State Rep. Kambium “Kam” Buckner called on Metra to release the findings of an internal investigation, expressing his “deep disappointment” in the rail agency’s decision to withhold the results of the work of an outside law firm.
“At a time when fiscal constraints require us to scrutinize (transit) governance, operations and agency structures, this lack of transparency raises serious concerns,” he wrote in a letter to Metra’s board. “Simply put, you cannot ask taxpayers to pay for an investigation and then tell them they have no right to know the results.”
Buckner’s letter follows reports, including one from the Tribune on Monday, about Metra’s hiring of law firm McGuireWoods to conduct a $1.57 million investigation and refusal to make the findings public. The investigation stemmed from anonymous complaints made to Metra about the agency’s police department.
Attorneys bills hint at the scope of the 2023 investigation, showing McGuireWoods undertook analysis related to an “investigation of potential disparate treatment.” The bills reference unspecified “EEO” incidents and complaints, according to documents obtained by the Tribune through a Freedom of Information Act request.
Metra denied public records requests for copies of McGuire Woods’ report, though, citing attorney-client privilege and noting the documents include preliminary recommendations that contain legal opinions and analysis, which can be withheld. The state attorney general’s office agreed Metra could withhold the report.
The failure to release information about the outcome of the investigation — and the agency’s decision to rely on an outside law firm to investigate its police department in the first place — raises questions about Metra’s motives, government transparency advocates previously told the Tribune.
Buckner, in the letter dated Tuesday, blasted the use of attorney-client privilege to shroud the outcome of the report.
“As a publicly funded entity, Metra has a fundamental obligation to be transparent and accountable to the people it serves,” he wrote. “Shielding the results of this investigation under attorney-client privilege not only undermines public trust but also sets a dangerous precedent for governance.”
Metra spokesman Michael Gillis said the agency was reviewing Buckner’s letter, and did not have further comment.
Buckner, in an interview, said taking public money then refusing to release the findings is not how democracies or public institutions should work.
“When taxpayers pay for an investigation, the public owns it full stop,” he said.
He also tied Metra’s refusal to release the findings to conversations in Springfield about what the future of transit should look like, as the Chicago area’s transit agencies, including Metra, stare down a massive budget deficit when federal pandemic aid dries up next year. Metra leadership shielding the results of the investigation from the public, then asking the public for more money to operate the system, would be “problematic,” he said.
Buckner had not heard back from Metra about his letter Wednesday afternoon, he said. He is also working on legislation that would change the state’s Freedom of Information Act to prevent public agencies from using attorney-client privilege to shield factual findings of investigations, unless the investigations are directly tied to pending litigation, he said.
In his letter, Buckner contrasted Metra with the Chicago Police Department, which he said took “significant steps toward increased transparency” after the 2019 consent decree. He also cited statewide reforms that he said have led other Illinois law enforcement agencies to move toward more transparency.
Metra should not be an exception, he wrote.
“Instead of continuing to operate under a veil of secrecy, Metra should immediately release the factual findings of this investigation — not just for the sake of compliance, but to demonstrate a genuine commitment to public accountability,” he wrote in the letter. “Transparency is not a burden; it is a necessity in public service.”
