Former county IT director asks court to halt record destruction
PROTECTED CONTENT
If you’re a current subscriber, log in below. If you would like to subscribe, please click the subscribe tab above.
Username and Password Help
Please enter your email and we will send your username and password to you.
By Randy Pierce
Action by the Madison County Board last month on the destruction of records concerning closed meetings it held during the past year is the subject of a legal motion for an injunction set to be heard on Feb. 24.
The plaintiff in this matter is Rob Dorman of Maryville, a former employee of the county who has been pursuing legal remedies concerning his dismissal over the past couple of years.
Dorman was terminated from his position of information technology director for the county, along with the county’s former administrator, Doug Hulme, in early 2020. Both have since mounted various court actions related to their dismissals, along with numerous requests for public information.
In this latest of his many legal filings with the Illinois Third Judicial Circuit against the county and various officials, Dorman is asking that the court prevent the destruction of closed meeting minutes and recordings concerning his situation prior to the end of 2022.
Represented by Attorney G. Edward Moorman of Alton, Dorman’s motion submitted on Jan. 24 is focusing on the county board meeting held six days earlier when a review of closed session meeting minutes took place. The board had adjourned to closed session for this segment of its meeting then reconvened before the public to pass a resolution, by a vote of 23 to 1, concerning which of those minutes would be released and which would be retained and kept hidden.
Dorman feels one matter of impropriety concerns the fact that the resolution which was approved was not in the agenda packet like other legislation is for every one of these meetings, nor had it been screened, reviewed and recommended by any of the board’s committees.
After obtaining a copy of that resolution from an unnamed source, Dorman found that it called for either the destruction of the minutes or that they be kept confidential and not subject to release.
Also at issue where he is concerned is the contention that the county clerk would not release the closed meetings information until the resolution was signed by Mick Madison, the pro tem chairman of the board.
Regarding this component of his filing for an injunction, Dorman believes, per state law, the signature of County Board Chairman Kurt Prenzler or the passage of 10 business days would have to occur before the resolution was effective and any meeting records could be destroyed.
This, in turn, according to Dorman’s legal action, will cause him to be “immediately and irreparably harmed” because those minutes are “relevant to this litigation and other matters relevant to the litigation involving” him.
Further stated by Dorman in his filing is that monetary damages are “not sufficient compensation” because this, what he refers to as a transgression, infringes on his right to be informed.
He alleges that the county board meeting agenda of Jan. 18 “did not sufficiently describe the action to be taken, specifically the destruction of verbatim recordings of unknown closed meetings” and “the public was never informed of what records will be destroyed and is unable to present public comment in a public meeting.”
If those meetings in question concerning this matter pertain to this and other litigations filed by Dorman, then he believes they should be preserved.
Along with further citing what he feels are applicable provisions of state regulations, Dorman’s concluding statements in his filing states, “Instead of litigating what it is not authorized to keep confidential, the defendant (county board) may be attempting to destroy it while there is active litigation.”