Last week, the River Forest Ethics Commission (EC) considered an ethics complaint against four members of the River Forest Tennis Club (RFTC) who also serve on the Development Review Board (DRB). Audio from the hearing raised troubling questions about how ethics are interpreted and enforced by village leadership.
Under the village ethics ordinance, “Covered Individuals,” including board members, are prohibited, as stewards of the public interest, from appearing on behalf of third parties before boards on which they serve. In November, DRB member Elias Yanaki presented a proposal to the DRB on behalf of the private RFTC to install lights.
At last week’s hearing, Yanaki stated that village administration coached him on how to deliver that presentation, including explicit direction from the Village President on where to stand and how to move during the presentation.
The EC’s acting chair noted the resulting appearance of impropriety: “It looks bad … it didn’t feel right.” Village leadership directed this zoning variance to the DRB rather than the Zoning Board of Appeals and provided a playbook to advance the RFTC’s goals — conduct at odds with the ethics code.
The EC’s finding in the complaint deepens concerns. Although the EC initially sustained allegations against Yanaki while dismissing those against other members, it ultimately declined to sustain the complaint, citing “confusion” about the application of conflict of interest provision and relying on the Village Attorney’s interpretation rather than its own independent judgment.
This result raises serious questions: Did the Ethics Commission interpret and apply its own code appropriately? Did the Village Attorney influence the EC’s decision-making, including attending its initial review? Why did the EC chair, who was absent during the hearing, sign its determination?
Ethics enforcement has been steadily weakened, particularly after the EC’s authority was restricted in 2021. River Forest must recommit to ethical governance by engaging an independent expert to revise the ordinance, clarify roles, and restore public trust.
Margie Cekander
River Forest