Last week, both local newspapers published a letter of Fifth Ward Alderpuppet Robert Ryan.  The Journal printed an unabridged version, the Herald-Advocate a shorter one.

Proclaiming that he would “not sink to the depths of name-calling or misrepresentation,” Ryan – in the lengthier Journal version [pdf] – promptly condemned fellow alderman and mayoral candidate Dave Schmidt (1st Ward) as “the biggest obstacle to moving our community forward.”

Well, so much for Ryan not engaging in name-calling. 

We could rebut or question – with documentation – many of Ryan’s assertions, but we’ll leave that to Schmidt and others in the course of the mayoral campaign.  We do feel obligated, however, to address two of Ryan’s points which sure seem like misrepresentations to us. 

The first is Ryan’s contention that Frimark “is worthy of our trust.”  We could write paragraphs explaining why that statement distorts the meaning of both “worthy” and “trust,” but we already have:  “You Can’t Tell The Players Without A Scorecard – Part 1”, “Dumb And Dumber”, “Shameless”, “Why Are We Bidding Against Ourselves?” and “Friends For Frimark”, to name just a few.

But where Ryan goes beyond the pale is with his contention that Schmidt did something “illegal” by “disclosing closed session minutes to the public on personnel issues.” 

First of all, accusing an elected official of “illegal” conduct is not just simple political disagreement.  It’s a charge that should be taken with utmost seriousness by the accuser, the accused, and the people of the community they serve.  So a vague and conclusory accusation like Ryan’s is problematic for a number of reasons, starting with its lack of detail.

It’s time to put up or shut up, Mr. Ryan. 

What specific “personnel” information did Schmidt disclose, Mr. Ryan?  And how, specifically, was that disclosure “illegal”?  And if it was “illegal,” Mr. Ryan, why didn’t you and your fellow Alderpuppets file a complaint about it with the proper authorities?

As we have previously written ( in “Witch Hunt” and “Frimark’s Secret Land Deals No Bargain For Taxpayers,” for example), the Illinois Open Meetings Act (“IOMA”) – which governs under what circumstances a public body can conduct its otherwise “public” meeting in closed session – does not require that any Council discussion or debate be held in closed session, nor does it require that whatever discussion or debate goes on in closed session be treated as confidential or secret.  So Ryan’s saying that Schmidt’s disclosure of some unidentified information related to a closed session meeting was “illegal” – without explanation – isn’t just irresponsible and vile, it’s just plain wrong.

But having followed Mr. Ryan’s career in public office – both on the District 64 Board and on the City Council – “just plain wrong” is often about as good as he gets.