pohlenz, Esq.
175 W. Jackson Blvd., Ste. 1600
Chicago, IL 60604
FAX 312/540—0578
Leland Milk
6903 South Route 45—52
Ch~banse, IL 60922
George Mueller, Esg.
501 State Street
Ottawa, IL 61350
FAX 315/433—4913
Keith L. Runyori
1165 Plum Creek Drive, Unit D
Bourbonnais, IL 60914
FAX
815/937—9164
Elizabeth Harvey, Esq.
Swanson, Martin & Bell
One IBM Plaza, Suite 2900
330 North Wabash
Chicago, IL 60611
FAX
312/321—0990
O4/~30/~UU~ u~:Jb
tAA
~
IthNNE1H
A LESHEN
~OO4
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that I have on the
30th
day of April, 2003, filed
the original and nine (9) copies of the following dccument:
RESPONSE TO COUNTY OF
KANKAKEE’S
RESPONSE TO CITY’S
MOTION TO RECONSIDER DISCOVERY RULINGS
with Dorothy N. Gunn, Clerk, Illinois Pollution Control Board, James R.
ThorrnpsOn Center, 100 West Randolph Street, Suite 11—500, Chicago, IL
60601—3218, and a true and correct copy thereof was served upon you on
April 30, 2003, by depositing a copy thereof, enclosed in an envelope in
the tJ S. Mail at Kankakee, Illinois, proper postage prepaid, before the
hour of 5:00 p~m., addressed as above, and by facsimile to those parties
with facsimile numbers listed above.
:Ken~ethA. Leshen
i
Assistant City Attorney
City of Kankakee
Kenneth A. Leshen
Assistant City Attorney
One Dearborn Square, Suite 550
Kankakee, IL 60901
825/93.3—3385
Rep. No. 03127454
Q4/3Q/~UO.-~ U~~J71~AA ~15~~JJ97
KENNETH A LESHEN
t~J
005
ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
RE CE ~V ED
CLERK’S OFFICE
APR 302003
Petitioner,
STATE OF ILLINOIS
Pollution Control Board
(Third-Party Pollution Control
Facility Siting
Appeal)
COUNT? OF KANKAKEE,
COUNTY BOARD OF
KANK~KEE, and WASTE MANAGEMENT OF
ILLINOIS, INC.
Respondents
COUNTY OP
KANKAKEE,
COUNTY BOARD OF
KANKAKEE, and
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF
ILLINOIS, INC.
Respondents
-
COUNTY OF KANKAKEE, COUNTY BOARD OF
KANKAKEE, and WASTE MANAGEMENT OF
ILLINOIS, INC.
Respondents
-
KEITH RUNYON,
Petitioner,
vs.
COUNTY OF
KANKAKEE,
COUNTY BOARD OF
KANKAKEE,
and WASTE MANAGEMENT OF
ILLINOIS,
INC.
Respondents.
)
POE 03—135
(Third-Party Pollution Control
Facility Siting Appeal)
CITY OF KANKAKEE,
vs
-
PCB 03—125
MERLIN KARLOCK,
vs
Petitioner,
MICHAEL WATSON,
vs.
Petitioner,
PCB 03—133
(Third-Party Pollution Control
Facility Siting Appeal)
POE 03—134
(Third-Party Pollution Control
Facility Siting Appeal)
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF ILLINOIS, INC.,
Petitioner,
vs
-
COUNTY OF KANKAKEE,
POE 03—144
(Pollution Control Facility
Siting Appeal)
Respondent.
04/.~J0/~
iju
~‘
u~,:jj
FAA
~ib~5J~7
KKNNE’I’H A
LESSEN
41
00~
:LLINOIS POLLUTLON CONTROL BOARD
CITY CF KANKAKEE
Petitioner,
V.
COUNTY OF KANKAKEE,
COUNTY BOARD OF KANKAKEE, and
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF
ILLINOIS, INC.,
Respondents
-
POE 03—125
POE 03—133
PCB 03—134
FOB 03—135
(consolidated)
(Pollution Control
Facility Siting Appeals)
RESPONSE TO COUNTY OF
F~ANKAJ(EE’S
RESPONSE TO CITY’S MOTION TO RECONSIDER
~ISCO\~RY
RULINGS
and through assistant City
to the County’s Response to
states as follows~
NOW COMES the CITY OF KANKAKEE, by
Attorney, KENNETH A. LESHEN, and responding
city’s Motion to Reconsider Discovery Rulings,
1. On April 29, 2003, the County of Kankakee, by and through its
Attorney, Elizabeth S. Harvey, filed a Response to City’s Motion to
Reconsider Discovery Rulings with the Illinois Control Board.
2. The Response references and incorporates Affidavits by Elizabeth
Harvey, Attorney at Law, and Charles F. Helsion, Attorney at Law.
3.
Since said attorneys responded
to the
Motion by opening the door
and providing affirmative testimony through their Affidavits, the
Petitioner~ now have at 1ea~t the right to cross examine them on
Affidavits they submitted in support of their Response Brief. Further,
whatever claim of privilege or other objections raised by the County and
said. attorneys
to providing
testimony on the subject of their ax parte
O4/,3O/ZU0~ U~~J7
FAA
Sl53.i~3~7
!(ENNETE A LESHEN
41007
ca~am~fliCCt~onS
has
now been ~iaived
through the s~bnittal of their
Afii~aV~.t5and therefore their depositions should be allowed.
4. After
the
filing of the City’s Motion, the Petitioners took the
discovery deposition of Leonard “Shaky” Martin. Mr. Martin has been a
Kankakee County Poard member for 30 years and was previously the chairman
of
oh.e Kankakee
County Board.
5.
In his deposition
Mr. Martin testified
that Mr. :-Ielston had
contact with Waste Management of Illinois, Inc. (hereinafter, “WMII”)
regarding the conditions imposed by the County on WMI in the County’s
approval
of WMII’s siting application and that he believed that Mr.
HelstCfl made those
contacts prior to January 31, 2003
(See, page 23,
line
9 through page 25, line 17 of Leonard Martin’s deposition
attached hereto
and
incorporated, herein as Exhibit A).
6. The Affidavits of
Attorneys
Harvey and Helston deny any
substantive contacts with WMII during the time period in which the siting
application was pending. WHII’s responses to discovery requests concede
that Donald Moran made contacts with the County’s Attorneys regarding
conditions during the prohibited time period. Leonard Martin’s sworn
testimony
supports the position that prohibited contacts were made. It is
precisely this type of factual dispute
that is best served by
scrutiny
through the discovery
process.
7.
The County .proDoses
that the depositions of these attorneys
should be limited to the specific phone call.
Leonard Martin’s deposition
testimony requires
that these depositions
be taken and that the City of
04130i’~uuJ u~:ôi FAA
~1~J~5JJ~J-I
f~f’~NE1li
A
LESliEr~
i~j
008
Nankak~e and
other Petitioners
be
allowed
to
inquire into the
full range
of contacts referenced by Leonard Martin in his deposition.
prepared By~
Kenneth A. Leshen
Attorney at Law
One Dearborn Square, Ste. 550
Kankakee, IL 60901
815/933—3385
Reg. No~ 03127454
Kenne~
Assistant
City Attorney
CITY POLLLrrON CONTROL/RESP.NOT. ~c.
04/3Q/~UU.) U~iJ1 FAA
aI5.3J~I
1t1~Nfth1H A
LJ~SFIEN
a_J009
DEPOSITION OF LEONARD MARTIN
-
4/29/03
23
Q.
Do you know whether any County employees
2 had contacts with Waste
Management regarding those
3 conditions?
4
A.
I don’t know.
5
Q.
Do you know whether any County Board
6 Members had contacts with Waste Management regarding
7 those conditions?
g
A.
I don’t know.
9
Q.
Do you know whether Mr. Heisten had
10
contact with Waste Management regarding those conditions?
11
A.
I believe that he did.
12
Q.
When do you believe
he
had contact with
13 Waste Management regarding those conditions?
14
A.
I think shortly after the conditions were
15
set into effect.
16
In other words,
after the County Board
17 passed the siting and the application from Waste
Management I think that he was
--
he was told by
the
19 County that he could negotiate conditions on behalf of
20
the County Board.
21
Q.
Before January 31st,
——
let’s focus on the
22 time before January 31st. Do you know whether
Mr.
23 Fielsten had
contact with Waste
Management?
24
A.
I believe he was.
EXHIBIT
MARILYNN~15-439-139OMROZYNSKI, CS~,FAX
815-439-8370KANKAKEE,
ILLINOIS
n
U4/3U/~U~5U~J(
FAA
~,Lb~$3J~’/
1U~1NITh1li
A
LhSHFIN
L~jU10
DEPOSITION
OF LEONARD MARTIN
—
4/29/03
24
You believe he did have?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q.
And upon what do you base that belief?
4
A.
County Board discussions and meetings.
5
Q.
Okay and in the County Board discussions
6 and meetings Mr. Heisten was present, is that correct?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q.
And he informed you that he had contact
9 with Waste Management, is that correct?
10
A.
Yes.
11
And that was in the time period before
12 January 31, 2003?
13
A.
I can’t be sure of that, but I think it
14 was, yes.
15
MR. LESHEN: Mr. Porter, I’m going to
16 ask you to stop nodding because even if it’s not intended
17 to communicate with the deponent, I
still find it
18 distracting. So I’d appreciate it~
i~
MR. PORTER: I am certainly not
20 communicating with the deponent. I will face the other
21 direction.
22
MR. LESHEN:
That
is why I phrased
it in
23 my dual way of saying it. I just want to make sure.
24
Q.
What information did you
--
there were
MARILYNN MROZYNSKI, CSRI KANKAKEE, ILLINOIS
815~439-1390
FAX 815-439-8370
04/3Ø/~00J 09:37
FAX 8159333397
KENNETH A LESHEN
~011
DEPOSITION OF LEONARD MARTIN
-
4/29/03
25
meetings before I take it then before the January 31,
2 2003 meeting?
3
A.
I believe there were.
4
Q.
Do you know which meetings those were
5
where that happened?
6
A.
No.
7
Q.
Were
you a participant In those meetings?
8
A.
No.
9
Q.
Who told you about the meetings?
10
A.
They
were at County Board Meetings that
n
those things were discussed.
12
Q.
And how did you become aware that they
13 were discussed at those meetings?
14
A.
Just by being there and listening.
is
You were present at the meetings where
16
those things were discussed?
17
A.
Yes.
Q.
Do you know whether
--
let me tap into
19 your expertise as the ex-County Chairmen.
20
Did there come a point when the County
21 changed its policy to provide for tape recordings of
22 meetings?
23
A.
That had been at that 1~ias been the
24
raodus operanidi like for four or five years~.
MARILYNN MROZYNSKI, C~R,KANKAKEE, ILLINOIS
8J5-439~1390
FAX
815-439-8370
U4/3iJ/~U’J~5U9:3~ FAX S159333.397
KENNETH A LESHEN
~OO1
KENNETH
A’ITORNEYAT
A. LESHEN,
LAW
P.CkEc~
cLERK’S
OFFICE
One
Dearborn Square, Suite 550
1~\PR ~3C) Z003
Kankakee,
Illinois 60901-3927
STATE OF ILLINOIS
Telephone
o
nution
C~t~rB~rd
(815)933-3385
~°
(815)933-3397
FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL COVER LETTER
DE:
April 30, 2003
Please deliver the following pages to:
MANE OF RECIPIENT:
see follo~iing service list
FROM:
Ken Leshen
RE:
City of Kankakee vs. County of Kankakee, et al.
PCB 03—125, et al.
THERE WILL BE
(11)
PAGES INCLUDING THIS PAGE
The
ln~rrnation
cOntained in this racslmlle Is
confidenti~Ire~d
may
also contaIn privi~ged
rnoy-ciont-lnforrnatlon or work
product.
The
infomiaUor~Is Intended only
for the us~o~the Individual or
entity
to which
it is addressed. If you
are
not the
Intended
rec1pIen~or the employee
Or
agentresponsible to deliver it ~othe intend~J
recipIent.
ysu
are hereby notified that any
use,
dissemination, distribution or
copying
ol’
this
communicadori
Is
strictly prohibited. I~you have received this facsimile
in
error, please notify us Immediately by telephone,
and
return
t1-~original message to us at the address
ist~d
above
via the Uniter Stales
Postal
~er/ice.
Thank
You.