Inventory or harassing behavior
and speech directed towards others is not permitted.
Disruptive behavior, including disruptive
or disrespectful conduct
during others' presentations is not permitted.
Banners, flyers or signage are not permitted.
Backpacks, large bags and sharp objects are not permitted.
Clear bags not tinted in color that do not exceed 12 by 12
by six inches will be permitted in our subject to search.
Health, food and beverages,
including in metal canisters are not permitted.
Cell phones must be placed on silent prior
to entering the meeting room.
Individuals must remain seated.
Public comments, speakers are permitted
to stand only when providing public comment.
Small handheld devices may be used only while seated,
and the user must refrain from interfering with the view
or hearing of other individuals.
Individuals or groups.
Failing to adhere to these rules will be asked to cease.
Such disruptive conduct
and failure to comply will result in there being subject
to removal from the meeting by the sergeant at Arms,
city of Chicago City Council.
Rules of Convict for Public Meetings 2023 to 2027.
Pursuant to the Chicago City Council rules of Order
and Procedure Rule 49,
the sergeant at ARM sets forth the following rules
of convict to be followed during the public comment period
and the duration of all committee and city council meetings.
Profane, vulgar, threatening, abusive,
or disruptive language is not permitted, demeaning,
discriminatory, or harassing behavior
and speech directed towards others is not permitted.
Disruptive behavior, including disruptive
or disrespectful conduct
during others' presentations is not permitted.
Banners, flyers or signage are not permitted.
Backpacks, large bags and sharp objects are not permitted.
Clear bags not tinted in color that do not exceed 12 by 12
by six inches will be permitted in our subject to search.
Health, food and beverages including in metal
canisters are not permitted.
Cell phones must be placed on silent prior
to entering the meeting room.
Individuals must remain seated.
Public comments, speakers are permitted
to stand only when providing public comment.
Small handheld devices may be used only while seated,
and the user must refrain from interfering with the view
or hearing of other individuals.
Individuals or groups.
Failing to adhere to these rules will be asked
to see such disruptive convict
and failure to comply will result in their being.
Subject to removal from the meeting by the Sergeant at Arms,
city of Chicago City Council.
Rules of Convict for Public Meetings 2023 to 2027.
Pursuant to the Chicago City Council rules of Order
and Procedure Rule 49,
the Sergeant at ARM sets forth the following rules
of convict to be followed during the public comment period
and the duration of all committee and city council meetings.
Profane, vulgar, threatening, abusive,
or disruptive language is not permitted, demeaning,
discriminatory, or harassing behavior
and speech directed towards others is not permitted.
Disruptive behavior, including disruptive
or disrespectful conduct
during others presentations is not permitted.
Banners, flyers or signage are not permitted.
Backpacks, large bags and sharp objects are not permitted.
Clear bags not tinted in color that do not exceed 12 by 12
by six inches will be permitted in our subject to search.
Health, food and beverages including in metal
canisters are not permitted.
Cell phones must be placed on silent prior
to entering the meeting room.
Individuals must remain seated.
Public comments speakers are permitted
to stand only when providing public comment.
Small handheld devices may be used only while seated,
and the user must refrain from interfering with the view
or hearing of other individuals.
Good morning everyone. Happy Monday.
The Committee on Finance is called to Order.
Today we'll be holding a TE Public Hearing
for the Thrive community.
Excuse me.
All right. Thank you for your patience.
We just needed to check on a on one thing.
Uh, today we will be holding a tougher public hearing
for the Thrive Exchange, south Invest Southwest Project
for which the city will issue multi-family, housing, debt.
The hearing will come to order.
We'll now have a roll call to establish quorum
Vice Chair Conway Alderman Lata
Alderman Hopkins, alderman Hall,
alderman Mitchell Alderman Harris.
Alderman Beal Alderman Lee Alderman Ramirez.
Alderman Quinn. Alderman Lopez. Alderman Moore.
Alderman Curtis Alderman O'Shea. Alderman Taylor.
Alderman Mosley. Alderman Rodriguez.
Alderman Scott Alderman Ccho Lopez.
Alderman Burnett Alderman Talia Farrell.
Alderman Cardona. Alderman Wapac.
Alderman Viegas. Alderman Sdo.
Alderman Vazquez Alderman Riley
Alderman Martin, chairman Dowells.
Here we have a quorum.
We have 16, uh, alderman
Silverstein Ramirez, Rosa Rodriguez Sanchez, Knutson Mitts
and Irvin have requested remote participation
for reasons stated under the provisions of Rule 59.
Can I have a motion to allow these alderman so moved by
Alderman Rodriguez?
All those in favor signify by saying Aye.
Opposed in the opinion of the chair.
The ayes have it and the motion carries.
I want to confirm that Alderman Silverstein, Ramirez,
Rosa Rodriguez, Sanchez, Knutson and Irvin are here.
Ramirez Rosa's here. President
Alderman Knudson.
Alderman Knudson's here. Okay.
Let the record reflect that this public hearing
that is being held pursuant to the requirements
of Section 1 47 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986
Notice of the public hearing was published on
October 16th, 2024 on the website of the Office
of the City, clerk of the City of Chicago.
Let the reporter mark the screenshot of such notice
as committee Exhibit number one for identification.
This is a hearing regarding the proposed plan of finance
to issue two multifamily housing Revenue Notes Series 2024 A
and B for the Thrive Exchange South Invest Southwest Project
herein after referred to as the notes,
the aggregate principle amount
of the notes outstanding at any time will not exceed
19 million 175,000.
The proceeds of the notes will be loaned
to Thrive Exchange LLC
and Illinois Limited Liability Company will refer to them
as the borrower to finance an affordable housing development
project, which we will refer to
as the Thrive Exchange Project.
The Thrive Exchange Project consists of one,
the acquisition from the city
of certain vacant land located at 79 0 9 South Exchange
Avenue in Chicago by the borrower,
and two construction
of a six story apartment building containing 43 rental
dwelling units and approximately 2,760 square
feet of commercial space located generally at 79 0 1
through 79 0 7, 79 0 9,
and 79 11 South Exchange Avenue in Chicago, Illinois.
The borrower will be the initial owner
and operator of the project DL three
Thrive Exchange, low-income housing tax credit,
south LLC, an Illinois Limited Liability Company,
who we will refer to as the managing member
is the managing member of the borrower.
And DL three Realty advisors, LLC
and Illinois Limited Liability Company is the sole member
of the managing member.
The city will issue the notes pursuant to its powers
as a home rule unit of government under the 1970
Constitution of the state of Illinois
and an ordinance adopted by the city council of the city.
The notes will not be a general obligation of the city,
the state of Illinois, or any political subdivision thereof,
but will be a special limited obligation of the city.
The principle of premium, if any
and interest on the notes, will be payable solely out
of the revenue of the Thrive Exchange Project
and other funds pledged
and assigned for their payment by the borrower In accordance
with the borrower loan agreement between the city
and the borrower, the notes will not constitute an
indebtedness or obligation of the city, the state
of Illinois, or any political subdivision of the state
of Illinois within the purview
of any constitutional limitation or legal provision.
No holder of the notes will have the right to compel
or ex any exercise of the taxing body of the city, the state
of Illinois and the United States of America,
or any political subdivision of any of them
to pay the principle of premium.
If any or interest on the notes written comments relating
to the plan to issue the notes must have been submitted
by email to the Committee on Finance not later than 12:00 PM
Friday, October 25th, 2024.
Let the record reflect
that no written comments were submitted.
Ladies and gentlemen, if any resident taxpayer
or other interested person attending this hearing desires an
opportunity to express their views for
or against the proposed issuance of the notes,
please do one of the following.
For those attending this hearing in person, please come up
to the microphone in the aisle when your name is called,
or for those who have called in on the toll free phone
number, please enter star nine on your phone
to notify the host of the call in number.
And once you are called upon to provide your comments,
please enter star six to unmute your phone.
Each speaker will be limited to three minutes.
Let the record reflect that there have been no comments
by phone and we do have a number of people
that have signed up for public comment
and we will get started with those.
Each of those individuals have three minutes to speak.
The first one to speak on this Tefra witness hearing
is Eduardo Chavez.
Yes, Almon. Mosley,
we have you and and Alderman Hopkins and Alderman Lee
and Alderman Waba and Alderman Scott.
Alderman Mitts as well. Madam Chairman.
Thank you. Alderman Mitts. We have you counted.
Rodriguez is here too. Um, chair.
Thank you Alderman.
You have three minutes Mr. Chavez.
Good morning. Just one small comment.
Um, the only reason I am opposed
to this in this current estate right now is
because I do believe that it should be the city's ongoing
commitment to be looking at this property,
not just a short term thing.
Um, in the short term mindset. Thank you.
Thank you. Our next speaker is George Blakemore,
The mixing of Money city money
with private money.
And as you was reading,
you see the city is not responsible for the notes.
So the federal government have gotten outta public housing
and then they're leading it up to the city.
CHA and CHA is getting outta public housing too.
It's just voodoo economics that you playing young lady
because let them
buy the property from the city.
Let them finance the property.
But, but no, you, you going, you always going to get slick
and do voodoo economics.
So it's only making the rich richer
at the expense of the poor.
So if, if the housing let, let him build those houses
and, and he can rent 'em out for whatever.
So the city
is CHA is now sleeping in the bed with these developers.
Uhhuh. That's called 69 in you.
All 69 down here.
Now here come Michelle just switching a little step out.
She's a part of the problem.
She voted for sanctuary two and you did too.
You supposed to be black.
You look black, you look real black.
I'm not a a a a fool by that, that blonde wig.
I know your hair is nothing like mine.
So we have to be selfish and advocate for our own people,
but we can't be sell out aunt your mama house ends
or still on the plantation.
The black man's problem is that he have fallen in love
with his enemy.
His enemy who's going to house all these illegal,
who's gonna pay for their schooling and hospitalization and
and medical care.
And then all that money comes from finance.
And this country was financed by black labor
and white wealth made this America great
black blood quit and kills
and you have audacity to to don't play the race card.
And you a black woman, a lady lady, pat,
do listen here.
You can't pass miss that blonde wig.
Your your hair's nappy.
Your nose is big, your lips are thick
and your other is black just like mine.
So don't be miseducated the miseducation
of a black man and woman.
You who do you think you are or who do you think we are?
Somebody is giving me more minutes and I'm loving.
Thank you Mr. Blackmore.
I'm so, I'm sorry Mr. Blake bore.
Thank you for liking my blonde wig too. Uh, Jessica Jackson,
This is what I do know.
This is supposed to be the Southwest Invest Project, right?
This is what I do know.
When I first started coming down here,
I started asking about that Southwest invest money
for the south side and west side.
I asked over and over again to have a meeting
with the black aldermen
and black Alder women to talk about our money
for the south side and west side.
That was earmarked by Lori Lightfoot.
I did a press conference on September 27th, 2023,
right in front of this building.
And it was about Southwest invest money that was supposed
to go to the e economic development
of the south side and west side.
When I spoke with Stephanie Coleman about that, she told me
that that money was a hoax.
That's what she told me.
Now all of a sudden y'all finding it
and you going to find it to house illegals
'cause Desmond Yancy and sat up here
and got in a contract
or something to sell South Shore out.
He told me outta his own mouth when I met with him,
he said South Shore is the only part of the city
where black people still live in large numbers by the water.
He said, in fact, I think it's that way all over the country
that South Shore is the only place
where black people still live by a large body of water.
He said outta his own mouth, if they get South Shore,
they got the south side.
That fool of a alderman turned right around
and gave it to him.
He sold out South Shore.
That's why he gonna get his short sought off self
outta that seat.
Y'all not going to build a bunch of projects In South Shore.
South Shore is a middle class working class community.
You not gonna bring a bunch of of illegals here
and build projects for them all over the south side.
They gonna go back to where they came from
and they gonna let that country get 'em somewhere to live.
Trump 2024 baby.
He ain't already said he going to do mass deportation
and he going do it 'cause he did it the first time he was in
office and he gonna do it again.
So how I can tell you developers don't get
to slinging them hammers too fast.
'cause this minute go down baby. Y'all done.
You gonna sit up here and move us out
and put film in the devil is a lie.
You better believe that Trump 2024 baby card
Wanna acknowledge Alderman Cardonas joined us for quorum.
Danielle Carter, you're next.
Danielle Carter.
So you all going keep ignoring us, right?
You all just going keep blatantly ignoring us.
So we sit up there
and asked you all to stop spending our tax money on illegals
to stop spending our resources on illegals.
We know that you all wanna take these, these our money
and put these houses up for illegals.
Nobody is talking about deporting illegals.
Nobody is talking about.
It's for the American citizens or Chicago citizens.
So we know what's going on.
You are taking, taking our tax dollars
and this is for the illegals.
'cause see, we own our homes. My taxes then went up.
See, we paying taxes for the legals.
And I keep telling y'all, I sit up there three times.
I done called in my neighborhood,
it's all down the block on every block.
They have entire restaurants outside selling hot food.
Now they getting free everything.
And now you all allow now to break the law
and have entire restaurants on the street,
all taxable income.
They not being taxed for that income.
So you gonna keep taxing us.
So we not gonna keep coming down here begging y'all.
That's over with. We are going to, and I filmed it
because I'm going to let America know what Kaela
America looks like, what the Democrat agenda looks like.
So since you all won't listen to us, the American,
American people, we won't Trump 2024
Chicago won Trump 2024.
And we're advocating,
and it looks like we're gonna turn it red
and what looks like Trump is going to be in office.
So now we're asking Trump to start with the federal level
that so-called black woman, she needs to be, we want her to,
we want him to throw her in jail for treason.
'cause she brought this to America.
She allowed this destruction.
And then after that, we, the people we coming up in,
we coming for that governor's seat.
We coming up in this mayor seat
and then these Alman seats,
y'all think we playing And I keep telling
y'all the same thing.
Make y'all laugh. It's gonna make y'all cry
because I be damn if my husband
and me gonna put 28 years, he's an officer
and we spend all our tax dollars
and you all gonna sit up there
and spend our money on illegals
who haven't paid a dime in this
system, I bet you that won't happen.
So Trump, if you listening,
because we going to DC next when Trump get in office
and we gonna talk to him
because black America, we done White America, Asians,
we all coming together, it's a wrap for y'all.
Just want to acknowledge Alderman Burnett,
who has joined us and will be counted towards Juan,
uh, Tiwan Sims.
It's um, Taiwan. Miss Doo, miss Doo.
So Martin Luther King had a initiative.
It was the Poor People initiative.
And I realize now Miss Dow is you're not paying attention,
but when you start speaking for poor people,
you hinder the agenda of the wealthy
and that causes problems.
So here we go. We have these individuals right here.
These are legal and grants.
She been here about what, 40 years a host of these people.
So, but understand that they have also paid into that tiff
that CJ Lopez wanna out of.
They put, they hard earned money into that.
They put they life blood into it.
They've been working in this country,
toiling in this country the same way black Americans have
the same way other immigrants have.
But see now y'all see black Americans
and all these other people descending upon legal immigrants
and y'all don't speak for 'em because y'all don't want to
because this is part of the agenda.
If we cause enough chaos
and disruption, we can keep the people ill-informed.
We can keep the people focused on themselves fighting
with themselves instead of pointing the finger
where it should be pointed at.
Y'all right there. Look out there.
These people have represented us into this bind
with they every consideration towards illegals
with they every considerations towards they own self
benefit and gain.
For every scheme that y'all ran during this little whatever,
it was time that y'all had to get this money,
just like the pandemic, that money,
all those little things was
to buffer the city and the citizens.
Instead, y'all chose to steal pip a and take
and now look where we at
to the point we had somebody coming in screaming at people
that they shouldn't be screaming at.
'cause they can't distinguish who they dealing with.
47,200 people.
How can I tell y'all, I can't tell all y'all Hispanic most.
That's all we, but to understand, it's not us against y'all.
Black Americans have been divested in this city
and y'all do it to the detriment of these people also
because y'all got now we started looking
and focusing on y'all.
Look, maybe it's y'all fault,
but we know where the fault come from.
Now see Joe Lopez, sit up. You done in this city.
That guy right there is done.
This is the, this is the chairman of housing.
How long have I been housed?
Ms Do when you came past me
and said, oh, we have housing for you.
That wasn't housing. That was the dilapidated church
on the north side of Chicago.
And which they intended to further disrespect me in this
individual because they wanna show me that they got power.
And I have no constitutional rights in my country. 44 years.
I'm not gonna scream and holler about it.
I gotta say it with dignity. My granddaddy fought for this.
All the liberties that y'all enjoy,
my granddaddy fought in the gray wolf for
and came back hurting.
I listened to 'em scream at night.
You people do not deserve to sit in any part
of city government.
You do not deserve to represent these people
because you all have abandoned us.
These people do not deserve what they getting. Y'all.
Ladies and gentlemen,
this concludes the public hearing on the proposed plan
for the City of Chicago
to issue its multi-Family Housing Revenue Notes series
2024 A
and B in the aggregate principal amount not
to exceed $19,750,000
for the Thrive Exchange Project.
Let the record reflect
that the public hearing on this matter was concluded at
10:30 AM
October 28th, 2024.
This concludes the Teer hearing
for the Thrive Exchange Project.
I'm gonna also want to, uh, acknowledge Alderman Hall,
who has requested to remotely participate today
for reasons under the Rule 59.
Can I have a motion to allow Alderman Hall so moved by, uh,
alderman Talia Faroh.
All those in favor signify by saying Aye.
Opposed in the opinion of the chair.
The ayes have it and the motion carries. Thank you so much.
Thank you. Alderman Hall.
We will now have a roll call
to establish the finance committee meeting.
Vice Chair Conway Alderman La Spotter,
alderman Hopkins Alderman Hall present.
Alderman Mitchell. Alderman Harris.
Alderman Beal. Well welcome
Alderman Lee Alderman Ramirez.
Alderman Quinn. Alderman Lopez. Alderman Moore.
Alderman Curtis Alderman. Osha Alderman Taylor.
Alderman Moseley. Alderman Rodriguez.
Alderman Scott Alderman Ccho Lopez.
Alderman Burnett. Alderman Irvin. Talia Farrell.
Alderman Cardona.
Alderman Wapac Alderman Rodriguez Sanchez.
Alderman Ramirez. Rosa, I know you all are virtual.
Um, alderman Viegas Alderman MIT
Alderman Sdo Alderman Vasquez.
Alderman Riley Knutson's, virtual
Alderman Martin Alderman Silverstein.
Yes. Alderman Lopez.
Thank you Madam Chairman. Just as a point of order,
how many members are here in person?
We need three more. Alderman Rodriguez.
Well, I counted you. Alderman Moore. I counted you.
Alderman Scott.
Mm-Hmm.
Alderman Harris. Who else?
Who was? Okay, so we have a quorum 15
Alderman Silverstein, Ramirez, Rosa Hall, Rodriguez Sanchez,
Irving, Knutson
and Mitts have requested participation today
remotely under the provisions of Rule 59.
Can I have a motion to allow these alderman to participate?
So moved by Alderman Talia Farrell.
All those in favor signify by saying Aye.
Opposed in the opinion of the chairs, the ayes have it,
and those alderman will be counted in this meeting.
At this time, we'll begin the public comment period.
This public comment period will be limited to 30 minutes.
Out of respect for everyone's time.
Each speaker is allotted. Three minutes.
The first speaker is Danielle Carter.
Moving on. The next speaker is Danielle Jenkins.
Ms. Jenkins, you have three minutes. Let's, let's go.
Uh, hello. My name is Danielle Jenkins
and I am in favor of the Pilsen tip expansion.
Um, I grew up in the Chicago area,
um, actually born and raised.
Um, lived in Minnesota for a couple of years.
Once, um, I became an adult, um, excuse me,
during my time in Minnesota.
Um, unfortunately I lived there
when George Floyd was killed.
And, um, my family experience a lot of, uh,
backlash due to that.
Uh, the police were constantly outside
of our home watching our home.
Uh, they were not there to protect us.
Um, they were there to make sure that we didn't do anything.
We were the only black family that, uh, lived in the part
of Minnesota, um, in which we, we lived in, excuse me.
Uh, because of that, we had to rapidly leave Minnesota
and come back to Chicago.
Uh, when I came back to Chicago, I stayed
with my mom for a while.
Um, also stayed in a shelter, um, with
my two daughters and my two granddaughters.
Um, and the shelter that we lived in, unfortunately,
there were mice, roaches, um,
just an extremely bad neighborhood.
And so we had to leave
and ended up going back to stay with my mom.
Um, and there unfortunately, it was quite a bit of violence.
Um, saw a lot of dead bodies, um, a lot
of shootings happening, um, in front of our faces.
And, um, I had to get my my family out of that situation.
And so eventually, excuse me, um,
excuse me, because of the, the danger, um,
and the fact that my daughter, um, my oldest daughter
and my, um, youngest grandbaby could not find housing,
affordable housing here.
They had to go back to Minnesota.
But my family, um, my daughter, my two daughters, I'm sorry,
and my granddaughter, my oldest granddaughter were fortunate
enough to find housing at the Resurrection Project
in Pilsen.
And once we found housing there, um,
it became a, just a beautiful theme.
My daughter and my, uh,
granddaughter both attend Young Men Elementary school,
and we have found, um, just a family environment there.
We don't have to worry about violence.
Uh, we don't worry about mice and roaches.
Um, the management is great.
The school is is great,
and it is just been a benefit just overall having to have
that opportunity to be in a place where you can go
and sit outside and not worry about, um, getting shot at
or, um, just being able to sit outside and just be at peace
and, excuse me.
Um, and so just going up in, in Chicago, uh,
being on, in the Austin area, which is
where we lived at in the shelter for a while, um,
being on the lower West side, which is where we stayed
with my mom and now being in the Pilsen area.
Okay, sorry. Thank you.
Thank you. Tiwan Sims.
Moving on. Josephina Avila
Town, alderman, WABA, alderman, osha,
and Vice Chair Conway as part
of the finance committee meeting
Eno, the admin and Alderman Mitchell
Eno, the admin, Jose And Alderman Riley.
Excuse me. Ms. Josefina. Ms. S Mento.
You can, uh, yes. Alderman Beal
What For the RA hearing,
so I just wanna make sure you, you got me on
the roll. Is it for that as well?
Uh, thank you. We'll count you towards Quorum on that.
Ms. S
Okay.
Just gonna translate for her.
Uh, for Josea Aviles, um, she's lived in Chicago
as an immigrant for many, many years.
For three years, she lived in back
of the Yards on 51st Street with a family
who offered her a small board.
In exchange for work, they had a flower shop,
and in that room, they kept all the merchandise
and she moved to a sofa for three years.
She worked from 9:00 AM to 7:00 PM seven days a week
and never received a dollar.
She decided that she needed to try simply go to church,
but the family removed her from the premises.
She found Resurrection Project
and lives at Casa Marvia in Pilsen on Morgan Street,
and is very happy to be able to live in a safe
and healthy environment.
And she encourages more opportunities for other people
to also have this access to decent
and affordable living in our community so
that they can too feel safe and feel at home.
Let us pass the Tiff expansion for Pilsen. Thank you.
Thank you. I want to acknowledge, uh, alderman Martin,
who's joined us for Quorum
and Alderman Nugent, who's a non-member, who's also here.
Our next speaker is Victoria Marto
Mareno.
I'm just going to translate
for her name is Vivic Victoria Marufo.
She's a proud leader and parent at Cooper Elementary
School in Pilsen.
She is fighting for the expansion of the Pilsen Tiff so
that her school can get air conditioning in the gym so
that her school can get access to, uh, security cameras
outside where violence has occurred.
And we students have been in danger.
She is fighting for this opportunity to a,
have a decent playground.
The playground that exists at Cooper School is in a very
dangerous space and has had to be left unused.
If we pass the PIL scientific expansion, we can provide
for these robust additions
and improvements so that our schools get access
to decent infrastructure and a better future.
Thank you. Javier Ruez.
Hello. Okay.
Uh, yeah, even though it's not on the agenda,
I'm coming here, um,
to speak against the PIL Scientific expansion.
Uh, since the last meeting,
it looks like the city's financial outlook
for 2025 still hasn't changed.
Uh, we still have a deficit in front of us
unless there's some new information
that the public doesn't know yet.
Um, but the Pilsen tip expansion will take away almost
a billion dollars away from the city's tax base
and make the deficit worse.
Add that on top of the new Board of Education,
possibly taking out a $300 million high interest loan.
Now that's a recipe to increase
everybody's property taxes here.
Um, just to cover the CPS loan
and the pils Scientific expansion.
Um, in addition to that,
the city hasn't even gotten a 2025 budget proposal yet.
Uh, how will the TIFF expansion factor in
to the 2025 budget?
Does anyone have that information available?
Uh, how could we proceed
with the TIFF expansion without first seeing
that budget projection?
Um, so I mean, we all know, like the TIFF could fund,
you know, good things here and there, right?
We know we all wanna fund Cooper.
We all wanna help out the schools.
We all wanna board build affordable housing.
I don't think anyone here is against that.
But we do disagree with the funding mechanism, right?
We already have the bond program that could be used for some
of those projects, right?
Nobody's fighting against, uh, Cooper renovations, right?
Nobody's here against that.
But regardless of whether you're in favor
or against a tiff, uh, back in August,
the alderman's office promised
that they would host a voting process
to see if the community was in favor
or against the TIFF expansion.
The process was initially scheduled
to be held from September 9th to the 13th,
and then it was changed to the 16th,
and then afterwards it was just delayed indefinitely, um,
until the alderman decides when to conclude it, right?
Nobody has an election in perpetuity, right?
You have an election and
that's the day, and that's when it's over.
Nobody has an election forever or
whenever the host decides to end it.
So to date, the alderman still has yet
to release the results of his kangaroo court election,
despite promising the community,
he would release the results again,
no matter if you're against or for it, right?
We were all promised a voting process
to gauge the community's interest due
to these moving goalposts
and, you know, the financial, you know, deficit
that we face here in the city of Chicago.
Um, we feel that, you know,
this PIL tip expansion should not go through.
Um, the community has already spoken, right?
We've been collecting petitions out in the neighborhood,
talking to neighbors, right?
They've all generally say they're against the PIL tip
expansion because of, you know, budget crisis, you know,
property taxes increasing, et cetera.
Um, so I'm just here to reiterate what I said last meeting.
No Pilsen tip expansion.
Next speaker is Mar Maria Miranda.
Good morning everyone. My name is Maria Miranda,
and I've been a resident for Pilsen for about 13 years.
Um, also the owner
of two family owned businesses on 18th
Street TM locker room.
It's a nail salon, uh, which I have operated
for seven years, and Golden Guy Sushi Restaurant
Open for three years now.
And I'm here to support the chief expansion
because small businesses are urgently
needed in our neighborhood.
Currently many storefronts, seed, bacon,
and for decades, Pilsen has been underfunded Pilsen.
Um, each year, commercial rents
and taxes continue to rise,
putting pressure on small businesses.
As a business owner, I have faced challenges in accessing
capital from banks often
because either I don't have enough
employees or high sales volume.
And I have watched other
businesses close for similar reasons.
And it's discouraging.
Latino women have put a new face into Pilsen small
businesses as many of our neighborhoods,
businesses are owned and operated by women,
as small businesses are more than just storefronts.
We provide a stability.
We provide jobs, we provide training for local residents.
We create a spaces where neighbors connect
and local culture is celebrated.
We are often the first to give back, whether
through supporting local events, community, uh,
members donating to school, or hiring, or mentoring too.
We are the heart of Chicago.
Contributing to the city vibrancy
and ensuring that our culture heritage is preserved.
My goal is to expand my business
and open a nail school to teach skills
to students from JU High School.
I also hope to eventually buy a building
so I can invest in ownership instead of paying high rent
to large developers by owning spaces
as small business owners can reinvest in the community,
ensuring that benefits of our work stay right
here in Pilsen neighborhood.
Now, just to be fair,
we just want our high taxes to stay in Pilsen.
We are not a liability here.
We're not here to take from other people.
That's a scarcity mentality.
We're not here to take from other neighborhoods.
So to our community that we know, we, we,
it deserves to retain taxes.
We pay, we preserve our culture
and works as a better future.
Thank you so much for your time.
The next speaker is Elias Zepeda.
Uh, good morning. My name is Aliyah Zepeda.
I'm a lifelong resident of the Pilsen neighborhood.
My family moved there from Mexico
and Puerto Rico in the 1950s.
And I'm also, uh, currently the executive director
of a small nonprofit organization called
Pilsen Defense and Access.
And that funds a, uh,
mixed martial arts community center in the ward there on,
on 21st Street.
Um, we've also worked directly
with several public schools since we opened in 2017
to provide onsite training for kids.
Grades, uh, two through 12, a hundred percent
of our children, family members.
'cause we have adult programming as well
that feeds into the kids funding.
But a hundred percent of our children,
family members receive scholarships to train
and compete in Brazilian jiujitsu.
And we believe we provide sorely needed safe
after school space for kids to study, do their homework,
enjoy our reading library, uh,
and train in the martial arts that help develop their, uh,
violence prevention skills, teamwork skills,
leadership skills and, and exercise.
Um, we're, we're proud of what we do,
but we have a wait list right now, um, just
'cause of, uh, of, uh, you know, we're trying to grow
and get more resources
and, um, there's a lot of demand from the families that,
that have, uh, come to trust us and what we provide.
Um, so, you know, as for what it's worth
as a lifelong resident of, of Pilsen as well, I've,
I've personally never seen, um, a more informative,
engaging, and thorough, uh,
policy consideration process at the, at the ward level.
So that's something that I appreciate.
I see not just big developers at the, at the meetings,
uh, but just regular people.
Like we have dozens here, um, learning
and trying to get information.
So I'm in pay, I'm in favor of the,
the PIL Scientific expansion.
Uh, and I hope that the committee
and ultimately the city council decide to approve it
because it could help a lot
of our family stakeholders improve their homes.
Those who are homeowners, um,
get much needed improvements in the schools
where just a few blocks away from Cooper, uh, for example.
And, um, and give community organizations like ours
more direct access, uh, to funds we can use
to expand services and the families of Pilsen.
You know, I, I'm, I'm all
for using public bonds, uh, as well.
Um, but, uh, I think my understanding is there's,
there's limitations to, um,
their use at the ward level for public work.
So to us, this is really about, um, self-determination
and more direct access to government
and the funds that we've been paying into.
Thank you for your time.
Our next speaker is Victor Lugo.
Uh, excuse me, Vicki Lugo.
Good morning. My name is Vicki Lugo.
I'm a lifelong Pilsen resident and community activist,
and I remain deeply connected
and committed to its wellbeing.
Today I stand in opposition against the proposed expansion
of the Pilsen TIP District.
This proposal is just a bandaid
to the underlying problem with property taxes.
Our broken tax system.
It's unacceptable that property taxes can skyrocket in
to 46% in a single year for one community.
While billion dollar corporations like Trump receive billion
dollar tax refunds, we need property tax reform,
not an expanded TIFF district
that will drain much needed money from across our city
and county Supporters of the TIFF expansion claim
that this proposal won't affect school funding.
But that's a lie or willful ignorance.
Diverting $1 billion away from the city's general budget,
which funds essential services like schools
and libraries, is a disservice to all Chicagoans.
While tip dollars are allocated for infrastructure needs,
they don't cover essential educational needs
or salaries, which are supported through the general fund.
Furthermore, it's outrageous to expect a neighborhood
to shoulder the burdens of inadequate utilities
and other infrastructure needs.
These issues shouldn't fall on Pilsen's homeowners.
They are the city's responsibility
to label these deficiencies as needs is misleading.
It's more like blackmailing
to the community into paying for services.
The general fund should already be covering, expanding.
This TIFF district will inevitably cause the city
to raise property taxes yet again on all Chicagoans to cover
what is being diverted to the TIF fund.
Can our black and brown communities
who have been historically disinvested,
afford more rising costs?
This proposal pits communities against each other,
creating a hunger, hunger Games scenario
where communities compete for resources.
Where's the equality for all Chicagoans in this?
When my property taxes went up, I appealed, but was denied.
These rising costs are the ingredients that begin
to fuel displacement
and gentrification, pushing Chicagoans not only from the
city out pushing Chicagoans out, not only from the city,
but also from the state.
It doesn't have to be this way.
Mayor Johnson's Bond program already provides funding
for many other projects outlined in this proposal without
the harmful consequences of expanding the TIFF District.
Yes, we need solutions to help homeowners,
but not at the expense of the entire city.
To the alderman in this committee, are you prepared
to continue driving families outta Chicago
and the state fueling and exodus caused by rising costs?
At a time when we should be working
to keep people here in the city?
Are you willing to dig an even deeper hole in the city's
billion dollar budget deficit?
I urge you to reconsider this proposal
and focus on solutions
that uplift rather than displace them in the
communities you all serve.
Thank you.
The next speaker is Reverend Tanya Lazano Washington.
And the last speaker, while she's coming forward,
will be Andres Guzman.
If you can get prepared,
Peace, peace, and power.
My name is Reverend Tanya Losano Washington, founder
of Healthy Hood Chicago,
and pastor at Holy Ground Methodist Church.
You might know my name because I've been here
for the last three meetings regarding the pif,
the Pilsen Amendment.
You've heard from many residents already about the very real
needs in our community
and what we could do if the expansion is passed.
I do have an update since the last meeting.
As this amendment has continued to get deferred.
We have been hard at work making sure our community is well
informed about what is going on.
On October 21st, 2024 Healthy Hood Chicago, in partnership
with the Pilsen Preservation Collective
hosted, can you please be quiet?
Yes, I'm there. On
October 21st, 2024 Healthy Hood Chicago, in partnership
with the Pilsen Preservation Collective,
hosted a people's assembly focused on the TIFF Amendment.
Over 100 residents participated, and
after receiving clear information about the amendment
and its potential benefits, there was a unanimous support
for it from our community, which has been grappling
with gentrification for the past decade.
This amendment is a part of our preservation plan, a plan
to keep our people home.
I have attended several city finance meetings
where this amendment has been deferred.
I understand there are concerns among some elders,
but I want to emphasize that we
as a community have done our part by gathering input
and engaging residents in discussions.
It's important to remember that you
as elected officials serve the people who put you in office.
The community has made its decision.
Now it's up to you to choose.
Will you maintain the old machine tactics reminiscent
of Mayor Daley, where the voices
of the community are sidelined?
Or will you embrace a new era where residents are empowered
and resources are allocated equitably?
We are actively organizing hosting information sessions
and ensuring that our community's voice is heard regarding
how funds are allocated.
For too long, residents have not seen the benefits
of their taxes in their own community
and that needs to change.
The TIFF fund should be used
as Mayor Harold Washington intended serving the people
and addressing their needs.
Some expressed concern
that supporting this amendment may trigger demands from
other communities for similar resources.
But isn't that the essence of democracy?
Shouldn't we strive for a system
where all communities have access
to the resources they need?
We wanna see our neighborhoods thrive
and ensure that the systems put in place
to serve us are effective.
We are tired of the old strategies
that perpetuate gentrification and displacement.
Our goal is to support residents
and staying in their homes, in their own communities.
I urge you to act in favor of our community
and support the TIFF Amendment, honoring the legacy
of equitable resource allocation that was envisioned
by the people's Mayor, mayor Harold Washington.
Uh, Andre Suzman.
Hello? Hello, hello? Hello? Hello, hello, hello.
You can hear me. Uh, my name is Andre Suzman.
I'm a Pilsen resident
and I just wanna share y'all a story
of like this whole TIFF campaign and what I've seen.
Um, I remember receiving a TIFF letter in the mail,
and when I received that letter in the mail,
I was like, what is this?
What's going on? And I just remember a lot
of residents being upset.
They were very upset, a lot of people were upset,
and they were just like, didn't we fight this a year before?
Wasn't just supposed to be over.
So, you know, after that I showed up
to a community teaching session,
which basically explained how tiffs work.
After that, I, uh, went over to four TIFF sessions held
by the alderman Byron Ccho Lopez.
I basically read a lot of articles,
peer review journal articles on Tiffs.
I read three presentations from the 25th Ward office.
As they continue to update their presentations,
I've read another presentation by 25th Ward, IPO,
and I've also watched videos on TIF by Tom Reser,
who's the foremost expert on TIFs
after, you know, doing all this stuff
and also canvassing with neighbors, talking
with residents about a hundred or more.
Um, I could definitely say without a doubt
that TIFs are inherently racist.
They're exploitative.
They target black and brown communities.
They call them blighted. And what TIFs basically do is
that they basically deprive these neighborhoods of fundings
that would've gone to schools, libraries, and parks,
and puts it into a TIF fund.
In other words, tiffs are defunding our schools,
our libraries, and our parks.
The billion dollar TIFF expansion that the alderman wants
to do is basically gonna be a billion dollars
of defunded public services.
Um, at the end of the day, the people, the question we have
to ask ourselves is, is who is paying for the tiff?
We do Residents, residents will be the one paying tiffs,
not the churches, not the nonprofit
organizations who are tax exempt.
So this idea that Tiff will generate $1 billion
for the community is the truth is
that TIFF will cost the community $1 billion
because residents will be the ones paying for it.
Um, this tip expansion is
basically a gentrification measure.
You know, it was supposed to be on a vote on a finance
committee on September 16th.
It was delayed. It was supposed
to be on a vote on October 2nd.
It was delayed. It was supposed to be on a vote today.
It was delayed. So what, what is going on?
Like the alderman was supposed
to have this last TIFF session at Juarez.
He changed it. He was supposed
to have a community vote on it.
We still haven't gotten the results.
And now like he's saying that, you know,
it's already, it's November already.
We still don't have the results
of the community tiff vote on what happens.
And now, you know, on top of that, during the TIFF process,
you know, one of his, one of the people that was in charge
of his voting polls was telling people vote for tiff.
You'll be sorry if you don't.
That to me is voter interference right there.
So di see a pattern that's going on here.
Overall, basically residents
of Pilsen over a thousand have submitted,
signed physical petitions against the tiff.
2,100 plus letters have been sent
to elected officials against the tif.
On all the five TIF sessions,
community have voiced opposition to tif.
And at the end of the day, these are community voices
that don't deserve to be ignored.
So I'm against it. Thank
You.
This concludes the public comment period.
Uh, the committee did receive written public comments.
Um, excuse me, if you are gonna make noise
and act up, I'm gonna ask you to leave.
You are not part of this public comment period.
We had a lot of comments. I called Ms. Sims.
Mr. Sims, I called Ms. Carter. They weren't here.
You are not part of the public comment period.
We received comments in, written comments in favor of,
and opposed to the pill scientific expansion,
these were sent electronically to everyone.
We have a total of 11 items on the agenda this morning.
Item number one is from the Department of Law
of Communication, transmitting reports of cases
in which verdicts, judgments
or settlements were entered into for the month
of September, 2024.
That list was approved and of approved payments
and denials was sent to approve, was sent
electronically to everyone.
If there are no objections,
these will be placed on the omnibus
as during public comment is over.
Ma'am, as during previous committee on finance meetings,
we will begin the law settlement orders from
the Department of Law.
Today we have four proposed orders
authorizing the Corporation Council to enter into
and execute settlement orders in the following cases,
Ashley Pfeiffer individually
and as the supervised administrator of the estate
of Joshua Beal, and as the mother and next friend of JBJ
and JB Minor children
and next of kin of Joshua be versus the City of Chicago.
Officer Joseph Tracy, Sergeant Thomas Duren
and the estate of Ryan Kinsella.
Um, we will have this case presented by Carolyn Franzi.
Morning everyone.
As um, chair do mentioned this case, um,
is a fatal officer involved shooting it is Pen presently
pending in the Circuit court of Cook County.
In her complaint, Ashley Pfeiffer alleges that the shooting
of her fiance, Joshua Beal, was unjustified
and led to his wrongful death.
The claims in plaintiff's complaint against Officer Tracy
and Sergeant Darrun are wrongful death against Tracy
and Darrun Assault Survival Act against Tracy
and Darrun assault by Ashley Pfeiffer against Tracy
and Darrun, intentional infliction of emotional distress
by Ashley Pfeiffer against Tracy and Darrun, willful
and wanton Survival Act against Tracy
and Darrun Illinois Hate crime Survival Act against
Tracy Illinois.
Hate Crime Act by Ashley Pfeiffer against Tracy Illinois.
Hate crime, wrongful death against Tracy.
The claims against the estate of
Kinsella are Illinois Hate Crime Act, wrongful death,
and Illinois Hate Crime Act wrongful death.
The claims against the city
of Chicago are both based on the theory
of respondent Superior and,
and based on the actions of Tracy Darrun
and on the actions of, uh, Kinsella, Joshua Beal was shot
after a road rage incident following a funeral procession in
the Mount Greenwood neighborhood off-duty.
Officer Tracy was driving home from work
and was blocked by members of the Beal's family.
Firefighter Kinsella exited his vehicle to an, to attempt
to move the stop vehicles from blocking the road.
Kinsella then became involved
and was beaten during a physical altercation between him
and the members of the Beal's family there observed this
and intervened off-duty.
Sergeant Darrun was on his way to work and also intervened.
The incident escalated with allegations
that defendants used racial slurs against Beal
and the member of of Beal's family.
Joshua Beal ultimately pulled a weapon
and pointed it at officers result in the officer's shooting
Beal seven times, causing his death.
Ashley Pfeiffer Beal's fiance, who was present
during the incident and witnessed the shooting.
Ashley seeks damages for intentional infliction
of emotional dis distress separately from
the shooting incident itself.
She has since been diagnosed with PTSD as a result
of her presence at the shooting.
Beal has two young sons at the time of his death.
The damages sought in the death
of Joshua Beal will primarily be those customarily sought
in wrongful death actions.
Plaintiff will argue
that Beal's death caused his young sons immeasurable grief,
pain, and suffering, mental distress, loss of love,
affection, society, and companionship.
They have been deprived of the care, nurturing
and direction of their father.
Members of Beal's family will testify
that Joshua was a caring father who did what he could
to support his sons Joshua, who is now 11.
And Josiah, who is now nine.
Plaintiff has disclosed a psychological expert
who will opine that due to the loss of their father,
the boys will benefit from future therapy that could cost up
to $10,000 over the next two years.
The damages sought by Ashley Pfeiffer
for her individual claims will include
severe emotional distress.
She has been diagnosed
with PTSD caused by the shooting incident.
She alleges this affected her ability to work
and parent her children and her doctor.
Estimates future care will be required in the amount
of $350,000.
The law department recommends settlement in the amount
of $225,000 to save on the cost of defense,
which will exceed the cost of settlement in this case.
In June of 2024, shortly
before the trial date, plaintiff reduced her demand
and we ultimately reached an agreement contingent upon City
Council approval to settle the case for $225,000.
The outside counsel fees in order to try this case,
are approximately $475,000.
Further, plaintiff brings claims under the Illinois Civil
Rights Act, which if plaintiff were to succeed on any
of those claims, would entitle plaintiff
to seek attorney's fees,
which would easily exceed the settlement amount.
In this case. Settlement in the amount
of 225,000 avoids the costs associated with
outside counsel fees and also avoids the risks
of a jury verdict in plaintiff's favor on some, if not all,
of the allegations against the city and the officers.
This settlement is a financially prudent approach
to reach the resolution in this case that is beneficial
to the city of Chicago.
Thank you, Carolyn.
I wanna acknowledge Alderman Quinn and Curtis who joined us.
Um, alderman O'Shay, did you wanna speak to this?
This settlement is a gift.
It's a very ugly mark in the history of our city,
and I'm glad we're finally settling this.
Uh, thank you Alderman Spinado.
Thank you Madam Chair.
Um, sorry Caroline, I missed a briefing.
I know you missed me. So, um, was, was there any, uh,
suspensions here for the officers or anything?
Or anybody get any time or what happened?
What happened to the officers involved?
Byron, can you slide over a little for me?
So, uh, co found the shooting itself was justified
how Officer Tracy was, uh, suspended for a period of time
for possession of unregistered firearms.
So this was an off-duty incident.
Yes. Thank you. Thank you Madam Chair.
Thank you Alderman Ddo. Seeing no other questions.
Can I get a motion for approval of this item?
So moved by Alderman Lee. All those in favor?
All those posts in the Who is the no,
uh, alderman Lopez.
We will record you as a no.
The do pass recommendation with the exception
of Alderman Lopez voting no.
We'll report it out at the next city Council meeting.
Item two B Winni Chen
and versus City of Chicago et al, uh, in the amount
of $325,000 we're joined
by Carolyn Franzi from the Department of Law.
Yes, good morning Again, this is a federal lawsuit
that was filed by the plaintiff when Men Chen seeking
to recover damages arising from his injuries
after he was shot by Officer David Perez on
March 13th, 2018.
Also for his prosecution for aggravated assault of officers,
David Perez, penny Zito, Brian Ortiz
and Sergeant John Mosquera,
and a violation of his Fifth Amendment rights into
how he was interrogated.
Leading to his charges, plaintiff alleges claims
of excessive force, false arrest, supervisory liability,
federal and state malicious prosecution, violation
of his Fifth Amendment rights, as well
as a monell claim against the city of Chicago.
This matter is being defended in-House by the law department
of the members of the Civil,
federal Civil Rights Litigation Division.
The law department recommends the city authorize a
settlement in the amount of 325,000
to fully settle all the claims in this case.
Plaintiff is a Chinese American man
who lived in the 11th Ward, which is Chinatown.
His wife had called police to report a man with a knife
and then assisted the officers accessing the room.
Plaintiff was in, plaintiff was in a room alone with a knife
and hurting himself with a knife.
Plaintiff was having a mental health crisis.
Plaintiff did not speak English.
The defendant officers attempted
to take plaintiff into custody while shouting commands
to him in English to drop the knife knife and using a taser.
Plaintiff was given one command in Cantonese.
Plaintiff exited the room and was shot
after David Perez felt that he was a threat
to the sergeant standing next to him in the room.
Following the shooting, plaintiff was taken to the hospital
where he gave a statement to detectives
through a Chicago Police Department translator.
Plaintiff claims the statement was not freely
and voluntarily given and that he was under the influence
of medication and due to his mental condition,
plaintiff was subsequently charged with 12 counts
of aggravated assault.
He was found legally insane at the time of the incident,
and the judge found him not guilty on all the counts.
The criminal case was pending against him
for over five years.
Plaintiff is seeking damages for the shooting, the arrest,
the prosecution, including lost wages, medical expenses,
emotional distress.
If he succeeds on any one of these claims, he'll be entitled
to recover attorney's fees, which will be at least $500,000.
The Law Department recommends settlement in the amount
of $325,000 to avoid the risks
of going to trial on this case.
Thank you. Carolyn. Any questions on this case?
Seeing no questions is there, uh, ultimately,
Um, I don't have a question, but a, a comment.
Um, this happened in the 11th Ward, um,
before my time in office.
Um, and it was, uh, disturbing,
uh, to say the least.
Uh, when we received the briefing on this, uh, I,
I think the circumstances here really, um,
elucidate the need for good, um,
language accessibility when it comes to, um,
interaction with the public.
The, especially the non-native English speaking public.
Um, you know, I'll, I'll be voting in favor
of this settlement today.
Um, but I think it makes a a really solid point that we need
to continue, uh, to make sure that we have good practices
and, uh, policies in place, uh, where we're, uh, making sure
that uh, when we know someone doesn't speak English,
that we're making the efforts to get somebody
who speaks their language to communicate with them.
Um, especially in a case
where there is a mental health crisis going on,
which this was obviously a case of. Thank you very much.
Thank you Alderman Lee.
Uh, Alder Motion made by Alderman Lee recommending Due Pass.
All those in favor of the motion signify by saying Aye.
Opposed? And the, uh, alderman Lopez
and Moore and Quinn
and Riley bu the
due pass recommendation with the exception of those, uh,
uh, individuals.
So Alderman will report it out at the
next city Council meeting.
Item two C, a case of Morgan,
Kendall Howard versus City of Chicago
and Marcus q Smith in the amount of $400,000.
This case will be be reported by, uh, Margaret Mendenhall,
Casey of the law department.
Thank you Chair Engineer Marcus q Smith Entered an
intersection on a red light.
He was responding to a call for an ambulance assist
and hit plaintiff Morgan Kendall Howard's car.
Plaintiff then aged 21 claims, PTSD.
As a result of the accident, the Department
of Law recommends settlement in the amount of $400,000.
On November 24th, 2019,
engineer Smith approached the intersection of 75th and King.
The light was red for his direction of traffic.
Engineer Smith unsuccessfully attempted
to stop the fire engine
by pushing the brake to the floor floor.
Twice the fire engine struck Morgan's car
who drove into the intersection on a green light.
The engine then pushed Morgan's car into a bus shelter.
Morgan had to be extricated from her car
with the jaws of life.
Engineer Smith testifies that his lights and sirens were on.
While plaintiff says she saw lights
but did not hear sirens at the time of the accident,
the engine was traveling approximately 20 miles per hour
and Morgan was traveling 30 to 40 miles per hour.
At the beginning of his shift, engineer Smith smoked, spoke
to the engineer that he relieved, who told him
that the brakes had issues
and that they had to be pushed all the way
to the ground to work.
Engineer Smith informed his lieutenant of the issue
and the Lieutenant did not remove the engine from service.
Morgan was transported to
or transported to the hospital from the scene.
She was diagnosed with PTSD as a result of the accident.
Her medical records reflect that post-accident,
she has difficulty sleeping, fear of driving
and trouble being around people.
Plaintiff's pass, total medical bills are $13,000.
Morgan claims a total of between 10.4 million
and 12 million in future economic damages,
including loss earning potential and medical care.
The law department recommends a settlement in the amount
of $400,000.
Thank you, Ms. Casey. Uh, any questions on Ms.
Alderman Riley?
Um, thank you.
Um, Madam Chair, what profession
does the plaintiff engage in?
The, um, the plaintiff is a,
a part-timer substitute teacher with CPS
Part-time substitute teacher with CPS.
And what's the claim for Lost Future Income?
Sure. And I can provide more information about that.
Alderman. The claim for lost future income was between
total economic, just economic damages was
between 10 and 12 million.
But specifically the lost future income, gimme one second
to give you that number
Specifically.
The lost future income is valued at $4.8 million.
And I also alderman, I would add subsequent
to the disclosure of 10 to $12 million in economic damages,
um, the Department of Law did retain a private investigator,
um, to conduct surveillance on Ms.
Kendall Howard, and the results of
that surveillance were mixed.
It did show Ms. Kendall Howard driving like there were 11
days of surveillance on four out
of 11 days of the surveillance.
It did show her driving,
but it was driving to, um, mostly her place of employment
where she was doing part-time teaching at, um,
we did disclose those results of the surveillance to, um,
the plaintiff's attorney, at which point the demand was made
of 900,000 based
and based on that $12 million in economic damages,
and we were able to negotiate down
to the proposed $400,000 settlement.
Understood. Well, I appreciate all the extra
work that went into the case.
Um, my issue here is I'm having a hard time with the
economic damages that were projected
here for this individual.
Um, and then learning that a subsequent investigation, um,
by our counsel, determined that she is driving.
And if driving is one of the supposed barriers
to earning income in the future, um, that gives me pause.
So I'll be voting no Madam Chair,
but I do wanna compliment the law
department for their work on the case.
Thank you, alderman. Re,
any other questions related to this case?
Seeing no questions, alderman LaSpada moves Do pass.
All those in favor signify by saying Aye. Opposed?
So that was, uh, alderman Scott, Riley Quinn
Cardona, uh,
we reporting this due pass recommendation with the exception
of those alderman at the, uh,
city Council meeting on October 30th.
Case number 2D is Germaine Harris
as an independent administrator for the estate
of Lee Harris versus Richard Zule et al in the amount
of $4 million.
That case will be reported out
by Jessica Felker from the law department.
Thank you Chair. The law department recommends settling
this reverse conviction lawsuit for $4 million.
Lee Harris was convicted on
of the June 18th, 1989 fatal shooting an armed robbery
of Dana Fier.
His conviction was vacated
and charges dismissed on March 16th, 2023,
and he was released after approximately 33
and a half years in custody.
Harris filed this suit on September 28th, 2023,
alleging he was wrongfully convicted as a result of police
and prosecutorial misconduct.
He died approximately two months after filing suit
and his son, Jermaine, is now pursuing the suit on behalf
of Harris's estate in the underlying crime.
Here. Ms.
Fe had been shot in the back of the head
after withdrawing $400 from an ATM in the Gold Coast.
She died a couple weeks after the shooting.
This was a high profile murder
with an investigation that spanned months.
Lee Harris was known to two
of the officers investigating the murder.
He had been a confidential informant for them.
In unrelated matters, Harris initially spoke
to officers about a week after the murder.
Officers then informed him that there was a large reward
for information about the murder.
Harris said he had information
but feared if he gave it to the police he would be in danger
over the next few weeks.
He spoke to various officers in the investigation.
On multiple occasions, he gave versions of the events
that night of the shooting
and in filing this lawsuit, he denied that any
of those statements were truthful.
Harris's suit asserts that he was framed
with the police department
and, uh, the prosecution forcing him
to give false statements.
The police reported that in the first few weeks,
Harris told them that he saw two men in the alley near the
ATM at the time of the shooting Ford and Cheese.
He was taken for a polygraph that reportedly he failed.
Over the next few weeks, Harris interacted
with multiple detectives
and according to the reports, continued to implicate others.
In September, detectives drove him to the alley
where the shooting took place,
and it was reported that this was when Harris admitted
to being in the alley when the victim was shot.
The next day on September 8th, Harris was questioned
after he was advised of his rights.
Detectives reported that he then said that he saw cheese
and chuckle look and a third black
man rob and shoot the victim.
A prosecutor recommended Harris be taken
for another polygraph exam.
And in that exam, he was deemed to have told the truth.
After that statement, Harris was
provided housing by the state's attorney
and the police department.
He was given a small amount of money for
and groceries for his family.
Harris contends that this food, money
and housing was used to induce him
to give more false statements On October 13th, about,
uh, about four months
after the murder, Harris then told police detectives
that he was the third man involved in the
robbery turned murder.
He told police that it was Chuck luck who wanted to quote,
knock the broad, but he and she wanted to let her go.
Harris asked to speak to a lawyer and he called one.
The lawyer advised Harris not to talk any further,
but Harris ignored the advice and spoke to a felony review.
Prosecutor gave the same story
and claimed he tried to protect the victim.
He was allowed to go home about two weeks later
on October 26th.
However, Harris was arrested, advised of his rights
and spoke to detectives and a prosecutor.
Harris did not want his attorney.
He again stated that he participated in the plan
to rob someone, but he
and Cheese did not want her to be killed.
It was chuckle luck who killed her.
Harris's attorney advised him not
to give a ri written statement, so he did not.
He was charged with first degree murder and armed robbery.
Under accountability theory, again,
Harris disputed in his suit that he truthfully, uh,
he truthfully gave these statements.
He claims that his inculpatory statements were
falsified and fed to him.
On October 27th, the day
after he confessed, I witnessed Dana Cepi
identified Harris in a law
or in a lineup stating she was pretty sure Harris
was one of the perpetrators.
She had previously reviewed a lineup only a few days
after the murder and identified a man named Ronald Grant
as another perpetrator.
Grant claimed to have an alibi,
but his polygraph exam indicated deception.
He was a teenager arrested in another case.
Unrelated later said that Grant had confessed
to shooting a girl and robbing her grant's.
Clothing was seized from his home.
Grant, however, was never arrested or charged.
While Harris was in jail, a fellow inmate,
David Tolls came forward
and told the police that Harris confessed
to him while they were locked up together.
Toll said that Harris admitted to the shooting
and throwing the gun in Lake Michigan.
Both tolls and Cepi testified in the criminal
proceedings against Harris.
The defense attempted to show
that Grant was the perpetrator introducing
that Cepi had identified him.
Nevertheless, Harris was convicted
by a jury on March 6th, 1992.
In the years that followed, Harris continued
to challenge his conviction.
Polls recanted his testimony
and said he was coerced by detectives to give it further.
Forensic testing was done on the clothing recovered from
Grant, including his sweatshirt,
and was reported to be consistent
with a victim's blood type.
And there was gunshot residue found on the sweatshirt.
Cepi, who had previously stated
that she had not seen Harris in a police de station at any
time before she identified him,
has now testified in her deposition.
She thinks she may have seen him at the station at some time
before she identified him,
but not the day she viewed the lineup.
She states that she still does believe
that she properly identified Harris
and that she was not influenced by that event
when he brought this suit.
In addition to alleging his statements were coerced
and entirely false, Harris claimed
that he was maliciously prosecuted
and that evidence was fabricated.
He also claimed that exculpatory evidence was withheld
and the police and prosecution used pressure over months
and promises of money to get him to relent.
The law department believes settling this case
for $4 million is a cost effective resolution.
It is very early in this litigation.
The case is in the beginning of discovery.
If we settle now, we avoid the cost of a defense, which
to get to trial would likely be close
to $3 million in this case.
There is evidence that points to another suspect.
There's a jailhouse snitch who was recanted
and Cepi sticks by her identification.
But her new testimony that she sought Harris at one
of the previous times she was at this station will be used
to undermine her identification.
The fact that Harris is deceased make it makes it more
difficult for him to prove his case.
Harris was not deposed and cannot testify to his account.
However, Harris spent 33 and a half years in custody.
So there is a risk if this went to trial,
we would have a very large verdict at $4 million.
This settlement would be just under
$120,000 per year of custody.
The county is also a defendant, has not settled, at least
of now that we know of and is moving forward with discovery.
This recommended settlement is a fiscally
prudent resolution in this case.
Thank you, Jessica. Any questions from
members of the committee?
Seeing no questions, is there a motion to recommend approval
of item number 2D?
So moved by Alderman LaSpada recommending Do pass.
All those in favor signify by saying Aye.
Opposed in the opinion of the chair? The ayes have it.
Thank you Ms. Felker.
We will, yes. Uh, Alder mentality Farrell,
How many, how many cases do we have, um, that are pending,
uh, with Detective Zuli as the chief detective on that case
where there may be allegations
of torture? How many are pending?
Um, just to be clear, there's no
allegations of torture here.
Um, but there's two pending cases against Zuli of,
against the city of Chicago.
And are those cases involving allegations of torture,
of tortured confessions?
Um, I can check for you.
I don't know what the allegations are. You can do
That for me, please. I'd appreciate
It. And I, just to be clear,
I don't know
that he was the chief detective in that,
Or I should say not chief detective
or chief of detectives, uh,
where he was the main detective on that case. Correct.
I understand There is a person
that leads the investigation
and then of course you have the chief of detectives.
I'm not, I'm not saying he was the chief of detectives.
Correct. I I understood
that you were asking if he was the chief detectives on those
cases, and I just don't have that information, but I'll
Get it to you. Okay. Could you get that for me please?
Absolutely.
Thank you. Could you get that for you through the chair?
Uh, Alder mentality Farrell. Thank you
Madam Chair.
Moving on to item number three on our agenda from the
Board of Education, an ordinance
concerning the authorization of fee waivers
or refund for the Chicago Board of Education
and its contractors for buildings
and facilities used for public
or governmental purposes with annual reporting
of fee waivers to the Office of Budget and Management.
We're joined today by Jamele Chambers from CPS on
this matter.
Jamel,
Thank you. Good
Morning, alderman Moseley.
We'll count you towards, uh, quorum.
Good morning, chairman Dow
I, members of the Committee on Finance.
For the record, my name is Jamel Chambers, serve
as city Council liaison for the Chicago Public Schools.
I'm also joined by Benny Dye.
I, executive director of Capital Planning
and Construction for the Chicago Public Schools Vote
of Education is seeking and committee approval
for a one year renewal of the city's fee waiver ordinance.
This ordinate wa permitt fees.
This ordinate wa permitt fees
for the capital projects managed by the Board of Education.
There is no ch no changes, um, to the ordinance
and will require the board
to seek renewal on an annual basis.
This is a long, longstanding and standard city ordinance,
and the board has historically been exempt from paying most
city permit fees.
The ordinance would not impose any direct cost on the city.
The board will continue to to comply
with the applicable provisions set forth
by the municipal code.
All required permits
and licenses shall be submitted for review to the Department
of Buildings for o other appropriate, um, sorry,
or other appropriate city departments.
This includes permits required by buildings,
land, and facilities.
All construction plans shall maintain in compliance
with applicable provisions of the code.
Any rules duly promulgated there under Mr.
Chairman, this concludes my testimony.
I'm happy to address any
questions that the committee may have.
Thank you Mr. Chambers.
Any questions for members of the committee?
Alderman Viegas, followed by Alderman Lopez.
Thank you Madam Chair.
Um, given that the, um, CPS is gonna be a separate entity,
um, do we
typically allow permit waivers
for like Chicago Transit Authority, Chicago Park District,
et cetera, the sister agencies?
Or do they have to pay permit fees as well?
I have not seen a ordinance since I've been the chair
from either of those two agencies.
Um, but I do know that this particular
practice tradition dates back to around 2000
for CPS. Gotcha.
So is there a way to find out if those other
Agencies we can get that information through the chair?
Yeah, because, uh, given
that CPS is gonna be a separate entity, I wanna make sure
that there's, um, consistency
around the, the waiver of permits. Thank you.
Thank you Alderman Lopez.
Thank you chairman and good morning
members of the committee.
Uh, a couple questions.
What would be the estimated value of the fees
and permits waived on an annual basis?
Um, so for next year, we are anticipating, um,
a little under 800 million.
A little under. Say that again,
What? Sorry,
A little under, um, 800,000.
Sorry. Sorry.
You almost made my day.
And that's been consistent with
the past, previous years too. It's been around the same.
So roughly speaking, it's $800,000 in in waivers for
both CPS and contractors, correct?
Yes, sir. And this is for
year 2025 only, correct?
Yes, we do, um, annual renewals for, for this ordinance.
So it expires, it would go into effect on January 1st, 2025,
and it would expire on December 31st, 2025.
And is this, is this a So in reading this ordinance,
is this a simple waiver
or is this a, a refunding
of permits once they are paid?
It's a waiver. So there is no refund
because there's no, um, cost, um, sent over to CPS.
So what they do is they, um, kinda get an idea of how much
of, um, permit fees are gonna be, the fees are gonna be
for the permits, and then those costs are waived so
there's no transactions.
So then why does section three discuss, uh, entitlement
of refunds of city fees?
What is that in reference to then?
I think that that's in reference to,
and you are, I'm sorry. Please, uh,
Identify yourself for the record.
Hi, uh, my name is Ette D or Vinny.
I am the, uh, executive director
for Capital Planning Construction at CPS.
And if I'm recalling the ordinance right, it's
for in the event that we don't get the waiver and, uh,
or if it's not approved by the end of the year
and we incur fees, then it would be a refund
that we would get once the,
or assuming the ordinance gets approved.
Understood. And lastly,
there's a section
of this which discusses in the section one, um,
that for monies owed.
So it says the fee waivers authorized under the section
shall not apply in connection with any monies owed to
by the city to any third party.
Is that referring to contractors we owe money to?
Or is that referring to contractors who owe us money
and how, and conversely, how do we ensure that contractors
who owe us money are not slipping through the cracks, um,
and doing work that they would not have been able to do
otherwise if they were required to get a permit and pay
accordingly back what they owe?
Uh, that's a good question.
Uh, I am not sure,
but I can tell you for on our side, uh, we, we go
through all of the, um, uh, when we submit for permits,
we go through all of the planning
and all of the, uh, uh, with the city.
And so if there is an issue with a contractor
that is brought to us at that time,
and then they either have to fix it or,
or then they cannot do the work.
So is there anyone that could speak to whether
or not a contractor who does work for CPS,
um, and owes the city money?
How do we guarantee that the city gets that money
with this ordinance before being allowed to do work at CPS?
It's my assumption that if, if there is a contractor
that owes the city money
and is trying to get a, a waiver that they would not get,
that they would not get that waiver and
therefore would not be able to do the work
And Until it's fixed.
I guess my concern, Madam Chairman, is just,
that's not explicitly mentioned here.
So that makes me, unless I'm, unless I'm mis
unless I'm not seeing it
and if anyone would care to clarify that part.
But I want to make sure that if we have vendors
who are outstanding in city debt, you know,
that's a big topic of us for us chairman, um,
that they're not manipulating waivers
or opportunities to work at sister agencies, not just CPS,
but all sister agencies, um, when they would
otherwise have to pay us for what is owed
before they were allowed to proceed.
So, um, if there's a way that we can,
Well, what I'm prepared to do, alderman Lopez, is to, uh,
uh, check with the finance department, uh,
and with the building department on how they handle this.
If this is something that we need to close the loop on you
and I have an ordinance that we're working on now regarding,
uh, scoff laws, so to speak, uh,
and we can manipulate or,
or modify that ordinance
to address this particular issue if we need to.
Okay, I'm fine with that. Thank you, chairman. Thank
You Alderman Riley.
Thank you Madam Chairman.
Um, and I wanna thank Alderman Lopez
for asking most of my questions.
And it's noted that $800,000 in fees is
what we're talking about here.
You know, over the years at all of our budget hearings, um,
we've asked questions about how the city comes up
with the fees, uh, the fee schedules that it does.
And we're consistently told that the cost of a permit
is linked directly to the cost of administering the permit.
So whatever research, work, background checks, uh,
onsite inspections, et cetera,
are typically reflected in the cost of the permit.
And it's, um, I understand
that this may have been practiced since 2000,
but lots of things are changing, uh,
regarding the governance of CPS.
Um, obviously the state legislature made a move
where we're eventually going
to have an entirely elected school board.
And many of my colleagues
and I are frustrated that, um,
the city council has looked at as a financial backstop
when we have zero purview, uh,
or jurisdiction over budgeting or spending decisions at CPS.
And that's compounded by the fact that, um,
the city's general funds are owed a great sum of money
by CPS for pension reimbursement.
And I know that that's an issue
that still has yet to be resolved.
Um, but my concern is that this body is continuing to send,
uh, tax dollars that we control
and that we're responsible for to a sister agency
that is not at all accountable to this body.
Um, and frankly, uh, looking at the new board of education,
we all offer our views on it.
I don't consider that board to be a legitimate one.
And so my concern here is that
with all the uncertainty surrounding CPS
and its governance structure and the upcoming elections,
and then the full school board elections in just a couple
years, um, the city should not be in the habit
of bailing out CPS on the regular.
Um, if they're to be a their own entity,
they need to manage their house.
And so, um, I'm open to a discussion if, if, if there's
an appetite, um, to allow the city council some more control
and oversight of CPS.
Certainly we can talk about providing revenue streams there.
Um, but as someone who is looking at having to try
and balance one heck of a budget for the city of Chicago,
which is my job, um, the idea of sending out charity, uh,
is, is difficult to rationalize.
Um, my job is, is protecting the taxpayer
and these are the funds that, uh, we control.
So, um, that said, um, I'll be voting against this.
Um, and typically this is not something
that I would have an issue with,
but so much is in flux at CPS right now.
Um, frankly, I don't trust, um, the future
of CPS in the near term.
And so for me, I'm not willing to, uh,
to grant these waivers
to this sister agency. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, uh, alderman.
And since we've been doing this since 2000 at the very,
I think 2000, this goes back, um,
your question I think is a good one for our budget director,
uh, coming up in the budget hearings.
I'm sure she's looking at the various financial
entanglements that the City of Chicago has with CPS.
Um, and that's certainly a question I hope you will
pursue during that time. Alderman Spto,
Thank you Madam Chair.
Uh, thanks for being here, Jamel. Uh, just few comments.
Uh, kudos Alderman Riley. Great, great questions over there.
And Alderman Lopez, appreciate 'em.
Uh, but I only have two comments for you, Jamel.
So one is vote for Pedro,
and two, if you report back to the school board,
can you please remind them that 41
of us asked them to keep Pedro?
And that's it. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, sir.
Thank you. Alderman Spaza.
Uh, can I get a motion to recommend approval
of item number three on the agenda?
So moved by Alderman Mosley.
All those in favor signify by saying Aye. Opposed?
Uh, that was from Alderman Riley. Anyone else?
Alderman Viegas. Uh, we will report out the due pass motion
with the exception of Alderman Riley
and Viegas, uh, voting no at the next city council meeting.
I wanna go out of order since, uh, CPS is here.
Uh, they don't have to come back
and take item number eight, which is, uh, the de
I'm sorry, it's not item number eight.
It's item number seven.
From the Department of Planning and Development
and Ordinance, authorizing the authority to enter into
and execute an IGA
or intergovernmental agreement with the Chicago Board
of Education for provision of tax increment financing funds
for improvements at Chicago Vocational Career Academy High
School, located at 2100 East 87th Street in the eighth
Ward in an amount not to exceed 500, excuse me, 5 million.
We're joined today by Jamal Chambers, Sean Newt,
and Vinny Dye from the CPS.
That work.
Good morning, chairman Doll.
I'm members of the Commun Finance.
For the record of, my name is Jamal Chambers City Council
liaison for the Chicago Public Schools.
Also joined by Sean New, our Director of facilities at CPS,
as well as Tim Jeffries, managing Deputy Commission
and Department of Planning and Development.
I'm here today to request your approval
of an intergovernmental agreement that will provide up
to $5 million in tip assistance
to restore the Acqui Acqui Center at CPS High School
to full functionally, um, for the benefit of the students
and surrounding community.
Here's a map showing the general location
of the project within the city.
The project is located at 2100 East 87th Street in the
Avalon Park community area in the eighth ward.
It's located within the Sony Island Burnside Tiff District.
The project site is bounded by 87th Street
to the South Anthony Avenue to the East 85th Street
to the North and Chappelle Avenue to the west.
These pictures are the current conditions of the pool
and locker room area, which have not been utilized since
2011 as depicted in the first photo,
the locker rooms are not a DA compliant
and are in need of restoration.
Additionally, significant structural damage, um,
of the glazed brick wall
and the pool area, as well
as the general deterioration on the pool envelope
are shown in the second photo.
These projects include interior renovations, S-C-V-C-S, um,
acro Center to make the pool operable, uh,
and meet a DA requirements improvements include pool deck
repairs, locker room upgrades, new pool equipment,
and associated MEP work throughout the those spaces.
The total project will cost $7.3 million with completion
of the project scheduled for spring or summer 2026.
If approved. Intergovernmental agreement will authorized up
to $5 million in TIFF assistance
with the remaining $2.3 million of funding coming from CPS.
The project will follow the typical, um, finance
and structure between the city
and CPS with the city providing TIF funds
to finance a portion of the project costs
and CPS supplying the remainder of the funds.
The pool will be made available
to the community in third parties in accordance
with the Board of Education's AC activity safety policy.
The policy establishes the standards for both City
of Chicago part district and third party users.
The Acara Center will be available
to the Chicago Park District during and
after school hours with the appropriate
written authorization.
A third party may use the facility during non-school hours,
weekends, and when school is not in session.
And at this and at the discretion of the principal
and local school cross council's approval.
Um, use of this subject use will be subject
to a written agreement in compliance
with lifeguard's supervision and insurance requirements.
The rationale for recommending this project includes making
the pool operable and a DA compliant renovations will allow
the school to create swimming and water polo sports team
and offers swimming and part
of the physical education classes.
Also providing a new public benefit to the community
by making it available for Park District rentals,
for community programs and summer rentals for day camp
and youth swim lessons and competitions, summer use
of the CVS CVS Athletic program training
and competitions for high school student athletes.
I thank you for consideration
and I'm happy to address
any questions that the committee may have.
Alderman Farrell.
Thank you Madam Chair. And
and I, I certainly support this project.
Um, 'cause I too need a pool, uh, renovated in my ward.
And I understand this. Um,
this project is gonna benefit not only the students, but
but also the community.
Um, my question is in line with the second, um, will the,
will the park district be able to contract with CPS, um,
over the summer and throughout the school
term for use of the pool?
Yes. So we work with the, um, park district community, um,
team as well as the principal to create a plan, um,
that allows the park district to use those facilities.
Okay. That's excellent. Then
that gives the school an opportunity to, um,
if they don't already have it, um, they have a, um,
a swim team and all of that.
Great. So I, I certainly, um,
congratulate my colleague on this project
and look forward to supporting it. Thank
You, sir. Thank you
All. Thank you, Madam
Chair. Thank you Alderman.
Um, alderman Lata followed
by Alderman Viegas.
Thank you very much. It looks fantastic.
It's a very exciting project.
Uh, I'm reflecting on it
and I have to bend your ear at a future point
'cause we have a pool of the first Ward school
that we wanna figure out a pathway on as well.
Could you go back to the sources and uses, please?
Who's That? What, uh, next one? The next Oh, okay.
The construction I get.
Could you talk about the other three categories on the,
the uses side?
730,000 for design is hard for me
to wrap my head around.
What does project implementation as well mean?
Yep. So, yep.
Sean Newark, director of, uh, facilities for CPS.
So the design includes not just an architect, we, you have
to bring a pool consultant in.
This pool has not been on operational since I believe 2011.
There are new, uh, Illinois Department of Public Health.
They, they actually control all pools in the state.
Um, and so they have new code regulations.
So it's actually a pretty in-depth
design we have to go through.
And some of the photos didn't show there,
but the mechanical, electrical,
and plumbing systems of this pool is in really,
we're basically starting from scratch almost
to get this pool operational.
And then Project Imple implementation is in-house at CPS.
We have a project management team that manages all this.
We have a very lean staff, so we have outside consultants
that manages the design, the construction,
the schedule, everything.
And that's all kind of looped into that.
Um, project implementation,
Sort of like the developer's fee we might see on the, I
Dunno if it's a developer's fee,
but it's, it's our, it's our team that does the development.
So yes, I guess you could say that.
That's fine. I understand.
Uh, and the environmental remediation.
Yeah. So it, the CVS was built, heck,
it's probably going on close to a hundred years old.
Um, so that means the nasty words of lead,
lead asbestos, especially the mechanical systems,
it's all wrapped in asbestos installation.
So that design and that construction
and that project implementation has remediation
in there and all kinds of stuff.
That's why those costs are higher than it
might normally seem.
It's very helpful to be for you to talk through that.
It's a great project.
And again, like the myriad community benefits on this,
like not just for the student, but for the public.
It's, it's really outstanding.
Thanks for bringing it forward. Thank you Chair.
Thank you. Alderman LaSpada.
Alderman Viegas, followed by Alderman Beal.
Thank you. Thank you Madam Chair.
And, and, um, gonna support this project as well.
Is it possible to get a list from CPS as to
what the outstanding requests are for some
of your infrastructure projects?
Your capital bill projects?
Yes. You wanna, um, district wide
or just district wide? Okay, I got you, sir.
And then, uh, on the project implementation,
the developer fee Mm-Hmm.
Is that negotiable or is that something,
Um, it's not really develop or negotiable.
It's, it's broken down by project, what the scope
of work is, who that team is.
Like We have environmental consultants,
we have architects, engineers.
That's that in-house, correct?
It's, it's under the CPS, uh, capital umbrella.
So it's under our, um, our umbrella.
But it is outside consultants. That makes sense.
It's not CPS employees.
Correct. It's not DPS employees.
I gotcha. Okay. Cool. Thank you.
Thank you. Alderman Viegas Alderman Bill,
followed by Alderman Scott.
Thank you. Uh, Madam Chair.
I just, uh, just a couple of quick questions.
Um, how many pools citywide do we have? That that's down.
That are down? Yeah.
I believe we have 80 pools approximately.
We have 80 pools system or district wide.
And I believe 28 are functional right now.
So that would be, Mm-Hmm.
Approximately 50 or so that are not working?
That's exactly my point.
Um, because I don't know if there was just a concerted
effort not to maintain these pools.
Uh, at some point, um, you know,
'cause I have a pool at Coreless that has been down
for over 15 years as well.
And the problem with the pools, number one,
uh, is the maintenance.
And if the school doesn't have the funds
to maintain these pools, they're just gonna go down again.
So are you all providing maintenance
for these pools once they get renovated?
Yeah, so we do have a, our facilities team has a, uh, a,
a pool contract with a vendor that goes around
and maintains these pools.
So once they're operational, again,
they are continually being monitored, worked on up upkept,
you know, they, water gets tested every day.
So we're doing everything we can to prevent
what you just described from
Happening. So are they gonna
have a budget
that could be cut at some point?
I mean, theoretically they could possibly get cut,
but right now there is no plans
for something like that. Okay. So
What assurances do we have with spending 7.3 million,
uh, on this particular pool?
Um, and because all the pools should be
operational citywide.
And so, you know, what assurance do we have
that in a year from now that, you know,
another pool goes down, we'll be in the same situation.
'cause the longer a pool is down, the more it costs
to get it back up and operational.
No, absolutely correct. So there,
certain pools like this one, if we do this,
there'll be warranties in effect.
So that lasts for a few years.
So that saves some of that long term.
I'm sorry, are you talking about You're right.
Warranties run out. Yep.
Okay. I got you. So right now, there is no plan to,
to cut the aquatic budget.
I would say I, I cannot guarantee, um, what
that looks like based on some
of the comments we've heard earlier about what the future
of the, of the budget is for, um, some of the maintenance.
But we would not anticipate anything
that would endanger new pools
that we've just constructed from being taken out of service.
All right. Well, I mean, I'm, I support the project,
but I also support all pools being
operational, uh, citywide.
But it sounds like three quarters of your pools are down
and that's, that's a problem.
Yeah. So just so I will say,
or we do have a list of the pools that I, that are, um,
the 50 or so we'll say, that are non-operational
and a list of what is gonna be required
to go into bringing each one of these pools back in line.
We don't have a timeframe
yet on which pools will be done next Mm-Hmm.
But we do have a list of what it's gonna take
to bring the remaining pools back online.
Okay. And I do agree that, um, you know,
the community should have access to 'em, uh,
because, you know, the park districts
or just the community, I mean, there are a lot of people
that are running aquatics programs, um, even scuba diving,
they're teaching that.
Um, but we need pools that are operational in order
to provide those particular services.
So I would encourage you all to really look at that.
And I know, you know, funds are tight, uh,
but having over 50 pools now citywide is a huge problem.
So, but I do support this project. Thank you.
Thank you. Alderman Alderman Scott, followed
by Alderman Lopez.
This is a Michelle's Ward. Good job.
I, I think this is a, uh, I am in support of this project.
And coming from a park district background, uh, I think
that it's important that, um, the board,
probably the CPS needs to, uh, align themselves
how the engineers at the park district,
their engineers take care of the pools.
It's just a, it's just another certification that they get.
And so that could be cheaper versus, uh,
finding an outside source.
Their engineers just take another class
and they get certified with the pools.
The engineers of the park take care of the pools.
But this is not only just a community,
it's a community benefit because it's gonna provide jobs.
If you think about probably two full-time jobs from an
aquatic staff, and the rest of 'em are part-time, uh,
probably about seven to eight employees that they'll have,
you know, coming through the Chicago Park District.
So I think that it's a great thing
because now we're employing, um, people
and now we, you know, the, the more pools that are up,
that's how we can create for the summer
that the pools are open at, at the parks.
And the reason why there's a shortage
of the pools at the parks,
because we don't have schools that are open to partnership
with the park and do the, the, the classes
that they typically would do.
So I think that that's important that we need to look at
how we can move that forward.
Because the more people are working, the more of our teens
and college students come home, those are jobs.
And so, you know, it, it really depends on the pools
that are open in the schools
because they teach those classes.
Uh, so great job.
I just wanted to add that so that, to give CPS, um,
a little bit more to think about when,
when they're opening these pools
and how they're doing the contracting these outside
to maintain the pool, because that is important.
And I know with the new, um, safety and guideline
and the regulations on these new pools, it costs a lot
and it costs a lot to maintain it.
And so, no, and they have to be maintained daily.
So please look into that with your engineers, um,
because I think that's huge. Thank you.
Thank you Alderman.
Scott, I know you mentioned Sean
and Jamal the, uh, partnership
with the park district on the rental side,
but does that partnership go, uh, beyond just rental
In terms of like people who could use the pool or
No. How you all
might support each other in terms
of maintenance related to some of the questions
that Alderman Beal was raising about your budget
and being able to, I mean, that seems
to me like a good suggestion to use, uh, some
of the Park District staff, pay them a little extra
to also maintain your pools,
but some kind of intergovernmental agreement. Yes.
So typically the park, they're there all day
and they main, they're the ones that
maintain the pool all day. Uh, at the
Park District facilities?
No. So like the parks that are in schools, like for one,
they're in, uh, let's say N-T-A-N-T-A is a, is a school
that has a pool, and the park staff is there all day.
The lifeguards are there all day.
Didn't know that. Okay, good point.
Uh, moving on to Alderman Lopez, followed by Alderman Lee.
Thank you Chairman. And again,
good morning members of the city council.
When was this application submitted for TIF funds?
I believe we submitted this, um, in June of this year.
Um, it went to the, um, September, um, tick meeting.
So I guess my question would be for DPD,
because many of us have outstanding
TIF requests, many of us
can find millions to invest in our wards for a number
of issues of concern for our residents.
And yet we are all on the verge of seeing all
of those requests kicked to the curb as we are about to
surplus all the tiffs in this city for this budget.
So what criteria was used to bring this
to fruition within two months,
while other wards are waiting two years?
And if whoever can answer that, I would appreciate that.
Um, I'll have the, not the park district answer this.
I will have, uh, Tim Jeffries
from the Department of Planning and Development,
Uh, I'm sure Tim Jeffries,
managing Deputy commissioner in the Department of Planning.
Uh, DPDs role is really to look at three things.
Uh, first is it in TIF district?
Second is the project that is being brought forward,
have sufficient TIFF eligible costs to support the request?
And then three, is there funds available in the TIF district
to support that request?
If it's Yes, yes, yes.
Um, we advance it to the TIFF Investment Committee.
Um, DPD itself does not sit on that body.
My commissioner doesn't. I do not.
We facilitate the meetings.
Um, but that, so I guess I, the specific criteria is that
it was, was at the meeting, it was presented
and the tick body as a whole said, this project seems good.
Let's advance it to the next legislative session
or the next legislative steps in the process.
Well, as a correction,
the tick is not a legislative function. Right.
I meant legislative body, this legislative body. Well,
The only legislative body.
Sure. So who are the members of Tick?
Uh, it's members of the mayor's office.
It's, uh, deputy me, Merri, deputy Mayor, Lori Lipson, uh,
the Chief Equity Officer, the budget director, the CFO, um,
and the Chief Equity Officer.
So all non-elected individuals
who are prioritizing which projects move forward
and which ones do not correct.
I they all members
Of the mayor's cabinet. And are And are
those meetings open to the public?
Uh, they're not. Are those
meetings recorded with minutes? Uh,
They're summaries of the meetings. And
Where are those summaries provided?
Uh, we publish them online
after every meeting, uh, on the city's open data portal.
Who's we? Uh, DPD manages that function.
So though you're not a member of it,
you publish their, their
Summaries? We administer
the overall
operations of the meeting and the logistics. Yes.
And they have no so clear,
they have no theoretical
concern about budget constraints.
Only those three criteria, which you just mentioned.
No, that's DPDs rule, uh,
of non-subjective criteria, um, of those items.
And if those items meet those non-subjective re criteria,
we move it to, uh, the full review.
And at that meeting, they take into consideration a number
of concerns or considerations,
including competing obligations, uh, you know,
pending in future projects and things like that.
And where are your criteria found?
Where's the authority for the creation of the cri
of the department's criteria?
The, the, the three that I mentioned? Yes.
Uh, we outlined them in the,
the city's overall TIFF program guide.
But those are all just generally legal requirements.
I mean, a project must be in a tiff,
it must reflect TIFF eligible costs.
And from a practic law
perspective, there must be money available. So
It's a departmental decision.
Uh, it's not something that's found in municipal,
excuse me, in municipal code.
Correct.
The geography and the eligible costs are in the TIF Act.
So it's the state That, that part are state law.
And then the availability
of funds is just a, a practical matter.
And the TS guidelines are created where,
Uh, the, the, like the, the secondary Mm-Hmm.
Review after that. Uh, there's none defined to it as,
as far as I'm aware right now.
Okay. So as much as I love seeing my colleagues get money
for their wards and for their communities,
and as we just heard, the fact that we've got, you know,
two thirds of our pools down, we still have a situation,
Madam Chairman, where you have projects that are,
and communities where you have winners
and losers being picked by an unelected group,
making decisions and not presenting them to this body.
This body, by the way.
And the entire city council, which has final authority on
how to expel, how to expend TIF funds.
Um,
Well, every TIF project comes before this body primarily.
Um, some of most of them do
Well once they're approved anyway
And approval, Well, one,
once they're approved from the unelected P people,
then they come here because there are a number of projects
that never make it past the firewall known as Tick to get
to the city council, to get to the Committee on Finance.
And I think that was one of the reasons why, uh,
this body put, uh, requirements
and criteria into the, uh, geo bond
or the Bond program because of those concerns.
But I would say that, um, hear your questions,
but I would like to move on.
You've made your point.
I've got three more TIFF projects to talk about.
Well, we're not talking about your TIF projects today.
Right now we're on right
Now, we're on project. I just wanna
Sure, madam. I just wanna make sure Madam
Chairman, that we are all on the same page when it comes to
how we're picking winning winners and losers.
Because in two months time, just shy
of when the budget's supposed to come out,
some wards get $5 million
and other wards are gonna be robbed of their own TIFF money.
So I think that's something that needs to be
Well said out here.
I see this body sees a lot of projects from a lot
of different wards, uh, that have, uh, tiff, uh, dollars
accounted for in those projects.
So, um, perhaps I believe we even did one
of yours most recently.
Uh, the school you had on the west on the, on your
Award, and that took seven years to get a Yes out of,
and it only got a yes
because the mayor needed a housing win.
All right, we're gonna move on. Alderman Lee.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, just a couple of questions.
Can you tell me, um, how many
pool projects are included in the current budget for CPS?
Um, I do not know that number off the top
of my head, but we can get that through
The chair to you. Yeah, I'd,
I'd love to get that through the chair.
So just going back to the earlier line,
Sorry. We, we have two projects
in this budget. Yes.
Yeah. So I, I I'm interested in the, the capital budget.
Both of your budgets are approved by the board, correct?
Correct. Okay.
Um, so just to Alderman Beal's point earlier, um,
a about the, the worry over what, uh, what
of these funded projects could be at risk down the road, um,
from a maintenance perspective?
Um, you know, I'm, I'm thrilled
that this project's being funded.
I'll be supporting this project for sure.
Um, I think we have to continue to ask questions, um, about
how these things are prioritized.
Uh, as many of my colleagues have already said, we, uh,
we don't have any, uh, authority over the CPS budget,
but we are partners, um, in funding,
obviously since 5 million
of the $7.3 million is coming from, uh,
from Alderman Harris', TIFF, um, I just,
I'd like to know through the chair
what capital projects have been approved that,
that have to do with swimming pools.
'cause I'm, I'm also very
surprised at the number of pools that are down.
That's really the really startling number and,
and really unfortunate to service to our students.
Uh, but I'd like to know how many pools are scheduled
for improvement, um, uh, in the current budget.
Um, and I think we'll be keeping an eye on
what the board prioritizes, um, moving forward in terms
of any, uh, budget amendments coming up. Thank
You. I'm gonna let our, uh, executive
director
Capital, um, answer that
Record for Capital.
You turn on her mic please.
And could you identify yourself for the record?
Can you hear me? Yes. Okay. Venue. Okay.
Venue at D uh, executive Director for Capital Planning
and Construction as Chicago Public Schools.
Uh, so this year in the capital budget, uh,
we are working on, uh, the pool at Beasley,
and we also working on the pool at Sullivan.
Mm-Hmm. Okay. So then this one will be
in next year's budget then? Is that how this goes?
Yes. Okay. Um, so this year, the one
that you just answered were things
that you're completing in this calendar,
in this current fiscal year?
Yes. Okay. So then going into the next fiscal, um,
is this the only school
that's getting a pool, uh, improvement?
No, I would say we, we, we budget every,
well at least in the past three years, I should say,
we have budgeted monies for, uh, uh, pool.
And we work with our, uh, sports department
to prioritize which pools we are working on.
And so this year we have to, last year we had to, um,
and so that's, that's kind of
how we are trying to, to work this.
And so the $2 million that CPS is contributing is just a,
a portion would be a part of that budget
that we put in the 26 budget.
And how do you, I don't know
that you have a rubric per se,
but how do you prioritize, like what's,
do you have a list in terms of like the worst condition
and you're, you're just sort of pecking away at those year
after year as you have funding for it?
Yes, and we are working with not just, uh, tiff,
but we are working with, um, the, uh, state representatives
for DCEO funding, uh, to get funding for pools
and, um, and,
and any local groups that were, are, are willing to work
with us to, to get monies for pool.
And then we, and then we are looking at to those
that our maintenance department,
and by maintenance, I mean we use outside contractors to,
to put pools that have just, uh, not, not at this scale,
uh, repairs to get those back in order as well.
Thank you. Um, I, I know
that you all have very difficult decisions to make
with limited budgets.
I think this, this conversation about pools just drives
that whole thing, um, home, uh, that priorities have to you,
hard decisions have to be made.
Um, and, and their, the need is great,
but we have limited resources.
Can I also, through the chair, get, um, a breakdown of
how much, um, other government funding has been
provided, let's say, over the last two years?
Um, specifically, um, actually no.
For all capital projects, not just pools. Yes.
That's all I've got. Thank you.
Thank you. Alderman Lee, alderman Ccho Lopez, followed
By Alderman Harris.
Thank you. Um, thank you, uh, Madam Chair.
And, uh, let me first congratulate Al Luman Harris
for her advocacy to start addressing the issues.
Um, you know, public schools.
I think that this is a desperate need, public investment.
Um, I think, um, just talking briefly with Al Luman,
Scott mentioned, uh, critical are these spaces even
to get more, um, overall lifeguards trained so
that we do not have what happened a few years ago
where we have half of our public, um,
part district pools closed,
which was a great disservice to our constituents.
I wanna commend all the women Harris, uh, for advocating
for her community into what we should be doing with Tiff.
It is investment in our public schools,
in our public district parks.
It is investing in our communities.
So let me just, uh, first, uh, commend her
and commend every elder person.
I think it's good that we are scrutinize.
And let me just, um, before,
and I'm fully support of this, um,
what I do think is also important, right, is that we also
are consistent with our approaches.
Uh, I think it is unconscionable
that we have half our public, uh, pools
and our public, uh, schools, uh, that still need repair.
Uh, I am grateful for CPS to help us.
We just got repair
or a school of Benito Juarez, yet we still have of many
of our schools who don't even have a playground,
as you heard today from some of the comments.
So I will encourage my colleagues to scrutinize.
This is a $7 million investment that will go directly
and a hundred percent for the wellbeing
of our youth in our public districts.
I would like to see the same scrutiny
when also council members asked for private money.
Uh, just had like a $14 million investment
in a private theater.
I didn't see the less, same level of scrutiny.
And I think we should, because we're gonna tie up our belts.
I do think that is important, that we're consistent,
but this investment from the south side, on the west side
of the city of Chicago, it is no longer an option.
This is what we are here to fight, to make sure
that the communities get this desperate needed funding
and full support of this
and encourage, you know, that's what we have now.
Soon a board of education members are gonna be
elected, participate in that.
That's what we have elected officials here
who also must oversee their tip dollars.
But I'm, I'm tired of the double standard of going
and taking money from private projects.
And then here I'm coming
and putting dirt on public
works that are desperately needed.
I think that is immoral and that's wrong and unethical.
And I will be called out more often than none
because I see the double standard in
some of the council members here. Thank you so much.
Thank, thank you Alderman Harris.
Oh, does anyone else have any questions?
We'll have Alderman Harris close. Alderman Harris,
Thank you. And thank you
to the council for all your great questions.
Um, I've worked, been working on this project since 2011
when we built Jesse Owens Park under the Late Mayor Daily.
And the, at the end of that, we couldn't afford
to put a swimming pool in that building.
And so we always had the agreement, the park district
and CPS that we would use CB S's Park.
Subsequently, by the time the park's built
and it's up, the pool of CVS is shut down.
So from 2011 to today, I've been working with CPS
and for that matter, uh, with the tiff to try
to build up the dollars, which took me quite some time.
We started off at 4 million. Now I'm at a $5 million ask.
So that should tell you how difficult it is in these tiffs
and communities of color and how long it takes
to build up the type of money that you need
to do the repairs.
Having said that, this is a hundred year old building,
and of course, the Avalon grid
that's right across the street from Jesse Owens Park,
the park and the community kind of all speak as one.
They all work together. They have a great, uh,
park advisory council
that lives across the street in the Calumet Heights grid.
And so, as we talk about this pool, what it means
to the community is that they don't have access to a pool.
They don't have to leave their community,
they don't have to leave the ward.
They can have the indoor use of a pool all year round
at South Shore High School.
I fought extremely hard in a design of that building
to make sure that we had a pool.
It has over, it's since it was built in 20, uh, 11 to
that same year, we've had issues with the pool,
but they have a swimming team.
So the meaning the young children that enter that program
and going into that school can be swimming competitively.
And they have a great female team and a great male team.
I like to see the rest of the students, um, on the south end
of the ward, have that same opportunity, uh, to use a pool
that I swim in.
And I'm gonna tell you from those pictures,
that pool has not changed since I was in
that building from 1976 to 1980.
And so I could tell you that it's a old pool.
It is not a DA compliant on any day you could trip over
that ledge, fall in the pool and fall in the deep end.
I get pushed in the deep end for that matter,
uh, in that pool.
And so I, I am happy that we're at the point
where we're going to invest the money
that the TIFF has the money to invest.
Uh, so I'm grateful
and I hope that all my colleagues can support
this, uh, for the community.
Thank you Alderman Harris, I want to congratulate you
as well on doing this project.
I've been pushed into the deep end of a pool
before, so I know what that's like.
Um, I, I will.
A motion made by Alderman Scott recommending Do pass.
All those in favor signify by saying Aye. Aye.
Opposed in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it.
And this Do pass recommendation will be reported out at the
next city council meeting.
Going back in the order of the agenda. Item number four.
Thank you so much. CPS, um, item number four,
from the Department of Housing, an ordinance
concerning the execution of a redevelopment agreement,
an issuance of tax increment financing funds to heart
of Uptown Apartments, LLC
and poet tiff, LLC for the heart
of Uptown Apartments Rehabilitation project
at 44 31 through 44.
41 North Clifton Avenue. 9 27, excuse me.
Yes. 9 27 West Wilson Avenue, 900
through 9 0 2 West WinDor Avenue,
and 8 47 through 8 49 West Sunnyside.
Finally, 41 30 North Kenmore in the 46th Ward in
the amount not to exceed $15 million.
We have with us Ryan Slattery from the Department
of Housing giving the presentation. Good morning.
Good morning. Thanks, Tral. Good afternoon. Oh,
Uh, good afternoon Tral
and members of the finance committee for the record.
My name is Ryan Lettering.
I'm a financial planning analyst for Department of Housing.
Um, I'm here today present the heart
of Uptown Apartments or Hoopa.
Uh, located at 44 31 to 41 North Clifton
900 to um, oh two West Windsor, 9 27 West Wind,
west Wilson, 8 47 to 49 West Sunny Side,
and 41 30 North Kenmore.
Four of the five buildings are located in the Wilson
Yard, TIFF Districts.
Um, the fifth, 41 30 North Kenmore is
located outside of the tiff.
All properties are in Alderwoman Clays Ward in
the Uptown community area.
Um, Wilson Yard, TIFF District is a hundred percent in all
women, all women Clay's Ward.
And she has provided a letter of support for us.
Uh, today's requested action is
to request the finance committee approve
and refer the heart of Uptown Apartments transaction
to City Council for the approval of the authorization
and execution of a TIFF redevelopment agreement with Heart
of Uptown Apartments, LLC for the use
of $15 million in tiff, uh,
and also to designate Heart of Uptown Apartments
and poet Tiff, LLC as developer for the project known
as Heart of Uptown Apartments to be located at 44 31
to 41 North Clifton, 900 to oh two West Windsor,
9 27 West Wilson, 8 47 to 49 West Sunnyside,
and 44 30 North Kenmore in the uptown community area.
The development team is a joint venture between preservation
of affordable housing or poa, uh,
and the voice of the people uptown.
Uh, POA is a national organization whose mission is
to preserve, create sustained, affordable, healthy homes
that support economic security, racial equality,
and access to opportunity for all.
The development team in POA provides creative
and responsive responsible strategies for preserving
and building affordable housing, uh,
carrying projects from acquisition through financing,
including renovation and
or construction to stabilize under new permanent financing.
BOA started working Chicago in 2008, has built
or renovated over 2000 apartments
throughout the Chicago Island area.
Recent projects for pro include Island Terrace,
Woodlawn Station, and they're currently working on the Ave.
Uh, voice of the People Uptown began in 1968 as a resident.
Uh, residents voice their opposition
for the Urban Renewal Plan
that would've displaced hundreds of residents in the area.
This mission is to promote, provide, and support creation
and preservation of the highest quality
of affordable housing in the uptown community area.
And to empower people of low, um, of low income
through engagement, advocacy, housing
and community development efforts, property management
and residential services.
The portfolio of properties that they own, manage
or partner with include 14 buildings
of which 214 uh, units are in the uptown community area.
These include, uh, voice preservation projects,
Clifton Magnolia Apartments, Hazel Winthrop Apartments,
and also the Heart of Uptown Apartments
Development Team is contracted LBBA
as their architect for the project.
LBBA is a Chicago based architectural firm, uh,
that's worked with a number of affordable projects within
the city, including the Tiara, Linda Croy,
senior Apartments, the Nelson Mandela Apartments,
and the Lucy Gonzalez Parsons Apartments.
The general contractor for the Project Iskander,
who has worked on a number of projects including Sarah
Circle, Woodlawn Station and Salute Center.
Uh, the bridge lender is fifth Third,
and the permanent lender is R four.
The project will be receiving 4% Litech through ida.
Uh, and the syndicator for that is BFIM.
The property management will be the Comm PO Communities,
and the attorney for the development
is Applicate Thorn Thompson.
The heart of town apartments will rehab 103 affordable units
in five buildings, ranging from studios at
approximately 500 square feet.
One bedrooms at approximately 700 square feet,
two bedrooms at 950 square feet,
and then three bedrooms at approximately 1200 square feet,
all below 80%.
A MI Coupa consists of two previous projects,
uptown Preservation Apartments
and Sunnyside, uh, Kenmore Apartments.
The city has two CDBG loans from the previous projects
that will be assumed in this transaction.
The development team proposes
to invest approximately $240,000 in construction costs per
unit that will, uh, prioritize repairs
and upgrades to major building systems,
including replacements of roofs, replacement of windows,
masonry repairs, repairs of plumbing infrastructure upgrades
to the AVAC system for better performance
of greater efficiency unit interior
and common area upgrades.
The project will provide this one.
Um, we'll provide 103 affordable units that'll consist
of a total of 20 units at 30% a MI 25 at 50% a
MI 40 at 60% a MI, and then 10 at 8% a MI.
Uh, the second table outlines the
maximum the tenants will pay.
The tenants for the portable studios will range from $588
to, uh, 1177 for the one bedroom.
So it'll range from six 30 to 1261.
The two bedrooms will range from 7 56 to 1513,
and then the three bedrooms will range from 8 48 74 to 1749.
And then to the right is the uptown, uh, market rate rents
as a comparable to the affordable units.
Uh, so this affordable, uh, the affordable rent paid
by attendance based on at tenant's income, uh,
not the market comparables.
The limits are based on the medium income
for specific geographic areas such as county
or the Metropolitan Statistical area.
The maximum rent for each defined affordable income, uh,
level is published annually by the US Department of Housing
and Urban Development and List according
to building construction types, uh, number of bedrooms,
and then a household size.
Uh, there's the table. Here's the table
for the most recent table, uh, income limits.
Okay. Uh, the affordable, um, rental housing, uh,
development has its whole development cost
of $55,526,157.
27% of that project,
or 15 million will be funded through the Wilson Yard.
TIFF District, the applicant is takes,
is taking a private loan of $5 million
and is leveraging the 4% Litech credits
that will generate approximately $20 million in equity
and almost $7 million in bonds through ida.
Uh, in all the per unit, total cost is $539,000.
Uh, the closer look at the uses,
there's roughly 14 million acquisition,
24.7 million hard costs, uh, 11.7 in soft costs.
So here's the neighborhood context
for the four buildings in the Wilson R Tiff.
So the Clifton, Wilson, Windsor, and Sunnyside.
And then here's the fifth building, Kenmore, which is
outside the, uh, Wilson Tiff District.
Um, Kenmore will not receive any T funds,
but it's part of the larger project, um,
that will help be used, uh, through the use
of tax credit equity, um,
from the 4% Litech deal through ida.
Uh, the next few slides are the current conditions
of the exteriors of five buildings.
So here we have, uh, 8 47 to 49 West East side,
9 27 West Windsor, uh, 900 West Windsor,
oh wait, we'll sentence, sorry, apologies.
900 West Windsor, uh, 44, 31 to 37 North Clifton.
And finally the 41 30 North Kenmore.
The project benefits include preserving
and rehabbing 103 to 4 billion units, uh, between 30
and 80% a MI
through the five buildings in the uptown community area.
Uh, also the residents will have access
to supportive services
through the voice of the people uptown.
Uh, there will be 25 CHA units and 15 uh, cliff units.
Also, there will be a community room and a kid
and a kid friendly room in the Wilson Building.
And then for the Clifton building,
there will be an outdoor gathering space in
the back with a pergola.
Uh, the project will receive Enterprise
Green Community Certification.
And then finally, the project will retain three equivalent
FTEs and 16 or 60 construction jobs
with approval to move forward.
The finance committee, we anticipate receiving city council
approval on October 30th
with the TIFF District expiring at the end of 2025.
Timing is of the essence,
and the plan is to execute the redevelopment agreement on,
on December 11th to allow for construction
to start in the new year with construction completion
by November 15th, 2025.
As mentioned earlier, today's requested action is
to request finance committee to approve
and refer part of Uptown Apartments transaction
to City Council for the approval of the authorization
of a TIF development agreement with, uh, heart
of Uptown Apartments, LLC
and poet tiff, LLC for the use
of 15 mil million dollars in Tiff.
And to Nate Har and to designate the heart
of Uptown Apartments, LLC
and poet LLC as a developer for the project known as Heart
of Uptown Apartments to be located at 44 31
through 41 North Clifton, 900 to oh two West Windsor,
9 27 West Wilson, 8 47 to 49 West Sunnyside,
and 44 or 41 30 North Kenmore in the uptown community area.
Thank you, Ryan. Very thorough presentation this morning.
Thank you. Uh, alderman Viegas.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, the 5 39 per unit. Mm-Hmm.
Um, you had a mix of studio
and then three bedroom apartments.
So that 5 39 is just an average
of all the, all the units, correct?
Correct. Is there a way to break it down per
Yeah, so for the studios, the average is, uh, 391,000.
The one bedrooms is five 48,000.
Uh, two bedrooms is 743,000,
and then three bedrooms are 9 39,
Almost a million dollars for a three bedroom apartment.
Yeah. Wow.
Um, okay. Thank you.
Thank you Alderman.
Uh, alderman Viegas, again,
Is this an existing structure that's just being rehabbed?
Yeah. Correct. This is an existing structure
that's being rehabbed that we're spending
9 39 for the three bedroom.
It's the average, so,
Okay. Thank you. Mm-Hmm.
Uh, alderman Lopez.
Thank you, Madame Chairman.
And now good afternoon, members of the committee.
Um, first off, I'd like to just, uh,
before I get to my question, continue on with
what Alderman Viegas was asking.
Can you provide through the chair a breakdown of
what these per unit costs are going to?
So for example, a three bedroom unit,
what exactly equals $940,000
and so on for all three types?
Yeah. Yes. Thank you. Don't be shy. You could answer. That's
Fine. Um,
Also, when was this application put in?
It was part of the 2021 QAP round
Is, I'm Sorry, it was part of the 2021 QAP round.
Okay. The, uh, and this quarterly
It's the qualifying.
Yeah,
It's the application for, uh,
low income housing tax credits.
And when was this TIFF application put in the same time?
Uh, correct. Yeah. Okay. All right. Thank you.
Uh, as, uh, Ryan stated, we do have a letter
of support from Alderman Clay,
but we have her chief of staff, Jesse Orr, who is set
through this meeting very patiently, uh,
to represent the Alderman.
So if you would,
Thank you Madam Speaker.
Um, and just a quick correction.
I'm actually not chief of staff.
I'm director of Development
and Infrastructure, so I don't wanna claim
any titles I don't have.
Um, but thank you, council. Thank you.
Um, Madam Chair, on behalf of the 46th Ward, on behalf
of Al Clay, we're very excited for this project.
Um, we think that investing in affordable housing doesn't
only mean constructing affordable housing,
but when those buildings are old,
and as you saw, a lot
of those buildings look like they were built in the 1920s,
that includes maintaining their standards of habitability,
that includes upgrading their plumbing, their wiring,
their hvac, um,
and we just, you know, we're very excited for, you know,
the ability to preserve more affordable housing in uptown.
As we see rising rents
and rising property costs drive more
of our lower income residents outta the ward.
Um, and, you know,
we're very excited to see this project through. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Orr. Uh, seeing no questions.
Any more questions? If I can get a motion
to recommend approval of item number four.
So moved by Alderman lasa.
All those in favor signify by saying Aye.
Opposed in the opinion of the chair?
The ayes have and the do pass recommendation
of the ordinance will report it out at the
next city Council meeting.
Ryan, thank you very much.
We're gonna skip item number five for a moment
and go to item number six,
which is from the Department of Housing.
It is an ordinance concerning the issuance
of tax exempt housing revenue bonds for the benefit
of lather preservation Phase one C project
located in the 32nd ward in an amount not to exceed
a hundred million dollars.
Uh, we are joined today by Anna Booth, uh,
from the Department of Health.
Good afternoon everyone.
Thank you Chairwoman Dow
and members of the Committee for the record,
my name is Anna Booth from the Department of Housing.
I'm joining you today
to present Lathrop Homes Preservation one c lp.
This development is located on the north side,
generally at Diversity Parkway and Damon Avenue,
and due to its size
and location of the Scattered Sites, portion
of the development are located in Lakeview
and portions are in Lincoln Park.
All of Lakefield Homes is in the 32nd ward,
and the alderman is Scott Waba.
Phase one C is located on the south side
of Diversity Parkway and the Lincoln Park Community area
and involves the addresses listed.
Thank you. Can I use that one? Thank you.
The requested action is for a bond inducement ordinance
for the benefit of this transaction.
The inducement is the city's declaration of their intent
to issue up to 100 million tax exempt housing revenue bonds
for the benefit of the transaction known
as Lathrop Homes Preservation one C.
The developers consist of related Midwest
and Vidi Redevelopment Corporation,
and the CHA chose this team as the master developer
for the Lathrop Homes from an RFQ, request
for qualification issued in 2010,
and one C will be the third phase the
developers will undertake.
The developers worked with architects, BKL
for the new construction.
Harley Ellis DeVero for the Rehabilitation
and Bauer Lato studio for the powerhouse.
BKL was founded in 2010 and has offices in Chicago, Atlanta,
and Washington DC BKL has designed for six buildings
with units totaling over 1800 in the Chicago area alone.
Harley Ellis Devereux founded in 1908
and based in Royal Oak, Michigan,
they have offices in Chicago, Los Angeles, San Francisco,
Sacramento, California, San Diego, Denver,
Dallas, and Boston.
And the firm specializes in multiple practices in including
healthcare, workplaces, mixed use
and residential to name a few.
Bower LA Studio founded 25 years ago,
is a Bipoc lab firm
that specializes in historic preservation.
To date Bower Lato has restored the Chicago Water Tower
and Pumping Station, Lin Bloom Math
and Science Academy, Chicago Cultural Center,
the Blues Heaven Foundation,
and the Humboldt Park Vote House, as is DOH policy,
a minimum of three general contractor bids are required
prior to identifying a general contractor,
and the development is in the process
of bidding the project, as well as negotiating
with lenders syndicators,
and with lenders and syndicators.
And they all will be named shortly and will be identified.
Before I return to this body
Related has 50 plus years of experience and has developed
or preserved 55,000 units
of housing throughout the United States.
They are currently working on completing phase three
of the Roosevelt Square development,
which is another CHA plan
for transaction located on the near west side in
the 28th Ward.
Vier D**e redevelopment was founded in 1967 by a group
of individuals and representatives
of local community organizations
on Chicago's near Northwest side who joined forces
to fight housing, neglect, abandonment, arson,
and eventually gentrification in the neighborhoods
of Westtown Logan Square, Hermosa Humble Park, and Avondale.
To date bicker D**e has constructed and
or rehabilitated over 1100 affordable and
or for sale properties over 372 buildings.
So Lathrop is a CHA plan for a transaction,
and the land that it sits on is all CHA owned at closing.
CHA will enter into a long-term ground
lease with the developer.
Lathrop Homes is a combination of new
and rehab construction located in a
landmark registered district.
It was reviewed and approved by the National Park Service
and State Historic Preservation Office,
and added to the National Register
of Historic Places on February 12th, 2012.
The first two phases are complete.
Phase one A was completed in 2019,
and it returned 414 rehab
and new units, which are housed in 14 buildings.
It also restored the great lawn and the river walk.
Phase two B was completed in 2023
and returned 74 units to the site and restored and addition
and restored additional landscape green spaces.
This phase one C will focus on the south side
of Diversity Parkway
and be comprised of the new construction
of one elevator building
that will house 59 mixed income rental units.
The rehabilitation of seven buildings
that will house 250 units, the demolition of three
existing buildings, and the structural repair
of the powerhouse.
Of the 309 units to be returned to site 213
or 69% will be available to CHA
and affordable households at the 30%
to 80% area median income levels
of the 213 affordable units,
121 will be CHA replacement units.
And upon completion, there will be 24 studios,
one hundred and sixty nine one one hundred and sixty two
and ten three bedroom units.
Other amenities will include landscape, courtyards,
community space,
and approximately 100 off street surface parking spaces.
The powerhouses smoke stack will be repointed and rebuilt,
and the interior will be built out as a gray box
that can be built out for future tenant once identified.
Further breakdown of the units shows that 57 units will rent
to tenants at the 30% area.
Median income levels 93 at the 60% area,
median income levels
and 63 at the 80% area median income levels.
The remaining 96 units will rent to market rate.
Households square footages are 454 square feet
for studios 652 square feet for one bedrooms,
838 square feet for twos
and 1,198 square feet for threes.
None of the studio units will rent to CHA tenants.
So, as mentioned, HUD sets income
and monthly rent limits on an annual basis,
and income limits are normally updated in April.
With and rent limits are normally updated in June.
Income limits are for the Chicago Naperville
and Joliet HUD Metro Fair Market Rent areas
and affordable rents paid by the tenant
is based on the tenant's income
and not on market comparables.
The maximum rent for each defined affordable income level
is published by HUD
and listed according to the building construction, uh,
construction type, excuse me, uh, number of bedrooms.
And it's, and it's according to building
construction type number of bedrooms and household size.
Rent per square foot is not considered except
that HUD housing quality standards and Chicago zoning
and building codes set minimum room and unit sizes.
Different federal funding development
and operating support sources
may have different maximum income and rent restrictions.
The CHA tenants will only pay 30%
of their income towards the rent,
and the CHA subsidies will pay, uh, pay
and cover the difference.
Total development costs are approximately 202 million
and subject to change pending final general contractor
pricing, first lender interest rates
and CI cater payin rates.
However, in additions to the issuance of the bonds,
the city will also look to provide TIF funds up
to 25 million
and a portion of the Illinois Affordable housing tax
credits, better known as donation tax credits.
Donation tax credits will be based off the value
of the CHA land lease
and discounted to 50% of the donated value,
which are then sold to generate equity for the benefit
of the transaction.
The, uh, CHA will loan funds of 37 million
and the development will also utilize state
and federal historic tax credits.
There will be a comment, grant, deferred developer fee,
and the usual $100 general partner equity contribution,
which is the requirement for the use of tax credits.
So this slide shows the north
and south portions of Lahr, all of the area
that shaded in the future.
Those are the areas that are complete.
And that's on the north side of diversity.
There was one new building that was erected on the south end
of Diversity Parkway, the dotted area,
but for the one senior building.
And that senior building is in yellow.
This consists of the phase that I'm speaking about,
which is phase one C.
Completion of this Phase one C will complete rehabilitation
of all the historic buildings.
Then the next couple of slides are renderings of
how the buildings will look well when complete,
and they pretty much will mirror
what was done on the north side of diversity.
And this one here is a rendering
of the newly constructed building,
and this is the rendering of the rehab
of the existing buildings.
So the public benefits 213 of the 309 units will rent
to CHA public housing
and affordable households 57 at 30%,
93 at 60%,
and 63 at 80% area median income.
They will have green spaces
and landscape courtyards, access
to the renovated Great lawn,
and the boat launch at the Chicago River,
a revitalized nature trail.
There's a Mary Crane Day nursery in the neighborhood,
and then they will have tenant community rooms, parking
and transportation, approximately 100 off street
surface parking spaces.
There is bus transportation on Diversity
Parkway and Damon Avenue.
And then there are designated bike lanes on Damon, as well
as a divvy station at Clyburn and Damon Avenues.
They will achieve 100 points in Chicago sustainability
by incorporating energy star appliances, working
landscapes and tree planting.
Indoor water use reduction by 25%
and 80% waste diversion to name a few.
Again, the requested action today is a bond inducement,
so the city can declare their intent to issue up
to 100 million in tax exempt housing revenue bonds
for the benefit of the transaction known as lather,
palms preservation, phase one CLPI will be returning
to this legislative body as well
as legislative committee meetings for final review
and approval once full underwriting is complete.
And other development team members, which again,
the general contractor, the first lender
and the syndicator have been identified.
The proposed project timeline,
bond inducement committee on finance, um,
passing out at the next finance, I'm sorry,
at the next city council meeting.
CDC for the use of tiff, uh, is to go in November.
City Council introduction
for the full transaction will go in December.
Committee on Finance
and City Council passages in January of 2025.
We are looking to close this development in April of 2025
with a construction start in May
and construction completion in May of 2027.
I do have an attendance, um,
senior Vice President Sarah Wick from related Midwest,
executive Developer Joy Argue Yeti from, uh,
from Bicker Diet Redevelopment,
and CHA project manager Anthony Alvarez. Thank you.
Thank you, Anna. Again, another great presentation.
It's very thorough. Um,
we do have a question from Alderman Viegas.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, the average
of 5 39 per unit you
that you displayed?
No, I think that was Ryan Right there. Mine,
I'm sorry, 6 53 per unit cost is 6 53 4 6 5.
Do you have that broken down per, per unit?
I know because that's inclusive of
studios, ones and twos, correct? Right.
I don't have it broken down,
but I can get it broken down and back to the ch
Yeah, I appreciate that. Thank you. If
you, okay. If you wouldn't mind.
And this project was started in 2010.
Uh, the development team was elected in 2010
through a request for qualifications through CHA.
Um, the planning for this project actually started back in
2000, I think it was, uh,
2003, and it started.
Wow. And so this is, like I say, this is phase three.
Uh, phase one return 414 units, phase two return 74,
and this one is to return 309.
When do we anticipate this project be completely
Completed?
They have to return, um,
an additional 230 plus units on site.
So that's probably another two to three phases
that it's going to take to complete it.
And those phases typically last how long?
Uh, it takes about, well,
depending on when they get chosen for funding,
because they have
to apply when the city has their open qualified allocation
funding round or ida, they have to receive funds from CHA.
So that can take a couple of years to get the money
to solidify the money
and then start working with the private investors
to get additional monies because they're so multilayered.
So that can take a couple of years.
So, so would would, would it be feasible to say
that it it could in all, in all,
all in 30 years to complete this project?
I, I guess 2003 is when you started talking about it,
That 2003, right?
That, Uh, 2000, 2003 mark,
it really started kicking in oh six,
I believe when they first talked about demo.
Well, 30 years to do a thousand units, a
Thousand, 27,030 units.
And then you wonder why we have affordable housing issues
when it takes 30 years to complete 1300 units
with the department that's responsible Chicago housing.
I mean, that's, it's in your name and it takes that long.
I tell you, I I, I really, I mean, I, I'm very frustrated
because I grew up in CHA for eight years,
and to see a project like this, when I remember
it being first talked about being redeveloped in 2010 under
Alderman Flores at the time,
and here to sit now in city council, having to support this,
and the project potentially could take 30 years to complete.
I mean, it's just mind boggling.
Someone's career can be,
you could have a whole career at CHA on one project.
I think we need to do something about that
because this to, I mean, it's disgusting to have homeless
a a homeless issue in the city of Chicago
and the department that's charged with it, taking their time
and, and getting this, uh,
getting these people in these homes.
I'm gonna support the project, but I'm just frustrated that,
um, and I know Alderman, um, I mean chairwoman, uh,
you have some land and C-A-C-H-A land is
A similar situation at, uh, icky
and Robert Taylor and Stateway.
I mean, I think this is a issue across every CHA development
about how long it has taken, uh,
some of this work to get done.
Yeah. So
I hear you. Thank you.
Alderman Ada, followed by Alderman Irvin.
Morning.
Thank you so much, chair.
I, I'm really proud to stand here
and have the opportunity to vote on this project today.
I think I first stood, like,
stood at Lathrop in 2005, and I was 24.
And my life has had a lot of twists and turns since then.
But what has been
consistent has been the residents at Lathrop
fighting for their community.
It has been, I would say,
this development team fighting for this community.
And I will say it has been Oldman Waba fighting
for this community.
And we could not be here without any of those three groups.
If we want to talk about how long this has taken,
that can be a conversation where, when we're not
all on cameras, but I'll say it was not the Department
of Housing, it was not the residents.
It was not Alderman Wag spec, and it was not related or, um,
and I'm, I'm glad for this.
We can talk about per unit costs.
I'm glad that the finance committee is having more of those
substantial conversations,
but that is part of the hard work of adaptive reuse,
particularly when projects have fallen into
a state of disrepair, neglect,
borderline obsolescence.
It makes it harder and it makes it more expensive.
And you could almost make the argument that would be easier
and quicker, cheaper to tear down these properties.
And it is certainly
and truly the commitment from related bicker d**e,
the alderman, the community, to preserve these properties,
that it's a beautiful campus, beautiful buildings that
we're both looking at what is going
to be remembered for generations.
That a great, it is a great project
and also perhaps a more expensive project.
But I'm grateful that we're here.
I will say if anyone has had an opportunity
to walk into these units, sometimes we talk about
as affordable housing as being
adequate rather than excellent.
These are excellent units on the north side of Lathrop,
on the south side of Lathrop,
and I'm sure that's what we're gonna be producing
through the next phase here.
So thank you for your work on this.
Thank you to the whole development team. Thank you, chair.
Thank you.
Alderman Irvin, followed by Alderman Lopez.
Thank, thank you, Madam Chair.
Uh, just one really quick question.
Um, my assumption is that you guys are using, uh, four,
I'm sorry, uh, 4% credits and not 9% credits, number one.
Number two, how much is,
are they deferring the entirety of the developer fee?
That's still under negotiation.
They're trying to figure out how much they're gonna have
to defer to fill a gap once all
of the other players are in place.
But right now we are carrying, um,
a $6 million deferred developer fee to show
what the gap may be.
But that wouldn't be all of their developer fee.
Oh, okay. I just, just interesting.
I, I've, I haven't seen a deferral at that level.
Um, but however, this is a, a fairly, uh, lar large project,
um, as well.
So those are only two questions I have.
I mean, you know, LA's been on the books for a while.
I know there's a lot of units, uh, going on up there.
Uh, but it's definitely, uh, needed, uh, throughout our,
throughout our city.
Um, so, uh, you know, hopefully let's move this along.
Thank you. Thank chair. Thank you Al
Alderman Lopez.
Thank you Chairman. And again,
good afternoon members of the committee.
I just have a really quick question.
How many of the displaced residents are going
to be ha be able to return to the lat poems?
I would defer that to, uh, representative from CHA.
I'm sorry, I will refer that to a representative from CHA
Mr. Alvarez. Is
that something that you can answer?
Is this your pro project area
In Leera?
Who? Lee. Oh, she snuck.
I'm here. I'm Deputy Chief of Development Lee Pretor,
and I'm more than happy to answer that question.
I think the question was how many
residents will be able to return?
So all the residents that were occupying the Lahr property
have a right of return to these units.
All the residents who were on site at the time
that work began in one A have mo have moved in,
but a hundred percent of residents
who are occupying have a right of return.
They have a first right of return to these units.
And how many individuals is that?
I will be able to get you the specific answer in terms
of what that is right now.
Again, some fo some residents had the opportunity
to move offsite temporarily.
They made that decision.
Some have chosen, they've moved offsite
and are excited about their permanent location
where they've been moved, but they are still being
and said, I would prefer actively decided
that they would prefer to stay
where they are rather than moved back.
But we would be more than happy to get you that update.
How many total residents were displaced
In terms of displaced once you start under
a project such as this?
No residents can be displaced.
All of them have a right of return.
Right? So how many is all of them?
So, Point of, hold on a second,
let her answer the question
and then I'll do your point of, uh, clarification.
So at, at a point in time, as soon as we made the decision
to move forward on this as a rat using some
of the financing sources, all
of those residents have a right of return,
and they had that right of return prior to that.
I would like to give you the, the total number
of units at this site. No,
Excuse me. We can get
that through the chair, Ms. Prather. Thank you.
But any other questions? Alderman
Lopez? Well, yes,
I'd like mine answer.
How many residents are we talking
about that we just, can you answer
That Alderman uh,
Lata point of clarification?
Yes. Yes. Chair.
I can speak to this because I was
there in meetings with the residents.
If the number of displaced residents is hard
to put an exact finger finger on, it's
because the residents fought for the right to remain
during construction and won that, right?
So in this case, which is rare, perhaps exceedingly rare,
with CHA developments, residents were able to move
to the south side while the north side was being
rehabbed and vice versa.
That's why this the displacement number
that we might be talking about, that would be very
Relocation number, Relocation number
that would be really, really relevant with a lot
of CHA cases is less relevant in the case of Lathrop.
'cause residents specifically fought for
and won the right to stay on site
during redevelopment. Thank you. Thank you,
Chair. Thank
You. So
again, that does not answer the question.
It is just a simple number.
If there were a thousand people at LA
that lived at Lathrop Homes, that's
how many people were displaced at some
point or some variation.
All I'd like to know is how many of,
how, what is that number? Because when
And, and Alderman Lopez, Ms.
Pritz says she would get that information
To you through, but I don't either,
neither response is answered
or even shown that, that understand the question.
So I wanna make sure that we're a hundred percent clear,
because if you are going to say that we're going to have
70 people with a, a right to return,
but there were a thousand people displaced,
we're mixing apples and oranges.
So I'd just like to know she can get, she doesn't have
to provide the answer now.
She doesn't have it, but I would like
provided through the ch well, but she has not acknowledged
that that's what we're talking about.
So I'd like to make sure that CHA understands, I'd like
to know exactly how many people were displaced.
However many people live through the project. Find so be it.
But however many are being welcomed home
because it's always been a bone of contention.
How many will be welcomed home? Back to this?
What is that number versus
how many were displaced at the overall project?
That's what I'd like to have back.
Thank you. Thank you. Alderman Lopez, Ms.
Prouder, you understand the question, right?
I, I understand the question.
We will provide that look forward to providing
that information of the number of move residents who
moved offsite,
and the number of residents who moved,
who moved offsite temporarily, who have the right to return,
as well as the number of residents
who relocated internally on the site.
Thank you. Alderman Lopez. You, you Drew?
Okay, I wanna confuse you.
Um, alderman Waba, do you want to close?
Yes, chairman, thank you.
Um, first, if, if I could try to answer that,
I think they're gonna have to get a very specific
number, uh, alderman.
But at the time, there were, um,
about 175 units when they closed that Southern area,
if I'm not mistaken.
Now, there weren't 175 people there, there was
a little bit more, I believe.
Um, they were all given that right to come back
to the south side.
Some of them moved to the north side, some
of them moved offsite, and some
of them were deceased over this timeframe, unfortunately.
Um, so that number
that she will give is probably different from, uh,
what the original number of people were
that were living on the south side of that site.
But I, I too, I think that's an important question
and answer that we should be able to get.
Um, and the, uh, so going back
to the project here, I first want to thank, uh, Anna Booth
because, um, she does excellent work on all these projects,
um, has been doing that.
And I think you see it in the work
that she produces here in these presentations,
and also her ability to kind of work through,
um, all these projects.
Now, I, I don't fault you for a second for not remembering
what date this first started, because long
before I was alderman, this was an issue
that was on the table in this community.
And, um, when I became Alderman, um, you know,
we, we were kind of thrust into this almost immediately.
The 32nd Ward was not, uh, Lathrop poems.
It was the first ward going back decades.
But, um, our first intent in the community getting all
of our community groups in the surrounding area together was
to basically say we want all of
that affordable housing on site.
Unfortunately, the original units couldn't be, uh,
completely rehabbed and kept the way they were.
But our over the last, uh, several years,
and I, I took this over, um, a little over a year ago
with redistricting.
Um, it was my intent from day one to move forward as quickly
as possible with the partners on this project to make sure
that this did not languish for decades longer.
Um, so lo
and behold, we're here today to really push for
this funding, uh, to move forward.
Um, you know,
and it really was the effort of, I think the residents,
the neighborhood organizations
and, uh, the Lathrop, uh, group working together
to get a project within a first few months of,
you know, redistricting.
Uh, it was very important to me to make sure
that we didn't lose any more of the buildings,
uh, than we needed to.
So, um, chairwoman it, uh, I did write a letter,
but I just want to ask for the support
of the committee members for this project.
I think, you know, for me it's, uh, it's an incredible thing
to finally hopefully see this, uh, completed
and have those affordable units there.
And really, you know, working with the seniors
and working with the residents there
who come into our office every day.
Um, this is something they've been hoping for dreaming of
for many, many decades.
And to be able to move back in there soon, um,
we'll fulfill that dream for them.
So I thank you for, uh, hearing this today.
Thank you, alderman Waba.
I have to tell you my, uh, first assignment, uh,
outta Social Work School.
In Social Work school.
I was assigned to Lathrop Homes
visiting seniors in their homes.
Um, what a, uh, very
tight community that was back then.
Uh, and I'm glad to see
that you've stayed the course to get this done.
It's been a long time coming.
Um, I also wanna acknowledge that we have a letter
of support from Alderman Viegas
and also one from Alderman Martin.
So, is there a motion to recommend approval
of item number six?
So moved by Alderman Irvin. Recommending Do pass.
All those in favor signify by saying Aye.
Opposed in the opinion of the chair. The ayes have it.
And, uh, we will report this out.
Do pass motion at the next city Council meeting. Thank you.
Thank you very much, Anna. Good work.
Um, I wanna go back to item number five.
We're gonna hold item number five at the request
of Alderman Mitchell.
Uh, we will not hear that today.
And moving on to item number eight, which is an ordinance
concerning the execution of a redevelopment agreement
with an issuance of tax increment financing funds
to Revolution Workshop
for space improvements at 34 10 West Lake Street
in the 28th Ward.
We're joined by Tim Jeffries from DPD on this one.
Uh, good afternoon, chair Dowell, members
of the Finance Committee for the record.
My name is Tim Jeffries, managing Deputy Commissioner in the
Department of uh, planning and Development.
Uh, I'm here today to request your approval
of a re redevelopment agreement between the City
and Revolution Workshop, authorizing the use of up
to $3.7 million in Tiff, uh, for the redevelopment
and expansion of Revolution Workshops.
Existing 15,000 square foot facility.
Uh, the subject property is located at 34 10 West Lake
Street, uh, within the East Garfield Park community area,
the Chicago Central Park, TIFF District, and the 28th Ward.
Uh, the site highlighted in red on this map is located at
the northwest corner of the intersection of Holman Avenue
and Lake Street on the northern edge
of Garfield Park is currently owned
and occupied by the Developer Revolution Workshop.
Uh, the subject property is also just west across from ho on
Holman, from the proposed location
of the new Firebird Community Arts facility,
which is highlighted in blue
and was named as a finalist
for a community redevelopment grant in the same round
as Revolution Workshop.
It's also in close proximity
to the hatchery on Kedzie Avenue a, a project
that previously received TIF funds.
Uh, shown here is the exterior view
of the building south facade on Lake Street.
The exterior will remain largely intact as part
of this project, apart from some new window additions.
Uh, and that includes leaving the existing mural in place.
Uh, and here is the interior view of the building, uh,
which the focus is on rehabilitation work.
Overall, the building is in reasonably good structural
condition, uh, but it lacks, uh, the interior organization
and infrastructure needed to best serve
Revolution workshops, growing staff,
their trainees, and their alumni.
Uh, the developer of this project, as I said,
is Revolution Workshop, a, a nonprofit social enterprise
that builds skills, uh, in Chicago's underserved communities
through free pre-apprenticeship and,
and construction job training for unemployed
or underemployed people Aged 18 to 40, uh, currently,
revolution annually provides support
and services for nearly 500 trainees, graduates,
alumni, and professionals.
The proposed renovation of their, uh,
15,000 square foot facility on Lake Street will allow
Revolution to continue providing high quality job training
and placement in the construction center, uh,
through the creation of more space
for higher quality learning,
advanced technology and growing staff.
Uh, the scope of work of this project includes, uh,
developing organized learning spaces
and in structural areas for training programs,
renovated offices and associated structural repairs,
including the n new MEP systems in the building, uh,
that will better meet the technical
and mechanical needs of the organization.
Uh, these renovations will allow revolution
to expand their professional pathways program, which, uh,
provides training for higher wage careers in engineering
and project management, as well
as their are contracting program,
which places their alumni in residential construction
and renovation jobs.
Uh, currently our contracting is renovating a house owned
by Revolution Workshop on the south side that will be sold
to alumni when complete.
Um, upon execution of the R-D-A-R-D-A revolution intends
to begin work immediately
and anticipates completing the project in full
before the end of next year.
Uh, the total project cost is approximately $5 million, um,
beyond the city's con contribution of, uh,
of 3.7 million in tif, uh,
revolution Workshop has committed, uh,
approximately $240,000 of its own funds
and secured a permanent loan of $1 million.
Uh, hard costs will comprise most of the uses of the funds
with the bulk of costs going to the substructure, interior
and services, including the
hvac, plumbing and electrical work.
Uh, if approved, the redevelopment agreement will reimburse
revolution for up to 3.7 million into eligible costs.
Uh, this reimbursement will be
provided as three progress payments during construction
with a final payment made upon the issuance
of the certificate of completion.
Uh, the city's investment will be protected
by provisions in the RDA that require the project to operate
for no less than five years.
If these conditions are not met, then the city has the right
to recapture any previously dispersed TIFF funds.
Here's a, a rendering showing the, uh,
facilities proposed interior.
When the project is complete, uh, the work will reorganize
and reorient the building's floor plan in an east west
direction in order to increase the overall size
and the flexibility of the main shop.
Um, that said, the proposed will work will retain
and capitalize on the, the structures unique
and industrial architectural features,
including the bow trus as shown here, uh, uh, by, with new,
new and modernized openings to increase the natural light,
uh, these new mezzanine spaces to create, uh,
additional space for trainee, uh,
community building and office breakouts.
Uh, so overall DPD supports the, the use of city funds
to rehabilitate Revolution workshops
existing facility on Lake Street.
As this investment would support a demonstrably successful
program, providing job training
to a key demographic in a sector that has a critical need
for more skilled workers, uh,
funding this project will allow, allow revolution
to broaden the impact of its organization
by expanding training offerings
and providing pathways to higher paying jobs
for local residents.
Now finally, the city's investment in this project will,
will leverage other successful investments, uh,
in the Garfield Park area, including the hatchery
and the pending Firebird Community Arts facility.
Uh, for all of those reasons, DPD is requesting the
committee's, uh, favorable consideration of this request.
Uh, I'm joined today by Molly Moriarty, the Director
of Operations, uh,
and Jackie Gallo, a senior program director, both of which,
uh, are work for Revolution Workshop,
and we're available to answer any questions you might have.
Uh, thank you, Tim. Uh, we have, uh, alderman Beal,
Um, safe for the record that, uh,
revolution Workshop is a phenomenal program.
Um, they, uh, recently came to the Ninth Ward
and they're doing a lot of training.
Um, they just purchased a building in my ward
and, uh, they do phenomenal work
and they're, uh, you know, giving people, um, you know,
the skills they need to, you know,
provide a permanent career, uh, for a lifetime.
So, um, you know, I wholeheartedly support this project.
It's a, a great use of TIF funds, um,
because this is going
to really teach these people how to fish.
Um, and so I just want to commend the alderman
and, um, you know, re revolution workshop
for doing, uh, their due diligence.
Thank you. And oh, oh,
Wow.
And, and, and for the rec, is this part
of the 380 something million?
I don't know.
Uh, alderman Lopez,
Can someone check that?
Uh, alderman Irvin is still alive
after that compliment that he got.
Um, when was the, uh, ticks application
Or, uh, this probably came in around fall
of 2022 and it was announced, uh, at or fall of 2023 rather.
And it was announced in January of this year.
The, the TIF application was announced in January. Uh,
They fill out a universal application, so it wasn't too SP
specifically, but yes, they filled out an application in,
in the fall of 2023.
And has the work already begun with the patient of,
Uh, I believe they've started some very preliminary work,
but it won't start in earnest until they,
till they execute the RDA.
Okay. And then I do have just one question
with regards to when we have people who do work
before they are getting money from us, um, with regards
to WNBE certification in
are their penalties if they start working, um,
without WBS before an agreement like this is approved?
How do we rectify that
If they, so I guess as a general rule,
DPD never recommends that any project start work
before they have an executed RDA.
Uh, that said, if they very much need to go for a reason,
we say that you, you really need to meet
with our Construction Compliance Bureau first.
Um, if they can prove up that the work that they did prior
to executing the RDA is comports with all the requirements
of M-B-E-W-B-E, then it's, it's not an issue.
But for projects that don't take that step, they oftentimes
are finding themselves behind the ball in terms
of proving up and, and providing the correct paperwork.
In this case, I know that they met with it,
and in this case, I also know that they are, uh,
this is a hundred percent MBE, uh, project. So it's,
And are we still inclu, including waivers
in these types of RDAs?
Uh, to the extent that there's a waiver to the extent
that there's no, uh, uh, contractor that can fill,
that can provide an MBE service in a particular trade?
Yes, that's, I believe that's the Bureau of Housing, uh,
construction Compliant Groups, uh, and policy.
Alright. Um, Madam Chair, if we could have
through the chair a list of any waivers that have been given
through previous RDAs up to this point for this year
on any projects, just to see what we're looking at,
if they do exist or not.
I would appreciate it, and since I forgot to ask earlier
and can't find it, if I could have a, uh,
if I could have all 20, 24 tick summaries as well.
Thank you.
Okay. Uh, alderman Irvin.
Thank you Madam Chair. Uh, again, uh,
work from our revolutionists.
They're doing great work
and have been doing great work, uh, in East Garfield Park
as they've been servicing a, a large number
of residents throughout the city of Chicago.
Uh, second, I want to thank, uh,
I wanna thank Alderman Burnett
'cause it's, uh, the Chicago Central Park Tiff only
have a very small piece of that.
Uh, the majority of that is in the, uh, 27th and 37th Ward.
So appreciate their support, uh, on this, uh, project.
And again, this is another project that'll be
coming to you fairly soon.
A Firebird, which is actually, uh,
moving from the 27th into the 28th Ward, um, uh, with this,
uh, in the next iteration.
So again, uh, thank everyone for their support.
I thank the gentleman from the, the Ninth Ward for, uh,
acknowledging the great work of the west side of Chicago.
So, uh, we'll write this down too. Thank you much.
You want it? It is okay, man, we, we won't, we,
we won't hold you hostage.
Thank you, ma'am. Thank
You. Uh, alderman
Irv, I would like to say that, uh,
we do have letters of support from Vice Mayor Burnett, uh,
alderman Mitt, and who's the 36th Ward?
Alderman Alderman Viegas.
Um, so is there a motion
to recommend approval of item number eight?
So moved by Alderman Harris. Recommending Do pass.
All those in favor signify by saying Aye.
Oppose and the opinion of the chairs the ayes have.
And we'll report this out at the next City Council meeting.
We're gonna go back to item number five now, which is, uh,
from the Department of Housing
and Ordinance concerning the execution
of a redevelopment agreement.
And is Alderman Mitchell here
the execution of a redevelopment agreement, an issuance
of multifamily tax exempt bonds,
and other financial assistance.
The Thrive Exchange LLC for the Thrive Exchange South
Project, located at 79 0 5 South Exchange Avenue
in, in the Seventh Ward.
This is for, uh, dollars related to the Chicago
Recovery Plan at 6.7 million, a $13.1 million
TIF request and a tax exempt bond request not
to exceed 19 thou
19,175,000 Al Mitchell here.
Good afternoon, chair there
and members of the committee for the record.
My name is hin Financial Planning Analyst from
Department of Housing.
I'm presenting Thrive Exchange South Project today
for the approval for of the ordinance.
Regarding the financial assistance from the city.
Alderman Gregory Mutual provided a letter of support.
The project is also supported
by the alderman, Michelle Harris.
Overall request includes an up
to 6.7 million loan from Chicago Recovery Plan,
a 13.1 million grand from tif, bounce Insurance of tax
and bonds to generate at least a 14.9 million equity
and convey one city owned parcel
to the developer DL three Realty advisors
for the development of the project.
The subject, the property will be located at 79 0 5.
Excuse me. Excuse me, Ms. Shin.
I did not see here on,
if you could just put a penant for a minute.
There is a substitute ordinance that was prepared, uh,
and sent electronically to everyone.
Um, alderman Burnett, vice Mayor Burnett makes a motion
to accept the substitute.
All those in favor signify by saying aye pose.
In the opinion of the chairs, the ayes have it
and the substitute is before. So continue.
Thank you. The subject property will be located at
79 0 5 South Exchange Avenue
on the southeast corner of 79th Street
and Exchange Street in the South Chicago community area.
Avalon Park Tip District,
the Master Plan Thrive Exchange was selected by the city
of Chicago through 79th
and Exchange in West Southwest,
the competitive funding award in 2021,
the South building was assigned to Department
of Housing in 2022.
And target closing This year, thrive Exchange,
LLC will be formed as a single purpose entity
and will consist of the managing member,
DL three Thrive Exchange, LEADx House,
and the investor member
National Equity Fund Assignment Corporation, DL three
Realty Advisors and mbe
and Bipoc LED entity is the sole member
of the General partner Wintrust.
The bank will be the lender for both construction
and the forum loan.
Selected GC is a joint venture between WE O'Neill
and the GMA construction group.
The project includes the new construction
of a six star ized building,
which will provide 43 affordable units.
Also feature ground floor for retail space,
project amenities including community room,
onsite management office, laundry facilities,
workout room, and back storage.
The parking lot will be funded separately.
This table provides a unit, a profile
for the proposed the project.
The subject property will provide four studios,
21 bedroom units, 19 two bedroom units, a total
of 43 rental units of which 100% will be affordable
for households earning no more than 60%
of the average media income.
The subject side is highlighted in yellow area,
including three parcels.
It's mostly vacant
and occupied by derelict building that will be demolished.
The parcel in the middle is owned by the city
and will be conveyed to the developer for $1
with a price the value of $50,000.
The other two parcels on the north
and the South were owned by third party entity
and purchased by the related entity
of the developer in 2022.
Budget showing a total development cost of
around 35.6 million, which 73% attributed
to hard cost, 17% for soft cost,
and a small portion for land acquisition contingency.
And the developer fee are in line
with affordable housing standards, city resources,
including a chief grant, a multifamily housing loan,
low income housing tax credit,
and issuance of tax exempt bond
to generate at least a 14.9 million equity.
And the seller note reflects the price difference
for city owned parcel.
Other funding sources,
including a typical first mortgage GP equity,
a grant from ComEd and a deferred developer fee.
The revenue exchange sales project
will provide 43 new affordable housing
units to the community.
Expected to create 100 temporary construction drafts
and eight permanent drafts in property management,
maintenance, security, and ground floor retail space.
The developer will comply with the requirements
of Chicago's affirmative action ordinance
and the city residency ordinance.
Again, the overall request to the City
of Chicago City Council is to approve the ordinance,
including an up
to 6.7 million loan from Chicago Recovery Plan.
A certain 0.1 million grand from T bounce issuance of tax
and bonds to generate at least 14.9 million equity
and convey one city owned parcel
to the developer DL three Realty advisors
for the development of the project.
Thank you for the consideration.
I'm joined today by Leon Walker, Andrew Stables,
and Yamin hin, uh, from DL three.
We are glad to answer any questions you may have today.
Thank you, Ms. Hin. Uh, we have, uh, alderman Lopez. Thank
You again, chairman. Uh,
few questions.
First off, when was this application
provided to the T for Tiff for the 13 million TIFF request
VO Walker from DL three?
You wanna answer the question? Oh, sorry.
Well, yes, that's what she's Oh,
on my list.
Can you answer his question?
Oh, is that something for the development to answer?
What was the, When was the
TIFF request given to the tick?
Um, I don't have the exact date,
but it was approved last year.
Didn't Ask Maria. Move.
Excuse me. Um, treasure Pap, it's good to see you,
but we're in the middle, but
we're in the middle of a meeting.
So the original chief amount was,
I, I will have to check my calendar, but I don't see it.
Um, but if you could provide that
through the chair, I would appreciate that.
Um, and then I just have one, one question
before, uh, our good friend here gives his presentation,
these three numbers that were up here.
This the recovery money, the TIF money, and the tax exempt.
Um, they are roughly $39 million.
And I think that your, uh, slide showed that this was a 30,
was it a 35, 36?
Yeah. So what is the two
and a half million dollars difference?
What's the d Where,
Correct. I can respond
to that. Sure.
Uh, Tamara Collins, managing Deputy Commissioner
for the Department of Housing.
Oftentimes when you see a bond deal, um, their taxes
and bonds that they cover the construction costs
and then other funds come in to sort of pay down that cost.
But because it's a bond deal, they have
to meet a certain threshold before other sources can come in
because they have to use the bond proceeds to pay for 50 50%
of the total project costs in order to meet that 50% test so
that they can get the full, realize the full amount
of the, uh, tax credits.
So sometimes what you'll see is like the total pro,
the total cost of funding versus the total project
Cost. Got it. So is
there a possibility that the TIFF will,
will be lower if more funds are shifted to the, uh,
tech exempt bond expenditures?
No, because that, that's just basically used
as bridge financing to do the construction of the project.
The TIFF will pay, will reimburse
for TIF eligible expenses on the project.
Got it. Okay. Thank you.
Thank you Alderman. Beal, did you have a question? No.
Alderman Mitchell, did you wanna speak to this?
Good afternoon, everyone.
So we've been working on this project
for a lot of years now.
I support the project.
Um, so I, I ask for advice, favorable consideration.
Uh, is there a motion to recommend approval
of item number five?
I'm sorry, I'll have him speak after we do you want to?
Thank you. Thank you.
Um, so moved by Alderman Beal.
Um, recommending do pass all those in favor
of the motion signify by saying Aye.
Opposed? And the opinion of the chair.
The ayes have it and the motion carries.
The DO pass recommendation will report it out at
the next city council meeting.
Thank you. Thank you, thank you.
Item number nine is a proposed ordinance authorizing the
payment of various small claims against the city of Chicago.
A direct introduction
that was sent electronically to everyone.
If there are no objections,
these will be placed in the omnibus.
Item number 10, a proposed order denying the payment
of various small claims against the city of Chicago.
Also, a direct introduction
and those list of payments
that were denied was sent electronically to everyone.
If there are no objections,
these will be placed on the omnibus.
Item number 11 is a proposed order authorizing charitable
solicitation on the public way.
Tag day permits.
It was a direct introduction for Chicago hopes for children,
uh, streets around Wrigley Field, November 26th, 2024
through November 30th, 2024.
If there are no objections,
this will be placed on the omnibus.
There being no further business before the committee.
Can I get a motion to adjourn? So move by Alderman Lee.
All those in favor say aye. All those opposed nay.
The ayes have it. The Committee on Finance meeting is now
over.