Orland Mayor Challenges Attorney General’s Ruling, Defends Call to Evacuate Chamber

Mayor Keith Pekau defended the call for an abrupt suspension during a February board meeting, saying it did not violate the Open Meetings Act.

Jul 22, 2024 5:38pm CDT | Updated Jul 22, 2024 5:50pm CDT

ORLAND PARK, IL — Orland Park Mayor Keith Pekau responded Friday to the Illinois Attorney General’s finding that he and the village council violated the Open Meetings Act earlier this year

Pekau’s decision to announce a suspension and ask the police chief to “clear the room” after the meeting got out of hand in February violated the Open Meetings Act, the Illinois attorney general’s office ruled.

At the Village Board meeting on February 5, more than a half-dozen Arab-American residents spoke, urging Pekau and the Orland Park Board of Trustees to pass a resolution calling for a ceasefire in the Israel-Hamas conflict. After several people addressed the board, the meeting became rowdy, with chants of “ceasefire now!”

Tensions in the room rose, and Pekau eventually abruptly called a recess and asked the police chief to clear the audience from the room. Pekau resumed the meeting half an hour later, video footage shows, and spoke to a largely empty room.

By calling recess and removing the entire audience from the room, the board effectively closed the meeting to the public, the attorney general’s office said. Raoul’s office determined that the mayor and board’s sudden call for recess prevented the public from attending the remainder of the meeting.

<< LEES OOK: 'Chef, maak de kamer leeg': Orland heeft de Open Meetings Act overtreden, zegt procureur-generaal >>

“While a public agency is not obligated to tolerate interruptions and does not violate the OMA by removing disorderly attendees who meaningfully disrupt the meeting, the Council here abruptly suspended the meeting after the Mayor warned the public that “we will be clearing the room so that we can continue our meeting,” the ruling said.

After 30 minutes, Pekau resumed the meeting.

“These statements and actions indicate that the meeting was suspended to remove all attendees so that the meeting could resume without the public present, rather than simply to remove those attendees who had disrupted the meeting.

“The public could not reasonably have expected that they would be allowed access to the meeting room after the recess.”

By clearing the room, “the board effectively closed the meeting to the public, even though most attendees had not disrupted the meeting,” the attorney general’s office ruled.

In his response shared Friday night, Pekau called the Illinois Public Access Counselor’s (PAC) conclusion that the board had cleared the room to hold the remainder of the meeting without an audience “unfounded and incorrect.”

“The meeting was suspended solely to restore order and ensure a safe conclusion to the meeting,” Pekau said in a statement. “Anyone who wished to return and was prepared to act in a civil manner was allowed to re-enter the boardroom and observe the end of the board’s comment period.”

He continued:

The PAC also errs in assuming that it can determine the minds of those present and concludes that they could not reasonably infer that they would be permitted to re-enter the meeting room after the recess. On the contrary, the Board expected that a call for a “recess” would generally be understood as a temporary suspension of proceedings. It was reasonable to assume that anyone interested in remaining after order had been restored would understand that the meeting would resume. The fact that members of the public chose not to return to the meeting is beyond the control of the Board.

Pekau said the initial complaint to Raoul’s office, filed by resident Michael Henry, misrepresented the tone of the meeting and the commentators. Henry claimed the disruptions were limited to “just a few” audience members, but Pekau said that was incorrect.

“The widespread booing was a significant issue, and PAC admits it ‘cannot clearly identify the source of the disruption,'” Pekau wrote. “Moreover, PAC appears to be overlooking the highly charged nature of the topic at hand — the violent Hamas-Israel war — which required swift and decisive action to ensure the safety of all involved.”

Pekau claims that people did not return after the recess because “they did not want to listen to opinions or comments from a board that did not meet their demands.”

According to him, Pekau and the board were within their authority when they requested a suspension to restore order to the meeting.

“The PAC clearly agrees that the mayor has the authority to take steps to maintain decorum and ensure that a meeting is conducted in an orderly and efficient manner, including taking a recess when disruptions occur,” Pekau wrote. “This is exactly what the Village Board did on February 5. The Board has fully complied with the Open Meetings Act and will not alter any safety procedures to ensure that the village can conduct its business effectively. Open meetings are important elements of our nation’s system of representative democracy.

“What happened at the meeting was an attempt to silence another point of view, not by superior argument, not by considered reason, but simply by thoughtless noise. Reasonable noise to silence opponents comes from contempt, from the ultimate contempt for their capacity to improve, or to know better, or finally to see reason.”