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 condo tearing. Others presentations is not
permitted, banners flyers, or signage are not permitted
backpacks. Large backs and sharp objects are not permitted.
Clear bags, not tinted in color that do not exceed 12 by 12
by 6. In 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 comment 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 conduct
and failure to comply. Will result in their being subject
to removal from the meeting by the sergeant-at-arms.
Uh, ladies and gentlemen, we are 1 short of Quorum and I
understand uh he is here so we will begin shortly. Thank
you.
The Committee on Public Safety will be called to order. Uh,
pursuant to notice given we have a sole subject matter
today to talk about a substitute ordinance, uh, for curfew
regulation in the city of Chicago, in response to large
group Gatherings, uh, we do have, uh, quite a bit of
interest in this topic and we have a lot of public speakers
were allotted 30 minutes for public speaking. And each
public speaker will have 3 minutes. Um, we do seem to have
a few more than we will have time for. So, I've randomized
the order, uh, and we also have a couple of organizations
that have had multiple, uh, public speaker submitted. We
would ask them to designate 1 spokesman for their
organization. Uh, in order to ensure that all voices are
heard, uh, with that, we will call the first witness. Oh,
actually, let's do a quorum call first. I think we do have
Quorum. Uh, chairman Hopkins is present, Vice chairman
Nancy.
Alderman, Chico.
Uh, alderwoman Gutierrez.
Alderman Lopez.
You see?
Thank you Alderman Lopez Alderman. Curtis
Alderwoman to Baris.
Alderman. Cial Lopez.
Alderwoman Fuentes.
Alderman Talya Ferro.
Alderman pisado.
Alderman Vasquez.
Alderman Vasquez, I just saw him.
Alderman. Kuden.
Alderman Gardner.
Alderman. Martin.
Alderwoman, Mana hoppenworth.
Alderwoman Haden.
Alderman Vasquez is present alderwoman Haden.
Alderman Silverstein.
We do have a quorum and we also have a request for a rule.
59 participation from Committee, Member Alderman Gardner.
Uh, I think some non-committee members as well, who do we
have?
Alderman, Conway Alderman Reilly are also present as
non-members.
Alderman Dal, who is a co-sponsor of this ordinance as
well, is President alderwoman Lee.
Alderman, Moore alderwoman Taylor.
Alderman Bernett.
Alderman Rosana, Rodriguez, Sanchez.
are also, uh, I got you
Uh, you're you're not, you're not you. I think you're a
member of police and fire.
Yeah, we yeah.
Yeah.
Okay. All right. Yeah. We'll acknowledge your participation
in full and sort that out later because they didn't, uh,
they didn't change the committee roster. So,
Uh okay so we need a rule, 49 motion, uh for participation.
Moved by Alderman, Chico hearing no objection. We got you
Alderman head.
Motion carries and uh, remote participation will be
permitted for this meeting. We will now proceed uh, to the
public speakers. We have a 30 minutes allocated. Uh, each
public speaker will have 3 minutes. First public speaker is
Charles Spence Mr. Spence please proceed to the microphone
set the timer for 3.
Good morning committee. Thank you for this opportunity to
speak.
I am here today to personally. Thank all the Hopkins for
his tireless efforts to ensure Public Safety in Chicago.
I also thank all those who worked collaboratively on the
ordinance under discussion today.
And October 3rd last year, Mayor Johnson stated it is
important. That law enforcement has all the tools it needs
in order to provide the type of Safety and Security Chicago
deserves
To that end. I'm requesting this committee passed the
ordinance.
And to make its use as effective as possible. I urge this
committee to allow drone use by the Chicago Police
Department.
The best decisions are aided by having the best
information. An aerial view provides details, not available
at Ground levels.
In determining what action to take the area, a drone can
quickly cover. And the information, it provides will be of
huge value.
Perhaps even more important and aerial view, AIDS and
assessing the implementation of any action taken.
It is is it working as intended are more resources needed
in a particular area, our crimes being committed, the
enhanced situational awareness and aerial view, provides
increases officer and civilians safety.
Perhaps it even indicates no action is needed. That
monitoring is sufficient.
for those who consider this over policing House Bill, 3902
authorizes drone, use the faa's public safety, and law
enforcement tool kit regulates their use.
Committee. This is a gimme, you even have Federal
forfeiture, fund 1505 to pay for them.
If in 2023 public and private entities in Illinois can
spend 225 million on violence reduction programs. The city
in 2025 can spend 500,000 for 22 drones and the training to
operate them.
Don't wait.
The violence reduction programs. Take time.
Residents of Chicago need this. Now, visitors to Chicago.
Need this. Now, the police officers in Chicago, need this
now.
You want this ordinance to work as well as possible. And to
achieve its desired objectives, allow the police department
to procure and use drones as part of this new approach to
crowd control. Thank you.
The next speaker is Daniel Schneider.
Good morning. My name is Dan Schneider. I'm an attorney
works with legal action. Chicago, We're a partner agency of
legal aid and we're a pragmatic organization. Our goal is
to try and use our connection to the people in the city who
are living in poverty. Plus the lawyers and social workers
who serve them to help lawmakers, like you make better
decisions. And now I am opposed to this ordinance, but I
come with a more narrow ask this morning which is to wait
to
Hold off and make a better decision than rushing this
through today. And now, I'm here, to talk about the law and
the time I have, and I get at this point, for many of you,
the question isn't, you know, facing concerns about public
safety, concerns from business owners and streeterville the
concern is not. Whether you going to act at all. It's about
whether you're going to make good policy or bad policy. But
bad policy includes making legal, mistakes and includes
giving away power to those who can abuse it in the future.
I'm talking about a future mayor and a future
superintendent. We don't even know yet. If this ordinance
passes as written, we are guaranteed to see it used in ways
that no 1 in this room intends or can imagine just as we're
seeing with over broad laws at the federal level. And when
that happens whether it's after a teen Gathering or after a
protest, the city will find itself. Again, writing massive
checks to plaintiffs and their lawyers. We've already paid
over 80 million dollars this year alone. Quite literally,
we can't afford more legal mistakes.
And this ordinance contains obvious legal mistakes. Yes, it
will get struck down in court, why not? Take time with it?
Take a week, Take 2 weeks. The final language of this
substitute proposal, which I'll note for those here was
only sent around after 5:00. Yesterday after business hours
before people could have a chance to review it, to digest
it, to have more lawyers outside attorneys. Look at it. No,
1 outside city government, except 1 consultant. As I
understand, actually saw it. And folks are being told as I
hear that, this case from the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals,
a case involving the city of Wawatosa who implemented a
curfew following the, uh, protests after the murder of
George. Floyd, after the murder of Jacob, Blake, uh, in
2020, that that case somehow gives the city, the carte
blanche Authority needed to pass this ordinance. It
doesn't, it will be struck down just like jur. Jus juvenile
curfews have been struck down in San Diego, in West, New
York in Sumner, watch Washington in Rochester. This will be
no different without more changes. Its going to have
happen and it's going to be expensive. Now, I can't get
into everything in the time I have, but this ordinance
allows people to be arrested on a standard based on less
than probable cause the definition of provides of a mass
Gathering is unconstitutionally vague. It's structured like
a series of nesting dolls layering subjective standards
inside of each other, making enforcement, dangerously, easy
and impossible to predict. And with these new changes in
the substitute circulated at the last minute. It's not
clear what limits exist on, what Authority can be delegated
from the mayor and the superintendent.
Dependent into who, these are fixable problems and there is
time, take it. Please don't commit yourselves on the record
with your vote, to supporting an illegal law that thank you
for your testimony. The next Witness
is Matt leko.
Matt lefco.
Hi. Um,
Yeah, please proceed.
Uh, thank you council members. Uh, my name is Matt lefco.
I'm a property manager. I manage the River East Center, at,
um, 322 East Illinois. We've got the AMC theater, The Lucky
Strike, bowling alley,
Um, I'm here on behalf of the business owners, the
customers, the, uh, the owners. The residents that share
the property with us, the hotel guests.
um,
you know, we are Ground Zero for some of the things that
have been happening in the neighborhood.
Um,
I don't know if this is the best version of this
legislation and I hope whatever legislation passes is the
best version that you are all capable of. But
um, we see firsthand that, uh,
Most of the kids are good. Most of these kids coming down
there.
are are great people and they're just looking for something
to do and
And God bless them for that. It's just there's a handful of
people that really cause trouble and we need a way to find
those kids and and handle them in a way that is
constructive. And
You know, hopefully benefits them and all the people that
they care about and that care about them, I don't know what
that is. Um, I don't know about the current version of this
bill but
um, we would certainly like to see
something constructive.
In the way of managing.
These um, these kids, you know, like I said, most of them
are good. Um,
just if there's a way to, you know,
filter out, some of these kids that, uh,
Are less great.
you know, I don't I don't know how to put it, I don't want
to make any euphemisms or anything but um,
You know, we need we need something, I don't want to do
something just for the sake of doing something, and it
sounds like they're probably better versions of what's on
the table today. But I do hope that all the stakeholders
can come together and find something that works and you
know, Insurance both the safety of the neighborhood and the
ability of the kids to come and enjoy themselves and
contribute to a thriving City. So that's all I got. Thank
you.
Thank you. The next witness is bernicia. Barry.
Burneika or bernicia, Barry.
Hi. Um, my name is behnia Barry. I am a resident of Ward 4.
Um, I'm here because I really care about my neighbors and I
want everybody to be able to live safely and uh, Carefree
not just um, the the people with platforms. So,
Everybody here. I I have a question for you all. If your
loved 1 was killed by a pitbull, how many of you all would
expect your Alder person to help if the pit bull's owner,
escaped with the dog before the cops or animal control
could get there.
How many people would want to know if a violent animal had?
Recently killed scaled, a 6-foot fence and killed.
75 yards from your child's School.
Right across the street.
The police officer and animal control services. Still have
done nothing to find this dog. It is loose.
And the owner is not facing any accountability or
repercussions. But here's, here's what I'll say, it's just
this past cycle. I was the national political director for
the number of cratic National Committee.
Before that, I was chief of staff for the equivalent of an
older person.
And I have myself had to respond to the most tragic
situations children being killed and drive-bys deadly
animals and so much more. So I know what constituent
Services should look like.
Here's what I will say. My older person Lamont Robinson a
few months ago when the convention was here was proactive
about following up so that he could get uh the national
surrogate and travel and get national attention.
when I text him asking for a contact for animal control
services,
he just told me that it was in Pat, Dallas District.
That was his only response, not even a number for his
staffer, nothing.
so,
Thankfully Zoe over here. Connected me with Pat dolls
office and her staffer Ivonne called me immediately and
reported it and is trying. They're trying to find answers
That's the type of council member and Alder person that we
deserve. This dog is still free right across the street
from a school. It can kill. And, and by the way, my dog was
outside playing with an 11th month. Old child, she saved
that baby's life.
And that dog owner is still free. So first of all, I'm
here, if anybody can give us information, it happened
between the 62nd and 72nd unit of East 37th Place Chicago.
If anybody can send tips on that has seen this Pitbull. I
have a video of the pitbull, um, on my social media and
follow me at behnia Barry. Um, I will give a reward of
yeah, thank thank you. Ma'am, we'll follow up with you on
this, uh, to the side please.
Uh, the next speaker is marlin.
hi, my name is Mara, I've lived in Chicago my entire life
and I'm involved with a ton of community organizations
First, thank you to the elected officials. Who are actually
listening. I had a feeling this would happen as the people
here, who are looking. Thank you for doing that, not on
your phones, not reading the paper, not looking away.
uh, even if your mind's made up, excuse me, the community
deserves your attention which I knew we wouldn't get from
at least these people um giving your youth, a snap curfew
doesn't fix the real issues and you all know that our
youth, especially black and brown youth need safe
supportive, engaging spaces not more restrictions
Over policing doesn't build safety investment does for all
you that are not listening. Access does community does
I wish you'd consider that and take your ego.
And your need for control out of this.
Curfews, don't reduce crime but we do know they lead to
more racial profiling, which I know you also don't care
about.
More targeting of Youth, who already don't have safe places
in their own neighborhoods and it's snap.
That's not Public Safety. That's just more control.
I'm asking you to vote, no, on this performative policy and
instead choose real solutions, which you don't care about
the kind that treat young people. Like, people not
problems. Choose empowerment over enforcement and show our
youth. That their lives actually matter.
Thank you for those listening. Thanks for not listening.
It's great. Nice of you.
Our next speaker is Dennis White.
Good morning, everybody.
We have a serious problem here in the city of Chicago and
it's violence, the mayor of of the city of Chicago, it's
not helping the citizen of Chicago. Now, I emphasize the
word citizen Natural Born people, taxpayers.
So, here's the thing.
We have to figure out what to do to reduce crime this year.
In the monthly, we only the 30th day of the month of April.
Shot and kill 105, shot and wounded. 399 total shot. 504
total, homicide 124
This is a serious problem.
The mayor has handcuffed the police long enough.
Now.
I don't want to say this, but I will.
I'm a shell, right driver? I had to carry a concealed
carrier.
I had to arm myself, just in case it was a carjacker, come
up at me. And if the citizen of Chicago had to stop the
crime, the police can't. Then we going to have to take
marathon on hands.
And stuff. So it's up to the mayor and the council member
because you all are responsible to make sure that the
citizen in your ward are safe.
It's up to the mayor to make sure that the the citizen of
Chicago are safe, not the illegal immigrants.
And here's another thing.
if you all, don't let Ice come in and do their job and
stuff, then maybe we need ice, need a deputized, some of us
because we know the streets better than some of you all we
know where they hang out at better than in some of y'all.
And if they come after us,
it's going to be a lot of graveyards feel now. I don't want
the kids to get caught up in the next mess but some of
these kids I carry in guns and backpacks. They wearing
black hoodies. They wearing these masks
It's up to the to parents, to take care of that Ralph Han.
Now, everything ain't going to be solved in this little
committee right here.
But you it's up to you all the council member to put your
foot down and put your foot in Brandon Johnson asked and
tell him to take care of this business a little bit better.
He has been because the only thing he's investing are these
illegals
and the only thing he put his money on is the illegals and
CTU.
So you all better take care of this because it's getting
warmer, it's going to get hotter and the and the body's
going to be piling up a little bit faster.
Thank you.
All right, thank you. The next speaker is, uh,
Nat painter.
Palmer, that Palmer.
Uh, hi uh um, I'm here to speak.
um,
Against the curfew because it it don't make any sense. Um,
I know like the people who are for the curfew don't really
care, they just hate black people and that's cool. Um, that
ain't my problem. Uh, but I do like think it's also like
wild that we just keep putting. Oh violence violence
violence. Like violence is a serious issue, bro. Um but
kids ain't got guns for no reason bro. Like like things are
really serious out here, my friends ain't doing stuff just
for no reason, bro. Like
I grew up in North Riverside. We had the mall right there,
and they had a curfew, all it did was make a sneaky, all it
did was make us figure out. Okay, well these cops clearly
can't be trusted these adults. Clearly can't be trusted.
How am I going to get around it? Whenever I got caught for
curfew, all we did was wait till the cops left and then
figured out how to get home or get, where we was going,
curfew, don't stop anything. What we need is to allow kids
into our neighborhoods, like um, buddy was saying about the
bowling alley and all that place.
I personally, believe all kids are cool. All of them if
stuff happens. Then we got to figure out why that thing is
happening. If we uh, took the same logic that we applied,
let's say to when we was, um, trying to invade Vietnam,
they had millions and millions of dollars, trying to figure
out strategies to stop that violence. There are literal
Wars going on in our city. And the only thing we do is
continue to increase policing. Contrary to what folks are
saying about Brandon Johnson, we continue to increase their
funding yet when violence prevention shows. It works. We
decrease their funding that don't make no type of sense at
all.
Um I don't know where folks are getting this myth. That
Brandon is handcuffing the cops. He's hiring more
detectives. He's listening to Snelling, like, violence is
also decreased violence has been decreasing. This is a
National Trans since the 90s. Let's not get caught up in
these lies that the right wing and racist. People will say
about our children, bro, that don't make any sense.
Children deserve to thrive children deserve
To be outside whenever and wherever they want, just cuz you
scared of my people don't mean, you should have control
over when our babies are allowed to be out. All it does is
make them feel, not welcome in our city. It makes them feel
even more like, okay? Why I care about these laws? Why I
care about any of this, I'mma handle it myself,
And I know because I've seen it, I know cuz I've like been
there. So like let's quit, just like policing these kids.
Let's make sure that they actually feel welcome in our
area. Let's make sure that there are adults there who know
these kids and actually like, hey is something pops off. I
don't know how to talk to you. I know your mom, I know your
dad. I ain't just trying to throw you in a cage where you
will only be treated like a criminal where you will only be
tortured and then you going to come out and that's all you
going to know, bro. I know again because I've seen it, I've
seen this violence. I've been around this violence. It
ain't it. The police have never stopped it. That's been a
400 year experiment and yet we still dealing with it. So
what we doing, what are they doing? Nothing.
Uh, the next speaker is Reese Johnson, Reese Johnson.
Um, Reese Johnson with good kids Mass City. Um,
Other night 3 uh teams were shot overnight. 1 of them is
youngest 13 years old.
You know, what? We here on the news city council. You all
planning on how to protect downtown from Teen trans. You
know what we don't hear from on the news, how you all city
council are planning on how to keep the youth safe in our
communities.
We don't hear plans on for teens in Austin Lawndale Little
Village, Back of the Yards Englewood Rossland Bronzeville.
Southshore, Chapman Washington Park on any other
communities in Chicago.
Where youth are where youth are victims and survivors of
gun violence every day.
Yes, it's a tragedy that 2 shootings happened downtown this
year when team Trends happen, but let's not forget that
students are current every day in the neighborhoods. I just
named
we need the city council to pass the Peace book treatment,
not trauma, e, and other programs, that will provide
youthful Job Services, mental health, care and
entertainment.
This alone with peacekeeping and restorative practices is
how we keep our community, safe and stop the teens drains,
past the Peace book, and not the unconscious, uh,
constitutional curfew law. Thank you.
And 1 more thing. Um,
The people the people that's not paying attention. Um,
kids around things are happening because of the people not
paying attention. You just looked the other way every time.
And I don't think that's fair to these kids because they're
young and they're trying to find something to do. There's
nothing around to see you to do for these kids. It's just
an open space. We trying to find something to do and the
people that are not paying attention. That's what happens.
The next speaker is Zelda. Boyd.
I all, um, I am speaking in strong opposition to this
ordinance, and I speak behalf of many people here who are
on the same page. If you agree with me, make some noise,
let's hear it.
we are Chicagoans are strongly against this ordinance
because
Oh my gosh.
Um, it
it prevents kids from being kids like ultimately and it's
not pointed at any white people, it's pointed at black and
brown people fact, it is directed towards like Southside
neighborhoods that are predominantly, black and brown. And
it's also has an awful way of communicating that these
curfews are happening in a snap of a moment. They what it's
like through social media. I
Sorry I might think you're cool but you don't have that
many followers or anything, there there's no way that any
of these kids are going to know about when these curfews
suddenly happening. They can be out, they might be out with
people and not even looking at their phone and then all of
all of a sudden they're being dragged away because of a
they had no way of knowing about. Yes. They might have if
have if they were following the right account or accounts
and check their phone at the right time. They might have
within the 30 minute time period been able to like leave
their there's so many like layers of things that have to
right? And in order for our like teens that are targeted by
this to be able to act accordingly. And at the end of the
end of the day, what about the other teams who just happen
to be in those same areas, unrelated to any of these
situations and get targeted just because they're in the
wrong place at the wrong time.
This adds an unprecedented like weird amount of power to
police that is just 1 sanctioned and unnecessary. And
ultimately unconstitutional is disrespectful to the kids
who are just trying to, like, grow up because you're,
you're making them villains. And like Pat said, there's
like Pat said that there you have to
Words, I'm going to keep moving. Um, but
thank you. Um,
Yeah, um, I'm gonna move on for now. But again, we strongly
oppose, this ordinance, and there's true like
Matters as to why this is unconstitutional. Thank you.
Uh, the next speaker is yina Jimenez.
Good morning. My name is um, a resident of the 14th. Ward.
I was born and raised in Brighton Park Chicago, I am
currently a senior at manetto high school and I am here to
speak on behalf of the youth.
Of increased, the peace and all the youth of Chicago. At
we work together as teams, living in the south side of
Chicago to address the needs of our community. With the
focus being increasing, the piece has Chicago youth. We are
fascinated by the amazing landmarks and places Chicago has
for us to enjoy. I invite you to vote. No.
On the harmful. Snap. Curfew proposal ordinance 816 021.
this new law will not only restrict us from enjoying what
Chicago has to offer, but also grow fear in us, and in our
families,
We want to be able to enjoy the amazing. Things Chicago has
to offer. We are just growing up and we don't want to be
limited to these opportunities nor fear them. Thank you.
Uh, the next speaker is Zoe Lee.
Good morning.
um,
I definitely oppose that that um that curfew and um you
already know like there's nowhere for these kids to go.
And y'all know this, all the money that y'all have in this
budget that has been passed over the years to go to the
South side and the west side for these programs. For these
children, the money never gets there and the money never
gets there because y'all stealing it and y'all going to
continue to steal it and that is the issue and that is the
problem. And until someone gets some forensic Audits and
figure out where this money is, these kids are going to
continue to come down because there's nothing in their
communities that I said, 2 years ago, when I came down here
It's not them.
And Brian Hopkins Oldman Hopkins. I was living in your ward
in summer 2023. When the migrant Takeover in the end of
Chicago happened, they were all over the place. Madelo
bottles everywhere music, they Taco selling everything was
all prostitution, they were drug drug use all of that.
Where was that energy?
Somebody just got killed, just got robbed down there, from
a, from an illegal. You know why? Cuz the, the end of
Chicago was down there for 2 years, operating under Andre
Vasquez,
Okay, and set. And and and and and and and and and and
again, keep it 100 the other day, when I protested, the van
Holland being across the street from the end of Chicago,
right?
The end of Chicago was open still, people were still going
back and forth in there. I thought the end of Chicago was
shut down.
Yeah, so I'm just trying to figure out, y'all got to figure
out when y'all going to let Ice come in here and do what
they need to do. So they can get the Trinity AUA and MS13
and arrested gangs out here. First before you work on a
curfew for some children who don't have nothing in their
communities.
So that's the issue, and that's the problem. And so when
y'all figure that out the disgrace 50, then maybe we can
maybe stuff can work but until then nothing is going to
happen. Until you guys start finding the money, follow the
money because the money is going to the South side and west
side. It's just not getting there. So that's the problem.
The next speaker is George Blakemore.
I say, I know it's not gonna call me. Listen here.
This is ways Fraud and Abuse also Mr. Blakemore.
Yo rankle, look like their mrr Blakemore what party are all
these people out here that you're looking at.
Blue.
They're all Democrat. What do you know, Mr. Hopkins from
He's a recycle.
From over at the county John Daly, try to set me up and
say, Christina, I hit her. I had a rich white lady friend
of mine. Carry me to court and, and, and follow me and and
and and and I was found innocent. So he's a recycle, this
is the old daily machine. These are the sellouts, these are
the engine Mas, but oh Mr. Blakemore, you calling them that
somebody call somebody Niger here,
And they didn't arrest him.
Oh, he called Mr. George Blakemore, I know you
I live in your voice. You gonna try to move me out of that
building.
I believe y'all. Try to kill me over County Hospital.
Ah that's why I don't want to go back to the hospital. I
want to come right down here and die right here.
Right here. I know you, you're no good.
And you had Christina. I've been out here a long time,
fighting for you, black people, y'all don't know me.
I've been out here a long time. Fighting people just like
that.
Just, you know, me. Don't you know me?
Don't, I'm asked you a question sir. Do do you know Mr.
Blakemore, I'm not a popup active.
I got history here. Do you know me?
Do you know when you try to set me up over at the county?
Do you remember Christina said that I hit her?
You all are dirty people.
You all are wicked people.
And they all Flew come by here.
I went red and then I flipped red and on our way, you going
black
The fuk off. We are the only people enslaved in America.
The only 1 enslaved in America, we don't owe American.
Nothing America owes us
America old black people and you calling my name. Wait a
minute, somebody The Gods Must Be working and stuff is be
working. You see I'm still here though.
Don't you see? I'm still here.
Do you see I'm here in living car?
Do you see me? I know you.
well, I know you and you know, good
The next speaker is Devonte Richardson, and this is our
final speaker.
Out of here.
Thank you. Can top your
good morning everyone. My name is renia Jackson, and I'm a
youth organizer with good kids Mass City.
Last summer, we joined a partnership with dfss and trained.
100 youth peacekeepers. Young leaders that are committed to
creating safer and more peaceful communities. This year,
we're doubly down and training 200. That's 200. Young
ready to lead Empower and uplift their peers. We urge city
council to stand with us pass. The Peace book invest in
events and spaces where teens feel seen valued and safe.
Not criminalized, our peacekeepers don't just prevent. They
model. What's possible? When young people are empowered and
invested in they deescalate conflict Foster.
healing through restorative justice practices and lead, by
example, at jcmc, we're on the ground every day, partnering
with different Community organizations and entering in CPS
schools to lead peace circles and create restorative
communities. We know what drives these trends that you fear
boredom isolation and lack of opportunity. Lack of
investment, the solution isn't more curfews or
criminalization, it's a key word, it's called investment
city council must ask itself, do you want to be responsible
for accelerating the school to prison pipeline or
dismantling that we believe? The answer is clear. Let's
work together to protect youth invest in their Futures and
honor their rights to gather and be heard. Let's pass the
Peace book. Now and protect these young folks for their
first amendment and set of this unconstitutional law. We
have to understand that last summer, good kids, mad city
was able to make an event for Halloween. At High Park
Academy, High School, High Park usually has team
Trends. But because GMC stepped in, and created this event
for young people to be able to be centered to be able to be
heard and seen. A trend, didn't happen at High Park because
there was a space where young people felt heard and seen
where young people would be able to be celebrated and set
of criminalized, we need to invest in things like the Peace
book and things like treatment not trauma and things like
eat something that is able to oppose these type of curfews.
Our young people are not criminals, they're young people
Trying to find their way. Why criminalize them when we can
mentor them, when we can give them opportunities, to be
great in a community that isn't uplifting them. Let's
invest in a community instead of investing in more
criminalization our children are already traumatized
instead of constantly opposing this more more than trauma
onto them conflicting, more trauma with over policing, why
don't we oppose that? Why don't we start with something
like the Peace book. So we're asking the everybody here to
say no to this amendment to say no to this curfew to say
yes to Peace book. And we're asking everyone to stand with
us and pass this piece book now. Thank you.
Uh thank you to our Witnesses. This concludes our period of
public testimony. Uh we do have uh to add to the attendance
roll call uh Alders Vasquez and Fuentes. Uh we also need a
we also need a motion to approve rule. 49 participation.
Uh, for Alder Gutierrez. Uh, moved by Alderman, Martin
hearing no objections. Uh, oh, and I'm sorry. Ed Alderman.
Cincho Lopez to the roll. Call, didn't see you come in
there. Byron.
Uh, okay, uh, some housekeeping matters. We do have a rule
45 report from the January 25th. Uh, that needs approval,
do I have a motion to approve, the rule, 45 report moved by
Alderman Martin uh, comments hearing none.
Uh, so ordered.
um, before we get to our uh uh witness testimony um from
the officials from CBD that we have here, we do need a
motion to substitute and I just want to make sure everyone
has the correct 1 before you. Uh, it's the 1 that was
distributed by via email, yesterday with 1 relatively minor
minor Edition, pick up the uh substitute before you and
make sure that on the very first page, the last sentence
should read
Upon receipt of notification, the office of emergency
management and communication shall issue notification of
the curfew declaration to any affected sister agency in
aldermanic office. So the last 3 words on that page should
be and aldermanic office. If you have that you're looking
at the right substitute. Um this language was originally in
in it was taken out and now it's put back in uh simply to
reflect that we insist and expect that the aldermanic
office is in the affected sister agencies would receive
such notification in the event. That a curfew was declared,
uh, oemc would do that anyway, as you know, that's, that's
what they do. Um, but it was just asked that it be included
in the ordinance, uh, just to emphasize that they intend to
do that. Um, which they said all along.
They would so, uh, with that, we have the substitute for
us. So we'll have a motion to accept the substitute.
Uh moved by Alderman Lopez any objection, hearing none, the
the motion is before us. Um, with that, I will turn it over
uh to deputy chief, John Hine chief of Patrol uh to comment
on the uh uh application of this ordinance, uh, CPD intends
to use this as a constitutional tool for Public Safety, uh,
and chief of Patrol high, and will elaborate on that.
Chief. Good morning. My name is John. Hi named the chief
Patrol for the Chicago, Police Department. Um,
Comments on this ordinance, I believe uh, the men and women
of the Chicago Police Department.
Of, uh, been thoroughly trained in constitutional policing
in every event and then, uh, no other evidence is more
clear than last year when we held the Democratic National
Convention at 7 Days of demonstrations and collaboration
with our organizers of such demonstrations, and everything.
The foundation of constitutional policing always being
there after, the convention was closed, we received a total
of 14 complaints related to that convention. Um, I think if
you look at it probably in a daily basis, there's 14
complaints throughout the city or more, uh, the officers
and men, and women have been dealing with large-scale
demonstrations. Uh, since October 8th. I'll give you a
clear small example. There's been over 521 demonstrations
of thousands of people Gathering throughout the city, our
men and women are out there, uh patrolling this and
controlling this and uh constitutionally based
Approach. Um, we use every de-escalation technique possible.
Uh so as far as this ordinance goes there would be no other
other difference besides based upon the activity that the
men and women from the top down Chief Deputy Chief Captain
Lieutenant, everybody on the scene, it would be activity
driven and it would be 1 of our tools 1 of our many options
that we have if needed to uh to address the situation that
occurs.
Thank you, chief.
Um, we also have uh, from CPD uh Council uh Scott Spears,
Mr. Spears.
Good morning, everyone. Um, thank you for the opportunity
to be here today and discuss this ordinance. Um, we were
presented with this, we've had an opportunity to review it.
Um, we believe it to be constitutional on its face. I think
that, uh, applying this is going to be the most important
part as the chief mentioned. We have gone through several
years now of constitutional foundations and policing. Uh,
would enforce this only, if it can be enforced
constitutionally uh we have a number of tools at our
disposal that we can use if we could use this and we could
use it in a constitutional manner. Of course, we would, um,
if we couldn't, we would not implement this ordinance so we
appreciate the opportunity to see you this morning.
Thank you, Mr. Spears. Uh, also, let the attendance record
please, uh, reflect. We have almond Curtis and, uh,
alderwoman Gutierrez with us. Uh, we we also have with us
in the box and I will call on him briefly, uh,
Joel bakey uh who is an attorney with almost 40 years of
experience in constitutional law litigation, uh, he was a
consultant on this issue and was involved in the drafting
of the ordinance. Uh Mr. Baraki
Thank you. Uh, Mr. Chairman members of the committee and
the council, uh,
By way of introduction. Uh, I have been litigating
constitutional issues since I started practicing law in
1987. First, as an assistant us attorney, then as the
solicitor general of the state of Illinois. And since that
time uh, in private practice representing, uh, a number of
individuals related to constitutional claims. I know that
ultimately as, uh, Mr. Schneider said, this case, this
ordinance, if it's passed, will likely end up in court. And
I don't intend my analysis to, uh,
Uh, overbear what the law department will argue. It will be
their job to defend it, but I can't. I'm also not an expert
in the legislative process but I can assure you from what I
have seen. That there has been a great deal of process
going into producing. This ordinance. It has changed over
time and response to comments from people within and
outside the city. Uh, it has evolved
uh, I know that a number of groups have expressed concerns
over its constitutionality and I would like to address that
uh this ordinance as far as curfews goes, has a great deal
of process in it and all of that is going to figure in
constitutionality. Uh it has rules and procedures that have
to be followed. It has specifically designated decision
makers. It is not something that is going to allow what the
Press has called a snap curfew to take place. Um
it will, um,
I believe having looked at case law dealing with curfews
that this ordinance will ultimately pass a constitutional
test. The First Amendment test uh that is applied by courts
looking at enactments like this uh looks to 4 factors. The
first factor is
uh,
whether it is uh it it advances a significant government
interest these teen takeovers as I understand it from what
I've seen myself and what I've heard from people who are
working on, this ordinance are a real issue. They really do
happen. They really cause problems. And the people who have
been injured in them so far, are the kids who are
participating in them.
uh,
So in that sense, there is a real issue here, and the cases
make clear that governmental authorities are not required
to wait for a problem to materialize before they address
it. They can act preventively when they have good grounds
to do so. And I think ultimately a court that considered
this ordinance will come to the belief that they do.
Uh it is as the Constitutional lawyers say narrowly
tailored to achieve its purpose. It has a robust set of
criteria to decide when it can be used. It has, uh,
oversight from both the police department and the mayor's
office there has to be a concurrent decision to use this
procedure, it has notice process that has processes and
rules that have to be implemented, including some that have
just been added to make sure that the the impact that
Alderman know,
Uh and it is not aimed at any expressive conduct. This is
not an all. This is, in fact, it has a number of
protections built into it to protect expressive conduct
that is protected by the First Amendment. This ordinance is
not about that.
um,
I would also note finally that having done, uh, some
research into the Constitutional, uh, law. And the cases
that have been decided based on curfews that anybody who is
doing that, including the law department, but including
anybody else is looking at this needs to look at a case
from the United States court of appeals for the seventh
circuit, which is the federal appeals court, that governs
Illinois along with Wisconsin and Indiana. And that is the
highest Federal Authority around here. It is a court that a
federal judge down at the Dirksen. Building will have to
follow and there's a case and I don't want to go into long
case analysis in this setting, but it's called Nolan versus
city of Wawatosa Mr. Schneider made a reference to it. And
for those of you who collect case sites, it's at 1:19 F4
507. It was decided last October, so it's a new case and it
concerns a curfew and upholds. A curfew that I think is
actually
Significantly more restrictive than the 1. That is proposed
here.
Uh, that curfew was it covered everybody. It was in the
entire city of Wawatosa from 700 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. for 5
nights. No 1 could go out unless they were coming home from
work or with other very limited exceptions. It was imposed
for the purpose of avoiding problems that would result from
an issue.
these the ordinance that you guys are looking at now
doesn't do that but the 1 in the Knowlton case, the 5 night
curfew was imposed because the the city of Wawatosa was
concerned about what would happen when the district
attorney of Milwaukee County made a decision whether to
charge uh uh ah Wawatosa police officer who had shot and
killed the black teenager. They knew there were going to be
protests. They had reasonably they were going to be
violent, and their answer was 5 nights. Nobody goes out,
protest, not to go to the grocery store. That curfew is
much more sweeping than the 1. That is contemplated here
which will be in reaction to specific evidence of
particular areas and I would emphasize in response to some
of the other uh concerns that have been expressed. This
ordinance is not over broad because it covers the whole
city.
It covers the area where there's a problem. The bank robbery
statute is not over broad because it covers all the banks
in America
this, or
This ordinance. Uh so as I say that Walla tosa curfew was
more restrictive. I think than this 1 had less process. It
was just issued by the mayor as a emergency order and it
was upheld. And finally, there will be many other
opportunities outside this curfew for Youth and other
people to conduct expressive conduct to get together as
long as they do. So in ways that do not violate this very
specific set of criteria and let there be no mistake as I
have learned from the discussions. I've sat in on the
police are going to take these actions, why not have rules.
Why not have procedures in my career litigating, on both
sides of criminal cases? I have seen police actions occur
with a lot less rules and a lot less limits and a lot less
process than this. And I think this process is commendable
but more to the point of what I'm saying, I think that
process will play a very strong role in the in
Having a court that hears the challenge to this, uphold it.
Thank you. Mr. Chairman for hearing. Uh, thank you, Mr.
Bakey, uh, before we go to questions from committee
members, uh, I do want to yield to the 2 co-sponsors of
this ordinance to see if they have any opening statements
and then we'll turn it over to uh committee members. Start
with chairman Dal and then go to Chairman, Ervin.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, um, I do support this ordinance
and uh, look forward to hearing the questions that come up.
I mean, I believe that the uh what we're seeing in our
public spaces, the Firearms, the fights and the property
damage cannot be tolerated, can't be tolerated and uh we
have to seek ways of uh addressing that. Now I do believe
in supporting uh activities like the Peace book. Um, but we
we need other tools and if this is a tool that the police
department says that they need, um, I support that
Thank you, chairman d. Uh chairman Ervin on a rule. 59, are
you? Uh are you online sir?
Yeah, he appears to be muted, we'll come back to him, okay.
Uh, chair recognizes older woman had
All right, get to share a microphone with uh chairwoman
Taylor over here. Um thank you um chair and thank you to
the presenters. Um if you guys ever seen the movie Foot
Loose,
You guys remember that movie?
Foot Loose, uh, the original, I haven't seen the remade
version. Um, you know, General premise is in a town, not
too. Unlike Wawa tosa, maybe not as wealthy a little bit
more religious. I don't know how many of you have been to
Wawa tosa. I have, super cute, um, premise of the movie
Foot Loose, um,
Restrictive. There are a lot of rules. Uh the kids don't
have anything to do outside or comes in. They start
dancing, dancing's prohibited. They start dancing like in a
barn, having these parties, and in response to behavior
that they didn't understand and that they found unwanted
the elders in the city, decided to you know, enforce their
curfews and come up with like stricter laws and spoiler
alert, it didn't work.
Okay. Um, I appreciate the problem and uh, appreciate the
public commenters that came today and have had some good
conversations with young people about this. And we know
that the property damage the violence that can result from
some of these unshaped. Gatherings is behavior that we
don't want to see.
Right? I I don't think there's disagreement on that.
I uh, question the efficacy of what's proposed.
Um, I know I've I've also hearing the Constitutional
concerns, it does concern me. Um, though I'm not a lawyer
to kind of read through, um, to know that we have
organizations telling us.
This isn't enough. So uh 1 point, I'll say to those of you
who are trying to pass this um and you're looking for a
solution, I think you should wait and talk a bit more with
our friends at the ACLU and others, if that's really what
you're trying to do. But more broadly, um,
Could someone maybe from the police department?
if um, I have had the experience in my district where uh,
Social Media stuff becomes uh evident the police get win
that, there might be some big Gathering. I've got the lake,
they talked to me and the other Alders and they talk about
their plans and how they're going to kind of Monitor and
that if anything gets out of hand, they'll disperse it. And
they've done exactly that without without this.
Total in the 24th district, they just do it. Um, hey, if
there's too many kids it's minors, it's we already have a
curfew. It's after 10 pm. This area is closed. Um, we have
rules already in place and I have seen them enforced. I've
seen the police department enforce, those rules, in a way
that is not dramatic to anyone. There are no incidents to
your point, right? Like, everything works. And I know my
colleagues downtown that are kind of the sights of some of
these, like, kind of larger Gatherings are in need of some
response and some solutions. But why can't you just why do
you need this? Why can't you just do the monitoring? And
hey, there's a large group and there's no permit and things
are getting out of hand. So you guys have to go home, like
what's the difference?
Thank you. I I I will comment on the incidents that take
place in Rogers Park and I appreciate uh the question and I
I think you're correct to that point in some extent. Um, I
think in Rogers Park when we've reigned our resources, our
deployments there. What's going on the individuals
attending those events have been in full compliance.
And that's great. As a police department. We full
compliance is the best result that we can ever ask for.
We've gone to those individuals and said, curfews
approaching. I think it's time to move on and they have so
through the escalation and full compliance and
collaboration and, you know, partnership with of our
community outreach and the elders. And everybody being
there, we've gotten full compliance. And I think that's
the, that's a greater result that we can hope for even
downtown. We asked for a full compliance before, any
actions are ever taken. I think. Uh, and every plan that we
take the first phone call is always to our Outreach or
community outreach Partners. I know that for sure because
I'm pretty responsible for deploying these resources. And
my first phone call is always to Our Community Partners to
say, can you help us with this situation?
Before we deploy resources before, the police department is
involved. I need your help in
Collaboration on this effort, but I I I commend you on Roger
spark 100%. We've had full compliance with those
individuals attending along the lakefront. So that's the
ultimate goal is to have full compliance to have our
children go home. And when I say children, they are young.
They go home safely to their parents.
To attend another event to live. Another day to grow up to
be successful adults, and be great citizens of Chicago.
Um, thank you for that. But I, I didn't get an answer. So I
I, I hear what you're saying. Was, do we have, I think we
asked for full compliance and when we have full compliance,
the event concludes, and it's over and we move on and as
far as notifying, the altars, absolutely our commanders and
it's important they should be reaching out to the altars
and letting them know that we have a situation going on in
this area and what our
Our project. That's not my question. My question is, why do
you need this? I I see. I guess what I'm sharing is. I've
seen police do this effectively time and time again, you
guys are already doing your jobs. I know that these issues
and what I'm hearing you say is that this is uh some of
these kind of large events you're seeing people not in
compliance. Um well if they're not in compliance, you're
already authorized to enforce the law.
And so why do you need? This is my question.
Okay. And I appreciate that question. Thank you, I think,
uh, there's many tools that the police department has
Um, this ordinance would just be another 1 of those tools.
if I could share a personal story with you which I think
maybe everybody in here should hear there was a an
incredible commander of the first district. She was
probably 1 of the best I've ever seen.
She was in pathetic for every citizen every officer, every
man and woman in a patrol car cared about them greatly. She
attended 1 of these gatherings down at the bean.
She was in charge of it, she was The Incident Commander.
A result of that incident, a child shot, another child that
died in her arms.
Um,
it caused her to retire.
so, at the direct result,
Of a child shooting another child and dying in her arms.
She left and still struggles with that on a daily basis.
What bothers her immensely too about that. Besides the
incredible tragedy that she experienced.
And that everybody in the families, everybody's touched by
that.
The city's touched by it.
Is that what?
The Gathering continued in only increased.
A child died in the middle of the street there while she
was holding at the child.
And the Gathering continued.
An increased.
I think that's for a minute to soak in.
and having this ordinance,
Maybe to stop that to save other children's lives is an
important tool to have those many tools and I agree with
you. There's criminal activity, the men and women of the
police department, are doing an incredible job every day
constitutionally,
The level of complaints and a level of concern. Because you
remember the men and women of the police department in our
citizens of Chicago and love the city and they want nothing
more.
To showcase our city. But when that child died in her arms
and she couldn't stop it. She was Ordinary by the time of
mass arrests. It was too late.
So, this ordinance gives us a tool if needed based upon the
activity going on that day.
To stop it to save other kids' lives and other children. I
mean, children's lives. I look at this and I look at it. I
mean,
16 years old, that died in arms and if she had in a tool
additional it would be beneficial I believe to address
these issues downtown and throughout the city.
I appreciate. Um thank you for for sharing that story and I
think you're getting me closer to trying. I'm trying to
understand
so,
In that incident right or in other incidents that you've
seen sure.
How does this change? Like what's, what is this tool allow
you to do that? You cannot already do because I'm I'm
hearing, hey, you might want to prevent things. Well, if
you guys get word, you see something on social media? There
might be some Gathering planned. Um, I know I understand
the difficulties. You, you, you guys try and find the
organizers. You guys, I've seen you guys do it. Like trying
to figure it out. Okay. You know something's going to
happen, you want to prevent it from happening. Um you you
know deploy resources to an area preventatively um what's
to stop you from dispersing a group over 20?
That.
Doesn't have a permit or like what's to stop you? How how
would this have made that incident, different? Right. So
like why why do you guys wait? Currently until there are
hundreds, right? Hundreds of teenagers. Why do you
currently wait? Well, I I think at the at the bottom of the
foundation that is constitutional policing. If say a a
group starts to gather and they're not committing any
criminal activity, they're standing there Council policing,
I think, I think, again, I will go back to, I think the
city of Chicago is 1 of the most beautiful cities in the
world in the amenities that everyone should enjoy.
But I think once the activity turns into a criminal nature
or violent or violent spontaneously and it's spontaneously
erupts at these gatherings. So at that time if the police
possibly had this tool, I think that we could enact and say
a curfew to save and to stop the activity because of
spontaneously erupts, it doesn't start slowly and if an
officer observes criminal activity he or she will address
that in a constitutional way, right? We we do it every week
and we protect First Amendment Gatherings Non-Stop and it's
in Chicago. I don't think any other police department does
it better than a city of Chicago, the men and women in the
amount of training that they received in constitutional
policing. In First Amendment gatherings,
Is unbelievable. I've, I've traveled everywhere and seen it.
I saw it on DNC but I see it every weekend because there's
there's multiple Gatherings 1 of these. Gatherings the teen
training was generous seeing what touches every neighbor,
the 77 neighborhoods as we draw resources from every
District to come down to address this issue.
Now the the commanders, the Greek commanders, we have in
the district are doing a tremendous job in backfilling our
cars, but that becomes an overtime issue also because we
are going to provide the best service to our neighborhoods.
Besides these gatherings that are taking place other
demonstrations are taking place as as you're surely aware
of in the city and the world, but there's multiple
demonstrations team gathers anything going on. So the
resources being pulled down to address. These are
incredible. So, if this tool when the spontaneous Behavior
happens, and it's criminal in nature or violent, I believe
in an ordinance like this. If enacted would only benefit
those situations, I appreciate the response, um, and share
and I say to the co-sponsors,
um,
I think this needs more time and and 2 points kind of
strike Me 1.
Not to be Petty but I do recognize and here we've got a
definition of minor. Um, I know for our, our friends at the
police department and the mayor's office. We've been
working pretty hard on the internet young ordinance and
I've been told that we can't Define minor. We're we're on a
sticking point about not pointing guns at children and I've
been told time and time again that we can't Define that
this is not
Not for you. This is for the mayor's team and the police
department have been working on us with this, so you guys
are defining it here in some way, that's making sense. So,
I'd like some follow-up on that, but through the chair,
what I what I'd like to see because I'm, I'm feeling like
I'm understanding a bit better. What some of the
limitations are this version, still concerns me given the
political climate that we're in. I think it is still too
broad, um, but I hear what you're saying on, what some of
the limitations might be on the preventative, safety things
that you guys are looking for. So I I'd love to continue
this conversation.
Uh, so for broad, when I read this and this is nothing to
do with the problem that you guys are trying to solve right
now, but it's hard not to see.
Giving giving power to a deputy mayor. I don't care whose
Deputy Mayor it is and to the superintendent about
determining a, a kind of
curfew on a Case by case basis for a gathering over of 20
and a time of political repression. We might not be facing
political repression here in Chicago currently under our
current government. But it worries me and I think those are
the broad like these broad definitions of hey 20 or more
and a gathering. I feel like this is still a little too
loose. Um so I think a, I would love to see this
Worked out a little bit more details. And so would just
urge, um, you know, maybe a a hold on this. I'm I'm not
making a motion or anything, but we urge you guys to maybe
work on it a little bit more, especially if what I'm
hearing is actually maybe a problem in police policy, not
necessarily um city ordinance. So thank you chair.
I, I think just a quick, follow-up that 1 of the things I
can appreciate about the ordinance is the checks and
balances that is put in place and with it. Um, it's a
collaboration between the deputy mayor between the mayor's
office and the superintendent along down with the Chiefs.
And everybody on the scene, the observations and everything
they're going on in the input going on. Uh, and the
probable, cause if these things exist before this curfew
would ever be enacted. Um, so I can appreciate the
collaboration between the mayor's office.
The deputy mayor of Public Safety along with the
superintendent and and every Chief Deputy Chief captain and
Commander, who are on the scene for these events. So I
appreciate that collaboration.
Thank you Chief. Uh, Alderman Martin.
Thank you chair. Um,
Chief good morning and everybody else here in the Box. Um,
I have 2 sets of questions. The first are more legal
and then others are more policy focused to follow up on on
up on on what alderwoman hadn't mentioned. I just noted the
outset and uh uplifting what alderwoman had in mentioned.
Um, I I do think that this needs more time, um, and not
time in terms of like, many, many months. But when I step
back and I say, attorneys from organizations ranging from
the ACLU. The shriber center, legal aid, Chicago,
Northwestern University of Chicago have consistently told
us that the proposed policy despite being very well
intended um, is legally flawed. I think we should stop and
listen and work through that especially when there were
many good changes that were made to the substitute, but
that, that substitute was shared with them and with us, um,
yesterday afternoon, um, I think more time is needed and
especially, when we're told that at least some of these
organizations May. Well file a lawsuit,
and that in the past when we've had curfews most recently
in 2022 where there were lawsuits that were filed, it was
settled out of court and at least 1 of um, the uh,
or attorney organizations representing the plaintiffs um uh
waived attorneys fees. I don't know that we can expect that
to happen again this time. And so if there's an opportunity
for a week or 2 to see continuing to work in, good faith,
which has happened to be clear to see.
If there is an opportunity to find common ground. So that,
um, uh, continued, um, uh,
Intentions to file, a lawsuit can be mitigated. I think
that would be good for our process. I think that that would
be good for the city, including our bottom line, and could
be done. Uh, I would hope in advance of whatever timeline
you and your, um, constituents would need. Um, uh, whether
it's May 7th May 21st, uh, say before the Memorial Day
weekend. Um, so I just want to, uh, underscore that with
regard to, um, due process related rights and all maybe
direct this to any attorneys, um, in the Box who can
answer, um, a little bit of background, uh, so Chicago V
Morales, which involved the Chicago ordinance. Some decades
ago uh, was struck down as unconstitutionally. Vague it was
an anti-gang loitering ordinance but I'll just call it like
anti loitering ordinance. Um, the court found that it
failed to provide sufficient. Notice to the public
regarding impermissible loiter and it was overly broad, it
was vague and specifically um Justice Stevens. And I quote
a
Law fails to meet the requirements of the due process clause
if it is, so vague in standard lists that it leaves the
public uncertain as to the conduct it prohibits. If the
loitering is, in fact, harmless and innocent, the dispersal
order itself is an unjustified impairment of Liberty. And
he went on to note that friends, relatives teachers,
counselors, or even total strangers, might unwittingly
engage in, in this situation, forbidden loitering, if they
happen to engage in idle conversation with a gang member.
So I think that it's really important to focus on what we
are looking to, prevent in the moment. And when I took a
look at this while atossa, um, uh, opinion. I don't see it
as being Apples to Apples here because specifically in this
is if anyone has the print out um, page 9 at the very top,
very top, uh, it talks about how the plaintiffs are
ignoring a lot of uncontested evidence, uh, noting that
among other things, civil unrest began simmering and
in the weeks, leading up to the curfew, people were
shutting down businesses, pushing people driving on
neighbors Lawns, thrashing, store windows, that the nearby
town of Kenosha. Saw a rioting extensive property, damage
serious physical injury. So in that situation, they did a
good job of noting. All of the reasons why that limited
1-time curfew was necessary. And so clearly, we've dealt
with incredibly problematic incidents in terms of certain
of these team Trends. I think that everyone is agreement
with that.
But when I look at the ordinance, even the revision is it's
discussing. It it to me.
looks very vague and potentially overly broad when it says,
uh, action that may present or cause, or in a manner that
is likely to result in substantial harm, substantial damage
to property or substantial injuries to person that seems
incredibly vague. So what exists in the code? What exists
in the case law? That provides sufficient. Um,
Clarity to our officers in a specifically, the
superintendent. And the deputy mayor um that would uh
lawfully trigger the imposition of a mass Gathering
designation. This seems this seems quite overly brought to
me.
Yeah, I think, uh, Mr. Spears will respond to that?
I think what we can look to hear specifically. And and what
we're specifically trying to address is the history of
these gatherings. And uh even in 2025, when we've had the
nicer weather, The Gatherings I think the chief can speak
more specifically to the incidents that have happened so
far this year. Um but I mean just uh looking at his notes
the March 28th incident at the city front Plaza.
Um, there was a shooting, um, 28th of March, similar, the
9th of March, I'm sorry to interrupt. I, I, I want to be
mindful of our Collective time, so I'm wondering kind of
prospectively. What would the police department and the
deputy, the mayor's office need to see in order to conclude
that there is, uh, a cause or the likelihood of a cause
that would result in substantial harm property damage or
injuries to persons like and and maybe a different way to
ask it. Is what are the sorts of things that you would need
to see again in terms of the publicizing of team takeovers
or social media engagement, that would lead you to believe?
Ah, this is likely to result in substantial harm.
Yeah, I think it's a great question. Thank you.
I believe, um,
When we start to begin, when our our intelligence gathering
happens, when you start to see the fires posted on open
source monitoring uh the verbage on the flyer when it
refers to a takeover.
Um at at that point, you start to see when we start to
deploy our resources. But even this, the first verbage on
any flyer by the promoters of these events is called a
takeover
At that time, you know, again I go back to being on the
scene for multiple of these. Um we want the kids to enjoy
themselves.
Beautiful city, right? Full compliance. Enjoy it have fun
but it's when the children start attacking 1. Another,
yeah, physically are there times where it says take over by
way of example where uh ultimately um the Takeover the
trend has occurred but there hasn't ultimately been
substantial harm to property or or person. I think there's
been, uh, takeovers that have occurred where we've deployed
enough resources. And I mean, by enough resources, it's in
a multiple of hundreds of officers brought to stand in the
middle of the said locations where these unpermitted events
are
Being encouraged to take place at.
Um I I believe that's just to provide the safety and the
protection for the individuals who might show up there.
Yeah. And uh, the officer is the men and women have done an
incredible job through their through their training,
through the escalation, right? Like I talked about so the
Constitutional policing to ensure that the the violence
didn't take place but again I I think I give you a personal
story multiple times where I've sort of North Avenue beach
within 30 feet when a child shot. Another child and there
were over 300 police officers on that Beach.
Tap into multiple times. And again we have to stand there
because based upon our training it is only correct and
right for kind of social policing to let the children enjoy
the beach. But at that second it's a split second where
another individual a child shot, another child in front of
us. Happened twice in front of me. Yeah, so I think just
based upon it and you can start to see when the activity
begins at what time the curfew in orders. If we might have
had this option then to stop it, where that child wouldn't
have been shot so that I I want to drill down into that a
little bit because I understand that, especially following
the 2 shooting incidents in Alderman, Hopkins. Ward that
there has continued to be monitoring of social media by the
police department. And that there are times that, um, uh,
take overs or other similar events that have been planned
either didn't occur at all or occurred, but in ways that
didn't cause harm. So, and I think to be clear, that's due
in. No small parts of the good work of your colleagues, uh,
colleagues at CPS and colleagues who, um, go out and do
violence, prevention.
Um, Street Outreach related work. So I think that there are
tools as you noted that exist that have been helpful. Um
but even with this ordinance, the proposal to me, it
doesn't ensure that a curfew doesn't happen and ensures
that there are consequences especially if people show up.
And so how is this in operation? Much different than the
existing tools to use a dispersal order because even if you
put this curfew in place, you you announce in advance, it's
not as if you arrest, anybody who comes, there's still no
notice, right? You're giving people, I think it envisions
with at least 30 minutes before the curfew goes into effect
the opportunity to disperse. So that to me seems very
similar to existing dispersal tools that you have at your
disposal.
Correct? I I think um in collaboration with CPS oemc,
everything if we have advanced warning, that 1 of these
these uh Gatherings will take place. I think the proper
notifications will be made in a timely manner through oemc.
Like I said through CPS through our Outreach workers or
aldermanic offices. But uh, as a good, a great example I'll
show you on Monday. It came out at 2:30 that was happening
at 3 oclock.
Right. And from those 2 events, we had I think 4 gun
arrests.
2 officers who were attacked and beaten into the medical
treatment so it's the proper notification. I agree with you
that when we had that through open source monitoring that
were able to uh disseminate the information to notify the
parents and to properly, put it out through OMC or Alderman
and everything that this ordinance it's just like I said,
it's just another tool. Yeah, to provide Safety and
Security for the kids that are showing up because like I
said, there's there is a small part like you talked about
the kids that show up where the violent Behavior happens.
But I think uh, I think if you attend 1 of these and you
watch it it is to protect the majority of the good kids
that are showing up. So an ordinance like this gives us the
tool to provide that security and safety to the good kids
that are showing up.
And I hear you saying that there are multiple tools that
exist right now, um, that you are using and oftentimes
using very successfully. And so my fundamental concern is
it while there are existing tools that can be helpful. We
are looking at a potential tool that we are told, uh, May
well prompt a lawsuit uh, that could cost the city
tremendous amount of money and may not uh prevent um take
overs from happening to begin with. And so that's where I'm
struggling to see. Okay, like
High risk. Um and I don't want to say low reward to be
clear, but when we already have existing tools that were
used, I'm wondering if the risk of litigation and payout is
too high point in time. Uh without and and maybe this could
be addressed through continued engagement with ACLU and
others is that too high when we already have so many tools
that we're using right now, oftentimes successfully, right?
right? And I I appreciate and I think I'll go back to the
checks and balances system that has been set up and place
here between the collaboration. Um, and these events which
which is incredible, the video documentation that we have
out there, the Department of Law and all the factors.
There's multi factors before this ordinance, whatever, or
the curfew would be enacted between all the information
that's being presented. To the deputy mayor to the
superintendent, from all the individuals on the scene. Now,
we're going to be able to articulate through video
documentation everything. This is why it's going to be
enacted. This is what we're seeing the 30 minutes. I think
that you're talking to
about is 30 minutes at the scene. Yeah. So, every 10
minutes of the text, anything we do for constitutional
policing, we're going to time stamp that we're going to
articulate. We're going to show the video for the body 1
camera, the pods along, with our own videographers out
there. Showing at this time, the violent Behavior or
spontaneous criminal behavior for the public welfare or
Public Safety. That we believe that this might be the best
option right now to enact this curfew,
Um, we talked about earlier, I don't believe that this
curfew would probably be enacted every time there's a,
there's an event, right? Because sometimes you don't
probably would not exist, the the circumstances. So every
situation in every Gathering is going to be unique in its
every setting. Um but I do appreciate the checks and
balances of it. I appreciate the, the protection, the First
Amendment. Um, my I myself am a parent teenagers, right?
20. But likewise, I got a 10 year old, so not quite there,
but good enough.
I want the city to be as proud of the police department as
I am. And the decisions that are made are always to protect
the individuals. Attending any Gathering throughout the
city. We are always going to protect the First Amendment.
We're going to constitutionally police with the event
that's going on and we're going to ensure that everybody's
rights are protected and that everyone hopefully gets home
safe to their family and friends noted. I think the last
thing I'll say and just not a question make time for
others. Is I remain very concerned that um
this this hasn't received the sort of vetting to ensure
that it would withstand a legal Challenge and even smaller
things that I'm not looking for an answer to because I
think it's modest but referencing, um, uh, in section e,
uh, that, uh, an arrest or a citation. Could be issued if
an officer reasonably believes that, an offense has
occurred as opposed to um using a more typical standard of
probable cause I mean that's something that could be
workshopped relatively easily. So that's the lower hanging
fruit, but I still think um, in in uh,
Hope you give some thought to this. Chairman if there's an
opportunity to give this just a little bit more time to
see, if we can reduce her outright extinguish, all of the
differences of opinion, with some of these outside
organizations who have signaled. Um, outstanding
constitutional questions? I would appreciate that. Um, and
I'm done for now. Yeah, thank you. Thank you Alderman. And
I, I know we have a number of non-members of the committee
that seek recognition, uh, and you're on the list. But uh,
as is standard practice, we're getting to the questions
from Public Safety Committee Members First, and then we
will go to non-committee members. So thank you for your
patience on that. Um, alderwoman Fuentes.
Thank you, chairman.
Uh, first, I want to level set. I think that uh, we all
understand the intent of this ordinance. We all care, very
deeply about the safety of our city, uh, but also the
safety of our young people, as a former educator. Uh, young
people mean a, a great deal to me. Uh, I also want to note
that I was told that we would be able to offer subject
matter experts uh to this hearing in which my office
provided 3 uh, and all 3, subject matter experts were
rejected from participating in this subject matter hearing.
I'm concerned with a couple things and I'll have a series
of questions for you all in just a bit.
I think this ordinance provides a lot of power to the
superintendent and the deputy mayor. Um, and let's let's uh
be honest, we we don't know who those individuals will be
in 2 years.
and,
Anyone who walks in to that position can utilize this
ordinance irresponsibly. Now I trust superintendent
Snelling to utilize the tools that are provided to CPD
appropriately. Uh,
But who would that person be in 2 years? Uh and so it
raised grave concern that this sort of ordinance can be
utilized and implemented as 1 C. Fits when there is 1
calling the shots on when the curfew is implemented and in
what areas the curfew is implemented. Um and so with with
that type of discretion and power uh
I I remain skeptical around how the ordinance is currently
written.
I also uh do believe that there are powers that CPD
currently has uh to prevent and to deal with some of the
issues that we see. So can I ask
Is the law on your side uh, when violence erupts on the
street.
I'm I'm sorry to look for just a little bit of
clarification is a law on my side when violence. The way
the law is currently written, the CPD have authority to
intervene dispersed and respond when violence is currently
happening on our streets. Absolutely.
Is the law on your side to disperse Mass Gatherings without
a permit.
It depends on the activity at the time. Absolutely.
And how the CPD currently Define mass gatherings in the
city of Chicago?
How we currently Define mass? Gatherings as you know, as
there's clearly a number of demonstrations that occur every
weekend. I mean I don't want to get into the list of the
organizations but every weekend that we have mass
Gatherings occurring all over the city on permanent events.
Um,
I think this what we're talking about today is far as the
the Gathering of young individuals. Um,
Is the compliance?
These Mass Gatherings that we have throughout the city
throughout every week and throughout all parts of the city
are in full compliance and collaboration with the
organizers and thousands of people that Gather in our
downtown and in our neighborhoods. Um, there's full
compliance with that. I think this ordinance is addressing
that was when we do not have compliance at the end of an
event.
Would you say that residents in the city of Chicago comply
with all of our laws?
You know every situation is unique. I hope for full
compliance but uh every situation is unique.
Do you have law on your side when people are vandalizing
Vehicles? Jumping on them? Breaking Windows tagging on
buildings, does CPD have the authority to make arrests and
enforce the law. Yes.
Can you just walk me through?
What does this Ordinance do differently?
Than what CPD already has the power to do, because I think
the narrative that we're hearing is that this can be
preventative. Do you believe that this ordinance is going
to be preventative and mass Gatherings of young people in
the city of Chicago?
I believe like I I kind of stated earlier, I think that
this is just 1 of the tools that we will have at our
disposal to assist us in these events. Now, every Gathering
every uh, young individual Gathering is different and
unique and it's every situation. Um, I think there's many
aspects that we use to address it. I talked about our
Community Partners, our Outreach that, uh, is first and
foremost that we try to get in and mitigate. So that so
that these uh, individuals have a safe fun experience to
enjoy the beautiful amenities, I believe like if this
ordinance was as an option it's only 1 of many options that
we have to exercise.
If CP.
You can already dispersed Mass, Gatherings, without a
proper permit. Or in this case we are also watching it. Be
publicized on social media, right? Whether that's Tik Tok,
Instagram, uh or Facebook young, people are publicizing uh
uh, these activities. Therefore, we can already Define it
as an unpermitted event in which CPD already has the
authority to disperse activities to do. Do not have a
proper permit, right? If someone in my community was
organized to have music played in the park.
Work and was publicizing the event. If they didn't have a
permit, we would shut it down, right? Because they're
publicizing it. We already know that they don't have a
permit because we can look that up at any single moment.
So, tell me, how is having that Authority different than
what is being proposed in this ordinance?
I think like I would go back to it. Every situation being
unique uh as far as your Park example, there's Park
security, there's collaboration amongst all City agencies
to address if something's incurring in the park. Um
historically these events for these young individuals have
been occurring at. I think it gives us the potential to
have just again 1 more tool to address so that the violence
doesn't occur to the safety of all those attending this
event, which is unpermitted. As you as you stressed, it is
unpermitted and it is promoted by an individual to attend
these events downtown. I think many things occur the men,
and women of the Chicago, Police Department, will always
engage and address any criminal activity that they observe
and we will address it and stop it. Because our number 1
thing is to protect like, sanctity of life.
protection or property and to protect everyone's civil
rights and they do that every day and they do a tremendous
job and I, you know, you can be more proud of the men and
women of the Chicago Police Department on how that they
address with respect and dignity to every situation.
Given the situation when we have young children.
Who are attacking 1, another and everything at this area,
is designated as a Zone. Say a curfew zone or however it's
permitted. If this ordinance is passed,
It gives another option for them to stop individuals from
being harmed and that's only 1 of many options. Now, if we
see individuals attacking each other, of course, we're
going to stop intervening and address it and if somebody
needs to be arrested, then that's, that's an option too.
But ultimately I think we asked for full compliance, right?
If you go up to an individuals and I think you've seen with
our videographers, we document everything to go up and ask
them if you will, please stop this behavior and please
voluntarily seize this behavior and go on your way. That is
our ultimate goal to have full compliance before. An arrest
is made. Sometimes, there are individuals who will not
agree to stop the behavior that they're engaging in. At
that time I believe this ordinance kind of gives another
tool to stop the violence or the behavior in that area from
occurring.
I appreciate that. Respectfully asks, how is this tool
different? You currently have the authority to disperse to
prevent the Gathering from happening based on the activity?
Not having a proper permit, right? And so how is this tool
different than the authority that CPD currently have has
under the rule of law that's currently written. I I think
maybe I can give an example the
Help out with the how the curfew Ordinance Works for these
kind of events and maybe it'll help maybe it won't. Um,
Every Gathering that we have with young individuals.
At 9:55 at night. It is over. We don't have to say a word.
The police officers are walking on the street, we begin to
announce that a curfew will be in effect at 10 p.m. 2200
hours at 10 p.m. We start this announcing to probably about
9:30 at night. And at 9:55, there's not 1 individual left
in that area of our currents except for the police standing
there.
so the curfew that's currently enacted right now at 10
oclock,
Is incredible. As far as getting individuals to leave the
area?
If this ordinance, if you ask me how it's different or how
an effect, if we designate an area in the 3-hour window,
that's proposed in this ordinance.
Say, the individuals are anything that's happening at 8:00
at night. If we, if we saw this activity or behaviors,
beginning to happen at 8:00 at night, if this was enacted,
it would be over and there'd be no individuals in that
area. Thus, providing Safety and Security to all the young
kids that attended at 10:00 at night, the individuals leave
on their own because they know the curfew is about to be
enacted.
Can you, uh,
Uh, Define providing notice for me.
Providing notice. Let's say an open source media that uh I
forget what they say May 8th. There's going to be a
takeover as posted on a flyer. Not our words, their words,
a takeovers occur. At that time, we would begin to work
with our community. Outreach workers are Alders our CPS.
Um, Partners oemc. Would begin to dispatch out much like we
do for NASCAR and anything else in an area. I also believe
historically, there are sites that these uh, occurrence
have taken place, and I believe that we will be able to
provide signage in all those areas that we Define as
probably where the individuals promoting this event will be
taking place. So, I believe that there will be signage, I
believe there will be social media blast. I believe we'll
get it through CPS schools, I believe, we'll get it through
the Alders office. Um so multi approach as far as
disseminating information has oemc agreed to provide
signage for every time the curfew is being implemented and
called for by the superintendent.
You know, the signage in, as far as the call goes, it'll be
between the mayor's office and the superintendent's office
along with again, the individual promoting this event. We
respond to
uh, as far as signage goes, um,
This ordinance is not passed yet. I'm not. I haven't asked
for that signage. So that's a unique situation and unique
question, will there be text messages sent out to Residents
potential? Participants, are you utilizing same platforms?
You use for Amber? Alerts. I think uh I'll refer that
question to OMC if that's okay with the altar.
Um, good afternoon, thank you. Um, chairman committee and
Council. Uh, yes, Alderman, we would use the same platform.
Sorry Chris, patini oemc. We would use the same platform
that we have been using currently Rave notifications. So to
your point. Yes, there are text messages.
Email, it can also do robo calls and that's all within the
same platform.
We have a point of information, totally yield.
For oemc, the text notifications, do you have to subscribe
to the system in order to receive those?
Um,
Chris patinho oemc. Uh, there are 2 different, depending on
the type of message. Yes. So when we talk about the notify
Chicago's, yes, that is something a user would sign up for,
but you are also able to create separate groups. So, for
instance, in this example, if notification has to go to the
aldermanic ward, we are already have all the aldermanic
ward contacts and so then we could send the notification in
the method. You prefer be it, a robocall, text message or
email. I my point is I just wanted to clarify. You have to
subscribe, you oemc has to have your phone number. In order
to do this you have to enroll in the uh well
if it is a wireless emergency alert so that is a WEA that is
where it is geographically set by boundaries. We've used
this previously in 2020 during coid where within those
select boundaries
It sends a notification to your telephone, think of it.
Like the severe thunderstorm alerts that come through from
National Weather Service.
Same platform. I know it's not my I don't want to run into
asking questions just because we're on the topic. Um is has
this method like the thunderstorm warning type stuff, the
the emergency system where it's geofence to a particular
area and goes to every single phone. Would that be used for
this? Has that been discussed? Um, potentially it could be
used. Yes, curfews do fall within. Um, the recommended
notifications, for weia guidelines, thank you for the
clarification. Thank you, chair.
Thank you. The ordinance also, uh, walks through um, that
if any minor after provided notice remains in the public
place of violation of the curfew, uh, that it would have
consequences and some of the consequences listed as
possible, 250 fee or some community service. What happens
uh when the family or the young person cannot pay the fee.
And by the way, you don't have to be the only 1 answering
question. No, that's okay. I know that you may not know
every single component, so feel free to pass it on, right?
And and I, I, I'll do my best to answer that it. Uh, I,
I'll see that turns into the court systems and it's out of
my jurisdiction, if that gives you.
Thank you. And then it also says that if a minor remains in
in a public place, they are in violation who defines the
public place. So, let's say, uh, tonight. We see, uh,
social media advertisement for a takeover at the bean,
right? We provide notice, uh, to the entire community area,
hopefully, the young people who are participating also get
the notice somehow, uh, does the public area as defined, is
it the bean?
Is it downtown, is it the entire city of Chicago? How is
that defined
Right? So historically we would go back and we would Define
where we had these gatherings take place and um, all with
all due respect, I mean every time it's historically it's
been pretty close to a similar, the the geographical
locations where these uh these young kids like to to hang
out or walk to or gather to us. It's it's it's pretty close
every time. And to find those I would hate to uh
I guess for security reasons, give the locations right now.
Um at a later time, I I'm saying that you have to give the
locations what I'm arguing as to is that the ordinance is
so broad that the Takeover can happen at the bean and uh,
The superintendent, whoever that may be can say, well, the
curfew applies to all the downtown.
Right. And so,
There's no specificity that the curfew would occur in just
the area in which the Takeover is taking place.
I think again it uh the promoter of these events gives the
locations that we would have to address and to uh deploy
our resources accordingly to and every 1 of those
situations is quite unique.
Alderman Reilly. Yeah, just to to be helpful to my
colleague, um, it's actually section 8-6-2, which is
referenced in this ordinance. Um, so those definitions are
found in the code as I was speaking with my colleague, got
him and Conway, Guardian minor parent, public place, and
remain are all specifically defined in the code, if that's
helpful. Thank you, chairman.
Thank you, Alderman. Reilly um,
I think that that's all for now. I I do remain uh,
skeptical. I also want to note that every peer reviewed
research tells us uh that curfews just don't work, right?
Um, You can Google it, you can ask researchers, you can ask
the institutions that have
Been studying this not just in the city of Chicago but
across this nation that when we Implement curfews. And in
fact criminalizes young people more than it keeps them
safe. Um, I do believe I agree with my colleague Alderman.
Matt Martin that this does need more time. Um, there's just
not enough thoughtfulness uh put into this ordinance just
yet. Um, I'm going to remain here the entire time to also
listen to colleagues that are in favor and understand their
perspective. Thank you chairman. Thank you. Uh, and
Alderman Reilly on your point of information, I know you
have another Committee hearing to get to. Was there
anything else you had to say on that?
Okay um yes chairman thank you. I um appreciate it. And
been listening to this debate. I'm not a voting member of
this committee, but I wanted to be here today.
Because this is a policy that would have a disproportionate
impact on the communities. That I represent downtown, uh,
as you do, uh, chairman and my colleague Alderman Conway
here to my right, um, you know, it's interesting. The
opponents to this ordinance are kind of hitting it from 2
different angles. I hear some folks saying we've got plenty
of tools on the books. You know, why bother adding an
additional layer?
Um, but then another set of opponents saying that, this is,
uh, Draconian and an overreach by the police department,
um, and so I'm not really quite sure.
Which issue is more important to the opponents, but the
bottom line here, is that our partners in public safety,
the police department of asked us for these tools, um, and
again, I, I've always been someone when, when this Police
Department comes and asks us to give them an additional
tool. My knee-jerk reaction is to always say, yes,
um, we want them to be effective in policing, our
communities and keeping them safe.
Um and unfortunately 1 of my colleagues brought this up
earlier and debate um this isn't Foot Loose. You know we
aren't in Elmore City Oklahoma and this isn't about kids
just having a good time and dancing.
Um, you know, last I checked, Kevin Bacon wasn't bringing a
taser to the dance and he wasn't tasing his friend.
And Jessica. Sarah Jessica. Parker wasn't packing heat and
shooting guns on the public right away and unfortunately
that's what we're seeing play out in streeterville.
While it's still light out.
Um, and I'll remind everyone, these aren't the fun warm
weather months, we all look forward to in Chicago.
Um this is during the colder uh less inviting weather. And
so I think there is a genuine and and very real concern
that if these activities continued unabated heading into
the warm weather months and we don't set some expectations
on a city-wide level, that the kids and their parents can
Digest.
Um, we are going to have more bad incidents involving people
being shot. God forbid, someone gets killed. Um but this
isn't unsafe environment.
And I don't disagree with folks who came here today, to
advocate for the long-term Solutions, and Community
investment, and youth programs. They're absolutely correct.
Those are good long-term Investments.
But they're called long-term Investments for a reason,
long-term Investments produce long-term results.
Um, I'm leaving in the immediate.
Um, the reality on the ground today is that they're going
to be more of these gatherings, probably this week next
week in the following week.
And we don't have the luxury and certainly not the taxpayer
resources to deploy hundreds of cops in the evening to
frankly babysit.
Other people's children.
Where are the parents? Um, I I keep asking that question my
colleagues, too.
You know, do they ask their kids where they're going? Um,
because this isn't about just going downtown and seeing the
landmarks as was mentioned by someone else. Earlier in
testimony. Um, these kids aren't spending time, exploring
our cultural institutions and landmarks. I strongly
encourage it. And I would love to see that happen. And I
would love to see some of these nonprofit groups take on
the mentorship role even more, you know, these kids can
come downtown supervised by Guardians and responsible
adults. Come on, downtown at night, but be supervised by
responsible individuals. Learn some cult.
Culture. Enjoy the downtown.
Um, but if this is about getting together and frankly,
twerking on CTA buses, in tasing, our friends, and starting
fist fights in traffic. That ain't, that ain't foot loose.
And, and so again, um, these kids their own lives are at
risk when they participate in these things. And a lot of
these kids come down here, thing is just to be a social
media event and that's great, but what it evolves into
devolves into
Is what I worry about and God forbid, these children and
it's true. The vast majority of these people are children.
God forbid, someone gets killed. We've seen it. Play out
here down down here before. Um, deputy chief Hine
referenced it in his testimony.
Um, so I just wanted to make 1 point and I know there's
some other folks who want to talk about it. It's technical
to the actual substitute itself.
Um and it's related to the process, that's used to declare
1 of these curfews. Um I have complete and total faith and
and and superintendent Snelling. I think he's doing a
phenomenal job and I trust his judgment.
Uh, I am concerned that we have also though stipulation that
the deputy mayor of Public Safety weigh in and and agree.
That the situation warrants. Um, curfew
Um, I I worry about that because of the current
Administration and I worry about it based on public
comments that the mayor made at a press event yesterday.
Where he did not endorse this ordinance, the way I would
expect he would given that he was at the table.
During the negotiations over it.
And that gives me some pause on whether or not, this Deputy
mayor's involvement will be used as some way the veto.
Uh, police actions that Snelling thinks are appropriate.
Um, and so again, I I don't want that to be the obstacle
for passing this ordinance. Um, I'm not again, I'm not a
vote on this committee, um, but I would strongly encourage,
uh, the sponsors to consider that and potentially moving.
Removing that from from the substitute.
Um, that said, I don't want to be, I don't want perfect to
be enemy of the good. Um, and the bottom line here is
unlike a lot of other big policies. We've been debating,
this seems to be seem to be rushed around here, um, to the
chief sponsors credit. When people raise their hands and
flag concerns. You went into negotiations and you've been
negotiating earnestly, uh, for some time now knowing that
we do actually have a a deadline for this 1. Um, because
once we start hitting
Consistently 75 degree. Whether this policy becomes very,
very important and very, very urgent. And so if we can't
make all the changes that I'd like, I'll live with it.
Knowing that the police have a tool in the Box.
in time for June, July and August, when we know these
events will occur and I given what's going on in
Washington, DC in the chaos, the president has created
here.
I suspect there's going to be a tremendous amount of
protest activity this summer too.
And so I think we need to give the police every tool
they've asked for and this is certainly 1 of them. Um so I
do, I do support the ordinance. I would love to see that
tweak made, um, to the deputy mayor provision. Um, but but
do think that this is, uh, an urgent matter that that needs
to pass before the end of May. Uh, thank you chairman.
Thank you, Alderman. Reilly Alderman Tavares.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, before I start my line of
questioning I do have concerns with that section 1B where
it states, that the deputy mayor again Gatewood. Has the
authority has the power to make the decision, to declare a
curfew along with the superintendent Snelling. I have real
concerns with that.
The superintendent should have.
Should be the only person making the decision to declare a
curfew, not the deputy mayor of Public Safety for the city
of Chicago, not this Administration, CPD superintendent,
Snelling should be the only person making that decision.
And with that, we passed out the substitute ordinance
striking. The Deputy Mayor, Gary gait with making that
decision, that way only Snelling superintendent Snelling
should make that decision. So I want to make a motion to
amend that. Substitute ordinance striking, that Deputy
Mayor Gary Gatewood from this and, um,
everybody has that in front of them.
Make a motion as distributed as pastor.
before we do that, can I get a motion on a rule 59,
allowance for alderwoman head and who actually had to leave
this meeting and is now
Hearing no objection Alderman, alderwoman, Haden is added
to the uh, virtual participation. I I renew my motion. Mr.
Chairman okay.
Is yeah. Where am I? Where am I looking for here? Was this
just distributed?
distributed that
Oh, 15 minutes ago. Um,
it's
section 1B.
The decision and Declaration of the curfew.
For Mass Gathering by the superintendent. And the deputy
mayor. Um, we're striking
The language of the Deputy Mayor so that way, it should
just be superintendent. Snelling making the decision of
declaring the curfew not tomorrow's a motion on the floor
for a revised substitute before us. Uh, Is there further
comments on that? Uh,
Okay. Yeah.
All right. Vice vice mayor Bernett. So isn't the isn't the
superintendent part of the administration?
That's the mayor of superintendent. I don't understand what
the difference is. Both of them are part. Both of them
answered to the mayor.
I, I don't understand.
That's my question. Yeah. Well for for clarity during the
drafting of this um it was uh made clear to us that in all
decisions of this nature. Currently the superintendent is
in direct consultation with the deputy mayor for Public
Safety, that's already happening and it would certainly
happen. If this ordinance were to pass under no
circumstances, would the superintendent be declaring, uh,
spot curfews, or taking action, uh, without a ongoing
dialogue and conversation with the deputy mayor, uh, for
Public Safety. Who they talk, you know, multiple times per
day,
So we don't need to codify that role. That that's the way
things work already uh and it was further clarified that it
is the superintendent's ultimate decision regardless of who
he brings into that conversation and how they go about
interacting with each other, the deputy mayor of Public.
Safety is a non-sworn civilian position that does not exist
within the police department. So, by definition, the deputy
mayor can't make that decision. He can talk with the
superintendent all day long about it and they do, but
ultimately, it is the superintendent's sole decision and
the purpose of the language. And the ordinance was to make
it clear that the superintendent makes that decision in
consultation and in close, uh, you know, uh, conference and
dialogue, um, with the deputy mayor for Public Safety. So,
so that's unchanged. And even if we take that language out,
I assure you, the deputy mayor of Public Safety would still
be uh in regular conversation and interaction with the
police.
Superintendent on this and all other matters of Public
Safety. So
Alderman. Martin.
Briefly, I would just say that I think this is more
evidence that it would be good to hold this for a period of
time for more conversation. I have a questions that I won't
um, uh, board the committee with in response to what you
just shared. But I I, I just think that's, I'll be voting
no on the motion. But I think if we can hold it um, to have
more conversation about this or anything else that people
want, I think that'd be
Terrific Vasquez.
Yeah, thank you very much. I think it's clear that there's
along with other things and if you know I get time to ask
questions. There's a lot of ambiguity here. I'm actually
looking here from an opposite standpoint, so let's say not
this Administration but a future 1. That's maybe a little
more authoritarian, has a superintendent Burge. Uh, where's
the check and balance if they were to do something that was
extreme. And so, if we're going to talk about those kind of
changes, I think adding an alder as far as part of the
decision-making process actually, is more of a check and
balance. So I think now you're opening the door to more
questions in a way that again, probably need more time to
discuss. Okay, Alderman Conway,
I I would say as, as someone who is the alderman of the
34th Ward, and it's been a lawyer in this town for 19
years, prosecutor for 7 of them. And I represent Michigan
Avenue from
Uh, about Randolph, down to down to Van Burren. I I
appreciate this because um,
I it's it's clearly a constitutional time place and manner
restriction and it allows the police to really intervene
before the substantial harm and substantial damage is being
done. But I I do speak on behalf of uh, alderwoman tobar's,
um, motion here because the difference between the deputy
mayor and the superintendent is we had advising consent
over the superintendent. Well, we didn't have that over the
over, the deputy mayor and the fact that we have a
situation here,
Where the mayor's office seemingly has to concur in this
discussion.
I mean the mayor has already said he's against curfews.
So, my fear is that they'll never Concur. And by the way,
we think they'll always concur, I'm not sure we even have
have this language in here. I mean, the plane. I think any
child would say that if you were to read whenever the
superintendent and the deputy mayor have jointly,
determined that there's a probable cause believe there's a
mass Gathering recur. The superintendent made declare a
curfew that that does require some kind of joint
determination by by the deputy Deputy Mayor. Um, and by the
way, if you think the deputy mayor is all like I said,
always going to go along with the superintendent then
there's no reason to have have the deputy mayor even in
here.
Now.
And and part of you issue, you have here is a is a speed
issue. I mean, the mayor's office has
Not shown a lot of Rapid action on issues that they don't
like 34 members of the city council want to keep shots
about her. There's an RFP that has been sitting out for 8
months. I don't know if we're getting stonewalled or
delayed but a tool that the crime Labs said, said saves 85
lives a year is not being not being utilized as a result of
that.
So I think it's very clear that superintendent Snelling
alone is best placed to make this decision as somebody who
has been a Chicago police officer for 33 years. While I I
do appreciate that. Deputy Mayor Gatewood does bring a
different perspective to his role.
By all accounts. He's never been a police officer. Never
been a prosecutor. Never been a
Oemc dispatcher and has essentially no experience in in
tactical law enforcement in that regard. So adding that
doesn't seem to to make sense. So I would ask to uh that we
we support. Uh, all we went to vs motion, uh, and and put
this with the superintendent, and not allow the mayor's
office to have a veto power, uh, over curfews here. Thank
you. Okay, Alderman Lopez
thank you, chairman and
Though.
Uh,
your neighbor.
um,
Is not on the committee. I fully agree with what he says,
because that is exactly what I was going to point out that
Requiring them to jointly, do everything.
Means that if they don't do it, jointly, we're not moving
forward. Um, I want to commend our colleague and I would
call a question on this matter to move it to an immediate
vote. Thank you. All right, and I'm assuming a role call
would be indicated. All right. So roll call on a motion to
substitute. You have the substitute motion behind you.
Uh, Vice chairman Nancy.
This is a motion, a motion to substitute.
Alderman. Urban please.
All right. Please Gentlemen, please
Okay, okay.
Thank you, Alderman, Ervin. As a lead co-sponsor, you have
the floor and I would ask you to please uh, recognize the
Quorum. Thank you.
My apologies. Um, Mr. Chairman, um
This will be, this is very simple. Um, I I think that uh
having a dual approach uh to this is in the wake of
everything that's going on to give that level of authority
to just 1 individual. Um, you know,
I think it's a compromise, was 1 of the reasons that I
agreed to work with, uh, the chairman on this, uh, the
original ordinance. We know had some challenges. This is a
work of
Compromise and putting things together so that we can do
something. Um, I will tell you this uh if those 2 items, if
that item is removed. I would not be supporting this
because I think it is necessary for there to be some other
interaction or intervention in the case. So that it is
clear that this is something that needs to be imposed
because it is something that is greater than what we
normally see. Now, again, there's a law enforcement
component and there's a civilian component, there's no
different than, uh,
I want you to use a, a military term, but you have a
civilian component of our military and you have an a
military component, right? And it's just making sure that
people are in concurrence and is there anything wrong with
that, right? And again, we talked about the
constitutionality of these issues and you have to see you,
try to put something in place to kind of mitigate that
where there are civilian and where there is civilian input
as well as as law enforcement input to get their right to.
Again it's those that are
Want to give this level of authority concurrence is not a
bad thing. And if it's something that needs to happen, that
people should be in concurrence, it should be very clear
that this needs to occur. Not the ability of 1 individual
to make that I trust superintendent Snell and I trust the
deputy mayor and again, as, as Alderman Vasquez, indicated
earlier, we have the ability today, we're in a good space
but in 8 years or 12 years we may be in a different place.
So again these are
Cautionary things that we put in place in order to prevent
some of the things that people are most fearful of. And,
and I think that's the point about this is to compromise.
And again, uh, I can just tell you if you guys remove this,
I won't be supporting it and I'll work like hell to get
everybody else not supported.
Alderman, kson.
And I do, you just want to reserve my questions for when we
get back to the body of the agreement. But um, on the the
motion, I
Looking at it. I I agree with chair chairman Ervin on the
the importance of having dual parties in here, but I am
concerned about Clarity of the language to me that sentence
sentence in subsection, B reads as 2 steps, where the
superintendent and Deputy Mayor have jointly, determined
that there's probable cause. So Step 1 is the 2 of them are
called to jointly. Determine that there's probable cause
it's not clear to me. What happens if 1's, there's probable
cause and 1 does not, it's not clear to me that. Um both of
of them are the right actors to be determining the metric
probable cause and then going to step 2. Um you should Step
1 happen then the superintendent made declare a curfew. So
Step 2 appears to be solely the superintendent. It's not
clear to me, you know how Step 1 is achieved without
unanimous belief in probable, cause to get us to step 2. So
what I would say is I'll I'll be voting um no on the motion
as well because
I have full faith in the superintendent and Deputy Mayor
Gatewood, but I think we got to clarify this language
because right now it's just it's a total gray area.
Alderman. Curtis
Yeah, Alderman, Chris hasn't been recognized and I'll come
back to you in your point. We're still your motion is still
on the floor. Ultimately like this.
Okay, uh I I just want to say, I think we in in a great
place. Um,
Can we come back in a minute this if it doesn't work?
Uh, because I I wouldn't get I'm I'm like all the routed
where, uh, we don't need a long term. Uh, if we can pass
this, I think we should pass it.
Uh, because I believe in the ordinance, but can we amend
this?
Later.
if uh, if we don't pass I I would rather compromise now
uh with with what chairman Ervin is saying, then to lose
the entire, um, substitute
Yeah, your your point is valid and yes we can we always
Reserve that right to come back and amended further, uh, if
need be but, you know, we're trying to contend with a
motion right now to amend it on the floor, Alderman, Lopez
your point of order.
Thank you again. Chairman a motion was made to call the
question. It is non-debatable. So per the rule, Robert's
Rules of Order, we need to immediately decide whether or
not we're calling the question without
Devolving into the derogatory commentary. I'm I'm informed.
Repeat the motion and then if you want to continue
speaking, but there's a motion to do this.
Alderman, Central Lopez, it German. I, I, my, my, my my
concern with this, I think and I know that there's a motion
to, to vote, uh, on this amendment. Uh, I would like to
know if there was any conversations with the office, on the
Inspector General of this. When we talk about constitution
constitutionality of, of these issues and we taking a vote
on something is potentially taking less oversight from
something already. Has many holes. I I am really concerned
about, you know, have we ever even talking with Inspector
General talk to Alderman Martin, in the past, about the
need of making sure that this kind of issues, especially
when we questioned Constitution constitutionality, are
brought up to the Inspector General, especially because we
don't want to take an amendment that to me, is, it seems to
be a, a really, really dangerous. Uh, president. When we
talk about less oversight on something, chairman, you
mentioned yourself is already codified. My biggest concern
is that we have in this
Be taking votes and I think like, we don't need housing, we
more than happy to bring the office on Inspector General.
I'm really concerned about taking such a vote, uh, without
checks and balances. So, my point of information is how we
check with the office on Inspector General on any of these,
these, or all of this. The Inspector General has received,
uh, correspondence, all along. They've been informed of
this, but they haven't opined 1 way or another on it. And
that's typically not their purview to do. So it proposed
ordinance. So I, I understand, I understand chairman and
that's 1 of the things that we talked to the in the office.
All the Inspector General about this needs to be a little
little bit more, um, like maybe a something due process
because we did it in the office of on the housing
committee. Even though, traditionally, we haven't done it
just because the issues that this can open up to the city
constitutionally being 1 of them. I really urge the
committee to make sure that we have an opinion for the
Inspector General. Before we take even such votes, okay,
almond, pisado,
It's just another unnecessary layer is what I'm, what I'm
seeing here. What if, what if what if and it's nothing
against the deputy mayor of Public Safety? What if he's
unavailable to get a hold of? This decision is going to be
made by the commander. I'm sure Chief hind could tell you
that the commander is going to reach out.
so um, the superintendent say, look, we have to Institute
Curfew. And that's how it's going to be done. Plain and
simple. Those are the 2 guys that are going to do it.
Bottom line. What if by some
Something happens. You can't get a. Hold of the Deputy
Mayor and we can't Institute this bad idea. Let's just
strike them from
The the sub I support the substitute for the substitute and
I'm not going to not vote for over threats from other
people, so I support it. Thank you. Okay.
All right, let's proceed then to a vote. And assuming we'll
we'll need a roll, call on this, the motion to substitute,
you have the ordinance before you, uh the language strikes,
the participation of the deputy mayor of Public Safety. All
other, uh,
Remains everything else in the ordinance is, is
substantially the same. So we'll start with the roll call,
vote, Vice chairman Yancey.
Alderman, Chico.
Alderwoman Gutierrez.
Alderman Lopez.
Alderman. Curtis
Alderwoman tabaris.
Alderman, sinol Lopez.
Alderwoman Fuentes.
Uh, Alderman talifero is not present.
Alderman pisado.
Alderman Vasquez.
Alderman kutson.
Uh, Alderman Gardner remote.
Um, in, in the I vote is, is for. This, is that correct?
Uh, chairman it's to accept a substitute
Okay, so uh I agree with pisado so is that?
That yes Alderman, Martin.
Uh, Alderman. Mina hoppenworth
Alderman hen.
Remote know.
Alderwoman Silverstein.
Hopkins will be a no.
okay, so we have, uh,
7, yes. And 10. No, the motion to substitute fails and the
original ordinance remains before us.
Alderman. Ervin.
Oh, I'm sorry.
Oh right. We also have uh Alderman Cruise. A non-committee
member. Uh, seeks remote participation. Rule, 59 motion to
allow that buy Alder amendment. I hoping worth hearing no
objection Al alderwoman. Cruz has joined us, uh, alderwoman
to bars. You continue to have the floor. Yes, thank you Mr.
Chairman, um, chief
I want to talk about Manpower, will the will there be will
the department issue? Any changes to the general orders to
ensure that there's not like a, a backlog or um, a log Jam,
when we're declaring a curfew and how it's being enforced.
So, as far as Manpower goes, thank you for that. I
appreciate it. Um, our districts are never left short, no
matter what events going on, because we give the
commanders, he or she the power to buy back to pay overtime
to make sure that the the calls for service are addressed
and the public safety is our number 1 priority. No matter
what's going on downtown. I mean, as you know, you could
imagine. There's multiple multiple events going on every
weekend. Every day that we have to address and send, um,
officers to the unique situation that these gatherings
The ripple effect, I should say.
Is, um, like Monday, for example, this came out at, uh,
2:15. 220 is I believe for a 3 oclock impromptu Gathering
So at that point, we're pulling resources from our day.
Tag teams this and that and we're pulling resources to
cover that. So our districts are are not short. Our
neighborhoods are always covered
Um, as far as general orders Staffing and everything. No, I
mean, that Staffing's done every day, from the deputy
chief, down to the commander down to the the watch
operations within to ensure that we have adequate coverage
in our neighborhoods. Never to be short
No. Why I asked that question is because it's my
understanding that detaining an individual is very
cumbersome. It's a timely process.
and it's a timely process because when an individual is
detained,
The offer, the officer. The police officer is essentially
taking guardianship of the minor.
and,
They're under you know they have guardianship of the minor
until a parent is contacted and until our legal guardian is
contacted and they arrived and they take the juvenile.
This process can take hours.
and so,
This process, my concern with Manpower is that this process
takes these police officers off the beat and they rank up
significant overtime.
For each individual curfew offense.
so, my question is,
what?
How can we how can this measure?
How does this measure? Can you talk about how this measure
impacts Manpower in the length of Tours?
So it, if uh, if if we are going to enact curfew or a mass
arrest situation, uh, notifications are made throughout the
different bureaus within the department. So the detective
vision and everyone starts to relocate to the processing
centers to ensure that we don't incur as much over time as
possible and ensure that we have officers on the street and
they fill out a mass arrests card at the time. This
ordinance is not we're not dealing with this yet but in a
mass arrest situation. Um, the Bureau of detectives and
everything, the notifications are made where they're
showing up, the officers will fill out the mass arrests
card on seen this guy. Describing all the probable cause
and actions taking officers involved. Hand it over to uh
where they're transported to the certain areas that are
identified, where we like to process that individuals, um,
limiting our overtime and ensure that the officers on the
seat. Because I think the most important thing that and no
matter what we're dealing with the DNC, or any large
Gathering that it's our responsibility is superintendent
down to ensure the safety of the men and women their
physical safety while addressing these uh situations as
they occur.
Alderman Vasquez.
Yeah, sorry. I just had a point of clarification on that
because my understanding was when I was speaking to 1 of
the sponsors that
Part of the reason this is being drafted is to facilitate
and make it less of a process. Am I hearing that the
process is already in place as far as detaining whether or
not this thing is moving. So I was referring to mass arrest
situations. Um, I think
being out there and seeing it is being an Incident
Commander for multiple reasons. Once if the curfew was
enacted, you'll see pretty much compliance. We're hoping
full compliance because, you know, most kids are not
involved in the activity. We'll want to go home, we'll want
to lead the area. I want to make the area safe, want to
make their self safe. So once we enact, if this ordinance
was passed, the curfew you would see. Such Behavior, said,
Behavior, probably began to cease because right now I think
the greatest example I can give at 10 oclock at night where
the curfew is enacted right now. At 9:55 you don't see an
individual out there. So if said curfew was enacted at 7,
oclock at night, sure sure. 8 oclock thus, bringing up our
officers to go back to their districts in their areas of
Patrol. Yeah. No, I I appreciate that. My question was just
very specific, none of that process related to detaining
and processing center. None of that changes, those tools
are already in place. That's all I added a question about.
Wait, we we have a case. It's a mass stress situation that
those policies already in place. I got you. Thank you.
In my next question, I want to touch on public transit. I
want to talk about the CTA was the CTA invited here today.
No.
Okay, do do we have information on how teens
transit to reach downtown's destinations.
stops are they coming from?
As they're making their way to downtown. Do we have that?
information from public transit?
teams are using?
our intelligence gathering. How many individuals might or
might not show up
Right. It's like any event that we we address our resources.
We are not going to send 25 teams to something where 15
people are going to show up. So based upon the resources
that we have and all the events going on, that's why every
day is pretty much unique, but it the ability to, uh, to
have the intelligence gathering to see unlike May 15th if a
open source has been identified.
Um, we'll begin to deploy our resources to that.
so it's I mean, is that kind of how but having the ability
to enact that curfew on May 15th,
Is a great.
1 of the tools 1 of the many tools that we could probably
use, if that event was going to take place, but what we
start to see we're not going to enact a curfew, if there's
no activity, this is all activity driven. So the deputy
chief, the chief everyone on the scene, we'll start to
observe that activity. And if that option to declare a
curfew is available and that is the best option at the
time. That is just 1 of the many aspects that we can apply.
So just because we're having a gathering does, I don't
believe that the superintendent or Deputy Mayor will
declare that this curfew go into effect. It'll only be upon
the activity that's taking place at the time. If this
ordinance is needed,
What was that on quickly? Thank you, Sharon. I just want to
say disruptive activity not just activity just because a
bunch of kids come down there. It's disruptive activity
right? Well we touch it or any activity that is criminal in
nature.
Alderman fours.
So, if you're currently having to see people,
On the ground with activities, uh, that are either.
Deemed to be risky or already breaking the law. Can you
already utilize your tools of dispersal based on criminal
activity or mass, uh, activity, Mass, uh, attendance of
individuals, without a permit, you already have those
tools.
As of right now, the the minimum wage we're patrolling
right now. If they observe criminal activity, they are
going to engage in, have the ability to make an arrest in
the rest is needed.
Same thing with any Gathering. If we observe criminal
activity or anything going on the ability to engage and
affect that arrest, is the same as any event gathered. I
think it will go back to again if the curfew if the fights
begin where individuals begin to attack 1 another and the
curfew is already set in place at that location based upon
earlier notifications. And in the process that we set in
place, it is a wonderful tool to end that to ensure the
safety for those children who are attending this event. But
how is that tool different than the tools that you're
continuing your line of questioning? That's not a, a point
of information and you already asked that question. So,
Alderman to bars back to you. Thank you, thank you, Chief
Hine, for answering my questions. I just want to let the
record reflect that, I strongly believe that this issue is
directly tied to the safety and enforcement on the CTA,
which was why I asked the questions about the CTA
These events are shameful to our city and these are not
victimless crimes. I repeat these are not victimless
crimes. Every resident that lives works and some Joys the
businesses. Here in downtown have been effective have been
affected by these take teen takeovers and
Lives have been lost and people have been hurt and we need
a strict policy. The residents of City of Chicago deserve
that they deserve that strict policy. We need to ensure
that we have a strict policy because these policies and
these ordinances that may look good on paper that are
drafted by supervisors and lawyers and politicians.
They rely on the enforcement of the rank and file police
officers.
They rely on the enforcement of the rank and file police
officers and without solid guidelines.
It won't work or will backfire. And so we need to have the
right mechanisms to ensure its Effectiveness. So thank you
Alderman. Hopkins, for all of the work that you've done in
this ordinance and thank you, chime Alderman, kson followed
by Alderman Chico,
Thank you chair. And I want to thank deputy chief Hine as
well. Um, so kind of like, some of my colleagues said, I am
inclined and hoping to support this ordinance, um, as an
additional tool for law enforcement. Deputy chief you've
helped me and other tools, we've kind of worked together.
Similar to the stop, hate littering ordinance. We worked
with CPD closely on creating a tool for CPD to better. Do
its job,
my question is just relate to scope because I think scope
um narrowed near nearly tailored scope, adds to
constitutionality as well as enforceability um and and
chair Hopkins, we talked about this a little bit but I
wanted to see if I could get the deputy Chiefs perspective
on the geography. Um I have a real concern with a lack of
any limit on geography. Say I'll throw out an example. Say
we did half a mile radius as opposed to the whole Lakefront
up and down. Um, I bring up Lakefront because in the 43rd
Ward that's where we see um, Team Trends. We had a a beach
takeover on Monday. Really the first night to nice day of
the season, I anticipate there will be more. I've always
appreciated in partnership with with you even before you
were in this role learning just how many guns are
confiscated at these takeovers. I do not want guns on the
beach and if this tool helps get guns out of these spaces
and off the beaches, I think that's really important. Um,
but what I'm wondering is why we need
Need to be Unlimited in geographical scope, why? We can't
limit it to um a the superintendent calling specific blocks
or up to a half mile radius.
So again, it it's going to be the monitoring of the
intelligence that we have. And the promoter is pretty much
the 1 design where this event is going to take place. So it
based upon that, an amount of notification, early
notification, that we get that we're able to identify. Did
you geographical location that possibly was going to take
place? Um, sometimes it's going to be fluid because
obviously, when he's Gatherings are taking place, you have
individuals show up and start to put out on social media
that the police are already. Here, we have to go somewhere
else.
So we're going to identify that area that the promoter is
trying trying to uh to set up this this Gathering. Um, and
again every 1 of those situations is unique, uh, but
historically there's been
5 or 6 locations that were able to identify somewhat but is
how far it goes once. If this ordinance was
say maybe enacted or we we established that a curfew Zone
needs to be established. Um,
It, it'll be hard to say how far that that spreads out
right now because we, uh, we haven't done this yet. Yeah.
And It's Tricky, it's like building a mechanism that could
be fluid that, you know, as, as the trend moves as
promoters move the trend.
My, why? I'm
Trying to advocate for a limit in a way is because I think
well, a, of course, the more we narrowly tail tailor, this
policy, the stronger, it is the less potential for legal
challenges on this.
Um, uh, and B, you know, I just don't want it to be. I
think none of us want it to be. Um, in the worst case
scenario misused, whether it's by a different
Administration, a different superintendent in a way that
would shut down everything. Because I understand in here,
there's good, there's good defenses to prosecution, but
those defenses don't come up until prosecution. They, they,
they're not coming up right? When the decision is being
made, whether that relates to that, it was a protest, um, a
First Amendment issue. Um, emergencies, Etc. So this point
on Geographic scope, in addition to the point I brought up
earlier on the motion to amend related to clarifying the
language as to the relationship between the deputy mayor.
and the superintendent are things that I would like us to
to work out again. I'm inclined to support this. I think
it's policy-wise a good tool and 1 that will impact us in a
positive way this summer.
Um, I just think we have to clean up some of these these
details.
Thank you. And and again, just from a public safety
standpoint for for me to give you the geographical
locations. Obviously, this information is going to be put
out there right now. If I'm at home, and I'm a promoter of
such such an event. I'm going to say, okay? They told me
they're only going to do 3 blocks. I'm going to call for 5
weeks away, so that's why when these events occur there are
debriefings and intelligence. Gatherings as far as how we
deploy, any Direct locations that we need to deploy at
Alderman, Chico.
Good afternoon. Okay. Chief
Chief, we've talked a lot about. Um, Wendy's takeovers are
detected through social media or other other avenues.
can you speak on when they're not detected and when we just
see Mass, Gatherings starting to form and how that's
different from when they are detected and we have that
information uh available to us. Absolutely. So throughout
the city, and at any given time and any given night, uh, we
might have a large Gathering
As a, as a determined, by The Watch Commander, or in our
sdsc rooms or however, were you able to monitor such event?
Um, at that time, it it, the phone calls are going and
resources are deployed accordingly to address it. First of
all, for the civilians, for their safety, in the
neighborhoods and everyone in that area. That's being
affected. But also for the men and women, it's important to
ensure that we send enough officers to protect 1 another to
ensure that their safety.
As successful outcome.
So there is a different plan of attack from when it is
detected.
And when it's not detected in the form of resources, um,
when we know what's happening, we're able to gather teams.
We're able to gather, you know, additional units and deploy
them in helping whatever District, that's occurring. Um I
think
Relying Less on.
Grabbing officers from from other districts throughout the
city to come to downtown. I know when it's speaking to my
commanders, in the fourth and fifth district, when they're
not detected, we're kind of going going to other parts of
the city grabbing officers from other districts to to have
them report downtown. I think my concern um and and with
that and giving the police this tool is
We have a lot of things going on.
In other parts of the city. And when, when these takeovers
take place,
um,
That can't be just the only thing going on in the city.
in terms of the fourth and fifth district, you know, I Come
From The Far Southeast side and when we're taking resources
from those districts,
When the resources already depleted, um, you know, I have,
we have to answer to our constituents, to our residents,
while it's going on. So I, I I'm in favor of this because
it gives police another tool.
To to enact and to avoid taking those resources from from
outside that district from other districts. Um, because
You know district manager, too, absolutely. And thank you
for that. Very fair and accurate. Um,
Spending my whole career in Patrol.
Commander Captain Lieutenant, everything's been in Patrol.
I understand the districts and and the Manpower and the
requests and the needs of uh the neighborhoods, all 77
neighborhoods. So it's important to always deploy our
resources accordingly. So that not 1 neighborhood is
shorted. Now there are multiple events that go on and thank
God. There are specialized units so we'll get into here but
But whether it be searched PRT the bikes additional, you
know, districts Manpower but you are 100% correct. It is so
important and vital and it is a ripple effect when these
Unannounced events or anything, go on to ensure the safety.
And and that's our 1 priority we never ever ever. Leave our
neighborhood short, thank you. And and I think it's fair to
say, you know, we have
less resources that we did 3 4 or 5 years ago and when we
go to these cap meetings or these Community meetings and
they see what's going on streeterville or downtown
And our residents asked us, you know, hey what about us,
what about that, Saturday night, where we had, um, a lot of
things going on. So, uh, thank you for that. Um, I will be
supporting this
Thank you uh, Alderman Vasquez.
Thank you very much chairman. Um I I appreciate that you've
been engaging in good faith and trying to figure out what
Solutions are. Because I think if we start from
I think the origin of this is we have these situations
occurring in certain Wars. It's happening regularly, and
the constituents are asking those Alders, what are you
going to do about it? And I think that's probably the
impetus for a lot of trying to figure out a solution. Um, I
do have some concerns um related to
Because it's because this conversation just felt visceral
from some of the comments of our colleagues. I kind of
wanted to level set certain things like as somebody who
grew up in this city who used to get kicked out of Navy
Pier, just for meeting up with other kids. Similarly, I
think sometimes we forget, as we get older and start
throwing the Blazers on. But what the experience of being a
youth is and the reason why I mentioned that is, I don't
think any child or youth has the intent of going anywhere.
To get into a fight or pull out a taser or do the thing is
my colleagues were mentioning. I think they're trying to
find a way to gather in the situations get out of hand,
which is, I would say, unfortunate and understandable. But
because people are responding to these events.
I just have to respond to some comments and and with
respect 1 of our colleagues left um but Alderman Reilly uh
kind of said some things that I think
He may not have understood how it's received by other
people. So when you're talking about these kids, who are
out here and you're like, you know, uh they need to go get
culture or where are the parents or this isn't Foot Loose,
Loose, its twerking, I think there's not the understanding
of how coded that language comes off, because there's a lot
of concern about who that's referring to. Because for
example, I don't imagine a snap curfew happening in
Wrigley.
When we know we've got, you know, I think a couple weeks
ago the Dodgers were take Dodgers fans are taking over
Clark Street, right? So how this is used is actually part
of the concern, it's not that we don't understand the
intent or the spirit of it. It's that we don't know who
makes the decisions or or what the thought process is and
how it's enacting. Similarly, um, I think, uh, alderwoman
tabaris, which is a very fair question about partnering
with CTA
Even in saying, are we checking where these kids are coming
from when you're talking about a city that segregated? It
may not be in the intent to mention it that way. But
certain folks are going to hear it and say oh so our south
side and West Side kids, not allowed to go downtown because
of where they might be coming from. And so I again I don't
think that's necessarily the intent of our colleagues but I
think when we're talking about this I would
Really recommend, we're a little more mindful about things
might come off to different constituencies and here in the
city. Um I think I respect um ottoman Riley's point about
us always talking about long-term Solutions. I think we see
that the long term Solutions have effect. I agree with them
that sometimes we don't have the best solutions for in the
immediate but we also have an invested in the long term
Solutions enough to actually see the results of those uh
Solutions actually bear fruit. And so I just
I wanted to lay all of that. Um, something else he
mentioned, which was, uh, if CPD comes to us asking for
tools, he has an inclination to say yes, just for clarity.
The ordinance came not from CPD, right? But from the
council side is that correct?
It I I'm not sure I understand your question. Yeah meaning
like it wasn't the superintendent who worked on drafting
this it was the city council. So it wasn't necessarily CPD,
who said, hey, I need to get these tools. We're going to
introduce legislation. We'd like for you to pass it. It was
from city council site saying, we believe this to be a
solution. So that's how it began, right? It it was a result
of input from the superintendent's office, okay? But it
but he was currently applied, they they
Correct I think like we're all legislators so I think you
had an idea you went to them for input as opposed to them
coming and asking us to do a thing. That's all I'm just
getting Clarity on that.
Before any ordinance was introduced, we sought input from
the superintendent's office and was asked to do this. So,
it was Mutual. Okay. Um so I think uh,
I've got questions and some of this is related to um cost,
right? So, I, I, I have the same thoughts as our colleague,
Uh, other person Fuentes that if you currently have the
tools right, meaning you get the social media information,
you know that they're going to be at a certain Corner that
they've said they're going to be a takeover. There's
nothing that impede, CPD from just being there proactively.
If you already have the information, right?
Like you I guess it's for CPD Nothing Stops you once you
get the information of like saying hey we're just going to
be there because we got the information correct.
So based on the information intelligence that we gather we
we will deploy our resources to that location and, you
know, to provide safety. But again, all of our deployments
and everything is based upon constitutional policing, first
amendment protection, and the rights of individuals to
together at a location.
It's only when the criminal activity and everything, the
codes, I think I I to give kind of an example. Again is
waiting till the 10:00 curfew when you see a lot of the
Maybe carrying out the scene. This is just the way at 7
oclock at night. When you're asking about costs and
Effectiveness for officers, going back to the 77 neighbors
and everything at curfew, if it's enacted at a 3-hour
window.
Is, uh, you know, again, it's 1 of the tools to enact
safety for all the kids that are showing up. So, I I
appreciate because I know in a lot of the answers you've
been providing examples, but you're not necessarily
answering like the question. I'm asking what I'm seeing
right now is curfew or not, if you know, you know, uh,
whatever takeovers happening on uh, Jackson and state or,
you know, you would know that enough to say, hey
proactively, we know this is happening on May 8th. So we're
going to we're going to prepare and have officers there
without a curfew in place. That's what you're doing anyway.
I would imagine because there's nothing impeding you from
doing. So that's a yes or no. We're doing that currently
correct, okay. So similarly
If a takeover is occurring, right? Which is which is, I
guess a second part of this ordinance, which is interesting
and I'll get to that later. But if, and if, if the
activities occurring, similarly, your deployment resource
to address it, as you see the activity happening, right?
That's a yes or no. Also,
Well I you know in in law enforcement yes or no is very
there's unique situations on how we deploy in the resources
and the options that we choose. Um, the activity we
sometimes, you know, law enforcement doesn't choose the
activity respond to the chaos to restore order. Totally
100%. We're going to deploy the right amount of officers,
hopefully to that situation. Yeah, I think what you need.
maybe if I can help you understand a little bit, how a team
Trend Works a little bit or a youth Gathering. I was young
once I kind of get it. But okay I I was young a long time
ago. Sure, sure. Fair, fair, fair long time. It was, you
know, take
So you'll see waves, you'll see individuals show up, who
are the original things happening and Wilder there through
social media and Hyper social media platforms. You'll see
individuals start to say share their location and FaceTime
life and you'll see waves coming down every 15 to 30
minutes more and more. It's kind of a force multiplier.
Sure. At that time as these individuals are coming down and
I to answer maybe the last almonds question, I don't know
how they're getting a lot of times right shares. And
everything that they have the apps where they're using CTA
buses bikes. However, they're coming down but it's waves
about every 15 to 30 minutes of individuals coming down.
So, when you originally started out with 60, right, then
you have a 180 within 30 minutes to 360 within 40 minutes.
think this ordinance, 1 of the greatest things they have,
have, but maybe going for, it is to enact that curfew to
is over before the 345 waves are coming down and then we
experience a tourist who was walking and got shot in the
arm and the activity that's occurring from it or another
Another child shooting another child were able to enact the
curfew, that's at this disposal. As a tool to stop, this
planned Behavior, where you're asking, whether the
resources and the officers have already been deployed to
know, know my, my question is is which are articulating
that you would do you already do. And the only difference
is, you're not saying curfew you disperse when an incident
occurs or proactively occupy the space. Like those those
activities are currently happening. I think this gives us
the ability, not to wait till 10:00 at night because it's
gives you officers and 1 more tool at their disposal if
they're seeing criminal behavior and everything. And
remember, I think the greatest thing ever, when you start
to see these children running in the streets, 1 of them.
God forbid, whatever gets struck by a vehicle.
I mean no 1 ever talks about the Reckless conduct when
they're running in the streets because not only the driver
of anybody driving down there. Could you imagine hitting a
child when 1 of these things? If we could prevent it with
the curfew ordinance to say, at this time, we're going to
protect the safety of your child know. I I, I I'm I'm not,
we completely understand that the effects and like the
things we don't want to see, help people are here, passing
a speed limit ordinance because we don't want to see people
get hit by cars. So I didn't, I think people understand no
1 to see that happen, but what I'm asking is more Logistics
and implementation, if right now, you're employing, people
proactively when you find out the information or in real
time. When something occurs, the only thing that's
different is you're just not saying curfew, you're still
dispersing, people are doing what you would, so I guess to
follow up on that question.
Either way, you're utilizing resource right? You're call the
Officers aren't coming out of nowhere so whether you're
having curfew or not wear those officers coming from
officer coming from multiple multiple to sources so an
officers we can bring from the detective division we could
bring from uh the training support group. We could bring
from headquarters, there's multiple facets within the
police department that we're draining our officers to come
down there and back filling. And when you talk about the
overtime in October, we'll be addressing this issue because
the amount of overtime that we have to pay to backfill to
ensure sure that our neighborhoods are protected. So when
you have these unpermitted events, these young Gatherings,
and everything, it is a large deployment of officers. I got
you. Yeah, I think I appreciate that, like, tactically. You
have other resources of Officer to pull from to. I don't
feel any of that's but I think that the, the thing to note
here is too that our detectives that we will pull down. I
mean there are families and victims that are depending on
these detectives to solve the case, but we're pulling our
detectives down to address these issues. I think the curfew
kind of stops
some of those resources from being deployed down there and
getting them back into the detective division. Is that
because you believe that there's less officers needed if
you have that curfew when you tell me, or you're still
going to need to say amount of people to enforce every
every situation is unique and as far as their followers or
responses, as on how many kids show up, don't show up how
many I mean, there's so many different,
Scenarios that play out to who shows up, how they show up
and why they show up. Gotcha, but how I deploy.
Yeah, it depends on the situation. It's almost it's almost
the same as how many shows up and then how we deploy. So it
varies on each situation, okay, so so I appreciate that
because that doesn't clarify, whether you're saving any
money, you could still got to make the call depending on
the situation but for oemc. Similarly, because the whole
communication, it's asking, um, I believe if feasible to
put communication out, letting people know, there is a
curfew and so the sign. Um, as I believe, uh, I forgot
which of our colleagues asked about it, that's 1 point. I
appreciate that. Oemc has a way to kind of geofence and
like get things out through text message. How precise can
that be related to like a curfew designation area?
Yes, thank you Alderman. Chris patinho oemc, uh the
technology as it stands and again this would be based on
any boundaries that we are given for the um, area in
question, but it's accurate down to 1/10 of a mile. Okay.
Okay. That's good. And then what's the cost each time
that's deployed? Like how much are taxpayers? Paying for
every notification when that happens, depending on the area
house, that figured out that that the software that is used
comes as part of a package, with our 911, dispatch
software. So, it's not based on usage, you just have
blanket usage on it.
I I just the reason I used to work telecoms and I would find
it a little bit challenging to someone's, not going to
charge you per like bulk or how usage. Do we know that for
sure. Um I I can get back to you with that. Absolutely okay
yeah I think part of what we negotiated, as part of the
budget process just for context, is the ability for Alders
to call for a fiscal impact statement related to
legislation that's being introduced so we all can identify
the cost. So um I'll be following up with Kofa to get a
fiscal impact statement because I want to find out the
overtime Resource as well as the communication piece to see
what we're talking about.
Um, okay. Um, this is more related to curfew that already
exists, right? How you doing?
I'm, I'm doing okay. Uh, somebody needs to mute. Uh, so uh,
So related to the current curfew and this, I'm gonna
imagine it's through the chair. Do we have how many arrests
have occurred related to the existing curfew since we've
had it?
What?
Yeah, the history since we've had it, do we have track
record data.
And I guess I'm going to ask you in what time frame.
Uh, I'll I'll say well from last term to this term because
I think last term mayor Lightfoot was looking to change the
curfew as well because we have a broad, you know,
definitely, I appreciate that. Question, I can get you that
information through the chair like I said,
I mean, you know, and again I think kind of
Circling my head here here.
It's important, obviously, the resources. I think we could
use less resources if this option is available and the less
resources we use for this kind of limits the over time and
also you get the officers back into the district. So I I
think that's a um and and and kind of the goal. Ultimately
for all this, always for every police officer, every men
and women is to get full compliance. Yeah, no I I
appreciate that. I think do the chair data is what matters
to me. Is if, if the, if the case being made is it saves us
funds in overtime, like to see the numbers on that because
I believe, we are overworked in these offices in a way that
makes it harder for them to make calls in real time, right?
And so, I want to make sure I'm mindful not just of the
the expenditure, but of the resource for the the, you know,
um, people out there doing the job. Um, okay. Uh, yeah,
because the reason I'm asking more about the arrests with
the current curfew, I'm trying to figure out the arrest,
the complaints, any lawsuits related to those because those
also have a cost again, through the chair, if you don't got
it. Absolutely. But I think we're not
Thinking through those parts when we're thinking about
constitutionality and all of it. So I do recognize as
you're saying, you're always going to think about the
constitutionality you're always going to think about the
freedom of speech.
But that's not necessarily what happens or we wouldn't have
the lawsuits and settlements.
and so getting the data separate from the intent is just
important for us to consider um,
there's a question related to uh, and see the C-section,
um, part 2 of that about the parent potentially having a
penalty if they knowingly allow a child to go, how would
you determine knowingly? Allow
Right? Like you go to a parent. They're not going to be
like, yep. I totally let them go, right? So how does that
have to even determine?
Um, good afternoon, all them. It's got Spurs general
counsel. Um, we determine that on a Case by case basis. Uh,
it really depends on the facts of each situation. Um,
sometimes it's, it's just abundantly clear that that's the
situation. Um, other times, if it's not, we can't meet our
standard. We obviously can't charge that. So it's only, if
we are able to meet that threshold to bring that charge.
So, let's do the chair. You could submit with that
threshold or standard. Looks like similarly, I just want
more clarity and I think that's
Part of the challenge in looking at it is we need a more
clear understanding of like, some of the, the
accountability there. Um, also section D there. The fact
that like, there's a promulgation of rules. We have no idea
what those rules are. It's that the superintendent will
come up with those rules us, not knowing what those rules
are while signing off on the ability to do so. And
something this crucial I think is challenging for me to
wrap my head around. So again Scott spar's
General counsel of CPD. Um, the rules here contemplate. Um,
adopting general, or special orders that are specific to
this ordinance. Um, our orders are available it directives,
Chicago police.org. They're also posted for a period for
public comment, so they will be made publicly available
meaning there. There's like a consideration of rules. You
posted it publicly before you figure out the rules are and
then Implement is that. I understand it correctly. We seek
public input on proposed rules. Okay? Um, and then I think
the ticket stuff thing, which is part G is also
something I'm concerned about because I believe
Not in this, I understand the spirit of it. But how it's
implemented is different, right? La la la is somebody takes
over a street.
They get to just walk, no problem because they said I got a
ticket.
I think that's a problem because they also take over
resource. They also make it harder for public
transportation. They also party hard right, but the fact
that we're counting on somebody to discern what 1 group is
held accountable to any other isn't creates a larger
problem that I think is going to lead to more lawsuit,
right? And and on on the other side of it, if I'm thinking
of it from your point. If I'm just if I'm a kid going to
the Takeover, I just got to walk around with a ticket stuff
and say, leave me alone.
Every situation is unique and we address that obviously on
our body and worn camera and videographers everything
standing there. If they have a defense to be there, then
then we would leave them alone but every every situation is
unique, right? So for clarity and I'm not trying to give
give any kids a heads up. If somebody did a takeover and
online print out a ticket stub, and they show up to this
thing and they just say I have a ticket stub. The, the law
says you got to let me go Alderman. If they like to pay
that price of going to LA pelusa to that ticket and I think
the city will that's my question. But I mean, I think
you're going to have to have a genuine ticket, an officer
is our men and women are smart enough. Our officers are
incredible officers and if somebody has a ticket stubs
showing that they're not an event on that date and time I
think the officers through their preliminary investigation
will be able to tell that this child is there for a
legitimate reason but the challenge that they have a ticket
that's 6 7 months away in the future. I don't believe
believe that's illegal defense. No, that's not my point. My
point is if you have a ticket for takeover Fest or
whatever, that's for that day,
That's a legitimate ticket if they're paying, and they have
a ticket. If it's a permitted, license event where bacp and
everybody's involved, absolutely, I think the investigation
and preliminary investigation will determine whether, or
not a legitimate event is taking place that said location.
Okay, and Alderman, if I, if I may interject here just for
your knowledge, the exemptions and the defenses for the
curfew in this ordinance are identical to the existing
exemptions and defenses in the current curfew ordinance. So
we are not creating anything new.
In that section that already exists. We simply mirrored what
was already in code, so this is not new, so I appreciate
appreciate that. I think. Um, I was against the larger
curfew for the same reasons, so I I appreciate that that
it's not something new, um, but I just
For all the reasons stated I know, I asked a lot of
questions so I appreciate the time. I think there's a lot
of ambiguity that leads to a lot of exposure. There's a lot
of potential for um, abuse whether or not the intent is for
that. And so I just have concerns that I think we all need
to think about because there's a difference between the
intent and trying to solve a problem and how it's going to
be implemented. And I think that's why I can't be support
and supportive of what's here. Now, and if folks want to
take time to figure out how to be more precise, I think a
number of us are open to that conversation. Thank you very
much. Thank you Alderman. Uh, we need a rule 59 motion for
vice chair yansi, who had to leave, but wants to continue
to participating. Moved by Alderman, Martin hearing no
objections. So moved. Uh Alderman Central Lopez
Thank you. Uh, chairman, I do want to get some
I did. I did contact the office on Inspector General about
this um, this important discussion. And um, and as I
mentioned to the chairman, the she's not aware of any
conversations about this. Um, this particular ordinance, I
do think that this is an important um discussion for the
Inspector General to have. Um also you know, for the sake
clarification and I know I don't know if there's any other
agencies and others OMC or any other um Coppa or others who
are waiting who have waiting on this, but I just want to,
want to, you know, encourage that we involve the office on
General. Because they do have actually preview into that.
into that. So, just for clarification, I think I heard that
this is something that perhaps Inspector General should not
have preview or doesn't have preview to. So, just for the
clarification, I would like to ask, uh, what kind of
conversations they have happened with the office of the
Inspector General. And, um,
And just clarification about jurisdiction or preview in
these matters. Uh, they they really have no formal role to
play in this either in the implementation or or in their
drafting. Uh, they're certainly entitled to opine on this
as they would with anything, uh, that's relevant to the
city of Chicago. But we're, we're not calling on them, uh,
to implement this in any way or participate in it. So, you
know, there was no, uh, specific Outreach to them. I know
their office is aware of these discussions. Um, but uh,
We have not asked them to formally participate in the
process nor would there be any any reason to any more than
any other ordinance that we uh, we contemplate uh my my 2
co-chairs are indicating that. They've had some
conversations Alderman. Ervin.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, uh, no matter matter of fact, I
think it's wholly, uh, you know, inappropriate for them to
even be involved in this. I mean they they are to look at
things after um after the fact the department we're talking
about, you know, wasting efficiency. I don't see their role
at this particular point in time, now given some experience
some experience given some a review, and if they want to
upon or something, after some things have happened, uh, it
different conversation again. Uh, now, if you ask, if the
Law Department had reviewed this, I think that's a fair
question. I just don't think the involve involvement of the
Inspector General at this point, you know, really
Make sense at this time. But the Law Department, general
counsel about the constitutionality and those things I
think are most most appropriate, uh, at this particular
juncture. Yeah, chairman d.
Thank you. Thank. Thank you. I just wanted to add, uh, to
Chairman CEO Lopez. Um, you might be you asking that
question because of the review that's gone on with the
green social housing ordinance. Um, where that's the
creation of a, uh independent not for-profit, which has,
uh, as on its board, um, city employees and people who are
not city employees and the extent to, which, um, the ethics
ordinance applied to them and, uh, needed the review of
the, uh,
Inspector General.
Yeah. Okay. The chairman, the reason why I asked this is
because this issue of curfew is not new to the city of
Chicago and in fact, in terms of efficiencies and the way
that we are using public dollars, uh, I mean, even some of
my colleagues have talked about the, the overtime, I think
that there's a number of foyers that have been requested
from, the police department that had not been answered
about the, the amount of overtime that this kind of
operations conduct. I don't know if you have that
information in terms of overtime and even just yet year to
date overtime. Uh, do we have that information?
Alderman Scott spar's general counsel CPD. Um, those foyes
need to be directed to the finance department. The city's
finance department, the CPD can't answer questions about,
uh, dollar amounts expended through overtime. And that
well, again and that's what I would like to insist on this.
Because I think that what we are discussing is policies
that are potentially, not only very expensive, but also in
my opinion and the other thing. Other question I want to
ask, did you receive to? This is a large department, or the
police department, do you receive the the letter from a
number of civil rights organizations, with some very
with some very specific observations, there's about a about
20 organizations, doing civil rights civil rights
litigation here in the city of Chicago. That already said
that the potentially will loss. They will file a lawsuit.
Have you received that letter?
Against Scott spar's CPD general counsel. I was not uh
recipient of that letter know. Yeah so again and I do think
that we should and I don't know if um I mean I know the
members of the progressive caucus that they certainly
receive the copy of the letter. Um so I just feel that
there's a number of holes in these uh, in these ordinance.
ordinance. I think that 1 of the responsibilities, and
call, and I will, I will again, call, and I'll make my
uh, public. I do think that the inspector general actually
does have preview into this as a matter of policy, because
this issue of curfew is not new. I am someone that does
certainly not does not support such a um such a policy
because it doesn't work but I'm really concerned about
public dollars use
That I do think that should be discussed here. I want to
discuss also what he also could result in a lawsuit, as
well. So in this, kind of, um, with this kind of holes, uh,
I do think that the city council is better off, uh, using
using some of those dollars to provide opportunities like
the Peace book that we just heard from some young people
that are prop that are proposing. But if we don't have that
information, how we going to make a decision? We don't even
know how much spend on these operations, but I tell you,
they're very costly but the the even the thought of this
being unconstitutional gives me pause and that's what I
did. I do think that it is, um, I do think and again, I, I
will urge the, um, uh, chair. Um, Hopkins to take more time
on this issue. This is not something that should be taken
lightly, and in this conversations again. And I just like,
chairwoman, that will mention, uh, uh, even though
traditionally, the Inspector General has not been
discussing issues of policy, especially with green social
housing. We welcome her participation as well as the chair
of the Ethics Committee. Uh, Alderman. Martin, I do think
that such a decision
Decisions should be done. Always not only with the
fiduciary responsibility, but the constitutionality of the
matter, we have 20 organizations that are saying that
they're going to sue the city. Why not using these
resources and potentially over time to actually create
spaces for young people. Not only to be saved downtown to
be saved in our own neighborhoods for God's sake. So I I, I
just want to ask, you know, my colleagues, you know, if if
this is something that that we willing to push without any
understanding of the impact even though I tell you,
The thing that we have enough data, even from the inspector
of this issue coffee is not new, but it doesn't have
doesn't seem to even make any dent on the issue and it
keeps getting worse. So my, my ask again, from from the
chair. Uh, I do think that these items should holding
should be holding committee. I do think that we, we are
better off taking time to discuss this comprehensively and
to work with the chair, not to provide in my opinion,
Draconian solutions that have never worked. But let's work
collaboratively. I mean, the collaboration with the part
district, for instance I would love to see young people
being able to use, you know, it doesn't seem that Chicago
Bears seem to have a lot of use. So that stadium for much
longer. Why don't we have the conversation with the part
District to open up that stadium and to provide
opportunities? I tell you, it'll be less expensive for the
city to do. Such a thing that use tons of over time ended
up with a potential issues of constitutionality a lot. So
that they spending, I I, I just asked my colleagues. I
understand why you why you want to push for Solutions, you
know, urgently
But I think that we have a responsibility to make sure that
we're not here. Every summer is the same conversation until
when
So my colleagues, I ask you. Let's work together. Part
District, CPS, let's discuss how we can do this in a way
that works. This doesn't work. Let's be honest, this
doesn't work. And to my colleagues, you know what, you know
what, we know the communities that actually don't have to
deal with. This is communities, that have, let's look at
the servers. They have tons of spaces for young people,
when it's going to be time for Chicago to have a space for
young people. When
That is my question people talk about how unacceptable this
is to have all these shootings and all that, you know, is
also an acceptable that we do not have a spaces for young
people in the city of Chicago. That is an acceptable. Let's
cheat all our children. I heard people now are race because
we don't have adults supervising kids. You know, those same
adults are working 2, 3 jobs to make ends meet
So I asked my colleagues with all these flaws, with all
these holes, we're still going to take a vote today.
So, I urge my colleague, I urge, uh, chairman, uh, Hopkins,
let's hold this item, and let's work on something that
actually works.
Uh, thank you Alderman. I will just point out that, uh,
this ordinance was researched drafted and written. Uh, by
lawyers, uh, lawyers in lrb, lawyers in the Department of
Law. Uh, our Corp Council, um, our own uh, legal adviser to
the city council. The attorney for the Chicago Police
Department, as well as outside counsel with his was stated
at the beginning, nearly 40 years of expertise in
constitutional law.
Navigation, every paragraph in. This ordinance was written
by lawyers with expertise, uh, so others can have different
opinions and you've heard some of those opinions today. Um,
but people who have uh, a history of activism on this issue
and happen to be lawyers, are entitled to their opinion
that does not vest their opinion on the constitutionality
of this act with any additional weight. Um all of the due
diligence that we performed in drafting this ordinance, I
believe in my opinion, uh fully prepares us for any
challenge that may be threatened and we can't be dissuaded
from taking the action that we think is appropriate as
legislators based on the possibility of a judicial review
judicial review by our companion. Branch of government in
the future that may or may not happen. Um, but it should
not Cloud the debate. On the merits of this ordinance, we
should stick to what we do best.
As legislators, which is decide whether this course of
action is appropriate or not. And that's what we've been
doing today. Um, but but I simply cannot allow the uh,
assertion that there's some constitutional defect in this
ordinance. Um that does a disservice to The Talented
lawyers who wrote it. I I wouldn't have presented this if I
didn't have that Assurance from them so that should not be
the nature of the debate and that should not be how we make
our decisions. Whether we're going to
Proposal or support this uh, as legislators that will be up
to the judicial branch. We have a lot of lawyers here in
this room right now. What we don't have in this room are
judges, right? And it's judges ultimately that make the
decision on the constitutionality of this ordinance in a
future action. And that's why we shared, uh, that decision
with you from the 7 circuit, uh, Appellate Court. Um, that
ruled on a very similar ordinance under very similar
circumstances, um, and it was quite clear from that Court's
ruling. And I know you'll all read it because you were
given it this morning. Um, it the language, uh, sets a
pretty strong precedent for the Constitutional legality of
this action that we're contemplating today. But again, that
shouldn't be the the nature of our deliberations here today
where the legislative branch, not the judicial branch, um,
but if we have more work to do in this ordinance, uh, I'm
certainly willing to, uh, continue those discussions with
you. Uh, going forward. Um, we do have some other, uh,
committee members that haven't spoke yet. We have got a lot
of non-committee members that are waiting.
So follow up, thank you, chair. Because you follow may
follow up is around the studies that we mentioned that you
know because it's not only an issue of constitutionality,
this is an issue of Effectiveness. I think you know I would
like to see any reference or how this curfews have worked
and where they have shown to be effective, you know, to
create the the the comprehensive safety that that we
discuss is there any studies? And again and I will welcome
of course the opinion of those other civil rights attorneys
as well they should be on the box but you know in the issue
of constitutionality but
Also the issue of Effectiveness where where are the studies
that we are using for the curfew? And again, where are the,
you know, cost Effectiveness as well? I mean, I don't even
have a number for the the the overtime number that we
using. But I want to see if where is where where's the the
coreview studies that you mentioning? Is there any studies
that we can refer to? Yeah, we'll share that with you.
Uh, let's take a 10-minute recess for uh bathroom break and
water break. Uh and and the non-committee members who have
been patiently waiting uh, for their turn.
Fine. We'll, we'll get you. You're not making another
motion, are you?
All right, take a 10-minute recess. And then we'll come
back, recognize Alderman Lopez and then go to non-committee
members. Please. Come back at 1:30.
Thank you, chairman sir. I've been an attorney for about 25
years now.
Okay, the uh, recess meeting of Public. Safety will
reconvene, we still have
2 more members of the committee who seek recognition and
then we thank again. The non-members for their
extraordinary, patience waiting to be recognized including
uh alderwoman Taylor. Um,
Alderman Moore.
Well, Suzanne virtual we do need a, a real 59 motion for
Alderman spas
Hearing no objection so ordered.
Uh, Alderman tabaris as well.
And I think we did Alderman already, so, uh, Alderman.
Curtis
Uh, thank you, chairman, uh, uh, Chief. First I would like
to thank uh everyone that got into a room to uh put this um
um, ordinance together. Uh, to figure out what made sense.
did make sense? Uh, what I like, what the chief said, uh,
and it seemed like No 1, picked it up.
This is not just happening in downtown, is happening in all
77 communities. Uh, I I do know that, um, and I wish I
could do, um,
Show a video of it happening in my asburn community and
it's not happening on uh, commercial streets or uh um, in a
park is happening right on residential streets. Uh and I
have a video. I have people, the young people dancing in
the middle of the street.
Can't get on top of the squad cars, and no respect to other
cars, they get on top of those. The worst thing that I've
saw was I saw children even less, than, than 10 years old
running around the streets.
um, um,
Uh, probably supposed to be being watched by the older
brother older sister, uh, it was heartbreaking. Uh, it went
from 60 residents
I mean 60, uh, teens to over 100, then it went to over 200.
uh it was it was um, and the worst thing about this
This the video even shows it at 1:40 in the morning. 1:40
a.m. June 13th.
Uh, a really bad sight to see uh, very dangerous.
Uh so so this is real. Uh I don't know how many people
actually got to live, a 10 take over but it's not where uh,
anyone will be prepared. Uh, if because if you don't catch
it on social media,
uh, because these promoters are getting very smart and I
heard, um,
ottoman Vasquez, uh, talk about, you know, um,
what did he say that? Um,
uh, if it if it um,
Like I can't I can't remember what he he he was just
talking about, but uh, this is real. Some of the promoters.
They're not looking for a safe and and I know uh uh all
have been CEO Lopez. Also brought it up.
Some of these promoters are not looking for a safe
environment to have, uh, uh, Team events. They're looking
for this to be disruptive.
Uh, and that's the reason why when they getting out there,
they write on top of the vehicles. They videotaping uh they
they doing this so they can act out why, who knows? But I
do appreciate this. Um,
Ordinance and I and I hope that we all could come to uh as
as a body, come to a situation because it's not just
happening in the downtown area, uh, sad that it's downtown
because I've always said, if if we lose downtown, uh, to so
many different things, we lose Chicago. Uh, so I'm hoping
that we come together, uh, past this and we figure out and
do make
Be uh some amendments later but uh this is something that
that doesn't need to be long-term and need to be right now
solution. So thank you. Thank you, everyone for trying to,
uh, come up with a solution. Thank you. Curtis app. Your
comments Alderman Lopez.
Thank you, chairman and good afternoon. Now, good afternoon
members of the committee. I thank our guests for being
here. Um,
Before I begin, I just want to take a moment to say that
I'm amazed. I'm glad to hear so many of our colleagues ask
questions of this ordinance that we never hear asked of
other other ordinances.
you know, to hear people talk about,
What's the impact? What's the cost? What's who's right at
input? It's a refreshing change of pace so I'm glad you've
been able to inspire that, uh, chairman Hopkins with this
ordinance.
um,
but I would just want to begin with.
A couple things first off.
We do have a curfew ordinance in existence, correct. Yes.
We do have a curfew ordinance that is considered
constitutional correct? Yes.
Okay, we are simply amending what is constitutionally
allowed.
Currently.
4 situations as they arise. Moving forward, correct? Yes.
Okay.
The police department.
to sum to sum up what I heard the
almost almost promoted you to First deputy
um,
but what we've heard you say is
to protect life property and civil rights through
constitutional compliance.
And I believe that as much as we like to refer back to the
days often when that wasn't the case, I think that that is
the case today, correct?
Correct. And we see that play out. Remarkably well time and
time again.
but we know,
that there are instances when there is a group of
individuals who respond well to programs support and
investment. As we heard, many of our speakers attest to
But there's also that small segment.
That no matter what you allow them to do.
No matter what programs you provide? What job services you
put in their communities?
They simply do not resonate with any of that. Correct.
Or has it been in your experience? You know, it's, it's
such a unique question again. I mean, there's I'll save you
the embarrassment, there's Unique Individuals, all
throughout the city. I won't make that a comment, I'll make
it, we know.
From our experience that there are 80% of of Youth.
Or young individual, young adults. I'll even put it at
young adults because it's not just youth resonate with when
we provide programs and services, they're 20% does not.
about 20% is intentionally seeking to destroy property,
become Tick, Tock famous, and
cause Mayhem wherever they're at.
It is not because they're bored, it's not because they're
isolated, and it's not because of lack of of investment as
we've heard.
Um, because to say that there's nowhere for kids to go
is simply disingenuous In This Moment.
How many parks are there throughout the city of Chicago?
How many, how many millions not
Hundreds of millions of dollars. Have we invested throughout
the entire city of Chicago, whether it's through our Parks,
whether it's through employment programs, we have 1 summer
Chicago, that actually puts you to work. There are all
kinds of options out there, but we also know that there are
individuals who when parents are not engaged, because the
family value and the family structure is weak.
Out the kids, go to do whatever they want to do.
Now.
We can try to obstacle with the causes are, but we know
what the causes are.
We can try to blame code words and and and point fingers
and try to embarrass people as my colleagues have done.
But that's not the case. We know what the problem is here,
we know that
our value system in this city.
Is messed up.
When not just the teen takers down teen takeovers downtown.
But as our colleague, just stated this would apply to
Street takeovers too, correct.
Correct. Theoretically
So this isn't just a streeterville issue. So to be clear,
this isn't just a loop issue to be clear. When I look at
the fact that Archer and Kedzie, which is nowhere near
downtown could have 150
15 year, old 18 year olds, 20 year olds.
Taking over an intersection.
This gives you a tool to not have to wait until 10:00 to
address them. Correct.
That's correct. So, all of those people who are looking at
this and trying to find an excuse to say, no think about
your neighborhoods. And if you see that stamp in the middle
of your intersections, where the tires are screeched out,
We know that that's happening earlier as well. We know that
that continues.
This gives us an opportunity to clamp down on that.
If we do nothing.
You can do nothing with regards to going after the youth.
As through the curfew until 10 p.m. correct.
well, again that the curfew does start at 10 at 10 p.m. but
uh obviously if there's criminal activity
Or there's individuals destroying property or anything. The
minimum wage of Chicago. Police Department, will
immediately engage at that time. No, I, I understand that,
but we also know that there are take place at 10:00.
There's certain enhancements that come with curfew
violations.
Correct.
Which are necessary most of which is that parents have to
come to the station and pick up their kids, right?
Yes. So
If we want to make sure that we're sending a message, we
have to hit the parents.
The ones who are responsible for these children. The ones
who are responsible for these youth.
Because it is in the law. What a youth is, it's not up for
debate.
12 12 to the age of 17, correct?
Correct. 18 is an adult. So if you are an 18 year old out
there with these events you are now aiding and assisting,
With the minors.
In activities that are detrimental to them correct, which
is also against the law.
Can we call it contributing to the delinquency of a minor?
So we have things that are also on the books as well, for
those who are helping those youth do this,
I believe this is a step in the right direction.
I believe that we have to as we've heard not just reclaimed
downtown, but reclaim all our neighborhoods.
Because there are real costs associated with this, we're
going to argue whether or not it's more important to how
much it's going to cost us to send a text message.
To a half square mile area.
How much is it going to cost us to send 200 officers to
send the?
Streets and sanitation plows to send all of that equipment
out there. When if we could just simply stop the growth,
the exponential growth, as we've heard when these events
take off.
We need to nip these things in the bud.
Quickly.
Because it's not just our youth that are paying. We're
paying 2 at our last finance committee. Chairman feel free
to correct me. It's 32 million. We're paying out for a
tourist.
Caught in the Mayhem of someone trying to become famous
committing crimes in our city.
32 million.
You talk about what we need to do to invest in communities.
We're paying lawsuits because that's small subset of Youth
are choosing to commit crime because they know we don't
have the tools because we have a adults who are engaging in
crime because they know we're not enforcing
We need to send a message. We need to be clear that our,
our values are that you can always come downtown, they
should come downtown. The city belongs to them.
And yes, it's not like Wrigleyville because they're not
shooting each other right after they're not shooting people
on the field or at the bars. And if they are, those bars
would probably be closed down.
this is a no-brainer to have this kind of Law and ability,
Even if it is with the mayor with the deputy mayor and and
the superintendent we have to be able to react what I like
some changes here, absolutely. But I think this is a step
in the right direction. It's a tool that helps us not just
downtown, but across the city of Chicago, and, as we move
forward, we can obviously address some of the concerns that
have been raised because I think,
There are some fairness to those questions. How do you, how
do you inform? How do you give notice? How do you ensure
that people know that what they're doing is no longer
permitted? In a certain time frame, all of those things
should be fleshed out. Absolutely.
But that is why we allow for Departments of promulgate
rules. For those who don't understand that and we do that
almost monthly we give departments the ability to
promulgate rules. That is not something new. That is not
something that has been foreign to this.
Chamber.
So to see everyone now act, like, they've never heard of
such a concept is remarkable to me.
But we know that holding parents accountable and and
strengthening our laws work.
And we've seen that through all the other issues that have
been included in the municipal code, as it relates to
Crimes by minors and I think that this can have the same
advantageous effect for all of the city of Chicago. Thank
you.
Thank you Alderman Lopez Alderman, David Moore on a rule,
59 participation. Uh, thank you for your patience Alderman.
If you are still with us, uh, you may unmute
Alderman Moore, we will come back to you. I am still with
you, I was just trying to adjust. Okay, thank you. All
right. Go ahead Alderman. Yes. Um, first of all, um,
chairman and I I want to thank, um, you for first of all,
not only, um, trying to represent, you know, as we all do
your
Um, constituents but also, um, more than anything.
Um, working with both chairman Dow.
And chairman Ervin to um come up with a substitute and you
could have fought back and they said no this is what I
want. Um, but you um, you know, you were genuine about
trying to um, you know, respond to a concern, um, from your
constituents, but some some things that many of us are
having and so, um, I want to thank you. I want to thank
chairman Irving and chairman Dow for, you know, um, you
know, working on some type of compromise. I do recognize
though, um, as as as as is coming out of here, nothing is
perfect, right? And um, because we are imperfect people and
so we're not going to get a perfect thing. But that is why
um, as Alderman, if we have to do amendments or do
anything, we come back and we do our jobs, and that's what
we have to do. So I just wanted to state that, um, at the
outset, the other thing, um, Chief Hines, I I appreciate
you. I usually get married.
What somebody steal my thunder. But in this case, I won't
but evidently you were looking at my notes. Um, when you
told that story because my whole premise of this is coming
from a totally different angle, uh, and it's to save lives,
I can I can assure you and tell you. Um, and that there's
other stories uh, outside of that 16 year old 1, innocent
young life or 1 innocent life period. But especially a
young life, it's just too many for us not to do anything.
Um, I'm I'm more concerned about saving lives here. Um,
there are innocent people that um majority of those people
come down to have fun or do something um probably that they
shouldn't be doing or connecting with things. They
shouldn't be doing in terms of. You know what? That's
probably not a good place for me to go, but I'm not going
down there to break in stores. I'm not going down there to
shoot anybody, but I just want to be around my peers.
And they're in a place sometimes they shouldn't be and then
an innocent person. Um and up um dead. And I cannot um, for
for me to go to sleep at night thinking, I didn't try to do
something to save, not even 1 life. And so that's why uh,
number 1, I I, I support, um, this organizer, I get to some
other questions, couple other questions, um, in a second.
Um, also when we talk about, um,
kids um wanting something to do, we as ultimate have to make
that happen and I and I get to that in a moment but I also
because for all those of us that talk and have those
conversations, there are a set of people that do not want
structure, they have told me that, personally, we don't
want structure. We just want to go down and do what we do.
You know what I'm sorry.
The way I was raised and the way I raised my daughter, you
have to have structure if I would have just let her touch
the stove. Her hand would have been burned off if I would
have just let her put her finger and the um electric plug
she would have gotten shot, you have to have structure. And
I'm not just talking about from a parent standpoint because
parents are working jobs. But from the city standpoint and
legislative we we can't legislate everybody, but there are
things that we can do. There's going to have to be some
structure in place, and for those that don't want to follow
that structure, they're going to be some type of
consequence. And so with that said, um, it's important that
we do because I'm about a person of solving and and
presenting issues we can talk about, we got to give them
things to do. Well, let's do it. We're the, we're the they
and so, I open up a place, like, agna Park. I open up a
place like Market Park and so we can do something
structurally. But we also got to sit down and say, with
people for like some good kids m
I welcome you to join me. What does that look like? Because
I don't want somebody else coming in with a gun or doing
anything crazy because they got an opportunity that they
see somebody that they don't like or whatever and start
shooting and then when we do structure stuff, then the city
city becomes legally responsible if there something like so
there's a lot of issues around that, but those are the
things that we have to be addressing. In the meantime. I
mean, simultaneously, we should be, um, to give our kids,
um, things to do not only in our communities, but it and
Millennium Park. Do we put fences up but what does all that
look like? So we got to get from saying they got to do to,
we have to do, so let's do it. Let's I'm going to work with
you. My brother Byron St, Joe Lopez and others, who saying
let's do something, but let's get the, let's get the ball.
Moving on it.
Alderman chairman Hopkins and others got the ball moving
on, something that was important to them. And to their
constituents, we got to get the ball moving on that. And
I'm, and I'm ready to, um, willing to work on that and so,
um, but you the kid that our children have to be willing to
have some type of structure and I'm willing to work with
good kids, mayor City and any other youth, um, to do that.
So now my question becomes and I just want to be clear.
Uh, and it was probably amended in the ordinance. That was
a, it was in there, when 20, or more. Did that did that
change? Or was it still 20 or more Gathering?
That remains Alderman. Okay, so so 20 or more. And I guess
there's a language based on what I've been listening to
because I haven't read the full substitute. I've been going
through it but I haven't read the full 1 yet. I'm assuming
there are some language in there that says and then I'm and
I'd rather work with scenario if there's a scenario that
there's nothing on um, YouTube about a crowd, um, or a
gathering, but 20 or more youth are somewhere, we're not
doing anything in that case, correct?
well, if there's 20
Young individuals Gathering somewhere. I mean, it's again,
it's activity driven. Um, no, no police at the local
district will handle that. Hold on, hold on, hold on. I'm
sorry, I don't mean to cut you off.
It's not actually driven if if, if if I just called 20 of
my young people and say let's go downtown or or 30. I'm
and, and, and I want to be real with this and I'm not
getting on Facebook. It's just 20 or 30 of us going. We we
grew up, we played football together, we just hanging out,
I'm just asking, we're not, we we're not doing any criminal
activity, that wasn't a call out. Um, but we're down there,
I'm just
Asking what happens?
Well again I think nothing happens. It's 20 of your 20 or
more of your friends downtown, enjoying the beautiful, many
of downtown and not committing any criminal activity or
anything. It it's happening right now. Today there's
individuals downtown enjoying downtown and there's no
reason for the police to engage at this time.
Okay, that's all I needed to hear. That's and I just
clear, because there is
Information out there. So I just wanted to make that clear.
Now, if 20 or 30 of those, get a little Rowdy and there's a
difference between Rowdy and criminal activity, I don't
know how you be separate them. But I'm so I'm assuming that
is
Um, what happens in that situation do is it just uh
dispersed or what happens in that situation?
Automate. Again, if it's 20 or 30 individuals who are not
breaking the law, I don't believe the police are going to
engage or encountered them. You answer my question. The
first time we went from we went from not breaking a law to
being Rowdy so that, and I'm asking because there's a
digital story, breaking a law and Rowdy and sometimes the
constituents can't even tell
So I'm asking you and can I think, you know? Ah, ah ah ah
again this is something I support because we got to do
something but I also want to make sure that we're dotting
our eyes and crossing our T's. So I'm not breaking the law.
I'm not breaking any windows, but I'm just getting a little
Rowdy down there. What happens in that situation?
Well, again, I think it's going to be a based upon the
chief. Deputy Chiefs and everything to determine your term
Rowdy. I, I really don't. I'm going to need clarification
on Rowdy. I think, uh, if you're just down there, not
breaking a law, enjoying yourself, the officers are going
conduct themselves. Always a constitutional policing and
address every situation with respect and dignity to, every
individual downtown. And and Rowdy, I guess is the
difference of opinion. But I mean, if you're not breaking
any laws,
I don't believe the officers will engage or encounter you.
Okay, if you're working on a car, that's a criminal
activity that's that's criminal damage to property. I mean,
that's that's what we're going to engage with. The officers
will go over there and make an arrest based on a sign
complaint or the individuals whose property was damaged,
but being loud or boisterous having a good time, that's
that's not illegal. I mean, it once you break the law, I
think the officer is Will engage appropriately. That's
fair. Chief, I appreciate that. Now my my, my next 1 is, so
the Gathering happens and everybody, we all we all come
and I'm saying we because I'm a, I'm going to put myself in
that category is a because I still think I'm young in my
mind. So we all come down there and and this process is
this Gathering. You implement the curfew the first action
you take in is dispersement, correct?
Correct based on observations at at absolutely. There will
be a, a timestamp would be able to articulate our probable
cause and uh, we'll have our own video documentation,
whether it be our videographers and our Law Department and
everybody. But it'll be a course of observations. Um, once
we notify the proper chain of command, and as the way this
ordinance, written, the deputy mayor and the superintendent
if uh this coordinates is this curfews is is ordered um but
but it'll definitely be time stamped through oemc. I mean
time that we do this, we'll get on the air and we explained
that uh a dispersal or curfew order has been given at this
time and uh, based upon all the facts and the circumstances
that we order it
Okay, and that's what I'm getting at. So as long as I'm not
committing the crime, you just asking me to disperse at
that. Hey, it's curfew um young man. You got to disperse?
Correct. Absolutely. And I think the greatest thing we're
asking for at that time is full compliance. Um, we explain
what's going on to the young individuals who are there and
explained that we're asking for compliance at that time to
remove themselves from the situation at that time. Okay.
And then still, I am not committing a crime but I refused
to disperse in a timely fashion. What happens to me next
I think, within the 30 minute time, I usually eat every 10
or 15 minutes depending on the situation and the severity
of what's going on, but probably approximately 10 minutes
later, another warning will be given another curfew
ordinance warning will be given all this being again,
documented on our videographers and body warn camera,
timestamp through, oemc and notifications to all the proper
authorities.
Right. And and and and again, once they're not in
compliance and I commit in a crime and you've given enough
order and they and they have not what what happens to that
young person.
after I think after the 30 minutes or so I mean obviously
you know, every situation again I talked about her is is
unique in what's going on, but uh, after the 30 minutes is
up and everything, the final warning is given, um,
I think we're going to ask for full compliance again, 1
more last time to get uh to I get that part when it's when
it's the last time when it's the last time compliance when
is the last time and I'm not commit, I'm not committing a
crime unless we consider breaking curfew committing a
crime. But we'll talk about that later. Um, or we could
talk about it in this, but if I'm not committing the crime
standing on, nobody's car breaking any windows. But I'm
just I'm hanging around there because I'm with that crowd,
but I refused to disperse what happens to me?
All right, obviously, we're going to have our officers and
constitutional policing to check to see if any of those
defenses. Apply, if you have a reason for being down, or if
you don't, and you've, you've disobeyed all 3 or 4 of the
lawful requests and orders. And you uh, continue your
behavior. You're going to tell the officers that I'm going
to continue to stay here and I'm not going anywhere and
you're under the age of 18. I think at that time you'll be
transported to the district of occurrence um or a facility
that we've deemed where the processing will occur.
When we say processing, is it a detain or are we
fingerprinting? Young people. It's a curfew of violation
that depending on the age and the violation that we're
going to bring to the station notify, their parents know
notify Youth and they will, uh, be processed accordingly.
Well, and I'm just asking what's processed accordingly, so
I'll know.
Again, Alderman, you're asking me for a situation that's
into the future, that I can't look into a crystal ball
until exactly what these kids are doing for a curfew
violation. They are taken to a youth detective where they
are processed, parents are notified and those parents are
legal, Guardians have to come to set facility to pick up
their, uh, I got you. But what is processed? What is
processed?
A a form is going to be made out of a juvenile uh curfew
violation form. Um notification is going to be made the
youth advisor is going to contact the parents. They're
going to come based upon a reports if they committed a
criminal act. That's I get the criminal act, I get that.
I'm not talking about criminal. So so they so at any time,
Emma at any time, all those youth, fingerprinted or
anything.
Again, for curfew violation. No. Okay, that's all I. That's
all I was asking. That's why I just wanted again. It's
about Clarity because if I don't know somebody else out
there, don't know 100% and that's why we get all this
misinformation. So that's all I was getting. I wanted just,
I wanted to say you to say that on record for curfew
violation know. So thank you. I get it. And so, I
appreciate this. This is something, I, I think this is a
good compromise. I think this is something we can, um,
should move forward with. But at the same time and with the
same energy, we have to, and I'm willing to do it. That's
why I'm offering Ogden park. I'm willing to sit down and
Mark that Park. So I'm about Solutions and so I want to
give our people our young people safe space but they also
got to know that their structure involved. So good kids May
at City reach out to me, I'm willing to work with you on
this to continue to give safe spaces. So I'm waiting for
you to see what that look like, because it's going to have
to come with some safety precautions. Because at the end of
the day, if something happens, then the city is on the
Hook because they sanctioned something me, whether me as a
alderman or the park district or whoever. So we really have
to be real about this and and talk this out and so I thank
thank you all. Uh, let's get through this and pass this to
Save a Life. That is my basis for supporting this to save
lives. And, and, and that's what I want to do. So thank you
for all your, um, um, answering all the questions that have
come out of here. Chief, I appreciate you and all that, you
all do and let's continue to work together, um, to keep our
um communities um, safe.
Thank you, Alderman, Moore, and thank you for your
patience, waiting on rule 59, uh, alderwoman Del. Did you
have a point of clarification? Yeah, just to tie up things.
So, uh, penalties under G for this situation where, uh, the
youth, um,
Fails to adhere to the dispersal order.
That section applies, correct.
Correct.
And the individual does not have a juvenile record, is that
accurate, that is accurate.
Okay, I just wanted to confirm that because I think that's
where Alderman Moore was eventually going. Um, but thank
you, chair. I wanted to take it to the end, I appreciate
it. Thank you, chairman.
Okay. Uh, thank you order woman tailor.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman
What I've mostly heard during this Committee hearing is US
demonizing young people.
Um, and I'm real disappointed in us for 2 Reasons. Number
1, we know the young people who are going down there. Don't
look like you all. They look like me.
That that's number 1. Number 2,
we didn't use every tool we already had and the toolbox to
kind of
Fix this issue or this problem. This is putting this is
like putting a Band-Aid on a bullet wound, and let me tell
you why.
We spend millions of dollars.
In summer, you jobs.
On youth. Um violence prevention and we have a youth
Council. Were they at the table when you all had any of
these conversations?
Don't all answer to me at once.
you were, they were not, there were plenty of things that
we could act where is dfss
who controls some of the money and some of the institutions
that we give money to
Where are they in the comp? Where's the health department?
Not none of that. We we where the young people that are even
supposed to be here.
Cuz we had this at the time, of course, where they can't
come up and advocate for themselves. And so I'm real
disappointed because every time y'all demonize young
people, y'all always start with this, we got to do
something.
This ain't the something we should be doing. This is not
it. This makes no sense and we didn't do our diligence to
work with everybody. Where's the park district?
Where is CTA?
None of those. We didn't. We're doing Silo work to fix
something that happens every summer for Generations in our
city.
Who is the person that starts these team trends?
Where are they from? Are there a young person?
there's been several, I think, promoters identified, um,
Across all the city suburbs.
Suburbs. So people who don't even live in the city.
Are doing some of these Trends, can you tell me how much
we're spending on social media through CPD?
No. I I would get that answer. Probably through the chair
please do because
We see them come up on social media. They tell you,
What they're going to do. And this whole thing about young
people, having resources, I don't got a Chuck-E-Cheese, I
don't got a bowling alley, I don't got a movie theater. I
don't have any of those things in my community. I have a
bunch of park districts with programming. That does not
support teams. What happened to we doing, open gym at the
park district? Those things kind of work.
We're not using all our tools. We're basically saying,
let's do some more policing where we already spend 40% of
our budget on policing on policing young people.
And I I have not heard you all say what actually happens.
Uh, all the person fences asked the question, what happens
when a parent doesn't pay does that young person sit in
juvenile detention, what happens?
Again.
That's going to be out of jurisdiction as a police
department. That's
The find it and how they recover that fine.
So you you y'all. So y'all came here to ask people for
their vote for something that you all don't have the answer
on.
With all due respect Alderman, Hopkins. I always tell
people that you are 1 of the smartest people that sit in
here. Um and I appreciate the work that you've done on the
missing girl.
This ain't ready and this is not the we should be doing.
I've asked the city since I've set in this seat in 2019
while we not talking about what the summer program is in
January. Here it is. We in April almost May and we're not
just talking about an issue that's supposed to happen. Do
y'all have this same energy that y'all have for our young
people, for those folks who at La Palooza
I know y'all don't. How many deaths have happened down
there?
How many times have they taken over the street after they
leave? How much y'all spending on resources on that?
Absolutely crickets in here. And so we haven't done
everything we could do, and don't give me wrong.
Let's not act like y'all don't already send police officers
down town. When there's something going on, y'all did that
all during Co
And that's something that came from. The police that didn't
come from all the woman. Tailor, y'all took resources from
the community to make sure that y'all protect y'all lovely
downtown, cuz that's what y'all really care about and just,
hey, hey, young people, cuz that's how I feel about all of
this. That's all I've heard. Young people. Young people,
young people. What have you done for them? Besides
criminalizing, where are they going?
Now, as a young person, I'm about to be 50, I don't know
what they think, I don't know what they want and I'm not
going to even pretend. I know how they think, but you
talking about young people who were in Co for how many
years
Like that does not have a we're talking about mental health
for police officers. What about mental health for the young
people in our communities?
But that ain't even been part of the conversation here.
When you talk about oemc, how many people are actually
downloaded the, the, the the app so that they know that
there is a curfew downtown that's already in place. How
many people get those alerts? Have we did a push to do
that. No.
There is an app that dfss came out that is them, literally
stealing parts of the Piece book that they've used. Can you
tell me how many young people have downloaded and where
those young people come from?
uh Chris patinho oemc for the oemc app in particular or the
DF the oemc app and the dfss app that they got that's part
of um parts of the Piece book. I'd be happy to provide that
to the chair. All of them. Y'all should have came with it.
You talking about people who do use work, everybody in my
office is UN
40. I'm the only old lady in there and I literally have to
talk to them because I don't understand. I'm not going to
pretend there's not 1 young person here, under 20, who we
talking about? We've had a conversation with not even what
they are parents and then we going to demonize them because
they got to work 2 and 3 jobs.
Because they can't afford to live in the city that they
love.
like we can't seriously be thinking about passing any of
this, and then we're talking about whose responsibility is
it. It's all of our responsibilities and I wasn't invited
to a meeting. I'm the chair of the education committee.
Neither was Jesse that I know of she is the person who is
the, the, the is the subcommittee on youth, that was not a
conversation that that's had with us.
Not 1 but we always talking about us and what we doing is
City Hall, what we doing is is is being a circus. That's
what we've been Universal and Ringling Brothers because we
continue to do the same things and expect different
outcomes. All I can see is us using this police presence
and this downtown and the young people who going to get
hurt and locked up our young people that look like me.
That's all I see. Nothing more. Nothing less.
And so what I would have liked to sing Alderman Hopkins.
Is us have a, a bigger conversation with? Where are the
experts? I don't see 1 youth expert in that box. I see a
bunch of lawyers. I see police officers. I see people who
do not work with young people.
Where are those folks? Because they should have been here,
they should have been able to weigh in. And so we looked at
this from a totally
The, we looked at this from the wrong way, this was not and
don't get me wrong.
I am not like every other person downtown is not a Haven
for me. That is not a safe space. For me, it is never been,
even when I was a young person, that's not where I wanted
to go to.
And we're talking about safety doing the summer, it wasn't
young people who set up a car show and a stripper pole in
the middle of Washington Park. Then why young people
What about these Car Care? Vans that y'all do nothing
about? What about those? What about those takeovers?
What about the take over to the lake where in certain parts
that you go to the police are telling you you got to move
at a certain time, but in other parts of the city, it's
as long as they're not doing anything or that's what it
seems like. And so I've made very clear what I stand with
this and I would love for us to have another conversation
and not pass this because I don't think you're wrong for
saying what happens when they are takeover, what we should
see happening and you all have those tools. And so, to add
something else, that is going to overol our communities
again, and that's going to charge cuz you didn't say it.
But you said it without saying it, it's going to cost us
some more money.
We are, are we already over in overtime?
Currently.
I think we we don't answer over time.
Yeah, I think the general counsel answered it earlier that.
We don't discuss our overtime budget at this time.
To clarify, that has to come from the, uh, Department of
Finance. They're the ones who calculate overtime.
How many incidents have happened in these areas that you're
talking about this year?
This year and last year you probably don't have it. Can you
get it through to me through the chair? Absolutely. And my
problem, with all of this is we have these open
conversations to so that our community understands what
actually is going on. And so, if y'all not to have somebody
these answers, it's ludicrous to me. It, we doing the same
thing we've done for years, we Implement without asking.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman
Thank you, alderman.
Alderwoman Lee.
Thank you chairman um and thank you um, Chief Hine and
everybody who's here today. Um providing testimony. Um,
I, I want to first, um,
just pick up on some of what my colleagues have said. I'm
gonna try not to be redundant. I'll do 1, if I may, can you
before you make your comments, can you make a rule 59
motion? Oh yes. I'll make a rule 59 motion to admit uh
Alderman's Alderman's Bato Cabarrus Elder woman tamarask
who else? Joy faroh.
yeah, to and Alderman Talia Farrell
I can't make a motion. I'm not in the committee. Oh, I'm
sorry. You're right, Alderman, Lopez? So moves hearing no
objection. Uh, those Elders are recognized and I think some
of them are already on, uh,
Other man's sposato on? Yeah, you're on sauna. Are you?
You're uh you're muted. It's seems yes. I am here, okay,
you're good. Okay, thank you. All right, alderwoman Lee,
please proceed, thank you. I was going to say, um, I'm
going to pick up in a few different places, um, because I,
I share sentiments and to be clear, I I have not made a
decision on this yet. Um, so I came really much today in
the spirit of listening to review the, the current
substitute. Um, I think it's clear that it's a really
nuanced complex issue that I believe really deserves a
holistic approach, and I know we're talking about 1
approaches a lot about these issues. Um, is that what it
feels like, we lack a lot of as accountability.
So I think that the calls for, um, conversations with other
organizations, sister agencies, like CPS the FSS and, and
others. Um, about what are we doing to create
accountability? I I
you know, I think having having a a fee or a fine in here
for the for the parent or Guardian, I don't know if I've
made up my mind on that but I think there needs to be
accountability. I think that's something that's clearly
missing in the conversation. And I like that we, we're
having that conversation now. Um,
And I think, you know, it would have been great to have the
Chicago Park District and our former colleague here to talk
about what his plans are to create more spaces. Um, I I
think we have to have a sort of multi-layered approach to
this, um, and I'm not, uh, I'm not making some sort of, uh,
Some sort of argument to to not pass this necessarily, I am
just sort of wrapping my head around the the implications
of the things that we're doing here. Um and I want to thank
the Chicago Police Department, especially the Ninth
District um on Good Friday night. Uh there was a a takeover
takeover of over of a home in uh, part of my ward, that I
share, with, uh, Alderman Lopez in canaryville 80200, teens
took over a house that was in foreclosure. Um, somebody had
started squatting there and decided to throw a party, um,
and it was
Frightening, terrifying for the neighbors that were there.
and thanks to the neighbors who do call police. Um and you
you know, I'll put a plug out there for, for every anyone
that's listening. We need the participation of the public
to help with these things, too. If nobody calls the police,
it's like, it's not happening, even though it's happening
real time. So, the police were called they, they got on the
scene and within 30 minutes. Had that party dispersed. Now
did everybody go everywhere. We the police wanted them to
go, no thankee. The rain came. So you know, we had some
help there. Um but you know, in looking at the the
ordinance, um, that's before us today and I'm not on the
Committees, I'm not a voting member, but this is 2
important. An issue not to come and participate in this
conversation. So um,
I'm wondering how the application of this ordinance would
have looked because this is not the what happened in my
ward what I don't think we get any notice on like there was
was no Advanced planning for it. It was just something that
popped up and you guys are great responding to these
things. But I'm, I'm looking for an example of something
that we knew was coming that actually happened. That we
wish we would have had this for. Can you give me an example
of something like that? Because here's the other framing
sort of question. Um, or through the chair that I was going
to ask for which is um,
How many? Because I know that these things are monitored
constantly. So how many of these potential, um, events have
we discovered? So, how many have we discovered? And then
how many have we been able to sort of deescalate before it?
It actually happens.
Uh, Chief before you answer. Um,
Alderwoman Silverstein makes a rule 59 motion to recognize
Alderman. Nugent.
Uh, hearing no objections Alderman. Nugan are you on?
Thank you. Chairman and pursuant to my role as president,
prompt under rule 36, I intend to participate in vote, on
this matter, as an exe member,
Thank you. Chief fine.
so it, uh,
At our open source monitoring when we're first notified of
these uh takeovers to take place, uh, the Bureau of
counterterrorism.
Is a first notification to uh the superintendent and to the
bureau Patrol detectives and everyone. So the notification
is made that we might be experiencing a takeover as any
location that they determine. That's a promoter puts out on
through a flyer. Puts a list of events that take place such
as boxing events.
Takeover, however, verbage that said promoter.
Wants to obviously promote the event. Um, events that we
don't know about that. Take place. Well, that's, that's
hard to measure, obviously, you know, we have no way to do
that, but as far as our course of action, once we
discovered that a plan starts to be put in place. And like
I said, I think the first thing that we do is call our
community members or Outreach. Um, we try to we try to
contact even the promoter several times.
sometimes with the 6s um 1 of your former or not former but
uh
Alderman, Robinson was extremely helpful. In these
situations downtown with contacting a promoter and
assisting us with this. Um, so the like you said, the first
plan always is our community outreach workers to deploy to
these locations, at that time. We determine I think try to
determine how big the situation is going to become. And
that way we deploy the right resources to this location for
the officer safety. And for the individuals who might be
attending and just for any individual in the immediate
location that we secure their safety. Um,
has that been effective sometimes?
um, like I said earlier it's been an amazing how many times
times we've known about uh takeover say in North Avenue
beach where children have shot other children in front of
hundreds of police officers
So was that a success? I don't believe. So I, you know, you
saw a child laying in the sand bleeding
No. Nobody should ever have to see that in their life. A
child shot bleeding in front of them because we are having
an unpermitted event.
when the beaches weren't open at the time,
But I believe that this tool, if we had that tool at that
time, probably would have been beneficial.
I'm calling at earlier in the night before this incident
took place.
Is there a thousand percent cure? I don't think there's a
thousand percent guarantee that I can give anybody sure, of
course. And I wouldn't, I would never ask you to do that,
but I think that this tool would be beneficial
understood. Um,
beneficial in in being able to try to get ahead of things
when you
When you get the, when you have enough evidence that you
believe that it's that it has the potential to be unsafe. I
think that the the the 1 of the great side effects, maybe
of this thing will be deterrence.
I think deterrence will be an incredible tool that.
Promoters start to see that the city of Chicago, that we
are not going to have this and it that site will be called
early.
and I think when I talked about earlier the force
multiplier, when you have 60, 80, 100 individuals showing
up, it's a force multiplier of 35 to 45 minutes when
they're showing where they are in waves and waves are
coming. And I think with this ordinance, if you call it
within that 3 hour time frame, that they'll know that that
this event is not taking place therefore saving lives.
Got it. And today, is there any? And I don't know. This is a
question for either you or anybody that's here from the Law
Department, maybe that can answer this. Um what are the
consequences for when, um, 1 of these events takes place?
place? Somebody is shot or property is damaged, is are
there consequences for the promoters? If you know who they
are?
That's a, that's a unique challenge. I think that we've
been working on for years.
Um, if we could tie them to that and have probable cause to
make an arrest, absolutely
Um, we rely on our detectives to to see what they can pick
up as far as evidence goes.
What's the, what's the, the, the burden at that point?
Like, what, what do you have? What does what constitutes
evidence that they were the ones that initiated the
The invitation the party at, like, not asking for a friend,
like, just asking. So it just occurred to me like what what
are the consequences for the people that are organizing
organizing these things. It's it's definitely a case by
case basis and I hate to to give that answer, but each 1
depends largely on its own facts and if we are able to
develop probable cause that the law has been broken, then
we have the opportunity to make the arrest.
um,
How does it how does CPD today? Work with the deputy mayor
Gatewood? I know that they couldn't be here but he he
mentioned that they work very closely with you. You're
already working together on stuff. He he actually said
something to me like that. Uh,
Your your success record at this point or the the rate at
which you're, you're able to sort of address these issues
before they actually turn into something. Bigger is around
70%. I they didn't really get context for, like, what time
period that covers, um, because it seems to me that if it's
70% what he says, um, that's pretty good track record. For
obviously, it's not perfect, we're not looking for
Perfection here. I'm just trying to gauge. Um, like how,
how big the
How severe the hurt is right now. I I can speak to the
relationship with uh the deputy mayor of community safety
uh Gatewood. Um I can honestly say that we speak 2 to 3
times a day and and, and for for me to speak on, who else
speaks. So I, you know, that's that's for him to answer
but, uh, his, his incredible collaboration for Public
Safety. Um, and I know the question came up earlier, I
don't think there's been 1 time that I've, uh, been on
unable to reach him. Um, he's a great partner for Community
safety, he's heavily involved. Um, I appreciate his
partnership, uh, and, and I know that throughout various
things, take away the, the Gatherings that we're talking
about, um, the street takeovers at the, the older woman
brought,
up earlier, I mean the deputy mayor has been incredible as
far as getting the city services and the as they as he
would like to say the full force of city government to
assist us and whenever a request we make to assist with
Public Safety, right? Um, I'm going to switch gears a
little bit. Uh,
so, the
the amendment to the curfew violation was 1 of the first
things that I voted on, when I became an alderman, um, and
I'm wondering the the reduction in age because we, we
changed that to 10:00. And then we, I, I think we also
changed the age to 17 or younger, um, versus, you know,
your this refers to, you know, well I guess 18. That's the
same thing. Same thing, this 2 different ways. Um through
the chair can CPD provide for us the number of curfew
violations uh or citations that have been issued for let's
say the last 10 years, we have coid in in that time frame.
Um, so I'd like to look for some, you know, better
comparison years. I'm just really wondering like, how, how
did the reduction in the or making the the curfew time
earlier, make a difference um in whatever was going on
downtown and have we
have we also had, um,
more of these incidents downtown so far this year
year-over-year, compared to, you know, this time last year,
what were the? It's a great question. Um, we get the
answers to you through chair and we'll show you a
year-over-year comparison and the numbers for curfew.
Um,
Sorry, I have just a couple others just bear with me. Um,
There was a question earlier about the geography piece of
it. Um, and I know you started to to answer that. I think I
just want to get on the record and just voice some of the
concerns around. I think, parameters, we should probably
talk about some parameters for like a Geo fencing. If you
will, um, you know, within a certain radius because also my
concern, um, as an alderman, who's not downtown, but very
close in proximity and off of a very convenient, you know,
CTA Red Line. Um, our Gatherings that may push South
Chinatown and obviously we had an unexpected 1 um in the
in the South part of the ward as well. So we know that this
is happening all over the city, so I appreciate that. This
is not just downtown um that that the the conversation
right now is about
Providing a tool that may be able to be used Citywide. Um,
But just because you disperse in 1 Place, well like what
happens when I mean the the order to disperse is the order
to disperse. We don't tell people where to go. We just tell
them to get out of the area. So can we take that maybe?
3 or 4 hours passed where this may may leave us. Um, I I
think we all share the concerns about resource allocation.
Um, and, and
We know you're not operating blind out there. Obviously,
you've got you've got intelligence working, you've got um,
all the all of the districts that are going to be, you
know, radioing in to tell you what's going on in different
places. Um, I just worry about the whack-a-mole effect to
this, right? That we have the same thing with the
motorcycle, Caravans with the Caravans you know, you set up
up in 1 place and they stop coming over here but then the
problem is is going someplace else. So I think it does.
I'll let you answer the question and then I'll I'll make my
other point after that. Absolutely. So
Every like you said, every every situation is unique and if
if for a dispersing in 1 area, obviously it's going
individuals are going somewhere else. We're hoping
Full compliance that that they that they return home
safely.
Right to the to the houses. Um,
But it where they go, I think uh, the commanders and all
the districts of 22 districts along with a, you know, every
the collaboration the, the team that superintendent
Snelling has set up from the first Deputy down. Uh, it's
kind of an approach of top-down leadership all the way from
the superintendent, the nightly phone calls, everything,
what's going on, throughout the whole city to the first?
Deputy to every Chief to every Commander? I think the last
phone call from me about every night is 2, 3 in the morning
and to see if there's anything going on at a large
Gathering. And we set up large Gathering, protocols, not
only for downtown, but for every neighborhood for every
district and how to respond and how to properly respond, so
that the individuals who are reside and live in those
districts are safe.
and also, it's important to us to make sure that every man
and woman, the Chicago Police Department is safe, as far as
our response goes, um,
Our captains obviously are out there working late. Our
watch operations lieutenants or heavily involved. We, we've
stressed that about, you know, taking ownership of your
watches in your districts and knowing what the problems
are, and where they are, are sdsc rooms are incredible.
Right? As you know, with the to be able to monitor to pick
up if we're showing a disturbance anywhere, or a large
Gathering and, uh, our street deputies are incredible
resource under the first deputies office to immediately,
deploy that location? And if additional resources are
needed, we've empowered our street deputies, to move them
from an area. Maybe that is an experiencing such a high
volume of calls or can not, you know, take away resources
from the area, but to assist us in that location.
Great, thank you. And I I just have I think 1 more issue
here to sort of address. Um chairman so I thank you for the
time. Um,
how do we, how do we determine how old people are?
I mean, are we? No, no, it's a great. It's a great question
because I could have somebody downtown tell me. I'm 19
years old.
you know, and at that time there are verification systems
and, you know, obviously our and I won't get into it for
security measures on how we do this, but there are measures
in place that you're able to identify individuals through
the peek ad system and everything. But again for security
measures for our officers, I won't get into that. But there
are ways to verify, um, the age of someone.
Um, if we can't prove that, you know, again it's a unique
Challenge and it's a great Point. You're making um, at that
point again, again, I think the officers while talking to
them will explain the situation in a possibility and the
outcome that we're seeing and again we're seeking again
that full compliance to say listen, it is a curfew Zone.
It's been enacted this time for your safety, in the safety
of everybody. In this area. We're asking you to please
disperse. If you'd like to go, you know, continue to lie
about your age this and that it is a unique challenge um,
without identification on them. Or you know, we are not, we
are not going to fingerprint them to find out their age.
so,
Got, you know, that that's helpful to me, you know?
I think fundamentally that the challenge we have here is
just a, a challenge, we have sort of a cross. So many
different places is that there's, there's a lack of trust
and there's, and I'm not saying that it's funded or
unfunded. I'm just saying what's so, right, I think that,
um, a lot of young people may not trust the police. I think
that there are, um, you know, we live in a time now where I
know we don't talk about it.
In this chamber very often but um, you know, the, the
that are also on police officers, it's a, it's a dangerous
job. Um, and it's pretty thankless these days, um, and
there's a I think there's a, a big sense when I talk to
constituents that, you know, police. Um, and I hear it all
the time from people. They're they're handcuffed. They
can't do anything. Um,
I don't necessarily agree with with all I. I think there's
I think that police today. Um,
Most police do the best that they can to keep people safe
to ensure that people have their rights protected. Um,
and that, uh, you know, unfortunately, where We've Ended up
in society is really put us in this position where, um, you
know, the the relationships that exist today, just make it
really difficult for people to trust that the police have
people's safety in mind and that young people can make a
decision. And then that all young people that are out are
up to no good. Um, in, we got to work at that as a
legislative body as a as a city, um, and we've got to bring
that conversation. Um, we have to continue to have that
conversation. Um and and with that I I understand the
urgency too with the need for, um, potentially at any
additional tool, that may help. Um, the police department
to, um, keep every area of the city safer. Um, but I think
it's, it's worth the conversation to to continue chairman.
Um, you know, I it, this just makes me wonder is listening
to the conversation today, again, not being a member of the
committee. Um,
Perhaps this is an idea that might work. Maybe it won't
maybe consider making it a pilot for a certain amount of
time. And then, let's that forces us to come back and take
a look and evaluate whether or not the the the efficacy of
this, uh, this uh, method is, is worth it. Um, so just a
suggestion, I I do think that, you know, we have to it,
cannot be a binary proposition, which is a lot of what
we've heard today. It's either or you're either with the
kids or you're not. You're the, what the police or you're
not. You're either about safety or you're not. And I think
that we should be about all of it. Um and it's worth
continuing the conversation. So thank you chair.
Thank you all, you know and I appreciate that uh the
insight and and at this moment have been remissed uh not
that the condolences to the Chicago Fire Department, who
lost a, a brave firefighter. Um,
I think the men and women who put a star on their chest
every day they look outside to Windows with their vehicle
and they see the reasons why that they took that oath, the
resiliency of the men and women of the Chicago Police
Department, when we talk about trust. Um, you got to
remember that they were they were kids in the city.
They have kids in the city, they are Chicagoans and they're
great Chicagoans, and they stepped through that door every
day after certain situations. When they see these young
children shot the mental toll, it takes in our men and
women is incredible.
Um,
give me a second here.
Earlier, uh, an older person talked about demonizing
children. I don't think there's 1 cop that's ever demonize
a child.
Um, I think that they put their lives on the line for
individuals that they've never met her lives.
Um,
couldn't be more proud.
What they go through every day and what they do. So I don't
believe it's fair to ever say that we demonized child ever.
I think what they do for children in the city is
remarkable. And I think the men and women are probably the
most remarkable Noble creatures.
Thank you, chief.
Just want to make 1 last comment. Um, thank you for that
Chief. Um and you know my comment earlier about demonizing
anybody, it was just more of a overall comment. Um, not, it
was not directed at the police office. No, not at all. But
I I just think it's so unfair that the Chicago Police
Department every day. Goes out there and their intentions.
When they looked at, like I said, they put that star on
their chest over their heart and it means the world to
them.
yeah, to
happen, and when I say, when a child shoots another child
in front of them, the mental toll, it takes on those
officers, let alone the families who are involved with
that. It's the ripple effect is so overwhelming for our
society and our city. Um, I think it just it's noted to be
said that we've seen officers, who worked during a global
pandemic.
And so, civil unrest at the same time, nobody can ever say
that in a history of police, but they showed up every day
and came through the doors.
For the citizens of Chicago. And I would say that for every
single first responder every front line worker. Every,
every, uh, first responder who, uh, who goes out every day
to puts their life on the line. I I attended uh, Captain
Myers's Funeral Service yesterday, um, and um, you know was
so clear the kind of person that he was um, and and really
um,
You know, I have friends that are police officers and
firemen, um, and it is when they leave their families, um,
and they say goodbye and I love you. Um, it could very well
be the last time so that that's certainly not lost on me or
any of my residents. Um,
the issues that we're facing and the tools that we're, you
know, it's incumbent upon us as a legislative body to, to
try to provide the kind of resources and support that, um,
the city needs and that that's through an agency like the
Chicago Police Department, I think we need to do that. But
I, I think that also
I think it also requires as holistic, an approach as
possible because if there's a way for us to do it where you
don't have to jump in front of a bullet or get in the
middle of a fight. Um I think that's an outcome, we could
all agree, we would all want. Absolutely right. Thank you,
thank you, thank you.
are we do have a Committee Member who is not yet had an
opportunity to speak. So uh, I will recognize her. And then
we will return to the role 59, participants, uh, who have
some hands raised there. So, uh, all the women may not have
been worth
Thank you chair. We had a chance to chat about this a while
ago and so I appreciate the conversation here and I see
that the ordinance has evolved since then. Um thank you
Chief Hines for being here too and those in the Box. Um, I
just want to Echo, um, alderwoman, Taylor's concerns about
Who is not in the room, including a young people, um, park
districts. Um, I I do believe that we, we need, uh, a
holistic approach as alderwoman Lee was talking because it
is, uh, and as you said Chief it's it's not just certain
neighborhoods. It's it's a social, it's a different world.
right, social media is calling in
Every, every part of Chicago, every Community, every
neighborhood and I'm a mother of, um, you know, my youngest
1, uh, just turned 20. So just out of out of teen years.
but but I can't imagine, you know, um, how things spread
spread um, it I'm in Edgewater I'm on the lakefront. I'm
concerned about what's happening on our on our beaches as
well. We have terrific commanders, the 20th and 24th. And
And we work very well with them. Um but I I am also
concerned about what's happening downtown. I want every
neighborhood to be safe. Um, I'm also very concerned about
What we're doing here and going back to the beginning of
the conversation with Alderman, Martens concerned about the
constitutionality of what we're doing and will it hold up
in quarts.
And so I just want to remind us that that you all are
already authorized.
To order the dispersal of crowds make arrests of people
breaking the law.
and those who are engaged in disorderly conduct per our
our, uh,
municipal code and that you and that we as a city can
Implement emergency curfews um as we have during the unrest
civil. Unrest and and we're already permitted to move
crowds and manage them under so6. O6, cpd's coordinated,
multiple arrest policies. Is that true?
We we have that Authority already correct. We do have a
coordinated mass arrest policy, correct.
Okay.
and then, I also,
we've been talking about who makes a call, because I, I do
think that's important, um, and I do want to understand
Because other big cities do it differently, they have the
mayor.
Calling, if it, if it needs to happen. Um, and I'm talking
about Boston La Nashville and DC, and they have or
ordinances authorizing the mayor and not the Police
Superintendent, um, to declare a curfew in emergency, um,
not because of a hypothetical risk of a large Gathering
that may create problems or threats to safety property
damage because of actual ongoing civil unrest, so can you
just speak on that a little bit?
Well, I I would be remiss if I'm going to speak on uh New
York Boston or LA and their policies. I'm not, I'm not
really up to speed on their policies. I think this
ordinance is as I spoke earlier, I think it's a great
checks and balances that. You have the the deputy mayor
from the mayor's office and the superintendent. And again I
think it
Just curfews, to be honest. There's going to be enough
probable cause that is over the top. You're going to see
the video documentation and we're going to articulate every
step of the way why we believe that it should go into
effect at any given time. I believe a lot of times that
you'll have these gatherings no matter what you want to
label them or call them that we will never put this into
effect because the probable cause in the articulation will
not be there you know or the proper documentation but I
think it's a great checks and balances in Chicago. How the
deputy mayor Public Safety along and coordination with the
superintendent?
Somewhat come to a decision of what we're going to do at
that time, but that'll be based upon obviously, all the
information provided by the chief. Deputy Chiefs. Every
supervisor along with the officers on the ground of what's
going on at that given time.
yeah, I I think it's very important to have coordination,
you know, we we did have um,
A teen takeover, social media post that was flagged to us
in Andersonville a couple years ago. And that was that was
very confusing for many people. It didn't actually
happened, but it it caused a lot of chaos especially with
our small business Corridor and so you know I I need to I
need to explain, you know, how is it going to work if it
does happen to be in our Ward um, because people people are
are concerned and, and at the same time, I, I want to
acknowledge that we've had many incidents of gun violence
in the, in the 48th Ward, too many too many and too many
involving, uh, Youth. And so, I understand that during, um,
when when you have to come out to deal with, with the, with
these, um, large crowds that the many guns have as a
alderman Newton was mentioning. And so I, I am concerned
about the guns. I I want that to be addressed and I also
want to understand
and like, how, what happens, after those guns are are
discovered and what happens to those youth, like, can you
just explain just very briefly like what happened is
towards that end? Because we want kids to be accountable,
we want to hold them accountable, um, especially if they
have a gun, can you just speak? Very briefly on that. So,
so absolutely if if uh if a young individual, let's say a
minor is in possession of a weapon.
They will be arrested.
They'll be arrested, they'll be taken to the district of
occurrence, where they'll be processed, uh, youth detected
will will take it over and then it'll be assigned to the
appropriate judicial branch, whatever that may be, where he
or she depending on their background. So there's a lot of
factors go into it. But any individual in possession of a
firearm illegally will be arrested and prosecuted to the
fullest extent that we can do.
Yeah, I appreciate that. I am again, very concerned about
guns, on the streets, and we, we need to figure that out.
Um, and we need to figure out ways to help kids. Uh, we
don't want to demonize kids. I I don't I wholeheartedly
agree with Alderman alderwoman, uh, Taylor and that we need
more resources. And as Alderman, Jesse Fuentes was pointing
out to, um, we need them to tell us what they also need.
Um, in terms of places to gather safe spaces, we need that
in the 40th War II. Um,
I I was curious about in terms of coordination. Have you
had
How, how does it work with the independent monitor for the
consent? Decree have you had conversations with them?
I mean, I don't, I don't know. You have to tell me because
I, I'm really curious. How does it work? Like how is this
going to work with the the, um, compliance with the consent
decree?
have I had conversations with the absolutely uh the
independent monitor, I mean uh, the independent Monitor and
and her team just came to, uh, the headquarters the other
day for a review with her associate monitors, um, where you
know, the list of requests and everything, but, uh, heavily
involved, the independent monitor show, you know, as I
said, and involved with the, with the process. But, uh,
You'd have, I guess more specific and what kind of
conversations?
I again we just I I feel like we need to have holistic
conversations about what we're doing and um and also if we
Know, that Advocates are saying that lawsuits are going to
be imminent. If something like this passes through Council
because of the constitutionality of it, I just need to
understand. I need to explain it. To people is all
um, so, um
I know that you were talking about um Finance in terms of
of, um, getting questions answered about how this will
impact our budget. Um, and also
So I guess through the chair can you?
Share what resources. I I would like to understand what
resources will be necessary to enforce a curfew declared
under this ordinance and how how do those cost scale up?
You know, um you're you're talking about 20 people, 100
people, 500 people like, how does how does that work? And
uh, can you provide that through the chair? Absolutely, I'd
be glad to get those answers for the chair.
Thank you.
Um I appreciated the question questioning of um Alderman
Moore describing the process of how um
How it will work. Um, can you
Can you speak more on how this will work in practice? Like
how how will the officers on the ground? Um, how how will
it work for them? Um, exactly. What do, what do they say?
What do
How is that communicated with the group?
Um, and and can you just go over the timeline again? Can
you explain all that?
Absolutely, at this ordinance, supposed to go into effect,
um, through the dispersals of 30 minutes. But, you know,
obviously I we obviously through OMC, there would be, uh,
Proper notifications made obviously through the alter's
office, our business partners, our faith-based the list of
it goes on and on and we're going to notify if there's
proper notifications to be made about this. Going to an
effect in a certain geographical location that affects your
order. I'm sure it'll go out, how they disseminate their
information in a proper channels. Um, as far as you're
asking, maybe operational, um, if myself Deputy Chiefs,
whoever The Incident Commander is at this location. And if
the term that we begin to think that the curfew going in
effect would be beneficial for the the safety and sanctity
of life. Um, those dispersal orders would start to be given
Those dispersal orders would be all documented video
documentation. Um, our Department of Law is always standing
along with us with the Bureau of internal affairs. Um,
what's important to mention too? And I I've kind of thought
Forgot about through a certain Avenues. My answers.
Our men and women are also being trained again every year
in constitutional policing. So for take away the DNC from
last year and the great training that our officers received
this year currently too, they'll receive again
constitutional policing training, which is huge is, you
know, the foundation of the basis of every encounter that
we have to protect every First Amendment, right? And
through the Constitutional policing based integrity and
honor of the system. Um, so those, those orders are given
we get back to your original thing, those orders are given
30 minutes to kind of got by. I can see, even went on to
see and again we're going to ask in each individual,
please, we're asking for your compliance. I am asking you
to please volunteer, to remove yourself from the situation
or area. If set individual says no I'm not. I'm staying
here at that point. You know, we're going to have to decide
what course of action that we're going to take and if it's
a juvenile who refuses to remove him or herself,
And then obviously we're going to remove that situation to
the station where it's a curfew violation. The curfew form
is filled out.
Uh a parent or legal guardian is notified. Um, they're going
going to come to the station, they're going to wait till
the process is over and then the youth investigator is
going to turn over that, uh, said child to their legal
guardian or parent.
I I have so many concerns about how it's actually going to
play out. I just I don't know, I I can't imagine how it's
going to play out. I so if it if it, if it helps you assist
I mean we do curfew violations every day in the city of
Chicago. Okay. Right. So I mean it's a process that that
they're well-versed in the officers, the men and women. So
we do curfew violations, curfew violations are not anything
new, so it uh, it's going to be handled appropriately and
like I said, in, with the safety of the, the, the child, or
the minor in mind,
Got it.
What, uh, 2 Alder woman, Lees. Um, idea of piloting was
that ever?
a consideration, because if you'd mentioned that there are
5 or 6 locations that that are known to you all,
Well, it would be tough to Pilot because I mean, every day
is such a unique unique situation, where the promoter,
whether he or she, however they see fit where they're going
to send it. So if they would send it, somebody that's not
in a pi of uh District or area.
I think uh I don't know how successful that it would be
because just because we don't know the the set location
every time we could change at any given time. So that's why
I'm kind of leery to tell you our safety plan to say it's
only going to occur here. Then you say okay I'm going to
have it over here and
This becomes an effective.
I'm sorry. I don't have the ordinance memorized, but is
there anything in there about holding promoters
accountable?
Uh, I I believe we'll go back to our general counsel here
about holding the promoters accountable. But it, uh, the
unique Challenge and I don't want to overstep my boundaries
here, so you went to a lot more laws.
Thank you, sir. Um, if we can find probable cause to bring
a charge against the promoter. Um, it's not necessarily
specified under this ordinance, but if there is something
else that we have probable cause to charge the promoter
with, then we would bring that charge.
Alderman Lopez and Alderman Martin.
Sorry.
um just a quick question with regards to what my colleague
just asked, would the provisions of contributing to a
delink to the delinquency of a minor apply? If you were
able to prove that this event was being targeting towards?
Youth.
Would that be something that's already on the books that we
could use to make that? Deficate? What she's asking about
that? That is possible charge. Again, it depends on, you
know, the individual facts and circumstances but it's
certainly something that could be considered. Thank you.
Alderman, Martin same point. My question was a little bit
broader which is just what types of charges has CPD
considered in the past. Putting aside, what has or hasn't
ultimately been moved forward with? You know, I'm I'm not
aware of those Alderman. Um, I'd have to get that to you
through the chair.
1 that you can speculate on. Like hypothetical not not
something that has happened in, I just don't know what sort
of charges could be brought. Well, I think that, um,
Alderman Lopez raised contributing to the delinquency of a
minor is a potential charge. Um, but, uh, you know, as I
sit here, I I don't have that knowledge.
Great.
This is an important point to, to consider, which is an, I
feel like another reason to have more conversations about
what we're doing here. Because that
That is we we're talking about somebody who's the organizer
who's the ring leader? Who's bringing
Folks in somebody who might not even live in Chicago,
somebody from the suburbs who's affecting the quality of
life of of everyone who live here and tourists who come to
visit us,
I, I think it's important to to point
Where we need to focus on, um, including the ones who are
organizing these events.
um,
I had a question about,
the so,
so, in the code 8, -4120
provides that property damage can include damage to grass.
Is that true?
I'm going to have to look that provision up ma'am.
um, well my point is
I'm just thinking about safeguards too, you know those who
um,
Don't have an interest in public safety, you know. And also
I'm thinking of you know, what are the implications of this
ordinance? Should it pass? Um, you know, based on what we
already have on the books and
so, I just want to understand what
What what is it? What is? What is a safeguard um that
ensures that a curfew can't be invoked because a group of
people are gathering and will damage the grass as a result.
Can you?
well, I I think uh, for for
Maybe for any charge of Park District or any maybe. Are you
looking at, like, like Grant Park or somewhere? I mean, and
if somebody, if you can prove the elements exist in, in a
criminal charge, whether it be that the day of the intent
to willfully damage the grass by. I, I don't know, by
whatever means, um, how they're tearing up the grass. I
mean, if somebody, if you can prove those elements of the
charge, then if they're committing a criminal act and we
can prove that and it's the officers will engage to stop
them from harming the grass.
Okay.
Um,
again I just I I I hope that we can have more conversations
about this before actually anything gets through, you know,
know, I I know that curfew is generally a really difficult
to enforce and um, a lot of people don't like them and
they're arguably ineffective, you know, according to a lot
of studies that are out there, but we need to do something
need to hold people accountable. Of course, we need to
provide more resources. We could do a better job of that in
the city and we have to work together.
Um, okay.
I think.
Again I I want to thank you for your work on this and also
uh, chair Dell and chair Irving um to to work with you
chairman to figure out ways to, to keep all of us safe. I,
I hope that we can continue the conversation so I I have a
lot of concerns. I'm very concerned about um how to explain
it to my community. When um, when we're providing more
resources towards something, you know that already has a
big chunk of our budget.
Um, I want to be able to justify it, right? And I want to
say that it's effective. Um,
And I want more voices.
To be in the room when we make these decisions, which I
feel like we don't have enough of at this time. Um, thank
you. Thank you, chair.
Thank you. 1 moment. We will return to the rule, 59.
Participants, uh, we have Alderman Crews, who has not had
the opportunity to speak at followed by chairman, Ervin
Alderman Cruise.
Thank you, chairman Hopkins, thank you for the opportunity
to speak. Um, I know I'm not a non-member, but I also want
to, you know, address a couple of different things. And,
um, want to say that, you know, we are very critical to the
administration. When we talk about collaboration and how do
we bring everybody to the table to make this decisions? And
I was really looking forward to this. I'm hearing as I
myself, like my colleague. Other melee have not made, you
know how a decision on. We're going to whether we're going
to support or not this um ordinance. And I was really
looking forward to, to this discussion, but there's pieces
that are missing. Obviously, in part of the panel here
where CPD is essential to, to all
All of this, we needed to have more people in the Box as
well to get their perspective of how things will will work.
So, I'm a little disappointed on that. But also, um,
chairman I understand and I respect you, um, are doing this
because you are listening to your constituents because your
constituents are demanding for actions. They are demanding
for for things to change and I respect that because that's
what we have been elected to do as um, local
elected officials. So I I want to say that as why have been
really open to this conversation, have been open because I
put myself in your shoes and every and the other authors as
well, there within the downtown area. And we we want to say
that. How do we bring those changes to to our
neighborhoods, to make sure that we're, you know,
addressing the issues to our, um, our residents. But again,
there are a lot of concerns when it comes to this um,
Ordnance because it is a complicated issue with a lot of
great areas. And what I have been hearing throughout today
has been Case by case, every situation is unique. We will
treat it differently, which makes me concerned because it's
like, how do you going to enforce that? How all these
different desperately districts are going to assess that
situation because everybody will have a different uh, way
of judging the situation? And also I'm concerned that some
of our residents will want to become the parents of these
kids. 1 of my
Finally said where are the parents? I am a parent. I am a
parent of 2 teenagers, a 15 and a 14 year old, who do take
advantage of the city and what the city has to offer, who
do go out, not only themselves but we have a lot of kids
and 1 of our parks to get together. They go out riding
their bikes because they have that opportunity to do so.
what I'm concerned is this this summer individuals which
you already have demonstrated. Because I can tell you that
because I see the videos, I see some of the residents that
go to agitate these kids. Of course, these kids react to to
this agitations because they feel disrespected.
And now we're going to say that 20 people or more is
considering is considered a mass Gathering. I have concerns
because of that because what about if these kids are at the
606 and they're hanging out with their bikes, listen to
music, just hanging around and you're going to have
individuals who are going to come and agitate them and say
is 8:00, you all have to leave. And then now they're going
to try to pretend to be the parents and to be the the law
and then now they're going to call the CPD and they're
going to start a whole issue. Like how do we come up? How,
how do we come out with a mass Gathering is 20 or more?
While chairman I was
Looking forward to, to this again, dialogue. Like I said,
and I seen your PE View. And I see the view of the chief,
when it comes to say, Hey, you know, once at 9:55 comes,
these kids are gone, they do on their own, we will not need
additional resources. I see that but now that I'm hearing
that is 20% 20. I would rather say 20 people or more
consider be a large Gathering. I am concerned. There's a
lot of gray areas.
Chairman, I want to work with you. I know what you're
trying to do for your community but can somebody explain to
me? How do we come out with 20 people? More is considered a
large Gathering?
um,
Yeah, old woman. Uh, again, this is, uh, this is targeted
towards, uh, large group Gatherings that are pre-planned
and involve on accompanied minors, it is it would never be
used for 20 people on the 606 Trail or 20 people Gathering
anywhere, uh, under a lawful conditions. Th this curfew
would not apply. This ordinance would not apply, and this
tool would never be used by CPD in those instances. This
tool is designed to be used solely in the event that you
see the type of teen. Takeover, Gatherings that have been
uh, repeatedly broadcast and video on on news media. We all
know what we're talking.
About there. It's large numbers of, uh, minors unaccompanied
under the age of uh, 18 17 or younger, uh, who are engaging
engaging in that, uh, chaotic Mass activity, that's what
this organ. This this ordinance is targeted to do so we're
not trying to capture every group that happens to be 20 or
larger. Um we just needed the definition of a large group
Gathering to create the framework for this ordinance. Uh,
so you I mean, it could could have easily been 15. It could
have been 25, you know, there's no uh no specific science
to what number Constitution constitutes, a large group
Gathering or not, but it's important to stress. When you
read the ordinance, the definition itself doesn't trigger
anything. The definition itself is not the operative
function for this ordinance. It's the activity that that
drives this. In fact, I would argue that we would be likely
On Solid Ground if we declared a curfew, when you had 19,
As a as opposed to 20 uh unaccompanied minors. Uh, on the
downtown streets, engaging in this illegal activity of a
takeover. So, it isn't the number that is defining how this
ordinance would work, or even what these events are. Um, it
it's the activity itself and I think I think we all have a
have a pretty good idea of the type of activity that this
is, uh, targeted towards I had these 2 events so far this
year in my ward, there have been others, um, in other
words, in in other neighborhoods as we
Heard in the discussion today. Um, so this will be applied
when it's needed where it's needed, and it will be limited
to those instances. It will not be applied on a daily
basis. It will not be applied when there's no, uh, illegal
activity or or, uh, take over activity happening. Um, it's
it's driven by the events as they unfold on the street and
we have had, um, more than enough Assurance today, uh, from
the Chicago Police, you know, including Chief iron and
their legal counsel, uh, as to the guardrails and the
restrictions that will be put through the rules making
process, um, which goes beyond what we should include in
the ordinance, their general orders, and their policies and
procedures that they will train their patrol officers to
do. Um, will be, again, focused exclusively on these large
group, takeover events, nothing more and nothing less, uh,
than what this ordinance authorizes. So I I hope that
clarifies it. Chief anything to add to that.
no I I think I think you had a great point and And in
regards to the 606, I and individuals sitting around on
their bikes listening to music and everything, there'd be
no reason for the police to engage with that unless there's
a something that somebody called about our calls for
service. But uh, I think you hit every point on that.
no, in this in, you know, and I'm going back because I know
uh all the more press on on that because we we want to make
make sure that that is exactly was not going to happen.
Because, you know, again, is there such a great area on
some, a lot of these answers are given its, you know, and
I've been hearing throughout and I'm really good listener.
When it comes to all of these meetings. And it it's just
that and it's a case by case. And the, you know, every
situation is going to be unique, it's going to be
different, it it trusts, it's a big thing here and we want
to make sure that are are youth, you know that I get where
where you're trying to go in and you're right, um chairman
we we know but at the same time, you know, when you when I
talk to the youth and 1 of the youth said, what are you all
trying to do to us?
That was his answer to me. He shook his head and walked
away, because for him, it's like, what else, what else is
going to come and again?
I think there is we need to have more time to discuss those
those those great areas. Um, possibly make some changes to,
to all this. But again at chairman I know we were trying to
do it and I know times is in essence and all of this
because you also have to um, listen to your your residents.
and, you know, do something about it immediately. But at
the same time, I am concerned that we're going to be able
to move forward with something that could cause
Greater damage to to the issue as well. So I hope that, you
know, the input that my colleagues and myself are given um,
you you really consider it and and know that hope again,
what is going to be that long term damage to to all of
this? Again, I do see your point. I respect what you're
doing when it comes to listening to your constituents, but
I also hope that you understand that we are concerned
because we want to make sure we have to have reassurance.
That what would this mean for the rest of the youth
Community communities across our our Wards? I just again I
just do not want people to become the parents and agitating
and harassing our youth by saying it's 8 oclock. You have
to go as 20 of you or x amount of number. You have to go,
but if you're saying that it's just going to be based on
targeted and, you know, promoting it.
Again.
I don't know if I have the confidence, that that's exactly
what's going to happen. But thank you so much for allowing
me to speak.
Thank you. Al Kruse. Uh, chairman Ervin, are you still with
us?
Yes, I am. Um, thank you. Um, ladies and gentlemen, I know
this has been a very spirited debate. Um, I, I too want to,
uh, try to thread the needle here. Uh, I believe we can
walk and chew gum at the same time. Um, I I know and
understand that there's some challenges in the communities.
I know and understand that I I was initially concerned
about the uh, ordinance as it stood on his face. I don't
believe that we should uh, restrict any area of the city
differently than any other area. I'm very grateful and glad
that, uh, chairman Hopkins. Uh, you know, took me up on the
offer to sit down and talk and see if we can craft
something that uh gave uh not only residents and Street
events something that that may be necessary. But also
residents and Rossland Garfield Park and Lincoln everywhere
given, uh, people, the flexibility that's necessary to
enact is needed. Um, and again even uh, even though, uh,
My colleague in the 15th Ward and I don't agree on a whole
lot of things. 1 thing, I think we do agree upon is that
uh, all of Chicago should be treated the same in these
relative and Endeavors. So again, uh, I know we have made
some great progress in in moving, uh, this this ball
forward. Uh, I know that there are, you know, people do
have some concerns, but I would not say that we need to let
perfect be the enemy, uh, of the good, uh, 1 thing that I
that I will add add to the conversation.
Uh just from our general, General things, is that? Um,
The way I, I I see this notice, um, the notice really is
for parents. Um, if you know that there's a high propensity
for something negative to jump off at a location, uh, as a
parent, I think it would be, uh, not not good for you to
knowingly, send your child that way. Um, as a chief, uh,
hyen has stated. Um, you know, people know you said 9:55
people began to do what is necessary. But as a parent, uh,
if I would have dropped, you know, my daughter, even though
she's 8 years old, once she gets older, I would want to
feel some level of comfort. But if I heard that there was a
something else going on there as a parent, uh, I I would
want to know that and not potentially put my child In
Harm's Way or uh, put her in the situation whereby, she
could, you know, be be compromised. And so I think we have
to uh, you know, think about
Some of these things in broader and broader, and broader
ways. Um, as relates, I know our civil rights
organizations, uh, have challenges and quite frankly, uh,
I've been, uh, in the position where I've had to go to the
ACLU, uh, with an ordinance trying to get something that,
that, that, that works when we were dealing with gang and
narcotics related loitering. When I first came into the
council, the biggest challenge that I have there is that
they very rarely will give us, uh, Solutions. Um, and you
know, while it's just not the ACLU, there are other
organizations at the table, uh, that that may need need
need the opportunity to digest some things. Um,
I I am uh, I want to make sure that what we're doing is
constitutionally sound and I believe that it is and uh, of
course uh we will always have individuals that that don't
think something is will make their opinions known, but
again, none of us are Judges and not necessarily, uh,
dealing with these issues. Um, but again, I, I also, you
know, know we should be able to walk and chew gum at the
same time and, uh, understand where the ottoman is. And uh,
the chairman is and trying to do what he can, uh, for his
community. But at the same time, my goal is to protect the
the residents that live in my community. So, um, appreciate
the work in collaboration that chairman Hopkins is done
along with all the dial and I to come to a uh, not perfect,
uh, solution but a a reasonable solution uh, in their
respect. Um, I am open if if if members are
I'm not a member of the committee. I am open to coming back
and and uh, you know, giving a little are uh if if that's
what the will of the committee is, if to do that, I'm okay
with that. Um, because I, I want us to be able to pass
something, uh, when we go to, when we go into Council
before the month is out, so uh we would like to, you know,
know, tackle and deal. What was going to happen,
potentially in some of our holiday festivities and
activities. And, uh, I don't want us to have, uh, held our
own sales hostage, in, in that respect. So again, uh, I
think this, uh, or this is much better than where we
started. Um, might it, you know, might there be some
smaller things that can be done? Maybe. Uh, but again, I
think that's the, you know, going to be the will of the
body and the will of the, uh, of the committee. I, I do
support
Uh, where we are. Um, and if we need to make, uh, you know,
some slight things, I will support that as well, but, uh, I
think that, you know, you all are sitting in there. I'm not
a member, uh, but uh, I, I am impacted. So I want to make
sure that our voices are heard, uh, on this, uh, on this
issue. Uh, Chief. I just have, uh, 1 question. Uh, 1
question for you. I know appreciate your leadership when
you're in the 15th district and all on the west side. So
I'm not, uh, not concerned as it relates to uh, you all's
uh, you all's use of this. Uh, my question is
Is a actor. Uh you guys are dealing in open source media.
How do you deal with the
The ones that aren't open source, that that create these
challenges. How are you dealing with that today? And how
will this help you deal with that in the future?
I I think if you can correct me if I didn't get the the
full question but, uh, I think, are you asking how we
monitor something? If it's not an open-source,
Yes investigation. Um obviously you know, the Chicago
Police Department, the first minimum investigations that we
have to be extremely careful. Never to violate that. So our
open source,
Uh, monitoring to our confidential analytic section is the
only way that we're able to do that as far as first
amendment investigations, go to the Chicago, Police
Department is fully committed to protecting every
individual's First Amendment rights and uh, at no time,
will we ever violate that first amendment? So we, we
the open source to the best of our ability. Um, our
district Intelligence Officers or sdsc rooms or other
sources um, in the districts to alert us if there is a
large Gathering or something going on, uh, downtown, I
mean, obviously, you know, the the pods and the cameras and
everything. If we didn't catch something on open source,
we're able to identify it through, uh, through our pod
system, or our sdsc room, or just, you know, I mean, as I
hate to say this, old-fashioned police work. The officers,
uh, the foot officers, uh, the superintendent's been good.
I mean, I know bike teams are being
Started in every District. The bike teams are phenomenal. To
get information back to the watch operation. Lieutenants
who notify their captains commanders and it goes up the
chain for the proper uh, resource requests and deployment
of uh resources to, to any situation that might be
starting.
Okay, thank you. And again, uh uh, you know, you guys uh,
We need to do something. Uh, and, and again, let's not uh,
hold hostage, we need, you know, few days. That's fine. But
we should not let this tear beyond our our our meeting uh
moving forward.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman
Yeah, uh, thank you, chairman, Ervin. Uh, we have, uh, the
3 lead sponsors of this ordinance present or 2 present in
the room and yourself chairman, Ervin. So, chairman Dal,
what is your preference?
uh, I support what uh, chairman Ervin has said, I think for
me, um,
I would like to see us come back.
And I would like, to have the civil liberties Advocates
review the latest. Um,
draft of the ordinance since it came out yesterday,
afternoon late afternoon, um,
I like the point that Alderman, Lee may maybe about not
making this a pilot but coming back.
In after Labor Day.
Uh, so that we can assess how this uh, ordinance has.
Helped us.
Um,
And I think that I would support.
Having more conversation on this but not a lot. This summer
is uh Upon Us. Yeah.
Um, I do have 1 question for the chief. How do you
when a gathering is, um,
A First Amendment right Gathering.
Well obviously, obviously there there there's a political
aspect to it. Um they they they've told us what their
grievances are. Uh, the location that they're going to set
up and what they'd like to address. So it's permit driven
I would say a lot of uh the events that we have downtown
are not permit.
Or unpermitted events. If you want to look at the history
of it. Uh,
We've kind of done unpermitted events because of the
compliance and the cooperation and collaboration with the
demonstrators and our organizers. Um, they've told us our
routes, they stuck to it. Everything's been peaceful. Uh, I
think there's been a couple instances where there's been
property damage of spray painting. That's cleaned up right
afterwards. So
that's kind of our first amendment issues right now. Since
October 8th, I think there's been over 521 unpermitted
events that took place without incident with the Chicago
Police Department.
Thank you.
All right. Uh, yeah. Thank you, chairman dial
traditionally. Uh, the way we work here. As you all know,
uh,
The sponsors have the ability to determine whether or not
they want to vote on a matter or want to hold a matter. And
here, we have, uh, the sponsor also happens to be a chair.
And my preference would be to vote on this matter today.
Since there's been so much discussion. I'd like to see it
resolved, but uh, I will yield to the majority of the 3 of
us, uh, chairman Ervin and chairman, Dow prefer. Uh that we
we hold this matter for continued discussion, uh, and I
will honor that request. Uh, but what I'm going to do is,
uh, rather than adjourn, I'm going to recess this
committee, uh, which under our rules, I have the ability to
do. Um, we will circle around to the committee members to
make sure that Quorum will be possible in the coming days.
And we're not going to drag this out, we're going to try to
expedite it. We've had more than enough discussion here in
this room. Further discussion will be uh allowed at the
next meeting, but we will determine that based on
everyone's availability and then I will reconvene it and
duly notice it. So it complies with the open.
Meetings act but what it will be is 1 meeting that happens
to continue over 2 different days. So there will be 1
committee report, ultimately, um, before the city council
meeting on, uh, May 17th. So with that, uh, we will stand
in recess until call of the chair. Thank you.
May say, yeah, that's a special purpose meeting though,
right? So I I don't anticipate.
Oh, it's a regular meeting. Okay. All right.
Okay.