Tinley Park Officials OK Changes To Executive Session Policies

Country Club Hills IL

26 October, 2020

11:55 AM

Description

From the Richard Free Press: By Jon DePaolis TINLEY PARK, Ill. — The Village of Tinley Park Board of Trustees unanimously voted to approve changes to some of its processes related to participating in closed session discussions or reviewing tapes of closed session minutes. The changes — which were approved in a pair of 6-0 votes Tuesday, Oct. 20, during the Village Board meeting — were partly in response to a recent Chicago Tribune article that some Village officials contend contained information not yet publicly discussed by board members outside of closed (also called executive) sessions. Under the new rules, if any Village Board member wants to participate in an executive session discussion through electronic or telephonic methods, it must be approved by the Village Board. Also, if any board member wants to review executive session minutes, that official must submit the request in writing to the Village's clerk, deputy clerk, manager or attorney. Then, after approval by the clerk, the official wanting to review the minutes must schedule a time to do so with the deputy clerk. "The recordings will be done in the conference room in the presence of the deputy clerk and [another] elected official of the public body," Village Manager David Niemeyer said Oct. 20 during a discussion about the new rules held at the Committee of the Whole meeting earlier in the evening. "The door would be kept open, and no phones or recording devices would be allowed. The elected official would have their own headset." Village Clerk Kristin A. Thirion said she thought the new policy for reviewing executive session recordings was "excellent." "Just from my military intelligence experience, to have not only the deputy clerk in the room but an extra elected official — I think that is an extra layer of security that is a good thing to build into it," Thirion said. Trustee Diane Galante agreed. "I think it is a good thing to have in writing, so everybody is on the same page and there is no confusion," Galante said. During the Committee of the Whole, Niemeyer also explained the rationale behind asking for Village Board approval before an official can participate in executive session remotely. "We've had some challenges with information that has been disseminated from closed session prematurely," he said. Niemeyer said the new rule follows the state's orders concerning remote participation during the pandemic. Thirion added that from her perspective, it was not good security to "allow people to partake in a confidential discussion remotely." "We don't know if that person remotely … not that somebody would do this … but [the conversation] could be recorded remotely and disseminated," Thirion said. "So, it is a big security risk in my opinion." Meanwhile, Trustee Michael Glotz referenced the Tribune article, stating that it contained information that had not been publicly discussed at that time. "People requested stuff, and the next thing we know, we talk about it and then it's released to the Tribune," Glotz said. That point caused a point of tension between Glotz and Galante, who asked Glotz to clarify who he was referring to as being the person who leaked the information. "I'm trying to understand, because you put a lot out there and you should just be honest," Galante said. "If you know someone gave it [to the Tribune], then you should talk about it. We should all know who you believe [did it]." Glotz responded by stating that the reason the items were on the agenda were "because people for whatever reason to hurt a developer took information out of a room that was discussed in here privately and released it to people." Galante countered by stating that there was information in the article that was not discussed in closed session. "So, where did that come from?" she asked. Niemeyer, however, said that none of the information presented in the Tribune article "should have been a surprise to anybody on the board." "All the information that was in the article were things that the board was aware of," Niemeyer said. "I do not want to get into what was said in closed session or not, because that is confidential. But [the reporter] had a number of items and pieces of information from closed session, and clearly he didn't have the whole picture." Because of that, Niemeyer said he talked to the reporter and "filled in some of the blanks to give him the whole picture." "But he had a good part of the closed session from somewhere," Niemeyer said. "I don't know where." Galante asked Niemeyer if the information was given to the reporter from someone on the Village Board. "I do not know where it came from," Niemeyer responded. "I don't know." Before the discussion ended, Galante addressed rumors that she said were circulating on social media that she and Trustee Cynthia Berg were the officials who gave the information to the Tribune reporter. "I don't think it's right that we are putting it out on social media that the 'Bobbsey Twins' are out giving out information," Galante said, referencing a nickname that was attributed online to her and Berg. "It's wrong, and it's a lie. And I take offense to it." Berg said that she was unaware of the rumors or the nickname. "That's news to me," Berg said. "I find that very sexist." At the end of the Village Board meeting, during the Trustees Comments portion of the agenda, Galante further clarified her thoughts and referenced what she perceived to be bullying behavior. She also said she does not believe all the trustees receive the same information as others on the board. "I believe possibly that meetings take place, and some of the trustees get some information – but not all," Galante said. "I think I've communicated this in the past that I don't feel we're all getting the same information. Yes, when I think I was closer to the group, I got more information. As soon as I wanted to be an equal on this board, I believe that stopped. I don't feel that always is the case. "I may have been against a development, because I didn't think it was the right thing for the Village. It was a choice from the information I had. It was nothing political. And, as a trustee, I was put up here to make the decisions of what I believe were right for the citizens. But I will not be a target for anybody. And if I have to speak every meeting, I will, because bullying adults or kids is wrong. We need to recognize what we're doing." Subscribe Richard Free Press is a one-stop destination for the news that most affects you, the southwest suburban resident. Be an informed citizen of the town you live in and love.