Whether its village board will have term limits going forward has become a polarizing issue for River Forest, after an April 1 referendum that showed 52% of residents voted in favor of them.
The exact wording used in a citizen group’s petition that placed the referendum for the matter on the election ballot has caused confusion about whether that referendum is binding or non-binding.
A special committee of the whole board meeting to dissect the topic, including public comment, has proven challenging to schedule. According to a June 24 email provided to Wednesday Journal by Cathy Adduci, village president, and Village Administrator Matt Walsh proposed two dates for such a meeting: July 21 or August 4, both Mondays.
As of Monday evening, Adduci said conflicting board member schedules are preventing the special meeting to be held on one of those dates, so the topic will likely be added to the Aug. 25 regular board meeting agenda. Walsh confirmed no board meeting is scheduled for Aug. 11.
Adduci, who running unopposed won her fourth consecutive term as village president April 1, said it isn’t feasible to include the topic on an already-packed agenda for the board’s regular meeting on July 14.
But some trustees are questioning that. Trustees Erika Bachner and Katie Brennan confirmed they had asked for the matter to be added to Monday’s agenda.
“We need to be tackling this issue sooner rather than later,” Bachner said. “I think we need to listen to the residents and uphold their vote, so I think we should be already working on this. I think it’s important enough to be on our next board meeting.”
Brennan agreed.
“I think we should talk about it earlier than Aug. 25,” Brennan said, adding she will be out of the country at that time. “This vote happened April 1. In general, Aug. 25 is more than another month away. Why are we waiting this long?”
The answer to that question, Adduci said, is an effort to take proper steps to ensure that whatever course of action is taken, it will stand up under legal scrutiny not only now but well into the future.
“We can’t just codify something (where) we’re not sure what the referendum is,” she said. “If it’s what the residents want in the future, we can get there.”
She confirmed that she and Walsh had been working to get a special meeting scheduled, but it proved difficult to align all board members’ schedules.
“We have to address it at the board table; I don’t think that’s changed,” Adduci said. “We still need to address it and it is a very important issue. But it’s not time sensitive. We can accomplish everything over the next two months.
“We should, and want to, do it right.”
Trustee Megan Keskitalo, who was voted in April 1, had also asked for the matter to be added to the July 14 agenda.
“For me, it’s that the citizens are feeling like we’re not responding,” Keskitalo said. “I am working to make sure that everything they want to talk about makes it on the board agenda.”
The language of the April 1 referendum question that asked residents to vote for or against term limits was specific:
“Shall the Village of River Forest, after the April 1, 2025, Consolidated Election, enact term limits for the elected offices of Village President, Village Clerk, and the six (6) Village Trustees for no more than two (2) four-year (4-year) terms total as follows: for each of three (3) Trustees beginning with the April 3, 2027, Consolidated election, and for the Village President, Village Clerk, and three (3) Trustees starting with the April 6, 2029, Consolidated election?”
However, there is debate over whether the petition included conflicting language. The title of the document stated, “Petition for River Forest Binding Referendum,” while the language in the subsequent paragraph said that “the following advisory question of public policy be placed on the ballot and submitted to the voters of River Forest for their approval or disapproval, by referendum at the Consolidated Election to be held on April 1, 2025.”
Walsh said Monday that village attorney Lance Malina of Chicago-based firm Klein, Thorpe & Jenkins was working on an opinion on the matter that will be provided before the meeting.
“It’s just going to provide the village board with different options on how to proceed with the referendum question,” Walsh said.
Brennan pointed out that, “I’d be curious to know what the question was posed to Lance that he’s answering.”
Keskitalo added that she’s asked “our village attorney for all legal remedies for this situation.
“I want us to definitively answer the question whether there are term limits for our village trustees and village president,” she said, “whether that issue is binding or advisory. This is something we are bound to respond to.”
Meanwhile, two citizen proponents of term limits, Susan Foran and Deborah Borman, both declined comment Monday regarding a potential special meeting. Foran is out of town, and Borman said she had no comment pending further details from the village.
What does Brennan see as the result of an eventual meeting regarding the referendum results?
“Common sense and good governance suggest that this village board act on the residents’ vote to enact term limits for the River Forest village board,” she said.
Getting resolution, Adduci said, will require discussion and debate at the board table with direction from the village’s legal counsel.
“I think all of us, all our elected officials, should want to get it right and correct,” she said.