On the confusion about term limits approved for River Forest officials in the April 1 election: At the Sept. 8 village board meeting, it was explained yet again that because the referendum had “ambiguous” language (allegedly both binding and advisory), there is some legal murkiness about what the village should do in response to the majority vote for term limits.
There also seems to be confusion about what the municipal code says regarding what a municipality can and can’t do to enact term limits. Because of this confusion, our attorney has been directed (again?) to get clarity on this. Meanwhile, it seems the board has received from our attorney information relevant to this issue that has been declared “confidential.”
A trustee asked that a summary (not confidential) be created that can be made available to residents so that those who are concerned about this are privy to what the board is dealing with — in the hopes, I assume, that we will understand the complexity of this matter.
OK, that sounds reasonable, but in retrospect, I’m now wondering what could possibly be confidential about the municipal rules. A personnel matter is, indeed, confidential. But municipal rules and guidelines for how to handle such a referendum and vote? Confidential? What on earth could be confidential about that?
Phyllis Rubin
River Forest