Copyright 2026 All Rights Reserved.

May 18, 2026

AG Issued Binding Opinion: Caseyville Violated Open Meetings Act –

By John Kraft & Kirk Allen

On May 18, 2026

Caseyville, Ill. (ECWd) –

In its third Binding Opinion of 2026, the Illinois Attorney General’s Public Access Councilor concluded that the Village of Caseyville (Village) Board of Trustees (Board) violated OMA during its January 21, 2026, meeting by failing to follow the proper procedure for entering closed session and by holding a closed session discussion that was not authorized by any of the exceptions to the general requirement that public bodies conduct public business openly.

The Board improperly entered into closed session by not properly disclosing their reasons for entering closed session, and the Board improperly discussed items in closed session that were not a listed exception to open meetings discussions.

From the Binding Opinion:

  • On January 22, 2026, Mr. John Buckley, a Village trustee, submitted a Request for Review to the Public Access Bureau alleging that the Village’s mayor called for a closed session for ” personnel issues[]” at the Board’s January 21, 2026, meeting, but the Board did not actually discuss personnel issues during the closed session. 1 He asserted: ” When the board went into Executive Session the discussion was related to businesses with outstanding T.I.F[.] loans. I strongly feel this is deceiving to board members and also to citizens at the meeting.”
  • In its written answer, dated February 26, 2026 , the Board identified ” the litigation exception” as the basis for entering closed session and asserted that the Mayor misspoke by instead citing ” the personnel exception[. ]” 8 The Board’s response stated that the discussion concerned ” Tax Increment Financing loans that were in arrears and owed to the Village. “
  • Accordingly, this office concludes that the Board violated section 2a of OMA by not publicly disclosing and recording into the minutes the specific exception authorizing the closing of a portion of the January 21, 2026, meeting
  • Because the Board’s closed session discussion did not concern pending, probable, or imminent litigation, this office concludes that section 2(c)(11) of OMA did not authorize the discussion. Accordingly, the Board violated section 2(a) of OMA at its January 21, 202.6, meeting.
  • In accordance with these findings of fact and conclusions of law, the Board is directed to remedy this violation by making publicly available the closed session verbatim recording of its January 21, 2026, meeting.
Binding+Opinion+26-003

SHARE THIS

RELATED

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *