2012 IL App (2d) 110579
Ill. App. Ct.2012Background
- Waste Management sought IEPA permits to expand a De Kalb County landfill and obtained county siting approval after a host agreement and a county hearing process.
- The De Kalb County Pollution Control Facility Committee conducted a six-day public hearing in early 2010, after which the County Board approved the siting with conditions.
- Stop the Mega-Dump (STMD) challenged the County Board’s procedures as fundamentally unfair under the Act, focusing on participation rules, prefiling tours, and alleged prejudgment.
- The County Board adopted an Ordinance and Articles expanding the class of “participants” beyond those entitled to notice, and the hearing officer relaxed rules to allow broad participation.
- STMD asserted that prefiling tours of Waste Management’s Prairie View Landfill and related discussions biased the County Board; the PCB found no fundamental unfairness and STMD sought administrative review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Ordinance/Articles violate fair hearing standards | STMD argues narrow participation limits undermine fairness | Board allowed substantial participation and waivers cured limits | Not clearly erroneous; no fundamental unfairness established |
| Whether prefiling tours constituted improper ex parte contacts | Tours before application improperly influenced the Board | Prefiling tours are not ex parte once application filed; no prejudice shown | Tours not ex parte; no prejudice shown |
| Whether the Board prejudged the application | Financial considerations and pre-hearing signals show bias | Evidence at hearing and sworn statements negate prejudgment | No prejudgment established; finances irrelevant to adjudicative facts |
| Whether the hearing officer’s relaxation of participation rules violated the Act | Relaxation reduced due process for STMD | Relaxation enhanced public participation and did not prejudice STMD | Not reversible error; procedures were fundamentally fair |
| Whether general public has right to participate as party under Act | Act grants broad public party status | Act limits party rights to specific notice recipients; public can comment | General public not a right to participate as party; formal right to comment suffices |
Key Cases Cited
- Fox Moraine, LLC v. United City of Yorkville, 2011 IL App (2d) 100017 (2011 IL App (2d) 100017) (standard for fundamental fairness in siting proceedings; deference to agency findings on mixed questions)
- Land & Lakes Co. v. Pollution Control Board, 319 Ill. App. 3d 41 (2000) (prefiling contacts may show prejudgment; must show prejudice to objector)
- Waste Management of Illinois, Inc. v. Pollution Control Board, 175 Ill. App. 3d 1023 (1988) (ex parte communications and fairness in siting proceedings)
- Peoria Disposal Co. v. Illinois Pollution Control Board, 385 Ill. App. 3d 781 (2008) (prejudgment and due process considerations in siting matters)
- E&E Hauling, Inc. v. Pollution Control Board, 116 Ill. App. 3d 586 (1983) (adjudicative facts and economic considerations in siting decisions)
- Fairview Area Citizens Taskforce v. Pollution Control Board, 198 Ill. App. 3d 541 (1990) (economic benefit and adjudicative facts may be considered consistent with law)
- City of Elgin v. County of Cook, 257 Ill. App. 3d 186 (1993) (local rules may govern siting hearings if fair and not inconsistent with Act)