Park Ridge mayor: Suppressing talk from closed meetings hurts transparency

• Reprints

Updated: February 20, 2012 8:10AM

Park Ridge Mayor David Schmidt believes Park District commissioners did the right thing by turning down a proposal that would have prohibited Park Board members from divulging information from closed-session meetings.

Stating that he prefers to “stay out of the Park District’s matters and the school districts’ matters unless they impact the city directly,” Schmidt acknowledged that he was pleased with the Park Board’s response to Park District Attorney Thomas Hoffman’s proposed closed-session policy on Jan. 5.

“As a resident I am glad the Park Board saw fit to shelve the idea,” Schmidt said.

In 2008, Schmidt, then an alderman of the city’s 1st Ward, was rebuked by members of the Park Ridge City Council for sharing details of closed-session meetings with the local press and public. The council presented Schmidt with a written “statement of condemnation” objecting to his release of documents shared during closed meetings.

Schmidt responded to the statement by pointing out that there is no state law prohibiting elected officials from sharing information from closed-session meetings. He also shared an opinion from the Illinois Attorney General’s Office, which states that public bodies do not have the power to sanction members for sharing information from closed meetings.

On Jan. 5 the Park Ridge Recreation and Park District’s Board of Commissioners heard the draft of a policy that would have made it a fineable offense for members to disclose details of closed-session meetings with anyone not in attendance at the meeting. Commissioner Richard Brandt, who requested the policy be drafted, was the only member of the board who showed support.

Schmidt said the fact that such a policy was discussed can be viewed as positive.

“The problem is elected bodies and their counsel are so used to closed sessions and keeping things confidential that they don’t understand the reason for the Open Meetings Act and the breadth of the Open Meetings Act,” he said. “I’m actually very pleased to see that this happened. I think this is a good thing in the long run. It helps foster transparency and I hope other elected bodies get the message that this isn’t the way you’re supposed to do it.”

Schmidt did say he agrees with Commissioner Rick Biagi’s desire to prohibit the release of documents that are “attorney-client privilege,” as “some matters are more sensitive that others.”

Schmidt added: “The risk is when elected bodies start making information ‘confidential’ as a way to get around the Open Meetings Act. Then I would not be in favor of that.”