Lombard setting rules on trustees' e-mailing

Lombard trustees are getting specific about what's appropriate for elected officials to write in e-mails and Internet chat rooms to comply with new state laws on electronic messaging.

The proposed guidelines make it clear residents and elected officials "should not have an expectation of privacy in any electronic messages that involve village business."

That means if a resident e-mails an elected official, the content of that message could become public record that can be obtained by the media or other residents.

Village Attorney Thomas Bayer said Thursday that individual communications by residents to elected officials or village employees can fall under exemptions that allow for privacy. However, if that e-mail relates to village business and is ever referenced publicly at a village board meeting, it falls into the public domain.

In that case, he said, a hard copy must be saved for future reference and potentially could be released under a Freedom of Information Act request.

The only time residents can expect privacy is if they are filing a complaint or alerting officials of a criminal act, Bayer said. In that case, in which someone is a witness, his or her name would be blacked out before any report is released.

Trustee Richard Tross had concerns with the proposed rules, which likely will be adopted early this year.

"I think that breaks my bond of confidentiality," Tross said. "A resident needs to know when he contacts me that the information is not going to be disseminated … to the press."

The goal is to ensure officials do the public's business in open meetings in view of the public rather than using e-mail to avoid scrutiny.

As such, the proposed Lombard guidelines also advise against trustees e-mailing more than one other elected official at a time. That also includes a prohibition on copying others.

If three or more elected officials are sending instant messages on village matters, it would violate the Open Meetings Act because a majority of a quorum has gathered in cyberspace, Bayer said.

If a message is passed sequentially from one trustee to another and then another within a short frame it also could constitute a violation of the Open Meetings Act.

Brief e-mails, such as those involving confirmation of a meeting, would not be subject to the FOIA, but lengthy e-mails with substantive detail on a trustee's position on a village issue could be, he said.

"You have to be careful," Bayer said. "There is a fine line."