control facility out of hand must meet to get local saving approval this is the only opportunity for the public and where this is a very nice three tier are technical in nature and the local government's ability decision to push control board's decision it is the law unless your honour's reverse it and it has turned siding upside down for example under this pollution control board decision i can walk no testimony i need no experts to meet these technically oriented nine crew tyria and to top it off even in the face of asper testimony in opposition to my public comment as long as i have the host government agrees consider that argument to be filed in the custody control of keeper records in other words the village clerk's office even if it isn't even if it kills person this does not know whether or not the document is actually legislative history over thirty years of case law in practice in illinois are rendered meaningless there is not a single case in which citing application to local approval has been o provided by the titian or applicant and have a opportunity to present evidence in response or advice you get you're going to have an opportunity to ask questions of the c yes we're not under oath your honor we have no opportunity publishing what it wants so they only have a burden shouldn't be required to attend each and every sunday the applicant should actually be the entity to come to the plan and say have just got it so very quickly the standard review on factual findings the pollution control board and you the villages actual find these determine whether they were against the manifest weight of the evidence use an opportunity for public comment for people to submit anything they wish to includes in fact the bill is required to consider even written comments and letters technical reports of anything received within thirty days after the hearing all of that under section thirty nine point two is evidence and the diligence required to consider every good and it did in this case ok so as you go through your argument and you talk about evidence you're talking about the of the hearing was raised twenty six days later during the course you're in the comment period the setback under twenty two point one four is not one of the nine citing criteria under section thirty two thirty nine point two i'm getting to in this case does have been one of the restricted from development approval shall submit sufficient details describing the proposed facility to demonstrate compliance mr seem certain submitted for binders with the and i list and in my brief all of the things that he puts got this letter you didn't feel that i just got i want to tell you about here's about protocols intrudes and this is on a one twenty eight this follow lance same objection not being part of the application so then she cons and we had all come into a close a landfill and we had brought in technical studies from new york about groundwater contamination that public comment even though it was not sworn testimony could be considered by the co the discreet case for this were in ninety seven i can't think of the name of it but where this chorus said we're not going to say that you had to cross examine the author of an expert's report in order for that to have been considered so even then this will have the fill the landfill capacity that we haven't seen her coming in our landfills will last longer and we won't need another one in the in our county for a million or twenty years according to the sheriff in this testimony which when you look at the two of the long and the intent of looking how the health departments funded and so the solid waste purpose of the money of the tipping is expended by the county to the extent that you ship it to another coming back to get that money so i would think that that's why they're opposed and certain  steps to mitigate the negative impacts it is therefore reasonable to wait and perform a traffic study that accounts for this change in the surrounding the roadways and should read up above where it talks about how the routes ways are being replaced so it's being replaced control would simply ignore that control precedent in this case well is it true that it has to be and as i think just a swarm started this out immediately looking at the language in section thirty nine point