Resident urges River Forest to explain ethics commission closed-session decision

Margie Saker, a River Oaks Drive resident, told the Village Board that the Ethics Commissions recent handling of a complaint was improperly shielded in closed session and that the commission did not follow the village codes procedural requirements.

"Regarding tonight's board discussion on the ethics commission, closed session is not justified. Rather, it should be an open session," Saker said, and she cited what she identified as section 1-23-8 C6 of the River Forest ethics code and Illinois' Open Meetings Act provisions. Saker said the commission dismissed the complaint after an initial review but failed to publish a written determination and meeting minutes required by the code.

Saker told trustees the Ethics Commissions initial review occurred 21 business days after an Aug. 8 complaint, but the code requires initial review within 10 business days. She also asked the board to explain who receives online complaints filed through the village portal and noted that the ECs webpage directs complainants to ethics@vrf.us.

Board members acknowledged the concern and discussed process clarifications. Trustees said the Ethics Commission is a recommending body and that, under the way the item was written on the agenda, some discussion was queued for closed session because the code allows limited closed hearings for specific complaint testimony and for appointments or discipline in narrowly defined circumstances. Trustees also said the board would review the agenda format so public notices are clearer when action stemming from executive session is expected.

The board did not announce a final public ruling on the complaint during the meeting; it moved later into executive session, saying an action item based on that session would appear after the closed session.