The ability to see corruption is the strongest weapon against it. But too many public officials try hiding important information from the public. Just take Chicago, where 19 aldermen were recently reported as using untraceable and unsecured private email accounts to conduct city business.

When will Chicago's elected leaders get the message that it no longer can be business as usual?

There are two primary reasons why sensitive and confidential government work must be kept on government email accounts and servers: transparency and security.

Residents, the media and government watchdogs have a right to access information on how elected officials are operating in their office and spending tax dollars. That right is being taken away every time a public officer acts covertly away from the public eye.

Information must also be kept in secure locations, not in private accounts, nor on a commercial/public server or random computers. City government uses encrypted and updated servers to protect information. Eschewing the safety of those servers is a dangerous game.

Rules and regulations exist for how city employees can use email and handle information. But Chicago aldermen have routinely considered themselves exempt from the rules and regulations that apply to other city employees and even other elected officials, especially for issues involving transparency.

In Chicago, transparency is many times heralded as important only when it is convenient for those in power. Many aldermen rightly championed government transparency as critical during the Laquan McDonald shooting scandal. Yet more than a third of Chicago aldermen still purposely keep their own government email correspondence away from the public eye.

Even Hillary Clinton and her most ardent supporters have acknowledged that it was bad practice when she used private email for government business. Yet, despite the significant coverage of this matter, Chicago officials still routinely discard government transparency as something that is nice but not always necessary for them.

The lack of accountability and real consequences is the major reason why leadership in Chicago continues to operate the city in an opaque and behind-closed-doors manner.

Too many examples show Chicago and Illinois public officials bucking transparency to protect themselves from embarrassment, the public eye or the law. A wide disregard for good government is illustrated by Barbara Byrd-Bennett's corruption case, the former University of Illinois chancellor or even Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who lost a lawsuit in an effort to keep his emails from the public.

Elected officials cannot be casual with how they go about the business of writing laws and spending tax dollars. If a CEO or business leader acts improperly or wastes company money, it is the employees and shareholders who bear the brunt of the damage. And many times, they have legal and financial recourse. But if an alderman, congressman or mayor wastes tax dollars or is corrupt, it hurts every taxpayer and resident, and electoral recourse can only take place every two or four years.

The poisonous effects of government corruption do not discriminate. Corruption hurts us all. It is because of this reality that our government has to be—by way of democracy, transparency and good government—an open book for all to see. Our elected officials should have learned this lesson by now.

Saying an alderman is not acting transparently is not the same as saying he or she is corrupt. But without vigilance for open, transparent and secure government operations at every level, it is impossible to tell the difference.

When will elected officials of this city decide that government transparency deserves more than lip service and empty promises? Hopefully soon. People are starting to watch.