Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Unclear on the concept of “an inclusive and democratic public dialogue”

Posted in:

Illinois

* BGA…

Amid protests this summer over police brutality and civil rights, Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot in the middle of the night removed statues of Christopher Columbus that had become a focal point of the demonstrations.

Lightfoot also formed a committee to conduct a thorough review to assess if other public art should be removed or changed and promised the newly formed Monuments Project Advisory Committee would begin “an inclusive and democratic public dialogue” about the future of Chicago’s internationally known public art collection.

But during its first six months of work, the committee’s deliberations were kept secret. In fact, the mayor’s monuments committee was designed that way.

“What’s said here, stays here,” is a message city officials delivered to the committee members at their Oct. 14 meeting, according to a slim, 24-page packet of committee agendas and minutes records City Hall released recently to the Better Government Association.

The committee is tasked with identifying any public monuments linked to white supremacy and injustice that “warrant attention” and could be removed. It ultimately flagged 41 problematic artworks, including statues of Columbus as well as Presidents Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, Ulysses S. Grant and William McKinley.

But despite Lightfoot’s transparency pledge, there was no public notice of the committee’s six meetings, no record which 30 committee members attended or any details about what they recommended during roughly 12 hours of online deliberations.

The public had no opportunity to observe or offer any input at the private meetings — none of which were recorded in audio or video form, Chicago Department of Cultural Affairs and Special Events Communications Director Christine Carrino said.

“The Chicago Monuments Project advisory committee is not a ‘public body’ and therefore the [Open Meetings] Act’s requirements do not apply to it,” Carrino told the BGA in a statement, explaining the city’s refusal to release committee recommendations and reports, attendance rosters and any recordings of its first six meetings.

posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Mar 3, 21 @ 3:35 pm

Comments

The proceedings remind me of the night Meigs Field disappeared.

Comment by Rudy’s teeth Wednesday, Mar 3, 21 @ 3:40 pm
=But during its first six months of work, the committee’s deliberations were kept secret=

Clear OMA violation. Hopeful BGA takes this to PAC.

Comment by Donnie Elgin Wednesday, Mar 3, 21 @ 3:53 pm
=The Chicago Monuments Project advisory committee..Open Meetings Act’s requirements do not apply to it=

Read the statute - advisory committees are included :
“Public body” means all legislative, executive, administrative, or advisory bodies of the State, state universities and colleges, counties, townships, cities, villages, incorporated towns, school districts and all other municipal corporations, boards, bureaus, committees, or commissions of this State, any subsidiary bodies of any of the foregoing including but not limited to…

Comment by Donnie Elgin Wednesday, Mar 3, 21 @ 4:03 pm
FOIA the minutes. Bet there aren’t any.

Comment by Joe Schmoe Wednesday, Mar 3, 21 @ 4:07 pm
My theory has been that the inclusion of Lincoln, Grant, and Washington is aimed at creating enough outrage to cause enough general opposition to removing statues or changing names, so they the Mayor can avoid decisions on things like the Columbus statue or LSD name change.

Comment by NIU Grad Wednesday, Mar 3, 21 @ 4:16 pm
This is Lightfoots way of sending a bill she doesn’t like to committee to die. Nothing is coming of this. No one is pulling the lever for her in 2023 because she removed a statue but some people might not show up because she did. Let the DSA/CTU backed candidate bring this up if they want.

Comment by 1st Ward Wednesday, Mar 3, 21 @ 4:21 pm
Ugh. Isn’t there someone brave enough to take on and halt the Monuments committee who looks to remove homage to 2 of Illinois’ greatest men and U.S. Presidents. The secret committee needs to take a hike (the nice 606 trail is available). Or, they should be told to go jump in the lake. If I’m not mistaken there’ a large one of those close at hand. Some things are just too patently silly for words, and trying to cancel Lincoln and Grant–in Illinois–is one of them.

Comment by Responsa Wednesday, Mar 3, 21 @ 4:26 pm
===looks to remove homage===

We don’t know if they are even considering it because the whole thing is being done in secret.

Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Mar 3, 21 @ 4:29 pm
“Let the DSA/CTU backed candidate bring this up if they want.”

Oh they will.

Comment by NIU Grad Wednesday, Mar 3, 21 @ 4:30 pm
==It ultimately flagged 41 problematic artworks, including statues of Columbus as well as Presidents Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, Ulysses S. Grant and William McKinley.==

Maybe I misread the BGA piece. But I thought they were saying that the 41 “problematic” items were the outcome of the secret meetings.

Comment by Responsa Wednesday, Mar 3, 21 @ 4:35 pm
===were the outcome of the secret meetings===

My reading of the website is these were the ones flagged by the public. Whatever the case, it’s no way to run a commission.

Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Mar 3, 21 @ 4:37 pm
=Clear OMA violation. Hopeful BGA takes this to PAC.=

That is incorrect. If a majority of a quorum of city council members were present then it would be a violation.

But the point is well taken, this should be public and not secret. She is not living up to her promises and hopefully is a one term mayor.

Comment by JS Mill Wednesday, Mar 3, 21 @ 4:39 pm
Bill Maher talked about this on Real Time this past weekend. The Land of Lincoln is considering cancelling Lincoln. Great to have Illinois be part of another national comedy sketch.

Comment by Frank talks Wednesday, Mar 3, 21 @ 4:57 pm
Donnie Elgin is right. The case law on advisory committees strongly favors including them in OMA. If it’s truly ad hoc and there’s no formal legal structure, the City might prevail. But as a municipality, you don’t want to guess wrong when attorney’s fees are involved.

Comment by Not a Superstar Wednesday, Mar 3, 21 @ 5:07 pm
“If a majority of a quorum of city council members were present then it would be a violation.”

You do not need a majority or quorum for the OMA to apply. This is incorrect.

Comment by Chicago Cynic Wednesday, Mar 3, 21 @ 5:10 pm
Poor Columbus. All he wanted to do was find a shipping shortcut to the Spice islands to buy black pepper and a few other odds and ends. Instead he runs into an unexpected hemisphere, bringing livestock, iron, gunpowder and printed word as gifts. For this today’s disrespectful peasant condemn him. Sad.

Printed words people. He brought printed words. If that means nothing you need help.

Comment by Al Wednesday, Mar 3, 21 @ 5:17 pm
A public monuments committee is not a ‘public body’…Kafka would be proud.

Comment by Grundy Wednesday, Mar 3, 21 @ 5:56 pm
=FOIA the minutes. Bet there aren’t any.=

If there are I’m sure the city and committee might claim the old “attorney-client privilege” excuse in rejecting the FOIA. Even if none of the minutes were going to be used in possible future litigation.

Comment by Essential State Employee Wednesday, Mar 3, 21 @ 5:58 pm
Al, he brought a bit more than that, like small pox, influenza, measles, plantation slavery, etc. I mean the Inquisition was in full swing in 1492 in Spain. but sure he brought gunpowder and iron “as gifts”.

Comment by The House Rules Wednesday, Mar 3, 21 @ 5:59 pm
==Printed words people. He brought printed words. If that means nothing you need help. ==

sigh

You obviously know very little of the robust civilizations that were present in the Americas. If that means nothing you need help.

Comment by Pot calling kettle Wednesday, Mar 3, 21 @ 6:03 pm
Did this committee actually meet or did we just assume they met? That might have been a better response that misstating the law.

Comment by Still anon Wednesday, Mar 3, 21 @ 6:49 pm
Clearing a few things up about the Open Meetings Act…

The underlying question is whether the OMA applies to this (relatively) ad hoc, advisory committee. The case law and Public Access opinions weigh multiple factors, including method of appointment, whether members are paid, what powers they have, etc.

I tend to think this committee wasn’t subject to the OMA, but it’s not cut and dry.

But that doesn’t at all mean the meetings shouldn’t have been public…

Comment by Watcher of the Skies Wednesday, Mar 3, 21 @ 10:24 pm