Orland Park board adopts vendor‑official disclosure requirements for procurement

The Village of Orland Park on Oct. 6 adopted amendments to Title 1 of the municipal code to add formal disclosure requirements for vendors and officials engaged in procurement and public contracting.

The ordinance adds two new sections (17 and 18 in the draft text presented) that require vendors to disclose business relationships with village officials and require officials to file reciprocal disclosures when they have qualifying ties to vendors. The board voted to remove the item from the table and then approve the ordinance by roll call; the final vote was unanimous in favor.

Why it matters: The new provisions are intended to increase transparency in procurement and reduce the appearance of impropriety where village officials, their spouses or domestic partners or entities in which they have a financial interest have ties to vendors seeking municipal contracts.

Key provisions described at the meeting by presenting attorney Jessica Fissler included: - A "business relationship" definition that covers relationships entitling a party to compensation, economic opportunity or payments in excess of $7,500 annually; political contributions are excluded from that definition. - A vendor disclosure form requiring vendors to list any business relationships with current or recent village officials covering the preceding 10 years and for 12 months following a contract or engagement. Vendors must update disclosures if circumstances change. - A mirrored disclosure obligation for officials (including trustees, department heads and the chief of police) to report qualifying vendor relationships. - Review procedures routed through the procurement officer (the finance director / procurement manager in practice); the procurement officer may request additional information and would forward disclosures to the board if a potential conflict requires board action. - Remedies for noncompliance that may include warnings, disqualification from bidding, suspension or prohibition from contracting with the village for up to five years, fines and an appeal process (written appeal to the village clerk within five days of a board decision).

Presenting attorney Jessica Fissler framed the change as a transparency measure: "Always disclose, always tell people that you have an interest," she said during the presentation. Fissler explained the thresholds used in the draft and described statutory comparators from state law.

Board members asked how the new ordinance interacts with the village's existing ethics code and state law. Staff clarified the amendment does not replace the existing ethics ordinance; it creates a formal disclosure process specific to procurement. The prosecution and penalties described under state statutes remain enforceable where applicable, and local code can be stricter than state law.

The board approved a motion to adopt an ordinance amending Title 1, Administration, Chapter 16 (procurement) to add the disclosure provisions (sections 17 and 18 as presented). The roll call vote recorded all members present voting "aye." Staff said the procurement officer will implement the new forms and posting procedures and will provide the public list of current and recent officials vendors should check when preparing disclosures.

What to watch next: Implementation details — including the public list of past officials, the exact submission and posting process, and training for procurement staff — will determine how the disclosure regime functions in practice. The ordinance creates an appeals process for vendors or officials who dispute a procurement decision related to a disclosure.

Vote at a glance: - Ordinance amending procurement code (disclosure requirements): Passed, unanimous roll call vote.