| | - BOARD
- STATE OF IWNOIS
- Pollution Control Facility
- WASTE MANAGEMENT OF ILLINOIS)INC.,
- Petitioner,
- Respondents.)
- Respondents.
- (Consolidated)
- BYRON SANEJBERG,
- Respondents.)
- Response:
- STATE OF ILLINOIS
- AFFIDAVIT OF COMPlIANCE.
- DUPLICATE
- 2001 TAXES PAYABLE 2002
- RETURN STUB WITH PAYMENT #1
- Equalized Assessed 21,190
- 1,768.04 2002
- RETURN STUB WITH PAYMENT #22
- To All Counsel ofRecord:
- RECEIVED
- Afternoon only
- Mr. Volini will not be available for deposition during the week ofNovember 10.
- Pending resolution ofthe question regarding Claire
- not be participating in depositions.
- Pollution Control Board
- e-taai(: gntuzffer@wukopenwest.com
- Very truly yours,
- Mueller
- THE ILLINOIS P0’
- Petitioner,
- RECEIVED
- STATE OF IWNOISPolltdlon Control Board
- BYRON SANDBERG,
- Petitioner,
- Answer:
- George Mueller
- 501 State Street0/ta iva, IL 61350Phone: (815) 433-47(15
- TIlE ILLINOIS
- OARI) Nov 102003
- PCI3 04-33
- WASTE MANAGEMENT OF ILLiNOIS)
- Petitioner,
- Respondents.
- BYRON SANDBERG,
- GEORGE MUELLER, Rc:
- GEORGE MUELLER, P.C
- BYRON SANDBERCJ,
- Petitioner
- Petitioner,
- Respondents. II
- Petitioners,
- Answer:
- communication;
|
)
PCB 04-33
(Third
Party
Siting Appeal)
RECEIVED
cLERK’S
OFFICE
BOARD
NOV 102003
STATE OF IWNOIS
Pollution Control Board
Pollution Control Facility
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF ILLINOIS)
INC.,
vs.
Petitioner,
THE CITY OF KANKAKEE, ILLINOIS)
CITY COUNCIL, TOWN & COUNTRY
UTILITIES, INC.,
and KANKAKEE
REGIONAL
LANDFILL,
LL.C.,
Respondents.
)
)
)
)
PCB 04-34
(l’hird Party Pollution Contro’
Facility
Siting Appeal)
COUNTY OF
KANKAKEE,
ILLINOIS,
and EDWARD U. SMITH,
KANKAKEE
COUNTY STATE’S ATTORNEY,
S’s.
Petitioners,
THE CITY OF KANKAKEE, ILLINOIS
CITY COUNCIL, TOWN & COUNTRY
UTILITIES, iNC., and KANKAKEE
REGiONAL LANDFILL, L.L.C.,
Respondents.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
PCB 04-35
(Third
Party Pollution Control Facility
Siting Appea’)
(Consolidated)
RESPONDENT, TOWN
& COUNTRY
UTILITIESJNC.’S
RESPONSE
TO PETTrI0NH4S,
COUNTY OF KANKAKEEJLLINOIS
AND EDWARD I) SMITH, KANKAKEE COUNTY SFA1 L’S
AflORNI\ S,
J~QCU
MENnLWESfl
Now come Respondents, Kankakee Regional LandlUl, LLC and Town
&
(ounin
Utilities, Inc., by and through one of their attorneys, (ieor2e Mueller. P.C., f~rtheir Response to
Petitioners, County of Kankakee, Illinois and Edward 9. Smith, Kankakee County Stat&s
AlEomey’s Document Requests, state as loliows:
1/
I
•
THE
BYRON SANEJBERG,
Petitioner,
vs.
7/
)
THE CITY OF KANKAKEE, ILLINOIS)
CITY COUNCIL, TOWN & COUNTRY)
UTILITIES, INC., and KANKAKEE
)
REGIONAL LANDFILL, L.L.C.
)
Respondents.
)
1. Identi& and produce any and all documents, letters, or rijernoranda which were read.
reviewed, or examined by the City of Kankakec during the consideration of the Town and
Country Utilities,
inc.
Landfill Siting Application, which either are or are not a part of the public
record of the hearing.
ResDonse:
Respondens are unaware of what, if any. documents outside the record were reviewed h
the City of Kankakee.
2. All communications, reports, correspondence. and other documents received or scni
by the City of Kankakee to or from Town and Country Utilities, Inc. regarding the planning.
development, and siting of the faeihly.
Response:
Respondents obleet to this Request as over broad in that it contains no time parameters.
Without waiving said ob)ection, Respondents identil~’those documents referenced in the record
of the proceedings in PUB Case NC).: 03—31. Respondents have no other responsive documents.
3. All notes, minutes, and other documents of al coummuications, phone calls and
meetings between ‘own and Country Utilities, Inc. and the City olkankakee, Illinois, the
Kankakee City Council or their agents, relating to the planning, development, and siting olthe
facility.
Response:
See Answer to Request No. 2.
4. Any and all documents relied upon or reviewed by or received by City of Kankakec.
its officers, Department heads, supervisors and staftor the Kankakee City Council (including but
not limited to its consultants, attorneys or experts) concerning or relating to the landfill or siting
of the landfill which is not contained in the application or the Cily of Kankakee public record.
Response:
Respondents are unaware of what documents, if any. outside the record were reviewed or
received by the City of Kankakee from other sources.
5.
Any and all documents, agendas, computer messages, telephone message memos,
which reference, mention, memorialize or in any way relate to any communications between the
City of Kankakee and Town and Country Utilities. Inc.
~)nse:
See answer to #9.
6. Any and all documents, correspondence. memoranda, e—mail, computer messages.
telephone message memos, or other evidence, items, records or things in any way referencing or
memorializing any communication of anyone with Hearing Officer Boyd, which are not part of
the public record, including any and all drafts ol the Hearing Officer’s report or
recommendations that were reviewed or amended by the City of Kankakce. Cu the Applicant.
~nse;
Respondent is unaware oidocumcnts relating to communications, ifany, between
Hearing Officer Boyd and other individuals.
7.
Any and all agendas. documents, correspondence. memos, c-mails, computer
messages or the like authored, generated or drafted by any City Council member concerning the
Application.
Response:
Respondents are unaware of what, if any, documents were at.~thored,generated or drn lied
by any City Council member.
8. Any and all documents, correspondence, exhibits, memoranda, writings or recordings
in any way referencing the deliberation or consideration of the Application or any condition upon
approval suggested. considered or imposed by Hearing Officer Boyd or the City Council, its
members, agents, employees, attorneys and staff
Response:
Respondents have no such documents.
9. Any and all communications, documents, memoranda, recordings. agendas, notes, or
evidence concerning any communication between the City of Kankakce and
I
and Country
Utilities. Inc., which refers ro relates to any potential or actual lawsuit, dispute or claim against
the County of Kankakee, including, but not limited to any declaratory judgment action (lied by
the City against the County. any injunctive action tiled by the City against the County. an other
County siting hearing, any civil action or other lawsuit filed against the Count)’, or any appeal ol
any of the aforementioned actions or claims.
Response:
Sec minutes of the Kankakee City Council meeting ol’ l-ehrual)•’~.200. at winch ibon’ms
Volini appeared and participated in an executive session of the council.
10. Any and all communications between the City of Kankakee or Town and Country
Utilities. Inc. and Mr. Michael Watson or Mr. Merlin Karlock, or any agent or employee of said
individuals or any agent, employee, consultant or person affiliated with any company that Mr.
Watson or Mr. Karloek are affiliated with in any way, concerning the County of Kankakee or an
action, suit or proceeding of which the County is a party or participant.
R~ponse:
Respondents object to this Request as documents relating to its communications with
other parties and entities who are not parties or participants herein are irrelevant and not
reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of relevant information. Respondents further
object to this Request as being over broad.
11. All correspondence, contracts or other communications between each opinion
witness or other witness and the City of Kankakec in connection with the subject matter et this
action.
~nse:
None
12. All demonstrative exhibits which (‘ii)’ of Kankakee. Illinois. the Kankakee City
Council or then’ agents may offer or use at hearing.
Re~ponse:
Respondents are unaware of what documents the C ‘i(v intends to offer ~uhearing.
13. All exhibits which City of Kankakee. Illinois, the Kankakee City Council or their
agents may offer into evidence or otherwise use at hearing including but not limited to
documents, summaries, objects, charts, and other items.
Response.:
See Answer to Request No. 12.
14. All transcripts, statements, articles, writings or other documents or langible itenw
which City of Kankakee may use at hearing in direct or cross~exaniinatsonof any witness.
ft~onse:
See Answer to Request No. 12.
15.
All releases,
covenants or other agreements, promises or understandings (including
any document reflecting or referring to the same) with respect to the subject matter of thLs action.
which is not contained in the Landfill Siting Application nor admitted into eviclcncc in the City of
Kankakee hearing on the Application.
Response:
None
lb. Any and all documents or things set forth or referred to in Respondcni’s answers to
interrogatories propounded by this or any Petitioner, or which Respondent or Respondent’
counsel consulted to prepare said answers.
Response:
See the record developed by the City of Kankakee herein. See alst. the record of the
proceedings in PCB Case No,:
03-31.
Additional documents relating to service of notices ace
also attached,.
7. Any and all communications. documents, reports, recommendations, memoranc.la, e—
mails, evidence or the like in any way referencing authored, received by or sent. to Mr. Ralph
Yarborough. Ph.D.
Response:
None
18. Any and all communications, documents, e nails, reports or reconunendatious
between the City of Kankakee. the City Council or its agents. attorneys, staff and employees
and
Hearing Officer Boyd in any way referencing Mr. Ralph Yarhorough, Phil. or any opinion.
recommendation or report of Mr. Yarborough.
Response:
Respondents are unaware of such documents.
19, Any and all documents or evidence in any way nieniorializing that a repor row Mv.
Ralph Yarhorough. Ph,!). was made pail of the City public record at any time.
Response:
Respondents are unaware of any documents relating to Dr. Yarhorough other than
documents in the public recerd herein.
20. It
is further requested that each party and/or his or its attorney in compliance with this
request liar
production shalt
furnish an
Affidavit
stating whether the production is complete.
Response:
STATE OF ILLINOIS
)
55
COUNTY OF
—
)
AFFIDAVIT OF COMPlIANCE.
Thomas
A.
Volini, having been
duly
sworn on
oath states that the foregoing Response h
lown &
Country Utilities,
Inc.
to
the
Document Requests tendered by Petitioners, (‘mmlv of
Kankakee.
illinois and
Edward
D.
Smith, Kankakee
County State’s Attorney, is accurate
and
complete
to the best
of
his knowledge,
information,
and belief.
Thomas
A.
Vohni
Subscribed and Sworn to Beibre Me l’his
Day of
.2003.
Nolary Public
fl~F~ICIAL$~XLn
GEORGE MUELLER, P.C
AUorne3’ at Law
501 Slate Street
Ottawa,JL 61350
P/zone: ç’SIS,) 433-4705
Oct 28 03 O?;53p
HEARTLAND
CITY
OP
KANICM(EE
7084580625
P.2
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
FEI~RUARY3,2003 7:043 I’M.
MAYOR GREEN:
I’d like
to
call the meeting to order, please. I’d like to ask Pastor Martin
Outzmer &om
Trinity United Methodist
Church to caine forward and opIm our
meeting with a prayer.
REV. GUTZMI3R:
I’ve been doing this now offand on for
six
years.
I’m
going to do something
difiàeni tonight. t want to pray for Ken Ream and for Nomian Coy. And, I
think we can do that andjust ask God to bless therest of our meeting, but
especiallyto pray for them tonighL Norman, has
twelve more
meetings? .J believe, in your capacity? Is that right? And,
so, we
want to
certainly rcinembar you. Holy and wonderfist Cod, we do pray for Icon, ho’s
come
out ofthe
hospital, we pray
For
his health and his
strength. We pray for
Norman
Coy,
he has these Iastmeetings
here, \Ve
pray
that
things go ‘veil, that
his health
continues (ogo
well, We pray for the heath and
saibty
of
all the
members ofthis Council, We pray for the work that t&y do. And, we pray
your blessing
upon
us,
each
one, for
our safety and for our judiciousness thai
all
that we do and all that we are about will be a blessing to you. We pray
in
our
Lord’s caine. Amen.
MAYOR ORLEN:
While you’re still standing, I’d like youjust to talce a monwat ofsilence for the
loss ofour astronauts this past Saturday. Amen Now, I’d like to
ask
Breytta
Johnson
and Eshawn Williams
if
they’d come forward and apes our meeting
with the Fledge? They look likethey’re
ill business,
don’t they?
BREYTTA JOHNSONAND ESHAWN WILLIAMS AND ALL:
Fledge
of Allegiance.
MAYOR GREEN:
Thank you very muvjt Roll call.
CLERK DIJMAS:
PRESENT: Brown; Hunter; Epstein; Baron; Nugent Wil.lian,s finn
(In spizU, but not
body
via
speakerphone);
Coy; Diersen; Trost iCinkade; Schwadc; Cathing, Cox (14)
MAYOR GREEN:
Depaxtn~entHeads.
CLERK
OUMAS:
PRESENT: Kinkade;Kanerad; Deu
Spice; Bohien;
Sinwis;
Schaeffer; Nolan; Gordon; Fueni
(10)
ABSENT: Poweç Leshen, Tyson (3)
MAYOR
GREEN:
Thank you.
On
your agenda tonight there will be two changes. Under Ne’.v
Business, Item C, the economic development agreement between the City and
SF5
will
not
be presented tonight.
The proper documcntation is not here. And,
we
Will
aM an item, F, which
i5 0. Broker
ofRecord
letterfor our dental
insurance.
Okay. yriu’ve got the minutes oldie January21,2003, meeting.
I
riced
a
motion to approve.
7:10 PM.
AttorneyLas/wa arrives
ALDERMAN IUNTER:
Mayor Greco, with the concun’ence of the seconder, Alderman Hearn, I
movethey be approved.
MAYOR GREEN:
Is there a second?
ALDERMAN HEARJN
Second.
MAYOR
GREEN:
Motion
by
Aidennan Hunter,
seconded by Aldennan l4eam.
All
in favor,
AYE.
Opposed
same sign.
MOTION TO
APPROVE
CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 21, 2003
C~vCournttMadrzy
F.bnia.y 3.2003
Page 1
Oct 28’ 03
O?:53p
HERRTLRNU
7O8458OS~5
p.3
MAYOR
GREEN:
Motion
carries I
don’t
know what we would have done, ‘tf
we
didn’t have him
here. Als, we have Petitions tonight. ES, we have the minutes from the
Planning Conimission ofJanuary 14. That’s information only. Add, we need a
motion to aecept the Findings and Recommendations.
ALDERMAN NtJGENT:
Mayor.! make the motion
we
accept
the
Findings and Recommendations
ofthe Planning Board.
ALDERMAN WILLIAMS: Second.
MAYOR GREEN:
Motion by Aldennars Nugeni, seconded by Aldennan Williams to accapt the
findings
of the Planning Cornrzission, Roll call.
CLERK
DUMAS:
AYE:
Brown;
Ilunteç Epstein;Nugent Williams; Hearn Coy; Diersen; Trost Kinkade;
Scbwade;Gathing Cox(l3)
ABSTAIN:
Baron
(I
have
a conflict
and!
hove
to obsiarn)
(I)
Mo’rJoN
TO
ACCEPT TEE FINDINGS ANt) RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR
CASE
#P803-O1:
AN APPLICATION
BY
JOSEPH hi, KANE REQUESTING A
7MNINC MAP AMENDMENT
TO CHANGE
TIlE
ZONING
CLASSIFICATION
OF ThE PROPERTY COMMONLY
KNOWN
AS 719
N.
KENNEDY DRIVE
FROM
R-1 SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
TO C-I NEIGHBORHOOD
COMMERCIAL
MAYOR GREEN:
Motion carries Now, we have the Ordinanoe which, ab, changes the zoning
classification at 719 N. Kennedy Drive. Is there a motion to Suspend The Rules?
ALDERMAN NUGENT;
Mayor, I make the motion
we
Suspend
the
Rules and pane the Ordinance.
ALDERMAN WILLIAMS:
Second.
MAYOR GREEN:
Motion
by
Alderman Nugeni, seconded
by
Alderman Williams to Suspend the
Rules that
would
interfere
with thepassageclthis Ordinance. Roll calL
CLERK DUMAS:
AYE:
Drown; Huntat Epstein; Nugent;
Williams;
Ream; Coy; Oieisen; Trost Kinkade;
Schwade; Gathing Cox(13)
ABSTAIN: Baron(S)
MAYOR GREEN:
Motion carries
rs
there a motion
to put
the Ordinance on its Ems) Passage and
Paz?
ALDERMAN NUGENT:
I make
that
motion.
ALDERMAN WILLIAMS: Second
MAYOR GREEN:
Motion by AldermanNugent, seconded
by
Alderman Williamsto
put
this
Ordinance
on
its Final Passage and Puss. Any questions?
Roll
call,
CIIRK DUMAS:
AYE:
Brown; Fluntet
Epstein;
Nugent; Williams;
Resin; Coy;
Dienen;
Trost Kinkade;
Schwade; Gathiag~Cox(13)
ABSTAIN: Baron (I)
MOTION TO APPROVE ORDINANCE CASE 11PB03’OI:
AN
APPLICATION
BY JOSEPH
M. KANE REQUESTINGA
ZONING MAP AMENDMENT
TO CHANGE
THE ZONING
CLASSIFICATION
OF THE PROPERTY COMMONLY
KNOWN AS
719 N.
KENNEDY DRiVE
FROM
R-l
SINGLE
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
TO C-I
NEIOIBORB000 COMMERCIAL
Cl~sCow.cd
M.etfng
flbnao,y
3,2003
Fag.
2
03
O2:53p
HEARTLAND
7084560625
p.4
MAYOR GREEN:
Motion carriet There are no further Petitions from the Chair Are there any
from the floor? Hearing none, Communications. The Chair has none. Are there
any
front
the floor? Standing Committees. Public Works. Alderman Trost.
ALDERMAN TROST:
It’s general infoirnation in ourpackets, sir
MAYOR GREEN:
Any qusions? Aldcnnan Gathiri~License and Franchise.
ALDERMAN GATHING:
It’s all there in evorybody’s packet
MAYOR GREEN:
Report ofOfficers.
ALDERMAN WILLiAMS: MayorGreen, I make a motion to approve the Report ofOfficers, place
the money in proper accounts and pay the bills in the amount of
$866,459.65.
ALDERMAN NUGENT:
Second.
MAYOR
GREEN:
Mellon by Alderman Williams, seconder) by Alderman Nugcnt to accept the
Report of C)~cers,place the moncyin the proper aaounts and pay the bills in
the amount of $866,459.65. Anyquestions on any oftIw bills? (not roll call.
CLERK DUMAS:
AYE; Brown; Husder Epstchi Baron; Nugcnt; Williams Heaut; Coy; Diersen; Trod; Kinkade;
Schwade; Gathing Cox (14)
REPORT OF OFFICERS APPROVAL OF BILLS $866,459.65
MAYOR GREEN:
Motion carder. Next, is New Business. We have Ilk the Redevelopment
Agreement between the City ofKankakea and Heritage Executive Center. I cited
a motion to atlo~the Mayor to miter into this Redevelopment Agreement
ALDERMAN WILLIAMS: Somoved
MAYOR GREEN:
Motion by Altman Wiliiann. Is there a second?
ALDERMAN KINKADE:
Second
MAYOR
GREEN:
Second by Alderman Kinkade.
ALDERMAN HUNTER;
I had a question. Yeah, I’ve just got a question. Urn, Iooldngon page
two,
The City shall
payto
Hentage
x number of
dollars and stuff and I
had made a phone call to Mt. France and I have not heard back regarding
some sninotity provisions in this propose1. And. I don’t
Soc the Life
ofme, I have not seen thoseparticular references inlhis document. And,
sot assume, Mr. Gosdo; that your particular otlice will have oversight
regarding the implementation ofthose provisions that
in
that
campsite interface with us
shall
not MIL...but shall comply
with alItherequisitnci~iil stsreçuiremetts. Isthat correct?
MAYOR GREEN:
I you know, I think Alderman, I can answer that question because they have to
because ofthe Executive Order we have issuet They must do that. We’ve
never
this has never been a part ofour redevelopment agreement. but as we
go into expending ilasde—and it
isCity
funds in this particular case-they will
have to do that.
They
have
to
comply with
our Executive
Order
ALDERMAN HUNTER:
So, the answer is affinnative?
MAYOR
GREEN:
Yes, absolutely. Alderman Schwsde?
ALDERMAN
5CR
WADE: Urn, (was a Iittle,,.....well, just bad a few questions. And, Alderman
C19’
Cc?wsthiMeeAng
Febnicty 3,2003
Rags
3
• Oct
as
us 02:54p
HERRTLRND
70845806?5
Nugent helped mcwith some of them, but, ah, with this
Section Six
on
pagetwo
underflonatlons,
wouldihe additional rent payment
obligations? So. that’s for the.
ATTORNEY
BOBLEN:
That will be claritied in the lease, The only rent, ifwe proccod on it in
this manner, the only rent that Will be paid will be the tatots, insumnoe
sad the common area maintenance,
ALDERI,1AN
SCHWADE: And,
the parking lot, is that both parking lots that we will essentially give
than,....orjust the one that we
ATTORNEY BOHLEN:
We’re not giving theni. But, we arc cormnitting that they arc available
for
the use ofthis &aility, yet
ALDERMAN
SCHWADE:
Okay.
MAYOR
GREEN:
That really, Alderman, would bethe same as we did when
it
was the Executive
Center before and then when Provena moved in.
-
ALDERMAN SCHWADE: Provena. ri~ht.
MAYOR
GREEN:
The parking is provided. We own and control theparking around thatbuildin~
ALDERMAN SCHWADE:
And,!
had a little question, but that was cleared
up,
too. Because I
thou~ttthat it might be more marketable since you already had the three
floors laken earc ofwith, you know, rent, biat evidently it’s not, For
sale
because it said that
the
lack
of
marketability
q’lhe propeit’
due
to the Ci~”slease ofthreefloors.
ATTORNEY BOHLEN:
I
think, quite frankly, stthat
we’re
trying to do is create language that will
comply with the TIP Act there,
ALDERMAN SCUWADE: Oh.
ATTORNEY BOll! EN:
To be blunt.
ALDERMAN HUNTER:
Are there any other areas which we need to address in this document here
that maybe we have missed?
ATTORNEY BOIILEN:
It’s a pretty straigbtforward proposition. The coat ofrenovationis not to
exceedligure
the
payment forthe aerpñsition cost ofthelhree floor,
is
that’s what the SL5 million is. It’s left on the tax rolls under
the ownership ofHeritage Development for the porpoecs of being able to
paythe necessary bonds that will have to be paid inthefliture.
ALDERMAN HUNTEIt
And, my rationale, and Ic( mc be cleat so nobody wilt try to interpret
wtmt my motivations art, we’re expendinga lot ofmoney hen.
Of
course, we’re getting some product back. And, I want to make sure
that
people who look like rae and maybe taO
lilmc
mc and
are there
working during the refurbishingand renovation ofthe
ATTORNEY BOHLEN:
And
you don’t mean
bald
headed, Hispanic speaking.
ALDERMAN HUNTER:
No. No. But, I jisst want to be suit, you know, that there aye
people
I was talking to some foRm recently and we were talking
about some ofthe infraslmcture projects that we’re involved in. And, I
remember one particular project—a curb and sidewalk project-went by
and
took some pictures, and it lookedlike
the
United Nations, the people
that were worting there You had Hispanics and you had women, and
you had blacks and you may have even had an American Indian there.
But,
it was
amazing.
I
just wanted to tnt sure thatpeople v.ho lock
like me and work like me and pay taxes likemc, those people are
reflected in the work force when they renovate that location.
CitvCour.dil~Ieeth,g
flbnaa.y
3,2003
Page
4
Oct
28
03 O?:54p
HEARTLAND
7084500625
p.S
A1TORNEY BOHLEN:
Arid, I think that’s a fair comment and that is something that we wilt
stress back to whomever he hires as contractors,
ALDERMAN BROWN:
Chit,
does itgo into detail on ~~hatour responsibility to maintain once
tve move into that building, what the maintenance is?
ATTORNEY BORLEN:
That’s the subject ofthe lease which is still not fatally negotiated yet
Hopefully, in the next
at your next City Council meeting we’ll have a
draft ofthe lease.
ALDERMAN BROWN:
Okay.
A’VFORNEY IIOIILEN:
But, in terms ofthe maintenance, the outside, the tincture,
HVAC.
electrical are all going to
be
maintained
by the
owner ofliw builtling
which is still Heritage Development. The interior maimenattoe, meaning
cleaning,
keeping
it
clean, 1.1 something, I guess, interior maintcnancc.
It’s
a
classic lessor/lessee relatioiship in terms ofrenting
a building,
ALDERMAN BROWN:
Okay,
will
that be
brought
to
the Council meeting?
ATTORNEY l301’ILEN:
You will have the lease. That has to be approved both by the Library
Board and by the City Council.
MAYOR GREEN:
And, more than likely, at the next City Courieil meeting which Will bra
weeL...two weeks
from
tomorrow, air, we will alsohave Mr. Kniffen here
bnause we Will start the process of selling the bonds for this projecL Okay?
Arty
other questions? Ifnot, roll call.
CLERK
DUMAS:
AYE:
Browtt Hunter Epstein; Nugent; Williams; Heart; Coy; Dierseit TmsL Kinkadc;
Schwade; Co,c (12)
ABSTAIN: Baron: Gathing (2)
REDEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OP KANKMCEE
AND HERITAGE EXECUTIVE CENTER, INC.
MAYOR GREEN:
Motion carries. Alt, next, is an economic development agreement between the
City
ofKankakee and MTS Consultin& ‘This is
a
sales tax sharing agreement.
MTS Consulting is
a
subsidiary company ofthe business that is rehabing the
Day’s Inn right now for extended housing.
We’ve gone
throughthis. I’ve mel
with Mr. Klein and Mr. Porush.
I’ve
harlihis contract reviewed by Mr. Power,
so I’m asking for you to allow usto sign this agreement. Itisthe sanic
apeementtat
we
have done with Inspired Development and the other
companies we’ve done the sales lax with.
ALDERMAN HUNTER:
Motion to approve.
ALDERMAN BROWN:
Second.
MAYOR GREEN:
Motion by Alderman Hunter, seconded by Alderman Brown. My questions?
Roll call.
CLERK DUMAS:
AYE:
Brown; Hunteç Epstein; Baroz Nugent; Williams; Hearn; Coy; Dierseri; ‘host; Kinkade;
Schwade; Gathing; Ccx (14)
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
KANKAKEE AND MTS CONSULTING
MAYOR GREEN:
Motion csthes. Next, is
the
agreement with IDOT for the placementofan
outdooradvertising sign. Mr. Bohlen passed that out tonight. It’s on your desk,
I think he would be more than happyto answer any questions regarding this
Cio~Council
Wetting
Fsbruory 3. 21)03
Pq. $
Oct 28 03 O?;54p
item.
HESRTLFIND
7084580625
P.7
ATrORNEY BOITLEN:
What this does, at thetirne that the lOOT was ready to let bids they had
oste Sse that they werenot able to settle in their budget is the cost of
relocation ofa billboard located on south at the inteisection ofCourt
Street and South West Avenue. They don’t have any money for the
acquisition or payment for the lease rights ofthat in their budget and
were going to
have
to
because they wcrcnt able to conic to terms
on the acquisition rights, we’re going to have to go In court which was
going to delaythis proceedingtbr the construction season. They
wouldn’t be letting bids until next tEl. As a means ci inducing
this.
laying to sobs this problem despite, I think, a general feeling that
we weren’t necessarily all exeiled about havingthe billboard moved front
the corner ofCourt Street and South West Avenue to the conies ofCourt
Street and North East Avenue, alt the decision was made to make sure
this project was accomplished, we would agree to that withihe
undentandingthat there’d be a sunset clause of eight years. Meaning he
could put it up for eight years and after that he had the zighl to petition
the City Council and Planning Board for a van”ance to keep it up, but it
explicitly says we do not.
we are not agreeing to leave
it
up and not
agreeülg to the extension That would be
up
lo the Planning Board and
the City Council that was here eight years from now.
MAYOR
GREEN:
So, we need a motion to allow usto enter into this Resolution.
ALDERMAN GAInING:
I’ll make the motion.
ALDIiItMAN SCII WADE:
I second it.
MAYOR GItEEft
Motion by Alderman Gathing. sec*mdcd by Alderman Schwade. Any questions?
Roll calL
CLERK DUMAS:
AYE: Brown; Huntez Epstein; Bnron Nugent; Williams; Heam; Coy; Diersen; Trot; Kir&ade;
Srhwade; Gatbing Cox(14)
AGREEMENT
wrrn
lOOT REGARDING
otjrooo&
ADVERTISING
MAYOR
GREEN:
Motion carries. Next, I’m asking for a reappointment of Mr. Simms to the
Appeals Board. We had two other individuals on there, Mike Gingrich Who was
an engineer and is no longer living Ira the City. His engineering company is in
the Village o(Bsadley 4$ Mike Olin. who is a contraclor.
Ai4
I’m asking
liar you to reappoint Mr. Si,nnis to the Appeals Board. I’m asking for you to
appoint Dale ?iggush from PSI who is a local conuactor in the City ofKankakee
and the
uSa
n4~poinlntentit Vince Thom~onwhoworks for the City of
Knnkakee as the Construction Manager at the Kankakee Municipal Utility.
ALDERMAN IRJNTER:
Mayor Green, I would request of the Council that we affirm your
appointments en
masse
and have a roll call I move that we accept your
appointments.
ALDERMAN GATHINO:
I second
MAYOR GREEN:
Motion by Alderman Hnnter, seconded by Aldcrman Gathing. Any questions? I
think all ofthose individuals you aLl know anyway. Roil call.
CLERK DIJMAS:
AYE: Brown; NurileE Epstein; Baron Nugerit; WilJiams; Hcarn Coy, Diersen; Trot Kinkade;
Schwade (lathing. Cox (14)
APPOINTMENTS: APPEALS BOARD
MAYOR GREEN:
Motion carries. Thank you. The last is, the City has cathed dental insurance or
Clot CouncilMeeSg
Febniayy 3,2003
Page 6
Oct
2803 02:54p NERRTLRND
7084580825
the employees have had the option ofpurchasing it. The City does not pay that
premium. It’s entirely up to the employees to do that. We have bad several
different carriers providing this coverage, so it basically hasn’t been uniform.
We’ve gone to Mack and Pariceewbo is our consultantand askedthen, to bid out
this insurance for one carrier, so ifv~e’regoing to make
ifpeoplewantto
psPicipate in the program, you make one deduction and we make one premium
payment. So, what we’re aslcingfor is to allow us to sign what we call an Agent
of Record letter which appoints them as our Agent of Record in negotiating this
for the City. So,
I’m
looking for a motion tonight
ALDERMAN SCHWADE: So moved
ALDERMAN EPSTEIN:
Setond.
MAYOR GREEN:
Motion by Alderman Schwade, seconded by Alderman Epstein. Roll calL
CLERK DUMAS:
AYE; Brown; HuNer Epstein; Baron; Nugcnt Williams; Heam; Coy; Diersen; Trost; Kinkade;
Sthwade; Gathing; Cox (14)
MOTIONTO ALLOW ADMINISTRATION TO SIGN AGENT OF RECORD LETTER
MAYOR GREEN:
Motion carries. Isthorennyothec New Business front the floor? Ifriot, we’ll go
into Motions and Resolutions. There is a Resolution for the NAACP. Someone
make a motion.
ALDERMAN HCJNTEJt
Mayor Green, move that we approve this Resolution and
also
thank
Madame Clerk, Anjanita Dumas, and her stag Linda, for their assistance
in pulling this together.
ALDERMAN BROWN:
Second.
MAYOR GREEN:
Motion by Mderman Hunter, seconded by Mdetmiua Brown to approve the
Resolution for the NAACP. All in favor, AYE, Opposed seine sign.
RESOLW’ION: NATIONAL ASSOCIATIONFOR THE ADVANCEMENT
OF
COLORED PEOPLE (NAACP)-94 YEM&S OF SERVICE
MAYOR GREEN:
Motion cant That brings tntto the last item ofbusiness, sad I think Nancy
has passed out rite n’taicmal to you. Mr. Wayne Drake is
hat
in the audicnce
tonig~tfromRingCanCompany. Ihadtheopportunitytotalktohiniaboulil,l
guess. three weeks
ago.
Ah, Ring Can is a very viable business in our
community They’re in the lCankakee Industrial Park on the north side of
goingKankalcee,isnorthstatlingof aprojedby
Americanthis
year
Spring
ofalmost
Wise.doublingAnd,RingthesizeCanofi5your
building. They’re going from 50,000 square feat to 100,000 square feet and are
going to be adding, I believe, if! understood correctly, somewhere around 50
employees. And, what they’re asking us to do, as you’re well aware, the City of
Kankakee every year, under whatwe call
our
Volume Cap, we get a bond
conaninnent from the State ofIllinois, and sometimes I relht to it as an industrial
revenue bos4 wherewe can give support to conçanies such as Ring Can. And,
what we’re doing here, what I’m asking you today, is to approve an inducement
resolution that cedes our money In the Will Kankakee Development Authority
wISh will then float a bond issuefor Ring Can in the amount of
S4.3
million for
the expension of their plant. Wayne would you Liketo make some cement? if
you want, you can come up
here
oruse the microphone in the bank Whale vet
you’d like. It’s always a pleasure having you here, too.
WAYNE DRAKE:
It’s a pleasure for me to come back for the third time to this august bi4’ because
it’s expansion and it’sjobs and it’s important to usand important to this
community. When we do this, we treed your help, so that’s thereason w5 have
donethat I’d be gladto answet somequestion if there are any. Wa’m goinglo
—
about S5 ½milLion, doublethe size cite plantto put 1st scene
manufacturingequipment to make most bottles, plastic bouja.
City
CosneilMeeh’ng
Febnawy4 2003
Page?
Oct 28 03 02:SSp
HEARTLAND
7084580825
p.S
MAYOR GREEN:
I think
ama I correct Wayne? Your company, really, one ofyour maw
companies that you supply is Dung; correct?
WAYNE DRAXE:
Here in this community, yes, I3unge Products.
ALDERMAN 14U4TEIt
Making this kind of investment, it appears that you have some
cormnitment and trust in Kankakee, is that correct?
WAYNE DRAKE:
Absolutely. Absolutely.
ALDERMAN HUNTER:
And these are primaiyjobs? Aldennan Baron always likes to do deals
like Ibis becausethese ate primary lobs. Glad to be ofassistance in that.
Moveto approve, Mayor.
MAYOR GREEN:
Motion by Aldemnn Hunter. Is there a second’?
ALDERMAN TROST:
Second.
MAYOR GREEN:
Second by Alderman Troal. kIn raised his hand quick~r.
ALDERMAN HUNTER:
He likes those jobs.
MAYOR GREEN:
Any questions from anybody? Roll calL
CLERK OUMAS:
AYE: Browo; Hunter, Epsteirz Baron; Nugeul; Williams; barn; Coy; Diersen; Trost; Kinkade;
Schwnde; Gathisig Cog (14)
INDUCEMENT
RESOLUTION
FOR
RING
CAN
MAYOR GREEN:
Motion carries. Wayne, thank you. We appreciate you doing business in
Kankaket vonj much. I would Like to ask for amotion now to go into Executive
Session to discuss litigation.
ALDERMAN BARON:
So moved.
ALDERMAN WILLIAMS:
Second.
MAYOR GREEN:
Motion by AldermanBaron, seconded by Alderman Williams to go into
Executive Session to discuss litigation. Roll call.
MOTION TO CC) INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION
MAYOR GREEN:
Motion cant I’m going to ask for the Chasabat to be cleared. Only the
Aldermen need to slay.
7:33PM
6:29PM
MAYOR GREEN:
Rem you wanted to say something?
ALDERMAN HEARN:
Alt, yes,
arc
you back into Open Session?
MAYOR GREEN:
Yeah,vøe are. We’re opening the
door
now.
ALDERMAN HEARN:
Okay, thankyou. Thank you, Mayor and the reason I’m thanking you
it I really appreciate
an your
efforts tonig)itto put This togeihet And, I
appreciate
myCouncil
colleagues for letting me be part
of
this ovenia&
And, ‘vhcmer you
all
know it or not, this
is
probably a historical moment
in City govmtrnenL Thankstoenryoae and goodnight
City Cowscit
Mating
F.hnraiy.~.2003
PageS
,.,.Otzt. 28 03
02:55p
HERRTLRND
7084580525
p.10
MAYOR GREEN:
Good night, Ken.
We’ll
see you later,
ALDERMAN HEARN:
Okay
MAYOR GREEN:
Okay, I’m
looking for two motions. Wilt anyone snake the first one?
ALDERMAN HUNTER’
I
move
that we grant authority to the administration to pursuean appeal
to the 3’’ District decision. Mditionally, we further authorize thatthe
administration file the necessary litigation against the County Board
re5ardirig tIre Waste Management siting decision.
.ALDERMAN BARON:
Could we
do that in
separate rulings?
MAYOR
GREEN:
Let’s do them separately. Let’s do the appealsas one.
ALDERMAN HUNTER:
No probka
MAYOR GREEN:
Isthere aseccndtn that motion?
-
ALDERMAN EPSTEIN:
I’ll second.
MAYOR GREEN:
Second
by
Alderman Epstein. Motion by AldcrmanHunter, seconded by
Alderman Epetciji to authorize the administration to enter
ATTORNEY BOHLEN:
To file
to pursuethe appeal oldie Pollution Conlrol Boani
decision.
MAYOR
GREEN:
Okay.
Any
questions on that? Roll call.
CLERK DUMAS:
AYE: Hunter; Epstein; Nugeut; Williams; Coy, Diersest ‘Frost; Kinkade; Sehwadu; Gathing;
Cox (11)
ABSTAIN: Brown; Baron
(2)
ABSENT: Ream (I)
MOTION TO AUTHORIZE CITY OF KANKAICEE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE
APPEAL OF THE POLLUFION CONTROL BOARD DECISION REVERSING ThE
SITING OF A LANDFILL BY TOWN & COUNTRY TSrILrTIES
MAYOR GREEN:
Motion carries.
ALDERMAN BARON:
On
another issue,
I
wou~dmove that
wetake the necesaaay
steps
to
appeal to Ike Illinois Pollution Control ~oard
the County’s
siting
decision on their Landfill
ALDERMAN GATHR4O:
Second.
MAYOR GREEN: Motion by Aldemran Baron, seconded by Alderman Gathing to take the
necessarysteps to appeal the County’s decision on the siting of their landfill.
Questions? Roll call.
CLERK DUMAS:
AYE: Hunter; Epste’m; Baron; Nugent; Williams; Coy, Dierses,; Troet; Xithca* Schmidt;
GalhingCo*(12)
ABSTAIN: Bcown(I)
ABSENT: Heens(1)
MOTION 10 AUTHORIZE
THE APPEAL
OF THE DECISION OF THE
KANKAXEE
COUNTY BOARD TO
GRANT
A SUING APPLICATION OF ALANDFILL FILED
BY WASTE MANAGEMENT,
INC.
Cry
CowsdtMating
Pebnra~y3.2003
PageD
,,Oct 28 03 02: Sep
HEARTLAND
7084580625
p. II
MAYOR GREEN:
Motion
caries. I need
a
motion to adjourn.
ALDERMAN COY:
So inovod.
ALDERMAN
TROST:
Secont
MAYOR GREEN:
Motion,
by
Alderman
Coy, seconded by
Alderman Trust. All in fuvor,
AYE.
Opposed saint sign.
MOTION TO
ADJOURNCITY COUNCIL MEETING
MAYOR GREEN:
Motion carries.
8:24
PM.
dry CoundlM.ehng
Febma.y 3.2003
Fag.
10
Kankakee County Real Estate Tax Bill
Kankakee County Collector’s Office, 192 N. East Ave., Kankakee, IL 60901 (815)-937-2960
MARK J. FRECHETTE,
KANKAKEE
COUNTY TREASURER
Township: OTTO
Parcel Number: 13-16-23-400-001
Parcel Address:
KANKAKEE,
IL
60901
Tax Code: 13002
BRADSHAW, JAMES &
Prop Class: 0021
BRADSHAW, TED ETAL
SKATES, JUDLTH A
203S LOCUST ST
ONARGA, IL 60955-1224
Legal Description
SEQ
BAL 160.OOAC
23-30-14W
DUPLICATE
2001 TAXES PAYABLE 2002
CHANGE
TAXABLE
VALUE!
100
TAXING DISTRICTS
FROM
LAST YEAR
x RATE + DRAINAGE = TAX
Tax Rate
Tax Amount
(Minnie Creek
Drainage
KANKAKEE
COUNTY
KANKAKEE
COUNTY
Pension
(KANK.AKEE
CC #520
(KANKAKEE
CC
#520
Pension
(CLIFTON CENTRAL UD #4
(CLIFTON CENTRAL UD #4
Pension
0.00
-16.48
-5.13
1.58
-0.12
-93.29
-7.88
0.669
0.208
0.233
CODE
4.711
0.245
223.50
141.75
44.08
49.37
1.0?
998.26
51.92
OTTO FIRE
-11.00
0.457
96.84
CENTRAL CITIZENS LIBRARY
-15.12
0.262
55.52
01T0 TOWNSHIP ROAD
-7.30
0.270
57.21
OTTO TOWNSHIP
-5.12
0.218
46.20
OTTO TOWNSHIP
Pension
-USC
0.011
2.33
TOTAL CHANGE FROM LAST YEAR
TOTAL
TAX
DUE
-160.36
I
7.28~
1,768.04
PLEASE READ REVERSE SIDE
FOR IMPORTANT INFORMATION
Parcel
~UIIIIIIIUhIllH~IIIHhIIhIIftU~I
Number
Bill Number DUPLICATE
13-16-23-400-001
FIRSTINSTALLMENT
DUE DATE
INTEREST PENALTY
PAID
PRIOR
YEAR
BALANCE
TOTAL
TAX
DUE
RETURN STUB WITH PAYMENT #1
3-DIGIT 609
SKATES, JUDITH A
203 S LOCUST ST
ONARGA, IL 60955-1224
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIJIIII(IIIItIIItIlIIItJIItIIIlIlIIIItjIfltlIIl
2001
PAYABLE
4ININHIUIIIIHMIUN
Parcel Number
Bill Number DUPLICATE
13-16-23-400-001
884.02
09/03/20 02
TOTAL
TAX
DUE
1,768.04
SKATES, JUDITH A
203 $ LOCUST ST
ONARGA, IL 60955-1224
Equalized Assessed
21,190
Assessed
Value
21,190
Township Multiplier x
1.0000
Equalized Assessed
21,190
I-liE or Veterans Exemption
-
0
State Multiplier x
1.0000
Taxable Assessed
21,190
Limited Exemption -
0
Senior Exemption -
0
Senior Freeze Exemption
-
0
Taxable Value
21,190
Tax Rate x
7.289
RE Tax Before Drainage
1544.54
PENALTIES
PENALTY INTEREST OF 1112 PER MONTH
ADDED AFTER EACH INSTALLMENT DUE DATE
FOR EACH MONTH OR PART OF MONTH
1st INSTALL DUE: 06114/2002
884.02
2nd INSTALL DUE: 09/0312002
884.02
Paid by
CHECK
CASH
CHANGE
2001
PAYABLE
2002
884.02
06/14/2002
Paid by
CHECK
CASH
SECONDINsTALLMENT
DUE
DATE
CHANGE
INTEREST
PENALTY
1,768.04
2002
PAID
Back to top
RETURN STUB WITH PAYMENT #2
2
PAY TO: COUNTY coaEcTOR~192 N.
East
A,m..KAJMt(AKEE, IL 60901
PAY TO:
COUNTY
COLLECTOR, 192 N. East Avq.,IWIKAXEE.
160901
NAME AND
ADDRESS CHANGE ONLY
PARCELNUMBER:J3—
~he~e01
~
~
~
-aa---
q00
Spo,’-A
Locust’
£/‘,
OWNER’S SIGNATURE AUTHORIZING CHANGE
FIRST PAYMENT RECEIVED
1
PAR
/~O$’O~
3ao_DO/
CEI.
NUMEEL
ft
e~ae.4a~
£~
a
Ao~
(~~3
LocuSt’
s#,
x
.4/
~—~c
~
~
OWNER’S SIGNATURE AIJTHORIZR4G CHANGE
FIRST
1
November 6, 2003
To All Counsel ofRecord:
RECEIVED
CLERK’S
OPPTCF
NOV 102003
At this point Town &
Country
does not plan to depose
any witnesses. That may change pending
completion ofpaper discovery. To facilitate scheduling ofdepositions that othersmay wish to take,
please be advised that I am available as follows:
•
November11, 17and26
•
November13, 14 and
25
All day
Afternoon only
Mr. Volini will not be available for deposition during the week ofNovember 10.
Pending resolution ofthe question regarding Claire
not be participating in depositions.
GMIsm
Manning’s appearance
as co-counsel, she will
Suburban Office
3015 Mkbury~
Napervi(~,IL
60564
Phone:
(630) 904-3505
Pollution Control Board
501 State
Street
Ottawa,
IL 61350-3578
TefepIwite:
(815) 433-4705
Fax:
(815) 433-4913
e-taai(: gntuzffer@wukopenwest.com
Very truly yours,
Mueller
THE ILLINOIS P0’
TUE CITY OF KANKAKEE, ILLINOIS)
CITY COUNCIL, TOWN & COUNTRY)
IJTILI’I’IES, iNC., and KANKAKEE
REGIONAL LANDFILL, L.L.C.
Respondents.
)
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF ILLINOIS)
INC.,
‘ft.
Petitioner,
THE CITY OF KANKAKEE, ILLINOIS
CITY
COUNCIL, TOWN & COUNTRY
UTILiTiES,
INC.,
and KANKAKEE
REGiONAL LANDFILL,
L.L.C.,
Respondents.
RECEIVED
CLFt~gRorr:rF
NOV
102003
STATE OF IWNOIS
Polltdlon Control Board
)
PCB
04-33
(Third Party roIh~tionControl Facility
Siting Appeal)
)
)
)
PCB 04-34
)
(Third Party Pollution Control
Facility
Siting Appeal)
)
)
)
COUNTY OF KANKAKEE, ILLINOIS,
and EDWARD D. SMITH,
KANKAKEE)
COUNTY STATE’S ATTORNEY,
)
vs.
Petitioners,
THE CITY OF KANKANEE, ILLINOIS)
CITY COUNCIL, TOWN & COUNTRY )
U1’ILIi’IES, INC., and KANKAKEE
)
REGIONAL LANDFILL,
L.L.C.,
Respondents.
)
)
PCB 04-35
(Third Party Pollution Control Facility
Siting
Appeal)
(Consolidated)
RESPONDENtTOWN & COUNTRY UTILITIES, INC’S
ANSWERS TO I NTERROGATORI
E~jjfl~RIjflflILfljjftNf~~,
WAfl
AN A
I
IIN0151 NC
Now
come Respondents, Kankakee
Regional Landfill,
LLC and Town &
Country
Utilities,
Inc., by and
through
one of their attorneys, George Mueller,
P.C
br their A nswcrs lo
BYRON SANDBERG,
Petitioner,
vs.
)
)
Interrogalories
propounded by l’ctil ioner. Wasle Management of Illinois. I tic.. state as ~ollows:
Identify all persons who provided infotmation regarding or assisted in answering these
interrogatories.
Answer:
Thomas A. Volini
George Mueller
2. Identify all communications ofT & C
that refer or relate to
the
2002 Siting
Application
or the
Facility
with the Ibilowing persons:
(a)
Donald
Green;
(b)
Christopher
Bohlen;
(c)
Ralph Yarborough;
(d)
Robert
Boyd
(c)
Any City Council
member.
Answer:
Respondent objects to Ellis Interrogatory
as communications relating
lo
the 2002 Siting
Application
are not relevant
to
the proceedings herein. Without waiving such objection,
Respondents
state that they are unaware of
any
such
communications
beyond those set forth in
the record of proceedings in PCB Case No.: 03—31 with the exception of a meeting of the
Kankakee City Council attended by Thomas Volini on February 3, 2003..
3. Identify all communication of~F& C that relèr to telate to the 2003 Siting Appi eat
iot
or the Facility with the tbllowing persons:
(a)
Ralph Yarborough
(b)
Robert Boyd.
Answer:
(a)
None
(b)
None
4. Please
identify all communications between the City and 1 & C that relèr or relate to
the
2003 Siting Application.
Answer:
Respondents object to this Interrogatory as it contains no time
parameters
and pie—filing
communications between the City and Respondents are not probative of any issue herein.
Without waiving such objection, Respondents state that thomas A. Volini had
numerous
casual
and informal communications with various City officials after August JO. 2002 and before March
7. 2003. The details ol’ these communications cannot be recalled, but they did not icier to or
relate to the 2003 Si tug Application with the exception oi Mr. Volini advising C ty of hcials of
Respondents’ nitent to tile the 2003 Application. Mr Volini also met with thc
City
Cotinci 1 on
Februaty 3, 2003. at which time lie advised the council of his intent to file a new application for
siting approval.
5. lfyou deny any of the requests to admit (nos. 1 through 37)
previously
served
upon
you on October 16, 2003, indicate what you are denying, the factual basis thereibr. the source of
your information and identii\ all documents that support your denial.
Answer:
Respondents object to this Interrogatory as vague, over broad. burdensome, &flIIIIUI ~OF
legal conclusions, and relating to matters on which the record is already complete and on ~hich.
therefore, there cannot be additional discovc;y.
6. Please identify each witness you expect to present to testify at hearing, and state the
subject of each witness’ testimony and identify any document any witness will utilize in his or
her testimony.
Answer:
Thomas A. Volini is expected to testify regarding service of Pre—filing Notices.
Respondents reserve the right to supplement this Answer as investigation continues.
7.
Plea.se identify each document used or relied upon in preparation of
the answers to
these interrogatories.
Answer:
The
record of proceedings in PCB Case 03-31; the record developed for the (:ity Council
on the pending Application; and the tax records of Kankakee County, Illinois.
Respectfully Submitted,
Kankakee Regional I 4ndlilI. IA ~Cand
!Fo~,n&
Country Utilities. Inc..
Respondents.
ihonms A. Volini
GEORGE MUELLER, P.C
Attorney at Law
501 State Street
0/ta iva, IL 61350
Phone: (815) 433-47(15
TIlE ILLINOIS
THE CITY OF
KANKAKFE,
ILLINOIS
CITY COUNCIL, TOWN & COUNTRY
UTILITIES, INC.,
and
KANKAKEE
REGIONAl. LANDFILL, L.L.C.
OARI)
Nov 102003
CLERK’S
orn~
STATE OF
ILLINOIS
Po’h,u0~Contro! Board
PCI3 04-33
)
(Third
Party
Pollution Control Facility
)
)
)
Respondents.
)
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF ILLiNOIS)
Petitioner,
THE CITY OF KANKAKEE, ILLINOIS
CITY COUNCIL, TOWN & COUNTRY
UTILITIES,
INC., and KANKAKEE
REGIONAL LANDFILL, L.L.C.,
Respondents.
)
Siting Appeal)
)
)
PCI)
04-34
(i’hird
Party Pollution Control Facility
Siting Appeal)
COUNTY OF KANKAKEE, ILLiNOIS,
and EDWARD I). SMITH,
KANKAKEE
COUNTY STATE’S ATTORNEY,
Petitioners,
)
)
)
)
vs.
TILE CITY OF KANKAKEE, ILLINOIS
CITY COUNCIL,
TOWN &
COUNTRY
UTILITIES,
INC., and
KANKAKEE
REGIONAL LANDFILL, L.L.C.,
)
Respondents.
)
)
)
PUt 04-35
(Third
Party
Pollution
Control Facility
Siting Appeal)
((.:oiasolidated)
RESPONDENT.
TOW_NtcQ~NTjiaiuJjj~s,jNc~,
RESPONSE TO PE I ITIONER, WAS1 F
MANM.FMLNILQJLJ.i LINOISI INI ~‘
U ST
FOR
MISSIO
N
Now comes the Respondents. Kankakee Regional Landfill, F.LC and
Town & Coufitr~
Utilities,
Inc., by and
through one of their attorneys. George
Mueller,
P.C.~ind
for their
Response to Petitioner, Waste Management Of Illinois, Inc.’s Request
lor
Admission, state a~
BYRON SANDBERG,
Petitioner,
vs.
)
INC.,
vs.
follows:
I. Respondents admit the Request.
2. Respondents can neither admit nor
deny this Request as
it calls
for
a legal conclusion,
Without waiving
such
objection, Respondents state that the records of the Kankakee County
Supervisor of Assessments speak for themselves.
3. Respondents object to this Request as calling (by a legal conclusion.
Without waiving
such objection, Respondents state that the records of the Kankakee
County l’rcasnrer speak br
themselves.
4. Respondents
object
to this request
as the tenu “individually” has a le3gal meaning and
this request therefore calls for a legal conclusion. Without waiving said objection,
Respondents
state that Judith Skates was served
in
accordance with all legal reqnirenients
lbr service..
5. Respondents object to this Request as being vague
and calling for a legal conclusion.
Without waiving
such objection,
Respondents state that the individuals identified in this Rcque~
were all served pursuant to certified mailing no,: 70022410000628 156428.
6. Respondents admit this Request.
7.
Respondents admit this Request.
8. Respondents admit this Request.
9. Respondents admit this Request.
10.
Respondents admit this Request.
II. Respondents deny this Request.
12. Respondents deny this Request.
13. Respondents deny this Request.
14. Respondents deny this Request~
15. Respondents deny this Request.
16. Respondents admit this Request.
I 7.
Respondents
admit this Request.
18. Respondents admit this Request.
19-36. Respondents object to all ol’these Requests
as calling for legal conclusions.
Moreover. Respondents object to these Requests as addressing issues on which the record is
closed, and in which there can therefore be nO additiona.l discovery or evidence presented. he
determination of whether the 2003 Application is substantially the same as the 2002 Application.
to the extent that such determination is required, is a question of fact to he determined by the CiIv
Council. Accordingly, the PCB’s review of said determination is confined to the record of
evidence developed before the City Council, and ii
is
improper by way of discovery to rc.qucsl a
party to comment or opine on said record of evidence.
37. Respondent denies this Request.
Kankakee Regional Landfill, LLC
and
Town
& Countiy I iti Ii ties,
Inc
Respondents.
BY.
Ihoinas A. Vol mi
GEORGE MUELLER,
Rc:
Attorney
at
Law
501
State
St
Ot1awa, It 61350
Phone: ~‘8IS~433-47115
STATE OF
ILLINOIS
)SS.
COUN’IY OF
The undersigned, Thomas A. Volini. having read the foregoing Response by Town &
Country Utilities, Inc. to the Petitioner, Waste Management ofillinois, Inc.’s
Request For
Admission,
state
that
the
same are true
and
correct to
the
best 01’ his
information,
knowledge. and
belief.
‘l’honuts
A..
‘Volin i
~
mci
Sworn
Me I Ins
tus
ot
Notary
PuN ic
“OFFICIAL SEAL”
SUSAN McCOLLUM
NOTARY
PUBLIC, STATE OF ILLtWOIS
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 07/01/07
GEORGE MUELLER, P.C
Attorney at
Law
501 State St
Ottawa, IL 61350
Phone: (815) 433-4705
BYRON SANDBERCJ,
vs.
Petitioner
THE
ILLINOIS
THE
CITY
OF KANKAKEE, ILLINOIS)
CITY COUNCIL, TOWN & COUNTRY)
UTILITiES,
INC., and
KANKAKEE
)
REGIONAL LANDFILL, L.L.C.
)
Respondents.
)
WASTE
MANAGEMENT OF ILLINOIS)
vs.
Petitioner,
TILE CITY OF KANKAKEE, ILLINOIS)
CITY COUNCIL, TOWN &
COUNTRY
UTILITIES, INC.,
and KANKAKEE
REGIONAL LANDFiLL, L.L.C.,
)
Respondents.
II
)
PCB 04-33
CLERKS OFrirv
NOv 102003
STATE OF
IWNOIS
Pollution Control Board
(Third Party P(mllntion Control Facility
Siting
Appeal)
)
)
)
PCB 04-34
(Third Party Pollution Control F’acilitv
Siting Appeal)
COUNTY
OF KANKAKEE, iLLINOIS,
and EDWARD ft SMITH,
KANKAKEE)
COUNTY
STATE’S
ATTORNEY,
)
Petitioners,
vs.
THE CITY OF KANKAKEE, ILLINOIS
CITY COuNCIL, TOWN & COUNTRY
UTILITIES, INC., and KANKAKEE
REGIONAL LANDFILL, L.L.C.,
Respondents.
)
)
PCB 04-35
(Third Party Pollution Control FaciIit~
Siting Appcal)
(Consolidated)
)
)
)
)
RESPONDENT. 1’OWN& COUNTRY
UTILfUESAN~S
ANSWERS 0 INflffl~QGAI oRHsnNoFRFouvPLuuo~g,
COUNTY OF KAN KAKFI~J
LNOISAN9H)WMUH)’M11U, KANKAKEt
COUNTY STATE’S
ATTORNEY
Now
come Respondents, Kankakee Regional Landtill,
LLC
and own & Country
Utilities, Inc., by and through one ol’ their attorneys, George Mueller,
P.(
‘..
for
thei i Aims~ersto
Interrogatories
propounded
by Petitioners, County ut’ Kankakee, Illinois atid lidwaid 1). Smith,
)
Kankakee County State’s Attorney, state as lollows:
I. Identify all persons who provided
information regarding or assisted
in answering these
interrogatories.
Answer:
Thomas A.
Volini
George
Mueller
2. Please identify al
persons of
Town
&
Country Utilities, Inc. who met, talked or
communicated with the City of Kankakee prior to the filing ot’tl’e Landfill Siting Application on
March 7, 2003 relating to the. planning, development
and siting of
the ftcility, and for each such
individual, please:
(a)
identify the individual by
name
and title and identif~’what type of
communication
took place (written, oral, telephone, e—mail, etc.);
(b) the subject matter of each such communication:
(e)
describe and delineate the exact statements
made
during the course.
of each such
communication;
(d)
identify date, time and
duration of each communication;
(e)
identify
the location
of each such
communication;
and
(I’)
identity
all
persons present at such communication.
Answer:
Respondents object to this Interrogatory as
being
vague,
burdensome
and over broad iu
that
the Interrogatory contains no time parameter or stailing date
br the requested
communications. Respondents further object to
the terms
“planning, development
and
si irig’ ~
the same
are vague and not precisely
deFined. Without waiving said objection, Respondent
indicates that
it
had those communications with the
City of
Kankakee identified
in
the record
of
the proceedings
ofPCB case
number:
03-31. Without
waiving the aforesaid
objection.
Respondents fiuther
state
that
Thomas A. VoIini
had
multiple, casual
and
informal
conversations
with
various
City officials and
staff me,nbers
afterAugust 19, 2002
and before
March 7, 2003.
The
number, date, subject matter,
and parties
to these casual
and
informal conversations
are too
voluminous to
recall
with
the exception
that
Thomas
A.
Volini specifically
recalls
appearing at
the Kankakee City Council meeting of
February 3.2003.
3.
Identify all persons
ofTown and Country Utilities, Inc. who met, talked, or
otherwise
communicated
with
the City of
Kankakee
after the
filing
of the l~andfillSiting Application on
March
7,2003, relating to the County of Kankakee or any pending or contemplated lawsuit
or
action with or
against
the County of
Kankakee,
and
for each
such
individual, please:
(a)
identify the individual by
name
and title and identify what type of communication
took
place
(written.
oral,
telephone,
e-mail,
etc.);
(b)
the
subject
matter
of
each
such communication:
K)
describe
and
delineate
the
exact statements made during
the course
of
each
such
communication;
(d)
identi& date, time
and
duration ofeach such communication:
(e~
identil~
the location of each such communication; and
(1)
identify
all
persons present
at
such
communication.
Answer:
None
4.
Pursuant to
the testimony of Mr. Werthnian there
~vere
meetings and con-iniunicalions
between the experts, witnesses, employees, agents or consultants ofTown
and
Country Utilities,
Inc.
with City personnel,
including City staff, after the tiling of the Application and before
the
Section
39.2
hearings
from
each such conimunicalion, please:
(a)
identi~’
the
individuat(s) involved in
the communications by name
and title and
identify
what
type of communication took place (written. oral, telephone, email.
etc.);
(b)
the
subject matter of each such communication;
(c)
describe and delineate the exact statements made during the course
of each such
communication;
(ci)
identify the date, time and duration of each such communication;
(e)
identify the location of each such communication; and
(fl
identi!~iall persons present at such communication,
Answer:
Michael Wcrthman had a telephone conversation with David ‘tyson ol (yson lmgmeering
in early June, 2003 initiated by Michael Werthman wherein he inquired ol Mr. Tyson when the
traffic signals at the Rimte 45 Interstate 57 interchange would bect)ine operational. He
W35
advised that those signals would hopelittly be operational within the next 31 days. No oilier
persons were panics to this conversation.
Respondent is unaware of any other communications between its witnesses, experts.
employees, agents or consultants with City personnel, including
City stall, after the
tiling oitlic
Application and belbre commencement of the hearings.
5. ldenti(~’all Kankakee City Officials or personnel, consultant. or employees (hut had
any involvement in, made any recommendations, proposed any conditions, or made any decisions
regarding the August 19, 2003 decision granting approval of Town and Countiy Utilities. Jne.s
Siting Application, and for each such individual, please:
(a)
identi~’the individual by name and title and identify what type of communication
took place (written, oral, telephone, e—mail. etc.);
(b)
describe the nature and extent of the person’s involvenieffi:
(c)
identify all documents reviewed by’ such person regarding the August
c,
2003
decision granting approval of the Siting Application;
(?1)
identify all documents generated by such personnel having involvement in.
making recommendations or decisions regarding the August 19. 2003 decision
granting approval of the Siting Application.
Answer:
Respondents have no knowledge of the City of Kankakee’s decision making process.
6. ldentif~’all individuals horn the City of Kankakee or l’own and Country titilities, Inc.
who met, talked, wrote, or otherwise comniunicatecl with Hearing Officer Boyd belbre, at, or
after the filing of the Landfill Siting Application on March 7, 2003, please:
(a)
he individual by name and title and identify what type ot comninoicat ion took
place (written, oral, telephone, e-mail, etc.);
(hi
the subject matter of each such communication;
(c)
describe and delineate the
exact slatements
made during the course ot each :~ucii
COlil
1111111
ical.ioi I
(d)
identi~’the date, time arid duration of each such communication;
(e)
identify the location of each
such communication;
and
(1)
identify’ all persons present at such communication.
Answer:
Respondents have no knowledge of which City of
Kankakee representatives met
with
1-tearing Officer Boyd. No representatives
of Respondents met, talked, wrote, or otherwise
communicated with 1-learing Officer
Boyd either hethre or after the filing ol the Landfill Siting
App! ieation.
7.
ldentil~’whether Town and
Country Utilities. Inc. is aware of any communications
Kankakee City Council Members with May-or (ireen or any other City- of Kankakee employee,
agent, attorney, stall member or other City Council niembet
after the tiling
of the Landill ~itiug
Application on March 7, 2003 relating to the planning, development and siting of the Facility.
and for each such individual, please:
(a)
identify the individual by name and title and identify what type ol communication
took place (written, oral, telephone, e—mail, etc.);
(b)
the subject matter ofeach such communication;
(c)
describe and
delineate
the exact slatenients made during the course oF each such
col nmun ication;
(d)
identify
the date-. time and duration of each such conimume-ation;
(e)
identify
the
location of
each such communication; and
I)
identify al persons present
at
such communication.
Answer:
Respondents have no knowledge regarding the communications between and among City
of Kankakee officials, Council Members, employees, agents. attorneys and staff
8. Identify each and every witness, consultant, employee or person associated with own
and Country Utilities, Inc., all Karikakee City Council Members who cue!, talked. or otherwise
communicated with City Department Heads, supervisors, staff, employees or consultants heThte
or after the tiling of the Landfill Siting Application on March 7,2003, relating to the planning.
development and siting of the Facility, and for each such individual, please:
(a)
identify the individual by name and title and identify what type oF conitnunication
took place (written, oral, telephone, e—mail. etc.);
(b)
the subject matter of each such communication;
(c)
describe and delineate the exact statements made during the course of
each such
communication;
(4)
identify the date, time and duration ol each such comniunicaUon;
(c)
identify the location
of each such communication:, and
(I)
identify all persons present at such communication.
Answer:
Respondents object to this Interrogatory as vague and over broad in that the terms
“planning, development and siting” are not capable of precise understanding and have not been
defined. Without waiving said objection, Respondents state that they arc not. aware
(f
any ~ucli
communications other than the communication
relerenced in
Interrogatory Answer No. 1.
9.
ldenti~’
all communications of Hearing Officer l3oyd with Town and Country
Utilities, Inc. or its attorneys or agents before or afier the filing of the Landfill Siting Application
on March 7, 2003, and
for each such communication, please:
(a)
identify what type of communication occurred (written, oral, telephone, e-mail,
etc.);
(h)
the subject
i,v tter
of each such communication;
(c) describe and delineate the exact statements made during the course of each
such
communication;
(4)
identify the date,
time and duration of each such communication;
te)
identify
the
location of each such communication:
and
(0
identit~’
all persons present at such communication.
Answer:
None
JO. Identity all communications by Hearing Officer Boyd with any other person beibre or
afier the filing of the Landfill Siting Application on March 7, 2003, in any way relating to the
planning. development amid siting ofa solid waste management Iheility, or his recommendations
or opinions concerning the same,
and for each
such communication, please:
(a)
identify what type
of communication occurred (written, oral,
telephone, e-mail,
etc.);
(hi
the subject matter of each such communication:
(c.)
describe and delineate the exact statements made during the cour~cot each such
communication;
None
Answer:
Respondents have no knowledge regarding the communications between and among City
ofKankakee officials, Council Members, employees, agents, attorneys and staff
8. identify each and every witness, consultant, employee orperson associated with Town
and Country Utilities, inc., all Kankakee City Council Members who met, talked, or otherwise
communicated with City Department Heads, supervisors, staff~employees or consultants heibre
or
after the filing ofthe Landfill Siting Application on March 7, 2003, relating to the planning,
development and siting of the Facility, and for each such individual, please:
(a)
identify the individual by name and title and identify wha.t type ofcommunication
took place (written, oral, telephone, e~mail,etc.);
(b)
the subject matter of each such communication;
(c)
describe and delineate the exact statements made during the course of each such
communication;
(ci)
identify the date, time and
duration
ofeach such communication;
(e)
identify the location ofeach. such communication; and
(1)
identif~’all persons present at such communication.
Answer:
Respondents object to this Interrogatory as vague and over broad in that the terms
~‘planning,development and siting” are not capable ofprecise understanding and have not been
defined. Without waiving said objection, Respondents state that they arc not aware ot any such
conlmthliea.Lions other than the communication relerenced in Interrogatory Answer No. 4.
9. Identify all communications of Hearing Officer Boyd with Town and Country
Utilities, Inc. or its attorneys or agents before or after the filing ofthe Landfill Siting Application
on March 7, 2003, and for each such communication, please:
(a)
identiI~’what type ofcommunication occurred (written, oral, telephone, e—mail,
etc.);
(b)
the subject matter ofeach such communication;
(c)
describe and delineate the exact statements made during the course of each such
communication;
(d)
identify the date, time and duration ofeach such communication;
(e)
identify the location of each such communication; and
(f~
identify all persons present at such communication.
Answer:
None
10. 1(lefltlfy all communications by Hearing Officer Boyd with any other person before or
after the ‘flUng of the Landfill Siting Application on March 7, 2003, in any way relating to the
planning, development and siting ofa solid waste management facility, or his recommendations
or opinions concerning the same, and for each such communication, please:
(a)
identify’ what type of communication occurred (written, oraL telephone, e—maiL
etc.);
(h)
the subject matter of each such communication;
(e)
describe arid delineate the exact statements made during the course ofeach such
communication;
(d)
identify the date, time and duration ofeach such communication;
(e)
identify the location ofeach such communication; and
(I)
identify all persons present at such communication.
Answer:
Respondents have no knowledge as to communications between Hearing Officer Boyd
and other individuals.
ii.. Identify all Town and Country Utilities, Inc. personnel that had any involvement in,
had any communications, made any recommendations, or made any decisions regarding any civil
action brought by the City of Kankakee against the County ofKankakee, including, but not
limited to, any declaratoiy judgment or injunctive action, and for each such individual, please:
(a)
identify the individual by name and title and identify what type of communication
took place (written, oral, telephone, e-mail, etc.);
(b)
the subject matter of each such communication;
(c)
describe and delineate the exact statements made during the course of each such
communication;
(d)
identify the date, time and duration of each such communication;
(e)
identify the location of each such communication: and
(‘0
identify all persons present at such communications.
Answer:
None
12. Identify each and every communication that Town arid Country Utilities, Inc. had
which led it to conclude that Judith Skates was the only owner entitled to notice concerning the
Bradshaw/Skates property, and for each such communication, please:
(a~
identify what type of communication occurred (written, oral, telephone, e-mail,
etc.);
(h)
the subject matter of each such communication;
(c)
describe and delineate the exact statements made during the course of each such
communications;
(d)
identify the date, time and duration ofeach such communication;
(e)
identify the location ofeach such communication; and
(1)
identify all persons present at such communication.
Answer:
See the Service Affidavit of Thomas A. Volini contained in the Siting Application. In
addition, the record in PCB Case No.: 03—3 1 contains additional iniormation regarding how
Respondents ascertained information required to comply with the statutory service requirements
herein. Respondents object to this Interrogatory as assuming a fact not in evidence, and further
statethat all owners of the subject property were properly served with notice.
13. Please identify each witness you expect to present to testify at hearing, and state the
subject ofeach witness’ testimony and identify any document any witness wifl utilize in his or
her testimony.
Answer:
Thomas A. Volini is expected to testify regarding service ofPre-fihing Notices.
Respondents reserve the right to supplement this Answer as investigation continues.
Respectfully Submitted,
Kankakec Regional Landfill, LLC and
Town & Country Utilities, inc.,
Respondents,
Thomas
A.
Volini
GEORGE
MUELLER,
P.c.
Attorney at Law
501
S/ak’
Street
Offaiva, IL 61350
Phone: (815) 433-4705
