Burr Ridge Eyes Limits To Public Input

BURR RIDGE, IL — The Burr Ridge Village Board plans to vote Monday on a new policy to limit public input during its meetings. But a watchdog group contends the policy has First Amendment issues.

The policy is an apparent response to Trustee Guy Franzese's complaint about residents' conduct during a zoning board meeting earlier this month, in which a proposed night spot at County Line Square was under consideration.

Franzese also alleged that people made derogatory comments about Italian Americans in the Zoom chat during the meeting.

Under the new policy, the board would prohibit abusive language or personal attacks, including sexist, ethnic, racist or similar derogatory language.

The policy would also limit public comments to municipal business. It does not say whether that rule means the public can only discuss items on the board's meeting agenda. And it is unclear whether the policy would allow residents to talk about subjects that the board has shied away from. Such topics include the village's long-running battle with its finance director, whom officials placed on leave eight months ago but is still collecting a paycheck.

The policy also would mandate that commentary "take place in a professional manner which displays mutual respect," but it does not give details.

In an email Monday, Ben Silver, an attorney with the Elmhurst-based Citizen Advocacy Center, told Patch that the public comment policy has a number of Open Meetings Act and First Amendment issues, including ones similar to Hinsdale High School District 86. He said he plans to phone into the board meeting to express his group's concerns.

In late October, the Citizen Advocacy Center gave a presentation on the First Amendment to the District 86 board, mandated as part of a district lawsuit settlement. The board was told its public input policy must be content neutral to meet constitutional muster.

In 2019, the school board barred three residents from speaking about their contention that a top District 86 official took different positions on a science curriculum proposal. The board president cut them off, saying they were barred from speaking about specific personnel. In their lawsuit, the speakers presented evidence that showed the board allowed people to praise specific employees during public input.