Chicago City Council violated OMA by failing to post meeting agenda 48 hours in advance

This reading view follows the source PDF's positioned text blocks. Page headers, repeated office furniture, and lower-margin notes are kept out of the narrative; source notes are available below. Reconstruction is automatic and imperfect — the PDF is the authoritative version, and it's linked on this page.

Dear and Mr. Levine:

This determination is issuedpursuanYto section 3. 5( e) ofthe, Open Meetings Act OMA) ( 5 ILCS 120/ 3. 5( e) ( West 2016)). For the reasons explained below; the Public Access Bureau concludes that the City of;Chicago City Council ( Council) violated OMA by failing to post an agenda for its November 15, 2017, meeting on its website 48 hours in advance of the meeting.

BACKGROUND

On November 14,, 2017, this office received Request for Review alleging that the Council did not post an agenda the Council' s website oron the City Clerk' s Legislative Information Center website 48 hours before the Council' s November 15, 2017, meeting. On November 16, 2017, this office sent a copy of the Request for Review to the Council and requested that it provide a written response to allegation. This office asked the Council to confirm whether it held a i ideting on November 15; 2017; and; if so, to T] here was just no real requirement as to how specific [ public bodies] needed to be to the public of what they were going to discuss that would be final action. And this just says that you have, to have a * * * general notice, if you're going to have and take final action, as to generally what' s going to be discussed so that — that people who follow their units of local government know what they're going to be acting upon. Remarks of Sen. Dillard, May 16, 2012, Senate Debate on House Bill No. 4687, at 47.

The Council asserted that the agenda for its regular meetings is permanently posted on the Chicago City Clerk' s ( Clerk) website. It explained that meeting agendas are typically also posted on the " Meetings" page of the Clerk' s website, but " as a result of a technical oversight," 1 the agenda for the November 15, 2017; meeting was postediate to the Meetings page. The Council provided this office with copies ofthe "City Council Regular Meeting Structure & Agenda," which it contends is the permanently posted agenda, and a copy of the November 15, 2017, meeting agenda. Both records list eighteen categories,of actions: - 1. Call to order by the Mayor 2. Call of the roll 3. Determination of Quorum 4. Pledge of Allegiance 5. Invocation 6. Public Comment 7. Reports and Communications from the Mayor 8. Communications from the City Clerk ., 9. Reports of Standing Committees* 10. Reports of Special Committees* The committee agendas/ reports posted on the Chicago City Council Calendar list the items that may be called for a vote at the City Council meeting and are considered to be part of the City Council meeting agenda. 121 This office considered and rejected a similar argument in 2013 PAC 22987. In that matter, the requester alleged that the Chicago Park District Board of Commissioners took final action to raise fees at the Art Institute and the Museum of Science and Industry, although those matters were not on the meeting agenda. The Board argued that those matters had appeared on agendas of the committee meetings, which had taken place in the morning before the afternoon meeting of the full Board, therefore theBoard had substantially complied with section 2.02( c). The Attorney General rejected the argument that notice of a final action on a separate committee meeting agenda was sufficient and concluded that the Board had violated OMA by taking final action on a matter without a general description of the subject matter of that action appearing on the meeting agenda. I11. Att'y Gen. Pub. Acc. Op. No. 13- 002, issued April 16, 2013, at 5.

The record that the Council considers to be its agenda does not include any description of the matters that were to be the subject of final action at the November 15, 2017, meeting. The record displays the order of business, or sequence of matters to be discussed at a typical meeting, but it does not inform the public of what specific actions were to be considered. See Black's Law Dictionary ( 10th. ed. 2014), order, available at Westlaw BLACKS ( defining order of business" as " the sequence in which a meeting considers its' busiriess"). Indeed, Rule. 3 of the City Council Rules of Order and Procedure, which is cited in the " City Council Regular Meeting Structure & Agenda," describes the items as the " Order of Business." Rules of Order and Procedure of the City Council, City of Chicago, Rule 3 ( 2015- 2019). An agenda is more" ` than a mere ordering of business items, iris "[a] list of things to be done, as items to be considered at a meeting, usu. arranged in order of consideration." Black' s Law Dictionary ( 10th ed. 2014), agenda, available at Westlaw BLACKS. The -Council' s list does not reflect the specific items to be considered at the meeting, and therefore it is not an agenda. Therefore,' even ifthe Council had timely published the standard order of business for the November 15, 2017, meeting on the " Meetings" page, it would not constitute an agenda as required by OMA to be posted.

The Council appears to argue that committee agendas are'incorporated by reference into the record that the Council considers its agenda. The footnote on the November 15, 2017, agenda provides that " committee agendas/ reports posted on the Chicago City Council Calendar list the items that may be called for a vote at the City Council meeting and are' considered to be part of the City Council meeting agenda. i3 The Council provided this office with agendas for the November 13, 2017, meetings ofthe Committee on the Budget and Government Operations and the Committee on Finance. It explained in an e- mail to this office that those agendas constituted the " substantive componenti4 of the November 15, 2017, Council meeting. This office reviewed the link to the November 15, 2017, agenda on the Meetings page of the City Clerk' s website, and found that the link displays only the November 15, 2017, agenda; it does not include any committee agendas or reports. 5 Although the Council informed this office of two committee agendas the Council intended to incorporate by reference, it would not be evident to the public that those agendas were considered part of the Council' s agenda, especially because there were three committee agendas posted on the Clerk's Meetings website between the November 15, 2017, Council meeting and the preceding meeting held on November 8, 2017. Further, as previously noted, the Attorney General has concluded that a "[ public body] must comply with OMA' s agenda requirements, including providing sufficient notice of,the general subject matter of any resolution or ordinance upon which final action may be taken at the public body] meeting, without requiring reference to other documents to determine what matters the Board might address." Ill. Att'y Gen. Pub. Acc. Op. No. 13- 002, at 5.

The Council' s posting of its standard order of business did not providesufficient notice to the public of the items it considered acting upon at its November 15, 2017, meeting. Accordingly, this office finds that the Council failed to post an agenda to its website at least 48 hours in advance of holding its November 15, 2017, meeting. This office requests that for future meetings, the Council post, in accordance with section 2. 02( a) of OMA, an agenda specific to its meeting that sets forth the general subject matter of any resolution or ordinance that will be the subject of final action at the meeting, as required by section 2.02( c) of OMA.

The Public Access Counselor has determined that resolution of this matter does not require the issuance of a binding opinion. Ifyou have any questions, please contact me at 217) 524-7958 or [email protected]. This letter serves to close this file.

Very truly yours, LAURA S. HARTER Assistant Attorney General,, Public Access Bureau 50479 o 202 notice improper mun