May 20, 2015 · 3 Comments
Elgin, IL (ECWd) –
Elections have consequences – so do past discussions
Time and time again we see public officials being told what they can and can’t do by their attorney. In many of those cases the elected officials have forgotten one important fact; the attorney works for you and you do not answer to him!
Unit 46 School District appears to have found themselves as one of those public bodies that is not comfortable with the election of new board members who want access to records.
Specifically, in this case, the new board members are seeking access to the closed session recordings. We have been told the attorney told them it would take a vote of the board to allow that, however, we challenge that attorney to provide such statutory direction as claimed.
In an effort to keep this simple thru reading prior cases on this subject, “Each member of the board of a community college has a fiduciary duty and a duty of due care to the college and the citizens of the district. As the court concluded a hundred years ago in Stone v. Kellogg, permitting a majority of the board to exclude the minority from knowledge of what the college is doing, or from access to its files and records, is inconsistent with the imposition of such duties.”
The same holds true for U46 and the attorney’s directions flies directly in the face of logic, as well as contradicting the Stone v. Kellogg case and the Illinois Attorney General’s opinion on the matter!
Elected officials should be provided unfettered access to records in their control!
By Kirk Allen
Readers Comments (3)