County Board - Regular Meeting

Is it this? Oh, there. Thank you. I'm so All right. Good morning, everyone. Welcome to the Will County Board meeting for July 17th, 2025. We'll call this meeting to order. Member Brooks will lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance and introduce the clergy. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. It gives me great pleasure to present to you an old friend with emphasis on old. Kurt Paddock is the pastor leader at St. Edwards a Christ Episcopal Church on Midland Avenue, Joliet. His parish has been part of Will Cotton history for over 185 years. You look good for your age, Kurt. In his leadership capacity, Kurt has served the congregation by focuses on provision of spiritual direction, new community outreach efforts, and building a strong relationship of the faith communities in this region like mine. Thank you, Kirby. for over 12 years. Some of you all might remember him as the director of the will county land use department. Under his leadership, the land use youth department and his p personnel were awarded dozens of citation for quality innovation and their program administration. Most notable among the recognition was the department selection by the American society of public administration for that prestigious organization public integrity award. Curtis married to Susan Paddock, a former dean of the Dol Junior College and they're blessed to have one daughter who's a public school teacher and three grandsons and I try to stick to your script. Kurt Paddock.

Thank you, Reverend Brooks. Thank you, madam executive and members of the county board. Let us pray together. Almighty God, who has given us this good land for our heritage, we humbly beseech thee that we may always prove ourselves a people mindful of thy favor and glad to do thy will. Bless our county with honorable industry, sound learning, and pure manners. Save us from violence, discord, and confusion, from pride, and arrogance, and from every evil way. defend our liberties and fashion us into one united people, the multitudes brought forth out of many kindreds and tongues. And do with the spirit of wisdom those to whom thy name we entrust the authority of government, that there may be justice and peace at home, and that through obedience to thy law, we may show forth thy praise among the nations of the earth. In the time of prosperity, fill our hearts with thankfulness. And in the day of trouble, suffer not our trust in thee to fail. Amen. All right. Ready to get going. Madam clerk, will you please call the role?

Richmond Williams. Dean Schlapman here. Ogala pretzel here. Butler here. Ogala here. Newquist here. Axley. Yes. Brooks here. Winfrey. Bulock. Logan. Freeman. Revis. Mitchell here.

Ortiz. Burkowitz, Hickeyi, Costa, Trineer, Bandine, Balich. With 22 members being present, we have a quorum. I need a motion to place on file the certificate of publication. Motion by Mitchell, seconded by Re. Madame Clerk, please call the role. Richmond Williams. Dean Schlottman. Ogala. Yes. Pretzel. Yes. Butler. Yes. Newquist. Yes. yes. Oxley, yes. Brooks, yes. Winfrey, Bulock. Logan,

yes. Freeman, yes. Revvice, yes. Mitchell, yes. Ortiz Burkowitz Hickey Costa Traer.

Yes. Yes. 22 in the affirmative. The motion carries. I now need a motion to approve the June 18th board meeting minutes.

Motion by Dean Schlotman, seconded by Mitchell. Previous roll call by Brooks, seconded by Winfrey. All in favor? Any opposed? Motion carries. I need a motion to approve the minutes from the June 18th executive session. Mo motion by Nquis, seconded by Dean Schlottman, seconded uh by previous roll call by uh Burkowitz, seconded by Hickeyi. All in favor? Any opposed? The motion carries. Madame clerk, will you please acknowledge elected officials and media present today? This morning we have county executive Jennifer Bertino Tarant, County Clerk Annette Parker, coroner Lorie Summers, recorder of deeds Karen Stuko and media. We have Michelle Mullins with the Daily Southtown.

We have no honorary resolutions or proclamations. So we will move to p public comment. Uh we'll begin with public comments for agenda items. Is there anyone here who would like to speak regarding um any agenda items? If you are here for a land use hearing, you can wait until the land use hearing, but this is for public comment for any of the agenda items. Going once, going twice. All right. Very good. Um moving on. I'm sorry. Um believe there's somebody that has public comment for agenda items. Okay. Yeah, you can just come down. You need you need to stand up and come forward. Yeah.

I did. I did. This is if you have public comments for any agenda item today, you can come forward and speak now. If land use if you're here for a land use hearing, you'll have time during the hearing. Hello. Say your name for the record. Christina Nitsky Tri.

Okay. Um, I'm here to talk about the 143rd Street expansion. You guys have it in a plan uh today. Uh when this project was originated over 20 years ago, times were telling a different story than it does today. The county, the housing market, the economy were all booming back then. This board along with staff were making predictions 20 to 30 years out. Even as sorry, even as your last study, you were making predictions up to the year 2050. Sometimes predictions come true and we all know that times can change and we can be way off. I have to say I'm rather disappointed on how far off we we are. I mean, someone should have stepped up and noticed the earlier that the earlier on predictions were getting further and further from reality. Someone should have made adjustments and stepped up to say something, especially if Yes. I'm sorry. Oh. that she's speaking.

Sorry. So, yes, I am the mayor of Homer Glenn as well. Um, so at the so someone should have stepped up, especially after the bottom fell out in 2010. But there's no reason to point fingers and there's no reason to continue to make decisions off of predictions when we can nowadays make make decisions based off facts, information, and testimony. When the previous boards voted to make to move forward along with this expansion, they based their decisions on information that they were provided. They voted to expand 143rd when 150 street 159th Street was not fully in play like it is now. In 2005, the county predicted an 85% population increase by 2030. 85%. Which means by 2030 your population would be 1,120,72 residents. As of 23, you were sitting at 702,728. You're roughly 419,000 residents shy of that prediction. That's a lot of residents to pack in in the next 4 and a half years. For the record, the county's population has grown by 94,000 residents, mainly in Planefield as they have doubled in public population and in Joliet. While Helmer Glenn is still sitting comfortably at 24,000 residents, we were also predicted to be around 45,000 residents. That's not happening anytime soon. 143rd Street was said to be the a commercial corridor. It's not. It's purely residential. The commercial corridor, the commercial portion of 143rd Street will already be a part of the Bell Road expansion. There are 12 businesses on 143rd, 10 which will be addressed with the Bell Road expansion, one which was already addressed with the Lamont expansion, leaving one commercial business which is a real estate agency. Just a few fun facts for you guys. In 2010, your ADT, which is the average

daily traffic in 2010 was 1,00 14,400. As your own study performed on December 6th, 2023, it showed that your a daily traffic was at 14,261, roughly 140 cars less than two 2010. The board members were told 143rd Street would not legally allow trucks. However, your 2019 plan, page four of 18, says different. I'd like to take a minute and just address the board. If this project was presented to you today, this very moment, as if it was never presented to you before, would you be willing to spend $70 million on three and a half miles of road, knowing that an overwhelming majority of residents in Homer Glenn time and time again, ask you to please deny this expansion, that over a 100 homes are directly impacted, that 143rd is a residential area and not commercial. that ID DOT's recommendation is to move to a four-lane option when your average daily traffic gets to 15,300. And as I already pointed out, your December 23 study shows we are roughly,00 average daily traffic below the recommendation. It is a proven fact that highways attract crime and speeding. The village of Homerglenn is voted the seventh safest community in Illinois. We do not want that to change. If I stood in front of you and asked you to assist the village in Homer Glenn in promoting our 159th commercial corridor and asked you to redirect traffic from 140 143rd Street, which is a residential area, wouldn't you guys help us out? Why are we pushing cars through residential and avoiding our commercial corridor? Help us promote our commercial businesses.

Mayor, I'm going to have to have you wrap up even with this. You're at four minutes. So, yeah. Motion by uh Mr. Butler to suspend the rules. Do a lot. Seconded by uh Logan. Thank you, madam. No, we have to take a vote. Okay. I'm clerk, please call the role. Richmond. Williams. Dean. Slapman. Yes. Oala. Yes. Pretzel. Yes. Butler. Yes. Newquest. No Yes. Oxley. Yes. Brooks. Yes. Winfrey. No, it's not. Bulock.

Logan. Yes. Freeman. Revis? Yes. Mitchell? Yes. Ortiz? No. Burkowitz? Yes. Hickeyi? No. Costa. Trainer. Van. No. Okay, let's stop with the side comments, please. Folks, people have a right to vote yes or no. We have rules that you folks voted on. We need 14 to what are we at? 12:10. So, can you please wrap up, mayor?

I if I have to, I assume I will. I just you you have to Yes, your comment your public comment it failed. So, you have to just please wrap up. TW, you have to have 14. When you change your rules that you folks vote on, you have to have 14. So, please wrap up, mayor. Thank you.

Since I have to wrap up, I will email each and every single one of you all the information that I have. And I strongly encourage you guys to deny this transportation plan as it is or at least make an amendment to remove 143rd Street to help the residents of Homer Glenn. It's a true disappointment to those who voted no as you guys are not provided all the facts. You're giving predictions that are not true and not coming true. You're not hearing all of the residents of Will County. You're only basing your basing your opinion based on what you want to hear and what you're told by predictions that are not correct. I ask you all and I encourage you all to please hear us out. Tired of not being heard. Thank you, Mayor.

Madam Supervisor Ryan, you have three minutes. Thank you.

Thank you. I'm uh as she said I'm the supervisor for Homer Township, Sue Stylin. I've been here before and I was been at the transportation committee meetings and again we're disappointed um the mayor has spent a lot of time researching this issue, fighting for this issue because it is so important to the residents of Homer Glenn and Homer Township and again we are feeling like we're not being heard and we oppose this so strongly. I just drove down 143rd Street. Every time I drive down there, I think about what this is going to look like. And it is going to devastate our community. It's going to hurt the economic development of 159th Street. It's been it's it's a safety issue. I mean, you're fighting for safety on one side, but it's going to cause a lot more traffic speeding through residential areas. And I it just I'm just pleading again to not um pass this portion of the transportation plan and to remove the section of 143rd Street and re-evaluate. Thank you.

Thank you. Is there any other public comment for any agenda item? Try again. All right. Thank you. We're going to move on to all old business. All resolutions and ordinances from the June 18th board meeting have been signed and returned. Moving on to new business. We have land use and development. Chair Pretzel. Madame executive, I'd like to make a motion to open public hearing for all land use cases. Motion by Pretzel, seconded by Revvis. Madam clerk, please call the role. Richmond Williams Lapman yes ogala yes pretzel

yes butler newquist yes yes yes winfrey bullockan yes revis yes Mitchell yes yes burkowitz hickey costa trineer yes and done. Yes,

we are now in public hearing. Please be advised, absolutely no new evidence or information will be allowed once this land use public hearing is closed. Are there any individuals who wish to provide testimony or speak during the public hearing? You can come forth now. Come forward now. Come forward. Please state your name and if you can help out by giving the case number. Uh my name is Kevin Hume. I'm the applicant for case C, I'm sorry, ZC25041 and 043, known as Black Road Solar 1 and Black Road Solar 2. I'm with New Leaf Energy, formerly Berago Solar. And I wanted to just touch on a couple things about the two projects that we have in front of you today. Um, one of the things that I don't think was transpired on the previous hearings was um, our native pollinator mix that we're calling out. The areas around the panels within the site will be planted with a native pollinator seed mix. These native plantings will provide water quality benefits, pollinator friendly habitat, soil stabilization, and watershed benefits. A professional landscaper, a landscape contractor will be chosen for the establishment and management of these seating areas. We are also working alongside Will Southern Cook Soil and Water Conservation District for specific species that they would like to see. The Will County Farm Bureau has been consulted and we've had discussions with them and they seem to think that um everything we've done so far is is in their uh approval. Detroit Troy Fire Protection District. I know that they've

had some um some issues, but we wanted to address a couple things that we definitely are going to have an emergency response plan in place during construction and operation. Project company will also offer to provide on-site training to the fire district. Um and we will also seek to make sure we get final approval at uh building permit. We also are willing to wave our appeal for a variance to request a 25- ft setback on the southern property line of site number one. We can simply reduce our footprint of the system to accommodate and in the increase in setback without a variance and we'll utilize the current 50oot setback. That is all. Thank you. They're I heard someone say they have a question. Oh, I'm sorry. Member Triner.

Um, will the installation of this solar array increase the number of students attending local schools and thereby increasing increasing the cost of the local schools to provide an education? Thank you. Thank you. Member Axley. Yes. Um, who will be paying for the additional training for the fire department? We would the project company. So, you're going to reimburse the fire department for the training hours the men the men and women of the fire district. Oh, I see what you're saying. Uh, that is um something we would need to talk to them about. We would definitely provide the training, but yeah, I understand what you're saying.

And who would pay for additional equipment to put out the fires on a solar farm? That I'm not sure. I do not know because how do you put out a fire at a solar farm? Typically, um it's foam is most commonly used. Foam or cement? Foam is what I've read. Um it also is is pretty rare. We don't have a whole heck of a lot of case studies on the panels catching fire. So, um, we definitely have some training that we can review with the fire department and

well, so I mean a foam truck is a whole different animal to the normal trucks that they have at the fire district. So, who's going to pay for a foam truck for the fire district? Are you guys willing to do that? I'm not sure that I do not know. Okay. Thank you. Thanks.

Any I think you're good. Thank you, sir. for this gentleman. All right. I'm sorry, sir. Sorry. It's a little Sorry. Thank you, Madam Executive. Um, it triggered a thought with me what member Oxley asked about the foam and you responding. You were pretty sure it was foam. Um, I have solar panels on my home. I own them. Uh, we had the unfortunate experience of a squirrel

and it caused the panel to catch on fire and my roof. Wow. Um, the fire department did come, but I don't believe they used any foam to put the fire out. Now, granted, this a roof fire, not a huge fire, but the key, as I understood it, and again, I could be wrong, was um, taking the power down. And so when a neighbor saw this fire on the roof, they alerted my husband. He ran outside. He went to the the breaker box and turned it off. I don't know how that works on a solar array. I'm not sure that you do. Yeah. Um but I'm wondering, do you have the ability to turn them off remotely?

Yes. Uh remotely, no. We can shut them off at the street side and that's part of the operations plan. So that would be part of what you trained like the fire department on is how to turn it off. Y which is the same thing my husband did only untrained and I'll have to talk with him because he's a a retired Navy uh cook and they every person on a naval ship has to know how to respond to fire and there are different ways and different circumstances and now I'm curious to ask him what do you do about electrical fire? Yeah. Uh I know it's probably not water, right?

I'm pretty sure. Uh, but he mentioned cement and I'd never heard of that and I I'm pretty sure they don't have cement available on a Navy question. Yeah. I just do you know if the cement is really the way I have never heard that before. I also know that um some there's some recommendations if depending on how the fire is is that you can let it burn out which I don't necessarily think that's a great idea either but I know that foam is probably the number one recommended method but he is correct by that's different apparatus and stuff like that it's required so okay thank you thanks

all right anyone you're now you're Yep now we're going it started thank you madam executive yeah I just wonder How of how common is a fire at a solar field? There's data that you can read and some of it's obviously pro solar, some of it's anti- solar. I do not know of a of a fire that has happened in our area, northern Illinois personally. So, um, but I don't know like what the exact statistics are on that. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions for this gentleman? Oh, Mr. Butler. So, does this specific um facility only have solar? Does it have batteries as well or just solar panels?

This will only be solar. No battery storage. Thank you. Thank Okay. No, you're coming back. Okay, folks. You got to like let's get our act together here, folks. Get your All right. Thank you, Mr. Balage. is the solar company gave you the MSDS reports uh from the panels themselves from the everything on it. So the the equipment that's under it, the panels, all of it because a lot of cases they're uh going to contaminate the ground. So we we we need to know that everything is in order.

Yeah. And did they give that to you? are spec sheets. I I would need to go back and look and see what they call out, but I'm pretty sure the spec sheets for the panels and the equipment list all of the uh materials used to manufacture them. And then the last question is uh assuming that within the next 10 years those solar panels no longer have any value because of uh hydrogen engines being created, which they're already in existence, they're going to get rid of them, right? And now when the solar company goes bankrupt and leaves, does the fire department responsible to take them panels out and dispose of them or who if not then who does?

So we have a decommissioning plan that is part of our submitt and we will post a bond for the dollar amount up to I believe 25 years from the start of construction. We include inflation in that bond and it is enough money to decommission the entire site. So the county I believe holds the bond and then they would then pay somebody to take it down. My question is more of the concept that no matter what the bond is, if no landfills accept it, what are you responsible to dig a hole and bury them and put cement around them or what what is the fire department's responsibility to the citizens to protect them if the solar panels are just left there?

So, there are certain places now that are becoming more and more popular to recycle some of the material. Solar panels have glass, plastic, um silicone, other things in it. The racking is all made out of uh steel. There is very very little concrete used in putting these sites in. Most of them are driven piles so they can be removed with very little imprint or footprint. Um there's transformers, couple concrete pads that are not very large, and then a gravel driveway and fence. So those are like the major components. Um, our decommissioning plan specifically lays out all the costs associated with removing all of these items. Recycling is hopefully going to get better as the years progress, but as of right now, we um would assume that the panels would have to go into a landfill.

Yeah, I'm just going by the premise that uh there's no more subsidies going out for these companies. So they're a lot of them are going to go out of business because they depend on our tax dollars to be making a profit and everybody in the room pays on their electric bill every month for these subsidies. So it's just not like it's uh tax dollars is coming off your electric bill. So you know I got a problem altogether with these solar panels with anything because when they when they are gone someone's got to take care of it take care of the problem. So you're you got bond money and so that's going to help. But what if there's no place to get rid of some of the you said not all the material there's some material that's still hazardous that there's nowhere to dump. That is the what's in in the actual panels themselves is up for debate on if it's hazardous or not. there are new manufacturers that are coming out that have less and less um I I think lead in the circuitry. So, um you know, I'm I'm not going to sit here and say that it's 100% biodegradable. It's not. But as the years go by, things are going to get more and more uh being able to be recycled. And so our our estimates that we come up with take most of that into consideration and it should be plenty to decommission the entire project.

Yeah. I'm not trying to give you a hard time. I'm just, you know, trying to point out that these solar facilities, they're not uh farms, they're facilities or generation hubs. You know, we're not going to energy hubs. You know, they we use the wrong word. It's definitely not a farm. It ruins farmland. So, uh, you know, I got a problem with that, too. But, you know, I just want to point out that there there's an issue for the fire department because you guys put out fires, but you also seem to be the forefront of uh saving the community when they got a problem. And that would be a big problem. And that's why I'm asking those questions of you.

So, I'm not trying to give you a hard time. Okay. But God bless you. Well, thank you member um Ogala. Sorry. Uh it's worse than the Judy Julie scenario. What county board district is your uh solar facility proposed for? Do you know? One. One. Okay. Um, as far as your connection polls to come, how many of your poles are are planned to not be buried? Do you know? I'm not sure what you mean. The utility poles themselves.

So, Kameed has so many poles that they install, but then there's poles for you. Yes. And what is the plan there? I like to see all of them buried. It's three for them and then three for us. Okay. So, it would be at least six. And and do you know if you have the ability what the voltage is and if the ability you have the ability to bury those the three beyond comeds. So which would be ours. Um I can get back to you on that. I think we can do underground installation. It's a way way more expensive and a little bit of a different process but I'm pretty sure we can accommodate that if that's a condition that you guys would like to see.

Yeah. So, so I live on a farm and so for me when when we are bringing an unlike industry to the country, okay, and you have all these poles standing willy-nilly in the middle of nowhere, it's it's really like changes the landscape. We live in the country. We don't want to see polls everywhere. I understand KMED can only bury they cannot do theirs, but definitely um where it's able to be done, the solar facility company should definitely bury every pole that they have. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, member Axley.

Um, you mentioned bonds. Is the bond going to be renewable every year or how do you plan on the bonding companies staying in business for 25 years because they come and go like insurance companies do? That's a good question. I I know that I do not know the financial portions of the bond, but I know that it I thought that the bond gets posted with the county and then the county holds it, but I don't know the financial. Who pays the maintenance fees on the bond every year? The upgrade? I don't know. A lot of unknowns here. Thank you.

I don't see any other lights here. Are we good? going once. We good. All right. Thank you. Please state your name for the record, sir. And if you can, the case that we are addressing. Thank you.

Uh my name's Clarence Debb, mayor for the village of Shorewood. Uh I'm referring to cases ZC25041 and ZC25043. These are both the Black Road Solar 2 and Black Road Solar One. Um, with that, uh, I appreciate your time, Madam Chair, members of the county board for letting us come to these. Uh, my comments are going to reflect both cases. First and foremost, project of this size has already garnered 10 objections and I think they are worth noting. You have objections for these projects from the village of Shorewood, City of Joliet, Troy Township, Troy Fire, Manuka Community High School, Troy Grade School, Joliet Township High School, Grand Prairie Water Commission, State Representative Harry Benton, and Rosal Leo's the Rosal Leo family who's out there at County Line Road in Baltro. The underlying concern on these two cases is sighting. The village of Shorewood supports solar in appropriately zoned locations. We've already annexed a solar facility. We worked with the gentleman. We worked with the company and made it work in an appropriately zoned location. So, we're not antisolar, but we are following our comprehensive plan. No different than when the county follows its plan where you put up a new courthouse. You weren't going to put a trucking facility in the middle of downtown. But the county board followed its plan. It put forth effort to put a plan together and move forward and follow through just as the village of Shorewood has done with stakeholders that we updated that through. Again, we're the village of Shorewood is following its one and a half miles of extr territorial, pardon my language, uh zoning jurisdiction based on county standards. And again,

This initial property uh which would be solar project 2 is right across from the village of Shorewood. Saddlebrook subdivision is annexed into the village and again it is immediately next to corporate limits. Again, we're not talking about a development that's 2, three, four miles away, anything of that nature. Um as the Grand Prairie Water Commission project moves forward, the village of Shorewood and five additional municipalities are part of this. This has a significant impact to our rateayers. Uh the village of Shorewood, the city of Joliet, village of Romeoville, village of Mila Shanahan, and the city of Crust Hill join together for the water commission which brings lake water to serve over 250,000 residents in 2030. So each of these communities is making certain our rateayers are not impacted. Again, each of these communities, the village of Shorewood had to make a plan. We had to establish a plan for Lakewater. No different than we may establish a plan for how we develop. No different than how the county makes a plan for how its land uses and how it's going to develop as well. Uh the other comments valuation schools there's a reason the schools got on board with this. The schools may understand and the schools do understand that's why they objected to these projects. Yes, there may be some there may be some money going into the schools with no student impact but it's nowhere near the valuation if it's any type of single family homes, town homes, apartments. All of that increases the land value and helps the schools. There is a minimal impact. The schools have recognized that they are not going to have an ongoing impact for the next 30 years of a

student burden. Uh you know uh Route 52 County Line Road's already been deemed a dangerous intersection. That project's already in the works with Dot to be a roundabout. Uh this project, the Black Road Solar North is right there along those edges. So again, why why add another burden? These solar panels aren't buried in the middle of nowhere, folks. These are right in smack off of 52 Baltz Road, County Line Road, Black Road. These are in plain sight. This isn't just a community solar project. That's uh a five megawatt facility. That's not just a community solar project. They're looking to do 10, that's two projects. That's 10 10 megawws. We're no longer talking community solar. We're talking a commercial. We're talking about a commercial energy facility now. And then what stops them from coming back and applying again. Let's not forget green energy currently only occupies about 2% of our energy grid. Data centers, hot topic. Everybody wants a data center. Data centers require energy and water. An average data center requires 350 megawatts of power. To do that on a 200 acre project for a 350 megawatt data center, you need 2,000 acres of solar. We have to put this in context. There's over 500 acres of commercial industrial rooftops that are available. We need to continue to work with our legislators to find better incentives to utilize that space, not our farm space. Again, the the bottom line is these projects impact our health and welfare of our communities. They do have a significant impact. When you want to talk about what the solar panels do, that's great. We residential folks are doing it. They can they can feel that

benefit themselves. But when you get into a com uh a commercial or a community solar project, there's no guarantee that the residents gain that they'll receive that benefit. You'll hear some of these folks talk about up to 10%. And again, you have to sign up for it. How is that supporting the region as a whole? The other bigger concern for you would be is your contaminants. Your contaminants aren't so much for fire. It is an underlying concern. I'm never going to take that away from fire department. Your bigger concern needs to be hail damage, vandalism from that product leaking, and then it's leeching into your soils. That's your underlying concern. Solar panels are made out of lead, other components, and I don't have the proper chemical names in front of me, but again, folks, the village of Shorewood supports solar in an appropriately zoned locations. I urge a no vote for both of these cases, which are on your agenda, items four and five. member

member Bage.

Uh yeah, you cited a lot of different things of why there shouldn't them solar panels shouldn't go in. Would you consider them a severe hardship to everybody? I would, but would you? it. I want to be very cautious on how I respond to that simply being we've approved in the village. We have approved a solar facility. We have one but again it's deciding each municipality needs to be able to find appropriately zoned locations and we have identified over 1100 acres of industrial space that fits and it doesn't impact the residential growth. We know there's a housing shortage in Will County. We want to be part of the solution. The village of Shwood just approved two different developments at Lenard that's bringing over 400 plus single family homes. We've got a couple of other builders that are looking at other options in where we can go. The village of Shorewoods itself is investing over $2 million in running sewer and water lines under the Route 52 corridor. As any of us know and as you folks know, working on a county board, working with a public utility is not the easiest and it's not a fast-paced process. It takes time. You can't just say, "I'm going to put a 24-in sewer line through KMED's easement nor under a railroad at the snap of your fingers." It takes time. It does it will result in progress, but it does take some time. Yeah, I wasn't I wasn't asking you about the uh you know the the solar cell, you know, the solar plate you already got. That's fine. That's already there. This new one, it seems to me that it creates a big hardship. And that's the thing that we're supposed to be the word hardship is what we need to hear. So that's why I'm trying to get you to say the word hardship. the the word hardship, the location of

these two projects in the village of Shor's opinion and within nine other objectures do have significant impact to the health and welfare of our communities. I hope that answers your question, sir. Thank you, Mr. Ballage, for leading the witness. Member Burkowitz. Thank you, Madame Executive. Um, I'd like to ask that we treat all our speakers equally. We didn't allow the elected official public hearing. This is a public hearing. They run differently. That was public comment. These are public hearings. This is we're in an official public hearing. So again, thank you. Yeah. Nothing new here. All right. Member Hickey.

Thank you, Madam Executive. Thank you for being here today, Mayor. Um I I know you were talking about the financial interests of the village of Shorewood and and I appreciate that and that is obviously your job. Um, we suspect as a county board, um, from some recent history that if we deny this project, we will probably go into a lawsuit and we'll have to defend the decisions. The village shore would have joined in any lawsuit that would be brought forth. Okay. So, um, but it's still the county that's going to fit the bill.

I believe that's probably a discussion to be have, not in a public setting at this point. Okay, I appreciate that. Um, and I I I don't love the way this is set out, but it sounds like you're talking about respecting the village of Shorewood's plan, which I appreciate and I agree. This is not where I would choose for this project to go in. Um, and we you talked about respecting the county's plan, which I appreciate. That's that's very nice. But this the legislation that surrounds solar is kind of the state of Illinois setting out their intentions and their plan. And I'm just wondering, do you think that the Will County Board should respect the state's plan? the the state of Illinois has clean energy initiatives and I have had numerous conversations with legislators through the state in addressing these exact concerns of what these different implications are. Uh matter of fact, members of this county board have sat through some of those different meetings and I know everybody has the the law as written and I of course will defer to my council but there's a reason it still comes to a county board for a vote. This is not a mandate. The way that that law is wrote, it is not a mandate. If it was a mandate, you would not have a planning and zoning hearing, a land use hearing, nor would it even be coming to the county board. It's not a mandate. It's initiative.

Okay. I appreciate that. Thank you very much. Member Nquist. Thank you. Um, my question is, what is your message then to the property owner that wants to I'm not sure if this is a sell or a lease situation. Um, like should they just wait until a developer's ready to get this income from their land or I I'm I'm just not sure how you reconcile that.

Uh, without a doubt, anybody having land plans is a fine is a finite balance. Um, each municipality has to walk that line from the from the village of Bowling Brook to Cole City. We every municipality just as the county does. When you approach and you're trying to expand any type of public utility or uh taxpayer funded entity or to support development as a whole, you you have to try to find that balance of working with different land owners as to what's the most appropriate. And again we use that plan as our guide. We have done that. We have brought in different stakeholders. Um you know the individual that owns the group that owns this particular piece may not have been involved but we did have a group of farmers when we talked to them about establishing our comprehensive plan. We did work with them um and they supported the approval of the comprehensive plan that the village has established. Are are there developer and you might not know this. I I'm not trying to put you on the spot. I'm just curious. Are there developers actually interested in these parcels?

There's without giving a specific developer's name, but there's a piece directly across the street that is and the obviously the current petitioner having a solar project in place. um you know, we we knew that was in place and we haven't steered anybody towards them because unfortunately when you a lot of times when you engage into the solar deals, you're locked into some sort of a contract until that's at least exhausted. Um there was a concern a little while back uh on a S road piece. Matter of fact, LAR is building 300 homes right across the street to that. We have another we have another builder looking at that parcel right there. It it happens. There are builders and out there on these projects, water is already readily available and to get into sewer there's options as to how any further development out there on that west end can happen.

Okay. Thank you. Sure. Member Bulock then Revvis.

Hi. So, you did kind of allude to this a little and I'm just curious like and again I don't know how this works when you do your village plan. Okay. and you say, you know, we see houses in this area and this area and that kind of thing. Do you do you engage with those land owners to say, hey, as part of our, you know, 10-year plan, this is what we're thinking and you know, we would offer you the whatever going rate or whatever you would say when you are ready to no longer own this property or something like is there is there a conversation like that? Because I I I will say I I know that a solar farmer is going to walk in and say, "Hey, we're going to give you 150 grand a year, happy retirement." And that's a hard thing to turn down. So it is does that conversation happen?

Yeah. So when a village in any municipality generally will create focus groups, you you obviously with a focus group, the amount of different vast amount of land owners, it becomes impractical to say we're going to invite 50 people into a focus group. That kind of defeats the purpose. But we did have specifically a focused group of farmers. Uh I don't I don't have that list specifically in front, but there were uh this group wasn't unfortunately one of those uh individuals that was part of that focus group, but the village did have a focus group with land owners to try to uh address those concerns about how different development will go forward, zoning, and what those expectations would be. So yeah, so that's kind of a kind of a no. Like you don't you don't get anything in there's no promisory or I don't know any nothing. It's just it's all discussion.

Yes, ma'am. Okay. Okay. Member Revis then Ogalo. Uh thank you, Mayor Debold. Uh how many years have you been the mayor of Shorewood? Uh mayor since 2021. So, this will be my fifth year. Okay. And you have a pretty good beat on how people feel in the community. Obviously, you don't get elected mayor a couple times without understanding the thoughts and feelings of your residents. I like to believe that's an accurate statement. Okay. And then, uh, can you speak to those 10 objections that came in? Did you play a role in helping get those objections? Uh, were they organic? How did those come about? I'm not your question. Just genuine genuine.

No, no. Uh, simply letting the different taxing bodies be aware. Uh some of them, let's be honest, they're they're busy. Um others are part of the water commission. Others have direct financial impact. Others, school districts, for example, they rely on development. That's how they build their schools. That's how they support their staff. That's how they uh they grow their facilities. So, school districts as a whole also are anticipating growth. Got it. And so, uh, is it fair to say you kind of spearheaded the opposition in terms of getting these together or it may have been a little bit more organic than that?

Uh, I think there's a little bit it's a little more organic to that. Uh, as the village short as the member for the village short, of course, it was in a direct impact to us as we reached out to neighboring uh, involved entities that may be of concern. They also joined in with the conversations. Got it. So, I guess my point is these entities were willing to follow the village of Shorewood's lead in opposition to this. I think that makes it easy for us on the county board. Uh, I have no further questions at this time. I think I know I'm going to vote. Thank you, Member Ogala.

Thank you. Thank you for being here today and also having the conversation down in Springfield, which members of the board, we do the same thing through our ICO and UCCCI groups. And one thing that needs to be identified, I know people say, "Well, what if the farmer wanted to sell and a developer bought it, what I want everyone to understand, the simple fact is every piece of farmland that is proposed to have a solar facility on wouldn't at this point have the ability to have somebody else purchase it, possibly near a town, a developer. But we have to look at the overall picture as far as the agriculture community because having solar companies come in and offer 10 times what a farmer would offer to lease that land limits the ability of our farmers to continue to farm in Will County. It limits the ability for them because they lose that land they may be leasing. So that cuts into their bottom line. In addition to that, it also prohibits our young farmers from growing and becoming a larger farm owner as well. So, there's more to this agricultural thing with solar than just the simple facts that everyone talks about. Speaking from the egg community, it's a detriment and will hit the bottom line, which eventually impacts the amount of of grain that is produced, which eventually hits the bottom line for how much revenue is brought into the county. So there's more to this than simply would somebody sell their land? They may, but they may not. If they didn't have the option, they would continue farming it and doing as they do now. So I wanted to just make that statement.

Member Hickey and then Dean Schlapman. Thanks. I again with great respect if this piece of property is that vital to the village's plan. Can I ask with the process why there wasn't an outreach to the specific land owner?

The the specific land owner we had a conversation with probably a couple of years ago. There was a set price point. Uh early early logistics were sewer water prior to the village engaging into making those investments moving sewer and water to the west. Um the my understanding of that point would be is since then the landowner was able to be engaged with the solar company. Um and at that point that would nullify any further discussions from us. Okay. Thank you. I appreciate that. That explains a lot.

But the landowner having the interest to sell is what also initiated our conversations to pursue sewer and water west of the tracks on Route 52. member Dean Schlottman.

So, I know there was some question to um the mayor was the only one who reached out to some of these other entities. Um I know I called cuz it's in my district. It's literally in my backyard and so I have neighbors and friends of my children and um you know kids who attend the GoPro uh baseball over there who some ride their bikes along there to get there. And I can just imagine a bunch of little boys running through a solar field to get their to their baseball game. Um, they don't want it there. Nobody that I've talked to in our neighborhoods is asking for this and are hoping that we will all vote accordingly um with the people of the area.

Member Burkit. Thank you, Madame Executive. Um, okay. So, um, thank you for being here today. Um, the the this parcel I I did drive out there, drove around and looked around. Um, so there are the the high tension power lines right in that area,

which is the reason why it makes it an ideal location for solar facility. Um, I I I don't know. Um, is that an appropriate place to put a subdivision or is that a place that people would choose to? Um, as far as zoning goes, I don't know if a residential zoning is ideal. Uh, right in that area.

Ma'am, you have the entire city of Joliet and properties of Village Shore that are immediately adjacent to the high tension lines and the railroad tracks. So residential zoning is already in place from about the Dupage River south. I I don't have uh right along Theodore Street, Kaitton Farm Road, that is all residential zoning and immediately adjacent to railroad tracks and uh the power lines there. And on the south end for the village of Shorewood, uh Westminster Gardens is the lines um the lines cross over the tracks somewhere right south of Style Road. So at that point, you're no longer right up against the railroad, you're against the power lines. But yes, residential zoning is already well established for 20 plus years.

And you mentioned the storm water commission. uh the property owner the or the the owners of that parcel they did cooperate with you to sell land to accommodate the needs for the storm water commission didn't they for the Grand Prairie water commission yes correct uh water commission was all based on engineers and cost-effective measures to minimize impacts to our residents and rateayers and they were cooperative with you to provide the land that you needed. I'll leave it as we negotiated a price. I won't go into further details about finances,

okay? But they own the property and they sold it to accommodate your needs. The water commission negotiated a price. That's about as far as I can say. The water commission. Thank you. Appreciate that, Mr. Vanine.

Thank you, Madam Executive. Um, just a reminder for the for the county board members, I I do know on your desk there is a sheet provided by the state's attorney's office. They are the Lasal Sinclair factors to consider for land use cases. There's nine of them listed. I've [Music] there's nine of them listed. Um, these are the these are the factors that I consider when it comes to uh solar farms. I believe the mayor has demonstrated at least five out of the nine. Um I just wanted to remind the board members that these are the items that we should consider. So uh that will be my recommendation for the remaining solar farm uh projects. Thank you.

I don't see any more questions. Oh, you have a followup for the the mayor. Okay. Well, hold on. Okay. Any question? Yeah. Thank you. Well, if it's a for why don't we wait till we get done, then you can ask your question regarding that. Okay. Comment. Uh clarification. Yeah. Well, I I want to add to

a comment to that. Um I'm a little confused about what uh Chair Vanine just shared instructing us to use. So, I'm directing this to council. I'm a little confused about those comments that this should be our guideline uh on whether or not to approve a solar facility. Um have you seen has she seen the who provided this to us? The I'm going to let the assistant stage attorney talk to you but this is from the committee whole committee the whole we had and some conversations too but I'll make sure it's in each of the packets. I don't think so. We're in public hearing right now, so I just don't want to muddy the record. Okay.

I I'm more than happy to go through all this once we come to the actual things. And I I actually wanted to make a couple statements before we vote. Those are created by courts. They're recognized at land use for all all types of land use considerations, not just solar farms. So those were just uh put together by an assistant state attorney. And if you remember, we we presented those factors to you guys in a uh training about a month ago. Correct. So, so you provided these to us today? Yes. Okay. Yes. With the recommendation that we follow these guidelines as to whether or not to approve a solar facility. Not a recommendation. That's your recommendation. It's the law. This is Yes.

Okay. What about our our um what about our land use department? Should we consider their determination? Member Burke because I I I agree. So we're going to answer all these at the end before he wanted to he was asked to talk about those anyway at the end. So let's get through our language and then we'll make sure we come back and address your questions. He had already asked to do that. So thank you. And if there's no other comments reque four and five. Thank you. Thank you.

Uh good morning madame executives, members of the county board. My name is David Silverman. I'm an attorney with the law firm Mahoney Silverman and Cross and I am the corporate counsel for the village of Shorewood. I'm here to speak to you uh on the same two issues that the mayor spoke to you about uh land use uh numbers 25-041 and 25-043. Uh I know there's been um a lot of talk about litigation in this matter and uh I can tell you that our firm uh on behalf of the village of Shanahan who is in litigation with a solar uh company that you uh denied has has uh been granted leave by the court to intervene and we've stood side by side with your state's attorney's office and I I hope and I think offered a tremendous amount of hope and research capabilities to them. the mayor just committed that if if this matter if either of these matters end up in litigation that we will be there again assuming that the judge would allow us to do that. I can also report that recently just last week um in Wnebago County where our law firm serves as special assistant states attorneys and represents Wnebago County that a judge ruled on a case involving a solar uh field that was two solar fields actually that were turned down there. He gave us the opinion on one. The second case is really the same. So, we expect the same opinion. But the judge up in Winnebago County in a very thoughtful uh and very insightful p uh uh ruling and opinion that was I think 15 pages single spaced ruled a couple things that I think are important to this discussion. One that counties do have discretion in whether or not they approve a solar field. that the legislation does not require the county to approve a solar application with regard to zoning issues. Uh so we we were very happy with that result. I know we have a number of cases pending in Will County uh where

we'll hopefully have a decision the judge predicts sometime in September. But I I think I was here in front of you maybe a year ago and made these same arguments to you that that legislation does not restrict your discretion. It allows for your discretion and you analyze this. The courts will analyze it. I think as the state's attorneys will tell you under LEL factors, you also have your uh special use factors in your Will County zoning ordinance. And our land planner testified at uh in front of the PCC that in her opinion that this did not that this these applications and one other one uh that's not before you today did not in fact meet the spe three of the special use criteria. That PCC uh hearing, I think, was very long. It was very thoughtful and very incisive. And they they heard testimony for about three hours on these three land use cases and they recommended denial and did as did your land use committee uh who also had a very thoughtful discussion on this. I know that many of the solar farms uh coming before you, solar facilities, um coming before you do not have recommendations from the PCC. So I I think that this one is particularly unique. I think that the commissioner pointed out right the question is is this the right place for it? And uh you have to believe this is the right place for the solar are we're not here to to fight solar on an institutional level. We're here we're here to tell you that we think uh the village of Shorewood's comprehensive plan should be respected and that this is not the appropriate location for these solar facilities. So, um, again, we ask you to respect, uh, the recommendation of the PCC and also the land use committee. Uh, we we we think we're working through the litigation issues and and as we've felt and as we've told you for a long time, we believe there is that discretion and that discretion can be exercised and we we appreciate if you would do that in

the negative today. Thank you.

Thank you. I don't see any questions, sir. My name is Mark Feck. We are the I'm the member manager of the uh land land owner. We own the land. Uh before I read a letter that we received that and you should have received late yesterday, I'd like to kind of address some of the comments that the good mayor from Sherwood had made. Uh,

he's referring to the same case that you're talking to right now. Yeah. Thank you. So, first of all, um, did you state your name? I'm sorry. Yeah, I'm sorry. My my name is Mark Feck. I'm a resident of Will County. I've been a res since 1993. Um, and we're headquartered in Will County as well.

Um, and I'm not really sure where to start. Uh, one of the things the mayor said was the land across the streets in contra in uh, conversations with a developer. That strictly is just not true. I know whenever uh he addressed the uh lower meeting that was his comment as well. We own the land. I would think we would know if uh people were in conversation. So that's how he started his his testimony and he kind of continued on for for 10 minutes uh after he was asked the question kind of what's going on and thing and tell us about this development. Well, of course, he certainly told you about what they've recently approved, but I would just ask you to ask him when was the last time uh dirt got moved on a subdivision in their jurisdiction. I'd ask you to ask him how many uh platted lots are developable to build with build on. I'd ask you to ask him um what developers are really saying. I'd ask you to ask him about the um recapture agreement that was filed against our property that cost money for the for a developer to even get started to settle. Um I will tell you tell you the building permits an activity that they've had according to a foyer that the that was filed. Um in 2024 they issued 16 building permits according to the foyer that was filed and there are still reviewed. Uh in 2023 they issued 22 building permits. uh in 2373 in 2021 87 I can go on. It was for the last 10 years. Basically the 500 lots that he he uh talked about if we use at the takedown it would take 10 years just for that one subdivision and they haven't moved uh any dirt they have the still they still have the same problems getting across the railroad tracks and the utility easements and timing. So again, they can approve subdivisions, but until where the rubber meets the road is when was dirt last moved for a

new subdivision, if you're thinking about residential development. Um, and I would hasten to say I don't think it's been since 2008, 2009, 2010, but it's certainly welcome uh to be corrected along those lines. Um, he talked about uh us being right next to Saddlewood. We're not right next to Saddlewood. We couldn't annex into Shorewood if we wanted. We don't have contiguity. And I'm happy to explain what that means. Certainly, uh, Mr. Silverman can explain better than what I can. Uh, as a side note, Mr. Silverman was talking about, um, the Wnebago case. He didn't mention what happened in Grundy County. I assume you all know about that. Um, people uh, these are busy roads. People don't want to build next to busy roads. Uh I think it's fair to say he alluded to the question as to whether uh we worked with them in in the in the village. Uh I can't speak to what exactly um the solar company did, but they did work significantly. What uh Mr. What the good mayor didn't tell you was we gave up a solar site as part of the negotiations. He said those negotiations took place two years ago. Uh we closed they closed on the purchase uh just a year ago and again uh the solar developer was very flexible in working with them. In fact, it hurt their project. Um so for him to say we can't um that they don't make adjustments just isn't fair. Um you know there's some some discussion about so solar panels. Hey, people are putting them on roofs in in schools. Why aren't we worried about that if that is indeed the case? Uh the gentleman talked about bonding. We're we're a little hard to work with with the solar companies. I grew up on a farm. We have farm ground. I appreciate Miss Ogala's comments on our on our uh agreement and

I'll go I'm not supposed to talk about it, but our agreement uh we also are bonded. So, we kind of think that if there's a problem, we're going to be more concerned about it than uh the good government of Will County. We don't want anybody losing a bond a bond that can't be drawn on. Uh so, we we will have the ability to b to uh draw on that bond. Uh also, I believe I uh stand to be corrected. I'd happy be happy to get back to you. I think that bond uh per Aean and per agreement needs to be updated at least every five years for the amount due to inflation, those kinds of things uh to cover the cleanup costs. We have the same we have we're more concerned about it than you. Uh uh to be candid with you. Um uh Miss Mala talked about uh farm farm ground. The economics of farming today aren't great. Um we're building corn inventory. Uh our bean carryover is going to be be high as well. We got a record crop staring us in the face. Bad prices. I would just share with the board we export 10% of our corn crop. We uh already uh grind into energy about 5 billion to six billion we'll probably produce in 2025 uh beans are going in biodeiesel without these energy uses of our product we'd be farmers be sunk there's plenty farm ground to feed America in the world still out there the other thing I would just uh talk about a little bit mala is with regards to the trend line yield as you all know farmers are growing a whole lot more grain on every acre of ground today versus 10 years ago 5 years 5 years ago, 20 years ago. Uh uh so I'm less worried about that. We can talk about this. This is a temporary use of solar um of the ground. We do have the ability to sell six parcels of 10 acres. You saw the conversations from the school and uh I think the good mayor uh artfully kind of dodged the question of hey did he did he whip up whip this up

or not. Um, if you listen to the PZZ PZ, the um, for instance, the um, we the township guy didn't even know where the property was at. He owned property across the street from it only a year ago. Uh, uh, so so to indicate anything different than that, in fact, he he apologized to me afterwards. He he even said uh, I wasn't even a farmer. So, uh, and later he he recalled that. Um, I can go on. I guess I might just read this letter that, uh, you all received late yesterday and also was sent to to the thing. Is is the letter from, uh, uh, Representative Roar and Elman in your package? Okay. Okay. So,

I don't you I don't you can't read a letter with somebody else from somebody else, sir. here. Well, so I did talk to the legislators to understand what the what the real law was and I'd be happy to share welcome to share that with anybody. It was sent to the count county board late yesterday. It seems and it seems a bit unfair um uh not to be able to read it. Yeah. Sorry, sir. Um, I'm asking right now because we are in hearing and I don't know if we can provide

I'd be happy to email it if anyone wants wants to see it or I got I got a copy of it with notes. You can provide it to us. So, so because it is it is not subject to cross-examination. No, it's the same thing as when public emails comments and we want to attach it to the public hearing. it can't be considered as part of the public hearing because there's no right to cross-examine that person. Uh it's one legislator's uh understanding of the the bill and therefore it can't be included as part of the things you consider in public hearing.

Um if that's true then why do we get copies of any public comments? I I I would just take this as a public comment. I would not be taking this as testimony, but I would like to see the letter even if it's not today, but I would prefer to see it today if it's if we can make it available. You you certainly can see it and treat it just like public comment, but it can't be read into the record here. Correct. Uh understood. Yeah. No, we don't. So, you you can you can see those things. You're just not I just wanted to make sure we'd be able to get a copy of it. We can't consider it as part of your Right. Yeah.

Thank you. May I'd be happy to provide a copy to you obviously. And do you have a question regarding this process or for him? Okay. Then I'm gonna member Ogala was first. So then I'll then you miss member Bergwit.

Thank you. So Mr. Beck, I just wanted to say something because you said um something about my response. You said the farmers grow more land today on the on the property than they did years ago. That is true. I farm. I know that. What I my comment was not having anything to do with that. Not saying we won't have enough farmland for future generations to grow enough farm to the food to feed us, but it's it inhibits an existing farmer who may be leasing that land today. Zoned a solar company comes and buys a they get to keep a status and put a solar facility on which is an energy plant. That to me is controversial. that farmer that was leasing that property no longer can lease that property because now you own it and you're putting solar on it and and I am very concerned for my young farmers who were currently possibly farming with their parents and now they want to continue farming but the land available is less and less every year because of the solar. So we're talking two different things and I know you tried to rub it off on well farmers grow more. That's not my point and that's not what should be considered. In addition to that, you've also

I appreciate the clarification and we do farm this ground ourselves and part of our group is the younger generation and it has been a way to bring in this entity has been been a way to bring in farmers and increase their knowledge. Still decreases the land available to farm. Agreed. Just like a subdivision or the buildout of uh Chicago.

Correct. But out where I live in the middle of the country, there's no subdivision being planned. Yet, we are losing farmland to these solar energy plants. So, in addition to that, you made the comment that the you were more concerned about about um protecting people than than the county board would be. You're speaking to somebody over there. I don't know. I was on this board when we created the solo ordinance. I worked with the Farm Bureau to make sure that we were very protective of our residents and we do have the bond looked at every five years to make sure that that cost keeps up with the cost. So, you aren't doing more than what we've done. And I want I want you to know that as a board, we look at all these different things and we try and make our ordinances as tight as they can to protect our residents and our land owners. Thank you. And I don't need a comment back.

I don't know if we can stop them from back though. So, if you have a reply, you can reply. I certainly didn't mean mean to uh Okay. uh dis disrespect uh the board and their attention to detail on those things. I uh was trying to indicate that we're just as concerned about this issues uh that the gentleman raised up. And then like many many of the solar contracts out there, we have I think more teeth in our contract than uh the typical applicant. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. We're gonna go member Burkowitz, then Dean Schlotman. Hold on. I'm sorry I didn't click you here. There you go. Mr. Fact, thank you for being here this morning. You mentioned a letter from Senator Elman and uh Janet Yang Bor. That's correct. Um who did was that letter sent to the board, the county board or will county government? Yes, according to email I received last night. And when was it sent to Will County government? Probably around 7 o'clock last night. 7 o'clock last night. Um

it was it was Go ahead. So if that's the case, um has staff received it and then we just we have not been provided a copy of it yet? I I just would like it's a question. I have not received so I don't know and I know your chief of staff I do know that the um Can someone answer that question? Uh he's out there talking right now so I don't know. What's your question? Did you receive it?

Well my question is is if we received it but we weren't provided it this morning and we've got a ton of information. All this stuff was given to us this morning. I feel it should be read. Well, the reason it can't be read is because it's not the actual person who is here reading it. And as the assistant states attorney said, can the staff read it then? We No, he's not he's not the person. Right. Let me finish. As was said, it cannot be read by a third party because you do not have the right to cross-examine the person who wrote the letter. We already hear it's not to cross-examine it. I understand it.

But if they hear it, somebody could have a question of what they were understanding. So, we've already said that they can't. Whether or not you can get the letter after that, yes, we are being told. No one, I'm sure, was here at 7:00 p.m. to to to give the letter, but um I I can't even Can you acknowledge if it was received? I don't even know yet. So, Mr. Yes. Okay. Thank it has been received. It was received, but it wasn't provided to the board this morning. explain again. Yeah.

So again, if you remember from your training in this public hearing, you're sitting here as a quasi judicial body. You're making decisions much like a judge would be. So I the way to think about it is if somebody was testifying about what they saw on a certain day, uh Mr. Pelky couldn't come up and say this person told me this thing and this is what the this is what they saw that day because the logical question is then okay here's what's in the testimony. Well, what about this factor? I don't know. I'm just reading a prepared statement that the there's a constitutional right of a landowner to cross examine as do you guys have the right to ask questions. That's why we don't read public comment into the record. That's why we don't read letters into the record because it's you can say whatever you want. There's no chance to question that person about what's being said. So that's why it cannot be considered.

My biggest concern is just if something came to the board prior to the meeting to be presented to the board and it didn't happen, we want to make sure that doesn't occur. Thank you. Thank you. Um I want to go I had already called on uh member Dean Schlottman to speak next. So you're all ma'am. Yeah.

Um I know that um you're saying that Shwood hasn't moved any dirt in quite a while. And we all spoke to the fact that it takes time for things to get approved and to be reorganized. And I do know that there is an approval for 400 plus homes through I think LAR is the builder um that's coming. So, it's not that Shorewood has not intended to do things. Um, I think they're in the process of building a new YMCA that I'm that's close to my home. Um, so they are moving dirt, if you will, to um, you know, incentivize people to come in and be there. So, dirt is moving. My will be moved.

My point was it's going to be a long long time before they get out to our farm. There's several farms in between. Uh there's a lot of uh undeveloped platted lots in Shorewood already. Uh there's a lot of or I can't speak to the number of infill lots, but if you look at Saddlewood, there's quite a number more than 10 of a of those lots still to be built on. That subdivision uh I believe was started prior to the year 2000 in the '90s. And that is the only subdivision today that's west of the subdivision in the Shorewood municipality or west of the uh railroad tracks, excuse me. But there's still being movement. They're still being built is the point. And some of those things take time. And um Saddlewood where it is, not everybody knew where that was. So um you know, it's lovely neighborhood. So I think as more people knew it was there, I think maybe it would move faster.

Kind of the same problem with our land. Um uh I would say that our land's in two in four different school districts. Two of the school districts didn't respond. Um uh um I think uh Mr. Prezel talked about what's going on in uh New Linux and Planefield in terms of activity. Uh it's fair to say activity is picking up uh in those in those regions with good school districts. We're just a long ways out and so when you think about 30 years I mean that's that's the issue. There's not there's not the demand. Uh I don't know. I would um I live over there and Troy's got um trailers in front of one of the schools. So I think there is the demand for new construction.

Mhm. 100%. There are trailers in front of the school. So, I believe that there probably is quite a bit of demand. Like, like I testified, they issued 16 building permits last year, 22 the year before, 73 the year before that it's ramping down. Interest rates are higher. If you talk to if you listen to what's going on with the builders, national builders like LAR, uh they're slowing their activity for now. The interest rates are high. I have a feeling that'll change. Thank you, leader. I'm sorry. Uh, Chair Van,

thank you, Madam Executive. Um, there was a comment made about an email and I just want to respond to that. I want to defend our county board staff. Um, apparently this email was received two and a half hours after the close of day. And the county board staff started at 8:30 this morning, which our meeting starts an hour later. If they did not receive the email, I don't feel it's their responsibility to to rush in and and run through emails and try to provide them ASAP. I'm sure they have plenty of things to do to get prepared for the county board meeting. If the gentleman, if the chief of staffer and the county board staff receive this email, they would be more than happy to pass it along when time allows. They work extremely hard, and I don't think it's out of malice. And I'm sorry this gentleman had to hear this, but thank you.

Thank you. Uh sir, I I did not mean at all to say it was out of malice whatsoever. I did not mean to indicate that. And I we agree. We agree. Uh the county board works really hard. Uh your staff recommended this for approval and we checked a lot of boxes on it. Thank you. Just to be clear, sir, this was not directed towards you. Okay. I I wholeheart agree. We've talked to land use department. They do a fantastic job. Member Mitchell, are you you done? Okay. So, we're going to go with uh member chair. Can you close it out or do you have a Oh, no. Wait, hold on. Member, go ahead. Member Pretzel. I'm going based on order here, so thank you. Forgot we have a long time going.

There's been a lot of, you know, back and forth on uh if these land owners were approached and are we really going to build a subdivision here. there. The reason that these comprehensive plans are so important is as soon as you put a solar field on on the map, it changes the rest of the property as well. Right there, there's a really good chance that once you put these solar panels there, that's never it's never going back to farmland. It really should be a map amendment because it never going to be farmed again. The likelihood of a developer putting a subdivision on the properties adjacent to across the street next to has just completely changed, right? Because what used to be attractive, what they used to think was a very marketable area no longer is. If there's one thing we've all learned about solar over the last couple years is that people don't want it near their home. We see it every time uh we have a new applicant. People are coming. We have a packet today with hundreds of signatures on it from people that don't even live that close to it. People don't want it. So, it does change the whole plan for Shorewood when you put a solar field right in the middle of their comprehensive residential plan. So, that's why I can't get behind this particular project. So, and I don't know if it necessarily matters if if somebody's approached you specifically on this property. It's the comprehensive plan is for that to be residential and putting a solar project there changes the likelihood of that happening all around it. So, just a couple other comments. If you've been out there, there's already a sports dome um out there, bar mini storage right around the right around there's uh Mayor Dol testified. Um we did have uh people send in letters of support as well, the neighbors. They

don't want to be they want to be out in the country. Uh they'd their comments generally were we'd rather have a solar farm there than uh a subdivision. So your points your point's well taken. Um they're on busy roads. Our property has has busy roads on it. Nobody wants to live next to a busy road. We work with uh the water commission Joliet and Shwood to help them with their water treatment facility. Um it it devalued the ground ground. Their own appraisal said it did. Um, and just to to comment to uh I think I can speak to the negotiations that took place. Uh, Mayor Debull was quick to say that the commission had quicktake rights to our property uh and threatened us with that. So, you can call that negotiations or whatever. Uh, he was happy to announce that that was part of the state legislature. So, imagine sitting on the other side of the table uh with that comment.

Later Richmond. So, I just want clarification. I did talk to our chief of staff. He said he does not have an email. Okay.

So, um I I don't know where and I'm not this is not accusatory of anybody. I just always want to make sure that as much information is on the table, whether it's from the residents, the land owner, our staff, whatever. So, if something does come up, um Chuck did we will get a copy of it. But to his knowledge, there is nothing that exists right now. It may have been sent. may have been sent to the wrong email. I don't know. I'm not going to make excuses for anybody. I just want to make sure that as we go through this public hearing, we have all the facts that are Kevin. Yeah, I appreciate your guidance on this, too. So, thank you very much. And I just want to make sure that we all have are on a level playing field when we make our decision. So, thank you,

Member Burrit. Thank you. Um, thank you for being here today. I don't want you to feel uncomfortable. I know it tends to feel a little personal um in respect to your relationship with the water commission and the the uh it was referenced that there was um interaction between you and them to accommodate the requirements they need. Now you just mentioned that that had an impact on the value of your land. Can you clarify that?

Sure. uh they had an appraisal done which uh is uh again Mr. So can correct me this uh states or states attorney can correct me but whenever you're doing condemnation on land uh they have to prepare appraisal for values for their case. That appraisal did show that by putting us selling the the ground to them it would devalue the remaining uh uh value of our property. And has that also that's also taken away the ability and the amount of land to develop in that area? That's correct. They well from a commercial standpoint, they bought our hard corner. Okay.

Which, you know, is uh if you look at the development going on and we talked about the YMCA gas stations, those kinds of things. There is commercial development going on in Shwood, but we just don't see the residential uh new new subdivisions actually being I did look at the parcel and the roads around it and so the land this land is right up against the road correct which road is it? It's the northern uh Sherman U they ground at the intersection of Black Road and County Line Road.

Okay. And then in between the road are the high tension wires. So there's a there's a farm uh between us and the high tension lines uh that we actually farm. Okay. You you farm it for the property owner? Yes. Okay. All right. Well, thank you for putting that into perspective. U when I was out there, I didn't see any how uh subdivisions being built or under construction right near the site, but thank you for clarifying that. Thank you for your question. All right, sir. I don't see any more. Oh, no, that's me. All right. No, you're good. Thank you, sir.

The one thing I just asked if if you're going to vote against it, if you would give the reasons why, help us understand it. Um it seems very logical for us. Again, the the planning commission or the um staff recommended for approval. I'm just trying to understand why it wasn't uh why you can't vote yes. Uh when you vote, if you vote no and thank you for all your time. You um go ahead. You want to do it at the end? Yeah. Yeah.

All right. We'll address that at the end, too. Come on, sir. I'm sorry. Please state your name in the case. Hi, my name is um Hernando Torres and my case number is um ZC25002. I'm here trying to get a special use permit to allow horses on my property. My property is zoned R1 where you're allowed to have one horse per acre or one animal unit per acre. And in this case with that saying I with that with that if I was to get that permit I would only be having two horses, a pony, two goats and that puts me at three units and a half and I will be storing them. I'm in the process right now of getting a permit for a pole barn 30x 30x 16 ft high where I'll be building four stalls, attack room, and a spot to like shower them. And that's pretty much it. And the manure, I dispose of it taking it to a friend of mine in Chicago where he makes it into compost. I take it around like every month, month and a half. And that's that's pretty much it.

I think you have a question, sir. Mr. Butler. Yeah. So just to be correct, you're only applying for um five units which is require which is allowed for the amount of land you have for the amount of land using three and a half units. That's how you're you're planning to use. Yes. So even though it may on the paperwork there it says more.

Yeah. It was a confusion when I was applying cuz I have 30 chickens as well and I'm allowed to have one chicken per every 2,500 ft. And with the acres I have, I can have up to 100. But in my case, I only have 30. So I was just confused. But in reality, I only want the five that I'm allowed to have. Neighbors next door, they were grandfathered. One doesn't have any horses. The second one does. She has two, but she's grandfathered to have six. Less than a quarter mile. There's a ranch. I believe they were approved in 2018 to allow horses as well as what I'm applying. Do do your do any of your neighbors um approve of your plans

to the right side? Yes, they approve of what what I'm doing of having the horses. It's nothing new to the community. You see people riding down state line trail riding. There's a cattle ranch on the and it's part of the community. Horses, cattle, livestock. And does the barn that you're um applying for a permit, does that fall within the code? So, you're not asking for anything extra? No. The barn that I'm building now falls in with the 1,800 square feet that I'm allowed to do. and and the the barn will be strictly used for

for only the horses. Like I said, it's only four stalls. Each tall each stall is 10 by 10. Tack room is 10 x 10. And the it's like a shower spot. I'm going put like a a boiler so I can even shower them in the winter so they don't smell. And since it' be 16 ft high on the top, it' be like a second floor to store all my hay, alalfa, whatever the case is, feed for the whole winter. Thank you, member Nquest. Thank you. Um, I just have a quick question. The goats are uh are they a half a unit or a third? Since it's since I'm only having two goats, it's um a unit because there's I think comes to a certain height. So, it's two of them, it becomes one unit.

And the pony I'mma have that's half a unit. So, but you want eight goats. No, just having two goats. I'm sorry I misunderstood you. That's what I was asking. Okay. Thank you, Member Burkowitz. Uh thank you. Thank you for being here today. Uh you just uh indicated that you were no longer uh planning on uh pursuing the variance and you were keeping your accessory building at 1,800 square feet. Is that correct? Did I hear that? Yeah. Okay. I don't see any withdrawal on our agenda.

Okay. So, that was okay. Great. Well, thank you for providing that. Member Traneer. I'm just a little confused about the number of animals. So, two goats is one, a pony is a half. So, that's one and a half. Yeah. You're allowed to have five units total. So you could basically have three and a half horses. I don't know of anybody that sells a half a horse, but you're building four stalls. So I was just kind of curious, why would you build four stalls if you can only have three horses? Because let's say in the further future I get rid of the two goats and the pony, I can put two horses. So it wouldn't be inconvenient just to make that for the pony.

Because the pony I have right now is for a niece with Down syndrome. So he's going to stay there till, you know, who knows how long he lives. No, no, I didn't even think about the fact that you Yeah, I could get rid of them and I could put horses in those. Yeah. No, thank you. That that because you're allowed five total and this is just a request to make sure that I can allow horses on the property. They can be horses. Yes. Gotcha. Thank you. Member Bulock. Uh question through you, maybe to PCC. I don't know. Has BCC done anything with the new barn um aotment? Because it was 4,000 ft before. So,

do we I'm going to ask the chair if he's aware of he doesn't have to go back. He's well within his rights to build the smaller barn that he's building 30 by 30. So, that happens anyway. They told him no on the bigger one. He's he's pivoted. Yeah. He's only here today to get permission to be able to have a horse on this property. Everything else is already settled. Right. Is there Thank you for the clarification. Any other questions for this gentleman? Good ones. All right, sir. Thank you very much. Thank you everybody. [Music]

Welcome sir. if you can a reminder your name and uh which case. Thank you.

My name is Dave Wols. Um case is ZC25-052. Um I was here last year. You all voted it down. I don't understand why everybody this year is all gung-ho going for it. He's changing from A1 to A3 zoning. Like I told you before, they don't want it for outside storage. They want it for trucking. Um there's a a ton of issues with this. Number one, um I have a a copy for you guys if you want to see it. The Will County sign that just put up on the property had the wrong date on it. That's issue number one. I mean, that should stop it right there and they should reszone it. I was told that they couldn't go for zoning again for a year. Lo and behold, it's not a year and they're going for A3 zoning, but they're still stating and swearing that they're going to do it for outside storage, but now they're pushing for RVs. They bow down because I shut them down because the spaces they have are 12tx 40 foot. There's 660 of them. There's no spots for motorcycles. There's no spots shorter spots for cars. They haven't said what they're going to charge for a spot. Now, there's outside storage all the way from 83 and Archer, all the way through Lamont, all the way past there and all the way to New Avenue. And all of them got signs out, open space, everything else. And they're charging 50 to 75 bucks a month. This guy's going to be dumping over $6 million into the spot for outside storage for RVs. It's not going to happen. Next thing is Lamont flat out told him last year, you

might as well sell the property because they will not give them a curb cut. The lawyer come up with, well, there was a curb cut there. That was when it was Dup Page Township. That's when Ed Palage owned that property 60 years ago. Things have changed. They applied for a green space u thing is why they tore the house down. They tore the house down. They took out the well. They took out the septic. Now they don't have any water or sewer on that property. They're not providing any bathrooms or anything else for these uh mo, you know, mobile homes or whatever else. There's no cleanout. They can't wash them out. They can't flush them. So the people that have them, what are they going to do? The kids got diapers and what else? They're going to fling them on the side of the road. There's no nothing provided for this thing. They want 247 access. They've changed everything that you people proposed, what Lamont proposed, and what Romeoville proposed. They don't want to put the privacy fence around. They don't want to put paved in there. They want to put screenings in. Now, just so you know, they bought the 15 acres that circles my house and they purchased the stuff behind me. They went to Romeoville trying to get annexed in. Romeville told them no on the back property. Romeville told them no trucking, no no storage facilities. They went to Lamont. Lamont flat out told them the same thing. Lamont is not going to add us in. Lamont has jurisdiction over the road. And their packet, they got in there. They're waiting for the curb cut from Romeoville. Romeo's got nothing to do with that road down there. They got to get it from Lamont. Lamont flat out told them. Lamont been diligent with Sitco for the last three years. They took all the property. They call it the 135th Street Quarter. You should know where that's out because you told me you know where quite well where this property is and be a good spot for it. It's not. They took and they purchased four homes on my side of the road and

Siko knocked them down for a buffer zone. They also took and they bought they took and they spent $7 million. They bought Big Run Golf Course for a buffer zone. They stopped Sterling Bay which across from the golf course wanted to put an 800 trucking terminal. Sitcom and Lamont technically stopped that because they wanted for a buffer zone. They annexed in Lamont annexed in from Banick Park on 130 fifth and and Smith road all the way to 127. So they would have jurisdiction being nice to Sitco and keeping it as open space and green space. They have this property for sale and the when you look at it, they say easy access, two easy accesses to the expressway. There's no easy access. All those roads have load limits on it. And the funny thing is they put the load or the the zoning uh let's say the uh street usage for all all the area. But strangely, they forgot 127th Street. That's the only way they can get up to this property. My road has a 5-tonon load limit on my end of the road. They can't drive nothing down that road. The other end has a 10 ton load limit. Uh 127th Street has a 25 ton load limit. All the streets across all have five, seven, and 10 ton load limits on it. There's no easy access to get in there and get in and out of there. They also put on that thing that it's a good spot for solar. Well, you people are all against solar and it's right on this thing. The pictures are in there. They they said it's a good spot to put solar in. Not a good spot for solar. The lawyer says, "Oh, the land is all nice and flat. From the road to the center of property, it drops 11 ft. From there to the back, it raises 13 ft. That sure don't sound level to me. They want to put screenings and everything else. Are they going to raise all that? The pond that they're proposing to put in there for um storage water is way too small.

it'll never handle all the water that comes down there. Then they come up with this thing that orders an 8 inch pipe or 10inch pipe on uh Mobile's side that they're going to tie to and bring that water to the retention pot. That pipe on that side goes the other way. All the water from Mobile heads towards 127th Street. It goes across where the Highline is. That's at 133. They can't lower that road because there's two concrete vaults. water. Uh that's where all their water from. Sitco mobile, everything dumps across that road. That's why they can't lower that road. And Sitco is not going to take and raise that highline up. Now, you can look on the thing, the first page in there, the Lamont Fire Department clearly states on their thing, they need a minimum height of 133 to get their trucks in and out of there. The Highline's at 133. I'm sorry. I say I It's a 136 minimum is what Lamont Fire District and is right in their letter, you know, and I highlighted it. So, I mean, they can't even get fire equipment into that property. They have no water to put the fires out. Lamont took last year and they got rid of their water tankers because they said that anywhere that they go, there's water where they can put the fires out. So, they got rid of their water tankers. Mobile has hydrants there. Sitco has hydrants something else out to provide water for for fire protection. This property has no water for fire protection. Um they like I said they got no cleanouts for state for the motor homes now. There Lamont's not going to give them a curb cut. Um there's no bathrooms, there's no facilities. And they and they said that they're going to put uh portag John's out. So if there's 660 spots, let's cut

it in half. That's 300 30 spots. Let's knock it to 300 spots. A port of John is good for one person for 10 days technically is what they state. So they're going to put 33 portagons out there for these people. Come on. You know, they ain't doing it for outside storage. They want trucking in that area. You all know it. Romeoville knows it. Lamas knows it. I don't understand. Well, you people don't know it. But then what I did find out, the young lady that used to be on your committee is now a uh I don't know what you want to call an advisor. And she walks into a thing and she holds up a thing. Oh, you guys all know who I am. And here's the thing. And look what they're doing on the property. And clearly you can see where the pond is that they filled in and it sunk. I showed you the pictures last year, me digging the pond out, my daughter fishing in that pond, everything else. They did all this before they applied for this permit. They cut 20 acres of trees down before they applied for a permit. You know, I mean, that throws big red flags out. According to you people, you're supposed to have a silt fence in around before any any workers on the property. They never put a silt fence in. They are just circumventing around your stuff claiming again that they want outside storage. It's not. And I'd like to know why with the wrong sign and everything else that discontinued. And like I said, I was told from your board that they can't apply for a zoning change. It takes a year before they can apply again. It's not been a year. That throws a lot of red flags out here. And I really don't like the lady that's been here and she's been in a hallway with the lawyer that's from Romeoville talking to you people, everything else. The last two meetings, she's talking

everybody up on a thing and everything else. And strangely, last year you all voted it down. I go to meetings and everybody's fourth. It doesn't make sense to me. So if you got people can answer my question, I really appreciate it. He wants to stay for A1 and a special use for outside storage. That's fine with me. You people turn this around and give him that I3. He can put anything he wants in there. He's got the property for sale. That makes him an instant 300 $3 million if he sells a property to somebody else. And they're going to have to go through the same route to try to get try to get in there. And Lamont flat out will not give him a curb cut. Lamont will make no money off that. Lamont has jurisdiction on the road. That's it. The property is unincorporated. Will County. People got any questions for me? Be glad to answer them.

I think you're good, sir. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Dan Gorman, senior developer for Enterprise Energy. I'm here to talk uh briefly about uh agenda item three, which is uh ZC25027. Um no one yet uh has talked about this project uh today. is a different project than the other ones that were discussed. This is a a community solar garden that's approximately 4.25 uh megawws uh in the township of Lockport. Um this project has been particularly wellsighted. The whole parcel is oversized, so there'll be substantial setbacks from the neighboring residences. There's already robust existing screening around all four sides of this project. So there'll be no uh vantage points of the solar garden either from public vantage points like the road or from the neighbors. Um there's a lot of economic benefits to the project, a lot of environmental benefits to the project and we do have a signed pre-anexation agreement with the city of Lockport uh to make sure that both the city's needs are met as well as uh the interest from the county and of course us as the developer. Um, at this point I'd be happy to answer any questions about the project. I know that was kind of a 10,000 foot view, but uh,

member Balich. Yeah. Uh, I don't have that in my district anymore. It used to be my district. Uh, Homer Glenn objected to it because it's in their mile and a half. They didn't file a legal objection because I don't see it here. But uh I know that area and it's right now it's uh the members are uh Destiny and Raquel but uh it's it creates a hardship for that area

and you I'm just telling I mean you can argue the point but you know when I look at it and I know the area real well because I used to have to walk in the that neighborhood and they already have warehouses all over the place by them. They have extreme amounts of truck traffic and all that stuff. So, they got hardships already. This is only going to create another hardship worm. So, uh you know, I don't get why you're putting it over there because if you look at it's right next to a big subdivision. It's an older subdivision obviously, but it's right next to it. So, you know, the people don't want it over there. They're not here because the people over there probably don't even know what's happening yet because they haven't been informed. Probably if you did, you'd have another 200 people here.

So, you know, that's the bottom line. So, uh you know, to me, you're you're you're trying to create another hardship for these people, and I don't like it. And in particular, we have notified um the neighbors of this property, but because of that robust screening, no one's going to be able to see the project from any vantage point. And most neighbors concerns are focused on the visual impact, but there will be no visual impact off the property itself. Um likewise there are no noises or smells or sounds that are going to issue from this is it's a fixed tilt solar and all of the u things that could make any noise would only make dimminimous noise to begin with and are so far inland from the neighbors that none of that sound will carry. So in in that regard once it's built you mentioned uh I think access road and that you had a bunch of trucks once it's built there'll be virtually no traffic that's generated by this. any other type of development use is going to generate a substantially larger amount of traffic on that road than we will outside of the brief construction window when we're doing it. Um, but I I do certainly appreciate the comments and um if there is a way that you know we are still going to be in conversations with Yorkville once it is annexed um and if there are design changes that we made, we're certainly willing to accommodate those at every opportunity.

Thank you. Um I think we're good sir. Thank you. Member or Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I can't see it. Sorry. That didn't show up. Baldhead. Um, this is right next to my district. Uh, I'm familiar with the property. There's signs been posted on it. Uh, the city has a pre-annexation agreement with the solar company and the owner of the property. Uh, they're looking for the revenue off of it. City of Lockport is City of Lockport's also putting a solar farm in at the old Texico property less than a mile away. That's all.

Thank you. I don't see any other questions, sir. Thank you very much, Speaker Van Dy. Madame Executive, thank you. Um, with further research, the chief of staff did find the letter that was referred to earlier. Um it was in a general email um with and we understand that we cannot take that into consideration under this hearing, but with permission from the state's attorney um we'd like to pass out the copy a copy to the members. I was go ahead. Yeah. Sorry. So I would ask that you not do that until the vote has has gone through because it does muddy the record as to what you're considering.

Thank you. Thank you.

Good morning. Uh, my name is Richard Vogle. I'm an attorney for the village of Romeoville and I'm here to speak with respect to case number ZC25-052. This is a application to reszone a piece of property on High Road from A1 to I3. I believe in everybody's packets or in the county's files, there should be a legal objection resolution that the village has filed. And I just have a few brief points that I would like to make in support of our legal objection. Uh the primary concern of the village of Romeoville is the fact that zoning this property as I while you know perhaps nominally necessary to approve the particular use that the applicant has described in its application goes farther in our opinion than what's necessary to approve that particular use. It not only approves an outdoor storage facility, which the applicant states that it's proposing to develop, but it would also allow a number of far more intensive I3 industrial uses, including but not limited to a truck and bus terminal uh and similar types of heavy truck oriented uses. The concern that the village has with respect to those types of uses is that the road to the south of the property, high road, only a small portion of it is within Romeoville's jurisdiction. It is subject to a 5-tonon weight limit, but it hasn't been designed to support the type of uh traffic that we would anticipate could potentially stem from a facility that would accommodate trucks and other heavy vehicles. I would also note that the application that was filed indicates that among other things uh recreational vehicles, farm equipment, and construction equipment could also be stored at this proposed outdoor storage facility. And I think we can all agree that some of the pieces of construction

equipment, farm equipment, and some of the larger recreational vehicles would exceed a 5-tonon weight limit. Um, thus we're concerned about potential protection of the villages infrastructure in the future. You know, while we understand that we do have the 5-tonon weight limit there, we're not always convinced that that's going to be honored by the general public or by the users of any particular piece of property. and it creates something of an enforcement burden to the village to try to police this as closely as would be necessary in the event that the property becomes used in the future for an I3 use other than what's specifically being called out in the applicant's application. Um, beyond that, uh, we also see that there's relatively minimal economic benefit to the village and quite frankly I think to the county from the project. It's going to be a gravel lot with, you know, some trees around it, some type of security fencing. That's not going to let generate a lot of tax revenue, uh, you know, for the county. It's not going to generate much in the way of, you know, what we would call quality jobs that we'd like to see attracted to the county. Um, the other thing this was this was previously the subject of a special use permit approximately a year ago that would have allowed essentially the same use that was voted down last year. And so we find it hard to figure out that if the special use was going to be declined a year ago that the response is going to be to approve something that's more intensive for the purpose of permitting the same use and we appreciate the opportunity to be heard this morning.

I don't see any questions. All right. Thank you, sir.

Thank you. Good morning. I'm Al Demanscus on behalf of Aaron Holdings and this is on that same matter. It's number eight in your uh zoning package uh ZC-25-052. Um first is um yes, this did come up before the board um last year. Uh and uh there is a limitation that if you ask for a special use, you cannot come back for a full year. uh and uh at that time we proceeded uh quite extensively in terms of putting together uh engineering conditions and all that for a outdoor storage. So as a result and we have our engineer here as well we are so far along that um we would if we're approved we would like to be able to start putting it together and putting it to productive use and put it on the tax rolls which uh uh there is an economic benefit. uh it will benefit because right now there is zero economic benefit. Uh in terms of uh the I3 I3 is the only zoning classification where outdoor storage is permitted as a matter of rights. Um with regard to this particular property, there are standards uh in terms of um uh for a map amendment uh and those are set forth in the staff report with the staff indicating that all of those are met. First is that the existing uses uh the uses right around here you have two of the four sides are Exxon Mobile including large oil tanks. you have one and a half which is Sitco with Sitco with a large refinery and along that same side which is the west side you have a railroad uh and they also have an environmental monitoring station just to the south and then the

other one half is uh in the A1 zone but the person there is operating uh a landscaping business with outdoor storage of farm equipment, landscaping equipment, construction equipment and everything else. The pictures that were referenced uh before, the reason they were referenced is to show that this is being done on something actually our understanding not permitted done on something that's basically not even gravel or anything else. And on top of it, uh there were issues raised about engineering and our engineer here as well. Those are all issues we need to deal with uh if we are approved. Uh and we will take care of the issues of curb cut. we'll take care of the all the issues of engineering drainage and otherwise. And in fact, at the last meeting uh with that particular neighbor, our engineer spent half an hour talking with that neighbor about how we can work together in terms of that drainage and we do have uh Exxon has a discharge right onto this property right at this point. So in terms of the map amendment, um you have the existing uses. This is clearly if you wanted to pick something that fits in terms of an I3 category, this is it. Um the zoning classification within the general area of the property. Uh I3 uh right next door. Uh the Romeoville classification and the line classification for Sitco are uh equivalent in terms of industrial suitability of property in question. This is not a property that is taking away from any agricultural. It's never been agricultural. There was one residence on its 20 acres. Uh, one of the issues was raised is, oh, okay, there was a pond. It wasn't his pond, but there was a a little pond on it. With the plans we have, which we submitted, we've got five of those acres will be for a detention detention basin.

Um, in terms of issues about, uh, toilet facilities and everything else, uh, that really those are all the issues that come up in terms of plan approval. you've got a good planned staff. Uh we've worked with that staff and we will do whatever is necessary. Uh we're not looking at uh having hundreds of people there at any one time. Uh there are people uh who come if you have a uh RV uh that you're not uh allowed to put it on your driveway. Uh in all these residential communities around you here in Will County, um where are you going to put it? uh and there are is a tremendous demand and that's why uh we've worked with Matt Garland from Lockport in terms of testing where the market is and there's tremendous demand for outdoor storage of recreational vehicles uh and and and the like. Um in terms of the trend of development, well the staff professional opinion is clearly true that this is not an agricultural parcel. This is heavy industrial all the way around. In terms of conformance or non-conformance with the officially adopted plans of the county 13 years ago, the plan uh referenced that this area is suburban communities development. This is not a no one's going to build a residence next to these oil tanks. No one's going to build it next to Sitco right there. Uh and the staff indicated that um in the in there the issues are uh will it um have impacts in terms of traffic which the staff reported are minimal, storm water which we've deal with, lighting which we've got a lighting plan, fiscal impact which is positive for the county. Noise there should be minimal or no noise. uh odor issues. Again, this is not something with any kind of ongoing

uh ongoing plans or anything else. The other is is that the particular land use plan of the county is to avoid any negative land use impacts on residential areas to be mitigated. There are not residential areas right there. In fact, on that high road, which is one mile long, there are literally only three residences. one that's uh uh to the actually all three to the south. Um then you know the the one thing that people have raised Romeoville's raised and the uh person who lives about half a mile down has raised oh this is just a a disguise for trucking. We are so above the radar right now that uh how are you going to do trucking if we basically start parking hundreds of trucks on a parking lot and you basically tell people okay park here uh but uh you know uh keep quiet that you got your truck here uh you're going to be uh fined you're going to be whatever and there's going to be people down the street the guy half a mile away is going to report you every single day there are limitations whether you put conditions or not conditions and this is the same person who the first hearing and the second hearing uh he was opposed to it regardless of what it was and we even raised the issue of conditions. Now today for the first time he's telling us that okay I'll agree if you put conditions on it. Well we were accept we were fine with conditions last year. We've got it we want to have it as outdoor storage. How you going to how you going to do trucking here where on the north side you have Lamont uh actually Sitco has a a pipe at 13'3 that doesn't allow most semitrs or others to go under it. From the other direction you've got a five ton limit. Those are

not it it doesn't work. Uh, and so it does work for residential out outdoor storage, RVs, and the like. The um, and I'm happy to respond to any questions. We ask for your approval. Uh, and we think this is an appropriate use and this is the only uh, zoning that's where it's a permitted use. Thank you. Member Brooks. Al, you mentioned, am I right? Five acres for retention. Correct.

Al, I live and you came to committee in Juliet unincorporated township. I live between Juliet and New Lennox and uh I have my own water sewer system. But whenever industrial come into my area, their retention pond they build solves their problem. But it can cause problems to those that exist. Five acres of retention sounds like more than enough. But answer for me, Al. Is that enough to control your retention for this facility for storage as well as solve the problems of the concerns of the neighbors around there? the the only neighbor that could potentially be downhill uh would be the neighbor to the south. And that's why uh our engineer from Morris Engineering spent half an hour after the last meeting speaking with that particular neighbor who is not here and who's at objective the last two but is not here today. Uh that we can work together on it uh and that we can help solve any kind of drainage issues.

Member Costa. Thank you. I live in a subdivision where our HOA doesn't allow for RVs or boats to be parked in our driveway, and I do see a need within our community to have outdoor storage um for a place where uh neighbors can put their uh recreational vehicles. Um in hearing some of the other testimonies raised, um I heard a speaker raise the concern about um this company not being truthful about its intended future plans. um and that this land might in fact be currently on sale right now. And I'd like to hear directly from you uh those intentions now and into the future and whether this land is for sale.

Okay. Um there is a sign, you know, for sale and that's also um part of market analysis is to see what the demands are, you know, with regard to the particular property. Uh and so the issue came up in terms of why it keeps saying that this is a uh disguise for trucking is is that um the principles of Aaron Holdings I do have a company called Vanera which is a trucking company located in Romeoville. Uh and but they also are investors in real estate. Uh in fact uh I've done uh work with them on zoning with regard to uh a condominium development. uh also was mentioned by one objector that there is another property that they have 135th that's got nothing to do with this but also is is is at this point an investment uh in terms of uh potentially for sale the uh our client is proceeding with the plans to develop it and that's why we've done the engineering while we've done the plans and it's all you know set forth there but certainly if there is an offer from a national company or something that comes in that does outdoor storage, they'll certainly consider it. So, it it is up there and is done for both market analysis as well as to see if there's someone, you know, willing to uh willing to pay them more, you know, for basically what they're put together.

Member Butler, sorry. Okay. So, I've got a lot of facts running around my head, but I I need some clarification. Sure. So there's two entrances in there. No, there is there is the um on High Road there is actually everything to the east. There is no entrance on that side. Exxon Mobile controls that property. So there's 20 acres right there. Uh and there will be uh that it's along High Road. So there's a good bit of you know frontage there. And at this point one way there was a 5,000 uh pound limit and the other way there was

Oh, I'm sorry. There is Yes. in the in the the the road jurisdiction is split between Lamont and Romeoville. And so to the south, Romeoville has a five-tonon limit. Uh going to the uh north there is a 10 ton limit. But the problem you have is is that um uh Sitco has a major oil pipe going across at the level of 13t 3, which is too low for a lot of any semi trucks or trucks. Would it be fair to say there's two separate routes to get in there?

Uh separate routes you've got if you took the 127th route, you would come off of the uh interchange expressway uh and you go over about uh 3/4 of a mile to a mile and then half a mile down or you would go for 135th uh and then uh to uh to the to the north. So is there any problem with the uh entrance from 127th? Where does the curb cut problem come in or

I you know I don't you know he's raised that and and there is an existing if you drive out to the property there is a space there where there was actually a curb cut because there was a home there you know for years and that's I I don't foresee an issue with that. uh and I've talked with the engineer about who's here as well today that uh that's an issue we will address in terms of appropriate entrances but it is not something that Lamont has said in fact Lamont submitted documentation here as well as the fire protection district and none of it says anything saying oh by the way you can't have a curb cut

so does it does it um it seems to me unrealistic that the uh that the other route that has a five ton limit, right, is really a route for this thing. Every all it seems like realistically all the traffic would have to come from the other side and they would be restricted as far as truck heights that you couldn't have semis go through there. Well, but at the same time, recreational vehicles of uh other kind of uh outdoor storage uh is under five tons. So, it could come off of 135th, you know, there. But certainly certainly the closer in the uh in the better route is probably 127th. Correct.

So a recreational vehicle such as a minivan and a pop-up trailer. Okay. I I don't fully know the the the weights, but I do do know they're as best I know they're under five tons. Yeah. Well, I would like to see some sort of um you know uh writing that says that all traffic comes from the other side because I don't think it's feasible to drive uh trucks down that um road that's 5,000 ft. I mean I drive a pickup truck and it's 6,000 lbs. So So that's 4,000 lbs under the five tons then. Oh yeah. I'm sorry. Yeah. Yeah. And and the thing is is that uh you know

but I mean with with the trailer too and stuff you're really getting close is what I'm saying and and that's something that uh you know was raised at the uh land use and committee meeting uh whether uh you know you could place restrictions on a map amendment and the question wasn't answered but at the same time we're open to that and in fact we were uh we accepted that uh when it was presented with a special use before but I I would certainly I would object I I would do not think it'd be appropriate to say you can't come from the 135th side because there are people who come there including a lot of people from Will County and who would be under under five tons. Thanks

member Oxley. Yes. Thank you Madam Chair. Um first and foremost it feels like we're getting off the subject. We're talking about semi-truck parking which is not the case. This is in for RV and outside storage. And we keep bringing up semis and semis and semis. It's RV storage and outdoor storage. Thank you. All right. I do not see any other lights on, sir. Thank you very much. Okay. Thank you very much.

Good morning. My name is Ben Jacobe. I'm here on the 10th item on the list. So, the the one solar project that has not been discussed yet, which is ZC250. This is a solar project um at Beams in Stony Island, clear on the other side of Will County from the Shorewood project that was discussed earlier. Um and I want to make sure that we distinguish the projects today. Uh we've actually worked with Shorewood in the past and uh where the mayor uh referenced the annexed solar project that was that was one of ours. So proud to work with the village of Shorewood when we could. Um this project's um a good one. It has no neighboring objectors. So no neighbors to our project objected at any level. In fact, one neighbor uh was even willing to write a letter saying that they would not object. And we have a letter of support uh from the Sunshine Garden Center. So good support uh for this project. The one objection that was received by the county was from the township of CIT. Township of CIT emailed the county and said that it objected to this project because it objects to all solar within the township of Creed. It provided no specific objection to this project. Um just a general blanket objection. um which I I have to say is the definition of arbitrary and and governments are not allowed to make arbitrary decisions and the PCC recognized that and discounted CIT township's uh objection uh for that reason and provided a unanimous recommendation of approval for the project. We were proud to receive that unanimous recommendation of approval from the PZC. We also received a recommendation of approval from the land use development committee and from staff and staff found um that we had met all the criteria and the factors in your ordinance. Um we hope to also earn your your board's vote today. Um I uh I feel compelled as the attorney to address the elephant in the room which is the siding law. Number of attorneys have talked

about it. Um we do have the opinion from Wnebago County. We also have an opinion from Grundy County that found that counties do not have discretion. Will County Circuit Court has not weighed in on the issue yet. There are some cases pending in Will County, but um the Will County Circuit Court has not weighed in on that yet. I I also but I I really don't want to get into that discussion with this project because I think this one very clearly meets all of your factors uh were you to consider them, the Lasal factors that I know are have been proposed uh to you. um this project fits the the uh standards of your ordinance of your solar ordinance of the las factors of your special use ordinance. Um so we don't want to get into a debate on the appropriateness of of the laws. We think this is a good project to site. And talking about sighting, I know that was the concern raised before. What what's a good place to site? This is a good one uh to site. Um again, no no residential objectors. It's next to a horse stable. Um everybody seems to be in agreement with this one. So, uh, we are here. I'm the attorney again. The lead developer, Jeremy Price, is here with me. We can answer questions about the project, um, if you have them. So, thank you for your time.

Member Ogala. Thank you. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to attend a land use committee meeting. So, I have a question as far as the uh, poles connecting from your project to come. Do you guys have prepared to bury those poles versus have them above ground? Sure. Jeremy Price, project developer. At at this time, I think we need to look at that request. I'm not prepared to make a statement or definitive answer.

Okay? Because I mean, I would be in support if that were the case. I know I know this area very well. This was my old county board district. It's very close to uh where I go, the grocery store at Walson Creek. And um it is it is uh largely agricultural out there. So having those poles buried would would help with the uh aesthetics of the uh site looking at it when you're looking across you can see out there. You can see for quite a distance and I think that would be very beneficial. So um it would be great if you could find out if you could do that because that is um something that I would I'm going to be requesting.

Okay. Thank you for your comment. the the site will be fully enclosed by a vegetative landscaping on all four sides just from a a visual aesthetics perspective.

Right. And you know I've seen many solar facilities throughout the county especially in eastern county which is where I live and I have not seen one vegetative sighting surrounding the front the back the side wherever. It's not one has ever been sufficient. They die. They're not well kept up. There's weeds. Bushes get buried in the weeds. I've not seen that. And I've also not seen any good vegetation on any um we would talk about all these um pollinator plants and such. I have not seen any particular not one particular solar uh facility that meets the standard of what I would think it should for ground coverage. So that's my that's what I've seen from what we have today already.

We will be just a brief comment. We will be qualifying this project through the department of of Illinois natural resources agria program. So we have to meet certain criteria on that seating mixture which is what we would follow and and I'm aware of um one solar facility in Mo who has agravoltics as well because they have put little sheep out there these poor little things had nothing to eat. So while you do that I've not seen it come to fruition yet. I've heard a lot of talk from a lot of people but I've not seen it. So if you guys can meet that standard that'd be great. We sure hope to be first. Thank you, member Burkwitz.

Thank you, Madame Executive. Uh, so I noted on here that we received um a letter from the Will County Forest Preserve and um there has been some issue when these projects move forward and they're going to plant perennials and it's going to be beneficial species and it winds up they don't survive. um and it winds up being weeds and then there's no mowing and it it is very unsightly in addition with other issues. So given that the forest preserve has actually commented on your project, have you reached out to them or had any contact with them?

We've been in touch with them several times during the development and they own the parcel to to the north or parcels rather. um my memory of of their correspondence was just selecting a different tree species. I I'd have to reread it on the other aspects. So, as far as the planting goes, will would you be willing to work with the forest preserve to find out exactly what's what types of native perennials would succeed there and work with them and make it a project that will um complement our forest preserves and something we know that will survive. Because again, you will have no water s source. And if we have a prairie right next door, that that's that makes it even more important that we have the right plantings in that project. So would you be willing to work with the forest preserve to make sure that you're planting the right species?

We'd be happy to review with the forest preserve district and and my understanding of the abuing preserve is is that it is currently farmed and is planned on being farmed for the next 20 years. just as a yeah we we we want to build that continuity continuity because it at some point in time we may return that to native plantings. So um it it it is important and I guess I'll have to make a motion to add that as a variance then. Yeah, you can't do that here ma'am. No. Okay. Thank you. Member Traneer.

Thank you. Um, I don't believe it's in our ordinance for how these solar arrays should be set up that we're asking you to bury pipes. And it's been brought up a bury poles. It's been brought up a couple of times today. Um, I live in a fully incorporated community in Bowling Brook and we have all kinds of electric poles everywhere. Occasionally when there's a new development, we get them to bury it. Um, in I would say in the homes that have been built since m maybe the 70s, those poles are are buried behind the residences. They're not in the backyard, but we have a good chunk of our community where they are in the backyard. Um, I assume, and I'm going to guess you guys might know, so I'd like to get an answer. um that in these rural communities that their electricity is not buried, that there are electrical poles, big wooden electric poles all over in this farmland because I don't know how else a farmer would get electricity. I don't believe they bury them. Um so I'm just curious.

Yeah, your description was was accurate. It's it's mainly above ground, you know, mainly underground in in urban settings were appropriate. Okay. So, we'd be asking you to do something that no one else in that community does if we were to ask you to bury those polls. Would that be a fair statement? That would be accurate. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, member Nquist. And then Ogala.

Yes. Thank you. That's my district and I know that area fairly well and uh yeah, I believe everything is above ground there. But um refresh my memory, there's only the one neighbor, correct? So in terms of the property to the west is the horse stable and so that is the letter of no objection that we received to the south it's a vacant parcel but they are constructing a home which we proactively addressed with the setbacks to the to the southeast there there is a house who you know did not provide any formal objection or letter of support but I had contacted and then the the eastern partial is farmed and then the northern part are farmed.

Okay. So, they are constructing a home and are they aware of it? They are. We've we've had several conversations over the months as as we did with Creek Township. I thought I saw construction over there. That's why Well, Creek Township is against all solar uh developments at this point regardless. So, okay. Thank you. Thank you.

And before I go on to member, just I I know we're getting it long and we will have a break after we go through all of land use. people are aware we have a we're going to ask the county board members to they should be in their seats and not having outside discussion just a reminder um member Ogala that's okay thank you so I just want to clarify several things one we were not aware of the fact that we could require or request I suppose require the solar facility um companies to bury bury the Kameed pole. So, Kameed does not bury their poles. That's true. But if you come to my house where I live on a farm and not in a municipality, my electricity to my house is buried. It goes under the ground. So, that isn't necessarily true. Comemed lines are above ground, but my connectivity to the comed lines is below ground. We were not aware of this until the the Mount Manhattan Township came and said that they would support a solar facility in their area if they buried these KMED poles these their connectivity poles to Kameed. KMED will not be burying their poles but the connection to Kameed can be buried and we can request that. I think it makes sense that we do that because instead of just having three poles you have six, seven, eight, however many poles standing out in the middle of this farm country. So that is why we're making this request now. We didn't know before. Margarite did research with Kameed and found this out for us. So this is to help people who are not fond of of Kameed, which is not Kameed of solar energy plants in the middle of agricultural areas because it's a different use than than what the use is granted to uh all of Illinois by the state legislature. So, we're trying to make what we do approve

more aesthetically pleasing, which is why we currently go with a agricultural fencing versus chainlink fencing. Those are things we've learned throughout the entire time that we've been working with with solar and the things that we've learned. So, what we did in the beginning, we've changed and asked for other things because we've learned that one, we can, and two, it makes the solar facility project better. So, I just wanted to clarify that. Thank you. I think you gentlemen are good. Thank you very much. All right.

I don't I think we are all set here. Chair pretzel. Anyone else have any land use cases? All right. Before I go back, uh well, we're going to have you close the hearing and then the assistant state attorney would like to make a comment. Thank you. Close public hearing. Second. Motion by uh pretzel, second by Revis. Madam clerk, please call the role. Richmond. Yes. Williams. Dean Schlottman. O Gala. Yes. Yes. Butler. Newquist. Yes. yes. Axley, Brooks,

yes. Winfrey. Bullock. Logan. Freeman. Revis Mitchell. Yes. Ortiz Burkowitz Hickey Costa Traineer Band. Yes.

Okay. Uh 21 affirmative. The public hearing is now closed. Assistant States Attorney Meyer.

So I did say, you know, we wanted to keep some of these comments out of the public hearing uh just to keep the record. So, I did write down a lot of the things that was asked. Um, first I'd just like to say disregard any information that you gathered outside of the public hearing. Um, that's the only source of information you can get. So, um, any personal, uh, discussions you had, site visits, all those sort of things, they were not part of the public hearing. They should not be part of your zoning decision. Um, in this case, also you can't consider information that's not in those LEAL factors that was were distributed to you, uh, that we did training on a month ago. Um you should know that the LEL factors apply to all ant use cases, not just the solar farms. Um so regardless, um you should be considering those for all these projects. Um they're mandatory. They're not suggestive. They're established by the courts. Um and there there's been a number of talk about the hardship factor. Um I look at that hardship factor very close because it talks about the hardship of the land owner, not the hardship of the surrounding uh property owners. And there were some comments about the hardship for the communities. That's not what the factor says. Um and then just finally, I repeat this again like I did in the training. You should be setting yourselves like a court. Um a judge would not get up in the middle of a trial um and start asking questions of people that are not with on the witness stand. They wouldn't go conduct their own analysis. They wouldn't go conduct their own things. You should be cons you should think of yourself like you've seen Law and Order. You've seen all these things. you're sitting up at the uh the judge with the gavl and that's how you're considering the information. So, I think that was everything that everyone had asked about during the public hearing comment period. Um but if anyone has any questions, I'm happy to answer them.

We're asking questions regarding what the assistant states attorney.

Yeah, I and maybe I should be directing this to the land use staff, but it does pertain to the LAL factors. Um, maybe I missed a finer point when we were having our committee of the whole, but I always thought the LEAL factors were just the one through six that are in the staff report. And I noted today, um, Speaker Van Dy brought it to my attention by asking the question that there are nine on here. And I just wonder, is there a reason the staff doesn't report on number seven, eight, and nine? that that is a question for land use why that doesn't include in their um in their reports but um those those are the things that the courts will look at um and there may be some crossover on some of those things land use may be combining them a little bit but they could certainly answer why they format it that way

yeah I it does make me curious thank you very much okay thank you chair pretzel

thank you madam executive first up on today's agenda zoning Case ZC250002, special use permit for the keeping of a farm animal. Variance for maximum accessory building area from 1,800 square ft to 4,253 square ft. Variance for animal units from 5 to 13. Variance for lot frontage from 165 ft to 101.53 ft. Creek Township, commonly known as 24948 South Stateline Road, Creek, Illinois County, Board District number three. I I do want to remind everybody we're just voting on the special use permit for keeping of a farm animal. PCC voted 3 to two recommending to approve the special use permit and land use and development voted 0 to 7 therefore denying the special use permit for the keeping of a uh farm animal. And I so move

motion by pretzel seconded by Revvis. Is there any discussion? Member Hold on a second. Yes. Yep. I'm finding it there. Um Oh, no. You were none. Member Butler.

So, I just want to remind everyone that all that this gentleman is asking for is what he's entitled to. He's asking to a special use permit for horses. is well underneath the amount of horses that he could have and he just wants to have his animals. He's got a um a animal for comfort for his niece, for the the the the pony. Um this is a good man, a good family. They have plenty of land. They're building a barn that will adequate for this. There should be no reason why this gentleman should be uh denied uh this special use permit.

Member Mitchell as a member of uh the land use committee. Um this gentleman has come before us a number of times to uh advocate for various things and I think this one uh might be the most agreeable of them. Uh, and he's committed. He's committed to cleaning up his property and being a good neighbor. And, uh, I'd say yes. I'll say I'll vote for this. Seeing no other discussion, Madam Clerk, please call the RO. Repeat the motion, please.

So, it's special use permit for the keeping of a farm animal. Richmond Williams Dane Slapman. Yes. Ogala. Yes. Pretzel. Yes. Butler. Yes. Newquist. Yes. Yes. Axley. Yes. Brooks. Yes. Winfrey. Bulock. Logan. Yes. Freeman. Revis. Yes. Mitchell. Yes. Ortiz. Yes. Burkowitz. Hickeyi. Costa. Trineer. Van Dine. Yes. 21 in the in the affirmative. The motion carries.

Okay. Next on the agenda, zoning case ZC25051, requesting a map amendment from E1 to E2, Manhattan Township, commonly known as the vacant property of South Ki Key Street, Manhattan, Illinois County Board District number two. PZC and land use were unanimous and I so move. Motion by Pretzel,

seconded by Ogale. Any discussion? Nope. We got to take a um unless member uh Freeman. Okay. So, a previous roll call by Revis, seconded by Costa with member um Freeman being a yes. Motion carries. Next on the agenda, zoning KZC25027, requesting a special use permit for a commercial solar energy facility in Lockport Township, commonly known as 14910 and 14750 South Archer Avenue, Lockport, Illinois County, Board District number nine. PCC voted 6 to zero recommending approval. Land use and development was 4 to1 with four conditions to approve the special use permit for a commercial solar energy facility. And I so move

motion by motion by pretzel, seconded by trer. There is discussion. Me. All right. Yep. We have discussion. Right. Member uh Bich. Yeah. Uh Homer Glenn did object to this. They didn't find a legal one, but they did object. And that's my district. I used to have this district and I know the people that live there and I feel it's a hardship for them people. So, I'm going to be voting no to it. And I think everybody should recognize that there is a hardship for those people. Thank you, member Ogala.

Thank you. As I did get up and go and talk to the back to Marjorie from land use, I was going to ask her to come up to discuss um the the changes that I'll make amend amen motions to uh amend the cases regarding the polls the com the polls connectivity polls to come at it. So here she comes. That way everyone knows what I discussed with her. Well, I have to know before I can say it.

Margaret Kennyville County Land Use. So, the county board in approving the solar uh regulations under the zoning ordinance. The intent behind uh utility connections was to have everything underground. What has become practice is a lot of the solar companies have come forward requesting conditions which then have been adopted as part of these special use permits for solar facilities to allow them to interconnect above ground. Um initially we did not have conversation with KMED but we were told by the developers that come required them to basically mirror what their

um infrastructure would be for the property. So if they needed four riser poles that KMED would bring to the property, the developer would have to bring four poles um to interconnect. And we have recently learned from Kameed that that is not the case. Um Kameed may be bringing in, you know, however many poles they need. If they need four poles, they'll put four poles to the property. But the developer could vary and interconnect that way. Um it just costs more on the developer side. So with that, um, the cases before you today were actually in the process of going through reviews and being scheduled for public hearing. Um, so we did not remove that condition. Um, so they are before you. You would just have to strike that condition, which I believe on this particular case, it's condition number three that states on-site power utility lines um would allow to be above ground if um the utility provider required it. Okay. So, there's confusion, right? I can see. Okay. So, as Margarit said, in the beginning, in the beginning, the intent was to have everything underground. Okay. But what happened was they were told that they the developer said, "Well, we can't do that." Several months ago, I said, "Margarite, can you look into this?" Because we never really looked into it. She called Kameed. She had a whole detailed report of everything regarding the situation and learned that Kameed doesn't have a problem. Kameed's polls will be above ground as she stated. They need three, four, whatever. But the connectivity pulls of the developer to KMED do not have to be above ground. The developer didn't want to do it because it costs them more money. This is 30 40 years that we're looking at. So asking them to bury these their connectivity lines to the Kameed poles to me is is the right thing to do for the

community. So I'm going to ask a clarify. So you adding to are you asking to add a condition? So we just what we need to do is just remove under staff recommendations number three which says on-site power lines utility connections will be allowed above ground if required by the electric electrical utility provider as as she stated does not require them to do it. Therefore I will be removing um condition number three or staff recommendation. Just going to have them check to make sure it's doing exactly what you want by removing instead of adding the condition. That's

and you so move whatever we I'll second that

number three. So, as Mary and I just discussed, um I think if you just strike it, it then gives the uh developer the the ability to do whatever they'd like. Uh so we would suggest that you amend it to require them to bury um bury it. Uh and that makes it clearer that you intend for them to bury it rather than just striking it. Um otherwise, I think it leaves it open to whatever they want to do. Of course, they're going to do the cheaper option most likely. Okay. Then the on-site power lines and utility connections shall be buried because that's what we should make a motion to change number three to that.

Yeah. Motion by Ogala, second by uh Revis. Any discuss wording isn't perfect. Yeah. Any discussion on on the additional uh condition? Member Butler? Yeah. I just want to say that every home that is built has the option of underground or above. It's that common. So either way is feasible. But you know, you're voting on that. We're asking specifically for it to be under. Okay. Just you know, member Richmond,

I I agree wholeheartedly on that. And I think it for the overall I mean it's it's aesthetically pleasing but also I think from from an overall safety perspective if it's buried underground it's not above ground and is you know so I think going forward I think that'd be a good thing for this board to always consider. All right so we are now no more think I see anyone else. Uh I can't we have previous role by Nquist seconded by Winfrey. All in favor? Any opposed? Motion carries. Now, uh, Mr. Butler, you need to reenter that as amended. Mr. Pretzel. Oh, what? I I'm sorry. Yes. Okay. So, thank you.

Yeah. I'm sorry. Yes, Mr. Pretzel. I'm looking right at you, too. Stony Case ZC25027 requesting special use permit for commercial solar energy facility in Lockport Township, 14910 and 14750 South Archer Avenue in Lockport, County Board District number nine. uh with the amendment and I so move. Motion by Pretzel, seconded by Winfrey. Previous roll call. Madame clerk, please call the role. Richmond Williams. Richmond, you were no. Okay. Williams, Dean Schlapman, no. Ogala, no. Pretzel, no.

Butler, no. Newquest. No. Oxley. Yes. Brooks. Yes. Winfrey. Bulock. Logan. Freeman. Revisit. Yes. Mitchell. No. Ortiz. Burkowitz. Hickeyi. Costa. Trineer. Yes. Van. Yes.

14 in the affirmative. The motion carries. Next on the agenda number four, zoning KZ ZC25041 requesting a special use permit for a commercial solar energy facility. Variance for number of required mowings from 5 to one time. Variance for maximum ground cover plant height from 13 to 36 in. Troy Township, commonly known as the vacant county line road, 10,000 feet east of the intersection of Baltz Road and County Line Road. Joliet, Illinois County Board District number three. PCC voted 2 to four recommending denial. Land use and development voted 1 to four, therefore uh thereby denying special use permit for the commercial solar energy facility as it applies and ISO move. Second

motion by pretzel, seconded by Ravish. Any discussion on this item, member Traneer? And then we'll go. I'm sure this might have just been a um mistaken reading, but you said county board district 1 and I thought I mean three and I thought this was in county board district 1. Okay. I'm not sure what I said. I apologize.

No, that's right. I just wanted to be clear. I have recently been out in this area actually buying some native plants. Um so I'm I'm fairly familiar with the area. Um, I do think that this case meets the LEAL factors and the additional three factors that have been added um over and above what the staff report is. So, I am going to be in support of this. Thank you. Thank you, man. Um, member Ogala.

Thank you. So before we move any forward, I'd like a make to make a motion to amend this to remove number three as it's written uh for the connectivity poles and electrical poles to say that they can be above ground. I would like to amend it to say that these poles would be buried. Second motion by Gala, seconded by uh Oxley. Is there any discussion on that? If you I know we have lights on if anyone any discussion on that. All right, madame clerk, please call the role. Richmond, yes. Williams, Dean Schlottman, yes. Oallo, yes. Yes. Butler. Newquist, yes. Oxley, yes. Brooks,

yes. Winfrey, Bulock. Logan, yes. Raymond, Revis, Mitchell, yes. Ortiz Burkowitz Hickey Costa Traineer Vine. Yes. 20 from the affirmative. The amendment carries. The motion carries. Thank you. Thank you. I still would like to make a comment though. Yeah. Let's get Can we get We're going to have the motion again now put out as amendment amended. Yeah. zoning case ZC25041 requesting a special use permit for a commercial solar energy facility as amended in I7 motion by protel seconded by Revis member Ogala.

Thank you and thank you for that clarification. So um we heard we heard a lot of people speak on this. We have a lot of papers on our ta on our desk and we've um that we've received here today regarding this um this DC 2541 and um I really think we need to look at respecting the local planning of our communities and this one fails to to conform to the planning that has been out there for I don't know how long their comprehensive plan has been in place but I think that we need to look at that this isn't just a cut and dry situation. that each each solar facility is unique as to where it's proposed. And um with that, I would hope that everyone will be joining me with a no vote. Thank you.

Member uh Dean Schlottman.

Thank you. Um so like I said, I live in this area and this is not something the people in this area want. And I think it goes to show I believe the owner of this property lives in Neapville, so they don't have to live next to it. So their, you know, investment, what they're looking at or how it's going to affect the area feels maybe a little different from the people who are actually next to it. And Mr. Richmond has spoken to this many, many times. You need to ask yourself, is this something you would want next door to you? And if the people in the area are telling you no, if the comprehensive plans are telling you no, if you have multiple um other municipalities telling you no, this is not something that is going to fit within our community, you know, as a board. I would hope that we would support the people who live in that area. And I will be a no vote.

Thank you, Member Band. Thank you. Um I also uh considered the LEL Sinclair factors for land use cases and hopefully this is the last time I'll have to refer to those factors but I do believe that they do fail. Um the majority of the factors fail on this particular project so I will also be a null. Thank you. All right. Seeing no further comments, madame clerk. Oh, madam clerk, please call the role. Richmond, no.

Williams, Angelottman, Ogala, no. Pretzel, no. Butler, Newquist. no. Oxley, no. Brooks, no. Winfrey. Bulock. Logan Freeman Revis Mitchell. No. Ortiz Hickey. Really? Costa R.

So yes, we're going to add um members uh Ortiz and Freeman would like to be yeses. So, just a second while we get the official count. You have seven. Six.

16 on the negative. The motion fails. Next on the agenda, number five, zoning case ZC25043, requesting a spe special use permit for a commercial solar energy facility. A variance for number of required mowings from 5 to one time. Variance from maximum ground cover plant height from 13 to 36 in. Variance for sideyard solar energy system setback from adjacent property from 50 ft to 27 ft. Troy Township, commonly known as Vacant County Line Road, southeast corner of the intersection of West Black Road and South County Line Road, Joliet, Illinois County Board District number one. PCC was 2 to four to recommend denial of the special use permit. Land use and development was 1 to four. Therefore, denying the special use permit for a commercial solar energy facility and I so move.

Motioned by Przel, second Mitchell, second by Mitchell. Member Ogala. Thank you. So yes, again, just like the other solar facilities that we discussed today, I would like a motion to amend to strike number three um and replace that with the request to um bury all connectivity and energy lines on this property. Motion by Ogala, second. Seconded by Oxley. Is there any discussion? Madame clerk, please call the role. Richmond, yes. Williams, Dean Schlottman, yes. Ogallop, yes. Yes. Butlerquist. Oxley, yes. Brooks, yes. Winfrey.

Bulock. Logan, yes. Raymond, Revis, Mitchell, yes. Ortiz, Burkowitz, Hickey, Costa, Traineer, Van, yes. 22 in the firm. The motion carries. Okay. Again, zoning KZC25043 requesting a special use permit for a commercial solar energy facility as amended and I so moved. Motion by Pretzel, seconded by Oxley, previous roll call by Revis. All right, madam. Any discussion then? Madame clerk. Oh, you have Yep.

Member Olla. Thank you. Yes. Hold on. I just turned your opposite. As I stated for uh zoning case that was number four up above for ZC25043 again this situation is very much like the previous one ZC25-041 in that it it does not follow the comprehensive plan that the community has taken the time to do as well as all the objections that come with this case. So I would I would hope that everyone would consider voting no for this. Thank you. See no further discussion. Madame clerk, please call the role. Richmond

Williams. Dean Schlottman. Ogala. Wretzel. No. Butler. No. Newquist. no. Axley, no. Brooks, no. Winfrey. Bulock. Logan. No. Freeman. Revvis Mitchell. No. Ortiz.

Burkowitz. Hickey. Costa R 16 in the negative. The motion fails. Next. Number six, zoning case ZC25046. This is a map amendment from A1 to E2 in Green Garden Township, vacant property on South 88th Avenue, Frankfurt, Illinois County Board District number three. PZC and land use Use and Development unanimously voted to approve the map amendment from A1 to E2. And I move I so move

motion by Pretzel, seconded by Revis. Is there any discussion? Any discussion? Madame clerk, please call the role. Richmond, yes. Williams, yes. Dane Schlottman, yes. Ogala, yes. Pretzel, yes. Butler, yes. Newquist. yes. Oxley, yes. Brooks, Winfrey, Bulock. Logan, yes. Freeman, yes. Revis, yes. Mitchell, yes. Ortiz, yes. Burkowitz, Hickeyi, Costa, Trineer, Oh, Bandai, yes. 22 and the firm. The motion carries.

Number eight, zoning KZ ZC25052. This is a map amendment from A1 to I3. Did we skip one? Did we skip? Yeah. Sorry, guys. Number seven, zoning K ZC25048, special use permit for ancillary liquor service in Homer Township 14508 Archer Avenue, Lockport, Illinois County Board District number nine. PZC voted six to zero with three conditions to recommend approval for special use permit. Land use and development was five to zero with three conditions approving a special use permit for ancillary liquor service. And I so moved motion by pretzel, seconded by Revvis. All right. Previous roll call by Oh, I'm sorry. Um,

Mr. I just want everybody to know that uh our township board when I was the supervisor, we uh had a plan commission meeting and they were in favor of this. Right. So we have a motion, a second a previous roll call by Trir, seconded by Freeman. All in favor? Any opposed? Motion carries. Now number eight, zoning case CC25052 map amendment from A1 to I3 DuPage Township 13141 South High Road, Romeoville, Illinois County Board District number nine. PCC voted 4 to2 to recommend approval of the map amendment from A1 to I3. Land use and development voted 5 to zero approving the map amendment from A1 to I3. And I so move

motion by pretzel, seconded by Ravvice. Member Mitchell. Uh I would like to make a motion to amend uh this case uh to um uh amend it to I1 with a special use to allow for RV parking. Second, hold on. Hold on. I see.

So, no, you can't you can't require them to have different zoning. Uh you can't amend the zoning they're requesting. They could ask to amend the zoning. Um but they they have a right to ask for the zoning they're seeking. It's not like a condition where you're putting things on there. They've asked for the I3. Um they're entitled to have a a vote on that I3 zoning. Let me ask Margarite to get us action. Yeah. Do you have questions for Margarit? Yes, we do. Okay. All right. Although I will gonna the attorney.

I again just posing um information to the state's attorney. Um, our zoning ordinance does grant the county board the ability to um modify a map amendment request at the county board. It is within their um purview. Um, but they also have the ability to remand the case. So, um, in terms of our legal counsel present, um, our zoning ordinance does state the county board has the authority to um, approve with modifications. And and may I add may I add something to what's happening here? They want to do business. We want them to do business. We're concerned about it being I3. I I don't necessarily if if it's allowed, we should be able to do it. There should not be any obstacles. We're going to we're going to let this be resolved before I continue with questions because the question is we want to make sure that we can appropriately do this. This section is uh 155-16.30H number one. So it says upon receipt of the planning and zoning commission's findings and recommendation, the county board may act to approve the proposed zoning map amendment. Approve the proposed zoning map amendment with modifications. um for example, reducing the land area or recommend another zoning classification or deny the proposed zoning map amendment. And then it continues saying the county board may also return the application to the planning and zoning commission for further consideration together with a written explanation for the reasons doing so.

And this does go back to the original. Didn't they ask for the I1 initially a year ago? for Oh, A1 with a special. Okay. [Music] Well, if they can take A1, they can take I1. This would make me happy. Makes more sense. Everybody would be happy. Member Mitchell, just to be clear, you want to do an I I one with a special use is what you're asking. Don't fail me, Mary. Let's go.

Come on, Mary. Come to us. So you do have the authority to change the request for map amendment. You do not have the authority to ask add a special use permit to it. So you can change it to I1. He's not going to be able to do what he's requesting to do. So that's where we stand.

So just for clarity, what you're saying is we can change it to I1. So then does he come back next month and ask for a map amendment so that he special a special I'm sorry I was map is in my head use amendment so that he can do business he would have to go through the he'd have to apply for a special use pro permit and go through that process. So that's crap.

We're gonna just answer some clarifying questions regarding what this process is here. We're member Ter. So if he's already barred right now from coming back for special use permit until the time lapses, what changes? Is it because we've changed it to I um one? Does that then start the clock over again on the special use? And to me, modify is modify. It doesn't say modify but not not issue a special use. So to me modify is modify. A lot of brains going back there. You you created a nice question. Yeah. That's what I do. Yeah.

You're done talking anyway. So I'll get you. They're all in question, but they're going to be directed towards them anyway. So we can do this. Um Yeah. Good time for a recess. We can go to the bathroom. Okay. Motion to recess for 5 minutes. I have a motion to recess for 15 minutes. Second. All in favor?

Any opposed? We'll see you in 15. I can eat all me. [Music] What that mean?

All right, I'm going to take it right to the assistant state attorney so they can reply.

Yeah, we are we are back in session here. So before we took a break, there was a a discussion about whether what the ordinance says when it says they may amend the zoning. Um we believe that is to allow you in a case where the applicant is okay with going forward with the I1. Uh I think the applicant has to be consulted to see whether they would accept uh a different zoning classification because you are putting restrictions on the use of their land. Um, so if the applicant wants to come up and indicate they would be okay with the I1 zoning, we could go forward with that. Um, but they cannot be forced to change the zoning on their land.

I I know I think they need the context. Sure. And and so if if the applicant were to take the I1 zoning, um there is a secondary piece, then they would need to come back for a special use permit relative to their um I I think it would be next month or the following month because they the clock uh we have to calculate that date, but it would be not at this meeting because they've previously been denied. And so the

Okay. No, no. And I'm going to tell you why I'm going to be hesitant to this. I mean, I am not going to start a procedure that we are going to start falling into every time something like this happens. I want to be able to protect what is going going what this request is, but I'm not just going to willy-nilly throw somebody up here. That's not So, I we need to make sure that this is a procedure that is responded and that we I mean that is I mean we're out of the hearing. So, I just I just don't want to start something that in two months something very similar happens and we're doing, you know, something again and, you know, that we maybe shouldn't be doing. So, if if if you the legal advice is that we can call the applicant up after the hearing to change something, then

certainly this is a unique scenario that we are doing in response to a motion. Also, one final piece of information. Regardless of whether it's I1 or I uh I3, there's still a legal objection. The vote the vote total does not change. So, whatever you ask to to see if he would accept a change in zoning uh questions. Nope. It is just simply whether he wants to uh would he be okay with his property being zoned I1. If if he if he says no, then we go to

Okay. What? I I don't know if it's the owner here or the attorney. What if he cannot answer for the at the owner? So, okay, sir, you go on. We like to do things a little unique. I mean, come back. Welcome back.

Um, my client bought the property four years ago. Um, he went through the whole process with the special use, was denied, and here he comes. Uh, it it's absolutely clear from both Romeoville and Lamont that he can't do anything with trucking. And now we're going back to something I won and I'm trying to, you know, we're going through them and and again it's it's it's it's like where are we, you know, and you know, in terms of special use conditions, what I mean, we're willing to accept that I3 and put it with the conditions, you know, that he had before. But to basically tell him to go I1 and and now I got to go look through the whole zoning thing to see what I1 does and anything else. and and you got I3 right next door. There's no I1 right there. The Romeoville equivalent is right next to it. Um it doesn't it you're putting us in a real real funny quandery at a time of voting, you know, where we haven't even had a chance to even think about that, look at that, anything else. And on top of it, it's been four years and he wants to develop and he wants to start, you know, Scott so far along in terms of engineering, wants to get it done. That's all we're not answer. That's why I asked if we have to answer questions. So we he So I I am I know we you said we're putting would my what I'm hearing is no. Okay. Thank you.

Yeah. Yeah.

So now I have to we are in the middle of a discussion. We're in the middle. We're in a middle discussion. Um, I we left off with you, Member Mitchell. Do you have anything else before I continue to go on? No. Okay. You don't have to. No, you don't have to. Okay. Are we Are we still in discussion? We are still in discussion on this motion. Yes. Um, well, because he has to. No, I'm not on the motion because we were told we were we Yeah, we were That's what I'm saying. Yeah. So, no longer. We're not Yeah, that's where I was going. We're now on the original motion since he did not. Is that Is that what I need to do? Yep. Thank you.

Um it's I'm going to say I'm I'm going to I am going to vote no um to the I3 because Romeoville has expressed they do not want an an I3 there. However, um I'm going to with that I'm just going to withdraw my motion, okay? Because they don't want it. So I withdraw the motion. Thank you. That's all you need, Jill. Thank you. All right. Now, we're going to continue on discussion on the uh agenda item. I've lost track of where we're at here. No. Yes, I know that, but I'm just going in order here. Who's There's Mr. Revish.

Thank you, Madam Executive. I am prepared to vote on this uh as it is today. No changes. uh the items on our LEAL Sinclair factors. Just looking at number one, uh the existing uses uh and zoning of nearby property. Uh that one uh it speaks, you know, it works. It's not like there's a problem in terms of the nearby property and the zonings. Uh and then I would also just like to say the property is on an island in terms of trucks just like uh I don't know if he was the attorney or whatever his role was. you know, there's the the clearance issue on one side coming in and then the weight ton limit on the other. So, I'm prepared to vote on this as is. Uh thank you to the applicant for bringing it forward and uh I encourage all the other board members to vote yes.

Thank you. Member Traneer and then Burowit.

Thank you, Madame Executive. Um, I don't know this part to be true, but I've been told that the property owner is more than willing to annex to the village of Romeoville and that the village of Romeoville would like to annex the property. If that were to happen, does that change the zoning? Do they then get to reszone it under the municipal rules uh even though we may have uh zoned it I3? So we, the reason I'm asking is we can we can approve this I3. He can go forward and build his uh storage facility. The village can annex it. They can change the zoning to whatever they want to change it to. Um that makes it conforming to storage. Again,

what your There's a lot of assumptions there. So what is your question to the state attorney? I'd like to know if the municipality absorbs this property if they can change the zoning. They certainly can. they they would go through their do they have the same zoning setup that we have that uh I3 is the most intensive that I and that trucking goes along with it. I mean is that typical maybe you don't know about this particular village but is it typical for a village's zoning numbers to match that of the county? I I'm not sure. Is there any way for land use or somebody to tell it? Well, I I don't know if they're going to know all the different Now she's shaking her head now. There's 32 different municipalities. I'm sure they all have their own. Yeah.

So, the village of Romeoville could annex it ostensibly, even force annex it, I imagine, because it's small enough parcel. Um, and they can reszone it to whatever they want if they do that. Correct. The the use would be grandfathered, but there would be they could change the zoning within the grandfather. Yes.

Right. And they get to grandfather it. So, I'm going to ask my fellow board members who seem to be supporting this land owner to vote yes today. And if the village doesn't like the fact that it's zoned, you know, I3, let them ask the property and grandfather the use and and and zone it to whatever they want it to be. I think that's a another possible, you know, way to get this guy what he wants and for us to try to do the right thing for the property owner and meet the Lel factors because it does meet the factors in my opinion. Everything around there is I3 with the exception of a little bit of property to the south and even that is being used for like a landscaping business and stuff. We the the owner has to have his clients abide by the weight limit of that road. um they can't get underneath that whatever you want to call that bar that goes on the road. Anything under 13, anything over 133 or 136, whatever it is. To me, this seems like a a good win for uh for the land owner and a way for the county to move forward. So, that's that.

Thank you. That's I'm just asking my fellow board members to support it. Thank you. Thank you, member Oxley. Yes, I totally agree with Mr. Revis and Mr. Traneer. Um, what else you want to do here with this property? Nobody's going to build a house there. It's next to all the heavy stuff. I say we take the vote. All right. I do not see any more discussion items here. Madame clerk, uh, please call the And just so you know, since there is a legal objection, we do need a, uh, 3-4 vote. Richmond Williams, Dean Schlottman. Yes. Ogala Russell Butler. Yes.

Newquest Yes. Axley. Yes. Brooks. Yes.

Winfrey. Bulock. Logan, Freeman, Revvis, Mitchell, Ortiz, Burkowitz, Hickeyi, Costa, Traineer, and Yes. 17 in the affirmative. The motion carries. Zoning case ZC25054. Another map amendment from A1 to E1. Wesley Township 2013 West Mantino Road, Wilmington, Illinois County Board District number one. Both PCC and land use were unanimous with full support recommending approval of the map amendment from A1 to E1 and I so move.

Second butler. Motion by Pretzel, seconded by Butler. Is there any discussion? Madame clerk, please call the role. Richmond Williams. Dean Schlottman. Yes. Ogala, yes. Russell, yes. Butler, yes. Newquist. yes. Axley, yes. Brooks, yes. Winfrey, Bulock, Logan, yes. Freeman, yes. Revis Mitchell, yes. Ortiz, Hickeyi, yes. Costa R, yes. 22 in the affirmative. The motion carries.

All right. On to number 10. Zoning KZ ZC250. Special use permit for a commercial solar energy facility. Variance for maximum ground cover plant height from 13 inches to 36. Variance for number of required mowings from five times to one time. Creek Township V beam beis road located approximately 1,780 ft north of the intersection of Bemis Road and Stony Island Avenue County Board District number three. PCC voted 6 to zero with four conditions for a commercial solar energy facility. Land use and development voted three to two with four conditions to approve special use permit for a commercial solar energy facility and I so move

motion by pretzel seconded by Butler. Is there any discussion? Member Ogala. Thank you. I would like to make to make a motion to strike uh condition number three and to change it to put actually change item number three um to say to bury the connectivity poles to comment. Second that motion to to amend by member Ogala, seconded by Oxley. Any discussion on the motion? Um do we have we have a clean role, don't we? Previous by uh Mitchell, seconded by D. Oh, this is just the amendment to Barry. Yeah. Uh, previous by Mitchell, seconded by Dean Schlotman. All in favor?

I. Any opposed? The motion carries. All right. Mr. I'm gonna read again. Um, zoning case ZC250, special use permit for commercial solar energy facility as amended. And I so move. Motion by Pretzel, seconded by Trir. Any discussion? Any discussion? Previous. Pre roll call. Madam clerk, please call the role. Richmond. Yes. Williams. Or Dean Schlottman. No. Ogala. Yes. Pretzel. Yes. Butler. No. Newquest. No. Axley. No. Brooks.

Yes. Winfrey. Bulock. Logan. Yes. Freeman. Revis Mitchell. Yes. Ortiz Burkowitz. Yes. Hickeyi Costa Rain. Yes.

17 in the affirmative. The motion carries. Okay. Okay, the next land use and development committee meeting will be Thursday, August 7th, 2025. Thank you. Thank you, Chair Pretzel. Moving on to finance committee, Chair Nquist. Okay. Good afternoon, everybody. We have a consent agenda, but I would like to make a motion to remove uh letter A from the consent agenda. I believe we need to vote on that separately. Okay. I don't think we have to. Yeah, I don't think we have to do anything. So with that room so I have been asked uh before Oh so should we do the

yes one

okay so then I would like to make a motion to approve the consent agenda which consists of B transferring appropriations within various county budgets c appropriating grant funds in the coroner's budget D appropriating stipen payments for elected officials e appropriating funds in the one-time grants budget. F. Assignment of tax sales certificates. G. Declaring vehicles as surplus and authorizing disposal. H. Declaring various equipment surplus and authorizing disposal. I, land use departmental budget appropriation of a payment by the Joliet Enterprise Zone. Um, and J, appropriating Illinois Housing Development Authority grant funds. Motion by motion by Nqua, seconded by Ogal. All in favor?

Any opposed? Motion carries. So, we'll now move back to before you go on to your monthly finance, we'll go. Actually, why don't you just finish? Sorry. Um, it was a consent agenda. Yeah. So, I just did motion. No. Do you want to go number two? So, going back to Well, why don't you go to finish your note? You just did you just read off number one. They are on consent agenda. You didn't read off number two. Okay. Number two are the monthly financial reports to be placed on file and I so move. Motion by Nquis, seconded by Traneer. Previous roll call by Ogala, seconded by or um Winfrey. All in favor.

Any opposed? Motion carries. So we are going back to number one A. Um okay. And I'm going this is the one I have to read the statement first. Okay. All right. The next item of business for the county board is a consideration of an ordinance ordinance authorizing the issuance of one or more series of alternate revenue bonds of the county in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed 200,845,000 for the purpose of refunding and purchasing certain of the county's outstanding alternate revenue source bonds. Now I'll go back to you chair.

Okay. So item A2-192, ordinance authorizing the issuance of general obligation alternate revenue bonds not to exceed 200,845,000 for the purpose of refunding and purchasing certain of the county's outstanding bonds from series 2015 2016 and I so move motion by motion by um Nquis seconded by Winfrey. Any discussion? We do have someone here who can answer questions uh if anybody has any. So far I see none. So motion second. Is there do we have a clean previous? Madam clerk, please call the role. Richmond.

Williams. Dean Schlapman. Ogala. Yes. Pretzel. Yes. Butler. Yes. Newquist. Yes. yes. Oxley, yes. Brooks, yes. Winfrey, yes. Bulock, yes. Logan, yes. Freeman, yes. Ravvice, yes. Mitchell, yes. Ortiz, Burkowitz, Hickeyi, yes. Costa,

Traineer, Van 22 and affirming the motion carries. And that's all I have with the exception of the next finance committee meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, August 5th. Thank you. Thank you. Moving on to public works and transportation. Chair Triner.

Good afternoon everybody. Um I understand a good time was had by all at the public works and transportation meeting this month. Unfortunately, I was not there, but I understand we have a consent agenda with the following items. Uh item A, confirming award of contract to Austin Tyler um for some resurfacing uh on River Road from East frontage to Prairie Creek Bridge. Item letter B confirming award of contract to Iriccoy paving uh for Washington District Road District resurfacing Yates Avenue from Kentucky Road to County Line Road in County Board District 2. Item C, appropriating 1,24,100 of transportation funds for acquisition of necessary rideway uh for improvements along Lairway Road in County Board District 4. Uh item D, appropriating $54,460 of transportation funds for acquisition of rightaway um for and costs associated with the improvements for improvements for Francis Road from Galer to I80 in County Board District 5. Item E, authorizing approval of the establishment of the altered speed zone along Division Street in County Board District 5. Letter F, authorizing approval of establishment of an altered speed zone along Planefield Neapville Road in County Board District 9. Item G, authorizing approval of the lengthening of altered speed zone along Planefield Neighborville Road in County Board Districts 9 and 10. And I so move. Motion by Traneers, seconded by Ogale. All in favor?

I. Any oppose? Motion carries. And then we have item number two. um 25-208 adopting the will county fiscal year 2026 through 2031 transportation improvement program and I so move motion by Traneer seconded by Winfrey member Ballage and so I make a motion to remove 143rd Street project from the plan

motion uh by Ballage seconded by was it you Mr. Butler, is there any discussion on the removal? Any discussion on? Yes. Okay, ma'am.

Thank you. I would just like to say why it's important for us to remove this for some of the things that we may have forgotten. Our studies predicted 20,000 cars in 2050, but own 22,000 cars in 2040. So, our studies indicate that we're declining. So, we have less less cars that will be coming our way. If if we do this, I am not quite sure whether this happens or not, but we'll be if we would do a five lane on 143rd Street, we would be adding more lane miles. If we have more lane miles, then I would assume that we need more employees because we need more employees um for snow plowing and repairs and such like that. So that would be an increase in the cost for us for this particular project. In the past, we've noticed that both the village and the township have supported the the three-lane option and they have not supported the the um five lane option. As we know, our phase studies from phase one to phase two can take seven to 10 years. so much changes in the meantime and and numbers are some of the things that change as a number of populations whether it be commercial or not that doesn't get discussed in here and we don't really have a discussion about it nor do we even think about it if we recall back in February 24 county board voted 129 to cease moving forward with five lanes and entertain a three-lane option which is supported by both the village and the township um we passed that resolution as a county board the Then the several days later the resolution was then vetoed for a couple of reasons. One was uh traffic demands or um were not addressed yet. We see that the traffic proposal will go down. So that doesn't make any sense. Another reason is that we had safety concerns. Well, if we had safety concerns that go back to 2009, I need to ask why is it that we've not done

anything about the safety concerns such as lower the speed limit, add stop, more stop signs or stop lights prior to this time, 2009 to 25 is quite a few years. In addition to that, we had um traffic study which told us that between 2013 and 2017, those four years, we had 202 crashes. But was not recognized was the fact that during this time 159th Street was under construction pushing the majority of cars to 143rd Street that increased the tra the traffic accidents and typically they happened at Crim Road which we definitely know needs to be um needs to be addressed. So that's that's one thing that needs to be addressed. um the statement that there is a there was also a statement in the veto of a two-lane is a danger to the public and again I go back to if it's a danger why haven't we addressed any of these things prior to any any decision going on back from 2009 okay so finally I just want to know want everyone to know that there is an expansion plan for both Bell Road and 151st Street so I think that by changing this plan and removing it, we would be doing a a good service to the residents of 143rd Street. You know, we sit here in these meetings and we hear when you adopt this five-year plan every year and you can change it. Then we're told, well, we really can't change the plan. We can't change the contract. So, I'm really confused how we change it. And we don't hear much input after the phase one study and the public hearings are done to to till to that's over. So, during that time, we're not hearing any of this information. So county board members are voting upon the information that they know at the time and so it's very confusing and that's why I think with this particular project we've seen it. If you look at the maps on your desk which shows 143rd and it was predicted to be a commercial quarter you'll see

that this quarter is is really residential and agriculture. We have farms out here and we have the um many homes up and down this 143rd Street. I've driven on 143rd Street many times, many different times of the day. And I can tell you I've never had even during rush hour, I've never been sitting and waiting at any particular time. Are there accidents? There's always an accident road. People are stupid when they drive. They talk on their phone. They they text on their phone. They do many different things. They don't stop at a stop sign. They don't stop at a stoplight. You can absolutely never prevent accidents from happening. But I do think what's right is to change this plan and make sure that this would have be a three-lane with improvements at intersections and such and let the people in Homer Glenn live the quality of life that they the reason why they live there and the reason why they want to continue living there and not force five lanes upon them. So I hope everyone will vote to support removing 143rd Street. Thank you.

Thank you. remember Butler. So with this project, we're we're going into a community. They pride themselves on being a dark skies community, which is, you know, no lights. They want it natural. It's a very small, close community and it has this road that goes through it. Everyone needs a road, so it's okay. But they don't want their neighborhood changed. They don't want a four-lane highway with lights and sound barriers going right through the middle of their town. Who are we to tell them that they have to change their lives? Why do some of the people on this board feel that it's okay to defend land right uh land owners rights when it comes to solar but they don't feel like it's important to defend landowner rights when it talks about the property in which they live. It should be just as important. Now I had proposed some ideas that we could do to to to help this process along. I think there's a lack of communication. I know that there are members on this board that feel that staff members are much more qualified to run government. Why we were elected, I don't know. But I do believe that I was elected to represent my people and if something comes up, I go out and talk to them and I find out exactly what they want. And I don't believe that happened here. And it certainly didn't happen in Mon.

Now we spent $6 million of government grant money, so we can't turn it around. We should just give this land to Homer Township or the village or both and be done with it. Member Bich.

Yeah. I just want to point out because it's so long ago and there's new people on the board and they don't know exactly what happened because it's been about uh close to two years now and uh Homer Township filed an legal objection which would require if it was land use 17 votes. Homer Township. It's I know don't work for this. I said that, but Homer Township filed that legal objection. I filed a legal objection objection as a resident because I live right off 143rd Street and the village of Homer Glenn filed a legal objection. So, you know, everyone's made it real clear we don't want it. And it don't only affect my district because there's three county board districts that are affected by this. Mr. Oxley's district and Sherry Williams districts affected. They got the western end of Homer Township. And then Destiny and Raquel, they have the Lockport Heights portion. So granted, yeah, I have a bigger portion, but guess what? It's bad for all all of us because the people don't want it. Those poor people in Lockport Heis will go nuts. They're They want a solar placed over there. Then they want to have a They're surrounded by warehouses right now. And what do you think's going to happen if this go this road goes through? Because the other part that connects from Route 59 is going to eventually end up at 143rd and 355. That's already a done deal with IDOT. So then just moving forward, all those properties that are cattle ranches over there, you think they're going to be able to keep their cattle with all the noise? The answer is no. So they're going to sell. Who's going to buy it? Warehouses. So now what are you going to have? You're going to have the trucks and you're going to have a lot of

trucks. And then when it goes east, the people in Orland Park are going to lose their marbles because all that land that they have to take to go east is going to cost a ton of money, a real lot of money. And then when it goes east further, when you get out of Orland Park, it's supposed to end up at Cicero. So you can't tell me that this is just a simple little road, you know, county road. It's not. It's an expressway, a big giant expressway going from Route 59 to Cyro. That's how the when it's all done, that's what the project will be. Now, I don't even know how many miles that is, but I bet it's just as long as as uh 94, you know, the part that goes from the south side up to the downtown Chicago. So, you know what? That road will be a huge hardship. I like to use that word hardship because I know that's the legal term that's got to be used. It's a huge hardship for everybody that lives in Homer Township. And going forward, it'll be a hardship to everyone east. So, I just hope that the board votes to stop this now. Thank you. Member Ravish.

Uh I have a clarifying question. I think we need uh executive director of transportation Ronald up here. Is he executive director? Is that his name? He's a director. Yes. Director or super. I knew it was director. I didn't know. Executive director is right. Oh, no.

Uh Mr. Ronaldson, my uh question is pretty simple. Uh with the project as it sits today, the the four lanes expanding to four lanes, that would take 116 parcels or part parts of 116 parcels. Correct. That's correct. And so if we were to switch to the threelane option, which is favored by many of the board members who do not want to see the fourlane option or the two lane with the suicide, the alternative option, um, how many parcels does that take? Well, until we do a full design of that, I can't tell you.

But in committee, you had estimated, you did some of the early preliminary work and ran some. we would reduce the impact to many of those parcels. We would still need a majority of those parcels and I think the estimated number was like 108, right? Or am I holding you to a number that you don't Yeah, I don't recall that number, but Okay. I thought that was the difference. So anyway, uh that was just my question really getting to the point that even if we reduce it down to a two-lane option with the suicide lane in the middle, parcels still get taken. Yes. Okay.

Yeah. with with a threelane open ditch, it would pretty much be the same amount of rideway. If we go to a curb gutter, there'll be less number of parcels, but a majority of still what we need. So, I think I've already Yeah, I I understand. Thank you. Member Richmond.

Thank you. So, I don't know. I I grew up in Orland in the 60s and 70s. I'm very familiar with 159th Street, 143rd Street and that 159th Street around Wolf Road had a handful of houses. Um I believe the name of the neighborhood was Skunks Hollow at the time. I don't know what the exact name is right now, but on 159th Street when you go further west, there was literally no housing. Going back, you know, 40 years ago, there was if you drove down 143rd Street was nothing but housing. There was literally no commercial. As the mayor stated today, um there's only going to be about 10 businesses on that 143rd Street corridor. They they want to keep it the way way it is and we have to figure out a way that we can accommodate these things. Now, as we go and we move forward on these long range plans, we need to actually work with the local jurisdictions a lot closer because they have plans. We heard it today in the in the solar uh discussions is they have a comprehensive plan. They're they're trying to figure out their communities. we overlay on top of them. We're trying to figure out our plans. I think as an organiza as as a government entity, we should be working a lot closer with these townships and these villages and say, "Here's what our plans are and and and get some kind of buy in from them that this is the direction that they want to head with their community as it as it marries up with their comprehensive plan." Um, I mean, I I hate to see a 100 plus people um have to give up their residency because if I'm correct, the houses that were along 159th Street, very few of them actually had an easement that abuted up to 159th Street. Here we've got 100 plus houses that literally 143rd Street will be um within 20 30 feet of their front door, many of them, and 20 or 30 feet from within their backyard. Um, it just it

just doesn't bode well for us as a as a government entity to um inflict uh Dan said it perfectly. We're going from a road to a highway. And just like I always ask these solar folks, would you want your parents or would you live right next to this thing? And I guess in this case here, my question is is would any one of us want to have that road highway uh running through our backyard or our front yard? So that's all I I just I I I've been against this project all along and I will continue to fight for the residents of Homer Glenn in stopping this project or making it at least accommodating uh for them if it's going to be if they're willing to work with three lanes and we can figure out a way to do that. Um great. But that's all I have. Thanks.

And I'm going to ask Mr. Ryson to come up because as I've said before, we have to really make sure we have information versus and and what's going out there and the comment was just made that the residents have to give up their residency. Are we taking pe are we demolishing or taking people's homes for this property? Oh, you're not on. I just am being clear with some of these. I'm giving a little leeway because I know but there are some strong statements I want to make sure that pe I understand too as well. Once the land acquisition land acquisition is complete, everyone's residency remains the same. No one is being relocated.

You said have to they have to give you I wrote it as you have to give up their residence. So I'm just I want to know if that's I'm I'm asking too because I learned a every time I listen to one of these I learn something as well. So yeah I well I know I understand but that was said so I just wanted to make sure that I'm sorry I just I'm

so let let me let me clarify that they're going to have a road. Am I talking to Jeff or No, that's I'm fine. I'm fine. Okay. I What? What? I What? You're right. You're right. Nobody's going to have their house taken away and bulldozed. But what they're going to have is they're going to have more of their property and encroachment of this easement closer to their residency, closer to their home, closer to their driveway, their front door, things like that, their their backyard fence, etc. So trees th those are the types of things that um I would not want for myself, my parents and my family or even candidly your family Jennifer. So that's all I apologize if I misspoke.

That's fine. That's I'm just I just want us to be careful here. Yeah, that's uh member Burkowitz.

Thank you. And I I would like Jeff to comment on this. I have two um two things to bring forward under the revenue and expenditures portion of the long range plan. Um Jeff, we it indicates that in June 2023, the county board uh directed will county department of transportation to update our policies uh regarding pedestrian facilities. And so, um, regarding pedestrian use, uh, trails, bike trails, um, we don't really talk about that in this plan, but there is this reference. And looking at our development, 143rd Street, I believe, is a more appropriate road to develop uh bicycle and pedestrian traffic or paths um than let's say 159th. So would you has there been any more discussion about that on your part? Yeah, during the process we've had discussions with the village of Homerglenn if they would like uh pedestrian bike facilities. We do that with all of our projects. We have discussions with municipalities. Do you want these? Because the county doesn't build them. It's it's the the municipal feature their their amenity. They will maintain it when it's done. We're going to cost share in it if in certain circumstances. But the answer is yes. We've talked about it with them. Um they did want pedestrian facility. So we have it. It's in the design. The final plans have that included. A bike trail itself is not because that takes up more rideway. So that question was asked the elected, well, let's save right away and just go with sidewalks on either side. And then there were subsequent meeting

later across the golf course property to try and save trees in that area. So another meeting with the Homer Glenn was held and we removed with their blessing the sidewalk on the north side of the road to try and save more rideway there. So, we've made accommodations throughout still keeping the pedestrian facilities that ultimately they want. Now, we do have to have an IGA with them to help pay for that and we don't have that yet, but the plans have it in there. So, I I'm I am glad to see that moving forward. um because of that usage there along that road. I think again I don't I would prefer to have the um the threelane versus expanding that road to preserve that quality and to also provide a more a safer environment for for pedestrians and people bicycling. So thank you for expanding on that. I appreciate it. Now, um, under the reference to the Rebuild Illinois plan, uh, which is on page 10, if you look in our packet, it refers to the motor fuel tax, uh, with the inflation index and our option to impose our own motor fuel tax, which

are we? We're on amendment to I'm I'm assuming I was giving her a little leeway to see if this is going to relate to 143rd Street. Is this part of I was giving her a little leeway. I was here. Yeah. So yeah. Uh thank you. Uh the first one pointed. The second one did not. Okay. I was I was wondering if it was but I still have a comment on the long range plan. So if right now Yeah, we're doing the amendment right now. So don't forget me, please. Well, press your button and I won't forget you for sure. All right. Yeah. All right. So, okay. Well, thank you. I was just trying to give her some time to get there. Uh, Mr. Oxley.

Hello. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Um, we present we were presented with these maps today and I'd like everybody to look at the green lines. Now, Jeeoff, is that green line the property you're going to take or the easements you have? Now, I don't have any idea what you're looking at, sir. these maps. I don't have that. That's not You don't? I do not.

So, it would actually those green lines are GIS's interpretation of what the property lines are currently existing. Existing right now. So now you're going to take more right of way and you're going to be against the houses in a lot of these spots. And we didn't get page five of the map which goes from Golden Oak up by the fire station and the the um Homer School. I don't I think it's Hadley. I'm not sure of the name of it, but cuz that's impacted by this too. And if you go back to the second page, if you look and and I drove up 143rd Street the other day and there's survey stakes up showing the new proposed rightway.

Yeah. The individual property owners have asked what it's going to look like. So we go out and give them they see. I get it. And if you go to and I'm back to Reed School, you're taking up one to one and a half queening spaces of a of a bus ramp on the entrance. You're taking the same up on the exit and the same. Why do you say that? Why do I say that? We're doing what to You're taking by the survey stakes that I looked at and they said RO means right of way. Correct. Yes, it does. Okay. So, we're on the same page. Yeah. I just I'm sorry. I misheard the part you were talking about. We're taking lane. So, I need to hit I'll try to be You're taking the queening spaces of the buses that are queuing spaces. Queening. Queing.

Queuing. Queeing. Okay, call it what you want. Um, but you're taking one and a half spaces up on the entrance to the bus ramp, one and a half spaces on the exit, plus one and a half spaces for the parking lot of staff. Where do you want them to put these buses out of the We're not taking anything like what you're saying. We are not impacting that queuing. So that stake that you put in the ground because they for the ask for that says ro that doesn't mean anything. No, I would if I have a chance to sit with you sometime, I'll go over the drawings with you. I'm telling you what you're stating is not correct. Well, why are these stakes I mean I looked all up the south side of 100.

Well, some are rightway, some are temporary. There are temporary easements to do the aprons a little better. So, the grades are matched certainly, but I'm not going to speak without the drawing in front of me. I cannot Well, I answer these. That's not my drawing. Well, I don't know who made them. Yeah. Do we know how these were placed on? Anybody who know who got these? Oh, they were just they're from a they were from a resident. Okay. I'll be quiet, but quite honestly, I'm No, I'll be happy to go over any of those individual plans with any of the board members, but what you're saying is not correct. Well, um, what you're saying we're not we're not impacting the queue of the bus lane. That's not correct.

Okay. I'll reserve that comment for later, but I don't like this project. We're going to be right up against houses. We're going to be up against fences and then down the road when somebody goes for a zoning change. We're trying to Oh, sorry, Mr. Oxley. Can we hold on? Let we one person at a time, please. Anyway, when somebody goes for a zoning change, they're going to be a non-conforming use lot because their farm doesn't have 10 acres. Now, it's only 9.25 because of the rightway. So, we're we're opening up a big can of worms of an area of nobody that wants this project. I say we scrap it and move on. Take the money somewhere else. Thank you. Member Traneer.

Oh, thank you, Madam Executive. Um, I was given some information that you were actually meeting with uh the mayor of Homer Glenn and maybe the township officials to see if there was some kind of compromise that could be worked out. Um, I don't want to remove this project. Um, I'd like to see a compromise or if we can't reach one, then we move forward and maybe just move forward a little slower um with the concept that, you know, we do the the turn lane down the center, but we go ahead and and acquire the the rest of the land that we would need so that people can kind of get used to the idea that this isn't going to be their land anymore. But I certainly don't want to remove it from the the packet. Thank you.

And full disclosure here, and I maybe Uh, Chair Van, we have started setting up me. We Yes, we've had had a meeting with the the village. Um, we've answered questions. Uh, the mayor and I have talked actually since our original meeting and some of the questions she asked that she presented today were already addressed as well. But yeah, we are meeting with county board members. We've set up who who touched the district. Sure. Um and then uh I think we had a conversation last week with uh uh the the mayor who was going to share we were sharing some more information. So yeah,

information is continuing to happen because those of us that are not privy to those meetings, we don't know what's going on and like I said, I had heard this kind of anecdotally and I just hope that you know we can move forward with the project in some form or fashion. So thank you. Thank you. All right, we are going to I'm holding off on people who have spoken. So, let me check my numbers here. They're all in order by hand. Uh member um Bullock, sorry. What exactly is the impact of taking this out of the plan to the county to the I mean I understand that um 143rd folks don't want this. Okay. So their road would remain the way it is. What is the other implications of this that we may not see? Well, a couple of things. Actually, you can't I don't believe you can't actually remove it from the plan. Um, but if the project were not to happen, um, the federal dollars would be thrown away. The 7 million we have allotted to this project would be thrown away. This lot of the six million we spent would be thrown away. the increased traffic that is continuing to happen regardless of the population. The ADT is increasing. Um I'm very happy to review whatever traffic studies that I think last month the village mentioned or was mentioned that the village was going to do a traffic study. I'll be happy to review that when it comes, but I would be very surprised if it shows traffic is reducing because none of our county highways that I'm aware of are reducing in traffic volumes. They're only growing. So as the traffic grows, the congestion, the safety impacts of that rural narrow road will increase.

Um, but in the end, if you want to consider changing the scope of the project, again, that's something you can do, but not not in the tip. You can do it any it's it's your agendas. It's your contract. Uh, this is the tip. This is just a plan of the snapshot of the existing contracts that the county board has approved and how we will implement those. How you change the contracts. That's that's that's your call public works. We can discuss these things. I I every during this time of the year we talk about the tip. If you have a different opinion on how things could go, we can talk about those. Um I do a every January I give a midyear update on all those projects as to the status. Are they in phase one? Are they in phase two or the phase three? That's an opportunity to talk about it. Um, on our website, the projects, each project has a status on there as where they're at. There's either a direct website or a PDF of what the project looks like and the status of it. So, all the information is out there. If anyone has a question, we are always answering questions. Give us the questions and we will give you the answers you need. And if you need to take action on it in your opinion, you got your own processes to do that. I can't tell you that process exactly, but the tip is my statutory responsibility to tell you where we are at and where we would go if we continue the contracts, the future contracts that you have control over, actually the future ones, but they're the existing contracts. So, that's my this satisfies my statutory role to give you that plan and it's up to you to decide on future projects.

Oh, wait. Followup. Followup. So then you're not talking that this is a future project. 143rd Street as planned is a contract for a fivelane cross-section. So that's how we are implementing it. Right. Member Logan. So I do have two questions for you, Jeeoff. Really, really quickly. Uh was the 159th expansion part of the original plan? The 159th Street was not is not that was the right word was not not we're aware of it. Yes. But it is not a factor in the 143rd Street project.

Okay. So since now that's been widened that moves traffic then. Correct. It moves traffic and uh the volumes on 143rd Street have increased since 159th Street was completed. 2019 12,300 according to IDOT's website 2023 IDA's website says 143rd Street now has 15,300 ADT and 159th Street was done in 2019 traffic has increased.

So it sounds like there's different numbers on that. Uh what is the overall cost of the project? We roughly within the within $5 million. I believe the outstanding dollars is around 77 million. 77 million. So if we were to give you $77 million right now, could you find better places to spend it? Yeah. Okay. Can you do both?

There's places all over the county to spend money. Are are there other areas where there's not uproar? There's not people that don't want it. Are there places that we impact rideway? There are rideway impacts on almost every single project we do. Every home, every tree will be impacted. So, all our property owners, not all of them, but a great majority of them. Don't always want to see the project. This happens on every transportation project. So, I wouldn't do a single project if we went by that premise. Oh, I wouldn't. Okay. If we go by the property owner not wanting their property stripped 5, 10, 15, 20 feet taken or their tree taken, we would not do a project. All right. I got no more question. Chair Van,

thank you. Um I we've been discussing this particular road for at least a couple years. I know we do have new board members that are seven seven months old. They've heard it every month for the last seven months about this project. I don't think anything said today will change anybody's mind. I think it's just a bunch of um willingness to share their thoughts. Every and madam uh clerk, I do know you have a tough job, but I could probably take role on this project and this amendment right now and pre be 100% accurate. So I would just suggest that we just move on and go ahead and vote. Thank you.

Well, you would have been able to call the question if you didn't talk first, but so we are going to we're going to move on, sir. Sorry. Yep. Uh we have we're going back for a second time. Member Butler,

thank you. Okay. First, I just want to say that there's a big difference between the the three-lane option and the other option. I mean, if you were just to talk about the community itself, you know, soft shoulders with the the ditch and stuff, even if it takes up almost the same amount of room, certainly not an obstruction with sound walls and that sort of thing. So, um I think you know right there there's that would be a would definitely be a preference and and I realize that properties aren't being you know people aren't being forced to move but some people you know a four-lane highway with you know big walls and lights 20t from your your front stoop might be you know something very uncomfortable. Um, the other thing is the route that people take when they go down 143rd. It's a preference. They could take 83. They could take 159th. Guess what? When I go to work, sometimes there's construction on the grains. I go down 80, 80th Avenue. You know, I reroute. So, we don't we don't need this project. We don't need it here. Sherry's got some roads by her house. They they need some work. You could do it over there. Okay. At what point do the people get to have a say in how their communities develop? Who are we to just say we have to put a bunch of people through their community? I mean, do we have no compassion for these people? We don't need this.

Okay. So, okay. So, you know, you have two minutes. So, again, back on more than one. Well, I'm just telling you this. I mean, again, you you like to correct me a lot and you know, when you talk the second time, you have to and I'm trying to give leeway to people, but I'm now I'm I we're going to have listen to people just pontificate. If you have questions for Mr. Ronaldson, please ask them. Okay? Please. I don't have questions for him. I'm debating. I I have discussion and I'm going to finish my last point. All right. I'm sorry that he's still standing there, but I have discussion. Okay, that's fine. You know, you know perfectly well too because you were one of them who said, "Jennifer, keep us on time." Yeah, you did. But I am talking about the most.

I understand. I understand. But three minutes the first time, two minutes and I have been extremely lenient, but as we said, we've heard all this. I haven't even talked a minute yet. Go ahead. Not a minute. You might like to Okay, finish your thought, please.

Okay. And and then when we say like we're throwing away like if we if we're throwing away these studies or this government money that's that addresses our whole procedural process because there should be more community involvement before we get these studies and spend the money. So that speaks to that. So the another reason why we should just change our policies and have better communication with the communities

member ballot. Okay, this is the I'm going to ask Jeff some questions and not pontificate. Okay. Uh Jeff, uh when you say how much land you're going to take on each side of the road, so if we went to uh three lanes or turn lanes, either one, and you put the utilities in the middle of the street, how much less land would you need?

We already are putting a storm sewer in the center of the street in many locations. So until we would do a design for a threelane, I don't have any answer. I'm just what I'm going by is what the uh our road commissioner at going back a little couple months ago. He ain't ro commissioner no more but uh he's an engineer like you and he said that uh if we did a middle lane or if we just did turn lanes where the streets are uh you would only need maybe six seven feet on each side of the street. Is that accurate? You think he I mean he didn't do all the exact numbers, but he went through it with me, so I knew I was talking about.

Well, that's exactly the point. That guy has no I know who it is. He has no review of the plans that we have had been working on for the last 10 years. The grades out there, the water we have to deal with, he has no idea what the impacts are. So to make that statement is totally disingenuous. Well, when you say five lanes, that's what it is. The current project is five. We're going to go to three lanes if it was a a two wide left turn lane. That's the term for it, right? Two wide left turn lane. Yeah. Okay. So, if we went to a two wide left turn lane, there'd be three lanes, not five. All you're doing is removing sound barriers up.

And so, I mean, where's the extra land going to go to a five lane to a three? All you're doing is removing a 12t lane. It's 12 feet. You got If you got five lanes, how wide are each lane? I'm telling you, if we go five lanes down to three, you're removing the outside 12ft lanes. 12 feet. So, 24 total, but 12 feet on the side of each individual property owner. And then going to what Mr. Oxley was talking about, how many feet is the road going to actually be from Hadley School, uh, Bobby Nun's school, and Reed School? You'd have to look at the We have to look at the drawings to answer those specific questions.

I was I'm being told by the schools that they're going to have a problem because the road is going to create too much noise for them to teach the kids, right? So, they're going to have to find a way to not have the classrooms anywhere near the road. So, do they have to expand? Because uh Reed School already expanded. they already spent the money to expand and the road will go up to where it's too close to the front of the school. So, and same with Hadley School and the same thing Bobby Nunes school would have it where it would be real close to their parking lot. And then how many subdivisions? There's one uh one. It's like a a closed subdivision, but if you go into that one, that's going to put the road right next to where all the houses are. What you're about where I'm coming from.

Yeah, you're actually you're you're playing right into the mischaracterization of the project on all those levels. Hadley School, I think you're I think you're talking about the not Hadley School. Hadley's on Park on Bell Road. I think you're talking about the one closer to Bell. Well, it's But that one isn't even in this project. It's in the current one under construction and there's a parking lot between the school. It's done deal. They they sold their right away. Bobby Nunan's they have a play area in the backyard. Yeah. It's like 30 feet away from existing rightway and we're not buying right away from them. We're buying a temporary easement and they've already sold. They've signed on. It's done. They're happy with it. And then the other and then the school you mentioned,

we coordinated them. They coordinated with us when they did their expansion to make sure that our plan didn't interfere with them and theirs didn't plan interfere with us. We worked with their engineers and in those discussions they were concerned about sight distance. So we even changed our plans even more to improve the sight distance along the profile. So we talked with them at that time. We are not impacting that drive aisle going through there to where the buses quue there. There's there's green space, the drive aisle for the school, and then the school that we're not impacting the school building or even the bus aisle.

And then your traffic study, if you do if you do a traffic study from Golden Oak West, you're going to get a real low number because there's no traffic at all. Just the people that live there going in and out of the subdivisions. No, 12,000 people is still quite a few from Golden West. Yeah. Yes. gonna let you let you wrap up there if you haven't. Okay. I would just want those are questions that uh you know it's like before when I asked him about Route 59 to 143rd Street. I'd rather you have the information that we don't do it. He said no

and then I found out that I talked to the guy that bid on the job and it's gonna it's happening. But it is an accounting job. It's an ID do job. Y control that. when we're talking it's real difficult for a lot of people to compete understand. I agree. That's why it go from now you got I do that's going to go from 59 to 143rd and 355. Then you got the county. They already built the bridge is stopped and there's a sign on it that says 143rd Street. Okay.

We're gonna Okay, we're going to wrap because we've already we had this but if then you go from from there you go to the next step Bell Road. So now it starts and then where that's where I live and there's four lanes. So in other words, they're going to put a third lane in the middle where I live. The people are going to look they're really going to go nuts. They can't get out of the subdivisions onto 143rd now. All right. You got to drive around to a stoplight somewhere unless you want to take your life in your hands. So after it leaves Will Cook Road goes to Orland Park. Have you talked to the mayor over there? Yes, we have. We have. And too happy about it.

No, I'm gonna disagree with you. Please don't talk to the regarding other people. We had a conversation. He's going to send his response to that. At the very beginning, if we stop that thing at 143rd, the trucks are still going to be able to come from Wisconsin and the north side of Cook County.

We're going to get back on track. We're going to get back on track here, Mr. Ballad, regarding amendments. So, I'm Thank you. Thank you. We're going to go on to member Hickey. Thank you, member Hickey. Thank you. And then um Mr. Ronaldson, if we went to a two wide left turn lane or three lanes or whatever, if we would change the plan, what happens to the money that we have asked for from the federal government?

We can't use that federal dollars in that type of improvement. has to be the fivelane cross-section that was approved through the state and the federal administr highway administration by their guidelines. That's what needs to be built. And uh what about the money that's already been invested in the project? If we were to go to a threelane, we would be reusing re having to re reapply a lot of that. A lot of it would not be able to be used again. It basically be thrown away. Okay. To go to a threelane, we'd have to engineering is like another million and a half just to do that design itself. Okay. And that cost is picked up by the taxpayers of Will County.

Yes. Okay. Thank you very much. Member Freeman. I'd like to call the question. Okay. All right. There's a motion to call the question, seconded by Nquis. Madam clerk, please call the role on calling the question. Speaker Vany, we can compare at the end. All right. Richmond Williams. Dean Schlottman. Yes. Ogala. Russell. Yes. Butler. Newquist. Yes. Yes. Axley. Yes. Brooks. Yes. Winfrey. Bulock.

Logan. Yes. Freeman. Revis Mitchell. Yes. Ortiz. Burkowitz. Hickeyi Costa Traer. Yes.

Vand 21. Affirmative. The motion carries. So we're now um on Mr. Balage's amendment. We're voting on the amendment to remove 143rd from the transportation improvement plan. And we have a No, it was Mr. Ballages, right? That was your motion, wasn't it? Yeah. And you motion do we who we had a second? I don't remember who, but yes. So, madame clerk, please call the role. This is on the amendment. Richmond Williams in Schlapman. Yes. Ogala Rzzel. Yes. Butler, yes. Newquist, yes. Alich,

yes. Axley, yes. Brooks, no. Winfrey, Bulock, Logan, yes. Raymond, Revvice, Mitchell, yes. Ortiz, yes. Burkowitz, Hickeyi,

Costa R. Okay. Yes.

Okay. 13 in favor of the amendment. So the motion carries rightation. Yeah. Yeah. So I'm I'm curious to know since again if that mean since he clarified what this really is this transportation improvement plan. Um, since we're not voting on contracts or what exactly, I think everyone would like to know what they voted on because we're gonna I don't want the community to think something different either. So, we're going to let Go ahead, sir. Oh, you're not on. I

So, it it indicates that you wanted the the plan or that portion of the plan removed, but uh Mr. Ronaldson is he submits the uh the plan. So, Mr. Ronald will make the final decision.

Well, hold on. You know, hey guys, listen. I I mean, I'm being serious. I was serious when I asked that question. I I don't know what it means because again, as you tried to explain, this is a plan. It's it's you don't you still vote on the contracts that things have already been done. I'm curious to know. So, if you want to, we will allow questions for just questions, not comments on this. Just questions. Go ahead. I I think the question that the county executive was asking needs to be clarified. This is a plan. This is not uh allocation of any funds.

Can we build a project that is not in the plan? Is there a prohibition in state or county state statute or county ordinance that if a project is not in the plan that we cannot build it? Now, is that kind of where you were going? No, I just honestly wanted to know because again, this is a plan that we have contracts with, right? They have we've expended dollars. We have contracts with this plan. I I want to know if the plan is separate from

the project, the project. Yeah, exactly what I was asking. Can we build a project that is not in the plan? We've already started the project. The vote wasn't to stop the project. The vote was to remove it from the plan. There is a distinct difference between stopping and removing. And folks, this is a serious question because I know we have people in the office and they're going to go back and want to speak to their community. I have your buttons. We just really need to know what this means. So Illinois state statute is what sets forth the requirements of the plan. The plan is supposed to be a report from the county engineer to IDOT as to what projects are pending in Will County for decades. In an interest of keeping the county board informed, the division of transportation has brought the plan to the county board to inform them and give them input. But the bottom line is you have voted for this plan. There is no requirement in state statute that county board approve the plan. You have approved the project. Mr. Ronaldson's obligation under the statute is to report the plan and all of the all the projects that have been approved by county board to ID do. That is what this plan is about. It's not about procedure. It's not about anything else. It is about what has your county approved and where what what is the timeline for what they have approved. If you don't want 143rd in the plan, then you need to vote to resend the project. Thus far, you have not had the votes to do that. So, the plan is going to go to ID dot as it's drafted.

And again, I know we have a so please clear. They they believe that by removing it, they have resended again. This is a plan. Have you talked they believe that since they took the this item just out of the plan that it has been rescended. That's no that's that's not all right. So what this was we're going to all ask questions and these are just I don't again we're just asking questions. I don't I don't care your thoughts whether you believe this is right or not. So if we're answering questions right now I'm going to go on the buttons because I do. So give me a minute because I have to do a lot of this. All right, Mr. Ballage, what is your question, sir? The qu Well, I'll have a statement.

No, I just said we're not doing state question for Mary. If you go by the actual statute law, Dylan's law states that it has to be expressly written in the statute for us to uh make a determination on something. That's what we've been told numerous times. So, our road commissioner said we could cancel the project anytime we wanted, anytime. And I asked him, why didn't we cancel it two years ago or two and a half years ago when this all started? And he said, because we had contracts. So, this plan is to initiate the contracts and we're removing it from the plan. That doesn't mean that we can't vote on it later on to put it in. Right now, there's negotiations going on with the township and the county executive and the village and the county executive and it'll have six county board members eventually with the county executive to come up with an answer. So, we're removing it. What we're supposed to spend thousands and millions and trillions of dollars just to do it because it's in the plan when we were told over and over again for the last year that we can change it. And that's why I said we should rem I was told by the state's attorney wrongly. Mr. McGrath gave me all kinds of grief last at the meeting. He said I can't make a motion to stall the plan for 6 months and I said he said because I made a motion similar to it before. And I said no it was a different motion and we argued about it. This is the same thing. You're stating a statute. It's not expressly written in the statute. It violates Dylan's law. So what you're saying is irrelevant.

We voted to remove the 143rd Street from the plan and that's it. So now the people that didn't like it are complaining. Well, why are you complaining? Because you didn't win for No, no one's complaining, Mr. Balage. No one's complaining. We asked the question. I asked the question to understand really what this means to the county. Well, again, thank you. I appreciate I understand that. All right. Thank you, Member Mitchell. We could pass the plan because Member Mitchell has the floor. Thank you. All right. I I I can't question. Yeah. Here's the question.

Then why have us go through this process? Like why why do we why did we just spend I don't know 20 30 minutes here? You knew, everybody knew going in today that this would be um the object of what both sides were going to do. We're going to talk about removing this one particular part from the plan. So why did you allow us to go through this process? Why didn't at that time you say you can't do this? This is not allowable even if you and why do we not know why did we not know that it does not matter what we who the people elected us to be here. Why do we not know that uh a bureaucrat no offense Mr. Ronaldson that a bureaucrat has more more power more is what you're telling me has more power than we do. We we want it removed. I think it's I think it's offensive to say that we think just because it's removed that everything's gone away. That is not true. I do not believe that. But I do believe when I vote to remove something from uh a report that it should be removed from the report. End of story. And then there should not be any overriding of that of that question. Just go through this process.

What is your question?

Question. That's the question. Why have why have us go through this entire process? Why is it that why is it that Mr. Ronson has more authority than we do as a board? We've been elected by the people. Why is that? So I had two questions. So if the county board wants to stop the project, they can put that on the agenda and have a vote straight up or down to remove the project. What you are talking about here is not the project. You're talking about the plan. The plan is something that is required by Illinois state statute. It is required that the county engineer prepare the plan and submit it to IDOT. There is no requirement in the statute that he even bring it to county board for approval. It has brought been brought to county board for approval as a courtesy for decades. Quite honestly, we didn't even look into this issue until you guys raised it a couple of weeks ago because it has always been done and there was never a question of whether it should come to county board. So, when it was asked of us, can you amend it? We did the research on it. We were asked to just let you have the debate to see what would happen and to give you the latitude. So, we did that. But at the end of the day, what Mr. Ronaldson's statutory duty is is to report to ID do what projects have been approved from by county board and where they are at the stage. So the plan is what it is. He has an obligation to report that. If you want to stop 143rd, put it on the county board agenda and have a vote up or down on 143rd Street. Man, your mic isn't on. Yeah, your mic

mic isn't on. She's answered the question. I I know. Yeah. Yeah. I'm sorry. The question wasn't answered, Madam Executive. The question on the table was why have us go through this process? That was the question. She just explained that it was asked that did not she did not. She knew if if she you you she said herself. She just let us do it because she just want us to have the argument. these. Did she not Wait a minute. Did you not say that you said let's go let's just have the discussion or whatever you want. Requested that we not say anything and to allow you to have the normal discussion that you have on.

Okay. So that's what was said, right? So I'm sorry I interpreted that as kind of the same. Let us go through this dialogue first. But that's kind of like that's kind of unfair to the people who came here from Homer thinking that it was going to be removed from the agenda is what I'm saying. I'm just saying I'm just saying if you knew that we weren't able to remove it from remove it from which which I'm willing to accept by the way. I'm willing to accept that you can't remove it from the report but I'm my point is that that should have been made clear prior to the back and forth because we could have been out of here a lot sooner.

Member Axley, did you still have something to say? No. Oh, you don't have to. No, you have a question. You have a question. It's a question. Oh, then wait till you we're gonna have county board comment at the end. Yeah. Yeah. All due respect, I didn't vote on it because I wasn't here. Yeah. Thank you. Um, we're going now on to member Ogala again. Please, you guys

stick to questions. You just talked about how long we're here. Stick to questions, which I'm going to stick to the question. question was why did we decide we're just going to let us sit here for all these hours and talk about a plan and whether we should have it or not or whatever if it was just for I don't know fun or something like that seems kind of crazy to me. I do recall last time we had this conversation that we were told we cannot change the plan. Now we were able to change the plan. We voted on that today. And if if this is true that the Jeff Ronaldson brings it to us as a courtesy, then it should be just a presentation that so that we see it. Why why is it not a presentation?

Well, so you just Well, I I don't know for why it's been voted on for years, Judy. As I just said, until someone asked whether or not it could be amended, we had never looked in it. It was on the agenda as a routine matter for decades. There was never any argument about the plan in the PLA past. So there was never any question about whether or not county board should vote on it. As you just acknowledged, someone told you some time ago that it can't be changed. Mr. Ronaldson said it during his presentation a half hour ago or longer. He said, "This is my plan. You don't really have the authority to change it." He said that.

So this is what we need. We need a clear and definitive answer as to how we can change anything because here's the plan. Here's the thing. For some reason, we look at maybe we should make an improvement to this road. Okay, that time it's in somebody's mind. Maybe a village mayor requested. I don't know. And the thought process begins. And I guess this will be a question for Jeff. During that time, we don't ever incur any costs when it's just thinking about it, but there's costs once we begin the study. And the study should tell us whether we should move forward with it or not move forward with it. But during that time, we will spend dollars. Whether we got the money from the federal government for the study or whatever, it's irrelevant. It's important to do the study to determine whether you should or you shouldn't do something. By doing this study, it brought to light many times later now that we're at phase two. Phase one was 7, 10, 12 years ago, what have you. Things have changed. Mayors have changed. Board members have changed. that the community hasn't changed as we see. It's not commercial as they claimed it would be. The number of residents in Homer isn't what the study showed. So things have changed. So when is it that the county board member actually gets to because there is no clear idea in my mind when we can say yes or no. What typically happens because I was the chair for the last two years. We get requests from the uh different departments uh uh other elected officials to put things on the agenda. We don't ever just say, "Oh, well, we're going to go ahead." We get presentations from Jeff all the time about projects. They're never in any detail. It's always high level. You don't see the the fine. I'm I'm going to say this, Jennifer.

Okay. I'm going to cut off questions after member O'Gala though because this is this was my this was my I brought up. So, I'm going to after member Ogala's finished, please ask a question again. asking when is it when is when is it that you can change a project? So there are various times. So you have multiple issues. They come up at public works and then if public works votes on things to move forward to county board, you move it forward. So whether there are

contracts that you're voting on, he they always say what road project it's for. You can vote the project down. And if you think the project needs to stop, then you should be having that conversation and saying, you know, I don't think this program is wise anymore. I think we need to put on the agenda a motion to rescend the authority for this project and and members. So again, I obviously this is going to need um you have a lot of questions. I brought the questions just to hear that opinion and now we're all going to give our own opinions and I appreciate I wanted to listen. So we this was my No, I'm done. No, I'm the chair here. This is this is and I'm sorry to do this but we are going on long enough

we you have got it. No you got Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. I know say that once the um is put to the floor that is no longer yours. Yeah. What is your point of order? That is my point of you present something to the floor it becomes the floor. It's not yours anymore. So you cannot end it. Yes I can. I Yes. A chair can end something. Yes, a chair can end conversation and we the flow, but once you bring an item to the floor, it is no longer yours.

It and and I'm going to politely disagree that I do can and we've answered the question. I again I know people have a lot of feelings and thought it was a general question because people in the audience and I just want to make sure that we have a better under understanding. So again, thank you very much. We have we need a um Thank you, Assistant States Attorney Tetro. We have We now need to go on to public health and safety, sir. Wait, no, we're not. We're not done. Yeah, we did. Okay, we need to take as mend. Okay, yeah. Yeah. Okay. I just member Traneer just made a a motion to remove the plan from the agenda. Is there a second? Second by Freeman. So we just to we're going to remove the plan from the agenda. We are moving the plan from the agenda. So that is the motion. There's a second. Uh any do you want to discuss?

Madame clerk, please call the role. We're removing the plan. Do you have a Do you have a comment on that? I have a comment on removing the plan. All right. All right. Do you have a comment on removing the plan? Member Bulock, what exactly does that mean

for removing the plan from this assistant states attorney Tetro just said it was a process that apparently never needed to do. It was just something that the the county board did as a courtesy. That's what we're hearing, but it's not technically needed. So now, member Traneer is asking to just remove it since it does not have to be officially done by the county board regardless. So that is that is why we're moving it. Do you have a question, sir? Hey folks, I'm learning with you. If we vote to remove the plan, the entire plan, the whole plan,

well, we already voted 13 yeses to remove 143rd Street from the plan. So when we vote to remove the plan, we're voting we don't that's already removed. We're removing it from all of it now. So, but I mean we you double No, I I want to clarify it when we're voting for this. Yes. 143rd Street is already removed and now we're going to vote to remove the rest of the plan from the agenda, but the 143rd Street is not in the plan right now. So, because it was removed. So, correct. So, 143rd Street remains removed and to remove the whole plan from the plan. Yes. No. what I said.

No, we already voted to remove 143rd Street from the plan. So, that's done. So, now if we're going to remove the plan from the agenda, 143rd Street is not included. But Jeff can do whatever he wants. Yeah, he can do whatever he wants. Okay. So, you're right. So, that was just a you we just amended you. We amended it to we amended it to remove it from the plan. Right. Right. So that is part is done right now. There's been another motion to just remove the entire plan. That's fair. So that's what we're I just wanted to clarify it that I wanted to make sure that 1403rd Street was removed from the plan.

We just we you period. It's not included in this removal of the

It is. It is because you have to vote to then a you you made an amendment. made an amendment to the item on the agenda. That one went down. So now you have to make an amend. We have to revote for an amendment on the entire item just like we we've done all along. And and before that we now we have we have because we've heard this we've had member Traneer say let's just remove the plan if we're not supposed to do it. And so the question I have then is if if we vote to remove the plan 140 if we don't vote to remove the plan, it stays intact. 143rd Street still remains removed because that's what we voted everything. No, because we never did an amendment to to we never went back.

We voted on the amendment and passed. Yeah, you can, but right now there's this amendment out, right? Right. But I'm saying it, right? All right. So, there's a motion in a second to completely remove the plan from the agenda. So, we have to vote no on it to keep 143rd Street removed. No, I'm you're

I'm trying I mean I'm trying to be like it what I what they're basically telling you is that it this is and again I'm hearing this too, folks. What I'm hearing them say is the plan is is is separate from the actual PL project. He has to turn this in as a report to uh to the state and since we just heard it really at this stage what we're doing here doesn't impact any of the road projects. And so she has just said let's just remove it if we don't have to do it anyway. And then for all intents of purposes, all the arguments and all the fights for any of those uh road projects can continue.

No, no, no. She No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. That's the problem. We have Yeah. You know, you did the purpose, Mr. Oxley. Jeff can't do whatever he wants. All right. All right. Well, are we allowed to make a motion to remove all his money out of his line item? No. Come on now. Don't. I mean, I'm just saying let's be what I'm hearing up here is that Jeff is like God. No, it's he's like and he can do whatever the hell he wants. And then when the state's attorney gave her opinion is protecting Jeff because again this is nuts. I'm going to take a recess if you don't get this back in order. Yeah.

Yeah. Hold on. I haven't called on anyone. No, I haven't called on anyone. We're going to We're having a lot of yelling out and I'm really am thinking about becoming recent. So, we have a motion and we have a second on removing the plan. All right. Is there any discussion on that? Yeah. Okay. Well, then I Well, okay. We're discussing on the removal of the plan or not removal of the plan. Um, member Nquest,

thank you. I just want to clarify because after all this discussion, I'm a little confused. So, the plan stays the same. The plan stays exactly as Jeff has written it. And by removing it from the agenda, we are basically acknowledging that we have no sway over this plan because the plan is a report of what has happened. The plan is not a guide to where we spend our money in the future. Correct. So I just want to clarify that that is the case. And Mary's shaking her head yes or nodding her head yes.

Yes. Okay. The plan talks about what's going on now and what will go on in the future. Jeff will submit his plan as he intended and then by us removing it from the agenda, we're basically acknowledging that we're not voting on it. We're just saying it shouldn't have been on here in the first place. Correct. Thank you so much.

Member Bulock. Member Bulock. Do you have comment or question on the on the removal? On the removal. Okay. Hey, can we all use microphones or something cuz this is I don't even know what's going on right now. Yeah. All right. Well, you have the microphone. So, I know people I have the microphone. Here we go. All right. The plan is a report. Period. That's all it is.

It's a report of what's going on, how much money is being spent, where it's going, blah blah blah. We don't have the ability to do anything specific to that plan. 143rd is still in the plan regardless of what we just went through. The reason we are removing it from the agenda is because we really don't need or I don't know what word I want to use to vote on that plan. The plan was brought to us. Here's the plan. We go okay, thanks for sharing the plan. and the plan goes to ID dot and we go on with our day. We cannot remove 143rd from the plan. Now I don't know maybe maybe we can say we want to dissolve the 143rd project. I don't know but it sounds like that's the only way if we can even do that then anything changes. So right now the plan that has 143rd in it exists. it has gone to ID dot and we don't approve or disapprove that and we need to take it off the agenda for that reason because it's not for us to say yes or no to. It's for us to say thank you for sharing the plan. Is that accurate

with regard to the plan? That is accurate. The plan is a plan. and it does not control the ordinances you have previously passed, the authorizations you have previously made. It requires only that the county superintendent submit a plan to ID do. Member Pretzel, I call the question. All right. Is there a second? Member Pretzel. Seconded by Trinire. U Madame Clerk, please call the role. Richmond. Richmond.

Go ahead. We're voting on to remove the plan from the agenda. Oh, we're vote on calling the question. Oh, vote. Thank you. We're voting on calling the question right now. Uh, Richmond, Ogala, I'm sorry, Williams. Dean Schlottman, yes. Ogala, no. Pretzel, yes. Butler, no. Newquist. no. Oxley, yes. Brooks, yes. Winfrey, yes. Bulock. Logan. Freeman. Yes. Revis Mitchell.

Yes. Ortiz. Burkowitz. Hickeyi. Yes. Costa. Trineer. Yes. Van Dyke. Yes. 19 in the affirmative. Um 19 in the affirmative. The motion carry. So we go back to the original to remove the plan, the entire plan from the agenda. Madame clerk, please call the role. Rich Richmond. Dean Schlottman. Yes. Ogala. Pretzel. Yes. Butler parliamentary inquiry.

Sure. The agenda says that we are to adopt the transportation plan as a county. Is there an ordinance that says that we are supposed to adopt it or not adopt it? If we adopt it, do we agree with the power? It's not right now. We're just voting to remove it from the agenda. Newquist Axley. Yes. Brooks. Yes. Winfrey. Bulock. Logan. Freeman. Revis. Yes. Mitchell. Yes. Ortiz. Burkowitz. Hickeyi. Yes. Costa. Trineer. Yes.

Van. Yes. 17 affirmative. The motion no more. 18 affirmative. The motion carries. I

thank you, Madame Executive. I don't know for how long I will continue to be the chair of this committee, but I will promise each and every board member going forward, as long as I am the chair, we will not be asked to adopt this. It doesn't belong on our agenda. I will ask that Jeff Ronaldson share his report with us and I will leave it up to the committee if they want the report before he submits it to IDOT or after. But either way, I will not be asking our committee members to vote on it because it is his job to do this report and we don't have any authority over it. Our next public works and transportation committee meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, August 5th, 2025. Have a great day.

Thank you. Member Butler, public health and safety. We have nothing to move forward. Our next meeting will be August 5th, 2025. Thank you. Member Ortiz, Legislative. Thank you, Madam Executive. We also have nothing to move forward. Our next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, August 5th, 2025. Member Freeman, leg uh Member Freeman, capital improvements. I have nothing to bring forward. Our next meeting is August 5th. Member Dean Schlottman, Landfill. There is nothing new to bring forward. Our next meeting is August 12th. Thank you. Moving on to executive committee. Speaker Van Dy. Yes.

Thank you, ma'am. Executive. Well, for what landfill?

Can we check? We'll verify after. Yes. Thank you. Um, Speaker Van Dy,

thank you again, Madame Executive. We have a number of items on our consent agenda. required qualifying statement for Will County multi-year plans. Setting the public defender salary. Increasing the number of enforcement deputies at the sheriff's department. Amending a liquor control ordinance. Resolution authorizing the will county executive to execute a lease agreement. Authorizing approval of contract for request for proposal demolition located at Walden Road. Adopting the HUD 2025 to 2029 plan. accepting a grant under the IHDA home repair ordinance amending the Will County code of ordinances title three chapter 37 and also chapter 40 and I would like to make that motion

motion by van seconded by yeah that's what you said right at the beginning out said that we don't have ma'am. We've already started the consent agenda. You should have made that mo let us know pulled out again. That's part of it. Yeah. Still we're being moot. We're just That's a moot point. Yeah. Go ahead, Mr. Vanine.

This this not only includes the transportation plans, but all plans that the county provides. So, I felt it was necessary to keep it in the consent agenda. If you would like it removed, I would be more than happy to do that. immediately. Well, if he said I'm starting the consent agenda and that it's at one time people you just let him go through you talk about like and didn't say like ho you know again I again is there something you would like out of there. What would you like out of there? What would you like out of there? Are you going to Okay. What item are you removing out of?

Thank you. I would like to remove items A B C D E F G H I and J from the consent agenda. Very good. All right. Just All right. So, Joe, please uh please go through each item individually. Thank you. I'm trying to I just please I know it. Just please let's

consent agenda is no longer. I would like to make a motion for resolution 25-209 requiring qualifying statement for Will County multi-year plans. Motion by Van Dy, seconded by Brooks. Is there any discussion on that? Member Ogala.

Yeah. So, I'd like to understand granted this is for all plans, but what does it actually accomplish and what other plans do we have any authority over and what plans don't we have authority over? because everything seems to have changed since I've been on this board, and this is my 13th year. So, what other multi-year plans are there besides this plan that we would have an impact on? I don't even know how to um I I don't know how to answer that because I don't know I don't have a list of all the plans that we um that we that we have in front of us. So, I cannot tell you that. I do know that the qualifying statement was something that was suggested by a couple members here and I assume if it's on one plan as I think speaker van said he it would be part of any multi-year plan. Is that what I'm understanding member? Um, Bendy. Okay. All right. Am I accurately I mean, if you I I don't have all the plans in front of me, Member Ogawa. So, if you would not like to vote for it, I I appreciate your question.

It just doesn't make sense that it would go to other plans because this is really specific to road plant road projects per how it was written. That's the title. I didn't make the title. Me. Okay. So, you could I mean, I would suggest if you don't like it, how is it written, you vote? No. Member

Yeah. It was my idea to do a plan. All right. And I'll tell you what happened. It was about protecting all county board members from being accused of voting for these projects that are happening now and in the future. That a plan is we were told a plan is just a plan. It's not something that's written in stone. It can be changed at any time during the process. Well, again, I disagree with the state's attorney again, and I'll do it over and over again, but that's what we were told. Then then this plan, this this resolution was brought up with the idea of protecting county board members from being accused of voting for different projects within plans. And that a plan is just a plan. it's a guideline or they said changeable at the committee. Uh we use different terms. Chuck spent a lot of time to get this language the right way and it protects all of us in this room from being accused of voting for something that wasn't wanted by a particular county board district or a different person. So, I was accused of voting eight times or six times of voting for 143rd Street project. I never voted for the project. I voted for the plan. It's different. I voted for the plan. And this protects county board members from being accused because the next uh one that we're going to be talking about will be Manhattan Mooney Road. That'll be coming up in a month, two months, whatever. But it's going to come to everybody at one point. And if you vote for the plan without this language in there, you get accused

of voting for the road or the project that you didn't really want because the people in your district don't want it. So that's all it was. And it was it's very simple and it passed through committee and I don't see a problem with passing it now. All it is is saying that these are not written in stone despite what the state's attorney says. It's we were told it's changeable at any point and that was the word that they used changeable. So that came from Jeff changeable at committee. So anyway, that I'm hoping everyone votes yes to uh this here item because it's important to protect us as we're going forward.

Member Thank you. Member Revis, I'd like to call the question. Is there a second? Second by Ortiz. Madame Clerk, this is we're voting on calling the question. Richmond Williams, yes. Hlapman Ogala Russell. Yes. Butler Newquist. Yes. Yes. Axley. Yes. Brooks. Yes. Winfrey. Yes. Bulock. Logan. Yes. Freeman. Yes. Revis. Yes. Mitchell. Ortiz. Yes.

Burkowitz. Hickeyi. Yes. Costa R. Yes. Bandit. Yes. 19. Oh, sorry.

Yes. Previous 20 in the for 20 in the affirmative. The motion carry. So, we are now going to call the question. We are voting on 1 A. Thank you. Mot on 1 A. Madame clerk, please call the role. Richmond, yes. Williams, yes. Lotmana, yes. Russell, yes. Butler, yes. Newquest, yes. yes. Oxley Brooks

Winfrey Bulock Logan Freeman Revis Mitchell Ortiz Burkowitz Hickeyi yes Costa R yes Van Dy yes 21 in the firm the motion carries okay we could we couldn't enter it and it's done now yes is it process. Um, well, actually, we've approved this and I think that's great. This language then goes into Jeff's plan. Is that my understanding? That is my understanding as well.

Okay. And and he agreed because he agreed to it. All right. Thank you. That's all I wanted to know. All right. Resolution 25- 210 setting the public defender salary. I so move. Motion by Van Dy, seconded by um Traneer. Is there any discussion? Member Ogala. Did you have a Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't know. Okay, I was waiting for the red light. Yeah, should be a green light. It's all bit. Yeah.

Um I know there are members of the public sitting out there and I'm quite sure that they are not sure why we set the public defender salary. So if we could have an explanation as to why we do that. Thank you. So the reason why it's set this way um is because there's state funding that kicks in when uh to when you have 90% of the state's attorney's salary. So you're just keeping there was a change by the state legislature as do the state's attorney salary, the the office holder, not my salary. Um and so you're amending that to make sure that the state funding still kicks in. Thank you. Member Revis call the question. Sorry. Member second.

Call the qu. Member Revvice voted to call the question. Seconded by Ortiz. Madame clerk, please call the role. You previous. No. Call the role. Richmond. I question. The freshman call. Please tell the role. No discussion. There isn't any discussion. You're right. Jean Slapman.

No, we're calling the We're taking a roll call right now. We're on the roll call. Where you Slapman? Question. No, we're we're calling the question. This is what you're voting on. Dean Schlottman. Ogala. Russell. Yes. Butler. Newquist. Yes. yes. Oxley, yes. Brooks, yes. Winfrey, yes. Bulock, yes. Logan, Freeman, yes. Ravis, yes. Mitchell Ortiz, yes. Burkowitz, Hickeyi, Costa, Triner, Vandid, yes.

19 members of affirmative are calling the question. Madame clerk, please call the role. We are on just so you know we're on two or one B 1B Richmond Williams Slapman Ogala yes pretzel yes butler yes newquist yes yes yes Brooks yes winfrey yes bulock yes yes yes revis yes Mitchell Yes. Ortiz. Yes. Burkowitz. Dicki. Yes. Costa R. Yes.

Bandett. Yes. 21. 21. The affirmative. I'm sorry. 22 in affirmative. Motion carries. Resolution 25-211 increasing the number of enforcement deputies for the Will County Sheriff's Department. And I so move. Motion by Vanine, seconded by Traneer. Any discussion? Member Gala. Thank you. Yeah. So, it's kind of confusing. Why is it that we have to approve um increasing the number of of sheriff's deputies when we don't have to approve other elected officials um to hire employees?

Can you speak to I don't know the the details that this brought forward. Yeah. Yeah. Madame executive and board members, I believe this request is for, and forgive me for not knowing um exactly what school, school 161, I hear, um their their request to have an officer full-time uh patrolling their school, and they will reimburse the sheriff's department over 100% of his salary or her salary. they will utilize this individual for seven months and the sheriff will be able to utilize the um individual for the remaining five months. Um that is for the reason.

Thank you. Thank you. Member Butler. Nope. Member Revis. I'd like to call the question. Can you just previous roll? Mot motion to call the question by Revvis, seconded by Ortiz. Madame clerk, please call the role. Richmond Williams. Yes. Dean Schlottman. Ogala. [Music] Ogala. Pretzel. Butler. Yes. Newquist. Yes. Yes. Oxley. Yes. Brooks. Yes.

Winfrey. Bullock, Logan, Freeman, Revis, Mitchell, Ortiz, Burkowitz, Hickey, Costa, Trainer, Van, yes. 22 in the affirmative. We are now moving on to item 1 C. Madame clerk, please call. Are there a pre is there? No. Previous roll call by Winfrey. So, all good. Seconded by Ortiz. All in favor? Any opposed? Motion carries.

Thank you, Madame Executive. Before I continue, I would just like to ask the board members to just everyone just calm down and take a deep breath. We've we've all been through this before and we know how this agenda works. So, we will get through it. Just take our time. Thank you. Thank you. Item D. You're very welcome, sir. Resolution 25-212 amending the liquor control ordinance chapter 110 code of ordinances. I'll I'll save you the the time of reading it all and I so move.

Motion by Van Dy seconded by Freeman. Is there any discussion? Previous roll call by Nquis or I'm sorry. Did you have a question? Thank you. Go ahead. Um I forgot. I'm sorry. But what is a class C1 liquor license? Is that Is that the pig?

Yeah. Yeah, I was going to say take a couple of deep breaths to uh for the clarification on C1. C1 is a package license only inside a gas station which means no on-site on premise consumption and uh which then in turn no entertainment and also because there's no on premise consumption no video game any other questions madame clerk over there's a previous I believe by Nquist seconded by uh Hickeyi all in favor any opposed motion carries Uh, resolution 1E2-213, resolution authorizing the Will County Executive to execute lease agreements for 10 South Chicago Street and 9 South Ozgood Street. And I so move.

Motion by Van Dy, seconded by Costa. Any discussion? We have uh member Ogala. Yes. Um, I was just wondering what was our lease agreement prior to this? How much were we paying prior to this time? A great question. For 10 South Cell Chicago Street, we are paying $100,000 annually. This reduces that figure to a dollar. Thank you, Mike. Thank you.

Any other questions? Seeing none, madam, do we have a clean roll? Is there a previous roll call by Winfrey, seconded by Mitchell? All in favor? Any opposed? Motion carries. Resolution 25-214 authorizing approval of contract for request for proposal for demol demolition located at 116 Walden Road. I would like to make that motion. Motion by Van Dy, seconded by Freeman. Any discussion? Previous madam or I'm sorry, member O'Gala. Thank you.

Yeah. So, I'm just wondering, does the county own this property? Um, is that why we're demoing it? I am prepared to answer that because I think I lost everyone from land use, but the county does not own this property. Uh there are many enforcement violations on this property and so we will then lean the property uh to attempt to recoup our demolition costs. Thank you, Mike.

There a previous roll call by Winfrey, seconded by by Mitchell. All in favor? Any opposed? Motion carries. Resolution 25-215 adopting the HUD 2025 to 2029 consolidated plan and actual I'm sorry annual action plan for program year 2025 I so moved motion by Van seconded by Costa member Ogala sorry I'm sorry madame executive but I did ask to have all these removed so of course I have a question for each one Hurry up.

All right. Come on. Hey, you folks, we need, like I said, we know it's getting late. Just let's be respectful to everyone here. Thank you. So, I just need to be clear that we are adopting this consolidated plan and annual action plan for 2025 year. Why is this plan different than the multi-year plan that that our Will County DOT? What's the difference here? Is this just a really a presentation or do we actually have the authority to approve or deny it? Uh, this is a plan that you would work with in conjunction with CDBG and HUD. And so those have been approved through the CDBG process. It's previously been through this board and now it's in a planning document to show our five-year outlook for it.

Thank you. Any other questions? Yeah. Okay. There was a previous then by Winfrey. Is there a second to that? By Hickeyi. All in favor? Any opposed? Motion carries. Resolution 25-216 accepting a grant under the IHDA home repair and accessibility program round two. And I so move motion by van seconded by Traneer. Member Oella. Thank you. So what what does this do for our residents? Does this allow does this give us money to help our residents do home repairs so they have easier accessibility or I know this one.

Oh, you I had a good one for this. You go ahead. Oh, I thought you you like you didn't know what you were going to say. I love the the exact agenda, right? Uh I am so happy that you asked this question. This is one we are really excited about and you are the first person to ask a question on in this month. So, uh we've been working for a little over a year now. We had been originally working with senior services on safe at home. I know that was important to many people on this board. We were able to get that program restored

and Martha and her team over at community development has been trying extremely hard to figure out how can we expand this program and so we were able to land this great grant through the housing development authority of Illinois. This is going to allow us for properties uh that have violations in uh unincorporated Joliet and Bowling Brook I believe are the three places that we can do it. So if they have violations on their property and they are not able to financially pay for it with a bunch of qualifications, then we are able to come in and help them clean up their property and reduce blight in our communities. So you said it was Bowling Brook Juliet Bowling Brook Juliet and unincorporated and unincorporated. I believe that to be the case. All right. Thanks. That's really good. I know that senior services did that save at home, but did they stop it? Unincorporated in general.

Unincorporated in general. So these could be land use cases that come to us here. So it's we work with Joliet and Bowling Brook. That's part of it. And so anybody in unincorporated those cases that come before us here, we do our adjudication. If they are financially unable, we are now able to help them but only for those three areas because uh it's a qualified grant and Bowling Brook and Juliet. Bowling Brook and Juliet already they we funneled their money for them, right? That I remember. Okay. Thank you. Well, I'm glad we got this grant. I think it'll be great for our residents in need. Thank you. We have more questions on this one though. U member Traneer and then Revvis was just going to ask after the fact, but since we're going through each item

in detail, um how would a resident of Bowling Brook get funds from this grant because they wouldn't come to our adjudication court because they are a municipality. I don't know if I have that specific. So, this is there's going to be still some things that we're going to have to figure out, but it's going to be land use and Bowling Brook coordinating with our community development department on violations that they think would fit in this parameter. Okay. Thank you,

Mr. Rabbit. Nope. Okay. All right. Seeing no more questions, Madame Clerk, or do we have a previous by Mitchell, seconded by Ogal. All in favor? Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. Uh resolution 25-27, an ordinance amending Will County Code of Ordinances Chapter 37. And I so move

motion by Van Dy, seconded by Butler, previous seconded by you already seconded. You came previous by Revvis. All in favor? Any oppose? Motion carries. And lastly, resolution 25-218, ordinance amending the will county code of ordinances chapter 40. I so move. Motion by Van Dine, seconded by Revvis, previous roll call by Traneer, seconded by Winfrey. All in favor? Any opposed? Motion carries.

And our next executive committee meeting is scheduled for Thursday, August 14th, 2025. I don't know if we will meet. We may this group may need a break from the month of August. That uh concludes my report. Thank you. I believe we do not have any appointments this month and so at this time we will. Okay. So I will move on to public comments relevant to matters under the jurisdiction of the county. Yeah. Well, we have commentary right here coming. Yes. All right. I'm gonna let you go. And I found it like true.

I had a request from some of the people that were waiting if we could is it possible to move public comments to the front? No, I meant this all the way to the front in our next meetings because they we do have public comment at the front for agenda items. Right. I and I from what I understand I think these folks knew they they they could from what I understand they could have spoken. because it is on the agenda because we posted it but they they purposely wanted it to stay some of the people that came to speak who were wanted to speak you can talk that's a change of your that is I'm just say no I'm not that is a change of your rules and I am going to let you work with your caucus on that so you can gentlemen you can come up sir please state your name

for the record just you can state your name

ladies and gentlemen my name is Mark Buell I'm talking regard to 2C 24041 land use. While it's been almost one year to the date that we were here discussing this very same subject, nothing has changed on the Will County taxpayer side of this discussion. We all have the same serious concerns regarding all the detrimental effects that this electrical industrial facility aka solar farm will have on our homes, family, and pets. My neighbors and myself were elated when the board cast a unanimous vote against this land use change last year. At least this time, the citizens prevailed over big money and big industry. Thank you all for that, Dad. The only thing that has changed since then is that Jeremy Price of renewable energy has sweetened the pot by promising a one-time payout to the city of Wilmington of $50,000. If the Will County board approves approves this permit within six months, there's a second payment of $100,000 promised within 30 days after Will County and Wesley Township finish all of their government approvals. Once built, there was a promise of a 15,000 yearly payment. All of this to sway the vote in their favor. Wesley Township is officially against this project, so I don't know what they're going to figure out there. Wilmington is 1.9 miles away. We don't even get police protection there. I have a few reasons that justify our objections to this facility. There are many reports of solar panels leaking due to damage from hail and trees. Equipments used in the facilities use antifreeze that if leaked would have to be dug up, contained, and removed from the site due to possibility of self- ignition. This information came from a Will County staff report. I've

included in a copy of this information in your packets. We do not have fire hydrants in Wesley Township. If there were any fire to occur for any reason, either due to their equipment or simply unmaintained brush, the results would be catastrophic. I had a simple garage fire seven years ago and we had fire units from as far away as New Lennox to respond. We almost lost our home. Everyone in Wesley Township has a well. Most wells near the site, excuse me, are 40 feet or less. Ours is 25. and my neighbors are 25. The contaminants that could potentially leak from the solar panels pose a real threat to our drinking water and are in close proximity to the Cana Key River, which is designated the natural water trail and one of the cleanest rivers in the state. I'm worried that if this facility is built, my property values will certainly go down. Jeremy Price claimed they wouldn't go down and may even be an advantage and property values would go up. I have included two documents from local real estate agents that clearly state that there would be a negative effect on our property values. I attended a meeting a meeting regarding yet another solar farm on Route 102 down the street. The company representative admitted that these facilities raise the air temperature by 5 degrees by their in while in operation. I'm also worried about or concerned about the traffic disruption and the road damage during construction. There are 1,700 cars traveling on this road every day according to the Will County Landers report. The proposed location of the power inverters is meant to reduce the effect of the electromagnetic activity but not eliminate it. According to the World Health Organization, there's a significant health risk of hypers

sensitivity to symptoms triggered by electromagnetic magnetic radiation fields. There are homes on the north, south, east, and west of this proposed facilities and they produce these inverters produce an enormous amount of electric electromagnetic activity. These symptoms include headaches, fatigue, skin rashes, sleep disturbances, and we are fearful that this effect will this will not only affect our family but also our pets and the beehives that we keep. On page five of the Barrett study, the land in this land use package, it states that there would be no glare from these solar panels. But on page six in the same study, it states that the properties to the south and to the east would see glare. It states that the owner's trees would be enough to block the glare. I have included pictures that clearly show there would be inadequate screening, not to mention in winter when there are no leaves.

Mr. Ule, um up here up front um we we do have a threeminut time limit and and we're we're right there. So, if you wouldn't mind please wrapping up. Thank you.

Okay, I will. Uh there will be a 45 decel hum on on this plant will be a constant but uh throughout the operation of this plant there will be a constant 45 decel helm a 45 del hum. This fact alone should be a deal breakaker. Corn and soybeans and family do not create that disturbance. The phil facility will have 24-hour commercial lighting. It will be a shame when we no longer see the stars over our house due to light pollution. I believe the Will County Board got it right by unanimously voting against this land use permit simply due to the very close proximity to existing homes. Mark Hansen purchased the parcel directly across the street from the proposed facil facility and had the land use changed from agricultural to residential. He sold the first lot to a young family and it faces the pro proposed facility and is one of the closest properties to it. I have included pictures that prove this this point as well. The executive summary in this land use document states that the surrounding land is agricultural when in fact is bordered by 10 homes. That is the start of hundreds of homes in the West Hampton community. If you go to page picture number one, this is looking northwest from my mailbox. You can see how close where that sign is. That's where it's all going to be solar panels. Number two, and also this is the road that 1700 people drive by every down every day. So the the panels will be facing my house and the glare will be in their eyes of everybody and the heat and the glare will be facing the road. Number two picture is a great Canour's house across the street from my house. You can clearly see that it you can clearly see that the to the right of it is where the solar panels will be right up to his yard right up to that tree line. Looking east from the site is I'm standing on the site where the solar panels will be. This is looking to my

next door neighbor's house, Bob Switzker. Obviously, you can see that there isn't any kind of screening that's going to block a solar farm. Number four is looking from Bob's front porch. You'll never see that that view again after this. And number five is the new house that Mr. Hansen sold the property. He is the closest one. And you can see it's just right across a two-lane highway. And when this where this facility started, when I started writing this allimportant speech, I wanted to concentrate on the real dangers and health threats that this facility would pose to the residents of this community. Not just that I don't want to see it instead of corn or beans or homes, but Rivals Road is a two-lane onem stretch of road leading into the community of Rust Haven. This is not something the residents of the community wanted as evidenced by their signatures on this petition.

Sir, please. I will. Not one person refused to sign it. They will yield their time for my

I'm not against solar power. I'm not I know it is future reality, but I don't think putting this facilities among residential homes is a right location. I don't think this was the intent when Governor Pritsker signed solar protections into law. These plants are far more suitable further out in the country. I have a petition that I turned into you guys with 27 or 217 signatures. Last night I'm up this this petition is up to 300 signatures and we had less than a week to get it together. We had four weeks last time. So people are outraged and concerned. There will be nothing to pro protect us from these hazards I have mentioned if this project is uh approved the petition uh one thing I have learned about this solar game is that it has a very unleven playing field um Mr. Hansen and Mr. Price, my family and I truly believe you picked the wrong spot. The residents of Rest Haven know it is the wrong spot. For all the reasons I have stated previously, I respectfully ask all the board members to vote against this land use permit to respect the wishes of the Will County citizens over big money and big industry. Thank you very much, sir, for your time.

Sorry, Ray. I have all the documents to prove that point in your packet. Okay.

Hello, my name is Edward Dunn regarding the ZC24041. I'm an adjoining land owner. I have 40 acres to the west border of this solar farm and I use that property to grow high quality hay, horses, and other livestock. One of my main concerns is runoff from this property. Everything runs downhill to the river from there. I get excessive runoff from that property as farm property when we get excessive rains is that we're not getting right now. But they have no no um plan for a retention pond or anything to control this runoff. So there's not much I can do about that. But you know, as Mark mentioned, this privy is on Rivals Road. It's an entrance to this rest haven subdivision. A lot of people drive by this. This is a residential area. And the owner of this property sold residential lots across the street from the solar farm. So, he admits this is residential. Finally, and this is a general thing about this solar farm stuff, it shouldn't stay zag say zoned egg. It should become zoned commercial industrial or something else. So the so that so so some taxes are paid on it. They pay nothing on taxes on a ground. And that's really all I have to say, but thank you for your time.

Thank you. My name is Grace Ule. Um, live on Rivals Road or C ZC 24041. I don't know if I can read this. This was written by a lady that pulled up in our driveway. Am I allowed to do that? This is public comment, so it's a little different to your

Okay. Thank you. She's a very timid lady and um we told her that she could type this out and register it to into the minutes of the meeting, but she said she wanted you to see it in her own hand. So, I'm going to give her a voice. Dear board members, my name is Terry Oreni Areno. I live one block off the Cana Key River in the Rest Haven subdivision off Rivals Road. I am a free spirit who truly marvels at all of the wildlife that surrounds me, especially the eagles. I speak on their behalf. At the intersection of Route 102 and Rivals Road as an eagle's nest with three eiglets, it is located in the first tree along Fork Creek. I have seen white heads in the nest. I have stopped to watch them feed in the fields along Rivals Road. The turkey vultures always wait patiently for their turn to feed. I never realized how much larger an eagle is until I saw them standing together. The eagles soar across Rivals Road as they head to the Cana Key River that borders Rest Haven subdivision. It is quite spectacular to watch them as they sweep down and catch fish. I am very fortunate to live in such a beautiful area filled with eagles, red fox, deer, and even the pesky moles. So on behalf of the eagles, I am pleading with all of you to pretty please, her words, not allowed solar panels in the feeding fields and nesting grounds along Rivals Road. Please don't drive the awesome eagles away from the area they call home. Protecting eagles from the threat of extinction is a conservation success story that we must safeguard for future generations to come. Respectfully and sincerely, Terry Anorreno.

So, you know that at the table? Yeah. Yeah. Yep. Thank you.

My name is Zachary Ule. I've been a resident of Rest Haven Rivals Road my entire life. I'm currently a student of multiple regenerative agriculture and watershed restoration programs. I'm here to oppose uh ZC2441. I start many of my mornings walking at first light and seeing that seeing those eagles that have been previously mentioned in other statements. Witnessing something as beautiful as one of those birds once is moving, but sharing a routine with a powerful animal like that is deeply valuable. I hear my feelings expressed in the words of John Denver. Though he'd be a poor man if he never saw an eagle fly. Many evenings I spend last walking with my family talking about our days and enjoying the sunset. After the sun goes down, the fireflies come out and we enjoy them. That is how I, as a resident of Rest Haven, enjoy the sun. The natural resources and environmental features in a given area regarded as assets having economic value in providing a service to humankind are known collectively as natural capital. If the proposed solar farm is put into place, there will be a glare shown off of each of its installed panels. The black plan panels in place of the existing vegetation will cause a potential heat increase of 5° drastically affecting surrounding vegetation and wildlife. This includes the eagles whose flight path back and forth from food and water at the Kinki River back to its nest is directly over the proposed annexation in subsequent solar farm. If the proposed solar farm is put in place, it'll be accompanied by industrial lighting that will shine into the surrounding properties 247. This will drastically affect the value of our surrounding properties and how we enjoy it. This will also remove the fireflyy's ability

to communicate, effectively removing them from our immediate area. These changes to the landscape will no doubt affect the flight path of the eagles, removing welcome neighbors in exchange for unwelcome. Wilmington Municipal Services are typically a far cry out in Rest Haven. Outside of extreme cases, the typical answer you hear is call county. In the past few weeks, my father was troubled by how many people as he was collecting signatures had told him, "If your house is on fire back here in Rest Haven, it's burning down." The annexation of this area by Wilmington may have been welcome if the express intent was to further extend municipal services to the community. the removal of surrounding citizens natural capital in exchange for a promise of contribution to the city to build this industrial site are not those circumstances. The proposed annexation and site raised the question of whether or not Wilmington will take responsibility in the event that the site needs cleanup after the solar panels have degraded into the soil and surrounding groundwater. If I'm not mistaken, even after the proposed annexation to the city of Wilmington, the majority of Rest Haven citizens will continue to need to call county for all of their problems. There are old myths about times before colonial and westward expansion, before horizons of corn and soy, about forests that a squirrel could climb across from the Atlantic Ocean all the way to the Mississippi River without ever touching the ground. While there's some embellishment, there's some truth there. Time and time again, we don't know what we have until our children don't know what we had. I fear a future for my grandchildren

where they can't even believe that there was ever even corn and soy where all the solar panels are now. Please again vote for this proposed solar farm with the will and future and citizens in mind. I thank you for your time today. You Hi, my name is Royanne Moore. I am going to make this short and sweet because I know we're all done. Um, the only thing I don't know if you guys are interested in, I did get a letter from Jackie Hos yesterday afternoon uh supporting us.

You can leave it there. That's fine. Yeah, they can grab it after. Um, I just want to say I want to first uh thank all the board members for their support and unanimous decisions last year on the denial of this project. I know you made the right decision. Um, solar farms do not belong in residential communities. No matter what the law is, I don't think the law was written to have solar farms in residential neighborhoods, 50 feet off of the first house property line. The guy's house isn't even 50 ft over, so you're talking less than 100 ft from his house. Um, I feel that if this passes, it is going to set precedent for future solar farms to be put in residential neighborhoods. And we're all on wells. That's the other thing. Um, we do not know enough about solar farms and what they will do to the environment and how to dispose of them, among many other things. It's like building all these warehouses and you don't have the roads to accommodate them. Um like it's Fork Creek is a half a mile downhill from this site. This is up on a hill. It literally runs down and 3/4 mile from the Kinki River. Um there's just so many unknowns. Why take the chance? Set precedent for future cases. Please stand with us and oppose this decision again and save our subdivision. Thank you. I am the last one. Kathleen Kennedy, trustee Wesley Township. And in your packet is a letter that we all signed.

So I want to thank you for your support last year. And uh this is not an appropriate location for a solar farm on Rivals Road. And that's zoning 240-41. Um please follow through with your no vote that you had last year. Uh say no to the vote. Say no to the special use permit because that's the only way to stop the solar. They're under a time restraint and we can stop them for good. So please vote no on the special use permit. Thank you for your time.

Madame executive, members of the board, good afternoon. Now, um just to briefly respond to some of the comments that were made here. I know we have limited time. Um, solar has been extensively studied. Jeremy Price, still Jeremy Price, sorry. Um, so solar has been extensively studied over over a 50-year period. You know, I think there were a couple main concerns there. There's going to be no antifreeze utilized in these projects. From a fire perspective, they are are increasingly rare. Uh, and we have coordinated with the fire protection district to have that conversation and prep them, you know, in case of an emergency if this were approved. uh a property valuation perspective. We included in the application which designated and and proved as as much as it can that it would not result in any deterioration of of sales values through paired sales analysis. Uh as far as the air temperature, there's there's no literature reflecting that. Um EMF, the EMF generated by these projects is is less than the EMF generated by a dishwasher or a vacuum. Um, it's essentially the same thing as a cell phone. We all have cell phones in our pocket. Uh, cell phones are exempt from SDS, material safety data sheets, just like solar panels. Um, there's there's one particular report I' I'd just like to read an excerpt from, bear with me, on the toxicity of these panels and and the lack thereof. So, this looked at a 2019 study. I'd be happy to provide you with a reference. It's a 2019 study that assumed a 100 megawatt solar project, which of course is much larger than what we're proposing. Every single panel was broken. And I'm just going to read the excerpts here. The study examined worst case exposure routes of soil, air, groundwater for typical 100 megawatt ACPV facility for crystal crystallin

modules, which we would be using, not cadmium teluride. and it examined the worst case residential groundwater exposure assumed that all broken panels from the entire array were exposed to acid rain for an entire year and the ultimate findings and and they model that with the assumption that there was a well just 25 ft away. The ultimate results of the study found that in the worst case scenario lead exposure via groundwater was four oritudes orders of magnitude let me see i.e E factor more than 10,000. So four order orders of magnitude less than the maximum levels defined by EPA to have adverse health effects which is the same standard for using uh public drinking water. So I think that speaks for itself. Uh the landowner did subdivide the parcel across the street and as part of that sale each of those those land owners were duly informed that the project would be constructed. I recognize this is not the most desirable use for everybody, but there are people that wouldn't mind living across or near a solar facility.

I'm going to need you to wrap up, sir.

Sure. Uh I think the last comment I would have here is, you know, that the residents passing this solar facility, which would be screened, also are passing two, you know, crude oil pump stations on on 42, same as same as our project without screening. Thank you. I'll be brief. Ben Jacobe, I'm the attorney for the project company here. This project is in a bit of a unique posture with the county in that it's already been in front of this board once. The board voted to deny the special use permit and then the project company has a lot invested by that point, a lot of money and time. It felt no choice but to appeal that decision, which it did to circuit court. There's a lawsuit pending. Um, that lawsuit has been pending for some time now. In the meantime, Jeremy and the team at the project reached out to to this uh to Wilmington, which is was the closest municipality, and had voiced concern in the initial proceedings, and uh brokered a deal with Wilmington that was pretty um pretty generous to Wilmington. And we heard some of those details earlier where the company is paying $50,000 upfront, $100,000 upon the permits being issued, building permits, and then $15,000 a year, which um is above market that I've seen. Anyway, so that was part of what has occurred in the meantime. Um with that deal in place and a resolution from Wilmington saying that it no longer has an objection, that it's withdrawing its objection and that supports or will not object to the settlement agreement. Um, we negotiated a settlement agreement with the county's outside council. Um, an armslength negotiation that took place to result, if approved, would result in the dismissal of the lawsuit with prejudice, a release of the county and all officials, and a covenant not to sue the county. Um, in exchange, we get our special use permit, and the project can move forward. Uh, that's that's the deal that was worked out. I believe

that's what will be presented to you um for your approval and if you approve it then you'll subsequently approve the ordinance approving the special use permit. The um the risk here and I I just feel compelled to to address that you know why does the county care why would the county enter into this agreement? Um the risk is that with a pending lawsuit, we've seen, we heard about them earlier, we've seen opinions from circuit courts on both sides. Will County Circuit Court has not weighed in yet. But if the court's circuit court or appellet court eventually find that the county has no discretion to deny permits and has to approve them, then the project moves forward anyway. And if it does that without the settlement agreement in place, then Wilmington also loses its its benefit that we've negotiated. Um so that's that's what we've put on the table. We felt that was a good faith effort to resolve the dispute with the county and with the village. And we understand that there are citizens um that are concerned still. We've heard from them and Jeremy's addressed their concerns and those were addressed in the hearing prior. Um but we hope that that we we hope to have worked out a deal here with the county and and uh we look forward to your feedback. So, thank you for entertaining the time. Um and we'll look forward to the vote. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else here for public comment under the jurisdiction of the county? Going once, going twice. All right, we are going to move on. So, we have two more items. We will have to go into executive session and then we'll come out and and vote. Um, so if we do have county board members who have comments and leaders who have comments, if you can keep it brief, I'm sure everyone would appreciate. Is there anyone who is compelled to leader Richmond? So, real quick, I I had like an hour and a half about Nico, but you know, with due to the time con, I don't think I've ever heard you talk an hour and a half. Maybe. Trust me, I can. All right.

Um, I I picked up a bunch of literature from Nico. What I'm going to do is I'm going to talk to staff, figure out where to put it. Um, I only picked up one copy of things that I went and attended. I didn't go to everything. Jackie went to some things and Denise and that. I'd like to find a place we can put it so that if you want something, make a copy, put it back, leave the original so everybody else has a chance to take a look at stuff. So, thank you. That's it. Thank you, Leader Williams. Thank you. Um, I just wanted to say that, um, the county board will be moving forward with exploring a strategic plan and hopefully that will help us with some of the issues that we have been experiencing today. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else? And then Speaker Vanden,

thank you. I just want to say I I know at times that there is uh some heated issues and you know my goal my goal here from the start was to try to get both parties to um to have better communication with each other. I feel like sometimes uh we may we may lose a little bit of our control and I would just like to see us operate uh in a more civilized manner and uh you know we we are elected officials and and it's hard to for the public to see us act out um you know it it shows a bad precedent and it and it shows them that it's okay to to do that as well. I just think we need to step up our game a little bit and and and act more like elected officials and this this is not Father Vany talking, but I just I yeah um that that's my comment for today. I understand that there are heated issues, but we just need to try to control ourselves. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay, I need I don't see anyone else light. We need a motion to go in executive session. No, we have to go to executive session first. Motion by Trir. Seconded by Nquis. Madame clerk, please call the role. And as they're calling the role, just so the residents know, we have to have everyone leave, but we will be coming back to vote. So, you can stand outside and we will be coming back to make a vote. It probably as long as they take to debate. I wish I had a better answer. We are leaving for executive session to go into pending litigation. Pending litigation. Richmond Williams. Yes. Dean Slottman, yes. Ogala,

yes. Pretzel, yes. Butler, newest. Oxley left. Uh, Brooks, I'm sorry. Brooks, Brooks is gone. Uh, Winfrey, Bullock, Logan, Freeman, Revvice, Mitchell. Yes. Ortiz Hickey Costa Traineer Vanine. Yes.

20 meffirative. We are now going All right, we're live, sir. Okay, with 19 members in the affirmative, we are now back to public session. I'm going to turn it over to Chair Van Dy for to vote. In order to put this on the floor, I would like to make a motion for resolution 25-219 authorizing settlement agreement and civil case 24 MR 33 380 RPI Solar 13 LLC versus the County of Will.

Motion by Van Dy, seconded by Dean Schlottman. Madame clerk, please call the road. So, just to be clear, we are voting on the settlement. We're voting on the settlement. Richmond,

Williams, Dean, Slotman, Ogala, Pretzel, Butler, Newquist, Alich, Winfrey, Bulock, Logan, Freeman, Mitchell, Ortiz, Burkowitz, Hickey, Hosta, Traineer, Vandine. No.

Yep. 13. and a negative. The motion fails. Madame Executive, I'd like to make a motion to remove the ordinance amending the Will County, Illinois zoning ordinance adopted and approved September 9th, 1947 as amended for zoning case ZC24-041. Motion by Van Dy, seconded by Dean Schlottman. Madame Clerk, please call the role. Richmond Williams. Yes. Dammen. Yes. Ogala. Yes. Pretzel. Yes. Butler. Yes. Newquist.

Winfrey. Bulock. Logan. Freeman. Mitchell. Yes. Ortiz. Burkowitz.

Hickey. Doing that. Costa, what was that? Costa. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Traineer. Yes. Viney, yes. With 19 in the affirmative, the ordinance case is removed. With that, we need a motion to reserve by pretzel, seconded by Butler. All in favor? Any opposed? Motion carries. The next meeting we are recessed to Thursday, August 22nd, 2025. Thank you.