New Illinois law gives many communities the ability to develop their own rules for public hearings

Public hearings can often be contentious and go on for hours. A new Illinois law gives communities under 500,000 the ability to develop their own rules for public hearings:

Those procedures could deal with the rights of participants to cross-examine witnesses and present evidence during a public hearing.

“It really boils down to efficiency,” said Annie Thompson, the governor’s spokeswoman. “The governor believes in getting the people’s business done in a manner that’s open and transparent but also in a manner that’s efficient. This bill will help (local) governments do that.”

State Rep. Darlene Senger of Naperville said she proposed the legislation in response to the marathon public hearings that happened when Navistar submitted plans to move its headquarters to Lisle…

“This bill allows municipalities that are interested in severely restricting who can participate in the process — under the guise of efficiency — to institute undemocratic and unfair rules,” said Terry Pastika, the center’s executive director. “When you think about the anti-democratic rules it could justify, it’s a big problem.”

I can see both sides. On one hand, a public hearing can go on for hours if a large or vociferous enough crowd wants to talk. These meetings can drag into the wee hours of the morning, making it difficult for public officials in smaller communities who work part-time as public servants. Additionally, one could argue that at some point there may be diminishing returns: jut how much does a group have to say to convince public officials that they don’t like a proposal? On the other hand, there are few official settings where citizens can interact with public officials. Public hearings allow citizens to express their opinions and make their voice heard. Citizens can feel that if they make a convincing or large enough argument, they can sway the outcome.

I would guess that this new law will have this effect: communities and citizens will now have spend some time figuring out what are appropriate rules where both sides feel like they can do what they want to do.

Polluting power plants and municipal boundaries

Many people do not want to live near facilities like power plants, sewage treatment plants, and landfills. However, if the facility is outside municipal boundaries, there may be little citizens can do. The Chicago Tribune presents a classic example – a power plant emitting heavy pollution that draws less attention because it is just outside Chicago city limits:

From a plane, it would be easy to think one of the nation’s dirtiest power plants is within the Chicago city limits.

But the aging State Line Power Station, a major contributor to the city’s chronically dirty air, sits just a few hundred feet over the state border in Indiana, leaving it largely unnoticed and untouched during a decades-long effort to transform the Chicago area’s smog-choked history.

Protesters regularly march in front of two other coal-fired power plants in Pilsen and Little Village, demanding an end to noxious pollution that wafts into the Chicago neighborhoods. Federal and state prosecutors are suing the owner of the plants to force significant cuts in smog- and soot-forming emissions.

Yet a Tribune analysis reveals that the State Line plant, built along Lake Michigan by ComEd in 1929 and bought by Virginia-based Dominion Resources in 2002, is far dirtier than either of the Chicago plants. It emits more lung-damaging nitrogen oxide than the Pilsen and Little Village plants combined, and churns more sulfur dioxide and toxic mercury into the air than either plant.

The article goes on to say that there are efforts to force this plant to clean up. Considering the attention these kinds of plants tend to draw when located in more populated areas, its interesting that this one has received less notice than other facilities.

A note: this plant can be seen easily from the Chicago Skyway.