Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Open Meetings Old City Hall topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Public commenters press Lebanon City Council over Open Meetings Act findings as debate over Old City Hall continues
Summary
Residents told the council the Illinois attorney general found Open Meetings Act violations and urged transparency; the council voted to commission a survey and commercial appraisal of Old City Hall as the community remains divided over demolition versus renovation.
A string of public commenters on May 26 accused Lebanon City officials of violating the Illinois Open Meetings Act and pressed the council for more openness as debate over the fate of Old City Hall intensified.
The hearing began with multiple residents raising the attorney general’s investigation and reports that closed sessions had exceeded legal bounds. One resident said the attorney general had investigated two closed sessions and “found that the city violated the Open Meetings Act in both” and urged the council to provide mandatory Open Meetings Act training and stop using closed sessions to discuss matters the public should see.
The charge prompted council members to say they were surprised and to request copies of the report. A council member said the city attorney had reviewed recordings and minutes and that the attorney general’s report had flagged limited excerpts as exceeding permitted closed‑session topics; the remedy the attorney general recommended was releasing the related minutes and recordings.
Public comment then shifted to Old City Hall at 312–314 W. St. Louis Street. Some residents urged the council not to demolish the building, arguing an appraisal might reveal its value and potential revenue from sale or reuse. "If you apply the same scrutiny to the disposition of the old city hall that you did to choosing financial banking options, demolition would not be an option," Dr. Joseph said, urging a commercial appraisal.
Other speakers pushed back, saying the building is a money pit and urged quick demolition. Council members emphasized they wanted more information before deciding: Paul said the council needed options — demolition, renovation, sale, or reuse — and approved two separate steps to get those options: first, a professional survey of the property and parking area; second, a commercial appraisal estimated in committee discussion at about $2,500–$2,700.
The council approved both motions on roll call. The survey was described in committee as a professional service that will come back to council with a contract for approval. Council discussion stressed that an appraisal would inform whether retaining, selling or demolishing the property is financially justified and that selling would require compliance with local bid rules.
Why it matters: The attorney general’s findings and the council’s next steps on Old City Hall together set a procedural and legal frame for the community’s choices about a visible municipal asset. The appraisal and survey mark the next formal steps; the attorney general’s report also raises questions about council practice in closed sessions and about how the city documents and shares records.
What’s next: The council authorized staff to seek proposals for a survey and a commercial appraiser; both items will return to council for contract approval. Separately, the council said it will release the minutes/recordings identified in the attorney general’s report as part of the remedy.
