REC~
CLERK’S OFFICE
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL
BOARD
JUN 1 02005
STATE OF ILUNOIS
WASTB MANAGEMENT OF ILLINOIS, INC.,
))
Pollution Control
Board
Petitioner,
)
No. PCB 04-186
)
vs.
)
)
)
COUNTY BOARD OF KANKAKEE COUNTY,
)
ILLINOIS,
)
)
Respondent.
)
NOTICE OF FILING
TO:
See Attached Service List
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on June 10,
2005,
we filed with the Illinois Pollution
Control Board, an original and four copies ofthe attached Waste Management ofIllinois, Inc.’s
Stipulation and Joint Motion for Remand.
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF ILLINOIS, INC.
By:
~
One of s
7
ttomeys
L
Donald J. Moran
PEDERSEN & HOUPT
161 North Clark Street, Suite 3100
Chicago, Illinois 60601
(312) 641-6888
Attorney RegistrationNo. 1953923
413765.1
BEFORE THE ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL
BOAR~DECLERK’S
C
E
OFFICE~V
~ED
WASTE MANAGEMENT OF
)
JUN 102005
ILLINOIS, iNC.,
)
STATE
OF
ILLINOIS
)
Pollution Control Board
Petitioner,
)
)
v.
)
PCBO4-186
)
COUNTY BOARD OF KANKAKEE
)
COUNTY, ILLINOIS,
)
)
Respondent.
)
STIPULATION
AND
JOINT MOTION FOR
REMAND
Petitioner Waste Management of Illinois, Inc. (“WMII”), by its attorneys, Pedersen &
Houpt, and Respondent County Board of Kankakee County, Illinois (“County Board”) by its
attorneys, Hinshaw & Culbertson, hereby submit this Stipulation and Joint Motion for Remand,
and in support thereof; state as follows:
1.
The County Board denied the Site Location Application for Expansion of the
Kankakee Landfill, filed September 26, 2003, on March 17, 2004. The denial was based on a
determination that Criteria (i), (iii) and (vi) had not been satisfied.
2.
On April 21, 2004, WMII filed this appeal, asserting that the rejection of Criteria
(i), (iii) and (vi) were unsupported and against the manifest weight of the evidence. WMII
further asserts that the March 17 decision was based not on the evidence but, rather, on improper
cx parte communication and political pressure, thus rendering the process fundamentally unfair.
WMII sought reversal of the March 17 decision, or, in the alternative, a finding that the
proceedings were fundamentally unfair and a remand to the County Board.
413 IlOvi
3.
On May 2, 2005, WMII submitted to the County Board a proposal to enter into
certain stipulations regarding this appeal.
4.
The County Board did not believe it had the authority to act on or respond to the
proposal because of the pendency of this appeal. As a result, the County Board adopted
Resolution No. 2005-05-25-76, authorizing that a request be made of this Board to remand the
proceeding to permit continuing consideration ofthe application. A true and correct photocopy
ofthe Resolution is attached as Exhibit A.
5.
WMII and the County Board agree that the most appropriate course ofaction with
respect to this appeal would be for the PCB to remand the proceeding back to the County Board
for further consideration. The remand would allow the County Board to further deliberate as to
the Site Location Application and proposal within the procedures set forth in Section 39.2 ofthe
Illinois Environmental Protection Act. 415 ILCS 5/39.2 (2002) The remand would also allow
the PCB to close this docket.
6.
The PCB has the authority to remand an appeal of an administrative decision to
the decisionmaker for further consideration.
Caterpillar Tractor Company v. Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency, No. PCB 83-58, slip op. at 1 (March 7, 1985).
7.
Resolution of this appeal by remand back to the County Board will result in
substantial saving of time, effort and expense by the parties and the PCB in litigating and
rendering a decision in this appeal.
8.
Remand will preserve any rights interested persons may have to appeal a siting
decision pursuant to Section 40.1 ofthe Act.
413 ilOvi
WHEREFORE, WMII and the County Board respectfully request that the PCB accept
this Stipulation and remand this to the County Board for further consideration.
Respectfully submitted,
County Board ofKankakee County, Illinois
By: ~
Charles F. Heisten
By:_____
Richard S. I~orter
Was Management ofIllinois, Inc.
By:~4/
~
Donald J.
n
Charles F. Heisten
Richard S. Porter
Hinshaw & Culbertson
100 Park Avenue
P.O. Box 1389
Rockford, Illinois 61105-1389
815.490.4900
815.490.4901 (facsimile)
Donald J. Moran
Pedersen & Houpt
161 North Clark Street
Suite 3100
Chicago, Illinois 60601
312.641.6888
312.641.6895 (facsimile)
413 IlOvi
STATE OF ILLINOIS,
1
~ ss.
County of Kankakee,
I, Bruce Clark, County Clerk ofsaid County, and custodian of the Records and Files
of said office do hereby certify that the annexed
isa
true and correct copy. of
~
THE KANKAKEE COUNTY BOARD hELD MAY 25, 2005.
RESOLUTION #2005—05—25—76
as appears
from the Files
and Records
flow in my custody.
IN
TESTIMONY WHEREOF,
I have
hereunto
set my
offi~áls~al,at
Kankakee, m said County,
this
25
day
of
lYW~.
A~D.-
2005
~
~
Clerk
By
Depu~
•
•
EXHIBIT
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNTY BOARD
Of
KANKAKEE COUNTY, ILLINOIS
•
Resolution No.: 2005-05-25-76
RE:
Request to the Illinois Pollution Control Board as to
•
PCB Case No.: 04-186
WHEREAS, the
County of Kankakee, a body corporate and politic, denied siting
approval of Waste Management of Illinois, Inc., seeking to site the lateral
expansion of a sanitary landfill
within
the County; and
WHEREAS, an appeal was taken of said denial by Waste Management of
Illinois, Inc. to the Illinois Pollution Control Board; and
WHEREAS, the County of Kankakee is engaged in certain litigation (No. PCB
04-1
86) with Waste Management of Illinois, Inc., now pending before the Illinois
Pollution Control Board; and
WHEREAS, the
County of Kankakee has received a communication from Waste
Management ofclllinois, Inc.,
in the nature of an offer to enter
into a certain
Stipulations;
•WHEREAS, the County of Kankakee, as the siting authority under the provisions
of the Illinois Environmental Control Act, has lost jurisdiction to entertain any
substantive matters, for the reason that its previous denial of said siting
application was a final action; and
WHEREAS, the only remaining mechanism for the County Board of the County
of Kankakee to entertain any such matters would be for the Pollution Control
Board to remand the pending case to the siting authority for the sole purpose of
allowing an opportunity for further deliberations; and
WHEREAS, the County wishes to exercise this final opportunity to fully explore
and deliberate further on various matters;
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED as follows:
The Chairman of the Kankakee County Board be and is hereby authorized and
directed, either himself or through his attorneys, designees, and/or agents, to
request the Illinois Pollution Control Board to remand said pending case No. 04-
186 to the local siting authority, to-wit: the Kankakee County Board, for the sole
1
and singular purpose of continuing deliberations on the application, based on the
record heretofore made in the underlying siting proceeding, without prejudice to
or in anyway waiving the position presently taken by the Kankakee County Board
in this matter on appeal.
•
SO RESOLVED this 25th day of May, 2005.
••
•
•
BoàFd Chairman
AUEST:
______________________
Board Secretary (County Clerk)
AYES: jq
NAYS:
4
2
PROOF OF SERVICE
Bridget Killing, a non-attorney, on oath states that she served the foregoing Waste
Management of Illinois, Inc.’s Stipulation and Joint Motion for Remand
by enclosing same in
an envelope addressed to the following parties as stated below, and by depositing same in the U.S.
mail at 161 N. Clark St., Chicago, Illinois 60601, on or before 5:00 p.m. on this 10th day ofJune,
2005:
Mr. Rick Porter
Hinshaw & Culbertson
P.O. Box 1389
Rockford, IL 61105-1389
Mr. Edward Smith
Kankakee County State’s Attorney
450 East Court Street
Kankakee,IL 60901
and by hand delivery to:
Bradley Halloran
Hearing Officer
Illinois Pollution Control Board
100 West Randolph Street
Suite 11-500
Chicago, IL 60601
413765.1
