planning & development
Statement Delivered at a Regular Meeting
of the La Grange Village Board of Trustees
April 21, 2008
Elizabeth Asperger
Village President
I'd like to open the meeting this evening with a little bit of information about an item that you may have read about in our local newspapers ... the alleged violation of the Open Meeting Act by the Village.
I guess I should first start with compliments for both of the reporters for Suburban Life and The Doings. I think that, if you read the entire articles, their reporting was both fair and balanced in each case. But as I know some read only the headlines, I thought maybe it was appropriate to update everybody on the facts with respect to this issue.
On April 21, after our regularly scheduled public meeting, the Village Board convened in closed session, citing in its motion for closed session an exception to the Open Meetings Act related to the purchase or sale of real estate.
Following that meeting a complaint was filed with the office of the Illinois Attorney General claiming that the Village Board violated the Open Meetings Act. The Attorney General notified the Village of the complaint and the matter was referred to our Village attorney, Mark Burkland.
Upon investigation and after communication with the Attorney General's office, we have acknowledged and agreed with the office of the Attorney General that there was an inadvertent violation of the Open Meetings Act in that the motion for the closed session should have included a reference to two exceptions to the Open Meetings Act, rather than just one that was included in our motion.
In addition to the exception related to the purchase or sale of real estate that was included in our motion, our motion should have included a separate exception related to the potential purchase or sale of securities or investments.
At the closed session the Board did in fact discuss the potential purchase of securities or investments, a discussion that would be covered that by that separate exception under the Open Meetings Act.
So the omission of that second exception in our motion was, in fact, a violation of the Open Meetings Act.
It's important to understand that the discussion itself was properly confidential. It is the failure to include the second exception in the motion to convene the closed session that was in fact the violation of the Open Meetings Act.
In light of these circumstances, we have agreed to expedite the processing of appropriate minutes of the closed session, and we have agreed to arrange for Open Meetings Act training with the Attorney General's office.
Their office has identified those two steps to us and has told us that, having completed those, they will consider this matter closed.
The bottom line is that a simple mistake in our motion to convene in closed session is what occurred on April 21.
We don't take that mistake lightly, and we will in fact be extra careful in the future to make sure that such an event doesn't happen again. But I want to make it clear that there was no intentional wrongdoing.
The criticism by Brookfield resident Thom Rae, who called the Board either “stupid” or “arrogant” is reckless and unfounded and, I might add, completely thoughtless.
The subject matter of a closed session is not typically disclosed to the public. In this case, one of our trustees discussed the subject matter of the proposed meeting with third parties and, as a result, it is now well known that the subject matter of our April 21 closed session was whether or not the Board should invest in the La Grange Theatre to preserve it for the indefinite future, perhaps by buying an interest in real estate or perhaps through some other security in the property or in the business.
Before April 21, the Village Board had conducted three public meetings, and in fact the Economic Development Commission had also conducted a public meeting, relating to the theater renovation proposal. At those meetings every aspect of the theater renovation proposal was explored thoroughly, including how the project could be funded.
At the April 21 closed session, the Board needed to review confidential and proprietary financial information related to the theater and analyze the costs and risks associated with the possible investment or purchase of an interest in the theater.
I'm certain that most people understand why this type of a discussion best be undertaken confidentially and, in fact, that is why the Open Meetings Act allows it to be undertaken confidentially.
This board has not attempted to hold back information from our residents about the fact that the owners of the theater want to renovate, that the owners are seeking Village assistance with the cost of that renovation, and that the Village is seriously considering an investment in the theater.
The fact is nearly all of our consideration of the theater renovation proposal has been fully in the public view. Indeed, this Board and all of our Village staff is extremely proud of the fact that we maintain a culture of transparency in governance here in La Grange. It's always been that way and I am confident that it will be in the future.