College of DuPage (ECWd) –
A recent ruling from the Attorney General confirmed the contract extension for COD President Robert Breuder was done in violation of the Open Meetings Act (here). That ruling took around four years to be issued. Why? According to the Chicago Tribune report, the AG’s office claims the ruling “should have been issued sooner, but was inadvertently delayed…”
Was it really an inadvertent delay, or did the fact that both (former) COD attorneys work for the AG’s office play a role in this four year delay? While we are not claiming to know this was an issue or played any role, the appearance is there, and the question needs answered.
There are at least three other requests for review awaiting the Attorney General’s opinion in reference to the College of DuPage. 2014 PAC 30969 (Aug 21, 2014), 2014 PAC 31511 (Sep 25, 2014), and 2014 PAC 31629 (Aug 21, 2014). Two of those approaching the one year mark…just wondering if this is also “inadvertent”?
ECWd has the following questions:
1. Did Florey let the college know that he was working for the AG when he was also defending the college on FOIA and OMA complaints?
2. Did Florey let the AG know that he was working for the College of DuPage while the AG was fielding requests for review about COD?
3. Did Vazquez let the college know that he was working for the AG when he was advising the board on OMA matters during meetings?
4. Did Vazquez let the AG know he was working for the College of DuPage while the AG was fielding requests for review about COD?