PDC concessions not likely to change outcome

Peoria Disposal Company is trying to woo Peoria County Board members into voting for their landfill expansion by making some concessions. Briefly, these concessions include (according to the Journal Star):

  • agree not to expand over trench C-1 (oldest part of landfill)
  • reduce the expansion area’s life to 12 years (down from 15)
  • shift landfill operations to 275 feet from the eastern boundary
  • agree to pay a yearly flat fee of $281,250 into a perpetual care fund
  • allow County Board committee veto power over any new waste streams
  • guarantee the Sankoty aquifer will not be polluted
  • place earlier proposed conditions in a host agreement enforceable in circuit court

PDC’s attorney told the Journal Star “the concessions should meet all the concerns expressed by board members, the county’s staff and even opposition groups.” I think it meets some of the concerns expressed by those various people, but definitely not all.

In early April, the board voted down three of the nine criteria for approval of the expansion. PDC’s concessions may change some votes on two of those three criteria, but they don’t change anything regarding criterion number one: whether this expansion is needed to accommodate area waste. PDC still only needs this expansion so they can continue to receive waste from out of state. If the board didn’t feel that was needed three weeks ago, they’re not going to feel it’s needed next week.

If just one of the nine criteria isn’t met (in the judgement of the county board members), they have to vote against the expansion request.

Bill Dennis, a hazardous waste proponent, casts a cynical eye on the county board, saying, “If the county board rejects this now, it just provides proof they rejected the permit contrary to the evidence and were prejudiced against it from the start.” Of course, in reality there is evidence for both sides in this battle. A board member’s disagreement with Bill’s interpretion of the evidence does not prove anything except that two rational people can look at the same evidence and come to different conclusions.