did you would probably as well as anybody given your involvement in two of the major cases in this area it seems to be a question that's raised in every one of these cases and until you came to this routinely raised it properly those three examples that i that i want to focus on again we have to go for a mere expressions of support which we know aren't enough to clear a convincing evidence of pre determination  y view it as this is a good idea and we need the money that's not enough to this is a good idea we need the money and i'm going to vote for it the that i think are the than making a good business decision project we could possibly contemplate the difference your honor is the citing station three point two still has to control the decision if the decision is made before the hearing takes place so i told her thirteen two thousand and nine mchugh comes back from the meeting of swell cosell who is the agency of lake county and submit a report to the rest of her board and she says number one landfills are filled to capacity and she said that she she claimed that she was just repeating what she had heard of the swallow meeting which was not true second of december thirteenth twenty a whether we're now getting closer to the time of the files and say ok sure and here by the way this particular set of meeting minutes this is the connection that we talked about in suddenly the conversation flips from the c and d facility to the to the ways transfer station this issue here and not having a transfer station and not having to scale for the police department or do we want to take something which is better than the thing and have timely fashion and maybe this end of this is this transfer station made this a reality by next offering season which would have been twenty thirteen they did and there's a there's a word missing here i i  reality by next operating season if you're getting to the operating season you've gotten through the permitting process because operating means not only have they got their siting approval but they go under development  operating permits providing because that's all obviously they're going to be offering half how do you get to what evidence do you have that there was anything untoward that when i'm behind those comments i mean other than just in her role as mayor a position of leadership looking forward planning for her community evidence to him that she or anyone else met this group out that there was some sinister that they are really looking at making this and this is specifically mayor q looking at making this for reality by next operating season in her mind at least they're already past the citing two the notion of a public official doing in the particularly in these economic times doing anything and everything to bring much needed revenue into a community is walkable you there's actually no complaint about it whatsoever the problem  comes in the context you cannot see this decision from the requirement that before you get to start getting the cash you first have to go through thirty nine point two and confirm that the medical criteria and that's what's missing criteria that justice just asked you about and certainly in reading your briefs aren't you we asking us to really weigh the evidence and decide in favor of your experts kno takes to develop all of these things and it let's assume two years then you don't need one of these things there is no urgent need in lake county for a transfer station assuming neither of these to have capacity available as it expires it is taken seven years and this is the testimony at the hearing as it took seven years to get this train to station to the point we are now and still  told us when when asked by the court of where is your evidence of clear and convincing specific evidence that the members of the side in authority were actually biased the first time  where the hearing officer drew the winery as to what discovery be so this actually had nothing to do with any particular application approved in front of the village this is just reporting on a slow leak and and certainly is not evidence in the way of specific evidence on in the original briefs which is mary if you ask the board if they want to take a tough road try to get more money and take a chance on them not having a transfer station and not having a scale for police department etc that then is actually in of the evidence what is your authority for saying that some evidence the word some is enough isn't the standard that the finding cannot be against the manifest weight of village and village board seeking information regarding all contacts and communications not just the transfer station between group and village representatives from march twenty eighth through the time of the filing of the application stating that they were looking for a particular thing relevant to the fundamental fundamental fairness issue raised before the p c b one point that they made in their brief was that regarding the q s comments during the december twentieth lemon village horn meeting regarding the host agreement for the recycling facility and not wanting to lose the transfer station and but that doesn't show that information concerning prior sighting proceedings for other facilities as relevant to the fairness of the sighting meetings that took place and malaysian ships developed at an earlier stage when they will preclude it from taking discovery they were given discovery they were given a board meeting minutes they were given information relative to the sighting of this transfer station but to try with our pointing to specific things that happened and say we just want all of them for the shooting from any discussions that anyone have is really trying to i think this question is for follow question so is your physician as of twenty fifteen there will not be sufficient capacity in the to live county way fils to accept lake county waste has or no i did not say that at all that's how we get this mission among all those because it isn't the replication of the effect that there is sufficient capacity through twenty twenty so that's why they go for waste needs from the actual capacity to this argument they created twenty years of need and this is the points made in our  effect as of when the obligation is filed so what do they do they switched it again now we wait for oh twenty years of solid waste plan which no longer existed to twenty years of a conceptual playing requirement it it's probably a function of how long it will take to develop a facility if let's accept their proposition which is not supported by the of it's let's say it's for seven years let's split the difference or call it five and a half years that means there's no need for a transfer station in lake county under the best of circumstances or the worst depending on your perspective until some time in twenty twenty one but the p c b and all of th where i think it was just paul who will let up their opinion and how is it on the fish that the p c b spent far more time describing the various claims of the parties than they did initially analyzing the issues and you need you need look no further than the opinion in this case really seventy three page opinion from the pollution control board seventy pages of that is that he said she said three pages of it is an analysis and then three pages