Red-light request shows FOIA flaw

The recent flap over Cook County's desire to force towns that refuse Cook County's red light cameras to pay for the intersections' maintenance highlighted a loophole in the state's Freedom of Information Act that ought to be closed. It began with Cook County Commissioner Joseph Moreno proclaiming that an opinion from the Cook County state's attorney legally authorized such a move. Upon my FOI request to the state's attorney for a copy of this opinion, it was rejected due to "attorney-client privilege," but said that I could appeal their decision to the Illinois attorney general, which I promptly did.

On Aug. 12, the attorney general's office sustained the denial pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act exemption Section 7(1)(m). This section permits keeping private "communications between a public body and an attorney or auditor that would not be subject to discovery in litigation."

I can clearly understand that in the context of actual litigation, certain communications between an attorney and its client should be protected from disclosure. However, when the publicly funded "attorney" is providing a public body with the legal basis to set policy, then this is an entirely different matter. Here you have Mr. Moreno stating that Cook County can legally do certain things. But when asked for the legal basis of that assertion we are effectively told, "No, you can't see that. Attorney-client privilege, Attorney-client privilege!".

While Illinois has made some improvements to strengthen its Open Meetings and Freedom of Information laws, it has still a long way to go. And, I am truly disappointed that the attorney general felt it was more important to protect Cook County's secrecy than it was to protect the right of the public to know the legal basis for how they are being taxed.

Mark Evenson

Palatine