Citizen Advocacy Center
  • Home
  • FAQ
  • About Us
    • Leadership Personnel >
      • Executive Director Search
    • Internships
    • Board of Directors
    • Advisory Council
    • Founder
    • Citizen Initiative Awards
  • Core Activities
    • Answering Questions of Public Concern
    • Education, Training, & Resources
    • Monitoring Government Activity
    • Advocacy to Strengthen Laws & Institutions
  • Events
  • Library
    • e-Newsletters
    • Newsletter Archive
    • Citizen Guides
    • Policy Reports >
      • Good Government Research Studies
      • Survey of Government Regulations on Public Assembly in DuPage Municipalities
      • Midwest Open Government Project
      • Right to Speak Report
      • Sexual Harassment Policy Survey
    • Databases >
      • Public Access Counselor Determination Letter Index
    • CAC News
    • Annual Reports
  • Act
    • Volunteer Opportunities
    • Internship Opportunities
    • Legal Disclaimer
    • Privacy Policy
  • Blog
  • Donate
    • THANK YOU!

Follow our blog here.

Maryam Judar to present national live webinar on Open Meetings Laws 

9/4/2015

 
Executive Director Maryam Judar will present a national live webinar on Open Meetings Laws for Lorman, provider of continuing legal education,  titled "How "Open" are Open Meetings Laws?" 

CAC friends and colleagues receive a special offer of 50% off when they use codes  [Priority code 15999 and Discount Code 18780069] provided in this informative brochure. 

Open Government Agenda/Legislative Session

4/15/2015

 
We want to keep you informed.  If you have any questions, please call us at 630-833-4080.
Open Gov Agenda 2015.pdf
File Size: 376 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

Picture

Public Access Counselor (PAC)  interprets "right to speak" provision in the Open Meetings Act

5/14/2014

 
Read the PAC Determination Letter

CAC offers to assist Plainfield Township Park District Board improve transparency and accountability

11/14/2013

 
Maryam Judar, CAC Executive Director offer the following public comment at last night's meeting:

Good evening Plainfield Township Park District Board Members.  My name is Maryam Judar and I am the Executive Director and a community lawyer at Citizen Advocacy Center.  CAC is a non-profit, non-partisan, community-based legal organization with a mission to build democracy in the 21st century.  Among the many projects CAC is involved with, our community lawyers assist people in Illinois with navigating the local government decision making system so that they may affect policy decisions on issues that matter to them most.  We also work with government bodies to develop policies and procedures that increase government accountability, transparency, and accessibility to the people they serve. 
  
I am before you today to address the characterization of members of your community on the Plainfield Township Park District government website.   Currently, a November 4, 2013 entry is posted referencing Requests for Reviews to the Public Access Counselor's office filed by members of the community.  The description of the community members on the website who filed the reviews is a “small group of radicals” who use the PAC review process to “possibly harass the Plainfield Park District Board for its decisions.”  
  
The entry goes on to state that “[i]t is our opinion at the Park District that these complaints were frivolous and a financial distraction from our mission.”
 
With respect to the public use of going to the PAC, it is  important to understand that the PAC serves as an ombudsman between government and its citizens on open government matters.  The Public Access Counselor’s office is dedicated to vetting FOIA and OMA issues when the answers are not obvious.  Both government entities AND members of the public contact the PAC for answers about FOIA and OMA questions. 
 
The Plainfield Township Park District website characterized the citizens’ use of going to the PAC as “frivolous” and
“potential harassment.”  Such characterization of concerned citizens using a legal process to clarify questions about government functioning, especially when the FOIA and OMA legal analyses start with a presumption of disclosure and openness unless there is a valid exemption, is a misunderstanding of the purpose of the PAC and that the
Park District’s response to such inquiries is part of the cost of public business, as well as a misunderstanding of the role of a citizen in a democracy.  
  
With respect to how concerned citizens are characterized on the website, using negative connotations appears to be intended to serve as a chilling effect on members of the public who disagree with government decisions
and how those opinions are expressed.  Is it a policy of this Board to belittle the public so as to discourage public participation, the questioning of how government functions, and the use of a resource that is specifically in place to
answer questions of public concern?  How does this meet the mission of the Park District? 
 
If you do agree that it is not the policy of the Board to belittle public engagement, we request that such offensive language be removed from the website immediately so that the ostensible values of the public body with respect to citizen engagement – regardless of whether you agree with the viewpoints expressed – is reflected on the website.  
  
If you do not agree, and find that such characterizations on the Park District website adequately reflect the values of the Park Board with respect to citizen engagement, may I suggest that the Citizen Advocacy Center might be of assistance to you in rethinking how to approach citizen participation.  CAC has worked with public bodies to help them achieve a higher level of government transparency and accountability, and most recently with Wheaton Park District – at their request.  We would be willing to help the Plainfield Township Park District assess their processes and procedures for engaging the public and in streamlining how it provides information to the public so as to lessen its cost relative to FOIA – free of charge to the park district. 
 
Clearly there is a disconnect in how the Board is relating to the public it serves.  I suggest that this disconnect does not originate with concerned citizens, but rather it originates in the dysfunctional manner in how the Board interacts with concerned citizens that is causing - as it states on the Park District’s website - “the financial expense to the taxpayers that could have been spent expanding programs for children, veterans, and seniors here in our community.”
 
Thank you.

For more about the November 13th meeting, check out the following articles:
Plainfield Patch: Peck Calls  Citizens ‘Radicals;’ Resident Ejected  from Park Board Meeting
The Herald News/Chicago Sun Times: Resident booted from Plainfield meeting

Chicago Tribune article reports possible OMA violation by Chicago Board of Education

8/29/2013

 
New rule to attend CPS meetings draws complaints
By Noreen S. Ahmed-Ullah Tribune reporter 8:11 p.m. CDT, August 28, 2013

A new requirement that participants sign up online to attend the monthly Chicago Board of Education meeting drew complaints Wednesday and claims the district is violating the Open Meetings Act.

Ronald Jackson, a regular at CPS board meetings, said he had signed up before the meeting but was turned away by security guards who couldn’t find his name on a list. Jackson asked to see the district’s legal department. Eventually, he was allowed into the meeting.

Jackson said  many others who tried to attend the meeting Wednesday where CPS was voting on its budget for fiscal year 2014 ended up leaving after being denied entry.

“I shouldn’t have to be harassed,” Jackson said. “District policy doesn’t override state and federal laws.”

Maryam Judar, executive director of the Citizen Advocacy Center in Elmhurst, said government agencies can ask for people to sign up to speak at public meetings, or even require people to sign up to get a count on attendance. But they cannot deny someone entry into a public meeting because they have not signed up beforehand.

“The purpose of the Open Meetings Act is that deliberations take place in public, and the public may attend the meeting as an observer, Judar said. “It would be in contravention of the Open Meetings Act to limit that availability to a select few. They shouldn’t be turning people away for lack of signing up.”

The district’s guidelines stated people who wanted to speak or even observe board meetings  “must register in advance of the day of the meeting.”

CPS officials said later Wednesday they will be amending their guidelines to make it clear that the public is not required to sign up in advance in order to attend the board meeting.

“Our goal is to ensure the safety and accommodate the needs of all attending our monthly Board of Education meetings,” said CPS spokeswoman Becky Carroll. “That is why we are requesting, but not requiring, that members of the public planning to attend these meetings to register in advance so we can best prepare to accommodate all visitors on those days. Any member of the public who wishes to attend the Board meeting can do so without registering in advance given that there is adequate space in Board chambers and its overflow room."

nahmed@tribune.com

Read the article at the chicagotribune.com here

Transparency in Suburban Government 

8/2/2013

 
 CAC is proud to partner with Medill Watchdog.  Both organizations value training the next generation of community lawyers and investigative reporters and the collaborative process.

At CAC, we help concerned citizens address local public policy issues.  Often times, the issues brought to our office by concerned citizens are cutting edge issues that have a regional or statewide impact.  Part of our mission is making our government institutions more accountable, transparency, and accessible, combined with strengthening citizens' knowledge base, skills, and confidence to participate in the democratic process.

CAC's collaboration with Medill Watchdog provides an opportunity for student investigative journalists to make FOIA requests, interview members of the community on their issue, interview public officials, and more. 
Resulting from our collaboration are the articles  No Sunshine in the Forest and Trouble on the Board

Time limit on OMA violations - NW Herald Article

7/18/2013

 

State office rules it can't review D-46 minutes
Advocate: 60-day window on closed sessions 'defies common sense'

By EMILY K. COLEMAN - ecoleman@shawmedia.com
http://www.nwherald.com/2013/07/15/state-office-rules-it-cant-review-d-46-minutes/amccmdp/

PRAIRIE GROVE – A time limit on when the public can challenge what a public entity does behind closed doors “just defies common sense,” an open government advocate said.

The Illinois Open Meetings Act lays out what governmental boards are allowed – and not allowed – to talk about in closed session, and the law gives residents 60 days from when a possible violation occurs to file a request for review with the Attorney General’s Office.

The Northwest Herald submitted a request for review after receiving minutes from closed-session meetings of the Prairie Grove District 46 school board, but last week, the Attorney General’s Office responded, saying it did not have the authority to review any potential violations because of the 60-day time limit.

The board met nine times behind closed doors from Nov. 13 to April 23, and the minutes for six of those closed sessions were released at a board meeting in June.

Based on the minutes, it appears that the school board possibly discussed what should have been public policy decisions, including the reorganization of district positions and changes in the junior high’s master schedule in light of declining enrollment and teacher retirements.

The minutes were reviewed by the district’s attorney before being released, and no questions or concerns were raised, Superintendent Lynette Zimmer said in an email after the release.       

Public bodies have to review minutes from closed sessions for release twice a year, and because those release dates mean minutes aren’t always released within that 60-day time period, it can “sometimes be very frustrating,” said Don Craven, an attorney for the Illinois Press Association.

“Unless you have someone on the inside who blows the whistle, it’s not very helpful,” said Maryam Judar, the executive director of the Citizen Advocacy Center, adding that the time limit is “very problematic” because residents often don’t find out a violation occurred until long after the meeting happened.

The Citizen Advocacy Center helps residents file record requests under the Freedom of Information Act and challenge governments when they deny those requests or violate the Open Meetings Act.

Judar would like to see the law changed either to remove the cap or, if a cap needs to be put in place, start the clock from when discovery happens.

The Illinois Press Association has raised the issue, Craven said, adding that there is also a need for finality for public bodies.

“That [the review of closed-session minutes] happens every six months, and you’re now eight months out from the day of the decision,” he said. “You’re then going to go back and start things all over again? That is very difficult for a public body.”

Copyright © 2013 Northwest Herald. All rights reserved.

Illinois Attorney General Issues Opinion: City of Elmhurst Violated Open Meetings Act 

2/27/2013

 
ILLINOIS ATTORNEY GENERAL ISSUES OPINION: CITY OF ELMHURST VIOLATED OPEN MEETINGS ACT AND IS DIRECTED TO IMMEDIATELY RELEASE VERBATIM RECORDING AND CLOSED SESSION MINUTES FOR TWO MEETINGS WHEREIN CITY COUNCIL
INAPPROPRIATELY DISCUSSED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT


Community lawyer quoted in Jan. 16, 2013 Chicago Tribune Front page article: Nepotism charges roils school 

2/4/2013

 
From the article: Three trustees — including Doyle — and about a half-dozen audience members described the process as a secret ballot because the way each trustee voted was not announced.

"Secret ballot, closed ballot, however you want to say it," Hill-Corley said. "No names."

The process violates the law, said Maryam Judar, an open government expert and community lawyer with the Citizen Advocacy Center in Elmhurst.

"That would be in contravention of the Open Meetings Act, which requires that votes be taken in public and not in secret," Judar said. "That includes being able to ascribe the votes to particular board members."

Read the complete article below.  The first file is a pdf of the front page/above the fold placement of the  article in print.  The second file is an online version posted the next day with a different title.

1-16-13 Chicago Tribune Nepotism charges roils school
File Size: 1262 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

1-17-13 ChicagoTribune.com Prairie State College plagued by accusations of nepotism, secret ballot
File Size: 1038 kb
File Type: pdf
Download File

Higher Expectations for Elmhurst City Council, LTE, Elmhurst Patch 11/27/12

12/20/2012

 

Elmhurst City Council members went into executive session on November 19, 2012 to discuss  “Selection of a Person to Fill a Public Office,” which in this case was related to selecting an interim mayor.  The Illinois Open Meetings Act allows public bodies to meet in closed session for a limited number of issues.  Specific segments of the law are weak in that it allows public bodies to go into closed session on this particular topic and for generally allowing public officials to take a consensus vote in any closed session as long as a ceremonial “final vote” is taken in open session.   

That being said, public bodies are not required to go into executive session for any issue and the purpose of the Open Meetings Act is explicit: it declares the necessity for public bodies to conduct their business openly to the fullest extent possible. The purpose is not to cherry-pick exemptions to justify closed door discussions on topics that are, without question, issues of public concern. 

The mere appearance of the item on the agenda for closed door discussion is unacceptable.  This is especially true given the hyper-politicized environment that will have more than half the council members on the ballot this April for either mayor or alderman.  The public deserves to observe, in its entirety, the process of selecting an interim mayor. This includes the discussion about the procedure for how the Council will act as well as the political maneuvering for majority support and the ceremonial speeches prior to the vote.  

Just because a government entity can legally do something, should it and is legal compliance with a weak statute good enough to earn the ranking of an open and transparent government?  City Council meetings should aspire to more than pro forma activities and our expectations of government should be higher. 

Ms. Terry Pastika
Executive Director/ Community Lawyer
Citizen Advocacy Center  
<<Previous

    RSS Feed

    2023.3.20._right_to_speak_pac_determination_let.pdf
    File Size: 218 kb
    File Type: pdf
    Download File

    Archives

    January 2021
    December 2020
    April 2020
    May 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015
    December 2014
    November 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    March 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013
    August 2013
    July 2013
    June 2013
    April 2013
    March 2013
    February 2013
    January 2013
    December 2012
    November 2012
    October 2012
    September 2012
    August 2012
    July 2012
    May 2012
    March 2012
    December 2011

    Categories

    All
    Andrea Alvarez
    CAC In The News
    Campaign Finance
    Chicago
    Citizen Advocacy Center
    Civic Education
    Civic Education
    Economic Development
    Elections
    Elmhurst
    Ethics/Corruption
    Events
    First Amendment
    First Amendment
    Freedom Of Information FOIA
    Freedom Of Information - FOIA
    Home Rule
    Illinois Legislation
    Intern Program
    Letter To The Editor
    Letter To The Editor
    Maryam Judar
    Open Meetings Act
    Redistricting
    Terry Pastika
    TIF
    Transparency & Accountability
    Voting / Election
    Whistleblower
    Zoning & Land Use

DONATE
Citizen Advocacy Center    
​
188 W Industrial Drive, Suite 106   Elmhurst, IL 60126-1600   
Phone: (630) 833-4080  Fax: (630) 833-4083
 ​© 2023 All Rights Reserved.       PRIVACY POLICY        LEGAL DISCLAIMER      CONTACT A COMMUNITY LAWYER
  • Home
  • FAQ
  • About Us
    • Leadership Personnel >
      • Executive Director Search
    • Internships
    • Board of Directors
    • Advisory Council
    • Founder
    • Citizen Initiative Awards
  • Core Activities
    • Answering Questions of Public Concern
    • Education, Training, & Resources
    • Monitoring Government Activity
    • Advocacy to Strengthen Laws & Institutions
  • Events
  • Library
    • e-Newsletters
    • Newsletter Archive
    • Citizen Guides
    • Policy Reports >
      • Good Government Research Studies
      • Survey of Government Regulations on Public Assembly in DuPage Municipalities
      • Midwest Open Government Project
      • Right to Speak Report
      • Sexual Harassment Policy Survey
    • Databases >
      • Public Access Counselor Determination Letter Index
    • CAC News
    • Annual Reports
  • Act
    • Volunteer Opportunities
    • Internship Opportunities
    • Legal Disclaimer
    • Privacy Policy
  • Blog
  • Donate
    • THANK YOU!