The Villa Park Village Board held special meetings on June 29 and July 6. Village President Kevin Patrick and one trustee—Jack Kozar—did not attend the June 29 meeting. Patrick and all six trustees attended the July 6 meeting.
According to a statement issued by Patrick after the July 6 meeting, four trustees—Cari Alfano, Jorge Cordova, Deepasriya Kumar and Khalid Sabri—wanted to terminate Villa Park Village Manager Michael Rivas at the board’s July 13 regular meeting, which took place after this issue was published.
Villa Park Village Board members have voted to relieve two village managers of their duties in recent years. In December 2021, board members voted 4-3 to terminate the contract of Rich Keehner, who had been Villa Park’s village manager for more than 10 years.
Last year, board members voted 5-2 during a special meeting on May 28, 2025, to remove Matthew Harline from office. Harline spent about three years as Villa Park’s village manager. In the same meeting of May 28, 2025, board members voted 6-1 in favor of appointing Rivas as the new village manager. Before becoming Villa Park’s village manager, Rivas spent about four and a-half years as Villa Park’s police chief.
None of the four board members who apparently want to terminate Rivas specified during open sessions of the two recent special meetings why they want to remove him as village manager.
Board members seek details from staff about the village’s finances during June 29 meeting
The primary topic during the June 29 meeting was a discussion related to the village’s current financial and budgeting situation. During that meeting, Sabri stated that he and Kumar had reviewed some documents related to the village’s proposed budget adjustment, as well as the village’s five-year budget projections. Sabri said some of the information he reviewed was incomplete and unreliable.
Trustee Tina Konstatos stated during the June 29 meeting that the board already had a meeting with a presentation on the budget. Konstatos noted that board members receive bill listings every two weeks that detail the village’s expenses. She also questioned the necessity of the special meeting, which she said was requested three days earlier, on Friday, June 26.
When Sabri asked during the June 29 meeting for step-by-step information about the village’s finances, Rivas responded, “None of this has been prepared. None of this has been expressed to us.” He added that village staff would provide the answers that board members asked for, but he said it would take preparation.
“You were asked repeatedly through emails what was the basis for this meeting, and you listed these four items, these four general items, with no specifics. Now you’re asking very specific questions which require a lot of data and analysis and research. We’re not prepared to present any of this information, sir.”
Alfano, who is the deputy village president, presided over the June 29 meeting in Patrick’s absence. She said during that meeting that the board was still waiting to see the village’s complete budget. She also said that she was not asked to provide suggestions for the village’s budget items.
“When we did ask to look at the budget, I was not asked for any input; I was asked if I would approve what came to us,” said Alfano. “That’s different than being told, well, go ahead and tell us what it is you want to cut; that’s not our job; that’s the village manager’s job.”
Rivas responded that the board held a committee-of-the whole (COW) meeting on the budget.
“We had an entire COW on this very same subject, when you were asked, and the board was asked, respectfully, what input and what cuts you’d like to have at that very same meeting,” said Rivas, who added that there were two or three budgetary items that village staff was asked to keep in the budget, following direction from the board.
Konstatos suggested that the board was sending a mixed message regarding the village’s budget.
“On one hand, we’re saying it’s not our job to cut the budget; it’s the manager’s job,” said Konstatos. “But then on the other hand, we’re saying, we need cuts over here, not over here.”
Village president states that four board members want to terminate the village manager
Near the end of the June 29 meeting, Alfano said she wanted to add a topic of discussion—regarding specific village employees—to the board’s discussion during that meeting’s executive session.
“It was in that closed session that a discussion ensued regarding the continued employment of the village manager,” noted Patrick, who was not present during the discussion.
“Following that [June 29] meeting, I was contacted by multiple trustees and later spoke with the village attorney, who confirmed to me that the four trustees who called the special meeting, Sabri, Alfano, Kumar, and Cordova, agreed that the Village Manager should be terminated at the July 13 meeting and that they were looking for a way to proceed with the termination,” added Patrick in his statement.
Villa Park Village Clerk Rolf Laukant attended the June 29 special meeting and reportedly recorded the conversation between board members during the meeting’s executive session. Patrick noted in last week’s statement that he did not attend the meeting “because of obligations related to my father’s passing the previous week.” Kozar did not attend the meeting due to what Patrick described as “a previously scheduled business matter out of town.” Patrick added in his statement that, “It subsequently became clear that there was no emergency and scheduling the special meeting on that day was a strategic attempt to have a meeting without me present, as well as another trustee [Kozar].”
Patrick reports that village clerk will not provide recording from June 29 executive session discussion
It might seem routine for the village president wanting to hear a recording of an executive discussion that he had missed to contact the village clerk, who would then provide a recording of that discussion. That did not happen in this case.
In Patrick’s statement, he said that he contacted Laukant to request an opportunity to review the recording of the June 29 executive session.
“On June 29, I submitted my initial request that evening,” said Patrick. “I followed up four additional times over the following days.” The village president added that, “To date, that recording remains unavailable to me.”
Laukant and Rivas were both absent from the July 6 special meeting. Rivas was on a previously scheduled vacation.
Laukant’s action, or lack of action, in providing Patrick with a recording of the June 29 executive session led Patrick to propose two resolutions in the July 6 meeting. One resolution proposed allowing a remote attendance policy for board members to participate in meetings when they were absent. Another resolution called for a referendum in the November 2026 election to ask if the village clerk should be appointed, rather than elected, with the appointment being effective in 2029.
Laukant was elected Villa Park’s village clerk in the 2025 election—the same election in which Patrick was elected village president. Their respective four-year terms expire in 2029. After he was elected village president, Patrick, who spent six years as a village trustee before his election, appointed Sabri to serve the remaining two years of his term as a trustee.
Board votes unanimously to hire Chicago law firm to conduct an employment investigation
Another proposal in the July 6 meeting called for a resolution approving the appointment of a law firm—Laner Muchin of Chicago—to conduct an employment investigation, which is apparently related to any action the board may take with Rivas and/or other village employees.
After Kozar made a motion to amend the remote attendance policy to allow remote attendance only at special meetings, board members voted near the end of the July 6 meeting to table the resolution regarding remote attendance. Five trustees voted to table the resolution, while Kozar cast the lone vote against tabling it. Patrick did not vote on the issue.
Board members voted 7-0 to adopt the resolution appointing Laner Muchin to conduct an employment investigation, at a cost not to exceed $30,000. Board members, including Patrick, voted unanimously to table the resolution to appoint the village clerk. The board will hold a future committee-of-the-whole meeting on that issue.
Board members also voted 7-0 near the end of the July 6 meeting to instruct the village’s new human resources manager—Jackie Pierce—to modify the village’s employment handbook. Additionally, board members voted 6-0 to table a resolution extending Rivas’ term as village manager until April 30, 2029.
At the opening of the July 6 meeting, Patrick noted that his father had passed away. He said he watched the June 29 meeting and was still trying to understand the necessity of that special meeting.
“I called this special meeting to get some clarity and some direction,” said Patrick in the opening moments of the July 6 meeting. Patrick added that he could have participated in the executive session of the June 29 meeting if the board had a remote attendance policy for its meetings. “We are here to talk about the contract of Manager Rivas,” added Patrick, who also mentioned the matter of hiring an outside law firm to conduct an employee investigation.
Multiple speakers express their support of Rivas during July 6 meeting
Eleven people spoke during the July 6 meeting’s segment for public comments on agenda items. The speakers included Villa Park VFW Post 2801 Commander Jim Blankshain, who thanked Rivas for his help in presenting the post’s Independence Day Parade. Blankshain said that Rivas has been a good friend to the post. Jim Urso, the post’s senior vice commander, spoke shortly before Blankshain. Urso said he admired and respected Rivas.
Former Villa Park Village President Nick Cuzzone, who preceded Patrick as the village president, spoke and said he was concerned that if Rivas was let go, it would lead to the village having four managers in less than five years. Cuzzone said the high turnover would make it difficult for the village to “get good people in” to fill important positions.
Former village trustee Christine Murphy also spoke during the July 6 meeting’s segment for public comments on agenda items. When she reached the limit of three minutes per speaker, Patrick informed her that her time was up. Murphy continued to speak, at which time Patrick asked a Villa Park police sergeant to clear the room. Murphy didn’t follow Patrick’s order, but she stopped speaking after the sergeant said he would clear the room if she continued.
Another former village trustee—Cheryl Tucker—spoke after Murphy. Tucker said that the village clerk answers to the people, and that there was no reason to put a referendum on the ballot asking voters if the clerk should be appointed instead of elected.
Konstatos read a few letters from supporters of Rivas at the end of the meeting’s segment for public comments. One of the letters came from Villa Park resident Frank Gentile, who has owned multiple area businesses for more than 40 years. Gentile described Rivas as an effective and dedicated leader.
Majority of board members initially vote against executive session discussion during July 6 meeting; the board eventually spends nearly two hours in executive session
After Konstatos read the letters from Rivas supporters, Patrick made a motion to go into executive session. The motion failed by a 4-2 vote. Alfano, Cordova, Kumar and Sabri voted against going into executive session. Konstatos and Kozar voted in favor of going into executive session. A short time later, Kumar said she was willing to go into executive session at the end of the meeting. Board members eventually voted to go into executive session. Patrick announced at 8:27 p.m. that the board would enter executive session. The board reconvened in open session at 10:23 p.m.
Board members continued their discussion in open session after the initial vote against going into executive session, and talked about a potential remote attendance policy, Kozar noted that he wasn’t able to attend the June 29 special meeting, which he described as a meeting “by ambush.” Kozar did not refer to Sabri by name, but he referred to him by mentioning that one member of the board was appointed.
Kozar continued to speak during open session, saying board members should talk about what they don’t like about Rivas and the village’s finance director, Suzy Mika. Kozar went on to express his support for hiring someone impartial to “find out what is true and what is not true.” He said there were “crazy allegations floating around,” and that the village needed someone to determine the truth.
“We need a professional third party to go through this stuff,” Kozar said.
Konstatos said she supported having an unbiased third party conduct an employee investigation. She said that the village’s staff and residents deserved such an investigation. She added that village staff members are “already worried about whose job is going to be next.”
Patrick, who said that having an executive session would help to protect the village from potential lawsuits, added that executive session exists to allow private discussion about village employees. Patrick addressed Alfano during the July 6 meeting, and referred to a recent meeting they had in his office.
“You told me you have four votes to get rid of the manager,” said Patrick to Alfano. Patrick said he couldn’t stop four board members from making that decision. He said he was asking for board members to listen to “all sides of the story.”
Speaking after the July 6 special meeting, Rivas said he would be at the July 13 regular meeting.
“I’m just trying to create better lines of communication,” said Rivas, who stated that he is a direct employee of the village board. “We’ve accomplished a lot,” said Rivas, who referred to The Union development at 100 S. Villa Avenue. That current construction project will result in a seven-story building featuring 238 apartments and 7,500 square feet of commercial space. “We hope to do more.”
