Riverside Info » About Riverside

Quorum on the Forum

(11 posts)
1 2

  1. KimJ
    Member

    Dear Ms. Jacobs,

    Thank you for writing to Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan with your questions related to the Illinois Open Meetings Act, 5 ILCS 120.

    You asked, “If more than one trustee of a seven member board participates in a website forum are they violating the Open Meetings Act?— Not necessarily.

    Under the Act, anytime there is a majority of the quorum of a public body gathered and discussing business they are subject to the Act. For a seven member Board, the Act is triggered anytime you have three members (which is a majority of the quorum) gathered discussing business. A gathering does not just mean gathered physically, it also means gathered via email or internet.

    So, if three members of the Board are on this internet forum discussing business, the Act is in play and they would have needed to provide advance notice, including proper posting of the meeting, keeping minutes and all the other components that are required to be in place under the Act. If one or two members are participating that would not be a majority of the quorum.

    Thank you for your question.

    Respectfully,

    Terry Mutchler

    Public Access Counselor

    Assistant Attorney General

    Posted Wednesday Jan 24, 2007 10:58 #

  2. MikeT
    Member

    One thing I wanted to clarify is that the 1 or 2 people who c/b on the forum is IN ADDITION TO the Village Manager.

    miket

    Posted Wednesday Jan 24, 2007 11:10 #

  3. MikeSedivy
    Member

    It would be interesting to understand what "discussing business means". All of the commissions were advised that having two members (assuming a 7-member commission) on any internet forum COULD be problematic if a 3rd member was observing the discussion. Maybe the Village is being conservative in its advisory and I don't blame them for that.

    Posted Wednesday Jan 24, 2007 13:17 #

  4. ChrisHajer
    Member

    Does the Village Manager vote? I thought it was just the trustees, with the 7th vote (President Wiaduck) being the tie-breaker. Is that accurate? I also thought a quorum was a majority, so four people, not three. What am I missing here?

    Can someone please clarify? Thanks.

    Posted Wednesday Jan 24, 2007 17:42 #

  5. MikeT
    Member

    Chris, you are right: the VM does not vote.

    Seems like 1 or 2 is ok on the internet, but not more. I'll repeat what the Madigan person said---

    So, if three members of the Board are on this internet forum discussing business, the Act is in play and they would have needed to provide advance notice, including proper posting of the meeting, keeping minutes and all the other components that are required to be in place under the Act. If one or two members are participating that would not be a majority of the quorum.

    miket

    Posted Wednesday Jan 24, 2007 19:03 #

  6. MikeSedivy
    Member

    ChrisH - the issue is if a "majority of a quorum" is involved, because it is possible that those individuals alone could take action. So if its a 7-member board/commission, a quorum is 4 and a majority of the quorum would be 3.

    Posted Thursday Jan 25, 2007 16:24 #

  7. MikeT
    Member

    Still seems that 1 or 2 plus the VM can come on board.

    Assuming, that is, they want to.

    This is what Madigan's office advised.

    miket

    Posted Thursday Jan 25, 2007 18:36 #

  8. Catherine
    Member

    Kim, thanks for following up with the AG. Did you send this opinion to the trustees on the Email the Trustees function and to the village manager. If not, I will.

    Posted Thursday Jan 25, 2007 20:31 #

  9. ChrisHajer
    Member

    MikeS - majority of a quorum. Got it. Thank you.

    Posted Friday Jan 26, 2007 00:08 #

  10. MikeSedivy
    Member

    The issue in my mind is that Trustee Grace has posted. If another Trustee posts either aware or unaware of her previous postings, there COULD be a violation if a 3rd Trustee is observing the conversation. I assume there is at least 1 Trustee who has viewed this Forum in the past. While I wish she would stay active in clarifying issues and providing her opinions, I can not fault her for not wishing to take personal risk in the matter.

    Posted Friday Jan 26, 2007 10:43 #

RSS feed for this topic

1 2

Reply »

You must log in to post.