February 2010
« Jan   Mar »


  • Karrie E. Alms: Amazing insight into the world of politics awaits any reader at pibgorn … from a Demon’s...
  • Tony: Homefield is Dynegy. Dynegy is Ameren. There Charging You twice for the same energy. Do you really thihk $.04...
  • SouthEnder: Also does anyone remember the Velvet Freeze located on Jefferson St, up the street from the Warner Homes....
  • Eric Pollitt: I flew economy class to Hong Kong for Christmas vacation, which is a 14 hour flight. When I got back...
  • Mike: Homefield has been sold to dynery. Google dynegy scandal to see who your new parent is. If this upsets you give...
  • mortified: Fun while it lasted. Godspeed!
  • aaron: your blogging will be missed but i know that your spirit of fairness will remain alive in your other...
  • Jon: CJ, your blog was a revelation and an inspiration. You have a wonderful talent that is an asset to the...
  • Billy Dennis: Of course the Chronicle is done: Screw you. The Chronicle is one of the best researched blogs...
  • Paul Wilkinson: CJ, am sorry you have ended your blog. It was well done. It seems many have given up as we keep...
  • Sharon Crews: Your voice is definitely needed in this community. Thanks for all your insights.
  • emergepeoria: Your blog is great resource to research Peoria issues. I hope you leave it up.
  • BucketHead: I was not suggesting that, I believe the both of you had very strong common sense and that lead to your...
  • C. J. Summers: Without anonymity, there is no courage among my detractors. Take a look back at the wide variety of...
  • Of course the Chronicle is done: Without Sandberg to give stores to the Chronicle there is no Chronicle.

Attorney General investigating D150 for possible Open Meetings Act violation

This came in the mail to me today from the Attorney General’s office:

February 26, 2010

RE: Open Meetings Act Request for Review — No. 5949

Dear Mr. Summers:

Thank you for submitting your Request for Review to the Public Access Counselor at the Office of the Illinois Attorney General pursuant to the Open Meetings Act (OMA), 5 ILCS 120 et. seq. Your Request related to an event held by the Peoria School District 150 Board of Education on February 16, 2010.

We have determined that further inquiry into the matter is warranted and have asked the Board to provide additional information to aid in our review. We will be reviewing relevant materials to determine whether the Board is in compliance with the requirements of the Act. Multiple requests for review have been filed with the PAC on this particular matter.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 217-785-7438.


Cara Smith
Public Access Counselor

Related post: District 150 and the Open Meetings Act.

13 comments to Attorney General investigating D150 for possible Open Meetings Act violation

  • Commenting

    At some point District 150 needs to realize that people are sick and tired of their bullsh** and they are not going to take it anymore. Until they have learned to respect the rule of law, abide by sound policies and listen to families and taxpayers, they can expect more of the same.

  • Jane

    You would think these people would know what the rules are… also, did you see that there is an agenda up on their site?

  • My advice for Kevin Lyons:

    Finish your review of the Mary Davis investigation. Once that is done, THEN investigate whether a press conference attended by the press (as well as a quorum of the board) was actually aclosed meeting.

  • I’m not defending the generally dumbness of how this thing was organized. But there are legitimate issues to whether or not this is a violation. Certainly, the Illinois Attorney General’s office should not what an open meeting is and isn’t and they say this isn’t a violation.

  • Billy — Read the letter again. This is from the Attorney General’s office, not the State’s Attorney’s office.

  • Tom


    My guess is that if you call and talked to someone at the attorney general’s office and called back later, and talked to someone else you could get two different answers and none would be a legal opinion.

  • Frustrated

    Seems like much to do about nothing. There are so many other “issues” that truly require public attention and investigation. This seesms to be some debate as to whether it is even a violation.

  • Frustrated — Exactly. There is indeed some debate as to whether it was a violation. I would like to see that resolved. I believe this investigation will help clarify the OMA for all parties involved, and that’s good for public confidence as well as district transparency.

  • Sharon Crews

    Frustrated, I do wonder why you believe that violating the Open Meetings Act is an inconsequential matter. Do you realize this isn’t the first time this year that the BOE has disregarded the rules about the act? The whole print out of the agenda was changed recently to reflect a practice that had not been followed until another violation was reported. On its regular Monday meeting nights, the board is to meet first in public (at 4 p.m. when they first convene) to vote to go into executive session (and they they return at 6:30 for the rest of the meeting). That step was ignored on the agenda and most likely not practiced either. I guess it is of some importance that the board has to vote whenever it is going behind closed doors and I guess the reason for going behind closed doors has to follow certain guidelines.

  • Frustrated

    Sharon – I agree with you in the instance that you offered. I think the District should follow the OMA. I am just referring to the particular news conference event under question. Nothing too secret went on as selected news “partners” (whatever that means) were in attendance.

    But as CJ offers in would be good to clarify this case so the District and other public boards do not make the same mistake going forward. But . . . at the end of the day if it is determined the District violated the Act, I think it was unintentional. If you want to “hang them high” there are plenty of other areas in which to do so.

  • Oh, crap. My mistake. That’s what happens when I try to blog after taking pain killers and cough syrup.

  • “the Attorney General’s office, not the State’s Attorney’s office.”

    Is there a difference?

    “Office of the Illinois Attorney General”

    Is there another State’s Attorney here? I thought the AG was the head of The State’s Attorneys.

  • More 150 news

    Week 25 news tease for six p.m. news “Is D150 distributing equipment illegally”?

    Here is story