<html>
<head>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 10 (filtered)">
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{margin-right:0in;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
span.EmailStyle18
{font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>There are interesting details in the middle
of this editorial that could apply state wide.</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Randi Doeker</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'>Chicago</span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'> </span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Tahoma><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Tahoma'>-----Original Message-----<br>
</span></font> </p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:
12.0pt'>Code of conduct' limits board's right to speak openly </span></font></p>
<p><b><i><font size=3 color="#800040" face="Times New Roman"><span
style='font-size:12.0pt;color:#800040;font-weight:bold;font-style:italic'>Friday,
October 7, 2005</span></font></i></b></p>
<p><b><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt;
font-weight:bold'>THE ISSUE:</span></font></b> Oak Lawn Park District's new
'ethics guidelines' are viewed by one commissioner as a 'gag order.'<br>
<b><span style='font-weight:bold'>WE SAY:</span></b> Board should reconsider
provisions that discourage officials from dissenting from the majority or
speaking freely with their constituents. </p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>A new
code of conduct adopted this week by the Oak Lawn Park District board is a
mixed bag that includes both reasonable guidelines for elected officials and
rules that, in our view, would inappropriately limit debate and discourage park
board members from speaking openly about their personal views. </span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>One
member, Commissioner Mary Wallace, said some portions of the code amount to a
"gag order" intended to stifle dissenting opinions —
specifically, hers. </span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>"Gag
order" may be an overstatement. The rules, proposed by a statewide
association created to advise and assist park district officials, appear to be
designed to help park officials do their jobs ethically and effectively. But
they also seem designed to put a good public-relations face on park district
actions, in part by giving a public impression that all decisions are unanimous
and the private impression that there is something unethical about a park
commissioner disagreeing with his colleagues. </span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Wallace
said she believes the code of conduct is a slap at her, prompted by her
outspoken disagreement with other commissioners over budget issues, the future
of the Oak Lawn Family Days festival and her proposal that the park district
consider opening a dog park for residents and their pets. </span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Park
board president Terry Vorderer said he introduced the code for adoption by the
board because he thinks it will help board members do a better job, not to rein
in Wallace. Maybe so, but the park board has used the code as a general
reference for perhaps 10 years and never saw a need to formally adopt it until
Wallace joined the board last spring. </span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Wallace
said she agrees with the majority of the code's points. But she objects
specifically to a number of provisions, including rules that board members
should not make public statements about issues that the board has not yet
decided upon; that they must support majority decisions after they have been
made; and that members should not promise in advance how they will vote on an
issue. We agree with her on these points. Elected officials have a
responsibility to talk about issues publicly before they are decided so their
constituents can have a chance to respond, debate or disagree. The idea that a
dissenting official must support the majority's position may be intended to
discourage dissenters from bringing up old arguments after they've been
settled, but it also could mislead the public about the degree of support for a
particular position. </span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>As for
officials not promising what position they will take on an issue, that strikes
us as a way to give political cover to officials who don't want to or can't
defend their positions, to insulate them from the public. Harry Truman said if
you can't stand the heat you should get out of the kitchen, and that principle
applies to park districts as it does to any other level of government. </span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>Most of
the code is perfectly reasonable, in our view. It urges officials not to vote
on matters if they have a conflict of interests, not to use their positions for
personal gain, to comply with Open Meetings Act and to treat their fellow
officials with respect. These provisions and most of the rest of the code are
reasonable guidelines or simple restatements of state law. </span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>But the
provisions aimed at muzzling dissenting board members and discouraging elected
officials from communicating with their constituents outside board meetings are
inappropriate, in our view. At best they are intended to keep elected officials
from rocking the boat; at worst they could have the effect of misleading the
public or keeping the public in the dark about matters it has every right to be
informed about. </span></font></p>
<p><font size=3 face="Times New Roman"><span style='font-size:12.0pt'>The </span></font>Oak
Lawn park commissioners ought to take another look at the new code of conduct
and reconsider the provisions that set limits on their rights and
responsibilities to speak openly and honestly about the public's business.
Whether the new rules are aimed at one particular commissioner or not, their
effects are to deprive the public of information it has a right to have, and to
limit the free speech of the entire board. </p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>