which did business with smaller companiesrnin the proposed taxing districtrninformed them that opposition to thernproposed solution would hurt their bottomrnline.rnThis was no idle threat. Under the Illinoisrnmosquito abatement statute, thernspecial taxing district would automaticallyrnbe created unless 51 percent of the affectedrnproperty owners signed a petitionrnopposing the district. In other words,rnthere was no “Australian ballot.” A business’srnstand on the taxing district wouldrnbe public knowledge, and the PRPsrncould use that knowledge any way theyrnwished.rnDespite these threats—or perhaps, becausernof them—the small business communityrnin southeast Rockford stood up tornthe powers-that-be. Mai Anderburg, thernowner of Dial Machine, and others spentrnover $50,000 and thousands of hoursrnfighting the taxing district through theirrngroup, Concerned Property Ownersrn(CPO). Most of the members of CPOrnwere apolitical; some had never even voted.rnBut they went door-to-door in southeastrnRockford, gathering the necessaryrnsignatures. Glen Ekberg, who had donatedrnthe Ekberg Park land to the RockfordrnPark District, was the only individualrnnamed by the EPA as a PRP; yet hernput principle ahead of financial considerations,rnand signed the petition. He didrnnot believe that placing a tax burden forrnthe Superfund cleanup on innocentrnsmall businesses was right.rnFrom the beginning, it was clear that,rnif those opposed to the taxing district didrnnot succeed in their petition drive, thernRockford City Council would have tornvote on the plan. The city council normallyrnacts as a rubber stamp for thernwishes of Mayor Box. The WinnebagornCounty Board, however, is a differentrnmatter. When it was revealed that a portionrnof the proposed taxing district was inrnthe county, and that the district couldrnnot be created without the board’s consent,rnseveral county board members —rnnotably Republicans Mary Ann Aiellornand Tom Seymour—stood up for thernsmall businesses in the taxing district.rnTheir tireless efforts would ultimatelyrnturn the tide.rnFor months. Mayor Box and thernChamber of Commerce portrayed thernEPA as the heavy. They argued that theyrnwere simply trying to protect the citizensrnof Rockford from further federal intervention,rna la the school situation. Butrnthe facts did not add up. For one thing.rnthe proposed Superfund taxing districtrnhad boundaries that were diflFerent fi-omrnthose used in the EPA’s Superfundrnstudy. Some members of the oppositionrnnoticed that certain politically influentialrnbusinesses had been excluded fromrnthe taxing district. Cih’ Attorney RonrnSchultz was forced to admit that the city,rnnot the EPA, had set the boundaries forrnthe taxing district, and that, under thernmosquito-abatement statute, the size ofrnthe district could be increased by fivernpercent every year.rnWhen Mary Ann Aiello decided to approachrnthe EPA on her own, hoping tornget some answers, she received a shock.rnThe EPA had not proposed the Superfundrn”solution”; the proposal had originatedrnin Rockford! So, who was the realrnenemy of the local taxpayer: the EPA, orrnlocal government acting in collusionrnwith local big business?rnThe truth began to emerge at a forum,rnorganized by Aiello and held at RockfordrnCollege. Hoping to clear up some misconceptionsrn—and perhaps some outrightrnlies—Aiello invited Andrew Warren,rnthe EPA’s attorney in Chicago, tornaddress the property owners in the proposedrntaxing district. A few days beforernthe forum, Warren told Aiello that hernhad received a call from the U.S. Departmentrnof Justice, and that he mightrnnot be able to attend after all. I calledrnWarren to find out why. He said thatrnDOJ had concerns that his visit might affectrnthe outcome of the Superfund petitionrndrive. I asked him about rumors thatrnwere spreading through Rockford: Wasrnthere pressure from the White House?rnHad Janet Reno intervened because ofrnMayor Box’s position with the U.S.rnCouncil of Mayors, or because of his otherrncontacts with the Wliite House? Hernrecommended that I contact DOJ directly.rnAn underling there noted my concernsrnthat Warren’s failure to speak at thernforum would give the appearance of arncoverup. Warren came to the forum, asrndid an attorney from the Department ofrnJustice, two attorneys from the U.S. EPA,rnand 2 representatives of the Illinois EPA.rnThe powers-that-be made a desperaternattempt to regain control of the sihiation.rnState Senator Dave Syverson (the Republicanrnwho shares a finance committeernchairman with Democratic MayorrnBox) attempted to take over the forum.rnBut there was little he could do. Whenrnhe mentioned the Chamber of Commerce,rnlaughter filled the room. Seeingrnhis best-laid plans going astray. MayorrnBox quietly slipped out of the room afterrna mere ten minutes. It was not the finestrnhour for the powers-that-be.rnBut even though those opposed to thern”solution” had gained the upper hand,rnthe city and the Chamber of Commercernremained arrogant. City Attorney RonrnSchultz refused to release the ConsentrnDecree (the document detailing the fiillrnterms of the citv’s proposed settlementrnwith the EPA), unfil the Department ofrnJustice made a call to Schultz at the requestrnof Mary Ann Aiello and Tom Ping,rnan auto mechanic whose shop was in thernproposed taxing district.rnAs Jim Hess, an attorney for ConcernedrnProperty Owners, commented,rn”Sometimes you have to look at the forest,rnnot the trees, Ron Schultz wants yournto look at the trees. It all has to be extended.rnIt’s not a question of whetherrn[the Consent Decree] would be revealed;rnit’s a matter of when. They’verntreated us like mushrooms. You knowrnwhat mushrooms are—you keep them inrnthe dark and cover them with horse manure.”rnWhat was the forest that the city wasrntrying to conceal? The Consent Decreernrevealed that the city of Rockford —inrnother words, the taxpayers—and not thernPRPs would be responsible for pavingrnthe entire $15,761,900 bill (plus interest!)rnto the EPA by the end of the year. Arnsection entitled “Effect of Settlement;rnContribution Protection” revealed thernextent to which the city wished to protectrnthe PRPs. Any business which signed onrnto the agreement could not be sued; anyrnbusiness which refused to sign, however,rncould be sued by the PRPs.rnThe release of the Consent Decreernvirtually assured the death of the taxingrndistrict. But the Chamber of Commercernhad one final trick up its sleeve. ThernChamber sent a videotape of the RockfordrnCollege forum to all businesses inrnthe proposed taxing district. The videotapern(quite accidentally, of course) had arnWatergate-style gap. The missing secondsrnjust happened to encompass anrnEPA lawyer’s statement that the EPArnwould not sue a business if the only evidencernof contamination on that business’srnproperty came from a contaminatedrnaquifer running underneath it. TomrnPing, the auto mechanic, discovered therngap, and Chris Bowman, a local radiorntalk show host who had devoted hundredsrnof hours of his show to the opponentsrnof the tax district, played the tapernon the air, over and over.rn34/CHRONICLESrnrnrn