Sangamon Sun

Sangamon County Board met July 11.

Here are the minutes provided by the board:

The Sangamon County Board met in Regular Session on July 11, 2023 in the County Board Chambers. Chairman Van Meter called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Mr. Stumpf gave the Invocation and Mr. Fraase led the County Board in the Pledge of Allegiance.

ROLL CALL 

Chairman Van Meter asked County Clerk Gray to call the roll. There were 28 Present – 1 Absent. Mr. Hall was excused.

PRESENTATION-TERRI CASEY, UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS EXTENSION 

Terri Casey, County Director for the University of Illinois Extension, addressed the County Board. She thanked them for allowing her to speak about the 4-H Program and Extension in Sangamon County. Every day she gets to live the dream by leading an organization that makes a positive difference in people’s lives with a staff that has a passion for serving others and “Making the best better”. That is the 4-H motto. She comes here tonight to deliver some good news in a world that can sorely use it. She is passionate about what she does. They have seen an increase in Sangamon County 4-H enrollment this year. They are up 39% this year from their numbers last year. They have 82 first-year members who make up 36% of their membership. They are above and beyond Covid numbers on their membership. This year they also saw an increase in their 4-H show participation. They had a 19% increase in their projects from 2022 and a 60% increase over 2022 in their livestock exhibits. They are back and it is great! They have added two new clubs this year. They currently have 18 4-H clubs with 6 clubs serving kids 5 to 7 years of age. Horticulture…let’s not forget our Master Gardener’s and our Master Naturalists. Currently they have 125 active Master Gardener volunteers and 33 Master Naturalist volunteers. Last year they helped with over 250 garden consultation requests from the public. They also produced and donated 702 pounds of produce. This year, when you visit the Illinois State Fair, be sure to check out the beautiful Idea Garden in front of the Junior Livestock Building. It is designed and maintained by our Master Gardeners. Spend a moment talking with the Master Gardener on duty and learn a little bit more. They are always looking for a few good gardeners and a few bad ones they can make better.

Each year they partner with Prairie State Beekeepers and the Sangamon County Farm Bureau to host a six-week introduction into the beekeeping program. They had 626 participants go through the program since its inception. Our Horticulture Educator, Jennifer Fishburn, is a beekeeper now. She gives invaluable first-hand knowledge and experience that she shares with others. They also offer SNAP-Ed Nutrition Programs to area residents. Snap stands for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. Participants in SNAP-Ed programming learn to save money, make healthier food choices, the importance of physical activity, as well as how to prepare nutritious cost effective meals. Programs are offered to our youths in schools, but also to adults at one of the 11 organizations and emergency food sites they partner with. Last year they reached nearly 3,000 participants. SNAP-Ed is federally funded through a grant from the USDA.

Extension is also part of Ag Educational Partnership. It helps provide staffing for the Ag in the Classroom Program. School children learn about agriculture and our food systems through fun hands-on activities. Last year, thousands of local students were introduced to agriculture through this program. A lot of people know us as the people who hatch chicks in the schools. If you have ever had that experience, it is so fun to watch how excited the kids are to see how chicks hatch. The future is bright. They are currently adding a new commercial Ag Local Foods Educator to our unit. This resource has been needed for a long time. They are excited to bring local staffing back to serve the needs of area producers. They are hoping to have someone in place by the end of the year, and the State Extension will be partially funding the program.

Thanks to state 4-H funding, they are looking to add an additional 4-H educator to our staff who will focus on serving local metro Springfield area youth. Her discussion today would not be complete without thanking the many dedicated volunteers and 4-H club leaders. They could not have the impact they do in their communities without their generous efforts. They also could not do their important work without the local support they receive from the County Board, the taxpayers, and local donors. She acknowledged them and thanked them for their support. She congratulated one of their own, David Mendenhall, who has been selected as a 2023 Illinois 4-H Hall of Fame Inductee. He will be formally inducted on Friday, August 11th in the Orr Building at the Illinois State Fairgrounds. He was with 4-H himself and has a long history of support for the 4-H, serving both as volunteer and on the 4-H Foundation. He also currently serves as a County representative on our Extension Council along with Brad Miller and Vera Small. She thanked them for their support and advice. She thanked the County Board for their time this evening.

Mr. Mendenhall thanked them for pushing for his nomination. It is a great honor and he has loved working with 4-H and Extension his entire life.

MINUTES 

A motion was made by Ms. Williams, seconded by Mr. Bunch, for approval of the Minutes of June 13, 2023 & June 27, 2023. A voice vote was unanimous.

MOTION CARRIED

MINUTES ADOPTED

CORRESPONDENCE 

A motion was made by Mr. Bunch, seconded by Ms. Williams, to place Correspondence on file with the County Clerk. A voice vote was unanimous.

RESOLUTION 1 

1. Resolution approving the planning year 2024 agreement with the Springfield-Sangamon County Regional Planning Commission for the Planning Year 2024 Unified Planning Work Program.

A motion was made by Mr. Fraase, seconded by Mr. Stumpf, to place Resolution 1 on the floor. Chairman Van Meter asked County Clerk Gray to call the roll. Upon the roll call vote, there were 27 Yeas – 0 Nays.

MOTION CARRIED

RESOLUTION ADOPTED

RESOLUTION 2 

2. Resolution approving the granting of a permanent easement to the City of Springfield for the purpose of utility construction and maintenance, sidewalk construction and maintenance, and for other roadway purposes.

A motion was made by Mr. Fraase, seconded by Ms. Deppe, to place Resolution 2 on the floor. A motion was made by Mr. Preckwinkle that the roll call vote for Resolution 1 stands as the roll call vote for Resolution 2. A voice vote was unanimous.

MOTIONS CARRIED

RESOLUTION ADOPTED

RESOLUTION 3 

3. 2023-013 – Edwin Waldmire, 6047 Waldmire Road, Rochester – Granting a Rezoning and a Variance. County Board Member – Tom Madonia, Jr, District #9.

A motion was made by Mr. Stumpf, seconded by Mr. Madonia, to place Resolution 3 on the floor. A motion was made by Mr. Stumpf to waive the reading of the professional staff’s report. There were no objections. A voice vote was unanimous for the adoption of Resolution 3.

MOTIONS CARRIED

RESOLUTION ADOPTED

RESOLUTION 4 

4. 2023-014 – Bomke’s Patch/Bomke’s Patch Pumpkins, LLC, 595 Country Lake Road, Springfield- Granting a Conditional Permitted Use and Variances. County Board Member – Tom Fraase, District #1.

A motion was made by Mr. Stumpf, seconded by Mr. Fraase, to place Resolution 4 on the floor. A motion was made by Mr. Stumpf to waive the reading of the professional staff’s report. There were no objections. A voice vote was unanimous for the adoption of Resolution 4.

MOTIONS CARRIED

RESOLUTION ADOPTED

RESOLUTION 5 

5. 2023-015 – Charles Burnight, 848 Forrest Avenue, Springfield – Granting a Rezoning. County Board Member – Sam Cahnman, District #18.

A motion was made by Mr. Stumpf, seconded by Mr. Cahnman, to place Resolution 5 on the floor. A motion was made by Mr. Stumpf to waive the reading of the professional staff’s report. There were no objections. A voice vote was unanimous for the adoption of Resolution 5.

MOTIONS CARRIED

RESOLUTION ADOPTED

A motion was made by Ms. Williams to go out of the regular order of business and proceed to Old Business-Resolution 9 from the May 9, 2023 meeting. There were no objections.

OLD BUSINESS 

RES. 9 - MAY 9, 2023 

9. Motion to reconsider the Board’s May 9, 2023 vote on Resolution 9-1, a Resolution concerning River Maple Solar II, LLC’s request for a Conditional Permitted Use for a Commercial Solar Energy System.

A motion was made by Mr. Stumpf, seconded by Ms. Williams, to place Resolution 9 on the floor. Chairman Van Meter asked the professional staff to give the procedural history of the case. Trustin Harrison stated the petitioner is requesting a conditional permitted use for a commercial solar energy system. Emily Prather stated the Planning Commission staff recommends approval. The staff reviewed the materials submitted by the applicant and determined that the proposal complies with Public Act 102-1123, signed into law on January 27, 2023. Mr. Harrison stated the Zoning Board of Appeals concurs with the staff recommendation with a vote of 4 to 1.

Chairman Van Meter clarified that they are now considering the resolution as it was amended on May 9th. There were two amendments offered that evening. One offered by Mr. Cahnman that extended the buffer area around the proposed solar plant. The other was offered by Mr. Mendenhall and was directed toward training for the first responders that might be involved.

Proponent, Seth Uphoff with Trajectory Energy Partners, addressed the County Board. Their address is 5901 N. Prospect Road, Suite 201B in Peoria. He stated he is joined tonight by the landowners/representatives of that property including Nancy and Chris Martin, members of the local Carpenters Union, and Bob Croto from Faith in Place. This project meets all the requirements of your old solar ordinance. They have met all the requirements and checked all the boxes of your old ordinance, which you put in place. They were recommended for approval by the Regional Planning Commission, and your Zoning Board of Appeals heard all the evidence under oath. After considering all that evidence, they also recommended that you approve this project. This is also supported by local labor and other locals in the community. He believes they are supporting this because of the benefits this brings to the table. The economic benefits this project brings to Sangamon County includes millions of dollars invested into the community with the building of this project. There is going to be good paying jobs for local working people in Sangamon County. There will be job opportunities during construction and post construction for local businesses and locals in the area. There is also going to be a significant increase in the property tax revenue generated from this property. Your minimum setback for residences was 250 feet, and this exceeds that in all aspects. In one spot it is over 1,000 feet, so more than four times your old project requirements. He urged them to support the land owners in the community.

Mr. Mendenhall asked if they determined the negative effects on the agricultural community during their research. Mr. Uphoff stated the Zoning Board of Appeals evidence was presented under oath. There was no evidence presented to that effect. The Chairman of the ZBA is a long-time fertilizer distributor here in Sangamon County and he voted in favor of this project. This is a very small piece of farmland you have available here in Sangamon County. You have over 500,000 acres, and this is a project that is less than 40 acres. You asked if we have done a study. How is anyone going to do a study when the project hasn’t even been approved? In relation to your agricultural industry in Sangamon County, which is very large, this is a very minute part of it. There could be some negative benefits, but you have to balance those with the positive. It is a very small piece of the farming industry. Mr. Mendenhall asked why they have not looked at non-prime farm land. Mr. Uphoff stated the solar companies are always looking for farmland or any land that can be used for solar projects, but there are certain requirements you have to meet. You need to have an interconnection point and a three-phase line where you can easily access and put power onto the grid. His family has farm ground in Livingston County, and he thought they had a three-phase line that went by one of their properties. It turns out it was not, so it was not even eligible for a solar farm. There is probably acreage out there you might think would work for solar, but the fact of the matter is, it may not work because it doesn’t have an interconnection point or the landowner may not be interested. You need to have both those factors in addition to other factors. You also can’t be in a wetland and you can’t be in a floodplain. There are multiple factors that have to be considered. It is a multi-factor analysis to find land where such a project can be built.

Mr. Mendenhall stated he understands this, but his question is if they have done the research, and the answer is no. Mr. Uphoff stated they are always doing the research for properties. Mr. Mendenhall asked what the negative effect on the Ag community is then. Mr. Uphoff clarified that his last question was why they didn’t put this on some other Ag land and he was explaining why it does not meet the requirements. Mr. Mendenhall stated he could show them 15,000 or 20,000 acres in Sangamon County where you could put this. Mr. Uphoff stated they would love for him to contact them and provide the parcels so they can take a look at them. Mr. Mendenhall stated he has tried to do that.

Mr. Cahnman stated the previous amendment was to have vegetative screening on the entire western boundary. He sees they are looking at having a 7-foot high fence. He asked if that is on the western boundary as well. Mr. Uphoff stated it is. The fence must surround the entire property for safety. It is required by the National Electric Code and by ordinance. Mr. Cahnman asked what the fence would be composed of. Mr. Uphoff stated it’s required to be a chain link fence. Mr. Cahnman asked if the vegetative screening would be outside the fence. Mr. Uphoff stated that is correct. It is called vegetative screening to screen the project and the fence from the outside. Mr. Cahnman asked if the vegetative screening would be 7-foott high as well. Mr. Uphoff explained there are a variety of plants selected and most of them grow to a height to shield that 7- foot fence. Once of them is Sumac, which can grow around 15 feet. The plants chosen are designed to put together a native vegetative screening to break up any of the view lines and to shield the project and fence. Mr. Cahnman asked if people who live west of the solar plant would see just the vegetative screening. Mr. Uphoff stated that would be his argument. From Long View, which is over 1,000 feet, it is difficult to see it at all, so with vegetative screening it would be even more difficult to see.

Mr. DelGiorno stated he assumes they are familiar with the new law enacted in January and the changes in place with that. Mr. Uphoff stated he is. Mr. DelGiorno asked if has also familiarized himself with the local ordinance they passed at the May meeting to enact and regulate what they could at the County level. Mr. Uphoff stated he has not gone through the most recently passed ordinance because this project was preceding under the old ordinance. Mr. DelGiorno asked if they are able to explain what the differences would be for the project if it were to fail tonight and they had to re-apply under the new law as it was enacted and effective in May. Mr. Uphoff stated they would. A company could come in and seek to site this project 150 feet from the structures that are on Long View or anywhere in that neighborhood out there. Under the new ordinance and statute, the project could be sited as close as 150 feet to the structure. Most of those structures are farther towards the west, and do not back up to the east side of their property lines. Someone could come in and put a project much closer to the properties in that neighborhood. That is not Trajectory’s intention. They have worked hard to try and work with the neighbors in that area. They know a lot of them don’t like it, but they have reached out, tried to make overtures and accommodations. They are willing to accept the screening on the project to try and make it less visible. They also moved it all the way over to the east side of that parcel to make it as far away from their properties as possible. Now would some other company come in and choose not to take into account those considerations? That could happen. Trajectory is going to stand by where they are placing this project, but somebody else could come along and put it much closer.

Mr. Ayers asked him to talk about the job aspect of this project. He asked how many jobs versus union jobs this would create. Mr. Uphoff stated they would have members from the Carpenter’s Union, including Riki Dial who is familiar with the types of jobs, that can be provide information on this.

Riki Dial, residing at 641 Foxtail Lane, Springfield, addressed the County Board. He is the Regional Director for the Mid-America Carpenters Regional Council and they represent 7,000 members in 74 counties in Central and Southern Illinois. There are 1,300 of those members who live and work in Local 270 based out of Springfield. The biggest reason the Carpenters Union is supporting this project in particular is because of their working relationship with Trajectory. They have proven to be a good community and business partner with the Carpenters Union. So many times in the past they have worked with solar developers that he calls “Fly by night contractors or developers”. They bring in workers from all over the country and pay substandard wages with little or no benefit packages. Trajectory has agreed to supply good local union carpenters to work on this project. He thinks that is the biggest reason the Carpenters Union is here to support this project. They do support the locals. There will be local carpenters and other craft’s people working on this project. They like to spend their money where they make their money, and they can make their money with Trajectory on this project.

Mr. Krell asked how much damage was done to other solar panels in lieu of the recent storms. Mr. Uphoff stated he is not familiar with that project and how it faired with the storms going through, but they do know there is always the opportunity for Act of God type storms to come through and create damage. These are not infallible or indestructible, but there is a technical memorandum from experts regarding the potential of leaching of any materials within these solar panels. It is pretty clear how they talk about the possibility of leaching of any materials, even when they are destroyed, is very small. They refer to it as either negligible or insignificant. They talk about various studies where they have tested solar panels and put them through non-real world scenarios and busted them up, put in acid baths, and have done everything they can to try and see if they can get damaging materials to leach out of them. Even in those testing scenarios, leaching of any toxic chemicals or materials is so small that it falls far below any health and safety standards for humans. Mr. Krell stated the question is what damage could be done if they are a flying projectile. Mr. Uphoff stated they would not cause any more damage than other equipment on a farm.

A motion was made by Mr. Cahnman, seconded by Mr. DelGiorno, to withdraw the previous amendment he offered that was adopted by the County Board in May. He proposed as a replacement amendment the following: Resolution 9 is amended to require the vegetative screening depicted on Exhibit C of the petitioner’s proposed conditions/site plan to extend along the entire western boundary of the project (near the proposed fence) and comply with the County ordinance governing vegetative screening in effect at the time of the filing of the petition. Mr. Uphoff stated they have no objection to the amendment. A voice vote was unanimous on the amendment.

A motion was made by Mr. Mendenhall, seconded by Mr. Cahnman, to make a second amendment to Resolution 9 to require the petitioner to comply with Section 17.37.050 B of Sangamon County’s Code entitled Coordination with Emergency Responders. Mr. Uphoff stated they have no objection to the amendment. A voice vote was unanimous on the amendment.

Opponent, Robin Martin, residing at 330 Country Towne Road, Springfield, addressed the County Board. She stated she is the Precinct Committeeman for Clearlake District 7, is representing members of this area, and they have three questions. She addressed Mr. Madonia on the first question. She spoke with him in May and he met with Mr. & Ms. Jones, whose back yard faces the solar farm, at their home and he said “This is a game changer” for two reasons. First, when you found out there was a petition of 90 plus people opposing it and again when you stood in the sunroom at their home seeing where the solar farm would be in their neighborhood. You even said you would get other board members to vote against it, yet, two days later after stating these things, you voted for the solar farms. She asked why he said that and then voted in favor of it in May. She addressed Ms. Deppe on the second question. She asked Ms. Deppe why she changed her vote when she originally voted against it. She addressed Mr. Truax on the third question. Mr. Truax drove out to the neighborhood where the proposed solar farm would be and stopped a resident who was walking her dog and introduced himself and told them he was against the solar farm because it is prime farm land. A few days later, you voted for the solar farm, so they would like to know why. Ms. Martin gave the County Clerk some affidavits witnessing these statements.

Opponent, Dale Matthews, residing at 17 Wind Cave Drive, Springfield, addressed the County Board. He is the Vice President of the Westview Park Homeowner’s Association. He built several of the homes in Westview Park and remodeled many others. He worked in the construction industry for 52 years and never once did he have a customer ask to build a home close to a power plant. He does not believe for a minute that anyone in this room would ever express such a desire; however, here we are debating whether to build a power plant next to a residential subdivision. Make no mistake, you can place all the warm fuzzy hype you want on this, but it is just that, a power plant. It is an industrial development next to a residential neighborhood. In no other circumstance would the zoning be permitted except in the irrational fervor over green energy. He knows why they want to build this and he does not think it has anything to do with saving the planet. It is about money. They simply want to make a buck. But why here? They want this location because it is close to a major power transmission line. They say it won’t affect our property values, but he disagrees. In North Branch Minnesota they saw a 17% decline in their property values. In Midland North Carolina there was a 15.5% to 16.8% decline. In Grandy North Carolina there was a 15.5% decline. In Spotsylvania Virginia there was a 30% decline. If property values are not a problem then he would like to suggest an alternative location as a possibility. It contains 452 acres, has a high voltage power line right across the road, has excellent roads for accessibility, and is at least 500 feet from the nearest home. Where is this, you might ask? It is right across the street from the Panther Creek Country Club. Now remember, it won’t affect property values, so no worries. You may believe that, but the homeowners of Westview Park certainly don’t. We don’t wish to be sacrificial lambs on the altar of green energy. Dig down deep and remember the golden rule and vote against this proposal.

Opponent, Shelly Connor, residing at 14 Long View Road, Springfield, addressed the County Board. Her main question is what is in it for you and why the sudden change of heart. She asked why there was a sudden change in the vote. She invited any one of them to come out and stand on her back deck and look over the property. Although it looks far away in the pictures, it is a lot closer than it seems. There are proposals for three solar sites within a three to five mile radius looking out her back door. She asked why they are putting these solar farms in the middle of a subdivision. There are wildlife concerns and concerns of a possible glare when they tilt the panels. She asked if they would want this in their back yard. She fully supports this but they need to look at reasonable places to put them. She heard “This is what the landowners want”. Her understanding is the landowners don’t even live there. Also, the jobs are just temporary. She fully supports the unions, but they need to look at the reality of this. She asked why they can’t move this closer to the quarry. She asked them to reconsider and vote no on this and consider the people in the neighborhood that this will affect.

Opponent, Max Dillahunty, residing at 27 Ann Drive, Springfield, addressed the County Board. He read an article about the CO2 pipelines and Mr. Stumpf said he wanted to hear the answers on safety and property values and roads. Well, they are very concerned about the property value aspect of this solar farm. They do not believe the information presented by Trajectory Energy Partners is correct. People in the neighborhood believe this will have a negative impact on all of their homes. He has lived there for 35 years and built it because of the farmland. They did not want to live in a neighborhood where there was a lot of electrical, but in an area where it is quite, calm, and with farmland around them. He has a petition with 57 signatures, and they all intend to ask for the reassessment of their property values if this passes tonight. They believe this will offset what Trajectory is telling you the benefit would be.

Opponent, Clifford Clement, residing at #2 Long View Drive, Springfield, addressed the County Board. He has lived out there for 52 years. His objection to the solar farm is that everything drains in their direction and they are going to put 40 acres of roof over that ground. He could go out in that field and dig a hole two feet deep and fill it full of water and 45 minutes later that water is still standing in there. So, they will get a tremendous amount of run off and it will come his way. That is one of the biggest concerns he has and he hasn’t heard anyone address that. When you plant stuff in that area, it turns brown and gets dry in the fall and becomes a fire hazard. He asked who is going to maintain that. You can’t just plant it once and expect it to stay there. They need to look at their landscaping. These panels are going to need washed and they will be washed with a chemical that can be irritable if it gets on someone. He asked the company where the water is coming from. Is it coming from their municipal water source or are they putting in a well? He also has an issue with the disposal of these panels. From what he understands, there is very little that is recyclable. He asked what kind of damage they would get from the storms that come in. You can’t just put panels in like that and have wind and it not affect something.

Opponent, Rosanna Pallitto, addressed the County Board. She stated she is a conservative Latino and grew up in Chicago and her parents spoke Spanish in her home. They were staunch Republicans. When she became of voting age she became a Republican because she saw the party platform of advancing our Founding Father’s principles of freedom, opportunity, and limited government. It says in our Republican platform that we recognize agriculture remains the Illinois core industry. Ag built this state, and growth and success is continued to depend on farm families. We know Illinois farmers feed the nation. What she witnessed here with the protection of the solar farm companies and the protection and interests of the Sangamon County constituents totally disregarded, has really enraged her. She does not know if they care or are aware of a movement that is underfoot to turn back to our true Republican principles. She looks forward to the Republican Party turning back to the foundational principles for the people and by the people.

Mr. Madonia addressed the question from Ms. Martin about Mr. & Mrs. Jones concern. He explained he was at the house and if he misled them he honestly apologizes, but at no point did he say he was voting against this. I said “You will have a tough time getting 15 no votes to overturn this.” At no point did he offer his support or mislead them in any way. If they mistook it as that then he apologizes. This petition may have swayed some board members who were on the fence.

Mr. Stumpf stated they have a lot of emotion here. Our Zoning Committee has emotions with everything that comes at them all the time, but they work a process. In this particular case, whether you are Republican or Democrat or any ethnicity, everyone has emotions and that is fine. For the last 12 years or more, they have worked directly with the Sangamon County Farm Bureau, the State’s Attorney, colleagues on the County Board, Regional Planning, and their constituents on the issue of wind farms, solar farms, and cannabis operations. They have worked with all of these entities and they all came to an agreement with the ordinances they developed. They developed the strongest windmill ordinance in the state and the 4th strongest solar ordinance in the state. With the Sangamon County Farm Bureau, half of them are for a lot of these projects and half are not. Everybody has issues within their organizations but the County Board has to make the ultimate decisions, and they have done that will all these entities. They all came to a conclusion on these ordinances that this is the best route to go. If a company comes in to do business in our County, the first thing they do is make sure they meet the criteria. This company met all the criteria developed on their first ordinances over the last 12 years, which has been tweaked several times. Not only do they meet the County’s old rules, they very much meet the state’s new rules by a landslide. He knows the emotions are high, but they meet all the criteria.

Ms. Deppe explained when she voted no they had very conflicting statements from both sides. Since then she received more information, so that is why she changed her vote.

Mr. Mendenhall stated he is not against solar projects, but he is against them when they are located where they take prime farm land out of production and have a negative effect on property values. They have listened to concerns about other projects and locations. He does 100% agree that people have a right to develop their property. He has probably developed more property, both Ag industry, and commercial than anyone in this room. He has developed two seed companies, a cattle feed lot, and several crude oil unload facilities and was always concerned about the location and if it would have a negative effect on the neighboring properties. Just because it meets all the criteria does not mean it is a good location. Mr. Martin said he would support this depending on where it is located. There are hundreds of locations in Sangamon County and adjoining counties where this could be. All they have to do is go look, but they do not look. They wait for landowners to let them know they are okay with it. It is all about the money. We need to wake up and use common sense.

Mr. Cahnman stated this project is on 35 acres which equals 0.0066% of Sangamon County farm acres. So, if this project goes through, the County would still have 99.993% acres remaining. That is about 525,000 acres or more. He thinks the impact on Sangamon County agriculture would be insignificant.

Mr. Krell stated he is old enough to remember that every Mayor always cited the Lakeside CWLP Power Plant as our “Jewel” of Springfield. Now that “Jewel” means nothing anymore. We need jobs and reliable energy around Sangamon County. On these issues, he usually votes in favor of the County Board members whose district the petition is in. We are having more of these come up, and if they don’t bother anybody in that area, he will vote for them.

Ms. Fulgenzi explained under the new state law, they have taken away our options by creating new legislation to take rights away from us. So, it is the Legislature and Governor who set these standards.

Mr. Bunch stated he talked with a lawyer and if they vote this down they will end up with a lawsuit. They are stuck in the middle here. If they vote this down tonight the state is going to allow it anyway. There is nothing they can do about this. They need to sue the state and the not the County.

Mr. Mendenhall agreed with Mr. Bunch, but they have to think about who we want to be sued by, the state or our constituents who elect us.

Mr. Uphoff stated there were topics brought up by the opponents and a lot of those were covered at the ZBA hearing under oath. They addressed drainage, run off, and recyclability. It is all in the record. This project meets your old standards. As he said before “Don’t move your goal post and don’t change the rules in the middle of your game”. There was talk about property and owner’s rights as well. One thing to keep in mind is everybody is entitled to an objection, but you can’t always let those objections become vetoes. If someone wants to move out into the country and then place a house there and say “I now have a veto over anybody else’s land for as far as my eye can see”, how is that fair?

Mr. Schackmann asked Mr. Uphoff if they do clean the solar panels and use chemicals. Mr. Uphoff stated they do not clean them or use chemicals.

Ms. Fulgenzi asked if they are going to apply for a storm water permit through the Illinois EPA to address the drainage issues. Mr. Uphoff stated all that is required and is part of the process. It was completely pattern tiled, and drainage experts testified at ZBA and said they would make any adjustments necessary to accommodate the project and accommodate any neighbors. He has spoken with experts and there are studies out there that stated when you install these projects and grow the vegetation being proposed for their project, they actually increase the penetration of the water in those areas. They actually reduce run off compared to when you have row crops.

Mr. Bunch stated people should think about it if they want to sue us, then the solar people can sue us too, so now we would have two lawsuits. They need to sue the state and not us. They are running this down our throat. Either vote it down and get sued or vote it up and people won’t like us. It is terrible that we are in this situation.

Opponent, Steve Jones, residing at 46 Long View Drive, Springfield, addressed the Board to give a rebuttal. We would not have a problem with what they do with their property if it wasn’t affecting 150 families. They are the losers on this. They did not ask for this fight, but they are not going to sit around and let somebody try to run all over them. There is a right and there is a wrong, and it is wrong to put this solar farm in our subdivision. As far as suing, sometimes you just have to stand up for what is right. He has tried to do this all his life and be as honest as he can, but when you start letting people run over you then you start to lose your rights. He stated in his email to the board members that he has faith in them and he knows there are a lot of good people on this board. You decide for yourself what you think is right.

Chairman Van Meter asked for a roll call vote on the motion to adopt Resolution 9, as amended. Upon the roll call vote, there were 14 Yeas – 13 Nays. Those voting Nay were: Mr. Constant, Ms. Douglas Williams, Mr. Forsyth, Mr. Fraase, Mr. Krell, Mr. Mendenhall, Mr. Miller, Mr. O’Neill, Mr. Preckwinkle, Ms. Scaife, Mr. Sheppard, Ms. Small, and Mr. Tjelmeland.

MOTIONS CARRIED

RESOLUTION ADOPTED

RESOLUTIONS 6 – 14 

6. Resolution approving a contract between the Sheriff’s Office and HomeWav to expand services to Sangamon County inmates to include off-site video visitation, online education, messaging (text, photos, video), and entertainment services (e-books, games, movies/TV, music).

A motion was made by Mr. Tjelmeland, seconded by Mr. DelGiorno, to place Resolution 6 on the floor. A motion was made by Mr. Bunch, seconded by Mr. Madonia, to consolidate Resolutions 6 – 14. Chairman Van Meter asked County Clerk Gray to read Resolutions 7 – 14.

7. Resolution approving the procurement of goods and/or services for the Coroner’s Office from Southern Illinois University for the purpose of performing autopsies in the amount of $264,000.

8. Resolution approving a grant application for the Sheriff’s Office from the IL Law Enforcement Training and Standards Board for the Law Enforcement Camera Grant in the amount of $124,405.

9. Resolution approving the procurement of goods and/or services for Information Systems from CDW-G for the purpose of renewing the licenses for Crowdstrike software to provide antivirus security on the County network in the amount of $132,152.

10. Resolution approving a grant application for the Land of Lincoln Workforce Alliance from the Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity for the WIOA Formula Grant in the amount of $2,389,165.

11. Resolution approving a grant application for the Child Advocacy Center from the Department of Children and Family Services for the Child Advocacy Program in the amount of $251,191.

12. Resolution approving a grant application for the Child Advocacy Center from the Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority for the Child Advocacy Program in the amount of $233,203.

13. Resolution approving a grant application for Sangamon County CASA from Illinois CASA to provide advocacy for children in foster care due to abuse and neglect in the amount of $98,665.

14. Resolution approving a grant application for Sangamon County CASA from the Illinois Attorney General to provide advocacy for children in foster care due to abuse and neglect in the amount of $40,000.

A voice vote was unanimous on the consolidation of Resolutions 6-14.

Mr. Cahnman asked the Sheriff’s Office a question regarding Resolution 6. He stated the contractor is going to charge $.20 a minute for phone calls. He asked what the current charge is. Tim Eggleston with the Sheriff’s Office answered it is going to be less. The current charge is $.21 plus taxes and fees. The $.20 includes taxes and fees. Mr. Cahnman stated this includes scanning of all US mail that comes to prisoners. He asked if they could just receive a scan and not the actual mail. Mr. Eggleston explained they currently do that today. The mail comes in through a service called TextBehind. They have a separate contract with ICSolutions today and it is going to continue to be TextBehind with Homewav in the future. A different company is going to hire a third party provider.

Mr. Cahnman asked about Resolution 7 where they are paying a flat fee of $264,000 for up to 220 autopsies and if there are more where they are paying $1,200 per autopsy. He doesn’t understand why they don’t just give them a flat fee of $1,200 per autopsy unless they know they are going to go above 220. County Administrator Brian McFadden explained that they do the flat amounts so it is the same cost per autopsy. They have to give an upper range as to how many they think they will do. Some years it is below that and some years it is above that, so that is an estimate. If they go beyond then they will come back for an amendment to the contract. Chairman Van Meter explained in order to retain this Forensic Pathologist they have to assure him of a minimum income. Mr. McFadden stated that is basically his income.

Mr. Cahnman also asked about the body cams mentioned in Resolution 8. He asked how many body cams they would be acquiring with this grant. Tim Eggleston with the Sheriff’s Office stated they have already purchased body cameras for both the Jail and Corrections. This is a grant request that is allowing them to be refunded for some of those expenses because it meets the timeline from when they purchased them. In the grant, the amount is actually $97,000 but they don’t know if they will honor both Corrections and the Deputies, so it could be around $40,000 to $50,000 but up to $97,000.

Ms. Douglas Williams asked what the other roadway purposes are that were mentioned in Resolution 2. Mr. McFadden explained it involves the new Transportation Center to give ability to their utilities to run through County property and allow access through the back alley behind the Jail during construction. They will have to move transformers because of construction on the first floor.

A motion was made by Mr. Preckwinkle that the roll call vote for Resolution 1 stands as the roll call vote for Resolutions 6 – 14, as consolidated. A voice vote was unanimous.

MOTIONS CARRIED

RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED

WAIVER OF TEN-DAY FILING PERIOD 

A motion was made by Ms. Williams, seconded by Mr. Bunch, to waive the ten-day filing period. A voice vote was unanimous.

MOTION CARRIED

TEN-DAY FILING PERIOD WAIVED

RESOLUTION 15 

15. Resolution approving a grant application for the Child Advocacy Center from the Illinois Attorney General for the Child Advocacy Program in the amount of $61,300.

A motion was made by Ms. Williams, seconded by Mr. Bunch, to place Resolution 15 on the floor. A voice vote was unanimous for the adoption of Resolution 15.

MOTION CARRIED

RESOLUTION ADOPTED

RESOLUTION 16 

16. Resolution creating a Pace Area and establishing the Illinois Finance Authority Property Assessed Clean Energy Program for record owners of property.

A motion was made by Mr. Preckwinkle, seconded by Mr. Bunch, to place Resolution 16 on the floor. A motion was made by Mr. Preckwinkle that the roll call vote for Resolution 1 stands as the roll call vote for Resolution 16. A voice vote was unanimous.

MOTIONS CARRIED

RESOLUTION ADOPTED

NEW BUSINESS 

A. Resolutions

There were no new resolutions.

B. Appointments

Appointment of Maria Ray to the Community Services Block Grant Advisory Board for a term expiring July, 2026.

Appointment of Brian Churchill to the Emergency Telephone System Department Board for a term expiring September, 2023.

A motion was made by Ms. Williams, seconded by Mr. Bunch, for approval of the appointments. A voice vote was unanimous. The nominations for appointment in August were also submitted.

MOTION CARRIED

APPOINTMENTS ADOPTED

C. 2024 County Holiday Schedule

A motion was made by Mr. Bunch, seconded by Ms. Williams, for approval of the 2024 County Holiday Schedule. A voice vote was unanimous.

MOTION CARRIED

HOLIDAY SCHEDULE ADOPTED

PUBLIC COMMENT 

There was no public comment.

REPORTS OF COUNTY OFFICIALS, REPORTS OF SPECIAL COMMITTEES, REPORTS OF STANDING COMMITTEES, COMMITTEE REPORT ON CLAIMS 

Mr. Truax gave a Special Committee Report on the Broadband Review Committee. In March of 2023 the County allocated funds from the American Rescue Plan Act to expand broadband services within the County. The committee was formed and consists of board members, county employees, and the Springfield-Sangamon Growth Alliance. Upon review of all the submitted bids, the committee determined that none of the proposals met their expectations. The total cost far exceeds what the available resources are for the County. They have a company that says they will provide Wi-Fi service to the entire county by 2025. It is possibly a $53 million project, and they were offering $3 million to get it done a little quicker because the schedules were falling behind. The State of Illinois is offering some more funding, and they can expect Wi-Fi to be installed in the entire county in the next 18 to 24 months. The Broadband Review Committee will schedule more meetings and will report back to the County Board on their progress for wireless and fiber initiatives. Chairman Van Meter thanked Mr. Truax and the whole committee for their work.

A motion was made by Mr. Bunch, seconded by Ms. Williams, to place the Committee Report on Claims on file with the County Clerk. A voice vote was unanimous.

MOTION CARRIED

REPORTS FILED

RECESS 

Chairman Van Meter stated the County Board office would be moving to Sangamon South on July 21st. The next County Board meeting will be at the Sangamon South building. They talked about trying an adjusted time schedule in both Caucuses, so the Caucus will meet at 5:30 p.m. and the County Board meeting will be at 6:00 p.m.

Mr. Stumpf stated there would be a public hearing on Monday, July 17, 2023 at 5:30 p.m. at the BOS Center for a presentation from Navigator on the carbon dioxide lines. They will also hear from OEM Coordinator Bill Lee, Assistant State’s Attorney Joel Benoit, and Brian Davis from County Highway. They will also hear from more opponents and proponents of the project. He invited all the County Board members to attend. He will send out an email to them.

Brian McFadden thanked the County Board members for all the cards, gift cards, food and plants. The display was really overwhelming in a positive way.

A motion was made by Ms. Williams, seconded by Mr. Bunch, to recess the meeting to August 8, 2023 at 6:00 p.m. at the Sangamon County Building. A voice vote was unanimous.

MOTION CARRIED

MEETING RECESSED

https://countyclerk.sangamonil.gov/County-Board/documents/MinutesJuly112023.pdf