AG: Dalzell Fire Protection District Attended Illegal Meeting –

Dalzell, Ill. (ECWd) –

The Illinois Attorney General’s Public Access Counselor (“PAC”) has issued a determination that the Dalzell Fire Protection District violated the Open Meetings Act (“OMA”) when the majority of a quorum of fire protection district trustees met with the mayor of the village of Dalzell on November 7, 2023, to discuss business pertaining to the Dalzell Fire Protection District and the village of Dalzell without posting an agenda or notice.

During this meeting, the village attorney told the fire district trustee not to say anything to each other or to the mayor, out of respect for the Open Meetings Act. This statement was made because there was a quorum of the fire district present, and they knew there was no posted agenda or notice.

This was essentially an argument over ownership and use of the building the fire protection district was using, and that the mayor was upset there was a fire truck parked in the building while he was attempting to have a “festive Halloween get-together” and the fire chief refused to remove the fire truck from the building when asked by the mayor.

From the AG’s determination:

Based on the available information, a majority of a quorum of Board members was present for the November 7, 2023, gathering. Further, the topics discussed were unquestionably public business of the Board, as they pertained to the Dalzell fire station and the actions of the fire chief. The Board denies that any deliberation or discussion occurred at the gathering, but the President specifically invited an additional trustee to attend, ostensibly for the purpose of receiving the information the Mayor intended to convey. Contrary to the Board’s assertion that its members did not engage in deliberation because there was no discussion, the Attorney General has noted that “[d]eliberation *** connotes not only collective discussion but the collective acquisition and exchange of facts preliminary to the ultimate decision.” Ill. Att’y Gen. Op. No. S-726, issued March 22, 1974, at 125 (quoting Sacramento Newspaper Guild v. Sacramento County Board of Supervisors, 263 Cal. App. 2d 41, 47–48 (1968)). In the same opinion, the Attorney General also quoted Sacramento Newspaper Guild for the proposition that,

“[t]here is rarely any purpose to a nonpublic pre-meeting conference except to conduct some part of the decisional process behind closed doors. Only by embracing the collective inquiry and discussion stages, as well as the ultimate step of official action, can an open meeting regulation frustrate these evasive devices. (Emphasis added.) Ill. Att’y Gen. Op. No. S-726, at 125 (quoting Sacramento Newspaper Guild, 263 Cal. App. 2d at 50).”

It is unclear why the President invited another trustee to attend the gathering if the Board did not have any reason to believe the Mayor would discuss matters germane to the Board’s business. But even if the topic of discussion was a surprise, the Board members could have terminated the gathering rather than listening to the Mayor’s concerns about the District’s use of Village property. Therefore, the purpose of the November 7, 2023, gathering was to obtain information in anticipation of responding to the Mayor’s concerns. Indeed, in response to the November 7, 2023, gathering, the Board prepared to consider a lease for the fire station, should one have been proposed by the Village.

Taking all these factors into account, this office concludes that the November 7, 2023, gathering was a meeting subject to the requirements of OMA. Therefore, the Board violated OMA by holding a meeting without providing advance notice and otherwise complying with the requirements of the Act. Because the Board did not vote upon items of final action at the meeting, no further remedial action is required, but this office cautions the Board to comply with the requirements of OMA when gathering to deliberate on matters of public business.

Read the Determination below: