LaSalle County committee presses for downtown courthouse generator, seeks Ameren action on transformers

LaSalle County property committee members on March 14 pressed for a decision on a long‑planned standby generator for the downtown courthouse and urged the county to push Ameren to remove electrical transformers stored in the courthouse basement.

The discussion centered on safety and business‑continuity concerns for courthouse employees, jurors and the public after repeated power outages and equipment failures. Committee members asked county staff to contact the mayor and Ameren for an update and report back at the committee’s next meeting in two weeks, with the expectation the item would be forwarded to the full county board for a decision.

The issue has a multi‑year history. Kurt (engineer/staff) said an original design and estimate existed and was ready to go out to bid several years ago, but the city and a local historical group raised aesthetic concerns that stopped the project. “We had the project ready to go out to bids to be released and then the city stepped in and said they'd like further discussion,” Kurt said. He said the project had been coordinated with Ameren in prior planning so the utility could remove its equipment at the same time and that a similar sequence of coordination could be attempted again.

Committee member Dave pressed for faster action. “The transformers have got to go. This is…just an accident waiting to happen,” Dave said, citing repeated outages and damage to county servers and other equipment. Dave and other speakers described episodes in which power losses required staff to travel to the courthouse to shut down equipment manually to avoid damaging surges and left employees unable to work.

Don (county official) reviewed earlier planning work and said Ameren had previously cooperated with timed work and weekend schedules. “We worked with Ameren hand in hand and we had it all set up,” he said, adding that discussions stalled over aesthetics and site footprint issues in prior years.

Committee members discussed cost and funding. Kurt said the original design had a rough estimate of about $400,000 several years ago; later in the budget process the line item was reduced and currently sits at $275,000. “I have to get some updated estimates,” Kurt said, noting lead times for custom sound‑attenuated enclosures and generator manufacture.

Legal and zoning questions were raised. A committee member urged involving legal counsel to understand potential consequences if the county proceeded without city approval. Pat (legal counsel) said the county would need to review the agreements that allowed the transformers to be located in the basement and examine options: “We’ll have to go back and look at how they got there in the first place,” Pat said. County counsel also warned that proceeding without city buy‑in could prompt litigation: when asked whether the city could sue to stop work, Pat said, “Could Ottawa file a lawsuit to try to enjoin the county from doing that? Sure.”

Several members argued that safety and uninterrupted court operations should take priority. A committee speaker described multiple incidents of equipment losses and people trapped in elevators during power outages, and urged decisive action even if it risked a dispute with the city. Another member suggested involving the chief judge to enlist political support.

The committee directed staff to contact Mayor Hasty and Ameren and to return with an update in two weeks and to put a decision to move the project to the full county board on the next agenda. Members also asked staff to bring updated cost estimates and to invite legal counsel to the follow‑up meeting.

If the committee receives a timeline from Ameren and the mayor, members said they expect to either move forward with a plan that includes working with Ameren to relocate transformers and install the generator or to make a formal recommendation to the full board. No final vote to authorize construction was taken at the March 14 meeting.

The committee also discussed alternatives such as portable temporary generators and a plug‑in external generator connection the county has used in the past; members noted these are stopgap measures that can require hours to arrange and do not reliably protect sensitive equipment.

The county has budgeted funds in past years for a generator project but members noted the earlier estimate will likely change and that equipment lead times and inflation could increase the final price.

The committee’s next steps are: staff to contact the mayor and Ameren, update cost and schedule estimates, request a legal review of prior agreements regarding the transformers, and return to the committee in two weeks with a recommendation to the full county board.