Sherry Williams, District 5 (D - Crest Hill) | Will County Board Website
Sherry Williams, District 5 (D - Crest Hill) | Will County Board Website
Will County Board Landfill Committee met July 3.
Here are the minutes provided by the committee:
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Ms. Newquist led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
III. ROLL CALL
Chair Katie Deane-Schlottman called the meeting to order at 11:00 AM
| Attendee Name | Title | Status | Arrived |
| Katie Deane-Schlottman | Chair | Present | |
| Daniel J. Butler | Vice-Chair | Present | |
| Steve Balich | Member | Present | |
| Sherry Newquist | Member | Present | |
| Annette Parker | Member | Absent | |
| Frankie Pretzel | Member | Present | |
| Joe VanDuyne | Member | Present |
Also Present: Chair Ogalla, and K. Fladhammer
Minutes Provided by: S. Ceci
IV. APPPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. WC Landfill Committee - Regular Meeting - May 2, 2024 11:00 AM
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Steve Balich, Member SECONDER: Frankie Pretzel, Member AYES: Deane-Schlottman, Butler, Balich, Newquist, Pretzel, VanDuyne ABSENT: Parker |
1. Discussion Regarding Need for Landfill Expansion and Other Necessary Information (Katie Deane-Schlottman)
Ms. Deane Schlottman stated I want to skip Old Business and get some questions to be answered before we discuss the Solid Waste Plan. Mr. Hartke, how many properties and locations has the Consultant considered for the location for the expansion of the Landfill.
Mr. Hartke stated I think that is more appropriate to ask that question to the Consultants that have come here today. We have Devin Moose the Principal Engineer from Geo-Logic, and Chuck Helston from Henshaw and Culbertson, Rick Porter who is Mr. Helston’s Partner at the firm is also here today.
Ms. Deane Schlottman said they are welcome to come up, but my question is how many properties have been looked at.
Mr. Hartke replied, our primary focus has been on our current Landfill parcel itself. There have been some other options that we have been considering, as far as the exact number of parcels I am not sure, probably an aggregate of 4 or 5.
Ms. Deane Schlottman asked if they are in different locations around the county. Mr. Hartke stated they are all contiguous.
Ms. Deane Schlottman asked who the authority was for determining which properties were looked at, and who made that decision.
Mr. Hartke said it was part of vetting out possible options to bring those forward, it was more of a practical sense.
Ms. Deane Schlottman said my question is who did that, because nobody came to the committee to say these are the properties we want to look at and these are the areas. It is my understanding that that is what is supposed to happen, that is the whole purpose of the Landfill Committee. If there has already been determination in certain areas for the landfill, none of that came before the Landfill Committee, and the committee never voted on the areas that those would be.
Mr. Helson asked to speak, I will be brief. As to your question I recall in one Zoom call that I had with you, Chair Ogalla, and Ms. Fladhammer. In addition to the onsite expansion which you just mentioned, in the preliminary stage there had been discussion about whether we should investigate expansion into an adjacent area. To answer your question Mr. Moose was the person tasked by the Executive Branch to look at possibilities. The reason he did that is because that is what he does for the industry.
Ms. Deane Schlottman stated I am going to interrupt you right there; we understand what Mr. Moose’s job is. I understand that he is the one that comes up with designs and different ways to present landfills. But, from my understanding it is within only one location at this point. We haven’t received any other options.
Mr. Helston said here’s why if I may, he also in addition to being very good at design, his firm and his team of 9 people are a preeminent national team in selection of sites, looking at feasibility of selections at landfill sites, transfer stations sites, and bio fuel sites, those types of sites, that is why he was asked by the Executive Branch to look at these sites.
Ms. Deane Schlottman said to Mr. Halston, to that you stated before that is still something that the committee still needs to decide, you stated that yourself.
Mr. Helston said if I may I was almost there, it is very preliminary now, for several reasons. We are not sure based on certain legal considerations and restrictions on use of property on whether eventually….
Ms. Deane Schlottman interrupted Mr. Helston asking if the restrictions come from JADA (The Joliet Arsenal Development Authority), is that what we are still worried about. Are we waiting for that to be okay, once JADA expires.
Mr. Helston said in looking at that, again, there is confidentiality that was assigned to us by the people who own those, and we said we would honor that confidentiality, because it is very tentative, and may go nowhere. That is why it hasn’t come to the committee yet. I can assure you when I know when it is legally feasible or not, you will be the first people.
Ms. Deane Schlottman stated at this point it sounds like we are not the first people, because it sounds like we are already moving forward in one direction, and we are being told this is the direction we are going instead of giving us options.
Mr. Helston stated it is very preliminary and that is why it may go nowhere. Ms. Deane Schlottman added so other options should come forward.
Mr. Halston said we don’t want to waste your time if at this threshold point, this 30,000-foot point, this 15,000 foot-point, this 10,000 foot-point whatever you want to call it, we don’t want to waste your time, your time is valuable if it is not feasible. Once we know it is feasible we will then come to you, because there is a combination of one or more, and I can’t say anymore, again, because we pledged confidentiality to the landowners. There are one or more of five parcels that could possibly be, all within the same area.
Ms. Fladhammer stated the Chair has allowed me to ask this question, without divulging any of the confidentiality that you are speaking of you are indicating to this committee that you are exploring an option, and you are going to wait to see if it is feasible, and if it is feasible then you will bring that single option to this committee. Currently, you are exploring no other options.
Mr. Helston said exactly. Thank you, Ms. Fladhammer, you will be the first to know.
Ms. Fladhammer went on to say, if that doesn’t work out then you are starting from scratch, again.
Mr. Helston replied yes, because what’s doable now, as I think I indicated to Chair Ogalla, Ms. Deane Schlottman and you, time is of the essence, what’s doable right now, is citing and expanding your own property. That is what you should focus on right now because you can get your hands around that right now. We might as well go into that briefly. As I indicated to you before, I am always available, I will leave my business cards, so that you can contact me directly.
Ms. Deane Schlottman stated I am going to let Ms. Fladhammer ask another question.
Ms. Fladhammer asked if time is of the essence, why are you not exploring other options, in the event that this one will not be feasible.
Mr. Helston stated because this one is logical, because one or more of the five parcels that are more or less adjacent to the existing landfill dove tail into the existing landfill. Here’s why, there are nine citing criteria that must be satisfied before this County Board can give site location approval. They deal in large part with minimization of impacts, of noise, of dust, of odor, and minimization of traffic and safety.
Ms. Deane Schlottman said in this situation we realize that this one area where this landfill is right now, all of that has been done, so obviously all those criteria are probably met in this area. But to my point, if you are saying time is of the essence, if this area does not work out, even if we go up with this landfill, we have no other option then, if this doesn’t go through correctly, and we are already behind. With the timeframes we have, with this one area, and if it fails, are we going to look for a different area elsewhere. It seems that it would take more time, why aren’t we looking at other options, maybe the City of Wilmington is done with landfills, that is a question that we don’t even know if they will have now, maybe they want it and maybe they don’t. Maybe there is another area within Will County that would want this landfill for whatever reason, and we are not going forward and asking further questions.
Mr. Helston stated like I said if we go with a modest vertical expansion and we couple that with a horizontal, taking off the dirt pile and utilizing the additional 25 to 28 acres that are there, on a modest vertical you gain 15 more years in addition to the 9 existing that you have, that is 24 years. Adding a horizontal onto that is another 7 years, that is 31 years which will allow you to explore the adjacent properties or other ones. What Mr. Moose has done; they have done it in conjunction with me for applicants in the Midwest. They are very good at it, they have done it in counties in Northern Illinois, we have tasked them to find other sites and they have done an exemplary job in two other counties in finding four or five alternate sites that would be ideal locations for landfills. You can ask them to do that if you want them to, they are very good at that.
Ms. Deane Schlottman said then that would be something that the committee would task them with. But this committee did not ask them on the other, that is something that somebody else did. That is why the committee was curious about who made the decision that this was the only location.
Mr. Helston said the Executive Branch, I know there is acrimony back and forth, it is not unusual, and I have dealt with that for forty some years dealing with government. Generally, the Executive Branch, as I indicated the first time I talked to this group, does the threshold planning, that is by law, your job as I indicated that first time is to look at the things that are presented to you and make the ultimate policy decisions. You are the group that looks at those and either says, yes, maybe or no, that is your job but first something must be formulated to put in front of you to make an educated and informed decision as to where you want to go from there. Does that mean that Mr. Moose and I plan it 80% of the way? Now we give you what we think is a feasible or conceptual plan, then you take it and run with it. Your job is to be policy makers for this County, and under the Illinois County Code, it is your job to take it and run with it and finish it out.
Ms. Newquist said I would like to summarize what it is you are saying. There are three possibilities here, one to get out of the landfill business altogether and I don’t think we want to do that because we have the RNG Plant. That leaves us with either expanding the current landfill or picking a completely brand-new site for a brand-new landfill. My question is given the time constraint that we are under, is it even feasible currently to consider a brand-new site for a landfill where one doesn’t exist right now.
Mr. Helston said it is very tenuous, that is why I said why not take what you have that you can deal with right now, with the vertical expansion alone, a modest one that is compatible with the surrounding area. Mr. Moose and I have done Criterion Studies for over 40 years, they have been accepted and make sure they are compatible with the surrounding area. I have talked about this before in conversations with Leadership, my suggestion is doing a moderate vertical expansion that gets you the 15 years and add it to the 9 which is 24.5. Look at the feasibility of moving the soil to a nearby site that will cost less than the initial threshold, that comes out to six or eight million, which I shared before.
Ms. Newquist said I think for me what would be helpful would be an indication from you, that in 9 years there is no way we are going to get a new landfill from scratch somewhere. If that is the case, then we do really need to focus our effort on expanding the existing landfill. Then that narrows our range of choices significantly.
Mr. Balich stated I get it you guys have a lot of experience; I am told that Mr. Moose is one of the top Environmental Engineers around. When anyone tells me I don’t need to know all the information, that makes me want to know why. Mr. Balich voiced his opinion that he feels the committee should be more informed and not told that they can’t be discussing certain things due to confidentiality agreements, and not allowing the committee to have more information.
Mr. Helston stated I will give you a response as I have given you over the years when you picked up the phone and called me before, you may recall or maybe not, but it is your right as a County Board member to do that.
Mr. Balich stated I don’t recall them.
Mr. Helston replied I do, and they were quite memorable, I recall them distinctly. There is a point in time with anything when someone comes up and tells you, “I want to tell you about this”. It must be fairly right, it can’t be in such a premature phase that it doesn’t make any sense to talk to you. I will tell every member of this committee; there are things when I say “confidential” that we cannot say in open session, and maybe not even in Executive Session because it may not fall within the scope of an expressive exception of the open meetings act, does that mean that I don’t want to talk to any of you, no, as I said from day one, the first meeting I was here. You are the policy makers, I can talk to anyone of you individually if you pick up the phone, email, or text me. I can talk to anyone of you, and I would be glad to talk to each one of you about where we are with the process. Mr. Balich, I have always enjoyed your enthusiasm and conviction, and that is why I have always enjoyed going back and forth with you, even at times over the years it seems maybe like there has been friction. Not from me, I admire your conviction.
Ms. Deane Schlottman stated Mr. Helston thank you, I am going to let member Butler ask a question and then Mr. Van Duyne.
Mr. Butler asked on the one location that you picked for the expansion if that location was chosen and maybe this is better asked of the State’s Attorney, does this allow us for the rest of this project to go out for bid.
Mr. Helston said I can answer that question. Here is the way that I would do it. The way we did it the first time around.
Mr. Butler said just for the sake of time could you just say yes, or no.
Ms. Deane Schlottman said I think what Mr. Butler is asking is at the point where we are talking about this one individual area.
Mr. Helston stated yes, you could RFP it as we did before, once we get it, there is nothing to RFP before you get it. You would site yourself as opposed to last time around it was the determination of the County Board that Waste Management would site it because they had won the RFP and won the contract. This time around you could site it yourself, secure a discernable legal interest so you can be a citing applicant, site it yourself and issue an RFP to all the waste companies, that is competitive and that is where you will get the best bid.
Mr. Moose said I need about three minutes or so, that’s all I need. The answer is if we had a green field site that was discontinuous or non-contiguous could be get it done in nine-years, the answer to that is probably. We have been tracking every site in Illinois for the last twenty-five years, the average is nine-years; some are getting done quicker, some are getting done slower. It really depends on the uniqueness of the site. I was charged twenty-five to thirty years ago for finding a landfill site for the County, I am the one that selected and founded the Arsenal site and at the time it was an active Army Ammunition Base. With this project like anything, the easiest least cumbersome thing to do is expand vertically on the existing landfill. I have come up with several scenarios for that. The next easiest is finding a parcel nearby to move the soil stockpile, it’s still your property but the amount of property that you must acquire is less. We came up with three or four conceptual designs for that. The next easiest is to acquire property contiguous to the arsenal site, we did not count the prairie but there is contiguous property that is privately owned next to the site, and we came up with several designs for that. We also said there might be a better place in the County that is better.
Ms. Deane Schlottman asked at this time you are not instructed to look at a plan beyond that area. You were only told by the Executive’s Office to look at this one area.
Mr. Moose replied that is correct. To finish off, I am always focused not just on safety but on what is best financially for the County. The most financially attractive thing would be a separate facility contiguous to the existing facility that has been cited by the County. That would allow landfill operators around the country to bid on this, that has taken away the tough part it also allows them to start a hauling business in the county which would increase more competition and it would not interfere with the contractual requirements of Waste Management and the RNG site.
Mr. Van Duyne said gentleman thank you for coming in this morning, I just want to lay this out here for everyone to understand, in my opinion. There are some members on this committee that are not happy about the fact that you gentleman were hired by the County Executive, and you are answering to them. There are members on this committee that want to hire their own consultant, until we can come up as a Board to find a solution to this, I think there is going to be friction. Not so much from me, but other members. Let’s just call it how it is; they want you to say that you were hired by the County Executive, and you answer to the County Executive. I think that we have done that and at this committee right here, and right now. I suggest we move on.
Ms. Deane Schlottman said there are other questions.
Mr. Van Duyne said also, before I finish, this committee decided to build a $65 million RNG Plant.
Ms. Deane Schlottman said this committee didn’t do that the County Board did that.
Mr. Van Duyne said OKAY a tit for tat, County Board, members of this committee are on the County Board, do you want to correct me for that, I understand, thank you for that. Anyway, there is no reason to discuss this anymore, this is nonsense, let us get our answers and move forward please.
Ms. Deane Schlottman said just for clarification it wasn’t the County Executive, it is the State’s Attorney that you work for, isn’t that correct Mr. Helston.
Mr. Helston said yes, but we work in conjunction naturally with the County Executive Office to put the preliminary constructs. When people say we work for the State’s Attorney or the County Executive we are retained by them, but we work for all of you. Mr. Moose and I at any time are willing to talk to any of you, where “it will remain confidential”. It is not only because of adjoining land owners, and I will end this too, you have people who don’t want expansion. You have people who want to frustrate your efforts, and the more that you say in public them more you hurt your own cause, that is why there is nothing to prevent us from talking to you “individually”, it is simply whether there is an Open Meetings Act requirement where we must watch what we say.
Ms. Deane Schlottman said since we know that this is a one site location, we are talking about one area, even though it makes the most since, sometimes what seems to be, is not perfect for the entire project. When this comes to the committee, and it will, this is the only option that this committee must discuss. That is what concerns me and some members of the committee. One of the only reasons that we may be waiting to move forward is because of the legal restrictions on some of the property through JADA, is that what is holding us up and does anyone know when JADA expires.
Mr. Helston replied we are still analyzing, we must look and then interact, that will be done very soon. If the legal restrictions cannot be worked around, then its game over on those sites. That is the reason we don’t want to bring it to you until we know the potential legal impediment can be resolved, after that it is either game over or we must move forward. In the interim if you want to look at other sites as I said before charge Mr. Moose with a site selection project in Will County. He just said he can do one in nine years; he picked this one originally when he and I were retained in the early 90’s by Will County once the base closure came through. He picked this site, and it has served you very well. He has worked with me to pick other ideal sites in Northern Illinois and the Chicago Metro Area, that is what he is an expert at, task him now to do that, he can do that.
Ms. Deane Schlottman said thank you for that Mr. Helston. Within this range of properties are there any other properties that have been located that we would not have to enter into a host agreement with, are we going to have to enter into a host agreement with these properties.
Mr. Helston said possibly, that is all I can say.
Ms. Fladhammer said I think the better question is, in the analysis by Mr. Moose the appropriateness of this piece of contiguous property, does it take into consideration the potential cost for a host agreement with either a property owner or a Village or a City.
Mr. Moose said our analysis identified the possibility of numerous things, but it didn’t quantify it.
Mr. Helston added because it is too early yet, but there is a possibility of both a host agreement, we already have one with the Wilmington area. When you’re in a governmental agreement it may modify that, or there may be a host agreement with a private entity too.
Chair Ogalla said there are people on this board who have very close relationships with the County Executive’s Office. I see them go back in groups and have conversations, come out and then defend them right here on the floor saying the other people are not in favor of this. The problem is other people, other people have questions because everything is hush hush. We had to form a Landfill Committee. I don’t know how many hoops we had to go through and how many months it took, I believe it was five months to get a Landfill Committee finally started, once we got that started there are more hoops we had to go through. Then we decided to hire a consultant to guide us from our perspective to understand more about the process. Today we were supposed to be going through questions answered by asking staff, I don’t know Ms. Deane Schlottman, did you invite Mr. Moose and Mr. Helston to come in today.
Ms. Deane Schlottman said I did not.
Chair Ogalla said you guys are here and I am the Chair of the County Board, it is fine to have you here, but we didn’t know that you were coming. That to me says there are other things going on behind the scenes, that is why we have all these questions. I understand that there are negotiations that are going on, I get that. Then we should also agree on what we would want to agree with the negotiations or not. If I want to negotiate for something and I must get it approved by others, what is that you are willing to give to get it. This is a problem, and this is why this is happening, and it makes you cloudy when the County Executive vetoes the right of the County Board to hire somebody, especially when the majority of the Board voted to support a resolution to hire a consultant. It is ridiculous that we can’t hire someone we want with dollars that are in our own budget. Then were told after the resolution had been passed that we should have a meeting without our consultant as soon as possible so we can pass this waste plan. Something is going on and someone is not being open and honest about this, there are two parties here that have different political situations going on. You guys have been here forever and have worked with different Speakers and now Chairs, as well as with different Executives, so I know that. There is talk outside this room, some are calling it sabotaging or conspiracy theories. People have questions and wonder what is going on, that is why this Committee has the opinion that they do. Then you are going and defend the Executive when she has never come here to have a conversation.
Mr. Van Duyne asked were you addressing me.
Chair Ogalla said yes, I am.
Mr. Van Duyne said address the Chair.
Chair Ogalla said I am the Chair of this Board, and I will address you when I want. This is ridiculous when you make accusations like that.
Point of Order was called.
Chair Ogalla said this needs to be said, we can go ahead and listen to them if we want to that is how this whole thing works, they have the person on the other side of the wall that makes all the decisions, and we are going to allow that to happen. We are going to sit in this room and follow the rules when everything else is going on over there behind the scenes.
Ms. Deane Schlottman stated to the Chairs point, when we were saying that for the consultant it would help us to ask you questions, there are still questions that you are telling us that we can’t have answers to.
Mr. Butler said I want to clear up something and I think you are a very nice gentleman, although I do feel like I am a part of a big filibuster because your conversations get a little long and detract from asking questions. I just want to go out to bid to get a competitive price, also it is obvious why you’re in that seat, because it is an area that requires a certain expertise. Us at this table cannot claim to know as half as much as you.
Ms. Deane Schlottman said I do want to point out that we do understand that your job is very specific, and I appreciate what the both of you do.
Mr. Moose advised the committee members both mine and Mr. Helston’s cards are here please pick one up and you can call us up at any time. I think the only thing that we are worried about is confidentiality. Lack of confidentiality at certain points of the project will jeopardize the success of the project, that is what we are concerned about. If there are any questions that you have about the process, if I can’t answer it here, please call me and I will answer it over the phone.
Mr. Balich asked about the procedure for tasking Mr. Moose.
Mr. Helston said to Mr. Butlers point I don’t want to be a filibuster, because I never wanted to be accused of being a politician, and that is what politicians do. That is why I recommended that you guys hire Mr. Moose immediately to do that, but I wouldn’t put the vertical expansion on hold, I would also dial in on what he thinks is an acceptable vertical expansion that gives you at least fifteen years. Then the fifteen added to the nine will give 24 years, I would do those two things.
Ms. Fladhammer said that goes back to my understanding of why the committee wanted their own consultant, to help them to know what questions they should be asking. This is the first time we have heard on this committee that they should be tasking Mr. Moose to do something additional. It was never told to them until they brought it up today. It is my understanding with some of the members of this committee have, that they don’t know the appropriate questions that they should be asking, which is why they wanted to have their own consultant.
Ms. Newquist said I just want to say first that I don’t view this process as political, regardless of what Chair Ogalla said. Second, this is something that you are probably never going to hear me say again, I agree with Mr. Balich on this. What I care about is looking for a solution that is cost effective and gives us the most landfill for our money. I would totally defer to your expertise but even if you say a vertical expansion and going to the horizontal route makes the absolute most since. I would like to see the possibilities laid out and the pros and cons and why you are recommending a particular course of action.
Mr. Helston said that he agrees and that is why you should task Mr. Moose at this point to do that. The other point is I agree with Mr. Balich also, I am going to have to see if the sun is going to come out. He is a very practical man in all the times that I have talked to him. On the horizontal plan, you must determine if it is cost effective to try to utilize the 25 to 26 acres by moving the dirt pile. You should have him do a break-even analysis of at what point it does not make sense to entertain doing the horizontal along with the vertical.
Ms. Fladhammer said I think you need to task him the direction of what you want him to do. No motion is needed.
Ms. Newquist stated we want Mr. Moose to do a cost benefit or break-even analysis on whether entertaining horizontal or lateral on site of 25 or 26 acres is feasible. In conjunction with that you want him to dial in on what he thinks is recommended as a vertical expansion. Also, a site selection process if either the existing site or any contiguous work out.
Mr. Helson said my partner Mr. Porter came here at no cost, he wanted to come with so he gets acclimated if he needs be here in the event, I can’t be here what I am asked to be here. He Just pointed out he thinks but you would have to ask the State’s Attorney; he has done a lot of work with governmental entities. He thinks that this committee must have a voice vote to approve that, so you would have to have a voice vote to do that.
Ms. Newquist asked do we have the budget; I mean how does that work from a budget standpoint.
Mr. Porter stated that is why I raised that; it would be extending your budget.
Ms. Newquist asked if it falls within our existing budget, is it an additional line item, I am on the Finance Committee, but we don’t really review the individual line items.
Mr. Hartke stated those tasks would be budgeted under our division.
Mr. Balich asked do we need to put that on an agenda by making a motion, or just a direction.
Ms. Fladhammer said it is a direction by the committee upon receipt of the information you can move forward and if you don’t receive the information, you can make them get it.
Mr. Pretzel asked if we expand the current landfill vertically and horizontally, do we also increase RNG revenue.
Mr. Moose replied yes.
Mr. Pretzel asked if we pick a completely different site in a different part of the County do we give that revenue up.
Mr. Moose stated no, with a vertical expansion you could use the existing RNG Plant or an expanded RNG Plant, depending on the size of the expansion. An expansion contiguous to the existing landfill may be able to use the existing RNG Plant or an expansion of the RNG Plant. Depending on where another facility might be, you might or might not depending on how far away it is and where the pipelines are.
Mr. Pretzel asked why you are looking so closely at the contiguous properties and no other parts of the County.
Mr. Moose said one of the reasons is that a contiguous parcel allows you probably on the order of about 60 years of additional life. It gives the County the most money and detangles the relationship that you have with Waste Management. It allows you to build a facility contiguous to Waste Management’s facility, let them finish operating and let them continue to do post closure care at the existing facility. The new operator then can build a site unencumbered by siting and permitting, that hard part is done, and it allows people from out of state to come in and try to develop operations within the state. That is in the most interest in my opinion to the County.
Mr. Helston stated I would agree, where I sit there are only two major regional landfills in the greater Chicago area. One is Zion and this one, this is an extremally valuable site long term, you will get several bidders, that is going to Mr. Butlers question.
Mr. Butler said it was my understanding we would get 35 years of continuous gas anyway. How long do those RNG Plants last usually.
Mr. Moose stated that like any equipment you have a limited life, depending on the use of equipment. It is going to need constant maintenance. I can’t give you a date, and I was not involved in the RNG project.
Mr. Butler asked would that plant pretty much be restructured or be required to be rebuilt after 35 years.
Mr. Moose said yes, I would think so.
Mr. Moose said you also have other infrastructure there, you have a pipeline connection that is a valuable utility that you have there.
Ms. Newquist asked if you would also add the RNG Plant considerations to your cost analysis for us.
Mr. Moose said yes.
Mr. Balich asked if there is a problem with the County being the operator itself and hire all of the exact same union people that are doing the job right now, except we would be the operator.
Mr. Moose stated it is done all around the country, there is one other municipal owned landfill that is operated by a county in the state of Illinois. It is a small operation, California, Florida and Hawaii, are government owned and operated sites. But it is a special set of expertise that you will need. It is a lot of capital equipment that needs to be taken care of, and a safety issue too. You are then running a competitive business; I think there is more advantage if you were to get an operator who has great experience and expertise. But then also it brings hauling to your facility. If you were to do that you would open to the County much more risk and liability.
There was a discussion on becoming an operator and what the risks would be compared to the reward.
Ms. Deane Schlottman said thank you for coming and answering our questions.
Ms. Deane Schlottman said I have a question that Mr. Balich asked me to make sure that I brought up. There have been documents that may have been shredded that concern the Landfill of Dean Olsen. Are we able to get information from those documents?
Mr. Hartke explained there were some comments about records from 2020. Mr. Olsen resigned from the County on July 1, 2021. In 2020 we have had 18 boxes created, that were for permitted sites and that were sent to Records Management for permanent retention, the permitted sites for those boxes were from the CDT Landfill, and the Wilmington Landfill. In 2021 there were another 44 boxes that were created between September 2021 to January 2023, some were for destruction because they were older according to the Illinois State Law, they were required to be retained for three years after it closed and then they could be destroyed. Some of these documents were as old as 1968, some of those documents were for permanent retention because they included permitted landfills. Any that had information that included monitoring went for permanent retention to Records Management. State Law allows us to dispose of inspection reports after three years that the case had been closed. We had 4 boxes that have gone to Records Management because of inspections and 7 boxes that were for inspection reports of both open dump site and permitted site inspections. In that same time frame, we had 26 boxes that went for permanent retention for the Laraway Landfill, they also went to Records Management; the Laraway Landfill is a very large site we have a lot of records. Two more boxes went over to Records Management which were either closed landfills or other historically significant sites, old refineries like the Texaco, and Univen Custom Blended Oils, a box of records went for permanent retention for that. Another six boxes that went for permanent retention with other various sites that went all the way back to 1968. That included landfills and some very old landfills that were permitted that we were going to keep on site, but they are permanently recorded. Then a box of Citco Refinery documents, ground water data that was sent over and another box of other refinery sites.
Ms. Deane Schlottman interrupted Mr. Hartke and said, I guess my point is, nothing from this landfill has been terminated.
Mr. Hartke said we have 45 boxes from the Prairie View Landfill that are currently stored in our division’s storage room. We must keep them on-site, because we never know when our Engineer or Consultants will need them to look back on them for an expansion. When I took over the division there was a lot of disorganization, so I have been very diligently working at organizing the division and the department. It was very necessary and even before I was in this position I was working on organizing files, we had probably another 200 boxes that went to records management before 2021, just on landfill files that went over for retention because it was a mess.
Mr. Dubois said Mr. Hartke has done an excellent job in managing the divisions records as you can see, he has very detailed records of what we have done, just like any department in the County we follow the records retention schedule, which is approved by the State Archivist. We don’t just throw things into the shredder, and we don’t throw things into the recycling bin, we follow the law.
Ms. Deane Schlottman said thank you.
VI. OLD BUSINESS
1. Authorizing Adoption of the Solid Waste Management Plan 2017-2024 (Land Use)
Ms. Deane Schlottman stated we are going to go back to Old Business, with the Solid Waste Plan.
Mr. Balich said I would like to table the Solid Waste Plan information until next month. Seconded by Mr. Butler. Motion passed.
Ms. Deane Schlottman said okay we will table that, I don’t know how many members have actually gone through and read the Solid Waste Plan, there is a lot in there. If the members could read through it and you have questions next month. Please send any questions that you have ahead of time so we may get them over to Mr. Hartke and Ms. Keane, that way they can have the answers, and we can try and adopt the Solid Waste Plan. Please send them to Ms. Fladhammer.
Motion to table the Adoption of the Solid Waste Plan until next months meeting.
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Steve Balich, Member SECONDER: Daniel J. Butler, Vice-Chair AYES: Deane-Schlottman, Butler, Balich, Newquist, Pretzel, VanDuyne ABSENT: Parker |
This item was discussed earlier in the meeting
VII. OTHER OLD BUSINESS
VIII. PUBLIC COMMENT
Ms. Fladhammer stated I would like to make a Public Comment so that it is on the record. Since there was no meeting last month in June, the minutes for this committee are up to date.
IX. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT/ ANNOUNCEMENTS
X. EXECUTIVE SESSION
XI. ADJOURNMENT
1. Motion to Adjourn @ 12:09 PM
| RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Joe VanDuyne, Member SECONDER: Steve Balich, Member AYES: Deane-Schlottman, Butler, Balich, Newquist, Pretzel, VanDuyne ABSENT: Parker |
Alerts Sign-up