Village of Lombard Legistar System

WELCOME TO THE VILLAGE OF LOMBARD BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING FOR

THURSDAY, JANUARY 3rd, 2008, HAPPY NEW YEAR. PLEASE RISE, MADAM

CLERK WILL LEAD US IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. THE PLEDGE WAS LED

BY CLERK O'BRIEN.

BEFORE WE GO IN TO PUBLIC PARTICIPATION, I WOULD LIKE TO JUST TAKE A

MOMENT TO OFFER TO DR. JIM BLANCHE, SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOL

DISTRICT 44 AND HIS FAMILY, OUR SINCERE SYMPATHY AND CONDOLENCES

ON THE PASSING ON HIS WIFE ON NEW YEAR'S DAY AFTER A LONG ILLNESS.

WE EXTEND AGAIN OUR CONDOLENCES TO THE FAMILY,AND PLEASE JOIN

WITH ME IN A MOMENT OF SILENT PRAYER FOR MRS. BLANCHE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THE MEMORIAL SERVICE WILL BE HELD IN

DAVENPORT, IOWA SO THERE'S NO SERVICES HERE IN LOMBARD SO I JUST

WANTED TO GIVE YOU THAT INFORMATION TOO.

WE WILL TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SWEAR IN THE PROBATIONARY PATROL

OFFICER FOR OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT. AND CHIEF, YOU WANT TO

INTRODUCE THE GENTLEMAN WHO'D BE JOINING US AND OUR VILLAGE

CLERK, BRIGITTE O'BRIEN, WILL BE DOING THE SWEARING IN CEREMONIES.

CHIEF BYRNE THANKED PRESIDENT MUELLER AND THE VILLAGE BOARD OF

TRUSTEES. AGAIN, WITH YOUR CONTINUED SUPPORT, I'M PLEASED TO

INTRODUCE TO YOU OUR NEWEST POLICE OFFICER TONIGHT, ROBERT

DILIBERTO, ALTHOUGH HE GOES BY THE NAME OF BOBBY. TO TELL YOU A

LITTLE BIT ABOUT HIM; BOBBY GREW UP IN CHICAGO WHERE HE ATTENDED

DE LA SALLE HIGH SCHOOL. HE DID GO ON TO COLLEGE AND OBTAINED HIS

BACHELOR'S DEGREE FROM FLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY. I'M GOING TO

LET HIM INTRODUCE HIS PARENTS, BUT HE IS A LAW ENFORCEMENT LEGACY.

HIS MOTHER IS CURRENTLY A CHICAGO POLICE OFFICER AND HIS FATHER IS

A RETIRED CHICAGO POLICE OFFICER. HE'S GOT THAT STRONG

BACKGROUND. A PERSONAL NOTE ABOUT BOBBY, HE IS QUITE AN

ACCOMPLISHED ATHLETE PARTICULARLY IN THE AREA OF BASEBALL. FOR

THOSE OF YOU WHO FOLLOW BASEBALL, HE ATTENDED LSU FOR A WHILE,

LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY, ONE OF THE FINEST COLLEGE BASEBALL

PROGRAMS IN THE COUNTRY. THEY CONSISTENTLY REACH THE COLLEGE

WORLD SERIES, AND BOBBY ACTUALLY PLAYED ON TWO COLLEGE WORLD

SERIES BASEBALL TEAMS, SO ACTUALLY, WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO OUR

REMATCH WITH THE VILLA PARK POLICE DEPARTMENT. [LAUGHTER] I THINK

HE'S READY TO BE SWORN IN. HE WILL START THE ACADEMY ON MONDAY,

WE'RE GOing PUT HIM TO WORK, WELCOME ABOARD, BOBBY.

PRESIDENT MUELLER: MADAM CLERK, WE HAVE A PROCLAMATION FOR

BLOOD DRIVE MONTH. THE PROCLAMATION WAS READ BY CLERK O'BRIEN.

PRESIDENT MUELLER: HERE ARE SOME REALLY INTERESTING STATISTICS.

THIS IS THE 20TH YEAR THAT THE VILLAGE OF LOMBARD HAS COORDINATED

THE BLOOD DRIVES IN OUR COMMUNITY. SINCE BEGINNING IN 1988, WE HAVE

HAD A TOTAL OF 76 DRIVES, THE GOAL WAS 6,962 UNITS. THE ACTUAL

COLLECTION WAS 6,793 UNITS WITH 801 DEFERRALS. 801 DEFERRALS MEANS

SOMETIMES PEOPLE CAME BACK AT A LATER DATE. THEY COULDN'T

PARTICULARLY DONATE THAT DATE FOR SOME REASON. BUT HERE'S THE

MOST STAGGERING FIGURE, I THINK, OUT OF ALL. THE HEARTLAND BLOOD

GROUP ESTIMATES, EXCUSE ME, THAT WE, THROUGH OUR DONATIONS OF

6,793 UNITS,

WE HAVE ACTUALLY HELPED 20,379 PEOPLE WITH BLOOD PROBLEMS, SO

20,379 PEOPLE WERE AIDED, SO TO THE RESIDENTS OF LOMBARD,

CONGRATULATIONS AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR SUPPORT OF THIS

PROGRAM. AND CERTAINLY TO THE STAFF OF THE VILLAGE OF LOMBARD

ESPECIALLY CAROL BOWER, WE THANK ALL OF THEM FOR THEIR EFFORTS

AND THE VOLUNTEERS THAT WORKED WITH HER ON THESE BLOOD DRIVES.

AND AGAIN, A REMINDER, JANUARY 9TH HERE AT THE VILLAGE HALL. YOU CAN

MAKE YOUR APPOINTMENT BY CALLING 620-5712.

PRESIDENT MUELLER: WE HAVE SEVERAL RESIDENTS WHO WOULD LIKE TO

SPEAK

THIS EVENING. FIRST OF ALL, BRAD JANISCH.

Mr. JANISCH: PRESIDENT MUELLER, HONORABLE TRUSTEES, THANK YOU FOR

THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME BEFORE YOU TONIGHT. I JUST WANTED TO TAKE

ADVANTAGE OF THE OPPORTUNITY OF THIS EVENING TO ASK FOR YOUR

SUPPORT IN THE UPCOMING FEBRUARY 5TH ELECTIONS FOR THE POOL

REFERENDUM THAT THE PARK DISTRICT HAS ON ITS BALLOT. AS YOU'RE ALL

WELL AWARE, THE POOL BASICALLY IS CLOSED INDEFINITELY AT THIS POINT

OF TIME AND WILL NOT REOPEN IN 2008 AND POTENTIALLY BEYOND UNLESS

THE REFERENDUM IS PASSED. THE REALITY IS FOR THE PRICE OF A CUP OF

COFFEE, ABOUT $3 ON A MONTHLY BASIS, WE CAN HAVE A BRAND NEW POOL

WITHIN OUR COMMUNITY. AND IT'S VERY VITAL THAT WE HAVE THIS POOL NOT

ONLY FOR THE KIDS BUT FOR THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY VALUES AND

ALSO FOR THE ATTRACTIVENESS OF LOMBARD AS A WHOLE. JUST IN

TONIGHT, I JUST WANTED TO TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY ONCE AGAIN TO ASK

FOR YOUR SUPPORT, IF YOU CAN WHATEVER WAY POSSIBLE, LOBBY FOR IT.

WE HAVE OUR FLYERS GOING AROUND, OUR POSTERS WITHIN SOME OF THE

BUSINESSES AND OTHER AREAS. WE'VE ALSO JUST HAD A WEBSITE POSTED

AT WWW.THEPEOPLE OR I'M SORRY PEOPLE4THEPARK.COM. IT WILL GIVE

YOU INFORMATION PERTAINING TO THE REFERENDUM ITSELF, THE

POTENTIAL IMPACT, AND ALSO THE HISTORY OF THE MORAN WATER PARK AS

WELL AS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. SO TONIGHT, I'D JUST LIKE TO CLOSE

ASKING FOR YOUR SUPPORT AND WOULD GREATLY APPRECIATE IT. THANK

YOU VERY MUCH.

MY NAME IS PETE KRAMER, 272 EAST TAYLOR ROAD. I'D LIKE TO SAY THAT I

STOOD AT THIS PODIUM IN AUGUST OF 2001 AND I DONATED $5,000

TO THE RESTORATION OF THE DUPAGE THEATRE. AND IN THAT DONATION, I

SPECIFIED THAT I WOULD PURCHASE THREE SEAT--THEATER SEATS AT $1,500

EACH AND ONE $500 SHINING STAR. THAT WAS THE WAY MY MONEY WAS

SUPPOSED TO BE USED. OVER THE NEXT SEVERAL YEARS,

2002 AND 2003, THE THEATER DEVELOPED SOME LEAKS IN THE ROOF. I CAME

TO THIS VILLAGE INTO THE AD HOC COMMUNITY NUMEROUS TIMES AND I

ASKED AND BEGGED AND PLEADED TO REPAIR THE ROOF MYSELF AT MY OWN

EXPENSE. AND AT THAT TIME, I WAS TURNED DOWN. I EVEN OFFERED TO SIGN

A RELEASE FOR ANY HARM THAT I WOULD CAUSE TO MYSELF EITHER FROM

ACCIDENT, INJURY, DEATH, SICKNESS, WHATEVER, AND I WAS REFUSED

BY THIS VILLAGE TO PERFORM THOSE REPAIRS. SO IN JANUARY OF 2003, I

GOT A QUOTE TO REPAIR THE ROOF, SOME TEMPORARY REPAIRS OVER THE

LOBBY, TICKET LOBBY, FLAT ROOF AND ALSO IN THE BARREL ROOF FROM FJA

CHRISTIANSEN ROOFING COMPANY IN CAROL STREAM. THERE WAS A TOTAL

OF ABOUT $11,000. THERE WAS $8,800 THAT JOAN OFFERED, JOAN

DESTEPHANO, THE LATE JOAN DESTEPHANO. AND THERE WAS $2,675 BARREL

ROOF REPAIR

WHICH I OFFERED TO COVER. AND I RECEIVED AN OFFICIAL STATEMENT

FROM THE VILLAGE OF LOMBARD HERE AT THAT TIME AND OFFICIALLY FROM

THE VILLAGE THAT THE COST FOR THE REPAIRS AND ALSO THAT I HAD TO

SIGN A RELEASE FORM TO USE MY DONATED MONEY FOR ANOTHER USE. SO I

HAVE A COPY IN HERE OF THE OFFICIAL PAPERWORK FROM THE VILLAGE OF

LOMBARD INCLUDING MY RELEASE FORM HERE FOR $2,675. JOAN SIGNED

ONE, AS I SAID, FOR $8,800. AND IT SAYS, BY AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE

OF THESE FUNDS,

I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT I AM AGREEING TO WAIVE MY RIGHT TO

REIMBURSEMENT FOR THESE FUNDS. WE DID THAT AND WE PAID FOR THOSE

TEMPORARY ROOF REPAIRS, AND WE ALL KNOW WHAT'S HAPPENED SINCE.

WHAT I'M HERE TONIGHT FOR IS THE FACT THAT THE REMAINDER OF MY

DONATION, WHICH WOULD BE ABOUT $2,375, I NEVER AUTHORIZED THAT FOR

ANY OTHER USE. AND I ALSO HAVE ANOTHER PIECE OF PAPER HERE THAT I

PLEDGED TO THE FRIENDS OF THE DUPAGE THEATER IN 2004, DUPAGE

THEATER FOUNDATION. I WAS PLEDGING ANOTHER $5,000 to THE

RESTORATION OF THE THEATER. HERE'S THE PAPERWORK FOR THAT. SO, MY

DONATION OF THE NEXT $5,000 WOULD HAVE COMPENSATED FOR THE

MONEY TAKEN OUT OF THE ORIGINAL DONATION. SO, IN MY OPINION, THE

ORIGINAL MONEY I HAD TO SIGN A RELEASE FOR, WHICH WAS

NONREFUNDABLE FOR THAT $2,675. SO, I FEEL NOW THAT THE BUILDING WAS

INTENTIONALLY AND WILLFULLY DESTROYED BY CERTAIN MEMBERS OF THIS

BOARD UNDER THE OBJECTION FROM STATE-FEDERAL AUTHORITIES,

CONCERNED CITIZENS, AND MANY DONORS LIKE MYSELF. SO I'M HERE

TONIGHT TO REQUEST THAT THE BALANCE OF MY FUNDS

THAT WERE NEVER I NEVER RELEASED THOSE FOR ANY OTHER OPTION

OTHER THAN THE THEATER SEATS, THAT I REQUEST $2,325 BACK WITH

INTEREST. SO I HAVE THE PAPERWORK HERE WHICH I'D LIKE TO PRESENT TO

BILL LICHTER, AND IN CONCLUSION, I'D JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT I THINK

THERE'S CERTAIN MEMBERS OF THIS BOARD, NO MATTER WHAT WE WOULD

HAVE DONE, THERE IS NO WAY THAT THEY WERE GOING TO EVER RESTORE

THAT THEATER. AND I FEEL PROUD THAT ALL THE PEOPLETHAT I WORKED

WITH OVERCAME EVERY OBSTACLE THAT WAS PUT IN FRONT OF US, AND IT

CAME DOWN TO THE POINT

WHERE WE EVEN CHANGED THE TRUSTEES ON THIS BOARD POLITICALLY SO

THAT WITHIN A GIVEN AMOUNT OF TIME, I THINK MAY 17th WE WOULD'VE HAD

A NEW BOARD AND WE'D BE ON OUR WAY IN SAVING THE THEATER. BUT DUE

TO THE OBSTRUCTIONISTS AND THE CLOSED MINDS HERE, THOSE CERTAIN

TRUSTEES DECIDED NOT TO ALLOW THE NEXT BOARD TO TAKE OVER AND

CHANGE THE DIRECTION OF THAT. SO, AS I SAID, I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THIS

PAPERWORK AND GIVE IT TO MR. LICHTER FOR HIS REVIEW, AND IF HE HAS

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, HE CAN CONTACT ME,

BUT I FEEL THAT YOU OWE Me MY MONEY BACK. BETWEEN JOAN AND I, AS I

SAID, THERE IS OVER $11,000 THAT WAS EXPENDED FOR A TEMPORARY

REPAIR WHICH I FEEL IS A PATHETIC WASTE OF MONEY AND HUMAN EFFORT

NOT ONLY ON OUR PART WITH EVERYTHING ELSE THAT WAS DONE IN THAT

THEATER

THANKS, PRESIDENT MUELLER. THE ECDC MET YESTERDAY. WE HAD A FAIRLY

ABBREVIATED AGENDA. THE FIRST THING WE DISCUSSED WAS LOMBARD

TOWN CENTER, THE ECDC IS PARTNERING WITH LTC TO HELP THEM CREATE

GOALS OBJECTIVES FOR THE COMING YEAR. THIS IS GOING TO MAKE IT

EASIER FOR THE ECDC TO EVALUATE THEIR PROGRESS AND THEIR

SUCCESSES SO WE CAN DETERMINE FUTURE FUNDING ALONG WITH THIS

BOARD. THE SECOND THING THAT WAS DISCUSSED WAS THE INTERESTS OF

THE COMMITTEE FOR A DOWNTOWN PUBLIC ART CONSORTIUM. THIS IS A

STAFF-PROPOSED EVENT. IT'S NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH THE SCULPTURE

SHOW ALTHOUGH IT DOES CONTAIN SCULPTURES. ESSENTIALLY, LOMBARD IS

LOOKING TO WORK WITH SEVERAL OTHER MUNICIPALITIES THAT HAVE

EXPRESSED INTEREST IN ITS ART CONSORTIUM. COLLABORATIVELY, WE

WOULD CHOOSE VARIOUS SCULPTURES. WE WOULD ACTUALLY COMMISSION

THE SCULPTURES, AND AT THIS POINT IN TIME WE ARE LOOKING AT

DISPLAYING THEM FOR A PERIOD OF TIME. IT WOULD ROTATE AMONGST

MUNICIPALITIES, POSSIBLY ON EAST ST. CHARLES AS WE ARE LOOKING FOR

WAYS TO BEAUTIFY AREAS THAT WILL NOT BE REDEVELOPED. SO IT WAS

MOTIONED BY THE ECDC TO EXPRESS INTEREST AND BRING IT FORWARD TO

THE BOARD, SO YOU'LL BE SEEING MORE ON THIS EFFORT IN THE COMING

WEEKS. NEXT MEETING WILL TAKE PLACE ON THE SIXTH OF FEBRUARY, 7:00

P.M.

THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. THE PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MET ON

DECEMBER 11th. WE HAD A RATHER SHORT AGENDA WITH A LOT OF

CONVERSATION. THE SHORTNESS WAS UNDER A NEW BUSINESS THAT HAD

TO DO WITH THE CHANGE ORDER FOR THE NORTHEAST LOMBARD AREA

IMPROVEMENTS. THAT'S THE AREA NEAR LOMBARD LAGOON, EAST OF

GRACE, NORTH OF VIEW. THAT CHANGE ORDER WAS A DECREASE OF

$155,000. I BELIEVE IT IS ON THIS EVENING'S AGENDA. WE ALSO HAD OUR

SECOND REVIEW OR FINAL REVIEW, IF YOU WOULD, OF THE SECOND DRAFT

FOR THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT. I, ONCE AGAIN, WANT TO THANK

OUR STAFF, MR. LICHTER, EVERYBODY AT THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. I BELIEVE ALL OF THE QUESTIONS WERE

ANSWERED AND WHILE THERE'S STILL SOME MASSAGING OR PLACEMENT OF

DOLLARS THAT NEED TO BE DONE, WE WILL ALL SEE IT, I BELIEVE THE FINAL

DRAFT IS JANUARY 29TH AT A JOINT MEETING. WE ALSO HAD

ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO THE PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE OF THE SETTLEMENT

WITH BURNS AND MCDONAL WITH REGARDS TO WESTMORE, AND PROBABLY

THE ONE TOPIC AND THE REASON WE HAD THE MEETING WAS THE FLOODING

ISSUE AT 1045 SOUTH GRACE. THE RESIDENT DID APPEAR, DID PRESENT TWO

ESTIMATES FOR THE WORK. WE FOUND THE DOCUMENTATION WAS NOT

SUFFICIENT AND WE HAVE ASKED THAT RESIDENT TO GO BACK, GET THE

REQUIRED INFORMATION THAT OUR STAFF NEEDS TO MAKE A

DETERMINATION AND GET IT TURNED IN AS SOON AS POSSIBLE TO THE

PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE. AS OF YET, WE HAVE NOT SEEN IT. HAVING SAID

THAT, MR. PRESIDENT, THAT CONCLUDED THAT MEETING TO THE NEXT

MEETING OF THE PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE WOULD NORMALLY BE NEXT

TUESDAY, JANUARY 8TH. IN LIGHT

OF A VERY SMALL AGENDA ITEM, ONE ITEM, CHANGE ORDER OF $5,000 IN

CONSULTATION WITH THE PUBLIC WORKS ACTING PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR,

WE'RE GOING TO CANCEL THAT MEETING. THEREFORE, THE NEXT MEETING

OF THE PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE WILL BE A JOINT MEETING WITH THE

VILLAGE BOARD JANUARY 29TH, AND OUR REGULAR MEETING WILL BE

FEBRUARY 12TH AT 7:00 P.M.

IN THE COMMUNITY ROOM.

LOMBARD REQUEST FROM THE PARK DISTRICT FOR FUNDING FOR THE

ADVERTISING, AND WE HEARD THEIR REQUEST. THESE ITEMS WILL BE

COMING TO THE BOARD AT THE NEXT MEETING. INTERESTING

INFORMATION,THE STATE OF ILLINOIS HAS DENIED FUNDING FOR LILAC TIME

IN LOMBARD THIS YEAR FOR ADVERTISEMENT, SO THE PARK DISTRICT DID

PUT IN A REQUEST FOR $8,000 AND THAT WAS DENIED BY THE STATE OF

ILLINOIS. DOESN'T SURPRISE ME, I GUESS, BUT THEY ALSO HAVE THEIR

ANNUAL REQUEST FROM THE VILLAGE OF LOMBARD WHICH IS $12,000. THAT

WILL BE FORTHCOMING TO YOU. WE ALSO HEARD A REQUEST FROM THE

LOMBARD GARDEN CLUB FOR THE LILAC BUSH PROGRAM, AND THAT'S $6,000.

WE APPROVED THAT. THAT WILL BE COMING TO YOU AT THE NEXT MEETING.

THERE WILL BE A TWO-PAGE OF THIS YEAR'S BUREAU WITH THE TWO-PAGE

LEDGER, AND WE HAVE AN ADVERTISEMENT PROGRAM GOING ON THERE. I

HAVEN'T GOT THE EXACT FIGURE ON THAT BUT WE DID APPROVE

ADVERTISING IN THE SPECIAL EDITION THAT WE PUT OUT FOR CONVENTIONS,

CONFERENCES AND SO FORTH, AND THAT WE ALSO HAVE A JOINT REQUEST

FROM THE VILLAGE OF LOMBARD AND THE LOMBARD PARK DISTRICT TO

PURCHASE A TENT, THE SIZE THAT THE PARK DISTRICT HAS. WE WILL HAVE

USE FOR IT FOR MANY OF OUR ACTIVITIES THAT WE DO. THE PARK DISTRICT

WILL STORE IT. THE PARK DISTRICT WILL TAKE CARE OF PUTTING IT UP FOR

US AND SO FORTH, BUT, FOR EXAMPLE, ON OUR EVENTS, CRUISE NIGHTS,

SOMETIMES WE NEED A BIG TENT. OUR MEMORIAL DAY SERVICES, WE NEED

ANOTHER TENT IN SOME OF THE EVENTS THAT WE USE THROUGHOUT THE

COMMUNITY. SO, THOSE ARE THE ITEMS THAT WE DISCUSSED TODAY. WE

HAD A VERY LONG MEETING, AND THAT'S ABOUT AN HOUR AND A HALF, BUT

THAT WILL BE COMING BACK TO YOU IN THE NEXT MEETING TOO. FOR

BOARD APPROVAL, ON THAT. OUR NEXT MEETING IS GOING TO BE HELD ON

JANUARY 17th, I BELIEVE IT IS, AT WHICH TIME WE'RE GOING TO REVIEW THE

BUDGET REQUEST FOR THE COMING YEAR. THAT CONCLUDES OUR

COMMITTEE REPORTS.

PUTTING THIS TOGETHER AND I KNOW HIS LOVELY WIFE IS HAPPY TO HAVE

ALL OF THAT PAPERWORK OUT OF THEIR FAMILY ROOM. WE'LL GIVE IT YOU,

BILL. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. WE DID PUT TOGETHER A SHORT

POWERPOINT FOR THE PUBLIC SO THEY WOULD BE AWARE OF WHAT'S IN THE

PROPOSED STRATEGIC PLAN. THE 2008 PROPOSED STRATEGIC PLAN IS

BASED ON THE RESULTS OF OUR THIRD COMMUNITY FORUM THAT WAS

ATTENDED BY 56 PARTICIPANTS IN OCTOBER OF 2007, FOLLOWED-UP ON

NOVEMBER 13, 2007 WITH THE STRATEGIC PLANNING SESSION THAT WAS

ATTENDED BY THE VILLAGE BOARD AND THE DEPARTMENT HEADS. IN

PREVIOUS YEARS, THE STRATEGIC PLANNING GROUP HAD PREPARED AN

ARTICLE WHICH PROVIDED A FORWARD LOOK AT WHAT LOMBARD WOULD

LOOK LIKE FIVE YEARS INTO THE FUTURE. THAT ARTICLE WAS DISCUSSED

AND UPDATED AT THE STRATEGIC PLANNING SESSION AND IT IS INCLUDED IN

THE PROPOSED STRATEGIC PLAN IN THE DOCUMENT YOU HAVE. I HAVE

UNDERLINED CHANGES IN THE ARTICLE AND ITEMS THAT HAVE BEEN

DELETED BASED UPON OUR DISCUSSION AT THE PLANNING SESSION. THE

STRATEGIC PLAN OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS HAS INCLUDED SEVERAL

GUIDING PRINCIPLES DEALING WITH PLANNING FOR FUTURE PUBLIC SAFETY

NEEDS AS A GUIDING PRINCIPLE FOR THE VILLAGE, MAINTAINING CAREFUL

MONITORING OF OUR FINANCIAL RESOURCES, CONTINUING TO BE PROACTIVE

WITH OUR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMMING, WORKING WITH OTHER

GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES COOPERATIVELY, AND DEVELOPING

CUSTOMER-FRIENDLY POLICIES. THE COMMUNITY FORUM WHICH, AS I

MENTIONED, WAS ATTENDED BY 56 RESIDENCE OF LOMBARD, CAME UP WITH

A NUMBER OF ISSUES, 58 ISSUES SPECIFICALLY, FOR THE COMMUNITY TO

CONSIDER IN THE FUTURE. THOSE ISSUES WERE CATEGORIZEDINTO 13

DIFFERENT AREAS AS INDICATED HERE, RANGING FROM DOWNTOWN

DEVELOPMENT TO COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, COMMUNICATION, SCHOOL

ISSUES, PUBLIC SAFETY, AND CODE ENFORCEMENT, FUTURE VISION FOR

PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT, FIRST IMPRESSIONS, RECREATION, AND THE

SWIMMING POOL, AMONG OTHERS. THE VILLAGE BOARD THEN TOOK THE

INPUT FROM THE COMMUNITY FORUM AND AT THE STRATEGIC PLANNING

SESSION, A NUMBER OF STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS AND ISSUES WERE

IDENTIFIED BY THE PLANNING GROUP. SPECIFICALLY, THE STRATEGIC

DIRECTIONS AND THE ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH THEM ARE AS FOLLOWS:

FIRST, TO ADDRESS GOVERNING ISSUES WHICH INVOLVE RECRUITMENT AND

APPOINTMENT OF A NEW VILLAGE MANAGER, REENERGIZING THE PROCESS

OF PROMOTING INTERGOVERNMENTAL COOPERATION AND PROMOTING

ADDITIONAL WAYS TO GENERATE HARMONY

AMONG MEMBERS OF THE VILLAGE BOARD. THE SECOND STRATEGIC

DIRECTION HAD TO DO WITH FUTURE VISION FOR PLANNING AND

DEVELOPMENT WHICH INCLUDED-ISSUES ASSOCIATED THAT INCLUDED

IMPLEMENTING THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ROOSEVELT ROAD CARTER

CORRIDOR STUDY RECOMMENDATIONS, ESTABLISHING A PROCESS TO ANNEX

THE KEN-LOCH GOLF COURSE PROPERTY, AND THE YORK CENTER CO-OP,

AND INSTITUTING IMPROVEMENTS TO THE RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW

PROCESS. THE THIRD STRATEGIC DIRECTION DEALT WITH PUBLIC SAFETY

ADDRESSING TRAFFIC AND PARKING ISSUES THAT INVOLVED BOTH

GLENBARD EAST HIGH SCHOOL

IN THE VILLAGE OF LOMBARD, EXPANDING CRISIS MANAGEMENT TRAINING,

DEVELOPING PUBLIC SAFETY PROGRAMS FOR ADDITIONAL OUTREACH TO

COMMUNITY GROUPS, PROPERTY OWNERS, AND OTHER AGENCIES. THE

FOURTH HAD TO DO WITH INFRASTRUCTURE INVOLVING RESOLVING THE

ROUTE 53 ACCESS ISSUES, COMPLETING IMPROVEMENTS TO MADISON AND 53

ASSOCIATED WITH THOSE ACCESS ISSUES, MOVING FORWARD WITH THE

STREET LIGHTING PLAN AND IMPLEMENTING THE FACILITY'S MASTER PLAN.

NEXT WAS TO ADDRESS SOCIAL ISSUES BY PLANNING FOR SOCIAL AND

HOUSING NEEDS OF AN AGING POPULATION AND EXPANDING THE VILLAGE'S

ARTS AND CULTURAL PROGRAMS. NEXT WAS FACILITATING COMMUNICATION

DEALING WITH E-COMMERCE, OTHER COMMUNICATION ENHANCEMENTS,

COMMUNITY PROMOTION CAMPAIGN, GREATER COMMUNICATION

REGARDING VILLAGE FINANCES, AND DEVELOPING NEW AND ENHANCED

MEANS OF EXPANDING COMMUNICATION WITH THE PUBLIC. NEXT WAS

ENCOURAGING DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT BY PREPARING A FOCUS PLAN

FOR THE DOWNTOWN, IMPLEMENTING THE CIRCULATOR PLAN THAT WOULD

CONNECT YORKTOWN TO THE DOWNTOWN, REVISITING THE CURRENT

DOWNTOWN PLAN AND DECIDING ON THE FUTURE OF VILLAGE FUNDING

FOR THE LOMBARD TOWN CENTER ORGANIZATION. THOSE ARE THE

STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS AND SOME OF THE ISSUES INCLUDED IN THE

STRATEGIC PLANNING

DOCUMENTS. AND WITH THAT,I WILL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS,

TAKE ANY SUGGESTIONS THE VILLAGE BOARD MIGHT HAVE. THANK YOU, MR.

LICHTER. ANY BOARD COMMENTS? YOU'VE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY

TO REVIEW THIS DOCUMENT. DO WE HAVE THE DIRECTION TO MOVE

FORWARD ON IT THEN? I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION. THANK YOU.

TRUSTEE TROSS: BILL, IN BOTH MEETINGS, THE MASSIVE PAPERWORK AND

NOTES AND SCRIBBLE PADS HAD TO STAND AT LEAST SIX-FEET TALL. HOW

DID YOU TAKE ALL OF THAT HOME AND GET IT INTO EIGHT PAGES FOR A

POWERPOINT PRESENTATION?

MR. LICHTER:OH, IT TOOK A LITTLE DOING BUT A LOT OF GOOD [LAUGHTER]

THE REAL DOCUMENT IS YELLOW

WHEN IT WAS ON THE BOARD, THERE'S A FEW MORE PAGES THAN THAT, BUT

STILL,

TRUSTEE TROSS: THAT'S WHY I CONGRATULATE HIM AND THANKED HIM FOR

WHAT HE DOES. HE DOES A GREAT JOB EVERY YEAR IN PUTTING THIS

TOGETHER. SO, AGAIN, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ATTORNEY BAYER; THE POLICY THAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU IS A--` A VERY

GENERAL POLICY THAT HITS THE HIGH POINTS.

IT REALLY BECOMES NECESSARY, IF YOU WILL, BECAUSE OF TECHNOLOGY

CHANGES. YEARS AGO, WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT, NO ONE EVER

ENVISIONED THE USE OF EMAIL TO COMMUNICATE BETWEEN ELECTED

OFFICIALS. RECENTLY, JANUARY 1, 2007, THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT WAS

AMENDED, SPECIFICALLY, AMENDING THE DEFINITION OF MEETING TO

INCLUDE, SPECIFICALLY, ELECTRONIC MAIL OR ELECTRONIC CHAT AND

INSTANT MESSAGING AS EXAMPLES OF THE TYPE OF COMMUNICATION THAT

CAN RESULT IN A MEETING TAKING PLACE. IN DOING THAT, THEY ADDED

LANGUAGE TO INDICATE THAT, YOU KNOW, NORMALLY A MEETING IS A

MAJORITY OF A

QUORUM OF THE VILLAGE BOARD GETTING TOGETHER, GATHERING

FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISCUSSING PUBLIC BUSINESS, WHICH WOULD BE

THREE OF THE SEVEN. AND THAT INCLUDES ANY CONTEMPORANEOUS

INTERACTIVE COMMUNICATION, WHICH MEANS IF THE GOVERNING BODY IS

COMMUNICATING VIA EMAIL AND IT'S HAPPENING INSTANTANEOUSLY, IF MORE

THAN

TWO ARE COMMUNICATING AT THE SAME TIME IT CAN INADVERTENTLY

RESULT IN A MEETING TAKING PLACE TECHNICALLY UNDER THE OPEN

MEETINGS ACT. WHAT THE POLICY DOES, IT TRIES TO GIVE YOU SOME

DIRECTION AS TO THE USAGE OF EMAIL SO THAT YOU DON'T FALL INTO THAT

TRAP OF ACCIDENTALLY CAUSING AN EMAIL COMMUNICATION TO RESULT IN A

MEETING. IT ALSO HAS A SECTION IN THERE REMINDING YOU THAT WHEN YOU

DO AN EMAIL COMMUNICATION THAT ALSO NOW FALLS UNDER

THE LOCAL RECORDS ACT AS A RECORD OF THE MUNICIPALITY AND CAN BE

SUBJECT TO A REQUEST UNDER THE FREEDOM

OF INFORMATION ACT IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT DEALS WITH PUBLIC

BUSINESS. F ALL THE EMAIL SAID IS, "I'D LIKE TO SET

UP A MEETING "ON SUCH AND SUCH A DATE, AT THIS TIME," THAT'S NOT

REALLY A RECORD THAT HAS ANYTHING ABOUT PUBLIC BUSINESS IN IT, BUT

IF IT'S A LENGTHY EMAIL SAYING, "HERE'S MY POSITION"ON A TOPIC"THAT

WE'RE GOING TO BE DISCUSSING "AND MY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION."

THAT'S SOMETHING THAT IF IT'S GIVEN OUT AND DISSEMINATED IN EMAIL

FORMAT,

A HARD COPY SHOULD BE SAVED SOMEWHERE SO THAT IF SOMEBODY

REQUESTED A COPY OF THAT DOCUMENT, SUBJECT TO IT BEING ABLE TO BE

DISCLOSED, IN OTHER WORDS, IF THERE WAS AN EXEMPTION UNDER THE

OPEN MEETINGS ACT FOR DISCLOSURE, THAT WOULD STILL APPLY. THIS

POLICY INDICATES THAT YOU HAVE TO BE CAREFUL IN MAINTAINING A

PERMANENT RECORD OF

THAT EMAIL TRANSACTION BECAUSE IT MAY BE SUBJECT TO A FOIA

REQUEST. AS I INDICATED IN THE POLICY THAT'S BEFORE YOU, IS WRITTEN AS

A VERY GENERAL POLICY.

THERE ARE POLICIES THAT OUR FIRM HAS WORKED ON THAT ARE IN MUCH

GREATER DETAIL. WE INITIALLY WHEN THE VILLAGE PRESIDENT ASKED ME

THROUGH BARB JOHNSON TO PUT SOMETHING TOGETHER FOR DISCUSSION

PURPOSES INDICATED TO KEEP IT GENERAL AT THE START JUST AS A

GUIDELINE

FOR PEOPLE'S USAGE AS OPPOSED TO GETTING INTO A VERY DETAILED 10-12

PAGE SINGLE-SPACED POLICY.

PRESIDENT MUELLER; THANK YOU, MR. BAYER. ANY QUESTIONS?

TRUSTEE O'BRIEN. YES. MR. BAYER, WHAT IS YOUR SOURCE FOR YOUR

MATERIAL? THE SOURCE OF THE MATERIAL FOR THIS?

ATTORNEY BAYER: IT WOULD BE INTERPRETATIONS OF THE OPEN MEETINGS

ACT AND THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT, WHAT THE COURTS HAVE

RULED IS A MEETING, ISN'T A MEETING, AND THAT'S WHAT PUT THE POLICY

TOGETHER IN OUR FIRM. AND AGAIN IT'S THREE MEMBERS HAVE TO FORM A

QUORUM FOR THIS, TO SAY THIS. IF THREE MEMBERS OF THIS ELECTED

BODY, WHICH IS A QUORUM IS FOUR, FOUR OF SEVEN IS A QUORUM, THREE IS

A MAJORITY OF A QUORUM. IF THREE MEMBERS OF THIS BODY GOT

TOGETHER AND DISCUSSED PUBLIC BUSINESS, THAT WOULD TECHNICALLY

BE A MEETING UNDER THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT. IF THAT MEETING WAS

PROPER--NOT PROPERLY NOTICED AND OPEN TO THE PUBLIC, THAT WOULD

PRESENT A PROBLEM AND WOULD BE A VIOLATION OF THE OPEN MEETINGS

ACT. SIMILARLY, IF THREE MEMBERS WERE IN A CHAT ROOM AND WERE

INSTANTLY MESSAGING EACH OTHER BACK AND FORTH AND IT WAS A

DISCUSSION OF PUBLIC BUSINESS

THAT CLEARLY WOULD CONSTITUTE A MEETING ESPECIALLY UNDER THE

RECENT AMENDMENTS TO THE DEFINITION OF MEETING..

TRUSTEE MOREAU: JUST A QUESTION. YOU MENTIONED THAT WE SHOULD BE

SAVING OUR EMAIL. MOST OF THE EMAIL THAT WE SEND OUT COMES

THROUGH THE VILLAGE EMAIL SYSTEM. SO WHAT IS OUR POLICY INTERNALLY

WITH SAVING THOSE EMAIL?

PRESIDENT MUELLER: HOW LONG ARE THEY STORED FOR?

MR. SEXTON: EACH INDIVIDUAL USER

HAS THE OPTION OF SETTING IT UP TO SAVE ALL OF YOUR SENT EMAIL AND

THAT IS SAVED INDEFINITELY ON THE VILLAGE'S SERVERS AS LONG AS THE

USER DOESN'T GO OUT THERE AND DELETE THE EMAIL. OKAY. AND IF I

COULD JUST SAY ONE THING ON THAT, ON SAVING RECORDS, THE STATE

STATUTE PROVIDES THAT A MUNICIPALITY CAN PETITION THE LOCAL

RECORDS COMMISSION-- RIGHT.--FOR A DESTRUCTION ORDER. IN OTHER

WORDS, HOW LONG DO YOU HAVE TO MAINTAIN THE RECORDS. THE VILLAGE

CLERKS OFFICE, IN AT LEAST, IN MY DEALINGS WITH THEM OVER THE YEARS

HAS BEEN VERY GOOD IN CONSTANTLY UPDATING THAT LIST OF THE TYPES

OF RECORDS AND HOW LONG THEY NEED TO BE SAVED. SO THE STAFF

KNOWS EXACTLY HOW LONG EACH RECORD, DEPENDING UPON THE

CATEGORY IT FALLS IN, MUST BE SAVED BEFORE IT CAN BE PERMANENTLY

DELETED FROM THE FILES. WHAT--ON THE SAME ISSUE, WHAT ABOUT IF

THEY'RE USED IN THEIR OWN PERSONAL COMPUTER?

MR. BAYER: WELL, EVEN IF YOU'RE USING YOUR OWN PERSONAL COMPUTER,

IF YOU'RE GENERATING A DOCUMENT THAT THEN IS TRANSMITTED TO THE

VILLAGE IN SOME WAY, THAT DOCUMENT BECOMES A PUBLIC RECORD OF THE

VILLAGE, AND THAT'S WHY YOU NEED TO BE CAREFUL IN WHAT YOU DO WITH

THOSE COMMUNICATIONS BACK AND FORTH AS I INDICATED. YOU KNOW, IT'S

NOT EVERY SINGLE COMMUNICATION IF ALL YOU'RE SAYING IS, YOU KNOW,

"I'M GOING TO BE LATE FOR THE MEETING," OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. THAT'S

JUST SETTING UP DIFFERENT THINGS. BUT IF THERE IS A VERY DETAILED

DOCUMENT AND YOU'VE SENT IT TO ANOTHER MEMBER OF THE BOARD EVEN

THOUGH YOU'RE USING YOUR OWN PERSONAL EMAIL, YOU KNOW, YOU NEED

TO HAVE A WAY OF SAVING THAT DOCUMENT IF IT BECOMES A PERMANENT

DOCUMENT OF THE VILLAGE. BECAUSE OTHERWISE, WHAT COULD HAPPEN IS

YOU COULD MERELY AVOID HAVING IT CONSTITUTE A PUBLIC RECORD BY

EVERYONE BUYING THEIR OWN COMPUTER AND JUST COMMUNICATING ON

THEIR OWN COMPUTER. SO, YOU HAVE TO BE CAREFUL. TYPICALLY, THOUGH,

THAT DOCUMENT BECOMES A PUBLIC RECORD WHEN IT'S ON FILE WITH THE

VILLAGE. AND SO, IF YOU'RE SENDING IT TO MR. LICHTER FROM YOUR OWN,

YOU KNOW, PERMANENT COMPUTER, MR. LICHTER IS GOING to HAVE A COPY

OF THAT SAVED HERE. I MEAN, IF YOU'RE CREATING YOUR OWN INTERNAL

FILES FOR YOUR USAGE AT HOME AND YOUR COMPUTER AND THEY'RE NOT

BEING SHARED WITH THE VILLAGE, THAT'S A DIFFERENT STORY. THAT ISN'T A

DOCUMENT THAT THE VILLAGE MAINTAINS AS A VILLAGE RECORD HERE AT

THE VILLAGE. THERE IS A FINE LINE, THOUGH, AND YOU KNOW, I WOULD SAY

ALWAYS ERR ON THE SIDE OF SOMEHOW SAVING A HARDCOPY OF THE

DOCUMENT. DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION?

TRUSTEE MOREAU:THE ONLY THING IS-- I'M ACTUALLY GOING BACK TO YOUR

RESPONSES. THAT ACTUALLY-- I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT WE HAD THE ABILITY

TO ACTUALLY DELETE THOSE DOCUMENTS AND THAT SEEMS LIKE IT POSES

SOME RISK TO THE VILLAGE, IN GENERAL, BY HAVING THAT ABILITY. IS THERE

ANY WAY TO CHANGE THAT?

MR. SEXTON: I DON'T KNOW THAT OFF HAND,

I JUST KNOW THAT-- OKAY. THAT IS AN OPTION IN OUR EMAIL SOFTWARE--

TRUSTEE MOREAU: OKAY. THAT YOU CAN DELETE EMAILS THAT YOU EITHER

RECEIVE OR SEND. AND THEN, THERE'S NO RECORD OF THOSE, I MEAN

THERE'S NO DATABASE THAT STORES ALL

THE COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE VILLAGE FOR A SET PERIOD OF TIME?

MR. SEXTON: NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF.

TRUSTEE MOREAU: OKAY, THAT'S A LITTLE CONCERNING.

TRUSTEE TROSS. OUR SERVER DOESN'T ACT AS A HOST FOR ALL

COMMUNICATION IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. CORRECT. JUST BUT IT COULD.

WHAT PEOPLE SAY IS. I GUESS I WANT TO GO IN MR. O'BRIEN'S OPENING

COMMENT. ANY TIME THREE OR MORE MEMBERS ARE TOGETHER IN PUBLIC

BUSINESS, AT THE TIME I THOUGHT IT WAS TO DISCUSS, NOT PUBLIC

BUSINESS, BECAUSE EXCUSE ME. GREG GRON, AND I, AND DANA MOREAU

GET TOGETHER AT LIZ'S CAFE AND WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE PARKS

OKAY. OR EAST VIEW TERRACE, AND ARE WE GOING TO HAVE A SWIMMING

DERBY UP THERE OR A FISHING DERBY THAT THE PARK DISTRICTS ARE

FRONTING, IS THAT PUBLIC BUSINESS?

MR. BAYER; TECHNICALLY, IT IS. BUT WE HAVE..

TRUSTEE TROSS: TOM, PLEASE, LET ME FINISH. I ALWAYS THOUGHT IT WAS

WE COULDN'T GET TOGETHER AND SAY, "I NEED YOUR SUPPORT "TO GO TO

THE VILLAGE PRESIDENT "AND HAVE COMMUNITY RELATIONS GIVE HIM

$5,000," MEANING PUBLIC BUSINESS AND ACTS THAT THIS BOARD WOULD BE

REQUIRED TO VOTE ON. WHICH IS IT?

MR. BAYER:THAT'S WHAT I MEAN, PUBLIC BUSINESS OF THE VILLAGE OF

LOMBARD. IF YOU'RE GETTING TOGETHER AND YOU'RE TALKING AS, FOR

EXAMPLE, IF IT WAS A MATTER THAT RELATED TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND

IT WAS SOMETHING THAT THE VILLAGE HAD NO CONTROL OVER, COULD TAKE

NO ACTION IN REGARD TO, AND IT WAS JUST A MATTER OF GENERAL

CONCERN WITHIN THE MUNICIPALITY THAT WOULDN'T BE NECESSARILY A

MATTER OF PUBLIC BUSINESS THAT THE BOARD HAS JURISDICTION OVER.

BUT YOU NEED TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT WHAT YOU'RE DISCUSSING BECAUSE

YOU CAN TAKE SOMETHING THAT ISN'T THE PUBLIC BUSINESS OF THE

VILLAGE. YOU KNOW, THE EXAMPLE PEOPLE GET IS WE ALL SHOW UP AT A

SOCIAL GATHERING AND IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE A COCKTAIL PARTY FOR THE

HOLIDAYS AND SOMEBODY SAYS, "WELL, WHAT ABOUT THAT ITEM "THAT'S

GOING TO BE ON THE AGENDA NEXT WEEK?" AND EVERYBODY STARTS

TALKING. YOU SUDDENLY TURN WHAT WAS A SOCIAL EVENT INTO IT. PUBLIC

BUSINESS MEANS PUBLIC BUSINESS OF THE VILLAGE OF LOMBARD AS A

GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY. BUT IF SOMEONE BRINGS UP, "WHAT ARE YOU

GOING TO DO "ABOUT THIS ISSUE "TO HELP THE PARK DISTRICT "OR HELP

THIS ONE OR A VILLAGE ITEM," IN GENERAL, THAT IS NOT PUBLIC BUSINESS.

IT'S AN ITEM-- UNLESS IT'S SOMETHING WHERE WHAT YOU'RE SUGGESTING IS

SOMETHING THAT THE VILLAGE CAN DO AND NOT JUST YOU AS AN INDIVIDUAL

OKAY. NON-TRUSTEE CAN DO. WELL. OR IS GOING TO TAKE ACTION BY THIS

BOARD. I GUESS I ALWAYS THOUGHT IT BOILED DOWN TO SOLICITING FOR

VOTES-- NO. AND NOT BUSINESS. NOW, WE CAN MOVE ON. I GUESS THE

NEXT THING IS--WHAT YOU'RE BASICALLY SAYING IS WE BETTER SAVE ALL

OUR EMAILS. I RECENTLY-- NO. HAD A REQUEST-- YES, THAT'S WHAT HE'S

SAYING. NO, IT ISN'T. IF IT BECOMES AN ISSUE, THAT IS DISSEMINATED TO

MORE THAN THREE ELECTED OFFICIALS-- NO, IT'S NOT. I BETTER SAVE THAT.

I THINK YOU SHOULD BE SAVING THEM ANYWAY. EVEN IF IT'S ONE, IN OTHER

WORDS, IF YOU USE THE VILLAGE EMAIL AND SEND SOMETHING TO MR.

LICHTER.

MR. BAYER: THAT DOCUMENT WOULD BE SAVED AS A VILLAGE DOCUMENT

EVEN THOUGH IT MAY BE JUST BETWEEN YOU AND MR. LICHTER. NOW, IS

THAT DOCUMENT PROBABLY GOING TO BE EXEMPT FROM OUR FREEDOM OF

INFORMATION ACT REQUEST, PROBABLY YES BECAUSE THERE IS AN

EXEMPTION FOR PRELIMINARY DRAFTS, NOTES, AND MEMORANDUMS, IN

WHICH POLICIES ARE DISCUSSED AND, YOU KNOW, DECISIONS OR DIFFERENT

MATTERS ARE FORMULATED. SO, IT'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE EXEMPT, YET

IT STILL CONSTITUTES A RECORD THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE SAVED UNDER

LOCAL RECORDS ACT FOR A DEFINITE PERIOD OF TIME.

TRUSTEE TROSS: TOM, I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU A SPECIFIC BUT NOT NAME IT.

I THINK EVERYBODY WILL KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. I RECENTLY GOT A

REQUEST OF FREEDOM OF INFORMATION FROM DEPUTY CLERK JOHNSON.

AND I DUTIFULLY WENT BACK INTO MY COMPUTER BECAUSE I WASN'T SMART

ENOUGH TO DELETE EVERYTHING AND SAY, "I DIDN'T HAVE IT ANYMORE,"

WITH REGARDS TO AN ISSUE THAT CAME BEFORE THE VILLAGE BOARD AND

COMMUNICATE BETWEEN MYSELF AND BOARD MEMBERS, ONE OF THE

COMMUNICATES THAT WAS INVOLVED IN THAT CAME FROM PRIVATE CITIZEN

AND IT CAME TO ME AS A VILLAGE TRUSTEE. I WAS TOLD I HAD TO RELEASE

THOSE EMAILS. IS THAT TRUE?

MR. BAYER; UNLESS THE EMAIL WAS PUBLICLY REFERENCED AT A BOARD

MEETING BY THE HEAD OF THE PUBLIC BODY, THERE TYPICALLY WOULD BE

AN EXEMPTION FOR THAT TYPE OF EMAIL AS AN INVASION OF PERSONAL

PRIVACY IF IT WAS A RESIDENT THAT WAS JUST COMMUNICATING

ONE-ON-ONE WITH YOU OR A PRELIMINARY DRAFT, NOTE, OR MEMORANDUM.

SO, I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE SPECIFICALLY TALKING ABOUT, BUT

TYPICALLY, THE MAJORITY OF THE EMAIL COMMUNICATIONS, UNLESS THERE

IS A PUBLIC REFERENCE TO THAT COMMUNICATION AT THIS MEETING IS

TYPICALLY GOING TO HAVE SOME EXEMPTION PROTECTION IN RELATION TO A

FOIA REQUEST. OKAY. SO, I GUESS SOMEONE'S ADAGE, DELETE IT AND YOU

DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT IT, DOESN'T WORK. I CANNOT ADVOCATE

DELETING EMAILS BECAUSE THAT WOULD VIOLATE THE LOCAL RECORDS ACT.

PRESIDENT MUELLLER; AGAIN, ON THE ISSUE, I WAS REQUESTED AND I

BROUGHT MY COMPUTER IN AND WE-- I PROVIDED 76 DOCUMENTS BETWEEN

MYSELF AND RESIDENTS OF LOMBARD ON AN ISSUE

OVER A PERIOD OF TIME. AND YOU KNOW, IT WAS REQUESTED UNDER

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION. I HAD IT IN CATEGORY AND HAD TO RELEASE IT.

TRUSTEE TROSS: AND, YOU KNOW. MR. PRESIDENT-- SO, I DON'T KNOW. I

DON'T KNOW HOW YOU-- I DON'T KNOW HOW TO SAY THIS AND STOP THE

OPEN LINES OF COMMUNICATION,

WHEN A RESIDENT SENDS ME AN EMAIL ABOUT AN ISSUE THAT THIS BOARD

MAY VIEW AS PUBLIC BUSINESS, NOT A RESIDENT REQUEST, I'M

HARD-PRESSED TO SUDDENLY SAY THIS IS AVAILABLE UNDER FREEDOM OF

INFORMATION WHEN A RESIDENT SIGNS THEIR NAME

TO AN ISSUE WHEN THEY ARE AGAINST A SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT OR ISSUE

THAT'S GOING TO BE VOTED ON BY THIS BOARD, AND THAT CAN SUDDENLY

BECOME SUBJECT OF FREEDOM OF INFORMATION. I THINK THAT BREAKS MY

BOND OF CONFIDENTIALITY AND I WON'T-- MAYBE YOU BETTER GET READY TO

START DEFENDING ME, BUT I DON'T INTEND TO START MAKING RESIDENT'S

EMAILS PUBLIC INFORMATION. AND I WOULD THINK THAT THERE WOULD BE

AN EXEMPTION-- OKAY. UNDER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT, BUT IT

WOULD PREVENT

THE NEED TO DISCLOSE THAT DOCUMENT. THANK YOU. SO, WE CAN GIVE

YOU A CALL EVERY-- SHE WOULD'VE FIND THAT FROM ME-- EVERY HOUR OR

SO EVERY TIME WE GET AN EMAIL? I'M SORRY. IT'S UP TO HIM TO SORT OUT

THE SHADES OF GREY.

TRUSTEE SODERSTROM: I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS ON YOUR POLICY

STATEMENT ITEM NUMBER TWO ABOUT THE SEQUENTIALLY EMAILING. RIGHT.

IF I COULD JUST USE IN REVERSE ORDER DISTRICT NUMBERS. IF I SEND AN

EMAIL TO TRUSTEE FITZPATRICK SINGULARLY, WHO THEN DECIDES TO SEND

IT TO TRUSTEE MOREAU, WHO THEN DECIDES TO SEND IT INDIVIDUALLY TO

TRUSTEE O'BRIEN, IS THAT A VIOLATION? Mr BAYER: NO. Trustee SODERSTROM

:OKAY.

MR. BAYER; UNLESS IT'S PREDETERMINED THAT THAT'S WHAT'S GOING TO

OCCUR. IN OTHER WORDS, IF YOU SENT IT TO TRUSTEE FITZPATRICK, THAT'S

A ONE-ON-ONE CONVERSATION

THAT IS LESS THAN THE MAJORITY OF THE QUORUM THAT DOESN'T VIOLATE

THE OPEN MEETING'S ACT. IF TRUSTEE FITZPATRICK, WITHOUT YOUR

KNOWLEDGE, TURNS AROUND AND SENDS IT TO TRUSTEE MOREAU, THAT'S

ANOTHER ONE-ON-ONE, YOU KNOW, CONVERSATION. THE ISSUE BECOMES,

HOW QUICKLY IS THAT OCCURRING? IF THE TIME SEQUENCE, YOU KNOW, IS-

-MINUTES. IS, YOU KNOW, SEVERAL MINUTES AND IT'S PREDETERMINED THAT

THEN TRUSTEE MOREAU RESPONDS TO YOU, NOW WE HAVE THREE PEOPLE.

AND IN THE SPACE OF A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME, THEY HAVE ALL DISCUSSED

IN SOME MANNER, BETWEEN THEMSELVES, THE ISSUE THROUGH THE USE OF

EMAIL, AND IF THAT WINDOW BETWEEN THE PASSAGE OF THAT EMAIL IS VERY

CONTEMPORANEOUS IN TIME, YOU RUN THE RISK OF IT BEING CONSIDERED A

VIOLATION OF THE OPEN MEETING'S ACT. Trustee SODERSTROM: SO, A

PERFECT EXAMPLE OF THAT, WHICH WOULD BE THOSE BUSINESS THAT

WOULD AFFECT, FOR EXAMPLE, ALL THREE OF US, IF I SEND AN EMAIL

REGARDING THE WESTMORE ROAD RECONSTRUCTION TO TRUSTEE

FITZPATRICK, WHO THEN HAD A QUESTION ABOUT IT WITH TRUSTEE MOREAU,

AND THEN SHE RESPONDED BACK TO ME, THAT'S SOMETHING WE'D BETTER

BE SAVING.

MR. BAYER: IT PROBABLY SHOULD BE SAVED BUT IT'S GOING TO BE EXEMPT

AS A PRELIMINARY DRAFT, NOTE, OR MEMORANDUM IN WHICH YOUR

OPINIONS ARE EXPRESSED. AND UNLESS SOMEBODY COMES TO A BOARD

MEETING AND MAKES A PUBLIC REFERENCE TO THAT DOCUMENT EXISTING,

WHICH IS THE EVENT THAT CAUSES YOU TO LOSE THAT EXEMPTION UNDER

FOIA, THE DOCUMENT WOULD BE SAVED, IT MAY EXIST, BUT IT WOULDN'T BE

SUBJECT TO DISCLOSURE IN RELATION TO A FOIA REQUEST.

TRUSTEE SODERSTROM: OKAY. AND THEN MY SECOND QUESTION ABOUT THE

DISCLOSURE OF THE RECORDS UNDER FOIA, SO THAT WOULD NOT ONLY BE

COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE ELECTED OFFICIALS, BUT BETWEEN AN

ELECTED OFFICIAL AND STAFF?

MR. BAYER:ABSOLUTELY, BECAUSE YOU WOULD BE EXPRESSING YOUR

OPINION TO STAFF AS TO HOW A CERTAIN DECISION SHOULD BE MADE AS A

POLICY ITEM ON SOMETHING. THAT WOULD FALL INTO THAT PRELIMINARY

DRAFT, NOTE, MEMORANDUM EXCEPTION.

TRUSTEE SODERSTROM: SO, AS TRUSTEE TROSS SAID IN SIMPLISTIC TERMS,

WE BETTER EITHER SAVE OR PRINT A HARDCOPY OF JUST ABOUT 98

PERCENT OF EVERY EMAIL WE GET.

MR. BAYER: RIGHT. AND MOST PEOPLE THEY RECOMMEND BECAUSE YOU CAN

ACCIDENTALLY DELETE THINGS. IF IT'S SOMETHING SUBSTANTIVE, YOU'RE

PROBABLY BETTER OFF PRINTING A HARDCOPY AND JUST MAINTAINING A

HARDCOPY OF YOUR CORRESPONDENTS ON PUBLIC BUSINESS IN a

CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER OF SOME KIND OR TOPIC ORDER. IT'S JUST, YOU

KNOW,

IT'S UNFORTUNATE BECAUSE THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF EMAIL WAS TO NOT

HAVE PAPER, YET THE OPEN MEETING'S ACT AND THE FREEDOM OF

INFORMATION ACT ARE CAUSING YOU TO SAVE IT IN PAPER FORM BECAUSE

IT'S A DOCUMENT.

PRESIDENT MUELLER: YOU HEAR COMMENTS MANY TIMES, "DON'T E-MAIL ME.

I DON'T WANT E-MAILS." [LAUGHTER] I'M JUST THINKING HERE, YOU KNOW,

SOMETIMES I SAY I FEEL LIKE I'M LEFT OUT OF LOOP. I THINK THIS IS A GOOD

THING, TO BE LEFT OUT OF LOOP. AND ALSO, YOU KNOW, TRUSTEE TROSS

JUST SPENT, YOU KNOW, A MONTH, PROBABLY, THIS PAST SUMMER

CLEANING OUT HIS GARAGE, 20 YEARS OF SAVING PAPER. AND NOW, YOU

GOT TO START, SAVE THOSE BOXES AND START BUILDING IT UP AGAIN, YOU

KNOW?

IT'S GOOD TO BE OUT OF THE LOOP SOMETIMES.

TRUSTEE TROSS: SO, JUST SO I CAN CLARIFY SOMETHING. YOU'RE GIVING US

THIS AS A POLICY STATEMENT FOR OUR CONSIDERATION TO ADOPT BECAUSE

OF THE 2006 OR 2007-- SEVEN. --LEGISLATION DEFINING OPEN MEETINGS AND

FOIA. CORRECT? OR FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT?

MR. BAYER:CORRECT.

TRUSTEE TROSS: THAT DOES NOT, AND I WANT TO BE CLEAR ON THIS

BECAUSE I MADE A STATEMENT, WHEN A RESIDENT EMAILS ME ON AN ISSUE

OR A COLLEAGUE EMAILS ME, THAT IN MY OPINION, IS MY COMMUNICATE.

WHAT ARE THE-- AND WHAT YOU JUST DESCRIBED, IF I DIDN'T RELEASE IT

UNDER A FOIA OR DELETED IT AND SAID, "YES, "I GOT THE CONVERSATION

"WITH LAURA FITZPATRICK OVER ART SCULPTURE." OKAY? WHAT ARE THE

CONSEQUENCES OF DELETING IT OR SAYING NO.

MR. BAYER WELL, IF YOU HAVE DENIED A FOIA REQUEST, THE FIRST STEP IS

THEY CAN-- IF THE VILLAGE DENIES A FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT

REQUEST, THE NEXT STEP IS TO APPEAL THAT DECISION TO THE HEAD OF

THE PUBLIC BODY. IF THE HEAD OF THE PUBLIC BODY DENIES THAT REQUEST,

THEN THE NEXT STEP IS TO APPEAL IT TO THE COURT SYSTEM TO DETERMINE

WHETHER OR NOT YOU WERE ENTITLED TO THE DOCUMENT. IF THE COURT

DETERMINES YOU'RE ENTITLED TO THE DOCUMENT, NOT ONLY DO YOU GET IT

BUT YOU HAVE TO PAY ALL THE FEES AND COSTS OF THE PERSON WHO

BROUGHT THE LAWSUIT.

TRUSTEE TROSS: TOM, I'M CONCERNED-- I'M NOT CONCERNED ABOUT OUR

INTERNAL COMMUNICATION, 'CAUSE RATHER THAN EMAIL,LET'S JUST GO

BACK TO THE OLD ROUTINE. TUESDAY NIGHT IS THE NIGHT BEFORE THE-- OR

WEDNESDAY IS THE NIGHT BEFORE THE VILLAGE BOARD MEETING, GET UP

ON THE PHONE, MAKE YOUR SIX PHONE CALLS,AND YOU KNOW WHERE

EVERYBODY'S AT AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH,OKAY? YOU DO IT

ONE-ON-ONE, THAT'S NOT A VIOLATION OF THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT OR

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION. BUT I AM CONCERNED WHEN IT COMES TO

EMAIL.

PRESIDENT MUELLER: RIGHT, BUT YOU'RE NOT-- I DON'T --USING THE

EXAMPLE YOU'RE TRYING TO GET TO, I DON'T THINK. YOU AGAIN USED AN

EXAMPLE AND USED TRUSTEE FITZPATRICK ABOUT SCULPTURE. I THINK

WHAT YOU'RE REALLY TRYING TO GET TO, AND MAYBE I'M WRONG, BUT

SORRY I INTERRUPTED YOU, DICK, BUT YOU GOT MR. LEE WHO IS A RESIDENT

WHO LIVES IN YOUR COMMUNITY-- THAT'S WHAT I'M GETTING AT. AND HE'S

GOT A FENCE ISSUE AND HE EMAILS YOU AND YOU EMAIL HIM BACK. THAT'S

WHERE, I THINK, THAT'S THE AREA YOU'RE TRYING TO GET, YOU KNOW, IT'S A

BIG-RESIDENT COMMUNICATING BETWEEN YOU AND THE RESIDENT. Trustee

TROSS: I WAS SPECIFICALLY TOLD-- AND I'LL GIVE YOU THE CASE

AFTERWARDS-- YOU COULD SAVE THOSE, YOU SAID. I WAS SPECIFICALLY

TOLD BY OUR DEPUTY CLERK THAT A FOIA REQUEST CAME IN FOR ACTIONS

THAT WAS TAKEN BY THIS BOARD, AND THAT FOIA REQUEST ASKED FOR ALL

OF THE EMAILS, TELEPHONE CALLS, TIMES, AND EMAIL COMMUNICATIONS,

AND WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS THAT I RECEIVED AND HAD REGARDING AN

ISSUE THAT THIS BOARD VOTED ON. SO IT WAS PUBLIC BUSINESS. IT WAS

BOARD ACTION. AND WHEN I SAID, "I HAVE OTHERS. I WILL NOT RELEASE

THEM," I WAS TOLD I SHOULD RELEASE THEM BECAUSE IT CAME TO ME

ADDRESSED TROSS@VILLAGEOFLOMBARD.ORG

<mailto:TROSSR@VILLAGEOFLOMBARD.ORG> AND IT WAS COPIED TO OTHER

VILLAGE BOARD MEMBERS. AND THEREFORE, THE TEXT AND THE EMAILS,

THERE WERE MORE THAN ONE, WERE SUBJECT TO FREEDOM OF

INFORMATION. BUT THE--

AGAIN, THIS IS BETWEEN-- THIS IS BETWEEN A RESIDENT AND MYSELF, AND I

BELIEVE EVERY OTHER VILLAGE BOARD MEMBER GOT IT.

MR. BAYER:WHAT I'VE INDICATED IS AND WHAT I'VE TOLD THE DEPUTY CLERK,

AND I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THE EXACT SITUATION YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT,

BUT FOR EXAMPLE, IF THIS BOARD HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT A TOPIC AND

YOU SAID, "I HAVE RECEIVED "A NUMBER OF EMAILS FROM RESIDENTS ON

THIS TOPIC," YOU HAVE NOW PUBLICLY DISCUSSED AND THERE'S BEEN A

PUBLIC ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF THE EXISTENCE OF THE EMAILS, AND THAT

CAN CAUSE THE EXEMPTION AS A PRELIMINARY DRAFT, NOTE, MEMORANDUM

TO BE LOST BECAUSE THERE'S A PUBLIC DISCUSSION INCITING TO, "I

RECEIVED AN EMAIL FROM TRUSTEE SO AND SO," OR "I RECEIVED AN EMAIL

FROM SOMEBODY.

TRUSTEE TROSS: TOM, YOU UNDERSTAND WHERE I'M AT, I THINK THE VILLAGE

PRESIDENT-- I UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE GOING. SAID IT CORRECTLY.

BUT I DON'T MAKE THE LAW, I ONLY INTERPRET IT. I BELIEVE THAT OUR-- I

BELIEVE THAT A RESIDENT NEEDS TO KNOW WHEN THEY ARE

COMMUNICATING VIA EMAIL TO AN ELECTED OFFICIAL THAT THAT

INFORMATION IS NOT GOING TO BE DISSEMINATED BY THE LADY WRITING OUT

HERE IN THE PRESS AT A LATER DATE OR BY SOMEONE COMING IN. AND AS

LONG AS--TO SAY, "I WANT A FOIA." AND AS LONG AS THEY SEND IT TO YOU

AND THERE IS NO STATEMENT UP HERE THAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED A

PARTICULAR EMAIL FROM

SOMEBODY, THE RESPONSE TO A FOIA REQUEST FOR ANY EMAILS YOU

RECEIVE FROM RESIDENTS ON THIS ISSUE WOULD BE,

MR. BAYER: I WOULD TELL THE VILLAGE CLERK, NUMBER ONE, IT'S AN

INVASION OF PERSONAL PRIVACY AS TO THAT PERSON'S OPINION TO YOU

AND NUMBER TWO, IT'S A PRELIMINARY DRAFT, NOTE, OR MEMORANDUM IN

WHICH THAT PERSON'S OPINION IS EXPRESSED AND YOU WILL USE IT TO SET

YOUR POLICY DECISION. AND THEREFORE, IF IT DOES EXIST, IT'S EXEMPT AND

YOU CAN'T HAVE IT.

PRESIDENT MUELLER: LIKE YOU SAID, "DIAL UP." DIAL UP. ANY OTHER

QUESTIONS? YOU WANT TO MOVE FORWARD? THIS IS A POLICY IN OUR-

-BOARD, SHALL WE HAVE SOMETHING AT LEAST IN OUR DOCUMENTATION?

KEVIN FITZPATRICK, 348 S. LEWIS, ASKED COULD A CITIZEN HAVE ANY

EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY WHEN CONTACTING A PUBLIC OFFICIAL BY EMAIL,

HIS UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT THERE WOULD BE NONE.

ATTORNEY BAYER GAVE AN EXAMPLE THAT IF THERE IS A CRIME COMMITTED,

THERE IS AN EXPECTATION THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO DISCLOSE WHO THE

COMPLAINING WITNESSES ARE IN A LAW ENFORCEMENT PROCEEDING, AND

IN FACT ,THERE IS A FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT EXEMPTION THAT ANY

DOCUMENT THAT CONTAINS THE NAME OF PEOPLE FILING COMPLAINTS,

THEIR NAME HAS TO BE REDACTED. THE VILLAGE DOES NOT WANT TO

DISCOURAGE PEOPLE FROM COMING FORTH WITH COMPLAINTS

FURTHER DISCUSSION ENSUED AMONG THE BOARD MEMBERS, THE KEY

POINTS INCLUDED:

· THE POLICY SHOULD CONTAIN SOMETHING THAT SAYS THE PRIVATE

COMMUNIQUES REMAIN PRIVATE.

· THE NEED FOR AN EXPLANATION THAT DISCLOSURE IS A CONFIDENTIAL

ISSUE BETWEEN CONSTITUENT AND AN ELECTED OFFICIAL, BUT IT MIGHT NOT

ALWAYS BE EXEMPT.

· DISCUSSION REGARDING THE FACT THAT THE VILLAGE JUST ADOPTED A

COMMUNITY FORUM IN THE 2008'S STRATEGIC PLAN AND ONE OF THE

PRINCIPALS IN THERE IS TO OPEN GREATER LINES OF COMMUNICATION WITH

THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE AND OUR CONSTITUENCIES. THE EMAIL POLICY

SEEMS TO CONTRADICT THAT.

· SUGGESTIONS FOR USING SEPARATE COMPUTERS, WHICH COULD KEEP

PERSONAL AND PUBLIC CORRESPONDENCES SEPARATE.

· A SUGGESTION THAT THE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY STAFF MAKE THE

SERVER SAVE EVERYTHING.

· DISCUSSION OF THE FACT THAT IT DOESN'T MATTER IF A MESSAGE

COMES IN UNDER A PERSONAL EMAIL ACCOUNT, IF IS A PUBLIC RECORD

UNDER THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT, IF IT IS A PUBLIC RECORD THAT

RELATES TO THE LANGUAGE BEING PREPARED OR HAVING BEEN OR BEING

USED, RECEIVED, POSSESSED OF UNDER THE CONTROL OF ANY PUBLIC BODY

AND PUBLIC BODY MEANS ANY LEGISLATIVE EXECUTIVE BODY. THAT IS A

PUBLIC RECORD.

AT TRUSTEE TROSS'S REQUEST, THERE WAS A CONSENSUS TO HAVE

ATTORNEY BAYER REVISE THE POLICY TO BETTER REFERENCE THE

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT, WHILE KEEPING THE POLICY GENERAL IN

NATURE.