Good afternoon everyone.
The Committee on Public, uh, the Committee on Police
and Fires come to order.
We will have a roll call to establish from a quorum.
Please note that any yes vote for purposes
of present may be used as a yes.
Vote for items that are later voted on.
Chairman Alia Farrell's Present, alderman Hall,
vice Chair Robinson.
Alderman Mitchell. Alderwoman Lee.
Alderman Curtis Alderwoman. Taylor.
Alderman Mosley. Alderwoman Ris.
Alderman Irving. Alderman Cardona.
Alderman Sdo Alderwoman Nugent.
Alderman Napolitano. Alderman Kon.
Alderman Gardner Alderwoman
Clay Alderwoman.
S Silverstein.
Alderman Mosley's Present.
We Have 12 members present. We do have a quorum.
We will now begin the portion of our public comments.
Those public speakers that have sign up
or either have called in to speak
regarding public comments will have three minutes to speak.
Our first speaker will be Mr. George Blake Moore.
Mr. Blake Moore.
I Mr. Blakemore. Yes. Good afternoon.
Good afternoon to you, sir.
And to members of your committee.
This is the Committee on Police
and Fire, uh, employees, people that work
for the police and fire depart.
And I see that you have, uh, an amendment that,
and I think these officers deserve a, a leave
when one of the, the uniform, uh, officers have, have, uh,
died or, or even been killed in the line of duty.
So we need good policemen,
but we also need good elected officials ultimates.
So never let that happen again.
You know, as the time is very important.
It's a time to live and it's time to die.
So if one of these firemen, a policemen
are not working
and they're not on time, you know what happened?
Eventually they let them go
because they don't respect their position, their title.
So again, you all have been very disrespectful
to the black citizens that have appeared here this morning.
Uh, uh, that lady called Mr.
Son, the young baby boy,
and she was reading out the rules for us to follow,
and then she went on attention about what's going on over in
Israel, uh, between the Muslim and, and the Jews.
And it, it was just, it's just out of control.
And none of y'all checked her.
You need to check yourself
because this city is in a crisis.
It's got many crisis.
And what is have occurred is just not anything new.
It's been going on here for years and years.
A one party system,
not a multi-party system, a one party system,
the black ones, the white ones, the Hispanic, the Asian,
all are members of this one party.
And this party is not functionable. It's non-functional.
And it's time for us to vote.
Go red, go red, a two party system.
It's time for us to change.
I'm particularly black people when you have all these black
faces in high places selling us out.
So it just didn't start with Brandon Johnson, mayor Dailey
and his daddy, all of them.
This Democratic machine is time to press ourself
of them and to go red.
Go red,
Go and go red.
Thank you, Mr. Blakemore.
Uh, Nick Speaker is Ms. Jessica Jackson. Ms. Jackson.
Good afternoon, Ms. Jackson.
Um, good afternoon, alderman.
Um, now while I have, uh, alderman Lee's attention,
because in approximately two seconds,
alderman Silverstein is gonna start talking to Alderman Lee
to distract Alderman Lee,
because Silverstein is just, you know, she's just rude like
that and insensitive like that
because she's been allowed to make her plight
and her group above everyone else's.
And of course, if you say anything about it,
uh oh, you are in trouble.
So she's sitting there right now.
The only reason why she not getting up and walking out is
because these firemen are here and they're white,
and she doesn't want them to see her behave that way.
So she's sitting here, but it's driving her crazy to have
to literally sit here, act like she's paying attention,
look at all that evil on her face.
That's a evil woman right there.
But as, oh my God, that's what I be saying, you know?
And I'm so glad to see you respond that way. Oh my God.
That's how we feel when we see you all walk
around while we are trying to talk,
while we see you all put our stats up there
for black people, this, black people that,
but you all don't do anything about our problems.
Yeah. Oh my God. Yeah.
I'm glad that you say that's how you do it.
Anyway, Trump 2024
for this reason right here, no one is going to continue
to deal with this
because in a few minutes, those firemen are going
to come up here and they're gonna say what they got to say
and watch how everybody is going
to give them their undivided attention.
Watch how that chair ain't going to be rocking.
Watch how you gonna get them their undivided attention?
You ain't gonna sit from that coffee while
those white men are talking.
You gonna give them their respect.
Oh, the glasses are going to come on.
You gonna put your chin, your, your face on the chin,
and you gonna be attentive.
You're gonna ask questions.
Oh, you gonna give them all the respect?
And as firemen, they do deserve respect.
Everybody loves the fireman. Everybody loves the fireman.
At least they deserve respect. Nobody's doubting that.
All I'm talking about is what I'm talking about.
The difference between the way you all notably know
to treat one group while you notably think
how you can disrespect another
and have the audacity to think you gonna read us some rules.
You are outside your brain, but you'll be all right.
I promise you you'll be all right. 'cause I'm 62 years old.
I know how to rock with it. I know how to be all right.
When that racism comes said, you know, you be all right.
You'll be all right.
Thank you, Ms. Jackson. Uh, Nick Speaker.
I, Nick Speaker is Mr. Taiwan Sims. Mr. Sims
good a
Hey, good, good afternoon. Good
Afternoon, Mrs. Sims. So,
um, on September 22nd, I was kind of confused earlier.
Y'all took shot spotter away.
Um, but the mayor had made a promise that was a,
a running promise, or how y'all say to the constituents
that he would plunge us into darkness on September 22nd
or whenever he was gonna do it.
However, Larry Snellen came into the city hall, sanct them
and said, Hey, I promise to keep the city safe and did that.
And this 50, if I'm not mistaken, Alder men,
I've been doing my research, 50 alder people,
50 voices against the mayor,
even though he sits in a mayoral position,
there are 50 people that can oppose his madness,
especially when this decision don't make sense for the fact
of taking Shot Spotter does not make sense at all.
Can anybody in this room make sense of it?
Because we still read getting headlines that read 25
Shot six Dead.
That's Chicago, but that's, then let's go to the other week,
12 and five and four,
and it's going to continue and continue.
It's going to get worse though,
because now when you understand, Hey man, there's nothing
to stop me in this act.
There's nothing to derail me from doing this.
Deter me from doing this. I'm gonna shoot everybody up.
Silverstein, don't worry.
I know you want to ignore this,
but sweetie, this this gonna reach to where you at.
It's gonna reach everybody here in the city of Chicago.
Y'all have put us in a place of danger.
Y'all put us right under the gun.
Y'all remember when Alderman,
David Moore was sitting down talking to the woman,
and then y'all heard Shooting right there
by a city official.
Now imagine when I know it's nothing to deter me
or stop me, there's nobody to follow up once I kill
or murder this individual, this innocent person.
Once I shoot this person down, once I kill this teenager,
nobody, because y'all, I I, I'm gonna have to say, y'all
elected to remove this deterrent in the city
and plunge countless people into darkness.
That's where we at right now.
And I want to know how y'all made sense of this.
How y'all didn't say to the,
to the mayor, what's wrong with you?
You crazy, dude. You know what city we live in?
You know what the headlines read every day right now,
somebody getting shot, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 people probably.
But how do we account for that?
How do we know what, what Y'all supposed
to trust The police?
Y'all supposed to trust superintendent.
Larry Snelling his decision
because he's the professional in that what y'all did,
and y'all came and gave him a congratulations,
then gave him the shaft by removing shot spotter.
Allow for it because y'all think that, oh, well,
we'll put the black man, the black man, do it,
and it'll no Larry, what Johnson is wrong.
And he black dog for it
because he lived on the west side of Chicago
and understand the detriment that we suffer on a day to day.
But y'all don't have, look, nobody,
nobody's screaming and hollering about that.
But you want to scream and holler about
somebody speaking about your race, argue about Oz.
Thank you, Mr. Sims. Our next speaker is Ms. Zoe Lee.
Ms. Lee.
And it is not even race, it's a religion. Good, Ms. Lee.
That's the worst. Like I said,
the Holocaust and slavery.
You already know slavery was much worse than the Holocaust.
It's just that we have not learned as a race of people
to be like how the Jews are.
So that's our issue,
and that's one of my goals that I want to, uh,
to accomplish, uh, in the next four or five years
because I understand my black privilege
and a lot of other black Americans understand their black
privilege, but we have been so complacent
with giving our black vote to the Democratic Party
that should be protecting us.
We shouldn't have no issues.
We should be able to find attorneys.
We should not have an issue
with our properties being stolen, our land being taken,
especially when we haven't received our reparations yet.
So a person can scream and yell
and get mad all the time, especially as a black American
and has yet to receive their reparations.
I am so ashamed of the city
of Chicago, a because I've been coming down here for a year
and talking about how the city of Chicago
is unlawfully demolishing properties and taking properties
and not one time has this body.
And even some of the police have been here
that higher up Snellen
and have tried to figure out what type of crime this is
that's happening with the elected, elected officials
that are helping this happen.
Like I, it's, it's been, it's, it's, it is crazy to me that
I come down here and I've been coming down here for a year
and to hear stuff like, oh,
the Republican party is paying her, paying me.
Y'all don't think that I'm having a, a situation
that the city of Chicago unlawfully demolishing my,
my family's building that's been in my,
in my family since 1965.
Y'all don't see the issue with that?
It has to be because I'm coming down here trying
to convince people to, to vote Republican.
Nah, the fact that the city needs to be,
needs to flip red
because the democratic party needs to, needs to understand
that the power of the vote is what it is.
Not y'all, y'all are terrible.
You Deborah Silverstein, you so racist. It's crazy.
And I come from a small town so I know what racism is.
Crack epidemic didn't mess my family up. Racism did.
So I know what a racist is
and I can call it out very well
just when it comes to the police.
People always say the police are racist.
Nah, it's, it's, it's certain people that are racist,
just like there's certain people on this body
that's racist and y'all are the problem.
But we're gonna fix it though.
Our next speaker is Mr. Michael Young Bay. Mr. Young Bay.
Yeah. She done lost her mind.
Good afternoon, sir. Good afternoon.
You know it's very disrespectful for you
to refer to me as a boy.
Lemme tell all you people something.
You know, a boy is one
of them punk ass boys out on the street
that's shooting and killing people.
A boy would've smacked the crap
after you one care who was in here,
what police or none of that.
Don't you ever disrespect me like that? And I mean that.
I won't give a damn who think they brave enough?
The next person disrespect me at that totality.
I'm gonna show you where the boy is.
I'm, I'm gonna exercise it.
I ain't gonna give a damn about going
to jail or nothing, Mr. Bay.
I have to ask you not to use profanity
In community. Yeah. Yeah.
I appreciate it. I,
I appreciate you and you know I respect you.
Yes, sir. I know. Yes, sir.
Because that was just way outta line.
And it's all the men that set up here,
people set up here and ain't say nothing.
And yeah, you know, I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm cussing
because of the things I'm going through with me
and my family, people intentionally trying
to keep us from being housed, me
and my family sleeping on the f*****g street
because the b******t.
No, I'm serious, man. I'm for real.
And I've been coming down here for a year.
I done gave the mayor a hard drive of the,
of the stuff they, they try to put us in, et cetera,
and to come down here and be disrespected like that.
Not no more. Y'all better look at that video
when I had grad Mitchell throw
and he couldn't get it loose.
I'm not playing no games.
I don't come to disrespect nobody or none of that,
but I will not tolerate it.
No, not at that extent. Not with no bigotry.
No, I will not, not against me as much as me and my family
and my nation of people built this damn country.
Damn. Ain't no cuss word, bro.
But enough is enough. You, you trash for that.
I ain't down here speaking on
nobody nationality or none of that.
I ain't degrading nobody discriminate or none of that.
I will not accept that no more.
And I mean that 'cause you'll put other people in harm
way for being ignorant.
Use a ignorant fool
and you better not ever in your life
disrespect me like that again.
And I don't care who powers to be, whether they Jews
or whatever, Crans, whatever.
I don't care. Don't you disrespect me and I mean that.
Now go on with this puss ass. Me.
Thank you Mr. Young Bay. Our next speakers,
Mr. Charles Spence.
Wanna get down. Lemme know I ain't duck nothing.
Slip with that chair when he started talking. Why?
Good afternoon committee. Good afternoon, sir.
Thank you again for the opportunity to speak
and for your presence as I do.
I was delighted to discover on September 30th,
the Chicago Police Department already has a drone program.
It was a great assist to my cause to hear someone
actually engaged with technology give a detailed
accounting of its benefits.
I know many of you have heard this,
but it, it has such great value with bears repeating
as Sergeant bu Rastro said with drones,
response times are faster.
Situational awareness is enhanced.
That is key to knowing what you're facing before you go in.
It leads directly to increase the safety for the officers
and for civilians.
It results in a reduction in excessive use
of forced lawsuits.
Costs are lower. There's no training required.
There's no salary, there's no special pays,
there's no pension contribution.
And with the $982 million deficit next year,
that means something productivity increases.
Re recent studies, numerous recent studies have shown they
are a four to one force multiplier.
And if I'm an alder with a high crime district
or a chronically understaffed district, I
and I can convert one officer from patrol to drone operator.
I'll take that plus three productivity increase all
day every day.
I was impressed with the questions asked at the
September 30th meeting.
Most impactful was Alder Moore's regarding
what is needed at CPD to move the program forward.
Captain Du stated, he needs 12 officers
to cover second and third watch.
I'm saying add to that seven more drones for a total of 12.
That way one can be in the air while
because of their limited runtime of 30 minutes,
another one can be charging in the hive.
That way you can rotate those drones all
night long if you have to.
One flies, one charges, one flies, one charges.
This is so simple and so sensible.
I don't know why this isn't happening, especially
since on October 3rd when the mayor stated it's important
that law enforcement has all the tools it needs in order
to provide the type of safety and security Chicago deserves.
So again, please committee, hold the mayor to his word.
Create a budget line in the 25 budget
for a drone team in the Chicago Police Department
and author an ordinance allowing
and detailing their use. Thank you.
Thank you Mr. Spence.
We have, uh, we have two callers requesting to speak,
um, by video.
Our first speaker is Mona Alise.
Mona Alise, are you with us?
Yes, I'm with you. Can you hear me?
Yes. And I probably mispronounced your last name.
I apologize.
No, you were perfect. I'm impressed. Thank you so much.
Well, thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today,
alderman and police and firemen.
I am sure you would agree with this statement.
To deny an individual
of their First Amendment right would be a violation
of fundamental public policy.
There's a situation that is heading to court right now
concerning a public safety event, one
that you will be embarrassed by if it,
and I wish for you to avoid it.
A woman was demonstrating in front
of the Scientology building down on Clark Street.
She was riding with chalk on the public sidewalk.
The Scientologist came out
and there was a verbal exchange, pretty calm.
She stood up and as she approached, as he approached,
she had allegedly brushed her breast against him.
Mind you, not chest bump just brushed.
There's a video, video showing it really didn't happen.
Scientology called CPD
and convinced them to arrest her under an assault charge.
The Scientologist was assaulted by a breast.
You would think that, that this should have been
dropped, but oh no.
The state attorney is chummy friends
with the Scientology org's dad
and main funder, Joseph Sala, an attorney himself.
He whispered sweet, nothings into the essay's ear.
So they would continue with the case
to show her as an example.
My concern is this,
Scientology is obviously weaponizing CPD against a First
Amendment demonstrator.
If this goes to trial, God forbid it will give a black eye
to your city and to CPD.
They don't want their horrors exposed in this he Diddy,
Epstein Nassar,
or a current case where the civil Rico is added
to the proposed as a proposed amendment complaint
to Bixler v Scientology.
I would really hate for, um, Chicago
to be implicated in this civil lawsuit that's coming down.
Why are we demonstrating to begin with as a scenario?
You youth, young children,
daily audit grown men doing security checks.
I won't explain really what a security check it is.
It's, it's basic counseling.
And these are words that are spoken to the grown man
locked in a room with a child.
While we cannot guarantee you
that the matters revealed in this list will be
held forever secret, we can promise you faithfully
that no part of it,
nor any answer you make here will be given
to the police or the state.
No Scientologist will ever bear witness
against you in court.
And I ask you folks, I ask you the police,
I ask the police chief, I ask the superintendent
to please investigate this collusion that could be happening
that would implicate you in a Rico case.
Thank you. And I yield back my time.
Thank you, Ms. Alise.
Um, our next speaker and final speaker will be Ms.
Nancy Drew, I'm sorry, Nance Drew. I apologize. Nance Drew.
Hello. Hello, Ms.
Drew, you have about three minutes. Thank
You. Thank you so
much for hearing me out.
I, um, also have issue with,
um, Scientology.
And since they moved into six 50 South Clark
in our city in Chicago, um, officers were called on May,
on April 27th, uh, to the Scientology building
to complain against demonstrators.
Officers advised demonstrators
to take down tape signs from posts.
Uh, the First Amendment auditors complied,
and one of the Scientologists also said that the chalk art
that was on the public sidewalk was
okay for it to be there.
Um, a couple of, I'd say two hours later,
the same Scientology employee
or volunteer came out
and threw a bucket of water down on the sidewalk,
aggressively assertively,
and started removing the shock arts, uh,
with a scrub brush.
And, uh, demonstrators, there were three of them, uh,
we're protecting the chalk art.
And he, uh,
the CPD was called
because, uh, one of the demonstrators
was, um, there.
And he came into her space as her feet were planted.
And he says that her
breast brushed against him.
Uh, I am concerned that CPD is being
influenced by Scientology officers arrived
and spoke to both sides
after, well, easily with Scientology.
And, uh, the protestors had to beg to be able to be heard,
uh, even with their gloves on ready to arrest.
The one, one of the protestors that allegedly was, uh,
gave the boob brush, the, the breast brush, I should say.
Um, and the officers,
uh, did end up arresting this, this, uh, protestor.
They mocked her. Um, vi video was shown.
Um, they, the police did
after going back into the Scientology building and,
and seeing the protestors, uh, video were able,
wasn't originally a breath brush, they said it was a hand,
and then later on it was a breast.
So I just want to, that, you know, there's evidence.
Thank you. Thank you Ms. And thank you Ms. Drew.
Uh, that concludes our public comment.
Um, I want to thank all of our, uh, speakers that come out
and speak on the, um, important issues that, um,
the city faces as well as, uh, them as individuals.
And I thank you for, uh, your comments this afternoon.
Um, the chairman would like to recognize Alderman, uh,
Mitchell, alderman Curtis,
and Alderwoman Tabba, uh, for purposes of a quorum.
And, um, alderman Lopez
and Alderman Burnett, uh, for being purpose,
um, present as well.
Each of you should have received the Rule 45 report
on September 19th,
or a meeting that was held on September 17th.
Are there any questions or comments
regarding the Rule 45 report?
There being no questions
or comments about the rule 45 reports.
Alderman Mosley moves to passage of this item.
All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those opposed nay.
An opinion of the chair, the Rule 45 report passes.
We have one item on the agenda today.
Item number 2023 dash 6 4 4 5.
It's the amendment of municipal code chapter three dash 36.
Add in a new section two dash 36 dash 7 62,
which establishes a policy
and procedures for bereavement leave following the death
of a uniformed service member.
Our chief, um, our chief sponsor of this item
is Alderman Napolitano.
Um, alderman Napolitano, uh, will be recognized for que uh,
comments, um, regarding this item followed by, um,
Patrick Cleary, Joseph Pease,
Patrick Gallagher, and Dustin Jeffers.
Um, so if I can have, um,
Patrick Cleary come forward please,
and Joseph Peace, Patrick Gallagher
and Dustin Jeffers, again, followed
by, um, uh, alderman Politano,
who's the chief sponsor of this matter.
Um, if each of you could please, uh, recognize, um,
I'm sorry, uh, let us know what your, um,
what your position with the union
or what the fire department is.
Uh, we appreciate it. Um, alderman Napolitano,
Thank you Chairman, uh,
thank you colleagues for being here as well.
And thank you to my firefighter brothers
and sisters for being here.
Um, I'm glad this is being heard today.
This came up, I think we introduced this maybe about nine
plus months ago, or,
and we've kind of pushed it off from time to time, hoping
that we can work something out
and figure out a, a proper way to do this.
Um, I'm glad to have the opportunity today, chairman,
to speak on this behalf.
Um, for those that don't know, I'm sure most of you do know
Chicago firefighters and paramedics are brotherhood
and, and a sisterhood.
We're bound to each other on a strong fact that we know
we are gonna back each other up in our worst day.
We're gonna help each other, whether it's on
duty, whether it's off duty.
But the most important part about this is we
become a family immediately.
Because in saving lives, we lean on each other
to save each other's lives.
Every time a paramedic
or a firefighter takes a run,
there's a chance they're not gonna come back, unfortunately.
And because of that, it's an unimaginable sorrow
to our brothers and sisters on the Chicago Fire Department,
our firefighters and paramedic paramedics.
It's not only a sour, a sorrow that affects them,
but it's also a grief of how they're going to figure out how
to take care of those that they lost family,
because that's what we do as brothers
and sisters on this department.
Chicago Fire Department has lost 11 members in line
of duty since 2015, unfortunately, losing all of them.
Two of them were to covid as well.
Another psychological distress
that was put upon not only the fire department
and police department, but the entire city of Chicago.
Another unfortunate part of this is since 2019,
we've lost eight members to suicide.
So if we're not recognizing
that there's a stress issue going on
here, we're just being ignorant.
There's nothing written right now
by the Chicago Fire Department to help these brothers
and sisters grieve for someone they
have lost in the firehouse.
And what I mean by that, as a firefighter
or a paramedic that loses their life in the line of duty
or to suicide, it's kind of done on a whim.
Police have an order to take care of it.
I'm not saying that our department doesn't do their due
diligence when this incident happens to come
and take care of our firefighters,
but there is nothing written.
There is nothing concrete. It's kind of just done.
Hey, this is what we're gonna do in this situation.
What we're asking in this ordinance is
to give our firefighters
and paramedics a moment to decompress.
This job is based on helping everybody in their worst day.
We don't ever get called to a birthday party to have fun.
We don't ever get called to something that is just great.
Nine outta 10 times. It's the worst day of someone's life.
Those are calls of house fires, possibly your house
burn victims, auto AC accidents, drownings
building collapses, infant deaths.
Imagine you having to go to an infant desk. Death.
I have still haunts me to this day.
Elderly abuse,
suicide train incidents.
If you haven't been to a train incident in your life,
don't ever go to one.
It is the worst thing that you are ever going
to witness in your entire life.
Electrocutions, overdoses.
And unfortunately, in the city of Chicago, constant murders,
shootings in the street, can you imagine this being your job
responsibility that you report every day?
And that's what you have to deal with.
And you have just lost a loved one,
and I mean a loved one, not your family at home,
but your family in the firehouse.
Your brother or sister who's a firefighter paramedic or,
or just a single role paramedic.
And you have to report to work
and drive that fire engine, drive that fire truck, scale
that roof, pull that line inside, make that hydrant,
put in a line, a lifesaving line into somebody's arm
to get 'em the proper medications
or fluids they need before you lose them.
And to do that all after you've just
lost a brother or sister.
I've sat down here for, uh, let me back that up.
This is my 24th year with the city of Chicago, five
as a police officer, little over 10 as a firefighter,
and now nine down here.
And in those 24 years, I know all
of you have heard us talk about how we can help
with mental awareness or help with people inflicted
with the stress or this anxiety or this depression.
And we've done nothing about it,
but we have a moment too, right now.
I wanna finish with this before my friends and brothers
and sisters speak, but I know we all took this job.
That'll be the, that'll be the line right away.
Well, you chose this job. Absolutely. I chose it.
He chose it. He chose it. They chose it.
And they will go every single time
that bell rings happily to do their job.
We're just asking to create some sort
of mental health release to help 'em mourn
after losing somebody, a brother or a sister,
and being able to do the best job they can
to represent the greatest fire department in the entire
country for the greatest city in the entire country.
If we got something wrong in this,
we can always amend it later or fix it.
If someone tells you that it's going to close a firehouse.
We work in shifts, three shifts.
When one shift is on two
or off, that means we have plenty of firefighters
that would gladly come in to work for a firefighter
that's mourning the loss of another.
I just think
for us not to have something in place for these men
and women is wrong.
It's on us that we didn't do that in the past.
It's on, it's wrong
that the department hasn't had something in the past.
I'm not faulting anybody for it,
but right now, let's fix it.
And I'm asking for you guys to sort this ordinance
and hopefully ha help this past due to city council
for a full city council vote.
I would appreciate that very much. Thank you, chairman.
Thank you. Altman Napolitano.
Also, I'm joining us from the Chicago Fire Department is,
um, Evan Hames, who's the general counsel, uh, for CFD
and Mike Devita, uh, chief of staff for the CFD.
And if, um, either of you wish to make, um,
a brief opening remarks, um, I'd appreciate it as well.
Uh, Patrick Cleary, uh, we'll begin with Patrick Cleary.
Hi, I am Patrick Cleary.
I'm the President of Chicago Firefighters Union.
Uh, this is a mental health issue.
I've been on over 37 years
and we never had a policy for this.
So I'll give you a quick synopsis of how this would work.
A firefighter would die, one commissioner would say, no,
you're not getting any days off.
Go to work. You get a different commissioner.
That commissioner says, yeah, you can have the time off,
but come up with an injury and lay up.
Then you'll have another commissioner that will say,
yeah, I'll give you the time off.
You'll get administrative leave and they take care of you.
We need a policy. This is a mental health issue.
It needs to be addressed.
We've had four that's just in the last couple years.
I I attended two of those.
I was on scene that two of those,
it it's not something you wanna deal with.
And a lot of firefighters don't want to admit
that they need mental health help.
Therefore, I would like you to develop this policy
and force them to get the help that they need.
Now, some people may say that, well,
you can handle this in negotiations.
I've been negotiating a contract now for over three years.
I cannot wait any longer to continue to negotiate
and negotiate and to have the city drag their feet
and never come to a conclusion.
Never come, come forward with proposals.
We need this ordinance now, and that's why I ask you
and beg you to pass this ordinance for us. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Cleary. Alderman Napolitano.
I'd just like to make a point of lar clarification
as well, just, and I know my colleagues know this,
but based on what President Clery said, uh,
even if anything is negotiated in contract
and we pass this, this ordinance through
contract supersedes the ordinance in the end.
So if they were to work this out in the, in,
in the future in a different direction
or a different way, um, that overtakes our ordinance.
So we're putting something in line as of right now
because it does not exist
and it hasn't exist in the last three years
that this contract has been avoided.
Thank you Alderman. Uh, thank you President Cleary.
Joseph Pease,
Uh, good morning. I
wanna apologize in advance.
I'm not, uh, very good at public speaking, so
I'm sorry I can't,
I'll read it for you. Good
morning and thank you for your time
and attention to this critical matter.
My name is Joseph Peace.
I'm a lieutenant in Chicago Fire Department
and I have just completed 18 years of service.
Over nearly two decades, I've witnessed firsthand the toll
that our profession takes on the mental, emotional
and physical wellbeing of firefighters.
It is in this context that I stand
before you to advocate for an ordinance
that guarantees administrative leave for bereavement,
a necessary safeguard for the mental health
of our department's members.
Numbers seem to resonate with this committee, so allow me
to share a few that paint the stark picture of
what our firefighters endure.
In my 18 years of service, we have lost 18
firefighters in the line of duty.
Five of them were men I personally knew
and one of them was
Amongst my closest friends.
I recently, I was recently present at a fire scene
where we lost a firefighter in a line of duty
and experienced that will haunt me for the rest of my life.
But the trauma doesn't end there.
I personally have known three firefighters
who took their own lives and a multitude of others
that have passed from job related illnesses,
the latest just last week.
These are not just members.
They represent friends, colleagues,
and human beings who have gave everything for the city.
But here's another number that demands,
demands attention zero.
That's the number of times I was approached
to see if I was okay after experiencing these losses.
Zero is the amount of mental health support offered to me
and my peers after enduring such traumatic events.
Carrying the body of a fallen firefighter,
a brother in arms should never be something you
have to process alone.
Until very recently, the Chicago Fire Department has just
one counselor assigned to help all of us.
She does her best, but she's overwhelmed by the demand.
For a comparison, the Chicago Police Department has 22
counselors, and even that isn't enough
to meet the needs of their officers.
How can we possibly expect a function at a high level
serving and protecting the citizens of Chicago
if we are not given the time and space to grieve, heal,
and process these tragedies?
Let me be clear, this proposal is not
asking for something radical.
It's asking for what should already be in place.
A guaranteed mental health break
after experiencing a traumatic loss within our ranks
we're human beings, not machines.
After the loss of Firefighter Andrew Price, for example,
members of his crew were told to report to work
the very next day his partner was driving,
was back driving truck 44 in the morning after his death.
How is that humane?
How does the city expect us
to continue functioning in our roles with such a disregard
for our emotional wellbeing?
The state has allocated $10 million
to support mental health services
for both the Chicago Fire Department and Police Department.
But where are these re resources being used
and how is the city prioritizing its firefighters,
the people who run into burning buildings to save others?
We need more than just funding.
We need a system that acknowledges our grief
and gives us the time to process it. Thank you.
Thank you. Uh, Lieutenant Peace. Thank you. Sorry.
Chairman recognizes Alderwoman Clay as present
for purposes of a quorum.
Uh, Patrick Gallagher.
Good afternoon, sir.
Uh, my name's afternoon, Patrick Gallagher.
I'm a, uh, uh, battalion chief on
the Chicago Fire Department.
Thank you for the opportunity
to briefly speak on the ordinance
that is being brought forward today.
Late last year, the firehouse I work at had to deal
with the unthinkable, the line
of duty death of one of our members.
Andrew Price tragically died at a fire on
November 13th, 2023.
We all under understand the inherent risk we take on when we
sign up for this job, and then we spend the next 20, 30
or 40 years hoping that something tragic never happens.
When it does, it is a shock. It's tough to process.
There is no handbook to deal with it.
We understand our duty to be there for our fallen brother
or sister and their family,
but we neglect what we may need for our own mental health.
In the days after his death,
I watched the members in our firehouse deteriorate
physically, mentally, and emotionally.
We responded as best we could under the circumstances.
While I do believe that time does heal, I understand
that grieving is a different process for different people.
I believe this ordinance is a positive step
for both the members of the Chicago Fire Department
and the citizens of Chicago.
When citizens need us to respond, they expect us
to be at a hundred percent.
When looking at this ordinance,
it would clear up any confusion as to what is
to occur when something tragic like this happens,
it also would allow for individual bereavement time
and provides for mental and emotional recuperation.
This policy would allow for members
to take the small step forward towards recovering from a
very tragic and emotional occurrence.
I appreciate the people that are supporting this effort,
and I thank you for your time today.
May all of our line of duty de death members rest in peace.
God bless. Thank you. Thank
You, chief Gallagher, our last speaker,
um, Dustin Jeffers.
Good afternoon. Good Afternoon.
My name is Dustin Jeffers
and I'm here today, not only as a firefighter,
but as someone who lost a brother in the line of duty.
Drew Price, he wasn't just a
colleague, he was a family to us.
When he fell, our world stopped.
But the days to follow, we were expected
to carry on like nothing had happened.
Within a day after the incident, I had to sit down
and tell my old family
and explain to them that despite everything I had
to report back to work, no time
to grieve, no space to process.
We all said we were fine, but we weren't.
And the truth is, we didn't know
what would happen if we admitted, admitted that
would we be given the time off to attend his services?
Would we be punished for needing time? Do we have to lay up?
There was really no, there was a real fear that admit
that admitting we weren't okay.
I'll never forget the day of his viewing.
There we were at the funeral home preparing
to say our final goodbyes.
When we were told to leave immediately for an
after action report, we were expected to relive everything
that had happened and then somehow return
to a duty like nothing had changed.
It wasn't just exhausting. It was dangerous.
And my belief, I feel the city is lucky.
Nothing major came in that night
because if I'm being honest,
we couldn't have s safely responded
and performed our duties.
This isn't just about taking on, taking off time to grieve
after witnessing one of our brother's deaths.
Deaths. This is about the safety of our crew
and the public we serve.
We need time to process, to grieve, to be human.
Other departments are given the time off.
So why aren't we after four line
of duty deaths alone in 2023?
How is there no bereavement policy in place
when you lose one of your own?
This should be the standard everywhere.
In fact, I've spoken with colleagues from other states
and cities who also are get time off
to honor their falling colleagues at
memorials in the first year.
And we're shocked that we don't have any policies in place
in such a big city department.
There has to be change moving forward, not just
for the safety, but for the safety
of the people who depend on us.
We need time, time to grieve, to heal,
and to honor those who given the ultimate sacrifice for Drew
all, all past and future line of duty desks,
and for every firefighter who will face this in the future.
Let's make sure we have the space
to do it right moving forward
by putting this ordinance into place. Thank you. Thank
You, firefighter Jeffers.
Is, uh, is there anyone from this, uh,
either the general counsel or chief of staff?
Do, do either of you wish to make opening, uh, remarks
before questions and comments by committee members?
Yes, please, if you could come forward
and if you could, um, identify yourself for the record.
Good afternoon. My name is Good afternoon, sir.
Uh, Evan Hay. I am the General Counsel
for the Chicago Fire Department.
To my right is Chief Mike Devita,
the Commissioner's Chief of Staff.
Thank you. Um, sorry.
Um, just a few opening remarks.
Um, to be clear,
the fire department has never denied members the ability
to take time off or any health issue, physical or mental.
Any requests that were were put
in, they were given the time.
And as far as I'm aware, no member has been, um, denied
leave following a member's death,
whether or not they was sought.
As you heard, some of the members choose not to seek it.
Um, as the alderman, as alderman, pa Napolitan, excuse me,
pointed out the police have an order.
That order was put in place in July of this year.
Um, after the alderman forwarded me the order, I sought
to meet with him to discuss this measure
because the police measure is for any traumatic incident,
which includes this, you probably know
any officer involved shooting.
So even though there may not have been any death,
anytime there's an officer involved shooting,
they are stood down until they're cleared to return to duty,
which is a form of layup, which is available
to every member of the department.
Um, the caption of this ordinance is
for city uniform members, but that is inaccurate.
This ordinance does not address police.
This ordinance is only for the fire department.
And I've been told that if the city, if the department were
to have a similar policy as to police, that
that is insufficient because it can be changed
by different administrations.
The same is true for police.
If this ordinance is as necessary as, as it has been said,
then it should be for all uniform members,
not just for fire department.
Why the, why, the disparity, why the inequity?
Um, the, the department believes
that the appropriate measure is a department policy.
Something that can be adjusted
to meet the needs of its members.
As it goes, you shouldn't have to get to the point
where we have to come in to move, to seek a sponsor,
to adjust an, uh, an ordinance
to meet the changing needs of the department.
Should members have leave? Absolutely.
Do they get it when they seek it? Again? Absolutely.
To, to codify This is,
I I have no better term than an imperfect solution.
Uh, a a department policy, a general order
is the appropriate way to go.
And as, um, Mr.
Cleary mentioned, it would need
to be bargained with local two.
And in the time that I've been involved in bargaining,
which is approximately two
and a half years now, I've never
seen a proposal from local two.
Today is the first I've heard from local two on this issue.
Is it a mental health issue? Yes.
And for health issues, the Chicago Fire Department has one
of the most generous leave policies.
Members are unable for health reasons, mental
or physical, to do their job due
to whatever circumstance it may be.
They have the ability to take leave
and then they have the ability
to come back when they're ready and healthy to come back.
Um, and for those reasons, we would ask
that you defer this matter at the very least, um, so
that it can be addressed through the department
as you have allowed the police department to do.
But I, do you want me to stay for questions
or should I get the chair?
I ju I just have a, a quick question
before where I, um, allow Mr.
Devita to speak. Um, is that the department, is
that the department's position
or are you speaking as general counsel
and that's, uh, the department's position
That you That's that's the
message that I was sent here to bring.
Yes. I'm sorry. That's the message that I was sent to bring.
Okay. And, and let me ask you from a personal perspective,
um, have you ever taken a day off when you've had a loved
one die the next day?
Have I Yes, I have not had to. No.
Okay. You haven't, Not not while I'm at the city.
And thanks, thanks for answering that, honestly. Uh, Mr.
Chairman.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, what, uh, the point
that you raised, what is the policy on leave
for the fire department for such an incident
that has been described in this, uh, ordinance
Policy?
That make sense? Yeah.
There, there is, there is no, hold on, hold on, hold on,
hold on, hold on.
There is no Al Alderman Irving has a floor.
There is no, and, um, alderman Irving asked a question of,
um, the general counsel, Evan hoe, uh,
any other speakers have to be recognized by me as chairman
of this committee, and then we'll,
we'll move forward like that.
Okay. Alderman Irvin?
No. My my, my question is, you, you mentioned that the,
uh, firefighter or a member of the,
of the uniform service would have time available
or that the protocol was that there was availability.
So my question is, what is the protocol
or what is the, uh, leave
or how does one do this currently in the
construct as it exists today?
I, as far as I can answer,
the department does not have a written policy on it.
But I would ask the Chief devita, um, be able to provide,
provide a little more detail as to what the department's,
uh, practices and policy is on the issue.
Chief Devita, Uh, Evan is a hundred percent right.
There is no, uh, written policy on that.
Um, we do it on a case by case basis.
So if a, if a member of the department wishes to take
what one, one be called a bereavement, a leave for the death
of a member that worked with them or on their shift
or their person they bunk with
or something like that, is there a formal process
for them to request that?
Or is that something that's outside of the construct
of a bereavement leave?
The, the member could request either
through written communications
or through the EAP counselors when they go to the firehouse.
And, and if I may, just to add onto that, the, one of the,
the points that this ordinance,
why I think it's an imperfect vehicle, is
that it will dictate how CFD members process their grief.
They will be stood down on the day of,
and they will be stood down on the following shift.
And there may be members who find solace in the fire
department who signed, find solace in going to do the job.
There are some who won't,
and there are some who are, this ordinance strips them of
that choice mandates that they be sent home.
Now they will have, they have available, uh,
they are EAP remains available to them as members
of the union pointed out.
It is now up to five counselors that have been approved
by City council budget and have been staffed in our EAP,
which is the biggest it's ever been.
Uh, but the way the, again, as the ordinance dictates,
they will be sent home not to return
until the second shift following,
unless the funeral is then,
and then they will be still by ordinance kept out of work.
Okay. Would the, um, from a,
from a health perspective, uh,
how much time is a firefighter allotted for, uh,
physical or mental health issues?
Should they get quote unquote sick and
and using that as a very general term?
365 days
Are those work days or calendar days?
Calendar days. So 3 365 calendar days for any, any type
of illness that incapacitates them from doing the job.
Anything that prevents them from
being able to form their duties.
Okay. Uh, thank you Mr. Chairman. Thank
You. Uh, Mr. Cleary, president
Cleary.
Uh, yes. I would like to comment.
Um, when Firefighter Stringham Stringer
and Anum died, I was there for the after action review
and those members that his coworkers asked to be off,
and the commissioner swore at them
and told them, no, you're going to work.
So don't, they can't come here
and tell you that people weren't denied.
They were denied. I will witnessed it.
Uh, there is no policy.
And finally, we have members, I was at the
after action review for Firefighter Price.
Those guys were on duty.
The guys that were there at the price
fire, I was at the price fire.
Those guys were zombies.
They weren't requesting time to be off.
They needed to be told they needed time off.
I went up to the exempt ranks
and told them, you can't let these people work.
You can't let this guy that was up on the roof
with him drive a truck.
And they said, pat, they're not requesting the be love.
I don't care. They look like zombies.
They need to go home and grieve.
They're not recognizing this. That's why.
And as for negotiating it, I shouldn't have to negotiate
my member to be able to grieve.
That's why I came to you guys to get it done.
I'm not gonna force and goggle bereavement leave
and give something up in return for it.
I shouldn't have to do that.
Thank you. Thank you, president. Okay.
Um, I, I kind of prematurely jumped into questions
and comments, um, when I asked the question.
Sorry. Uh, no, no.
So let's, let's back up a little bit
and, uh, let's give, um, chief
of Staff Davida, uh, an opportunity.
So I have nothing for, okay. So he waves that and,
and now we can get into questions and comments.
Uh, we'll, we'll start with, uh, Alderwoman Tabba, followed
by Alderwoman Lee.
I want to thank my colleague, alderman Napolitano,
for bringing forward this ordinance.
This is so important. So thank you.
I strongly support this ordinance
because we as a city need to invest more
for our first responders,
especially our fight fighters with resources.
And this ordinance is a step in the right direction
to help them with their mental health
and their mental wellbeing,
because they are out there every day saving lives.
So we need to pass this ordinance today
and show that we support our first responders.
I will be voting yes in committee and on the council floor,
and I urge my colleagues to do the same.
Thank you.
I, I, I bear That's how you,
IJI guess. Um,
we have, um, Alderwoman Lee, followed
by Alden Alderman Kon, and then, um, Alderwoman Nugent.
Thank you Chair. Um,
and thank you all for being here today, Mr.
Cleary, uh, representatives from the, uh, fire department.
Just a couple of questions to follow up on what, uh,
chair Irvin was just asking.
Um, I know that there's not currently a
policy to address this.
Uh, people can request leave
for either physical or mental health.
Um, who makes the determination as
to when they're fit enough to return to duty?
In this case,
There is a medical order that is actually part
of the collective bargaining agreement
that outlines the process by which a member returns to duty.
Um, I am, it goes, actually goes to the Office
of Public Admin, public Safety Administration.
Uh, but I'll try and summarize it, is that
when a member is cleared by their own professional, the,
the treater that is then
provided to the doctor in the Office
of Public Safety Administration,
who either agrees or disagrees with it.
And if they agree that the member is ready to return
to duty, then the member is sent to return to duty.
So, by way of example, if somebody suffered a broken leg,
they hurt themself off duty, uh, they would lay up,
they would get better, their doctor would clear them from
any further treatment that would be
provided to the, um, medical division in the Office
of Public Safety Administration.
The doctor there would then, uh, take a look at the ref,
the treaters, um, progress notes, uh, meet
with the member and then clear the member.
If they had been out for more than, um, is it 30 or 90 days?
90, um, out for more than 90 days, they would then go back
to the academy for, for some retraining,
and then there'd be return to duty.
That's a physical injury.
So if, if a member came to you, um, and,
and actually did request time off, um, a mental health day,
uh, because of anything,
'cause it doesn't even have, let's not even bring a,
the death of a, a fellow firefighter into this.
Um, I, it actually, lemme ask this first.
Is there a bereavement policy
for the loss of a family member? It's
The, it's the city's bereavement policy. It's
The city's bereavement policy.
Same policy holds for uniform members.
Okay. And what's the city's bereavement policy?
Just for the record here? Anybody?
Uh, it's three Days.
And if you live in a, um, a state that's not contiguous
with, um, Illinois, um, it's five.
Okay. Three days of its local five, they've,
if it's not okay, if
The deceased family member, it's not,
Not you. Okay.
Um, I'm,
my mind's just a little blown honestly
that there's not one, and I get it.
Look, I, I'm not trying to make a, a judgment.
I, I hear both sides of this.
I'm appalled that we don't have a policy, um,
for our firefighters like we do for police.
And I, and I get this may not be the,
the perfect thing here.
Um, what, so if I,
if I declare mental Health day, and I,
and I need to take a couple of days off to,
to just get my head on straight, and let's say I'm, I'm out
after three days, I, I tell you I'm ready to come back.
You guys just say it's okay to come back.
They go back through medical and
are clear to return to duty.
And I will give you an, an a, a for instance,
without getting into any of the details of it.
But there are members who have taken medical, medical leave
for mental health purposes.
And during the process of returning them, there were,
during the course of treatment, it ca became evident
that they had physical issues
that they did not even were unaware of.
They would obviously have to be cleared physically
and mentally to be able to return to duty.
That is, that's the process. Whether it, it does,
the process does not distinguish between a physical
or mental impairment or injury.
And I think that's where it's deficient.
Um, that you, you can, you can address the physical,
but with, you don't have anything to,
there's nobody addressing the mental,
and if there's only one counselor for the entire department,
and I, I, I haven't even heard if there's any role
for this person to play in this as well.
So let's say someone went
and found, uh, reached out to the counselor
and they were able to get an appointment, um, with all
of the other stuff going on, or,
or their notes that the medical is then looking at from
that counselor to say, you know, I've, I've spoken to this,
you know, firefighter three times about the same issue.
Is there any of that documentation that's going on?
The answer is, it depends. And the reason it depends is
because EAP, both the city's EAP police, EAP fire,
E-A-P-E-A-P writ large, if the member of the, if the,
if the individual who's seeking the help
of the employee assistance program counselors does not
release the provider, the clinician to share those records
with anyone, then HIPAA prohibits the
counselor from sharing those records.
If a member were to suffer some sort of loss,
whatever it may be, on duty, off duty, person, on the job,
person off the job, whatever it may be,
they can go to the EAP.
And if the EAP agrees that this person should not be working
for the course of their mental health process
and the member releases EAP to notify medical, then
that notification occurs
otherwise they are bound by HIPAA to keep it private.
EAP is not authorized to contact the department in any way,
shape, or form without the release of the member.
So the, the member would have to say it was okay.
Just like, just like, just
Like I would if I needed, if I wanted my
information released to whoever
And if it Exactly, if a member were to
start on a mental health
recovery process, I, I don't, I'm sorry.
I don't really know a better way to say it.
And they were to seek counseling off shift, right?
They're, they're 24 on 48 or 72 off,
and they were doing it on their off days
through city insurance or not.
And they got to a point where they needed
to not work in order to make the
con the rest of their recovery.
They would have, they would take the process to lay up
and when they were ready to come back, the process
that exists on the collective bargaining agreement says
as they go back through medical before they return to duty
to ensure that they are ready
and able to resume their duties.
Okay. Um, I'm gonna, if,
if it's okay, chair, wanna keep going?
No, go ahead. More. Thank you. I'll cut off in 30 seconds.
Please, please do. Um, I,
I'm not trying to hug the floor here.
I just, I have a lot of questions, um,
and I just totally lost my train of thought real quick here.
Um, is there any training currently
for chiefs in each of the, um, in, in each
of the fire stations, uh, to observe
or make determinations as
to anybody's mental health, fitness?
Because I'm, the, the question that I'm trying to get
to is if, if I'm in charge of a fire station,
and I'm sorry if I'm using all the wrong terms here,
firefighters, um, but if I'm in charge of a station
and I've got a, a, a battalion of people that are working
for me, and I know them, we, we live together, we've,
we work side by side
and I can identify something is going on with somebody.
Is there a current process by which,
or a policy that the Chicago Fire Department has,
which would obligate that leader to identify
that there may be something going on with somebody,
or if there's a physical limp?
I mean, I know it's two different things,
physical and, and mental.
I'm trying to elucidate the difference between the two.
I, I, I would say I saw Mr. Clear raising his hand.
I believe he wanted to try and offer an answer.
We do not have anything called mental health days.
We don't have mental health days.
So if, if I'm having some type of mental health issue,
I have to go to a doctor
and the doctor has to write a note that says,
pat cannot work for the next week
because of this clinical depression, whatever.
That's how it's done.
As for me, having, I'm a chief on the job, me,
for having training to, to figure out
who has mental health issues.
I have no concept
or clue how to determine
that I have not been provided that training.
And, and prior To that, if I,
if someone's misbehaving at work, I could report
that to my superior.
If I think someone's under the influence of some type
of drug, I could report that to my superior.
But we don't have mental health days and we should.
I, I understand that.
Just one quick comment, then I'll jump over to you.
And to be fair too, I, if you, you're around folks,
and I know that there's not a policy for mental health,
but if you see something's wrong
with somebody, you would say something.
I guess, and I guess what I'm asking is,
if you said something to, to the higher ups in, in CFD,
I'm wondering if there is a policy then at that point
that would trigger someone to just be benched for a day
or to go take a time.
Like, you know, sometimes I tell,
this is not a great comparison,
but, you know, our, our ward office staff work really hard,
and if I see someone's been working seven days without,
without a break, I might tell them to take a powder take,
take the afternoon off, take the day off.
That's fine. We'll make it up some other way.
Um, but I just, in, in my own little way, I do that
and I, I can afford to do that
because I run my office at different,
my people are not depending on my on, on me
to be fit to save their life.
Yeah. Just like I said at the
after action review for Firefighter Price, I pointed out
to the on-duty exempt ranks,
these guys are not fit for duty.
It should not be working today.
They ignored me and they let them work. Okay. And,
And, And I wanna let Chief
All all do want me leave. Let me, let
me just clear a couple things up. Yeah. Alright.
Uh, we do have people that are logging on and,
and they may be logging on, uh, uh,
as we continue this meeting.
So I'm, I'm saying that to say that if you speak
and when you speak, um, please identify yourself
for the record so that the public will know who's speaking.
Okay. Don't have to do it every time, but every now
and then, let us know who you are so that,
and I'll recognize you when, um, if, if, for example,
if all the women Lee is asking, um,
general counsel a question and,
and, uh, president Cleary, you feel
that you may add some important information,
just gimme a nod.
I understand that Fireman's not.
Um, and, and, and I'll acknowledge you
and then you can answer that portion
of that question as well.
Ultimately to, yeah, this Evan Ham, the general counsel
for the fire department, and as, as you pointed out, um,
you know, you have the, you have the, uh, you know,
kinda unilateral authority with your staff.
Um, I'm, I'm a city employee as well.
Um, I don't have mental health days.
I get 13 days off sick leave every year. That's that.
If I am unwell, that is how I go about it.
And if I'm gonna be absent for more than three days
by city policy, I have to bring a doctor's note to return
to work saying that I'm clear
to return based on whatever ailment it may
have have sent me out.
Um, I'm gonna ask Chief Davida
to describe every day at roll call
the company officers chiefs
or company officers who may be part of the roll call is
to establish that everyone is physically
and mentally able to do the job that day.
They are fit for duty.
I mean, as you said, somebody shows up with a limp.
So would that Chief dta
Yeah, that's, that's
Mike DTA from the Commissioner's office.
That that is accurate.
And, you know, we're not,
we're not opposed to closer to the mic.
I'm sorry. We're, we're not at all opposed to having
a policy in place.
We just wanted it, we didn't, we were trying to make it a,
a department policy, not a city ordinance.
Understood. Um, chairman, I'm,
I'm chairman, recognizes on President Clery
At Clery, president of Local two.
I was on duty as a battalion chief at the
after action review for firefighter Price's death.
I, as a Battalion Chief on Duty, pointed out to the,
on-duty exempt rank members, that these members were not fit
for duty and should no longer be working today
in the firehouse.
And they ignored me. That's why I'm here today.
So you pass this ordinance, please help us. Thank you.
Thank you, president. And just to be clear,
the current policy, in that case, people had,
the individuals would've had
to request it to have the time off.
They would've had the time off had they requested it.
Correct. Okay. That, that's all I've got. Thank you. Okay.
Thank you all. The woman and I, I'm gonna, um,
take upon a privilege and,
and skip the line a little bit, um,
before I go to Alderman Kon, uh, alderman and ano,
because I, I don't think this was said a little earlier.
Um, just my understanding of this policy, um, a person,
and, and this is in regard to line of duty death, as well as
a su a suicide, uh, any person assigned to that firehouse
where the DC deceased member worked, uh,
would be given a leave the next day, a leave
of administrative leave the next day.
And any person assigned to the firehouse
of a deceased member, uh, will be given administrative lead
to attend the wake or funeral, uh,
or memorial service, or the deceased member.
Um, and any person that's assigned to the firehouse, uh,
I'm sorry, any person assigned to the same shift, um, will,
will be, uh, placed on administrative leave
for the remainder of that shift.
Is that correct? Okay. Um, Altman Kni.
All right. Thanks for everyone on the computer.
This is Alderman Knudson.
Um, so Alderman Lee asked a good amount of my questions,
but I was wondering, under current policy,
she's still stole my under, um, under current policy,
what is the typical timeframe
that it takes from a firefighter requesting
a bereavement day and them getting a formal
and final thumbs up?
Uh, under the current policy, you,
you can ask for it day of,
Correct. So if
a firefighter loses, um, one of their coworkers,
brothers, sisters, they, they need to ask
to start the case by case basis.
How long is the in-between, between the ask and the answer?
Yeah, go ahead, president,
President, we don't have bereavement leave
for when a firefighter dies.
I, if, if my coworker dies,
I cannot put in bereavement leave for that.
I can only put in bereavement leave
for family members. Okay.
So it's not for a coworker. So what I'm asking though is
what they're saying right now, it's weighed on a case
by case basis, a day off that a firefighter,
they've said could request upon it.
So I'm, I'm really just asking, you know, when they make
that request, it said, you said it goes to OPSA?
Uh, no. They, if they are, if they,
what you're asking is whether they, when they request time
based on the death of a, of a colleague, yes.
There's a difference between a making a request for time,
which as Chief David had said, has not been denied, versus
what is referred to in the department is laying up,
which is taking medical leave.
Taking medical leave is the day of.
They, there's a form they submit
and then they're on medical leave.
President Cleary. Yeah, go ahead, president. This
Is President Cleary speaking.
There is no policy for bereavement leave for coworkers.
Like I said in the past,
it's at the whim of the commissioner.
One commissioner swore at them and told them to go to work.
Another commissioner said, yeah,
I'll give you the administrative leave.
Another commissioner said,
you don't get administrative leave.
Come up with a layup layup and you'll get the day off.
There is no policy. That's why we are here.
Yeah. And thank you, president.
So you really, I, I was trying to close a gap
and you just close it in a more direct
way, which I appreciate.
I think when we don't have these measures
guaranteed in the affirmative,
there's a question whether you'll get any time at all.
And the thing about bereavement is it's immediate.
There, there can't be a question to it.
Bereavement in any sense of it.
There can't be a question, especially when it comes
to firehouses, that, you know, will need to be
restaffed under these things.
We should just know that this is policy.
And I'll, I'll also note that, you know,
this has been a bad year for firefighters.
There's been a good amount of deaths.
But when we think of this policy,
it's not like this is something, something
that's happening every day.
Thank God this isn't something that will change staffing
for the fire department part department,
I would think significantly.
Um, uh, you know, I just wanted
to look into that process a little bit.
I will definitely be supporting this.
We need to support our firefighters.
I'll note that we have another piece
of legislation in the committee in zoning tomorrow
to support our, our firefighters.
Um, but with the amount of mental strain that some of these,
these guys and girls have gone through, um,
and go through every, every day of their jobs, it just,
some things just can't be left to question.
They've gotta be things that you haven't
as ex as an expectation.
So, thank you, Mr. Chair. I wanna
Clarification Alder and Napolitano.
I'll, I'll, I'll make this really quick.
Uh, we, and to my colleagues, we keep saying policy, policy,
this policy, there is no policy.
We need to establish that right now,
and we have to stop saying policy.
And if this does become policy that is open to change
by any, any administration, any staff,
any brass can change it at any whim without coming
through us to find out how our firefighters
and paramedics feel about it.
They could change it for a, a, a new,
a new commissioner coming and can change it
so it doesn't exist.
And if it does, did exist as policy,
it could be changed at anyone's whim.
Thank you, Jeremy. Yeah, so I'll, I'll just note,
and I'll apologize for my, my use of the terminology,
but I'll note then, uh, alderman, an added benefit
to you bringing this forward is clearly just teaching us all
what is policy and what is not policy.
And I think that's incredibly helpful. So thank you,
Thank you for the, um, point of clarification.
But policy dictates that I call Alderwoman Nugent next,
and then Alder Woman Silverstein.
Thank you, chairman. Um, first,
I guess I'm just curious if, if it's the policy
of the city air quotes around the term policy
that this should be done
during the collective bargaining process,
why aren't there any counselors
or mental health professionals here from the city
to talk about just the current state at large?
Like, why have we not included
what I think would be a really important piece
of this discussion today?
Uh, Evan Ham, general counsel for the,
the fire department, um, alderman,
I'm gonna kind of answer in two parts.
Um, one, uh, it's not city policy.
It's state law that requires bargaining of any terms
and conditions, ter changes to terms
and conditions of employment.
Um, if this were to be enacted,
it would be a change in terms of conditions
of employment that would require bargaining.
Now, as you can tell by my collective bargaining partners
here from the union, it's not gonna be a
very short bargaining session.
They are full support of it.
Um, toward that end, I can't answer why, uh,
EAP professionals from either police
or fire weren't invited here today.
Um, they are probably ministering to their members.
Um, and I, and I would just add that one of the reasons
that the fire department believes this ordinance
needs further consideration is the police department does
not have a bereavement leave policy.
They have a traumatic incident policy
where members are mandated to stand down
until they're declared fit to return to duty.
That was the policy. And that is a policy, that's an order
of the police department that was put in place in July,
but they, they have no bereavement leave policy other than
the same policy that we all have as city employees.
Okay. I, I guess I just, I would've liked
to have seen some mental health professionals here
with you today, and perhaps you guys could have suggested
to bring them to, um, just a few comments on my end.
Uh, I wish there was no need for this ordinance, um,
but clearly there is, and we have to do this.
Um, this is really just a small gesture
to offer a few moments for our friends in the prior
department to decompress following the loss of a colleague.
Um, so it's incumbent on us here in council to do it,
and I'm happy to, um, there was some comments earlier
surrounding, um, what a member
of the fire department would have to do
after a colleague passes away and ask for time off or not.
Um, I think that the last thing a person grieving needs
to do is deal with HR and supervisors.
Um, I think we can just do this act of kindness so
that it's one less decision somebody has
to make in probably one of the worst days of their life.
Uh, grief is so ugly and, and messy.
I, I think we can just do this
and it's the right thing to do, no questions asked.
Um, I'm happy to support this.
I can't believe that, um,
we didn't have something like this. So thank you, chairman.
Thank you all. The woman al the woman Silverstein,
followed by Alderman Gardner.
Thank you, chair. Um, I also just wanna say
that I am in full support of this ordinance,
and thank you to Alderman Napolitano
for bringing it before us.
Um, to those that were up here speaking earlier,
I saw the pain in your faces.
I heard the pain in your voice,
and I just wanted to say I'm very sorry for your loss.
You have my full support. Thank you.
Thank you. Alderwoman Silverstein.
Alderman Gardner, followed by Alderwoman Clay
Chair.
Thank you Chair. Uh, thank you to all the men Napolitano
as well for, uh, bringing forth this, uh, leg,
uh, ordinance.
Um, so I hear what you're saying as far as the city,
and I understand, uh, where you're coming from.
And I'll testify to the fact being a fireman for 14 years,
uh, that the city's program for layup is very giving
for those who choose to use it.
Um, I have seen many people use it.
I've seen some people unfortunately abuse it,
and I'm sure anybody could, could probably say the same.
Um, now you said this should be a part of CBA with the city
and local two, is that correct?
You were asking us earlier to defer it,
or when you first came out when you were
talking. Am I correct or
No, to, to clarify?
Um, what I had suggested is that the department be permitted
to make a policy the same way the police department had made
a policy in an order on how to handle the situation.
Um, that, uh, just like with police, anything
that needs changes need to be bargained with the union.
But should you pass the ordinance,
should the full city council pass the ordinance,
it would still need to be bargained
before it was put into place.
Correct. So I, I know Local two is currently,
or firefighters are, are currently without a contract.
Now, how many days does that President Cleary
know over three years?
Three years. And is there any light at the end of the tunnel
and as far as your, no.
Okay. So that for me is, is the hard part
of, there is no light at the end of the tunnel as far
as saying, okay, this should be a part of, uh,
a collective bargaining agreement.
Um, and we are getting the answer
from the president from local two that's saying
that there is no, there's no movement,
there's not a deadline, there's not even a date or a goal.
Am I correct in saying that? President Cleary? Yeah.
Cleary, yes, you are correct. Okay.
Um, so with that being said, it's very hard to side to side
with or empathize with what you're trying to say.
And I, and I would believe my colleagues feel the same way,
Uh, ultimately, go ahead
and just, I, I think some clarification is necessary.
When departments, when employers make policy changes
that affect the terms and conditions of employment, it needs
to be bargained, but it is not part
of the collective bargaining for a contract.
For instance, when the police implemented their policy,
and I don't know whether or not they did, I, I worked
for the fire department, sure.
But when the police implemented their policy in, uh, July,
the FOP or the PPPA could have demanded
to bargain over the implementation of that policy,
or they could have accepted it outright,
and that would've concluded the bargaining.
A policy such as this can go into place
and be agreed upon by the union outside
of the collective bargaining over wages
and everything else that's on the table with,
with President Cleary and,
and the city there is, there is no mandate
that a change such as this, whether it be via ordinance
or department policy, be agreed upon separate
and apart from the rest of opening bargaining.
Right. I, I guess my, my concern is that in the midst
of doing that, of trying to agree on something,
God forbid something happens to another firefighter
or somebody else, and that we come
to this circumstance once again,
and we're having individuals, which I know too well in,
in the fire department, it's, it's, um, you,
you can say it's a pride thing.
You could say it's, um, um, it, it's very difficult, I think
for, uh, many firemen
and police officers probably the same, to say, you know,
I'm gonna take a day off, uh,
or I'm gonna take two days off.
And I would side on the air of caution of, of having it,
if it's in policy, where it's, it's mandated, uh,
for certain individuals to take these days off to, to,
to take the time that they may need for mental, uh, anguish.
Um, So I understand what your,
what your argu argument is,
and I know it's a, it's a difficult argument
because I don't think that there's a person in this room
that doesn't under understand the, uh, depths of, of
what a lot of firefighters
or police officers may be dealing
with when they do le lose a colleague.
'cause there's not too many professions
that have to deal with that.
But the problem is, is that in, in, in the meantime,
while we're trying to go tug play tug of war, God forbid,
as I said earlier, this happens again.
And now we're, we're dealing with firefighters
who are dealing with grievances
but are not taking the time off
and they're not capable to do their jobs leaving other
people, meaning residents as well, their jobs at,
at, at, at risk.
And that's, and that's where the hangup is. It
Ultimately, you're absolutely right. It is
an insanely delicate balance.
And again, from the department's perspective,
and remember, that's who I'm here on behalf of.
Um, I don't have the luxury of speaking on behalf of myself.
Uh, the, one of the concerns
of the department is that should this ordinance be passed
as it's written, that the member who would prefer
to grieve at the department at work to,
to bury themself in work to,
because that's how they want to go
through their grief journey, um,
is going to be robbed of that opportunity.
And, and that's again, why the department believes
that this is an imperfect approach
and that a department general order
or policy is a more appropriate way
because there's certain flexibilities
that can be written into that,
that are not included in the ordinance.
Yeah, I, I understand what you're saying.
And, and, and what is that old saying
of all I'm sure Alderman Irving could say, don't let,
don't let perfection to stand in the way of progress.
Uh, uh, uh, it, it, it's kind
of running along that same line.
And I think that's where the hangup is once again.
And I think the smart thing to do is to move forward
with this, which I believe a lot
of my colleagues will be doing today.
Thank you, chairman. Thank you.
Alderman Gardner, Alderwoman Clay,
Thank you so much to my colleagues,
uh, alderman Napolitano.
You know, we share a love for CFD.
My best friend is the first woman Ghanaian
firefighter in CFD.
Just got on maybe not even two years ago.
So I have had to learn a lot more about CFD.
And my hat goes off to you on so many occasions
because you are carrying the lives
of not just innocent civilians that you show up for,
but you're carrying the lives of your brothers
and sisters that you show up for each and every day with,
and you wanna get home to your families.
This, for me, has struck a nerve, not just for you all,
but it has also struck a nerve for CPD.
And I think I'm having a, a, a battle with myself here,
because I don't want us to continue to come back
and create these policies just for one offs, right?
I think that a universal policy should be looked at here.
Um, and it's something that I, I don't think
that you'll get any pushback from my colleagues here
that say, why don't we have a bereavement policy
for these one-offs?
Because your jobs are high risk jobs. What is our proposal?
Be it it policy decisions
or HR personnel decisions that's universal for folks
that are in these high profile areas.
Um, I'm deeply, uh, concerned at the lack of, um,
the EAP for also CCFD, um,
that is alarming
that you don't have enough counselors on site to care
for such a traumatic event like this.
Um, I am really inclined chairman to ask
that this behold held to look at a policy that is universal
for CFD and fire
and also police, so that we can make sure
that we are doing this together in collaboration
and not just putting one-offs on the books.
I'm totally in support of making sure
that a bereavement policy stands,
but I wanna make sure that
that looks universal for everyone.
Thank you. Wanna clarification? Alderman Napolitano?
Um, thank you, chairman.
Um, just to, to cover that topic really quick.
So the, the Chicago Police
Department helped me put this together.
Okay. They, they have their own already.
They think it's a travesty that we don't have ours.
Um, they didn't ask to be put into a universal policy.
Um, they said what they have is, works perfectly for them.
Um, they actually helped me create this based
off of their policy.
Um, so our goal is to right now, that would be great
to do in the future, but until the future,
if something happens tomorrow
or the next day, I don't think we should be waiting for
that day to, you know, to happen to, to hold it
and to do another, you know, put it in a universal policy.
Yeah. Well, and I totally agree with you
that something could happen tonight
and we're in a situation
where you don't have a perfect policy in place.
I think for me, I would just wanna do a little bit more due
diligence on my end,
and that's just me just being completely transparent
to learn more about CPDs policy.
Right. CFDs policy.
Is this something that we can, again, make sure
before we just push this out,
because we wanna make sure that it's right as much
as possible, um, that we can just have
that conversation one last time
before we get to a final decision?
Are, are you asking to hold this item?
I am. Is that a motion?
That's a motion. Alright.
I entertain a motion, um,
after we finish with public comment.
Thank you. Alderman Lopez.
Thank You, chairman.
I'm willing to wait for that motion
for my comments if you want.
I'm sorry, I'm willing to wait.
No, I, I'd like to move forward public, uh, with, uh,
questions and comments before we entertain.
Okay, fair enough. Uh, good afternoon,
gentlemen and members of the committee.
Thank you for allowing me to speak.
I'm not on this committee, but I wanted to one, uh,
vocalize my support for the efforts of all
of the co-sponsors, um, of this
as I'm sitting here listening to this
crazy conversation we're having today.
And it is crazy to, to have an expectation
that people in their worst moment are gonna
voluntarily know to ask for help.
Um, a couple questions I have for the fire department.
First off, you said this was, uh, an improper,
imperfect, how did you characterize this ordinance?
I'm sorry, alderman Lopez. What was that,
um, question for, how did
You, how did you characterize this ordinance?
If I, this Evan Ham, the general counsel
for the fire department, alderman Lopez.
I apologize. I don't remember exactly what I said,
but I, I believe I said it was an, an imperfect measure.
An imperfect measure. Okay.
So this ordinance was introduced 299 days ago.
How many times have you the department?
Uh, our law department
and my colleagues met to discuss how
to make the imperfect more suitable?
Uh, I don't remember the exact number.
I've had numerous conversations through the IGA as well as,
um, directly with Alderman Napolitano.
Um, when the CPD policy was put in place, he, uh,
did me the courtesy of sending it to me.
I attempted numerous times to engage with him
and for reasons that are beyond me, was unable to.
So, in listening to you today, it sounds as
what makes this imperfect is that it requires,
in your estimation
and what the ordinance says, it requires
a firefighter to be required to take a day off
when one of his or her coworkers is killed in a line of duty
or commit suicide.
And that somehow is going to be too arduous an ask.
Am I correct in that assumption?
I think you're mischaracterizing what I was trying to say
Then. Would you care to clarify?
Because I heard
that numerous times today,
so I wanna make sure I'm
understanding what you're trying to say.
To some extent, it takes the decision out
of the member's hands entirely.
If, if I suffer a loss
and I want to go to work the next shift by this ordinance,
I would be un that would not be permissible.
So then my assertion was correct that
because it requires that the employee, the firefighter,
take a day off when there's a death
or a suicide, that we're somehow doing a disservice to
that member, correct?
In part, yes. Okay. So then
as I'm reading this ordinance chairman, there were eight,
a total of eight shells listed, seven
of which deal with the employee.
So what if this were to be amended on its face to say,
shall at the concurrence
of the employee at every single one of those instances, does
that make this more suitable?
Shalls will be, Well, I thought about that.
The idea of going from Shell to May,
but may puts us in a position where commissioners
of the future can do whatever they want.
This, I think if we say shell with the concurrence
of the employee, gives them the option,
gives them the opportunity to not have to ask
to be given a day off.
And if they don't wanna take
it, then they don't have to take it.
But otherwise they get that same opportunity.
Would that fix your legal, your issue?
Uh, to be clear, not my, not my legal issue,
but I think what you the ultimate is suggesting
could address some of the issue.
Yes. But it does not address the issue that you have as
Alderman Clay pointed out.
One policy for one department. Nope. I
I get that part. Get that and
Allow the police department to make their own policy
that could be rescinded tomorrow.
Well, as of today,
we are talking about the fire department,
and as of today I am, I would
entertain a motion from a member of the committee
who if they wish to amend the
seven shalls starting at a, a one on down to include shall
under with the concurrence of the employee so
that this would, there thereby satisfy the issue in question
of whether or not you're forcing someone to take a day off
Alderman Lopez. We, we
do have a, a pending motion that I'm gonna recognize,
um, before we move on to our last speaker, but,
But that's fine. Chairman,
I'm just leaving that motion out, out there.
I can't make it. Um, but I'm leaving it in case anyone wants
to make it because I think if that is the,
the primary hangup
that we're somehow denying someone the right to not work,
um, then I think that would be a, a
suitable remedy for this.
I could second that motion.
Thank you. Thank you. Alderman Lopez. Um, alderman Mosley.
Action. Thank you Chair,
and thank you to Alderman and Napolitano
For this ordinance.
Uh, I wanna get some clarity on looking at, um,
section one A two, I guess it, no, uh,
a one, uh, any member of the UniFi Uniform Service assigned
to the firehouse of the deceased member
of the uniform services on the day
of such death shall be put out of service for the remainder
of the day such death occurred.
Is that the entire house or is that just a shift?
Peloton, That is a shift.
And that's how it's read and understood.
Just wanna make sure there's no, uh, mis confusion
or confusion about that, that it's not the entire
engine or house.
That's how it's written. It's, it's the shift
and we work in different shifts.
So, I mean, it would only be proper that the shift that was,
that worked with that firefighter is the one that's out
And from union and department's perspectives.
That's how you all read it, or,
Hey, clearly Yes.
E Evan Ham. I think there, now you're asking a
how is the statute to be interpreted question.
And I think one of the issues that you've brought up is,
at times members of a firehouse who are assigned
to a firehouse are detailed to another firehouse
for staffing purposes.
And to some extent, I think the ordinance does, would leave
that question open is that if the five of us, or
or six of us started the shift,
but one of us was sent to another firehouse
and then one of the remainder were to have suffered
that end, how would it have,
how would, should it be applied?
Should it be everybody who was at assigned
to the firehouse working that day?
Or is it everybody actually in the firehouse?
I, I don't know because I'm not the author.
Uh, I think that, but I think your interpretation
is, is accurate.
And I'm asking 'cause I wanna make sure,
like in terms of coverage.
So how would we cover an area
and giving folks time that they need off?
What does, what does that look like?
Wait, Clarification, chairman, you'll require
Hold, hold on, lemme call on you first.
Alder, miss Sdo for the point of clarification.
Now point of clarification.
If you have five guys in the Firehouse center,
often there's nobody to go there.
The city would rehire five people to,
to run that house for that day.
Thank you Alder, miss Vado.
Okay, I'm just making sure,
'cause I know I, I receive a lot of emails about downgrades,
a LS downgrades and so forth.
I wanna make sure that we have proper co coverage.
Um, some of the calls that you heard my colleagues raise was
what does the other mental health services look like for
our firefighters?
Um, I know there's been some programs particularly
through the libraries, uh, particularly the one on Damon
that was set there for the proximity
to a large population of firefighters.
What other mental health services are available to our men
and women fight and fighters?
I almond I think it's gonna be, not to misuse the term,
but it's gonna be an imperfect answer, is that the,
the fire department and the police department each have
their own on staff EAP.
Um, it currently there are, um, is it four or five clinic?
Five, five clinicians And a supervisor is also a clinician
that are available to CFD uniform members.
The remainder of the city employees, all 13 plus thousand
of them have one mental health professional at
their, at their disposal.
Um, if there are instances where, uh, this,
the fire department's EAP is overwhelmed with, uh, need
for help, they do rely, um,
and ask to rely on the help from
the Chicago Police Department.
There's a certain reciprocity
between the departments when there is a greater need
for mental health, um, assistance.
Got it. No, I, I mean, uh, the 21st award was one
of the awards that was, uh, severely impacted by the loss,
the, the tough year that the fire department had last year
with the loss of, um, uh, uh, Jermaine PE Jr.
Engine one 15.
So hope that we can come together
and figure out how we can get the firefighters, uh,
the support that they need. Thanks.
Thank you, alderman. Pursuant to Rule 59,
Alderwoman Lee has requested to attend the remainder
of this, uh, this committee meeting by remote means.
Can I get a motion for that approval?
So moved by Alderman and Mosley again.
Um, all those in favor say aye. Aye.
All those opposed an opinion of the chair. Aye, have it all.
The woman Lee will appear, um, with the remain, uh,
the remainder of the meeting, um, via remote means.
Um, before we move on to, um, uh, all woman Clay's motion,
uh, lemme just say, I, I completely support, uh,
this this ordinance, um, as a, uh, 23 year veteran of,
of the Chicago Police Department.
I, I see the need for not only me mental health treatment,
but mental health education with our first responders.
Um, and, and so I'm completely support supportive of, um,
being able to, um, assist our firemen
and our police officers in any way that we can, um, toward,
uh, not only just education, but treatment.
Uh, we have a better respondent, a a better first responder.
Um, we, we can make sure
that their wellbeing is being taken care of.
And so I compl I completely support it for that reason.
Yes, there are gonna be some that, uh, uh, that want to go
to work the next day because we all different, uh, deal, uh,
deal with grief differently.
We do, some of us, we work through grief.
Uh, some of us cry, uh, but some celebrate
because of, uh, uh, you know, they know
that there's no more suffering for them.
And, and so with that reason, I support this ordinance
because I understand that, um, we need
to support our first responders, our fire off,
our fire firemen, as well as police officers,
um, alderman Irvin.
And then we're gonna take a vote.
Oh, thank you Mr. Chairman. Uh, uh, the point that, uh,
uh, alderman Lopez raised as a, as a friendly amendment
to this, uh, to this ordinance, uh, did,
Were you, I'm sorry, Altmeyer, can you repeat that?
The friendly amendment that Alderman Lopez, uh,
recommended for this particular ordinance.
My question is, was that something that, uh, the maker
of this ordinance was in support of doing?
Or, or not? Just as a point of just for the record.
Yeah. Um, and I was gonna cover that after,
because if, if we get it out of, get it beyond this, um,
this motion to hold it, um, in committee,
then we'll address the,
the friendly amendment,
yes. In supportive of it. Oh,
Okay. Alright. Okay.
Okay. That's fine.
And I'm, I'm gonna say this. Uh, and,
and generally, uh, I, I do believe that this should, uh,
be addressed as, as a policy of the department that, um,
'cause you all know and understand
the nuances and everything.
However, uh, the point that was raised, that this is
language for over 200 days, uh, the department has
to do a better job of addressing those particular issues.
'cause again, uh, we should not as a,
as a legislative bo body have to legislate this level
of a rule to this level of minutiae, uh, in the department.
So, uh, I'm hopeful that not only did the fire department is
listening, but other departments are listening as it relates
to, uh, certain work rules
or change that, that are being
brought to us to be dealt with.
So again, uh,
this really should be addressed in a different manner,
but I do understand the reason, the rationale as
to why it has landed here and, uh,
and our, our ability to act on this
and the need to act on this.
So, uh, with that being said, uh, you add two motions and,
and, uh, we can dispose of those.
I thank you. Uh, pursuant to rule 59,
alderman Mitchell has also requested to attend the remain
of this committee meeting by remote means.
Uh, can I get a, uh, motion for the approval
of Alderman Mitchell?
So moved by Alderman Mosley.
Again, all those in favor say aye. All those opposed nay.
The motion carries. Alderman Mitchell will be added,
will not be added, but will be able to, um,
attend the remainder of this committee meeting
by remote means.
All right, uh, we have a mo motion
that the chairman is recognized, um, that's on the floor,
a motion by, um, chairwoman Angela Clay
to hold this item in committee, do a
Roll call.
Roll call has been asked.
Uh, we a roll call.
A roll call vote has been, uh, been asked.
Alderman Robinson, alderman Hall. Alderman Mitchell,
I'm sorry, chairman, are you our yeses to hold and our
No. Yes. A
yes vote is
to hold this item A yes vote is the hold item in committee
A no vote is moved forward.
Alderman Mitchell, no.
Alder Alderwoman Lee, no.
Alderman Curtis Alderwoman Taylor
Alderman Mosley woman Ris No
Alderman Irving, no.
Alderman Cardona Alderman Spaza
PDO is a No.
Alderwoman Nugent, no Alderman Napolitano, no.
Alderman Knutson Alderman Gardner,
Alderwoman, clay, all the women Silverstein
al the mental Pharaoh votes A No,
there are 13 nos one.
Yes, the motion fails.
Uh, the next motion that's been be the next motion.
That's before the committee is a motion by Alderman Lopez
to, uh, to make a minor, oh, I'm sorry, chairman, chairman,
um, not chairman,
but the chief sponsor Napolitano, to make a minor amendment
to the language of the ordinance
that's been presented before.
Committee. Uh, if you can let us know exactly what
that language is, uh, for the record,
Um, I'm gonna change it to Shell
with the concurrence of the employee
With the concurrence or assurance.
You want this Concurrence.
Okay, shell with the concurrence.
And that'll be made in, um, several items
or several paragraphs.
Uh, the motion is to amend the, make the minor amendment,
um, to the ordinance with the, utilizing the language shall
with the concurrence of the employee.
A yes vote is in favor of that minor amendment.
A no vote is not in favor. Alderman Irvin.
Thank you Mr. Chairman. Okay, so, um, that would be
section wouldn't be section A,
but section A one A two,
A three, B one,
B two.
That would be it.
Yeah. B one and B two. And I, I think B three, I'm sorry.
Um, um,
C shell saying, no, you can't change right?
C Yeah, no, no, no. If you change, for example, in, in a,
you mean the person from EAP will show up at the
concurrence, the person from EAP shall
be required to just show up period.
I don't know if you want to, I don't think you wanna change
that portion of it.
Just the 1, 2, 3 and the one
and the two for, um, uh, the B section and the one
and two for one, two and three phase
Section. That's correct. We're excluding
A and we are excluding C
and we are excluding D if it, if it appears in D as well.
D, those B. Okay. All right.
All those in favor of
that minor change signify by saying aye.
Aye. All of those opposed say nay.
And the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it,
the ordinance and the record shall reflect
that there is a minor change to, um,
to those sections that were enumerated.
Now the last item on the agenda is the passage of,
and again, well, let me give Alem
and Napolitano an opportunity
to close on this matter before we go to vote.
Um, I'm gonna just ask my, uh, colleagues
to stick around for a couple more minutes.
Alderman Napolitano.
I, I, I actually had a lot more to say,
but I'm not going to because this is a movement that we have
to still get passed city council.
So, uh, I just appreciate every one of you in here, um,
and I appreciate all of your both sides of all this.
You know, we have to get it right.
Um, we always have the power
to amend later, whatever we get wrong.
Um, chairman, I can't thank you enough for getting, uh,
I appreciate you working with me through this as well
as all my colleagues as well. No problem.
Thank you Alderman. And, um,
before we, uh, vote on this happy birthday
to our colleague Alderman, Nicks Pado,
there being no further there being no
further questions and comments.
Uh, can we get a mo uh, motion
to pass item 2023 dash 6 4 4 5, the amendment
of municipal chapter two dash 36
by adding new section two dash 36 dash seven six
to establishing a policy
and procedure for bereavement leave following the death
of a uniformed service member.
So moved by. So moved by Alderman Cardona.
All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.
Aye. Nay, An opinion of chair, the ayes have it.
There be no further items before the agenda.
Can I get em on the agenda? So moved by Al Condo to adjourn.
All those in favor? Aye.
All those opposed nay in Opinionative chair?
The ayes have it. Before we adjourn,
the chairman recognizes, the chairman recognizes
President Cleary on behalf
of the Chicago firefighters and paramedics.
Thank you very much. Thank you. The meeting is adjourned.
Hi, uh, thank you for that. I gave that to.