Recessed meeting from yesterday.
Uh, we will begin this morning with, uh, public comment.
We have five, uh, members of the public who wish
to make comment, which will entertain at this point,
beginning with Jeffrey Cabbage.
Say that's, say it correctly. Kabbage My apologies.
May proceed.
Alrighty. Thank. Oh, we good?
Yes, go ahead All. Thanks very much.
Uh, good morning Committee members, uh, all two of you
that we got here so far today.
But, uh, uh, my name is Jeffrey Covich.
I'm a Senior Policy Analyst
for the Better Government Association here today on behalf
of the Chicago Healthy Homes Coalition,
of which the BGA is a member.
The BGA has done a significant amount
of reporting on housing safety in Chicago,
including our 2222 Pulitzer Prize winning series Failures
before the fires, which examined the limitations
of the city's current complaint driven inspection system.
And it's sometimes fatal consequences that reporting led
to the creation of a building code
scoff law list at the time.
But other than that, the city has not substantially altered
its inspections programs, and tragedy continues to occur.
On today's committee agenda, we have the Department
of Housing, which has done substantial work over the past
few years to improve the city's data
regarding housing stock affordability and accessibility.
And one critical component
that is missing from Chicago Safety infrastructure still
and from the housing department budget
as reflected in the mid-year report,
is a municipal rental registry, uh,
or a single stop database of owners
and property managers for rental units.
Currently, about a third
of the city's large apartment buildings are owned by LLCs,
which can obscure the actual ownership
and operation of the building from both
tenants and city officials.
This year, the mayor's office has been piloting a sort
of bare bones rental units database called the Building
Blocks, which is available
through a one year grant funded contract.
Well, it's not a full registry.
It has been an important proof of concept,
and we're strongly urging that a rental database program
continue and be made a part of the Department
of Housing's operations and Budget as older persons.
A rental registry is a tool that you
and your staff should have access to for the safety
of your wards, for your residents,
and for your own ward operations.
And it's a tool the housing department should have
as it continues to improve the city's data
and the administration's understanding of our housing stock.
I know we have a long budget season coming ahead of us
that is only just starting with these mid-year hearings,
but I want this to be on everybody's mind
as we look at the Department of Housing's current spending.
Uh, to date and think about what the department is going
to need in the coming year,
please consider a permanent rental registry
as part of that budget process.
And do feel free to reach out to myself
or any other members of the Healthy Homes
Coalition if you have any questions.
Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Covich.
Uh, next we'll have, uh, Martin Kola.
Uh, good morning. Uh, Martin Kola,
uh, of impact for equity.
For the record, uh, I'm an attorney, uh,
staff counsel on the housing team there.
Uh, I'm giving public comment today on behalf behalf
of the Chicago Healthy Homes Coalition, a group
of community organizations, health workers
and housing advocates, seeking
to create a proactive rental inspection
system here in the city.
Under our proposal, apartments across the city would be
inspected before they become hazards to tenant health,
rather than through a complaint based system.
A proactive rental inspection system,
however, can't work if city departments, ward staff
and renters can't figure out who owns
or manages buildings, especially when those buildings are
owned by LLCs and other corporate entities.
That obscure ownership a sometimes article published last
week showed that nearly 34% of all large seven unit
or more buildings in the city are currently owned by LLCs,
a number that has more than tripled since 2006.
A rental registry would allow city departments, ward staff,
and renters to quickly communicate with people responsible
for the maintenance and upkeep of buildings owned by LLCs if
and when conditions deteriorate.
As you heard from Jeffrey, the city currently has access
to a bare Bones registry through the Mayor's office,
and we are thankful for the work the Mayor's office has done
to get the registry off the ground.
But we believe this work
belongs with the Department of Housing.
As a result, we're asking, uh, that the city, uh,
appropriate half a million dollars in the upcoming budget,
um, to hire staff, uh, and,
and grow the current bare Bones registry within the
Department of Housing, uh, and,
and really allow the program to flourish.
Uh, thank you very much for your time.
Thank you, sir. Uh, next we'll have, uh, Terrence Sloan.
Terrence. Was it Johnson?
Hello, I'm Terrence Johnson.
I'm a tenant in a nonprofit owned residential building.
Uh, for the last four
and a half years, there's been, uh, countless numbers
of problems that I've reported to IDA
and various other government organizations.
Uh, some of those problems have included staff violence
towards me, in which I've, uh,
contacted the police about filed reports.
Most of the most of that violence was
because of retaliation to my speaking up, lack
of responsible and professional communication attendant
about services, uh, lack of knowledge
and information about who actually owns the building so
that, uh, I could forward my complaints
directly and more effectively.
I've been told by IDA
and various other government officials
that government can't do anything about these problems
because the building is privately owned.
Uh, this is the reason why, uh, I also ask for support, uh,
for a permanent, uh, rental registry.
Uh, and I hope that you can, uh, find the money to pay
for this in the upcoming budget.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Johnson. Uh, next we'll have,
uh, Mr. George Blakemore
And up down business and affairs and consumer service.
I've never seen so much, uh, chaos.
So much inefficiency.
So much corruption.
And you are the chairman.
They have the various departments now.
This is up now business and affairs.
And then the citizens come up here, uh, to,
to see the members on these committees.
You know, better. What's wrong with you?
You know better. What's wrong with you
to call the citizens up and, and it's empty seats.
And this one, the first one is up, is business
and app affairs, not housing.
And then the, the citizen has a right to speak at housing.
Why? You don't want us to speak what's wrong with you?
You represent us.
We pay you what's wrong with you?
It's not only you, it's all of you.
It's a culture of corruption here.
Look at these empty seats here.
Why is it that you all are anti citizens
that pay you, that you supposed to represent
who in the hell you think you are?
Why would you do this?
Because you had bad examples.
Ed Smith and these other old, uh, sell our black hacks,
and you saw them, uh, do corruption.
Now you are doing corruption. It's something evil here.
It's something an American here.
Can't you see that Sullivan are not here, and you are happy?
I know you're black and not be, in fact, Uhhuh,
and I'm old and gray and skinny.
So is something wrong with the system?
The system is broken. It's broken.
It's all Democrats,
but no good black ones, no good white ones, Hispanic, Asian,
or one party system.
A corrupt system, a evil system.
I advocated for Trump to come here to clean up the swamp,
make America great.
Not because America hadn't been great to black people.
Uh, I I, I make America great again to make America great,
but I'm challenging black people.
Black Americans. You got to make yourself great.
We were once a great people. We had business.
We had Black Wall Street. We have gotten low low.
Thank you, Mr. Blakemore, for your comments.
Uh, our final speaker for the day is Michael Young Bay.
Oh,
Please, the chair.
Go ahead.
May. You may proceed.
Thank you. Um,
I started coming down here because of housing.
And sometimes I may have spoke outta anger, frustration,
you know, because of when things, people do things
to you intentionally from keeping you from being housed,
or they offer you unsatisfactory housing, you know,
where they show you apartments.
That's the stove got just nasty.
Just, I mean, just nasty rent holes in the
place, blood in the tub.
I even gave that fly drive to the mayor.
I put that video out on my, on my, uh, Twitter, you know.
But it ain't getting no attention though.
But, you know, I came down here in good faith
because I feel like no one should be acceptable to that.
You know, a lot of y'all,
y'all got nice jobs and things like that.
You know, it ain't right for someone
to even show you a place that look like that.
How is you showing that to someone?
And on top of that, it was me and my wife
and a, uh, Mexican man was the only people
working in the shelter.
So me and my wife got income,
and we being treated like that.
I wasn't raised like that.
You know, I come down here
and y'all see me in suits and ties and things like that.
'cause I, I wasn't raised to be nasty.
I wasn't raised to to be an acceptance of anything.
I got good mannerism, everything.
You know what y'all have seen from me in the past? Really?
Not me, but hey, I'm fighting for me, my wife and my child.
On top of that, how we got into that situation, you know,
and the discrimination from all Chicago,
salvation Army, the Booth Lodge, um,
shelter on the North side, you know?
'cause they would discriminate against my daughter
because she has seizures.
You know, people need better housing.
People need cleaner housing.
People need safer and cleaner environments.
That's what will occur.
The violence, not Trump.
We keep looking for one person.
Like, oh, he so magnificent.
If y'all look back, I wasn't Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump,
Trump, like the rest of the people that was surrounding me.
You know? And some people think that I'm also a part
of these various groups.
Now I'm on, I'm my own man
and I refuse for anyone to disrespect me or my family.
And that's what was going on when I was coming down here.
You know, and them things not right.
Also being violated of my freedom of speech
and amongst other things. Thank you.
Thank you for your comments. Mr.
Bay, uh, committee will, uh, stand at ease while we, uh,
bring in, uh, business affairs
and consumer protection for our first, uh, department today.
She don't talk her.
I
Good. Okay.
We'll come back to order.
Uh, we're gonna begin today with Business Affairs
and consumer protection.
Um, welcome, commissioner Kafa,
if you could introduce your staff
and give your open statement
after which we will go into questions.
Good morning. Uh, my name is Ivan Kafa.
I am here, uh, to my right.
First is first Deputy Tiffany Brooks.
To her right is, uh, assistant Commissioner
of Inter Intergovernmental Affairs for BACP, Chris Jessop.
In the box, we have, uh, Chicago Local Control, uh,
local liquor commissioner, uh, Shannon Trotter,
to her right is our Deputy Commissioner for licensing.
AJ Lee, to his right is our Managing Deputy
and Chief Small Business Officer, Ika pi.
And, and to her right is Adam Weller, assistant Commissioner
for our Office of Labor Standards.
Good morning Chairman, Jason Irving, vice Chair Nicole Lee,
and members of the Chicago City Council.
I am Ivan Cap, the commissioner for the Chicago Department
of Business Affairs and Consumer Protection,
also known as BACP.
I am here today with my team to share our progress in
how we manage our department's budget to ensure
that every dollar entrusted to us is used efficiently
and eff and effectively for the Chicago's businesses,
workers and consumers.
First, I would like to express my appreciation to the mayor
for his guidance and unwavering support
during this midyear budget process.
I also want to thank all of you for your support
and continued engagement.
BSCP plays a pivotal role in our city.
The department's core function include licensing businesses,
supporting small businesses,
regulating the public passenger, passenger vehicle industry,
ensuring comp business compliance,
and protecting the rights of workers and consumers.
BSCP has remained focused on delivering high quality
programs and services to all 77 communities.
Through strategic planning
and responsible fiscal management,
we have achieved meaningful efficiencies while maintaining
our core priorities.
There are three key areas
where these efforts have made a measurable impact.
BACP has maintained quality programs
and services under the BACP Neighborhood Business
Development Centers program.
65 local business service organizations help entrepreneurs
and business owners start, grow,
or sustain their small business in every ward in Chicago.
Additionally, through our business education programs
and expos, we are educating, empowering,
and providing current
and future business owners
with vital information and resources.
We also continue to respond to complaints
and conduct investigations
and businesses to ensure compliance
with Chicago's municipal code.
Finally, through city initiatives like Cut the tape,
we help new and existing businesses save time
and resources, enabling them to grow and create jobs
and see a faster return on their investment.
I want to address our revenue and budget.
Our revenue for 2025, driven by licensing fees is paid
for similar collections as last year.
Year to date, BACP has issued nearly 5,300 new licenses
helping new businesses get their start in Chicago.
Lastly, we have prioritized the stability of our workforce.
The mid-year budget shows BACP with a vacancy rate
of less than 7%, reflecting improved retention
and greater workforce stability.
BACP overtime expenditures are less than 13% of our budget.
As the midyear budget report reflects, uh, showing a, uh,
creative problem solving to provide services,
equally important, we have invested in our staff
through cross training to build a more versatile team.
We have proven that it is possible
to be fiscally responsible while mission driven.
I want to thank the Chicago City Council for your time
and ongoing partnership.
And my team and I are happy
to answer any questions you may have.
Thank you. Uh, commissioner, uh, this is a question
that I've asked, uh, every department that has come
before us, uh, thus far.
Um, given, uh, our, uh, current financial situation, uh,
last year, I know we did, um, 3%, uh,
expenditure reductions, uh, this year.
Uh, I think we'll probably end up doing, um,
somewhere in the same, raise, even higher, three
to 5% in expenditure reductions.
Can you, uh, expound on how
and what impact that would have to your department, um,
either through, um, cancellation of services
or time to complete services, um,
or outright just reduction in services.
Could you expound on, uh, what that impact would mean
to your, uh, department? Thank
You for that question, chairman.
Um, so although, uh, BACP is known for its collaborative
approach and, you know, quickly to adapt to changes
specifically, uh, fiscal changes, um,
a further reduction would definitely impact
some of our programs.
Whether it is, uh, longer waits
for our public vehicle licensing
or longer waits for licensing, uh, business licensing,
or it may be, uh, a a, a short, uh,
or a longer wait for investigators to respond to complaints.
Um, you know,
we further cuts will definitely be, uh, noticeable.
Um, we don't, we don't, uh, uh, we're not shy to create
and come up with solutions to that.
We work very closely with, uh, our Office
of Budget Management.
And during this time, we are going to be, uh,
working hand in hand with them.
Try to identify where those, uh, cuts are going
to be coming from, um,
and, uh, make sure that our,
our services continue to be intact.
Um, when, uh, when we reconvene, uh, in,
in October, if you could delineate, uh, for us, uh,
what changes you will need to make to meet the expenditure,
uh, reduction targets that exist, uh,
that would be appreciated.
'cause I think we need to know, um,
what the changes would do
and how they would impact your department's ability
to deliver services.
And so, again, this is something that we're asking of, uh,
of every department so that we are clear on, um, what these,
uh, what these specific impacts would mean to, uh, to us
as a, as a council and what these impacts would mean to the,
um, to the, to the city.
Um, secondly, uh, I know that there's been conversation,
you know, around the sign ordinance, um,
and, um, the, can you give us the current state
of what the rules are and what the ordinance states,
and, um, based on some of the proposals
that have been presented, uh, what, what that would do?
Sure. So right now, the, uh,
ordinance was held in committee, uh,
during our last meeting.
Um, what we're proposing is to build on an, an,
an existing ordinance that is housed
with the Department of Buildings.
This is going to, uh, add BACP to the existing ordinance
so that we can enforce it.
It's going to give, uh, it's going to, uh,
add a QA curating a cure period of, uh, uh, 10 days for,
uh, businesses to be in compliance
before any enforcement is issued.
But it's, it's a, it's a, it's a, it's an ordinance
that's already in the books.
Uh, we're just adding BACP to it.
We're gonna be focusing on signage, uh, LED lights,
distracting, LED lights,
and of course, the requirement to have a permit if you want
to go over 25%.
So it's giving BACP the authority to, uh, join, uh,
departmental buildings in that ordinance.
Okay. Alright. Um, Altman Lawson, you have questions?
Any others for questions? Altman, Lata and, uh, UD guys?
Okay. Everybody will got you guys. Okay.
Actually, let me go to, uh, bill was here first,
so we're gonna go with Bill first.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr.
Chairman, I don't have any questions,
but I, you know, have a statement and a, and a observation.
Um, you know, I look at the attendance
that we have here in this body right now,
and I look at when we're talking about waste inefficiencies,
uh, there's no difference in what
we're gonna be doing in a couple
of months than what we're doing now.
And the questions that really need
to be answered are gonna be answered and asked
after the budget has been presented.
I'm gonna tell you, I'm just really, um, amazed that,
you know, the big push to have these hearings
and then the people who were pushing
to have these hearings are not even here.
Okay? That's number one.
And number two, we have a million dollars worth
of salaries right here
that we are asking every department to come down.
And they should be upstairs doing some work.
They should be upstairs doing the city's business,
but instead they having to come down here.
And this is probably one time every commissioner is going
to agree with me that they have to come down here today
during these makeshift hearings
where we're not getting answers.
The answers need to be coming
after we get the budget presented.
And I think this is just a waste of taxpayers time,
dollars, and effort.
And we should just cancel these hearings, get our budget,
and then have the hearings like we're supposed to have.
Because again, the people that push
for this ain't even here.
They not even, not even here, you know,
I guess if they're able to just check the box
and said, this is what I did,
and they can go back to their community
and say, I passed the ordinance to have some hearings.
This is a, this is a disgrace to taxpayer dollars
to have all these people here
that should be upstairs doing real work,
getting the real budget together
so we can ask real questions to get real answers
to find out what's going on.
So that's all I gotta say,
and I thank you all so much for being here today.
Thank you. Uh, alderman.
Bill, uh, next we're gonna go to, uh,
alderman Lawson, followed by Alderman Nugent.
You recognized As being present here today?
No. You're, you're on the roll. We, we have a, a fair, one
Of the seven alderman who are present today.
We, we've got a continuous meeting, so we're all here.
So Alderman Lawson,
The chair, uh, I, uh,
I'm surprised there's not more people here as well,
but I will always, uh, come and have questions for BACP.
They know that. Um, just generally speaking, I'm,
I'm gonna ask this to a lot of folks,
but what were you seeing, just the trend mid-year?
What, what areas are underperforming?
What areas are overperforming?
Um, I know we had
to put more money into public passenger vehicle
in the last year's budget.
Just sort of trend wise.
What, what can you tell us about where, uh,
your money is being spent faster or slower? Well,
Our largest bureau is of course, the enforcement team
that, that is, uh, 62 budgeted positions.
So that's where we see a lot of the expend, uh,
the personnel expenditures, uh, are come from, uh,
in the enforcement team.
Uh, but it's also revenue generating, right? Right.
And the enforcement and,
and the ticket writing, um, followed by two other, uh,
bureaus, which is the, our small business center,
our licensing and public way, uh, bureaus
and our public vehicle, uh,
licensing bureau are exactly the same.
Roughly, uh, 20 28, 28 people per bureau.
So that's where we see, but again,
they are revenue generating.
Sure. Is that where you're
busiest though, as well? And that's more,
That's where, that's, those are public
facing areas, right?
So they're, they're dealing with, um, with the customers
and they're dealing with, with people.
But, you know, we're seeing that's
where the money's coming from, the revenue's coming from.
Right, right. Um, another area
that we do very well is a smaller group,
but it's, it's the one that carries, uh, the community work.
It's our small business advocacy team led by loca here.
That's where we see our corporate dollars going.
$3.3 million in that line that goes to,
to support small businesses and,
and, uh, uh, those delegated agencies
that are working in the community providing hyper technical
support, uh, to new businesses, existing businesses. And
A lot of, a lot of the small business stuff is
CDBG grants.
Right. Certainly direct two are, are partners.
CDBG grants are, are managed by the, by DPD.
Okay. Okay. Very next, right? Yeah.
Um, uh, specifically around licenses, uh, sort of the trend
for the beginning of the year as compared to other years.
Are we seeing an increase in new licenses
or renewals or a decrease?
Uh, and if there's any specific areas
where we're seeing more or less would be
great to know that. So our,
Our renewals are, are consistent year to year.
They're about between 80 and 85%.
Uh, but what we're seeing is it's a lot
of new businesses coming online.
Right. We are, we are, uh, issuing the, to the cadence
of about 500 business licenses a month, uh, since 2023.
500 new per month. Yeah.
Okay. So since 2023, uh, uh,
we've issued about 16,000 new licenses.
Um, and so far this year in 25,
about 5,300 new licenses.
So it is signaling a, a healthy, uh, uh, you know, uh, uh,
economy of this, uh, in, in Chicago. Um,
So I guess then to follow on that, what are we,
what licenses are we seeing more of?
And what licenses are we seeing less of?
Uh, Let me this year compared to others.
Sure. Let me, uh, if, if, uh, our Deputy Commissioner
of licensing can answer that question.
Hey, Jay Lee, deputy Commissioner, uh,
for business licensing, uh, we could provide you like a list
of the most common new licenses
issued through the chair, maybe.
So my question is, compared to other years,
what trends are we seeing?
What upticks we're seeing more, uh, penny cap licenses
and less livery licenses.
That's what I'm looking for, is
where are we seeing increases?
What industries are increasing their licensing?
Yeah, I, we could pull that data for you.
We don't have the specifics Sure.
Broken down that way right now, but
Sure. And then I, I guess
I would ask
that about liquor specifically too, as far as numbers
for the beginning of the year trends,
and if they're more packaged,
more on premise, more outdoor patio.
Thank you. Alderman Shannon Trotter,
local Liquor control commissioner.
Um, the, the numbers are, are pretty, um, consistent.
Uh, so for example, in 2024,
there were 2,729 consumption licenses.
Um, this year to date, there are 2,765.
Um, so for new applications, um,
this year we are at 206.
Last year for two, or for 2024, there was 346.
So it, it's pretty, it's pretty, um, consistent.
Not a, not a huge increase or didn't decrease.
Great. Um, where
are we seeing, I know your,
your biggest bureaus are in inspections.
What's your vacancy like?
Uh, I know 7% is to the department total.
How about with inspectors?
Uh, right now we have, uh, five vacancies Okay.
For inspectors. Great.
And three are coming up online for, uh,
to be posted for hiring very soon.
I don't have to tell you my colleagues
and I love inspectors.
Um, I know, I know that may be something to look at
for the next round here.
Um, especially 'cause they're revenue
generating and we need everything.
It's probably revenue generating.
Um, I guess you mentioned cut
the tape in your opening statement.
I'll probably just close with that.
What, what sort of major, uh,
initiatives from cut the tape at business affairs have been
the most successful so far?
So we are, our, our, one of our number one goals of
what we wanna accomplish is to continue to reduce the time,
uh, for issuing those licenses, right?
I mean, these small businesses, sometimes they, they,
they get, they sign leases, they start, um, uh, you know,
their, their, their, their business venture very early.
Um, and sometimes they have to wait a little bit of time
to get those, the licenses.
And we want to, we wanna, we wanna help with that, right?
So while we're, we're looking at efficiencies within our
licensing, um, um, you know, uh, process
and working with other departments
that are involved in the licensing process to, to identify
where the bottlenecks are,
because we want to, even though we've made a lot of progress
by, you know, making changes to our website
by putting things in on, in, you know, more plain language
to assist the less, uh, resource businesses,
we see some areas where business licenses are taking,
are taking a while to be, to be issued.
So we, that's our number one goal, is to continue
to reduce the time, the average number of days for the,
for license to get out the door.
That, that would be great if you could quantify
that by license type.
So, 'cause I, I know liquor is going,
was gonna be longer than selling t-shirts, right?
The average number of days
for a license right now, and that's the average.
Not every license gets out door is 13 days down from 53.
Um, but again, you know, of course legal licenses take a,
take a take longer because they have to go
through the public comment, uh, a period and,
and there's more requirements,
background checks and things like that.
But on average, uh, we went down from 53 days to 13 days.
You should lead with that. That's a good stat. It is.
You're very the lead. We very should throw
That front. We, we not
continue to, uh, uh, of course,
you know, building on that.
Great. Great. Thank you. No problem. Thank you, chairman.
Thank you. Al Lawson, uh, Alman.
Newgen followed by Alderman Moore.
I'm sorry. Alder spotted them. Moore.
Thank you. Thank you chairman.
And good morning, Ivan. And, and your good
Morning. All
The women, um, to 53 to 13 actually is really awesome.
So congratulations. That's a big deal. Thank you.
Um, question about the business compliance enforcement
expansions going to seven nights a week
that was proposed in the budget.
Are, are we there? Are we doing that?
We are five nights, uh, Wednesday
through Sunday originally from four to five.
So by balancing our workforce, working with the union,
with afscme, working with our teams, we were able to
switch back from a four day work week, uh,
to five days work week.
So our nights and weekends team are, are available, uh,
Wednesday through Sunday, um,
from 9:00 AM to 2:00 AM
And what happens, and I recognize we're up against
terrible budget constraints,
but what happens if you need
to get an inspector out on those other nights
Other than Monday and Tuesday?
O other than Wednesday?
Uh, we work with them with the police department. Okay.
If there's anything that happens on a Monday
on, on, uh, on Tuesday.
Um, and that's, that's their weekend.
Uh, we work with the police department.
Okay. And then, um, the mid-year budget report, it said
that BACP had gone from, um,
your three year vacancies were down from 38 to 13.
Of the ones 38 minus 13 of those open.
How many of those are revenue generators that are open?
So right now, five are, are revenue generating, um,
uh, directly revenue generating.
So the investigators, yeah.
Um, there are other, uh, AJ do you, can you expand on that?
AJ Lee, deputy Commissioner business licensing?
Um, yeah, the other,
the other open positions are administrative
or, um, functional in nature, not revenue generating.
So just the five. Okay. So five.
There's also supervisor for them.
So the supervisor supports the revenue generation
of the other ones perhaps, but, okay.
So the open five Five are revenue generators that we have.
Five. Yes. Okay. Um, thank you. That's all I have.
Chairman. And thanks Ivan.
Thank you. Um, alderman Nugent, uh,
alderman on Spotify by Alderman Moore.
Thank you so much, sir. Commissioner, thank you very much
for being with us.
Uh, I wanted to like ask you again,
like following up on this, the revenue piece of things.
'cause we're talking about cuts expenditure reductions.
I, I struggle to see what that does for the city
where BACP is concerned
and like, yeah, here's where I'm coming from.
Last year there was a, through the chair request that showed
that BACP produces a 80 north
of $80 million in revenue for the corporate fund annually.
That's against a $22.8 million budget.
So wildly revenue positive for the city.
And if we were doing a real economic impact study,
when you all help businesses open more quickly, that
generates property taxes, generate sales taxes mm-hmm.
Generates income taxes. It is hard for me to imagine
how reducing your budget
helps our overall budget for the city.
Um, I'm putting that out there just as a statement.
I wanted to ask through the chair,
if you can help us understand fees for service within
BACP that have not been inflation adjusted,
let's say in the last five years.
And whether that can help us hold things at least neutral,
where your department is concerned.
Sure. I, I, I will get back to you
that, with that information.
I appreciate that, sir. Not A problem.
My only other question was, uh, related to
the shared housing program, the commissioner's adjustment.
I'm curious if you can, because we know what
that looks like on our side of things, the review side
of things, I'm wondering what is the staff time
that it takes for approving those shared housing
applications on your side?
And whether the administrative fee that's charged for
that currently covers the cost of that work.
It's, it's an area that we are looking at right now.
Uh, as we, so if, if you wanna breakdown of fees about,
um, I'm gonna pass it on to Chris to talk about, about,
about that a little bit.
So, uh, thanks Alderman.
Chris Jessup, assistant commissioner.
Um, and I, I might also call on AJ Lee,
but, um, as far as the, the shared housing applications go,
um, it, it kind of depends on the, the person
and the, the specific application.
But to be, to get the registration, there's just
that registration fee.
If they have to apply for a commissioner's adjust adjustment
for whatever reason, there's no fee that's added to, there's
No fee for the commissioner's adjustment.
Ajs. Yeah, that is correct.
That's interesting. That's the conversation
to continue offline.
Uh, yes.
So, uh, we have one FTE that, that works directly
with, um, share housing two FTEs.
Yeah. Two full-time employees right now working and,
and things, uh, uh,
share housing in the application process.
And then with the commissioner's adjustment, then it goes
to our prosecution and adjudication.
Um, but, but two FTEs directly working on shared housing.
Duly noted. Very interesting. Mm-hmm.
Again, like, uh, my other questions have already been asked,
so my thanks to you and your team mm-hmm.
For being here with us today. Thank you, sir.
No problem. Thank you.
Thank you. Alderman. Alderman Moore, uh,
alderman Fuentes Lopez, you have any questions for BACP?
I know you do. I got you. Go ahead. Alderman Moore.
Thank you, chairman. Uh, first of all, uh, thank you, uh,
commissioner on your team for, um, being here
and, uh, for always, uh, being, uh, responsive.
I know we're going to do some thank yous
and all that during, um, budget.
But, um, to Sharon Charter to thank you so much for, um,
you know, again, answering your phone and then being active
and proactive, um, to help in our communities.
And, um, that means a lot to me,
and I appreciate you so much for, um, what you do as well
as to Tiffany Brooks.
Um, again, same thing.
Thank you for picking up that call
and not only getting on it,
but uh, as I tell my staff, be responsive,
follow up and follow through.
And, um, you trust that your team has done that.
And I appreciate, 'cause we've been able
to do some, um, good things.
And I wanna make sure that we, um, continue that.
Uh, one of my things,
and I I really wanna talk about this process of like,
when we have these, um, bad actors
and then we put them on, uh, plan of action.
Um, I, I think in my, uh, let's talk about that process,
why it's done and what can we do to possibly improve it.
Because part of me sometimes think that just takes too long.
So talk about that.
We're happy to, you know,
if you wanna have a side conversation about that,
we're happy to to do that.
The plan of operation, um, it's mostly in, in, uh, it's,
uh, it's more common in the liquor world.
Shannon can probably expand on that,
but I, I, I see where you're coming from with whether
There's gas stations, there
Are gas stations, and again, it's a process that, uh,
is re it's could be requested by your office, requested
by the commander, or requested by the community,
um, directly to us.
Um, uh, it's, uh, you know, at the end of the meetings,
the community meeting process, there are, you know, we, uh,
and, and part of the, the, uh, conversations
through the meetings, we can land on more restrictions on
top of what's already mandated by code, um, on a document
that needs to be, uh, that the,
the business has to abide to.
So if, you know, we can, we can talk detail.
Um, but that's basically the core of the, of the function.
Uh, thanks Alderman.
I just want to add, uh, Chris Jessup,
assistant commissioner, I just wanna give a shout out
to Gerald, uh, deputy Gerald Dawson
and, uh, his team on the prosecution
and adjudication team, following kind
of those similar complaints about how long it takes when,
um, like non hospitality licenses are going
through the community process toward a
plan of corrective action.
They've, they've adapted their rules to limit the number
of meetings so that it doesn't, so, so like, if, if,
if the business isn't cooperating or,
or participating in the community's request,
we're not gonna prolong those, those conversations anymore.
We're gonna just refer the, uh, refer the conversation
to the law department for prosecution there,
because we, we have had many situations
where there are community meetings that go on
for absolutely six months a year.
And so, um, in the last, uh, four months
or so, we've a, a amended those rules in that process.
Great to limit the number of meetings that we host
Chris. And thank you so
much. And I'm sorry, uh, Chris, and,
and I, I gotta acknowledge you as well.
I mean, um, even when I call there,
and so there's times you even call me
and ask me do I need anything?
And I just wanna say thank you, um, as well.
And, and I just wanted to touch on that
because as we work to not only clean up some of this stuff,
which is also, uh, lending to some of the crime issues
and things like that, we wanna make sure that we have,
you know, that we're working to, um, together on this.
So I appreciate, um, that move that, that helps me to, um,
you know, uh, uh, make sure
that we're doing the things in a mortar
streamlined, um, fashion.
Uh, from a, from a, the only the other question
that I have is, okay, this supposed to be midyear, um,
you know, um, budget review.
And I just want you to, uh,
and I've asked this of several commissions, just be honest.
Uh, do you have the tools that you need, um, to, uh,
be successful with and, and, and, and,
and always ask if everybody always want more.
And I think it's part of what I think Alderman, um,
and I wasn't here that alderman, um, Irvin probably asked
'cause he's been asking everybody that in terms of, uh,
what do you need, um,
to make sure you're being effective for us?
And are you getting that assistance?
Because we, as the body, we can come to you for a lot
of stuff and say a lot of stuff,
but part of our job is to make sure that you have
what you need as well.
And given this mid-year point, do you feel you've been able
to be effective with what you have? Sure.
I, I appreciate that. I mean, of course, we, we, we like
to take pride in, in the way that we,
we quickly adapt to change.
Um, whether it's fiscal changes or,
or operational changes, we are quickly to adapt.
We work very closely with OBM, um, you know,
to identify those very critical, important areas.
But I, I appreciate the support
that you're providing me right now.
Okay. So, so you're saying you're
good, you got what you need?
We'll, we'll, we'll just continue to work with our,
with our partners Okay.
And identify those critical areas. But I, I appreciate,
Right? Because part of
our job is not at the last minute, right?
Mm-hmm. And, um, it, it's, so when this budget is formed,
we, we are in there saying, Hey, this is what's important.
This is important, and we want to make sure
that what's needed, um,
because we're gonna be knocking your,
knocking your door down saying why this isn't done.
Sure. And you may be saying,
if I had this, I could help you.
But that's why we need to know, you know? And so
We'll continue that conversation. Thank you so much.
All right. Thank you. Thank you, chairman.
No, it's, it's, um, I think it's an interesting,
uh, question as it relates to, uh, the resource allocation.
You know, I, we're gonna have some tough decisions to make
as a council, and, um, I, I just want us
to understand the impact of what these, um,
reductions may mean on services.
And I think it's imperative that we know, so
that we can inform our citizen to read.
Um, again, we are in an environment
where we have either stable or declining in revenue,
but increased cost.
So we, we will have to make some decisions on how we want
to manage those things.
And one of the points that I, I will continue to make is,
um, you can't put 10 pounds
of potatoes in an eight pound bag
and expect things to go well.
Right? So we just need to understand,
and we need to translate
that understanding to our constituents.
Uh, and again, these become points of decision
that we all have to sit down
and collectively come to some conclusions on,
on the service side or the revenue side.
So again, um, I just think it's fair for us all
to understand, uh, what expenditure cuts mean to,
uh, departments and you all's ability to deliver the service
that we continue to call and ask you for.
So, no problem, chairman. Thank you.
That's bad. I,
I, because I can get those 10 pounds in
the eighth county lasting
Bag. Well, we,
we've, uh, we, we've probably stretched the limits
of elasticity, uh, on whatever bag we're going to use.
So, and,
and again, I, I know that we have always tried to, you know,
there and there and, and let's not be, uh, let's, let's know
that there can be some additional
efficiencies carved out of this.
And I think these exercises force us to do that,
and also potentially force, uh, us
to evaluate should we be doing certain things.
And that's what the conversation needs to be focused on.
So, again, uh, some things we may like to see,
but is it really necessary?
And, and this is an exercise
because again, uh, with revenues are, are, are
the same or declining with expenses going up from labor.
And, and again, we are a service delivery organization.
Um, we've gotta ask these, these are hard questions,
but we've gotta make some decisions and ask the questions
and live with the consequences of those decisions.
So, alright. Alder Island.
Thank you, chairman. Uh, good morning, commissioner.
Good morning, alderman. Um, I'm gonna save most
of my questions for the real budget hearings.
Um, and I, I truly wish this was a mid-year budget hearing,
'cause it's not, it's, it's mid-September.
Um, and I won't go where Alderman Beal did,
but I echo his, his sentiment.
Um, so I'm gonna give you a couple of compliments.
Um, I want to just recognize all the great work
that Chris Jessop does.
He's been a tremendous asset to my office,
and I appreciate his responsiveness.
Uh, likewise, you commissioner.
Um, I appreciate you making yourself available,
uh, when we need you.
And of course, um, uh, commissioner Trotter as well, uh,
and Amanda Wand in her office, who helps us, uh, craft
responsible plans of operation for liquor applicants.
Mm-hmm. Um, you know, I think when it comes to your budget,
there aren't gonna be a whole lot of people lining up
to suggest cuts to BACP.
Um, as was noted by a number of previous speakers,
you have a lot of revenue generating positions in your
office, uh, and I'd like to see you have more of them.
Um, this budget is not about making indiscriminate
cuts across the board.
Um, there are some departments that need more manpower
and there are others that lead less.
Um, and I would argue yours is one that needs more.
Um, so I don't think you have to do a lot
of defensive fighting, uh,
during this upcoming budget season.
But, um, a bit of constructive criticism
based on my own anecdotal observations out
on the right of way.
And in our parks, um, there is a tremendous
and unprecedented amount
of illegal vending going on throughout the city of Chicago.
Not just in my ward, but throughout the city.
Um, alderman, could you, what did you say? Illegal? What?
Vending. Oh, vending. Okay. Yeah.
So we have entire wet bars, uh,
and Alderman Hopkins has talked about this at length.
Um, I, I hardly ever go to Bears Games.
Um, I could probably count the number
of Bears Games I've been to in my lifetime on one hand.
But I went on Monday and, uh,
on my long walk from Michigan Avenue to Soldier Field, um,
I counted no fewer than a dozen of massive coolers
on the sidewalk serving cocktails, martinis,
Manhattans, uh, you name it.
Um, unfettered unbothered, um, BAC commissioners.
I saw the badges walking, not commissioners,
inspectors walking by doing absolutely nothing.
Um, at least a hundred, at least
100 petty cabs.
Not, not armed with the city license plate.
And yet, I saw your inspectors
harassing licensed petty cabs.
Um, we have 200 licensed petty cabs in the city of Chicago,
as you know, and we've got more than
that, that are unlicensed.
Yet your inspectors are harassing the licensed petty cabs.
Um, we are watching that industry crater
because people are coming in here without licenses, many
of them without driver's licenses, um,
who are poaching this business from people who go
through all the steps that we've laid out for them.
And you've just promulgated new rules, which are tough.
They only seem to apply to those folks
who have license plates.
And they're getting increasingly frustrated
saying, why should we comply?
Why should we have license plates when these people can come
in from Texas and California
and violate all of the city's laws with impunity, um,
and continue to do it every day.
It devalues our licenses.
And so, um, I would ask publicly here, please
focus on the unlicensed petty cabs.
They have no care for our rules here,
and they leave in a couple months
and they're gonna come back next year and do it again.
Um, great disincentive to comply
with licensing requirements when people
don't see them enforced.
Um, so I, I earmark that,
but the illegal vending
that's going on is not just in the parks.
Um, I'm seeing this in River North
and I've heard about it happening in Fulton Market
and up in Wrigleyville mm-hmm.
And other uptown, um,
late night when you don't have inspectors available,
or very few, we have folks setting up full kitchens on the
sidewalk with propane tanks, tables,
hot dishes, the whole thing.
And they do this for hours in front of restaurants, in front
of bars, in front of nightclubs.
These aren't even food trucks. Takes 'em an hour to set up.
And these guys are doing this every single weekend.
These are massive, massive fines.
And these are not City of Chicago residents.
These guys are coming in from the
suburbs to make this money.
Um, we need your guys to write more tickets.
We need enforcement, enforcement, enforcement.
We've got great laws on the books.
The last thing that I'll leave you with, commissioner, um,
and again, I think that,
that your department does an excellent job
and we depend on you for a lot of things.
Um, are you familiar
with the Illinois Wrongs to Children Act?
It's Illinois statute. I'd encourage that, encourage you
to get, get familiar with it.
And we're gonna be doing the same of CPD.
So this is an Illinois law. It's not a city ordinance.
Um, but the law says that it is, it is illegal
to beg solicitor van with children using children.
And there are a lot of kids being used to beg,
but more importantly, to sell candy
and roses on the right of way.
And I don't mean at three in the afternoon
or five o'clock in the evening,
I'm talking about two in the morning.
Um, this is not something the city council passed.
This is a a, an Illinois statute
that's been on the books for a very long time.
It's to protect children from being used and abused.
Um, I'd like for your inspectors to be vigilant of that
as well, and to call that in.
Uh, we cannot allow children to be used this way. Sure.
Um, so thank you Commissioner.
Uh, we'll talk more during the budget hearings,
but again, I, I do appreciate all the
hard work that your department does.
I want to get you more resources to do it,
but please help us by really impressing upon the inspectors.
We need them to be proactive and
and aggressive in, in enforcing our code.
Thank you, alderman. Thank you, commissioner.
Thank you. Uh, alderman Riley.
Uh, I, I do agree with, uh,
what the alderman has stated about the enforcement of these,
uh, makeshift, um, kitchens and, and operations.
Uh, I know that we've ushered in the food truck.
I know we're, we're a foodie town as, as a, you know, like
to say, but there are limits to everything.
And, and, uh, number one, safety.
Uh, and number two, uh, I,
I've seen exactly what he's talking about.
And, uh, it, it does devalue.
Now, while we are a great culinary city, um,
it does devalue, uh, especially when they set up in front
of businesses and other places that have gone through
and complied to, um, to do just that.
You talk about low, I can tell you in the 38, 3900 block
of Madison, you know, same thing, lady, pull up a tent,
you know, just as if she's at home.
So again, i I do echo those concerns around these, uh,
unlicensed, uh, vendors, especially in areas where there are
legislated no pedal zones.
So, um, these are,
these are all things I think from an enforcement aspect
and just from a good safety aspect that we need to be,
uh, considering as well. So
I just want to Clarify that we are,
our investigators are out there every day enforcing against,
uh, on license activity every day.
And, and we are, you know, we we're, it's,
it's one of our priorities.
It's, it's all over the city.
There's a lot that is happening when it comes to that.
And our investigators are responding to every complaint
that comes from this body around that problem.
Um, because of, you know, the involvement
of Alderman Riley earlier, and, and,
and, you know, for, for a while now, we were able
to now get, uh, a partnership with the park district
where now we can enforce inside of parks.
This is new. We've never done that before.
Um, park District had their own rules
and PACP was not, uh,
could not enforce on Park District property.
Now we can't. So we're seeing some movement there too,
and we'll continue to do that.
Okay. Well, maybe, uh, alderman Riley's Monday night.
You know, you guys don't work Monday night, so, um, I guess,
uh, slip the, uh, um, slipped it
for a Monday night football.
So, uh, but, uh, I don't think, uh,
based on the performance,
we'll be on Monday night again anytime soon.
So, Altman Vazquez,
Thank you very much.
Um, before I follow up on some of the questions, I'll go
through the chair questions, just three
to just kind of list.
Um, so same thing we're gonna be asking a lot
of different departments is how departments determine
when they assign third party contracts
or when they do things in house.
So anything that's happened in the last year
or two where you've, you know, either enacted new contracts,
just to kind of understand the protocol
and how decisions are being made.
That's one. Uh, next, it's the list of any internal revenue
and expenditure transfers from January 1st till today.
So we get the quarterly transfer reports.
We're not seeing a lot of reporting on it, so we'd like
to see if internally you there have been any
of those changes that maybe didn't make it to the reports.
Uh, and then third is to share a list of FOIAs
that BACP received in 2025, including requestor information.
Um, please, uh, also share how many work hours
and rough all in costs broken up by type legal fees, salary
and wage, et cetera, associated with your department FOIA
so far in 2025, I think we're looking to see
how every department's handling FOIAs.
And so those three questions are just
through the chair. No, no rush at all.
No Problem. Um, uh, related to a couple of things, uh,
well, lemme get the questions up that way.
Let me, let me stop you for a second.
You, you say internal transfers, what do, what are you
actually asking in that respect? Yeah,
So part of what was negotiated last year as part
of the reporting that we're supposed
to get is anytime a line item changes from its intended
purpose into something else, the biggest example was kind
of, um, talking to, um, OPSA related to, or PCPD.
We're gonna ask them today, you
got less money for settlements.
Where are you moving mon money from
whenever those changes happen, if it's not in the intended
line, we have to get a report every quarter.
We're not getting those, we're getting
a report with nothing on it.
I, I think, um, and,
and I, the reason I asked the question is because if,
and again, and I, and I think we, we may have to,
I may ask law to produce a memo on this
because a specific line,
and I, if, if my memory serves me correct,
there are eight categories of expenses
and it's, it's, it's similar to a lump sum,
almost a lump sum appropriation.
If everything is wholly within that group of costs per se,
and it might moves within that, moves within that box
because otherwise those items do come to us.
Now, for example, our movements between personnel
and contractual are not within the same bucket, right?
Right. So we have to, council has to approve those buckets.
Now, anything outside of that has to come to us for, um,
for an adjustment in the form of an amendment, which again,
the committee does.
And so I just want to, I just want there to be some clarity
around what is allowable versus,
uh, not allowable.
And then at the same time, I think the better point of
what you're trying to see is probably
to look at the line items and see what the expenses are
and align is because one may over overspend in a line item,
but in, in totality still be within the confines of their,
uh, of that, whatever the series I'll call for lack
of the bucket or that, that series.
So I, I, I think, um, I think what you may want
to look at is more
of a detailed expenditure line based on the budget, uh,
al allocation, because I think the transfers aren't getting
to what you're asking for.
That don't, I mean, that,
that's been the crux of all of it.
We want all the detail, all the data,
we want the file types, we want everything possible.
So like your good government folks could actually go comb
through with the fine tooth comb.
So yes, that, that is what we're getting at.
And so I think as we have further conversation on
how it evolves, there will never not,
there will never be a point where I want less detail.
Well, but I, I think a lot of
that data is available in the data in the, in the,
in the data portal, uh, for expenditure. So, uh, you,
But much, the challenge is much
of it can't either get exported or it's in a PDF
and we can't get the data files to actually do the work.
So for the number of years we've done it, we've had
to get interns, take line items from PDFs,
put 'em into Excel sheets,
and then create it all ourselves rather than just pull
the report, which we know exists.
Oh, that's why you got all those
people in your office. Okay.
A hundred percent Got it. All day, every day.
And I guess what not added cost to the taxpayer either.
So a lot of interns, a lot of volunteers. So, uh, okay.
Um, let's see.
So you mentioned commissioner five revenue generating
vacancies that were open.
Can you share the titles and positions
and explain what the challenges are in filling them?
So there's currently 16 vacancies.
Out of those 16 five are investigator positions
that are revenue generating.
We, we were working with OBM
and HR when it comes to, to hiring, you know,
posting positions and going through that whole process.
So we are, um, you know, we continue to work with them.
So right now we are approved for three vacancies
that are gonna be posting very soon, uh,
three investigator vacancies that are gonna be, uh,
positions that are gonna be posting very soon.
So, so,
Okay, because you're talking the hiring
freeze, is that why Yeah.
The, the slowdown. Yeah.
I think, I think maybe as we're all kind of being mindful
of it, if it's a position that generates revenue,
it's probably one that
shouldn't be held to the same standard.
'cause you're making money if they come in.
And that's, and that's part of it. That's why
Just Something this vacancy coming on Bo online,
because they are revenue generating and per,
Per, uh, per the budget director.
And I think per the memo that was submitted on the hiring,
I'll call the slowdown, uh, revenue gener.
Revenue generating positions more or less were exempt and,
and some public safety positions were exempt from
that general order.
Okay. So by that time then it should
be five positions, not three.
Yeah. So we're starting with three
and then we, we will continue to work with them.
Okay. Um, the other one through the chair is,
as you're looking at revenues related to fines,
permitting, right.
The amount of revenue you get in through the process, um,
any breakdown on like different revenue you're seeing come
in, whether it's through violations or licensing,
and if there's anything that's gone up year over year down
to kind of get a sense as we're looking through
what things we might wanna modify.
Right. If something, if you're collecting out of fines
for something and the number of fines is going up,
but the revenue's still the same
or the, the, the penalty's still the same.
It's not disincentivizing behavior. Yeah.
So it might be looking at trying to raise revenue there,
not revenue, but raise what the cost would be are fine.
So just things like that, like a breakdown would be helpful.
Sure. Um, I think the other two things I'll mention one
as it relates to street vendors.
'cause I think it's a very important thing everyone's
raising up there is there are conversations about updating
what street vendor law looks like
because there should absolutely be enforcement.
But there also needs to be a path for people
who want to do it legally.
And how that looks like.
We are behind many major cities that are so far ahead
of us on the different businesses,
the different entrepreneurship, the different food
and culture and things that we bring.
We know there are parts of town
that thrive on having the street vendors there.
Um, so having conversations about what right looks like,
where it can actually occur as opposed to where it shouldn't
and what accountability looks like is all fair.
And so I'm glad that people are raising it up.
I think we need to have the conversation
before anything gets introduced.
Mm-hmm. And look forward to more conversations.
And the last thing I will say, related
to the mid-year budget hearings, really glad
that some folks are here.
Um, obviously people also look at it virtually.
Um, I think there is clearly value in asking
these questions this early.
'cause every year I've been here,
we don't even get the answer.
So the budget's been voted on, which is ridiculous.
Now I know for members who are gonna vote no, no matter
what, they don't even have to show up
and they can talk about how they're here or not,
but they don't even do the homework to tell us
where to find efficiencies.
So I'm just glad that the people are here are doing the
homework and there's people across the board
that are watching and appreciate the
value, looking to get it better
every year. Thank you very much.
Thank you. Altman Vasquez.
Uh, and I, I will agree that we do, um,
this gives us a prelude and, and,
and I would like to get to a point where we are in a more
of a dialogue, uh, throughout the year.
So, uh, I think this is a step in the right direction.
And some of the questions that we're asking today, uh,
come October should be, you know, should be answered
and we'll have the information that we need as a body to,
uh, do our, uh, do to do our due diligence.
Um, I know we've had some new members come.
Anyone else have questions for, uh, BACP? Go ahead.
Uh, alderman, uh, uh, Nugent.
Thank you, chairman. I have one more question on
You as well, Mr. Chairman.
Um, my, my apologies, uh, chairman, uh, we'll go
to au Autumn NuGen, then I'll come to you chair.
Um, a quick one.
And if you can't answer it today for the hearings in
a week, how about that?
I've had to deal with pro paintings in my ward,
and I've gotten a lot of different advice
and counsel on who picks them up and what to do.
I just, when Alderman Re was speaking
to the issues on sidewalks, if, for example,
if an inspector goes
and sees that there's something illegal happening
and there's the use of a propane tank, how do you get rid of
that propane tank right there? What's the steps?
We, when, when it comes to propane tanks,
we work very closely with, uh, CFD fire prevention.
Okay. So if there's a,
if there's something on the sidewalk,
you would call the fire department.
Mm-hmm. Okay. I appreciate that.
I've just, yeah, it's been an, it's been an ordeal.
Anything flammable, you know, something like that.
I would, we will seek their advice. Yeah.
All right. Thank you. I
appreciate that. Thank you, chairman.
Thank you. Thank you. Uh, uh, Altman Nugent, uh,
our apologies, uh, those online, we can't see the, uh,
the general setup like it is.
So if you guys could, uh, make the, uh, individuals
who are in the, uh, that are online, uh, so we can see them.
So my apologies, uh, chairman Dow.
But, uh, you, you may proceed.
Uh, thank you, chairman Irvin, uh, wanted
to thank you also for the clarity around
the hiring positions.
'cause that was one of my questions about
those five positions.
Uh, but now I understand that they're revenue generating.
I thought it was just for, uh, first responders.
Um, hi, commissioner, before I start, I wanted to thank you
and, uh, the members of your team, uh, specifically Shannon,
Tiffany and Chris for, uh, their support
and assistance, um, as we navigate some
of the challenges we have in the ward.
Um, just wanted to ask you a question
regarding the night inspections.
I think I heard you say Wednesday through Sunday, 9:00 AM
to 2:00 AM How many inspectors do you have, um,
that are specifically targeted to this?
That's one question.
And through the chair, can I get a number on,
on the inspections that you've done at night, how many you,
how many you've done, and
where those inspections have occurred by Ward?
Sure. Uh, we'll get that information for you.
So, the breakdown between nights and days.
We have 16 nights investigator, uh, chairwoman, uh,
from Wednesday through Sunday, 16, 16 nights,
and 23 assigned to the day shift.
Okay. Thank you. Um,
and how does this night division,
um, collaborate?
Or is there any synergy between these inspectors
and the task force inspectors?
When you think about efficiencies to, uh, city government,
um, is there some way to be more collaborative
with the task force inspections
and the nighttime inspections?
Sure. Uh, alder, uh, chairwoman, so this is the group
that forms the task force The same, the same investigators
that are assigned tonight are part of the task force.
So the BACP task force is, uh, led by BACP
in partnership with Department of Buildings
and CPD Vice Unit.
Okay. So the task force that you're, that you're referring
to for Fridays and Saturdays are part
of the 16 nights investigators.
All right. And that task force group, uh,
also does daytime, uh, inspections, right? There
Is a, a, a version, uh, of that for days, yes.
Okay. I, I really would recommend that you all, uh,
include the health department.
Um, it seems to be a, uh,
disconnect between the task force members
and the health department in terms of, uh,
inspections that may occur in, for example, uh,
convenience stores where they're selling expired food
and other
Sure. That, that invitation
remains open.
Okay. Uh, can you talk a little bit about,
uh, administrative approvals for vacation rentals?
I know I've brought up in the past that I get, uh, uh,
information regarding these vacation rentals.
The applications are not always fully complete.
I don't want to get them
until you have a complete application.
Hey, chair, uh, this is, uh,
Chris, assistant Commissioner.
Well, first I just wanna thank you, uh,
because we did amend the process at your request
maybe two years ago.
Um, the reason that alders get those, um, is
because some of your colleagues will use that information
and act and proactively reach out to the applicant to say,
Hey, uh, the Ward has specific criteria
or specific questions to follow up on.
And by the way, you're, you know, based on the,
the information that we've received from BACP,
your application is weak or incomplete.
Um, I, I would be happy to talk to you about, um,
additional changes there.
But, um, we, we amended the process two years ago, um,
to kind of address your concern.
And, uh, happy to, happy to chat through how we do
that further while still making sure
that your colleagues have, have that information.
I appreciate that, Chris.
I think the, the concern that I have, you still, uh,
with a completed application, I still have time
to proactively reach out to the owner
and have that conversation.
I just don't want to do it twice.
Um, so, um, I guess I'll add, I'm the one
that wants the full application.
There may be some al that don't want it,
but I want the full application and we'll leave it at there.
We can have more conversation.
I just wanna throw in chair
that our team does not proactively respond
to the lack of information.
It's very clear what applicants have of,
of the commissioner's adjustments are to provide and,
and to remain kind of unbiased
as we review those applications.
We're not gonna coach them through how
to successfully complete a
commissioner's adjustment application.
But yeah, looking forward to those conversations.
Okay. Um, and then my last question, um, commissioner,
you mentioned in your remarks that, uh,
to Alderman Lawson's question
that the enforcement division was very active.
Can you gimme a sense of the trends of enforcement that
you're seeing, you're enforcing mostly what the most
and what the least, for example?
So the consumer fraud.
Um, so our number one is, uh, complaint that we receive is,
is consumer fraud.
Chairwoman. We get a lot of, uh, um, uh, complaints about,
um, contractors not fulfilling their, their contracts and,
and, and people, uh, uh, being taken advantage of.
So always consumer fraud, uh,
has remained the number one complaint followed
by unlicensed activity.
Okay. And on the unlicensed, are you able on both
of these able to tell me how many per year and where
Sure. I can, I can,
I can, uh, do the chair, talk
to the chair, of course, yes.
Okay. Yeah.
I look forward to having more conversations at the,
you know, the budget hearings.
But, uh, this has been helpful. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Uh, chairman Dowell,
any other questions for, uh, business affairs?
All righty. Well, thank you, sir.
Uh, we look forward to, uh, seeing you again in,
uh, six, eight weeks.
But, um, I think it's clear, um, from a,
from just a conversation today that, uh,
we definitely would like to see more enforcement
of the rules and regulations as they exist.
Uh, you guys have done a, a very good job of adjusting, um,
to the, the environment.
The fact that you have the night
and weekend inspectors are, have been, I think, a,
a very positive, uh, move.
'cause everybody knows what time you get on and get off.
So now there's a little more, um, you know, coverage on our,
on our nights and weekends.
So again, I want to thank you all in the, in the team
for working with, uh, ASME
and getting that, uh, getting that done
and to, uh, continue moving forward.
One thing that we haven't really touched on
is, is around liquor.
Um, I know that we have stepped back the times
of operations, uh, to midnight opposed to the 2:00 AM.
And just want to know what type of impact you all see
that having, or has it had, uh, in your,
in your operations? Sure.
I'll, I'll, I'll ping Shannon, uh, to expand on that.
Sure. Shannon Trotter, local liquor control Commissioner.
Thank you for the question, alderman.
Um, I, in terms of the hours, we did scale them back
for package goods licensees to 12 o'clock.
Um, it, I would really sort of de defer to,
um, our enforcement team on, on the impact that
that's had in terms of enforcement.
But I will note that the scaling back
of the liquor time does not necessarily mean that
that business closes at midnight.
So, for instance, if you are seven 11,
you can continue selling other goods
that are not liquor past midnight.
And we have, um, seen some enforcements in
that area specifically.
I can think of a few cases, um, where the vice, um,
team has gone in and done investigations as well
as our investigators where people are continuing
to sell alcohol, um, past that, that, um, hour.
And we have been able
to successfully bring licensed
discipline cases against them.
Chairman, I can, I can get you, uh,
a breakdown on those complaints.
They come from time to time.
I don't, I don't, I'm, I'm not sure.
I don't think it's, there's a big problem with that.
People do respect those,
but I, I'll, I'll lemme take a little
deep dive on the complaints. Well,
I just asked the question and how, what, you know,
what impact does it have?
'cause I, I think some of those who were in, in board wards
where, and I'll use Chicago
and Cicero for example, that the,
the activity just migrates, uh, the, um,
the sales activity just migrates across the border.
Um, it's a little different in the interior of the city
where you, you don't have options,
but a lot of stores that are close by
to our neighboring communities, um, have that opportunity.
And those stores are generally open to the regular hours of,
uh, of, of 2:00 AM.
And my question is just really around the impact.
And, and I, I'll probably ask the same question
of the police department if that,
because again, uh, we, you know, we have, uh, uh, people
with various levels of ingenuity
and, um, you know, when the liquor store closes at 12,
then the, the other store opens in, in a van
or in, you know, some other, uh, nefarious location
that's still doing that.
And sometimes we create in our desire
to look at public safety, we create black markets that, uh,
that are unregulated, that respond differently,
that still does not stem the problem
that we were originally trying to, uh, decrease.
I use cigarettes as one.
I mean, we've created, I I, I've got,
I got places they sell cigarettes in my ward
that are more lucrative, the dope spots
because of the fact that cigarettes are
so high in the city of Chicago.
And I think these are some of the unintended consequences
of, of such actions.
And again, we're, we come in with,
with very good intentions,
but in some communities, those,
they just don't work that way.
It, it creates another set of problems that, um,
I don't think anybody intended to, uh, to see.
The second question around liquor is
the incidental licenses.
Um, what enforcement have we done
or auditing have we done in relation to incidental licenses?
Because again, those somewhat bypass our moratoriums
and, um, they, you know, with the incidental license,
you know, supposed to be at least, uh, 50% greater of non,
uh, alcohol sales.
And so what auditing have we done of businesses?
What enforcement have we done in that respect?
Uh, sure. Chairman, I can answer that question.
Um, with regard to the incidental license, it, uh,
the only exception would be, um, well,
the primary exception is a restaurant to the moratoriums.
Um, so there are other situations where you are,
you would be getting an incidental license incidental
to some other activity
that would not be a moratorium exception.
So for instance, a bowling alley
where your primary activity is bowling, um,
but you're secondarily selling alcohol, that would not, um,
be an exception to the moratorium.
So the moratorium would stop
that if you're specifically talking about, um, sort
of places that are, uh, disguising themselves as
restaurants, but they're really more like taverns.
Um, we do have, well, at the,
at the license application phase,
we are doing a heavy vetting of those applications.
We are looking at the layout.
We, our investigators are going for pre-licensed inspections
to flag whether, you know, the feel
of the place feels more like a lounge
or a bar than a restaurant.
We are reviewing their menus, um,
to see if they're sufficiently rising
to the level of being a restaurant.
Um, restaurant is a defined term,
and it means basically that any place
where a meals can regularly and be prepared.
So we are looking at the kitchen equipment to ensure
that it, um, allows them to produce the menu
that they're submitting.
So that's the first thing that we're looking at.
At license application.
If there are changes that move
that business away from operating as a restaurant,
we have some tools available to us, um, to,
to look at whether they are no longer
meeting that exception.
Um, vice will do, um,
undercover investigations on our behalf.
Uh, we also have the ability to, um, request books
and records to review their sales.
It's not always a 50%, um, split when it comes to alcohol
and food, um,
because one,
alcohol prices are often substantially more than food.
Two people have sometimes more than one drink
where they're only having one meal.
So it's not, it's not as a hard line at, um, whether
you're a 50% food or, or greater.
Um, but we do look at, in books
and records, we will look at even the, the ordering.
So if you're only getting, you know, lemons and limes
and sort of cocktail garnishes, um, we will be able to sort
of discern whether, again, whether you're able to meet that,
those menu requirements to rise
to the level of being a restaurant.
Um, WW with that being said, uh, why not to have,
or why was there an exception carved out
for restaurants in the, uh, moratorium process?
Because again, we've always stated that the,
the liquor sales were incidental to the food sales.
Now, granted, and,
and, uh, my understanding it was that the 50% rule was,
was something that was, should be enforced.
Um, and, and,
and so I'm just, I'm just asking like, I mean,
how many audits have we done?
How many investigations have we done to see if
that is the case because they are given an exception
to, uh, the rule?
Or do we just not allow the exception?
And I'm not sure if the exception is based on statute
or if it's based on an ordinance
or if it's, you know, was a court case.
I, I don't know. But I it just seems to be an end
around the moratorium that
residents have traditionally asked for.
Yeah, so it's, it's by ordinance.
It's an exception to the ordinance.
There's, there's a list of, of them, uh, you know,
from an economic development standpoint, for every applicant
that wants to open a restaurant in the city of Chicago
to come to have to go through an alderman at a minimum,
a three month process to lift the moratorium,
which is at least two blocks, um, is, is
a pretty burdensome process.
Um, it also, the, the, the notion is
that the deleterious impact of a restaurant is,
is far less than that
of something like a nightclub or a tavern.
Um, so, you know, it is our largest group of,
of liquor licenses,
and there is still the capacity of any alderman to object
to any type of application.
And, and I, I think, you know, and,
and I would, I would say that everyone in this room knows
that we take the objections to liquor licenses,
whether they be incidental or tavern very seriously.
And we, we work to, to mitigate any, um,
any disruptions in those communities that would be caused
by the license or work to, to actively deny it.
So the moratorium is, is it stops the application, but,
but there's also such great control within the alder
alderman and the community
and the local police commander to object
to these applications, um, on their own, independent
of having that additional burden
of the moratorium needing to be lifted.
Okay. No, I, I, I understand your point.
Like I said, I, I just think we need to put a little effort
and energy into potentially auditing
or doing something beyond that, just
so it's just not considered a free pass
or end round, uh,
the moratorium in, in their, in their respect.
So, uh, with that being said, um, um, we will,
uh, conclude your participation today.
Uh, we look forward to seeing you, uh, for 2026, uh, budget
and the questions through the chair.
If we can get those back to everybody,
we would greatly appreciate it.
Uh, the committee will stand at ease while, uh,
we bring in our next department, uh, the Department
of Planning and Development.
Thank you everyone.
Okay. The committee on budget is going to begin again.
Uh, we have with us Commissioner Boatwright
and she's with GPD,
and she'll give us some brief remarks
and introduce her team. Welcome, commissioner.
Thank you. Um, so just to start off
by introducing my team, um, here on the diet,
I have my first deputy and our zoning administrator,
uh, Patrick Murphy.
And then I have Alex Budnick,
our Deputy Commissioner of Finance.
In the box I have David Scully,
our Managing Deputy Commissioner Tim Jeffries,
our Managing Deputy Commissioner Mary O'Connor,
our Deputy Commissioner for our small business team,
Paul Moody, assistant Commissioner Amy Henry, the Director
of Human Resources,
and Whitney Mungin, our Director of Land Resources.
Um, and I guess I can just kick off my statement.
Um, thank you. Thank you all.
I'm happy to provide a brief overview
of the department's progress in 2025 in our
outlook for the rest of the year.
As you know, DPD is the city's principle planning
and development agency,
and we're currently staffed by 160 full-time professionals.
We currently have 35 vacancies, 22 of which we expect
to fill by the end of the year.
Please note from your package that through mid-year
DPD has spent about 29% of its 15.4 million
in corporate appropriation,
and 25% of its 9.8 million in TIF appropriation,
which is consistent with the pace of previous years.
I'm pleased to report that DPDs process improvements have
resulted in many tangible benefits for both the city
and your constituents.
Our cut the tape efforts have reduced plan commission
application timelines by 40%.
Reduced valuation timelines
for city-owned parcels from six months to one month,
have reduced non-invasive right of entries
for city land from months to days.
Eliminated redundant design review meetings,
and reduced zoning board appeal meetings length by half
last year's cost cutting.
Also moved more of our core planning functions
to in-house professionals,
including multiple corridor studies, community plans
and development policies that are essential
for neighborhood vibrancy and private investment.
These efforts have resulted in proactive rezonings
of more than 4,500 parcels citywide in cooperation
with local ward ward offices, creating more predictable
and contemporary land use patterns
to encourage private investment.
This total is exponentially more than previous years due
to the city's urgent need
to rightsize our land use legislation
for business and residential investment.
Likewise, our efforts to leverage vacant city land
for new construction continues to expand through one round
of lot listings in April, consisting
of approximately 400 city owned lots
and multiple RFPs for specific development sites,
our April listings are collectively valued at $27 million.
So we expect significant returns
for more than 250 purchase applications
that are currently under review.
Note that 85% of our sales are market values
and 70% of our sales are
for new construction project versus the side yards
and open spaces that formally characterize our
land dispositions.
Not every listing leads to a sale,
but overall process improvement
and shy Block Builders website have substantially
increased our output.
Among this year's land sales are 36 lots
for missing middle housing projects
that will create more than 110 market rate units in North
Lawndale, all of them constructed by minority developers.
These initial missing middle projects represent
approximately $37 million in total investment
with $17 million in city support.
From the new housing and economic development bond,
we expect hundreds of additional units
through future funding rounds, including the 54 lots listed
for missing middle projects in Morgan Park,
Chatham, and South Chicago.
Meanwhile, approximately 1,700 mixed income housing units
are advancing in the loop through our LaSalle initiative
with the Department of Housing.
These six TIF assisted projects represent more than
$900 million in total investment
with an additional nine office
to residential conversions proceeding elsewhere downtown
through private efforts.
Collectively, these 15 projects involve approximately
$1.4 billion in nearly 3000 new units
and nearly half involve current or pending landmarks.
So we're excited by the historic preservation components
as much as the mixed use diversity.
Before I close, I'll quickly reference our economic
development efforts, which in the first half
of 2025 include more than $60 million in grants
for more than 150 neighborhood development projects.
The city's financing is essential given the lack
of conventional financing for all the south
and west side bakeries, coffee shops, restaurants,
and other large
and small businesses that are essential for neighborhoods
of choice everywhere.
Again, this is just an overview
of the department's progress through midyear.
I'm happy to elaborate
or respond to questions as you see fit. Thank you.
Thank you, commissioner. Uh, questions from the committee?
Okay. Uh, alderman Moore,
Uh, first of all, um, thank you, uh, for appearing
and we're gonna get more, um, depth into things
during the budget,
but I just wanna as, as we are, um, well,
we're passed the midyear technically,
but, um, it, I just want to just say thank you
and your team, and especially
you commissioner, but it's a ref.
It's a reflection of you,
but your team as well for just being totally responsive
and being there when, um, alderman call upon you,
especially I myself, there's not a time,
never been a time you've turned me down.
Um, you've educated, you informed,
and, um, you've been, your team have been truly helpful.
And I just want to continue, you know,
as we make the progress going specifically in the 17th ward,
I think we're gonna continue to do some great things.
And I just wanna say, um, just thank you so much
and, uh, uh, what you've laid out here.
It, it is some of the questions I was gonna ask.
You don't even have to ask 'em now.
You know, you laid it out in, in terms of what you've done,
especially what, um, you know, in terms of what we,
when we talk about passing that, um, um,
housing economic development bond, how it's being used
and everything like that, that was very important.
So I just appreciate, um, your effort and,
and thank you for this and we'll
just get more into the stuff and budget.
But I just appreciate, um, what you're doing.
You're doing a an excellent job and thank
You Derman. And I
guess, uh, my, I my last thing will be,
'cause I'm asking everybody this is,
and some people being political correct about it.
And if you have to, I guess I understand,
but when I'm asking a question, I really want to know
to make sure that I, I know we have to cut in this budget.
I know we gotta do some things,
but I want to be honest about what we need
because part of us being a budget weather cut, we may have
to make some tough decisions.
I know people don't wanna raise property taxes.
Everybody stay away from that.
I am just true believer when you give people the services
that they need and they can see and touch
and feel something, uh, they'll, they'll,
they'll take the shoulder on some water burden.
But I, the question is, do you, uh, have you had
what you needed from this budget to, um, do the things
that you needed to do since it's the midyear budget
and looking forward, is, is there anything specific
that you say, Hey, you know what, this is what I'm going
to need in order for me to continue to be effective?
Yeah, I appreciate that question.
Um, just as a reminder, last year we took a substantial cut,
$1.7 million that predominantly impacted our Bureau
of Planning and design,
and that's the bureau that works on our RFPs that works
with our citywide team on the disposition
of our 7,055 vacant lots.
That's the team that works across all 77 community areas
by region to ensure that we're given equitable opportunities
and development opportunities across those areas.
Now, as a result of that budget cut,
we couldn't stop the services, the land use planning,
the citywide planning that we're doing.
We had to instead lean on our brilliant,
passionate team to do it in house.
Continue cuts. Though I am concerned about our ability
to still deliver those services
that our auditors have grown accustomed to in a way
that you all have grown accustomed to,
and most importantly, in a way
that all 77 community areas should have.
And so that means that it's a reduction,
not just from a planning and design standpoint,
a reduction in our timelines to review grants
with additional budget cuts, a reduction in our ability
to engage small businesses to ensure that they're aware
of the grant opportunities that we have.
They know how to get to the funding sources that we have
and ultimately are awarded grants and dispersed dollars.
And so it's not just one bureau that can be negatively
impacted by budget cuts.
Um, it's our whole department
and by our whole department, it's the services that we, we,
we lend and offer to,
to our auditors across all 77 community areas.
And so, while yes, we can always use more resources
to be able to do more, hire more, I think that we, um,
do a phenomenal job of making do with what we have.
But I am concerned about the impact
of additional potential budget cuts on a budget
that has already been substantially cut.
Thank you for your honest answer.
I appreciate that so much.
Thank you. Um, alderman,
Thank you Alderman.
Wo, commissioner, thank you so much for being here.
Always really appreciate your, your partnership
and your work in our city.
Um, a couple questions, uh, two that I have currently.
One, I just would love for you to, um, inform our colleagues
and the public about, um, your department's kind
of philosophy around transit oriented development.
Um, because I think that'd be really insightful.
I think it's really, uh, prudent to the kind
of conversations that we're talking about, the need
to generate, you know, revenue base, uh, to, you know,
fund our, our transit system, um,
and to really modernize our city.
So if you could talk a little bit about that first,
and then I have a second question. Sure.
Um, a great question. Thank you for that.
Um, when we think about our,
our transit oriented development opportunities,
it's one thing when you all look at our RFPs, our request
for proposals that are listed, many
of our RFPs are TOD sites.
We wanna really leverage our city lots
that are close to transit.
There's an opportunity for improved ridership.
We've got projects that we've completed
that absolutely have increased ridership along CTA,
but more importantly, it's an opportunity for us
to put vacant lots back in productive use.
We're talking about contiguous city owned vacant lots
that are not on a property tax row.
We're talking about opportunities
to really focus on repopulation while also building more
density in areas.
And so many of the RFPs that we issued recently, um,
both mid-year and
after midyear, um, really focus on those TOD sites
that will remain a priority for our department.
And it doesn't mean that other sites
that aren't considered TOD are not important in terms
of reactivation and, and,
and getting those properties sold
for both affordable housing and market rate development.
But we absolutely recognize the importance of starting with
and leveraging those lives as priority lots.
Excellent. And then, um, on your second page here
of your remarks, you talk about, uh, the, uh, listings
of the value of land at 27 million.
Um, you also talk about
or note here that 85% of the sales are at market values.
Um, could you explain a little bit more about what governs,
I mean, look, getting money for our land is great, right?
It's a good revenue generator.
Um, but at the same time we know that land acquisition
for affordable housing is, you know, very difficult.
Mm-hmm. And so I know we have our $1 program,
so can you explain a little bit about how, uh, you balance,
um, the sale of properties at market value
and then what governs
or what informs the sale of properties that help
for affordable housing land acquisition? Sure.
Absolutely. So we have a few different programs,
and I'll talk about DPDs programs
and I'll talk about our partnerships, DOH
as we think about our partnership with DOH as an example,
when we have affordable housing opportunities,
those lots are sold for a dollar.
Those lots are sold for a dollar
because we wanna appreciate the, the difficult nature
to finance affordable housing deals.
And so having to bear the cost of acquisition
through a market rate sale for development
increases your overall, right, total project cost.
And so those lots are sold for a dollar missing middle,
which is our new housing initiative that we announced
with our housing and economic development bond is an
opportunity for us to take our city owned lots,
put 'em back in productive use,
but not focus just on single family homes.
We're talking two units up to six units.
Those lots are being sold
to developers for a dollar as well.
And so, while it's a traditional market rate deal,
it's different from your traditional market rate
development driven deal.
Because we're leveraging the housing
and economic development bond to help
to offset the development costs, we wanna ensure
that those units can be sold affordably.
And we also wanna ensure
that there's an opportunity for wealth generation.
And so we've launched our first pilot on the north side,
excuse me, on in North Lawndale.
Um, and our second pilot was launched in three community
areas on the south side, the first pilot.
Um, we we're super excited, you know,
are gonna start breaking ground next month.
Um, with many of the groundbreakings
occurring before the end of the year.
It's an opportunity for us to do a couple things repopulate,
ensuring that we, you know,
really focus on our commercial corridors
and those wealth building opportunities
because it's the retail that follows rooftops.
And so if I can focus on repopulation in those areas,
it's easier for me to keep grocery stores open.
It's easier for us to attract groceries.
It's easier for us to track retail
and other amenities that many
of us have grown accustomed to.
And so we're leveraging our lives
and selling for a dollar when and where appropriate.
But I caution us, you know, when it comes
to just reducing all sales to a dollar,
there's appropriate reductions for dollar sales.
And I think affordable housing
and our missing middle are appropriate uses
to reduce our sales by a dollar.
But I think it's also important to note
that our land is valuable, of course,
and it's important for us to get our,
our lots back on the property tax roll.
And it's important for us to promote market rate development
and affordable housing.
So it absolutely should be a both
and not a either or opportunity.
Obviously, affordable housing should
and remains a priority for our city,
but there's an opportunity for those developers
that are market rate developers
to buy our land at market value.
Our land is valuable and should be sold as that.
Um, and so I would say also just from a department
standpoint, we should think of our land
as an opportunity to generate revenue.
It's an important conversation given
budget challenges that we're in.
Thank you, commissioner. I really appreciate it.
I also want to echo my, uh, the comments.
My colleague Alderman Moore said, uh, you know, your,
your leadership is great.
We're huge fans of yours in the 35th Ward,
and I believe you're also the first commissioner
that reached out for a meeting with me, uh,
shortly after I was sworn.
And so again, I really appreciate your
tenacity. Thank you very much.
Thank you. Great.
Uh, any other alderman having questions?
Uh, alderman LaSpada,
Thank you so much.
Um, I mean, I suppose I'll,
I'll mainly join the course of praise.
It's a pleasure working with your whole team.
Our regional planners are fantastic.
Your team to work with is great.
I did have like two quick questions.
I was curious with the, with the TIFF program,
so like looking against previous years,
it looks like we've had fewer RDAs come
through the Committee on finance this year
than in previous years.
I'm wondering if that's mainly related to the,
the short term suspension of the tick,
if there's other reasons for that.
Could you elaborate on that? Yeah.
Um, I'll actually have Tim from our team to kind
of go over high level.
Maybe Tim, you can talk midyear the number
of redevelopment agreements that have been executed,
and then maybe we can talk about how
that compares to prior years.
And I wanna save a little bit of our thunder
for when we do our full year budget to really come.
I know, I know we are for full year. Yes.
Uh, I, Tim Jeffries, managing deputy commissioner in DPD,
um, I guess to date,
or for the mid-year number, our total number of uh, uh,
allocations, meaning council approval and or,
or RDA executions rather is a 33.8 million.
Um, I can get you the before and after comparison.
Um, I think in general, um, I don't think
that saying tiff,
using TIFF specifically is a good benchmark, uh, of
the efficacy because we have a variety of different sources
and we match the sources, uh, to the programs.
So in some cases it might make sense to use tiff.
In some cases it might make sense to use NOF or bond.
Uh, and we're making those decisions on a project
by project basis and the, the health of the program
as a whole, rather than trying to, um, you know,
meet a benchmark of this specific amount of tiff.
If anything, I'd look at the bottom line of
how much an allocation or awards or,
or allocations in any given year.
And I guess through midyear total,
we're, we're very comparable.
I think we're I 18 last year, 20 this year to date
so far, uh, for midyear.
And I can get you the specific numbers.
Do we have a, um, I mean, continuing this line
of question very briefly, and this might be more of a
through the chair question, can you give a sense of what are
unobligated year end balance is looking like
across the TIF program?
Uh, I would have to defer
to O-B-M-D-P-D you're talking about on
a district by district basis.
Uh, in the aggregate.
In the aggregate. Uh, I can discuss with OBM
and try to provide something to you through the chair,
but I guess DPD is a user of those reports,
but we don't maintain those reports.
Uh, and so I don't,
DPD doesn't have the exact most up-to-date figures.
Um, and I guess, uh, when I'm looking at things,
I'm looking at on a project by project basis,
so I'm looking at it at a district by district basis,
not the aggregate of every single TIF district as a whole.
No, that, that's fine. I just know that it's gonna have a,
a very real impact on some of the decisions
that we're making over the next 60 to 90 days.
So I wanted to get ahead of it,
but if you would reach out to
them, I'd really appreciate it.
Um, I just had one other question,
and again, like not clear if this is through a,
through the chair, but as we're talking about where,
where our expenditures go, the cost of different incentives,
I'm wondering, like, again, like in the aggregate, not
as a whole, the various property tax class
incentives mm-hmm.
That come through committee and council
and may, it may be more accurate to say
that they're administered by the Cook County
Assessor's office.
How can we get the clearest understanding
of the overall impact on our property tax levy
of the various Class Ls, class sixes
that we, we pass and approve? Yeah.
I can give you a, just a high level kind
of overview in terms of the numbers.
Yes, please. Approved. Um, and this is just through midyear.
Um, so just capital grants, um, 34 capital grants.
This is, you were talking approximately city
funds awarded
$106 million property tax incentives.
We're talking about 20 property tax as incentives approved.
Um, that totals about $47 million.
We can provide a more detailed breakdown Yeah.
Of what those 20 property tax incentive applications,
what wards they're in, what use, et cetera.
Um, in more detail through
the chair, if that would be helpful.
That'd be fantastic. And I'll, I'll just restate
what I feel like you said, like
when we make cuts to departments that move development
forward, it's not like anyone in this box
or anyone on your team is upstairs sitting on their hands
or playing minesweeper.
You know, like the work that you do moves,
developments forward, creates jobs, creates revenue.
Mm-hmm. The, the multiplier effect of your department,
BACP, department of housing coming
after, it's worth us questioning like
what is the genuine economic impact mm-hmm.
Of those cuts. And are there ways for us
to work either on the revenue
or efficiency as opposed to cut side to keep
that work whole and keep it moving a pace?
'cause making folks wait longer
to get developments approved in this city.
Benefits genuinely no one. Um, so appreciate that.
Thank you. Uh, president Pote.
Thank you. Chair LaSpada, uh, alderman Vasquez,
alderman, Andre Vasquez.
I'm paging you.
Thank you very much. Thank you very much.
Um, so I have the same questions
I've had for different departments.
Um, first question
and this all to the chair, so I don't need the answers now.
I just wanna make sure we get 'em in there. Okay.
Um, one is, um, kind of the process
and analysis for determining when you're going into third
party contracts and not.
So we, um, I think every department
and commissioner when they're getting into contracts,
we wanna find out if it's cheaper to do
it in-house in certain things.
And so whatever that process is to determine it,
if you could say, share that through the chair.
Uh, the second would be, um, any internal revenue
and expenditure transfers.
So, you know, quarterly we get the reporting
that lets us know if something moves
from one lineup to the next.
We've been getting reports, but they don't necessarily give
us a lot of detail that we've been asking for.
So we wanna know internally, um,
when those decisions have made
and when those changes have happened, if
that could be sent through the chair.
Uh, and then, um, well actually four questions.
Uh, the next one is related to FOIAs, right?
Each department gets FOIAs.
We wanna find out kind of
how many hours are used to then address those.
Uh, I think we're trying to get to the point
of if it makes sense to kind of centralize some
of those things rather than have each department take on
some and see what the cost looks like.
Mm-hmm. Uh, and then, um,
I guess if you use a little different,
or expenditures mm-hmm.
That maybe look either way more
or way less than what's typically been trending year over
year, just 'cause we want to kind
of capture some of that information.
Um, the, the other next question I have
is no more through the chair.
Okay. Uh, it's related to Tiff's. Shocker.
So, um, there have been,
I guess a situation I'll articulate happened in, in 40,
we've got a TIFF that was extended, um, that goes from, um,
Berwin North on along Lincoln Avenue.
And it was intentionally done knowing
that there might be some investment needed
for Mather Park, Mather High School.
Right? These are, um, uh, Mather High School's, one
of the most diverse schools in the city.
It serves a population that really needs more investment.
The park, there's been beat up.
And so we were moving forward
with getting the TIFF to fund that.
Um, and it felt like it came to a bit of a stall. Mm-hmm.
And so in finding out, we then had to talk
to Deputy Mayor Kenya Merri to figure out
what the process is for determining,
and she wanted to see more information from CAP
or capital information from Park District,
but these are all things that are new
that we've not experienced before,
whenever we've had to make any of those improvements.
So my question is like, what's changed,
what documentation there is
to whatever new protocol there is
or expectations, just so there's clarity across the board.
Sure. Um, obviously we all have concerns about what's
happening with tif, whether it's
surplus or what we're doing.
So I'm just curious as to those changes
and what the process and rules are.
Sure. So just for clarification, you're asking
what the new kind of profit t review process is?
Yeah. And how it differs from the previous Correct.
TIFF review process. So I'm gonna pass it to Tim to kind
of talk about Tick versus TRR,
which is our new review process for
TIFF request, um, going forward.
So Tim, do you wanna just kinda give a high level overview
on kind of how it's changed, why it's more efficient,
and how we, you know, um, do the individual review?
Uh, hi again. Tim Jeffries,
uh, managing Deputy Commissioner.
Uh, yes. We launched a new, uh,
internal review process in May, uh, previously, uh,
TIFF Investment Committee T tick,
or now TIFF request review process, TRR, um,
that fundamentally a lot of the components are the same,
but, uh, we move to a structure that is, uh,
a bit asynchronous and has component pieces.
So, uh, it goes through a three step process.
First one is DPD, where DPD, uh, the item comes to us.
We process it through our system
and input it into the database.
Uh, and then we look at the project's,
geographic eligibility.
Uh, it's, uh, legal like conformance with the TIF act.
And then if the project has enough eligible costs
to support the request, um, if the answer
to those questions is yes, we advance it to OBM, uh,
and then they look at the financial feasibility.
Uh, and if they determine that it's financially feasible,
then it moves to a final review with the mayor's office, uh,
where they will the item is presented, uh,
and that they, uh, uh, the, uh, the Deputy Mayor
for Business and Neighborhood Development.
Uh, it's presented to her as she looks at it.
And then a determination is made, I guess, to your point,
uh, about these new items?
Uh, yes. Uh, a lot of it is new.
Uh, everything is new with this process.
Uh, and I think that, uh, it's, as I said,
it's only been in place since May.
So really that's only, uh, maybe four months,
four cycles so far.
And I we're determining what we want to do
or what needs to be done for every single item.
So, uh, we have a very detailed playbook
that we have created for this
and we're, uh, updating it regularly at this point
until we can sort of hit a, a, a, a regular cadence
and a, a predictable pattern
of this is what's needed every single time. Sure.
Yeah. If, if, um, to the best of your ability, any kind
of like process, guidelines, protocol, what those steps are?
What tools, metrics, rubrics.
Um, you know, for example, we had to vote on the,
um, the bond for the affordable housing that we all kind
of said, like my main question was
like, how do we hold it accountable?
How do we get tracking? How do we make sure
that we know what results look like?
And so obviously this is a separate thing mm-hmm.
But it's every bit as pertinent to find out if
what TRR is compared
to tick are we actually, is it efficient?
'cause it slowed the hell outta what we got going on.
So there's nothing efficient on my end of it,
but is it leading to better results and better outcomes?
Is it something that is centralizes decision making in a way
that feels a little too old school for some
of our tastes potentially?
But I think all of that is left
to whatever the data and process is.
So I think that would be important to know. We
Can get you a good comparison to versus TRR
and to speak to your, your concerns around efficiency.
A little bit more detail to talk to that.
Definitely. Thank you all so much for
that. Sorry, go ahead.
And then the remaining questions we can certainly get,
get you through the chair, specifically
around our program administrators
and some of the consultants that we work with to be able
to really enhance the work that we do within the department,
uh, without having to hire yes, dozens of additional staff,
but still deliver what you all have grown accustomed.
Yeah, that'd be great. And then, uh, chair,
if I can have the liberty of one more question.
Sure. So there was a lot of questions related
to TIF surplus about a month ago, uh, about who gets funds,
who doesn't get funds whenever the city does a TIF surplus.
Uh, it's my understanding that when the city does a TIF
surplus, we get 25%.
And agency such as CCPs gets 52%,
they would actually get more if we do a surplus,
that is money they would get.
There aren't any stipulations to it. State mandated.
We don't hold any of that. That's my understanding of it.
But just wanted a clarity on the record.
Like that is how it works with the to surplus, right?
Yeah, you can go it,
Uh, yes. To
the extent the surplus is declared, the, those funds, uh,
are statutorily required to go back
to the taxing bodies per their share of the levy.
And so that would be the kind
of the 25 52 like, is that accurate? Am I just,
Uh, I think the city's a little less than 25, but yes. So
We get less than 25 and they still get
to these two just clarity.
'cause there's so much, so much narrative out there
that the facts and the law are the facts and the law.
So thank you very much for that. That's all I got chair
For you.
Okay. You good? Okay. All right.
Thank you Vice chair. All right. Ottman Lawson.
Great. Thank you Chair.
Um, and thank you commissioner
and team, uh, appreciate all the work you do.
Um, I want to, I'm, I'm sort of asking everybody, you know,
at a midway point in the year, if,
if you look at the programs
and funds, sort of what is outperforming expectations
and then what has maybe been a little sluggish?
Uh, yeah, generally speaking,
Uh, great question. I think in
terms of outperforming,
just from a revenue standpoint, um, our property sales,
and I think it has a lot to do vacant sales,
I shouldn't say property, our vacant parcels.
Um, I think it has a lot to do with our shift, um,
and our focus on vertical development,
recognizing the importance
of just focusing on construction in our neighborhoods.
And so we, um, those efforts have in our leading
to higher revenues from our sales,
and I'm expecting the revenue to continue to increase, um,
significantly, uh, year over year.
When we think about our, our shift to larger RFPs
for market rate development,
to single family home development, um, to those TOD sites
that we talked about a little earlier,
those are all market rate deals
unless they're missing middle or
unless they're affordable housing.
And so those market rate sales should continue
to drive more revenue. Right.
Right. And anything a little slower than you'd like?
Um, you wanna speak a
Little bit that you wanna admit to kind of
Zoning revenue, um, at a, at a very kind of high level?
Um,
Sure. Uh,
alderman, we, so a couple things just
to note from a zoning standpoint.
We had one element of the permits
that we reviewed that we've seen.
A, a good acceleration, especially that you'll notice
through your committee is the changes that council approved
that allow for type one map amendments to include a variety
of what would otherwise require administrative adjustments
or variations that allows applicants for, for any
of your colleagues that haven't gone through this,
that allows applicants to proceed with projects only
through a map amendment that then absorbs whatever,
what in prior years would take subsequent relief zoning,
board appearances or administrative reuse saves time.
We've seen about a 14% increase in the volume
of those applications that have come
through our office compared to the first half of last year.
Right. On the flip side,
we've seen a rather significant decline in the volume
of plan developments, both from a filing
and then from a permit issuance standpoint.
So we still see a high quantity of overall permits citywide,
but the value
and the scale of some of those, we've seen a reduction.
Namely, uh, on the plan development side,
I will say, I just wanna add one
component, um, to Patrick.
We're talking permits versus
PDs being introduced and approved.
And so the one thing I would just wanna make sure we are
aware of when we talk about PDs, these are plan developments
that come through plan commission for approval.
We're actually seeing an increase in the number of,
or the value of approvals.
As an example, last year we saw over $11 million,
11 million, excuse me, dollars
and plan commission approvals,
which actually is more than 2022 and 2023 combined.
So when we talk about pipeline, that's impressive, right?
Those are projects that we're hoping to advance, um,
to Patrick's team as we talk about those permits, right?
That's cranes in the sky eventually shovels in the ground
and ultimately ribbons cut.
And so I wanna make sure that we're kind
of talking about plan, commission
and plan developments in two different lenses.
Both the pipeline that we're seeing
and the growth that we're seeing there.
Year to date, well, I should say mid-year to date, right?
We're talking $8.2 billion in plan commission pipeline.
We're hopeful that as interest rates go down as some
of the challenges that are being faced nationally,
and I would argue internationally as it relates
to real estate and the environment improve, we'll start
to see those actual projects go into development.
Right? So I just wanted to kind
of talk about two different lenses from
that standpoint, because I think it's important.
I think we've seen in 44 some challenges
where people have opted to avoid a plan development.
Part of that is cost part of
that labor, part of that is process.
And so whatever we can do on the process side,
you know, I'll be a partner for you.
I was gonna give you a shout out on the land
sales, but you already did that.
And so thank you. It would be great to have that sort
of in your report like year over year.
Our, our pri you know, our, our land transactions have,
have reached this level because we are doing them
for new construction and outside yards.
Um, and that we're at, we're closer to market value.
Um, I also really want to commend the teams that are working
with ALS around the city on corridor
planning and community plans.
Mine is this close to being done.
Um, and uh,
looking at the rewards in their corridors in smart ways.
Um, it does, however, have a cost
to the committee on zoning.
And as the acting chair, we're outta money on title special.
Um, it's great that everyone is, is looking at their award
and being proactive in doing those things.
But next year we're gonna have
to figure out a better formula.
You're right. Um, 'cause when, if everybody wants
to rezone half their award, there is a cost.
Um, and it is born by taxpayers when it's all their manic.
So I just wanted to put a point on that, um,
because we, we'll have to figure that out for next year.
So, um, again, I,
I think the department is working smarter and better.
I, I've always appreciated your background.
Um, time kills deals. I've heard you say it a thousand
times, so whatever we can do
to be a partner on that, I appreciate.
So thank you. You thank, thank you.
Thank you, chair. Okay. Thank you.
Um, I'll take an opportunity right now to,
uh, bring something up.
I don't, pardon me if you, if you've already discussed this,
um, I know that one of your, um,
because you have insight into the neighborhoods,
and I know you have a lot of pet peeves in the neighborhood,
one being the science Yes.
That, that occupy or cover our windows.
Have you had an opportunity today to kind of,
to give a little brief, uh,
because I think there was some,
I won't say misunderstandings, I think,
I don't think the intent or the spirit of the ordinance
that we were looking to move, uh,
was adequately conveyed. Yeah.
I think our BACP commissioner got a chance to speak
to the, the sign, uh, the window kind of ordinance and, and,
and potential changes that are underway during his, I heard
that was one of the first couple questions, um,
that was asked of him.
But overall, you know, the idea is how do we ensure
that our corridors are far more vibrant, more open and, and,
and, and ripe for development.
Um, there is currently an ordinance that exists, um,
that our zoning team kind of, you know, manages,
if you will, with our partners to ensure
that you can't have more than, what, 50%?
Well, High level, yeah.
25, 20 5% of cover, of window coverage. Yeah.
And so, you know, Are we understanding that body? A
Lot of businesses aren't adhering to that.
Um, I think in the spirit of partnership and collaboration,
and I appreciate the BAC commissioner,
'cause he mentioned this, the idea is not to be punitive.
The idea is to do friendly door knocking
and let you know, partnering with our ssas
and our corridors, our corridor manager, excuse me,
and our chambers that's managed
by Mary O'Connor from our team
and our partners at BACP to remind our businesses
what the expectations are to give friendly reminders
that over 20%, 25% coverage without a permit can allowed.
Um, and, and not to be punitive,
but ultimately the goal is to ensure
that every single corridor, regardless
of if you're downtown Hyde Park
or on the north side, looks inviting, is welcoming.
And the signage is respectful of the community.
I think at the end of the day, that's the overall goal we
want, regardless of what community area you're in.
And so there's lots of partnerships, lots of discussion,
lots of education underway to ensure
that our businesses understand that we're partners, um,
and don't intend to be punitive,
but at the end of the day, to remind them
what the expectations are
and more importantly,
what actually exists in the current ordinance.
And is it correct that the different form, but the,
but the ability to enforce this exists right now?
It does. From the books, it does exist.
I want, I want to, as we talk about challenges though,
I wanna remind you that I'm limited in terms
of inspectors right now.
Right. I've got two. And so we've got 77 community areas,
and you don't have many
corridors, you know, across the city.
And so two people, you know, being tasked
to do the enforcement is, is challenging
because those two inspectors are inspecting other zoning
violations and challenges.
And so I just kind of wanna be really clear
and manage everyone's expectations.
It's gonna require a lot more hands on deck,
which is why it's a, you know, there's,
there's power in partnership
and ensuring that we've got the right departments on board
to ensure that the enforcement team is there to help.
But more importantly, we're doing that outreach ahead
of time, so it's less punitive
and more partnership. Okay. Driven.
I know through my discussions, people were concerned, um,
about certain entities.
There are exceptions, correct?
Like the hospitals daycares are there, what are the, some
of the exceptions that we're looking at? Sure, that'd
Be good. So the
coverages that are,
or the, the impacted business license recipients would be
exclusive of those that you listed.
So it focuses on the retail
and commercial entities, not daycares,
office space, hospitals, things of that nature. Okay.
Okay. Okay. I'm trying to remember what other, what other,
um, what other feedback I got.
Um, and I think the ordinance also
includes the, the lighting,
The updated, not the current.
So the current doesn't include the LED lights, that's often
around the perimeter, but the updated, um, the, you know,
the change is, is including that language.
Okay. Okay. All right. Well, good, good.
I, I, I, I like the direction that,
that you're, you're taking things.
Um, so I appreciate,
and you know, you have a partner in me
to always work with you guys.
Um, uh, Bodu, anybody have any additional questions?
Cardona, Lawson, Cruz,
es, Citro Lopez.
Thank you. You all the body, everybody.
Any last minute comments?
No, just thank you for you all's partnership.
I mean, my team is amazing.
They're brilliant, they're so passionate.
They talk to you and your team often.
And so I think there's power in partnership.
You know, we know what you all's priorities are
and we know how to ensure
that we're leveraging the resources to ensure
that your businesses, your residents, um, you know,
key sites are being redeveloped.
So I just appreciate you all's ongoing partnership.
Right? Well, you have it. Alright. Yep.
So with that said, um, Bonnie, we're gonna stand at ease,
uh, until Department of Good Housing,
and I also confer with the chairman,
I gotta find Chairman Irvin to see, uh,
what, how he wanna proceed.
So we'll stand at ease.
How are you? Yeah. Keeping camera,
Um, uh, members of the committee, we're going
to take a break now.
So, uh, committee, we will come back in at 1215.
Uh, we're gonna take our a 30 minute break right now, uh,
as, um, we'll be in 300 a.
So, um, so we'll take our break right now
and return at 1215.
Good afternoon. Uh, we are, uh, back reconvening, uh,
before us is the Department of Housing.
Uh, commissioner Castaneda. Welcome.
Uh, if you could introduce your, uh, staff that's with you
and, uh, here and in the box.
And then give your opening statement
and then we'll proceed from there.
Good afternoon everyone.
Um, with me here on the day is Tamara Collins.
The department's Managing Deputy Commissioner.
In the box are Amy Henry, our Director of Human Resources,
uh, Alessandra Budnick, the Deputy Commissioner for Finance.
Matt Stern, our Deputy Commissioner
for Policy Planning and implementation.
Esther Rell, our Deputy Commissioner
for Housing Development, will Edwards,
our Deputy Commissioner for Neighborhood Preservation
and Christopher Smith,
our Deputy Commissioner over Construction and Compliance.
The mission of the Chicago Department of Housing is
to expand access and choice for residents
and protect their right to quality homes
that are affordable, safe, and healthy.
The Department of Housing remains committed to our vision
that every Chicagoan, across all 77 community areas
has access to safe, quality, affordable housing,
no matter their income, race, or zip code.
We continue to advance this vision under the leadership
of Mayor Brandon Johnson,
whose administration has prioritized housing equity
as a key part of an inclusive and just Chicago.
Investing in housing isn't just about providing a
roof over someone's head.
It's about improving public health, reducing crime,
supporting student success, building generational wealth,
and creating stronger,
more stable communities across our city.
Safe, affordable housing is one of the most effective
and equitable tools we have.
To address the challenges facing Chicago today.
As of mid-year 2025, the Department of Housing continues
to demonstrate diligence, stewardship of public funds.
Through careful planning
and discipline management,
we have kept our expenditures closely aligned
with our budget, ensuring
that every dollar is maximized for impact.
Our consistent spending rates this year reflect this ongoing
commitment to fiscal responsibility
while advancing our mission.
Through mid-year 2025,
DOH has expended $6,768,331,
or 57% of its total budget,
$931,567,
or 76% of its special revenue, which is the ah,
Hoff Affordable Housing Opportunity Fund budget,
and $5,117,419
or 8% of its federal entitlement grants.
This expenditure rate is consistent with previous years.
On the staffing front, our current vacancy rate is 17.9%,
and we have achieved our lowest attrition rate
since since 2019.
This effective management of both financial
and human resources positions us well to meet our goals
for the remainder of 2025 and beyond.
As of year to date 2025, a total
of 634 housing units have been constructed, rehabilitated,
or preserved with 496 of those designated as affordable,
an additional 1,603 units are currently under construction
to support these efforts, a total
of $131,863,669
have been invested in affordable housing initiatives.
These figures reflect the continued commitment to expanding
and preserving access
to affordable housing within the community.
Our efforts to tackle vacant
and abandoned housing remain central.
To date, 78 buildings have been acquired
and 72 transferred to local developers for rehabilitation,
creating opportunities for reinvestment
and neighborhood stabilization.
We have also stewarded a new pilot to support shared equity,
home ownership, empowering buyers
and community-based organizations
to build lasting affordability with just $4.1 million.
We supported four cooperative
or Community Land Trust acquisitions totaling 20 permanently
affordable units, and help 23 home buyers purchase homes
with long-term affordability guarantees.
In 2025, we successfully developed
and passed the green social housing ordinance making Chicago
one of the few cities nationwide embracing
this forward-thinking model.
This ordinance enables the use of housing
and economic development bond funding
to create permanently affordable, publicly owned housing,
a new and powerful tool
for housing desegregation and sustainability.
By mid-year 2025,
we successfully launched a 2025 qualified allocation plan,
or QAPA key framework guiding the awarding
of low income housing tax credits.
The nation's most vital resource
for affordable housing development
and preservation aligned
with the mayor's build better together
and cut the tape initiatives.
The 2025 QAP ensures that investments prioritize equity,
transparency, and neighborhood growth while fostering strong
public, public-private partnerships.
By mid 2025, the Chicago Department
of Housing has made significant strides in advancing housing
through the development and refinement
of the 2025 Architectural
and technical standards Manual
Building on the draft released in June,
DOH incorporated extensive public feedback on the initial
chapters and introduce two new chapters focused on critical
pre-construction and construction phases.
These updates have brought greater clarity, flexibility,
and transparency to design requirements,
contracting policies and project timelines.
Key improvements include a revamped amenities menu tailored
to resident community needs,
streamline contract execution processes,
and clear milestones to shorten pre-construction timelines
to 18 months or less.
Looking ahead, DOH remains committed
to refining these standards through ongoing public input,
maintaining a clear focus on speedy project delivery while
preserving quality and community priorities.
In 2025, we are completing key projects under the non
congregate shelter acquisition program, delivering safe
and high quality housing options for Chicagoans facing
or at risk of homelessness.
These sites represent a shift towards housing First
solutions focused on dignity and stability.
We're also supporting efforts
to preserve single room occupancy units
and expanding programs like Right to counsel, ensuring,
ensuring that tenants have the support they need
to avoid displacement and stay housed.
The Green Home Chicago Pilot advance an equitable clean
energy transition through whole home retrofits of one
to four unit homes in underserved communities.
With over 2000 residents registered 30 homes under retrofit
and funding to complete up to 250 homes.
This program improves health outcomes, energy affordability,
and housing sustainability.
The Green Home Chicago pilot supports tenant protections
by making energy efficient upgrades without displacing
residents or increasing housing cost.
We have streamlined our home repair program
to integrate the work of small accessible repairs
for seniors or SARS to add accessibility repairs
for any homeowners that need them.
Adding improvements like grab bars
and level faucets to ensure all Chicagoans can
successfully age in place.
This ensures that vulnerable residents, including renters
and multi-family buildings, can age in with, in place,
with dignity maintaining both their independence
and housing security.
In closing, I wanna recognize the commitment
of our Department of Housing team, your dedication
to creating a city where everyone, regardless of race,
income, or background can access quality housing,
is both urgent and transformative.
Thank you once again for your time partnership
and continued support of this critical work.
I welcome your questions.
Thank, thank you. Thank, thank you Commissioner.
Um, just to open with, uh,
I know we did the green social housing ordinance.
Uh, are there any deals in the pipeline, uh, for that?
And, uh, if so, uh, can you kinda give us, um,
like where, uh, neighborhood wise, where these deals are?
And is this, uh, when you anticipate this,
uh, move coming to council?
We are, uh, not yet at the stage of deals.
So right now what the green Social housing ordinance allowed
us to do was to establish the independent nonprofit
that will run, um, green social housing.
It will be known as the Chicago Residential Investment Fund.
Um, and the board has not
yet had its first official meeting.
It will be meeting for the very first
official time on September 30th.
At that point, um, we want the board
to move forward on two things.
One is the job description for the CEO,
and the second is for approval on a request for information,
which will lead to the deals.
Essentially, we want developers to come to us, let us know,
um, what they think of, like the terms that we're offering
and offer up possibilities for that.
It remains our goal that we will have to projects
that we will be able to do, uh,
groundbreaking on start on next year.
Okay. Um, the other, uh, question, uh, is
around a RO.
Um, we know that the, the a RO ordinance has
functioned and created, uh, units, affordable units, um,
in, in some areas.
Um, we have, uh, at least, uh, I know that, uh,
on the near west side
and in some communities, uh, we are wanting to see
offsite development
and, um, in, uh, what I'll call
pre potentially gentrifying areas to create, uh,
um, regulated units, uh,
for rent and rental and for home ownership.
Um, can you kinda walk us through that process
and how, uh, developers and
or communities could utilize a RO units, um,
in the community, but also generate
additional offsite opportunities
and especially in communities
that have the potential for change?
Absolutely. Thank you Chairman. Um, for the A RO,
the a RO has several ways in which, uh,
developers can fulfill their obligations to that sort of,
uh, what we think of the basic 20%.
Um, that happens in many community areas.
One of the options is an offsite option,
and so most recently we had, um, a project take advantage of
that in the 32nd ward.
Um, but if that is something that you wanna see,
that is certainly something that, um, we are happy
to help a developer walk through.
Um, usually encouragement from the older person about
how they want to see the a RO obligation fulfilled goes a
long way for a developer to understand what that is.
The only rule that, um, is sort of hard and fa
or there's two rules that are hard
and fast on offsite units.
Number one is that they have
to be per ordinance within a mile of the originating, uh,
development because we wanna make sure that, to your point,
alderman, uh, we are having the units built in the same
places or near the same places
where the triggering project is, particularly when they are,
uh, areas that are beginning to gentrify.
Um, and the second one is that the units be comparable.
Um, we wanna make sure that, um, there,
if it's a really nice unit that is being built, um,
in the triggering project, that also the offsite units
that are going to low income families
are also really nice units.
Now what, um, I a follow up to that, um,
it was my understanding that, that there was the
ability in certain areas.
For example, I, I'll use East Garfield Park as one
of the areas that were, I,
I don't know if it was called an opportunity area
or something of that nature where, um, units potentially
that were greater than a mile away could be utilized in
those specific areas of the city that we've identified as
high potential to, you know, to, to, to change over.
Uh, is that not the case anymore? Or where are we with that?
Yeah, no, that, um, so opportunity areas,
transitioning areas
or community preservation areas, I'm sorry.
And, um, low to moderate income areas are sort
of the three categories, um, under which we, um,
have the a RO map that looks at the whole city.
And so there are slightly tweaked, um,
rules per area based on trying to figure out, are we trying
to preserve, is this an area that already has a lot
of affordability and things like that.
So we can absolutely look at, um, the way
that we can use offsite units in opportunity areas
because again, the idea of opportunity areas is
that these are areas that are rich in amenities
and often have less opportunity for folks
to be able to rent affordably.
Now if the developer does not meet their obligation,
how do you all, um, number one,
how long do you give them to do that?
And then what do you do if they don't?
Um, we have a process with the Department of Buildings
by which, um, any a RO triggering project has a hold on it
until we release the hold certifying
that they have fulfilled their a RO obligation.
And so we work closely with the Department of Buildings
and if someone is asking for a permit
and they have not yet fulfilled their obligation,
they would have to come back and work with our team.
So is that from just the permit
or what about like a certificate of occupancy
or when you, the Department of Buildings, I,
I guess their involvement would just be on permitting and,
and doing the C of E, right?
Correct. And so you can't even get the permit
to start building or start doing the work that you wanna do
until you have fulfilled the a RO obligation
and we certify that and release the hold
Well certifying the obligation.
And so developer A goes through your process,
builds the, uh, the original unit,
but then the qua the, um, the,
the qualifying offsite units are not built.
How do you hold them accountable for the offsite not
units, uh, being built? So
The offsite units have to be done concurrently
with the triggering project, so they cannot, um,
do one first and then the other.
They have to do both at the same time in order,
to your point, I think ensure
that they are both getting done.
Okay. And again, the final, I guess the final thing that
holds everything up is your
certificate of advocacy generally.
Um, so again, we are,
we're involved usually in at the building permit stage.
So certificate of occupancy, um, is something
that DOB handles independent from us.
We just say at the beginning making sure
that the permits are being held.
We do also do site inspections, so our team goes out
to physically view the buildings
and make sure that the thing that, um,
the developer has said is going
to happen is actually what has
Happened. But if the, if
the developers start, I mean, let's say,
let's say you do get both sets
of permits done at the same time,
but you, you start focusing on the Money Pro part
of the project versus the affordable part of the project.
How do you guys regulate that?
Um, so, uh, we are keeping an eye on, based on
where they're moving along, again,
if they've pulled the permits at the same time, fine,
but then we, uh, again, do the site visits.
We go out and make sure that there is work happening.
And the same time, um, all the a RO developers
that we're working with at this stage are very familiar
with a RO and they also know that any sort
of default on a RO, um, on one project will put um,
them in jeopardy on another project.
Okay. Alright, ADA,
Thank you Chairman. Uh, and
thank you commissioner for being here.
Always appreciate seeing you and speaking with you.
Um, I also want to appreciate, uh, take some time
to appreciate your leadership
and your department's assistance in making sure
that we have a smooth and successful implementation
of the Northwest Side Housing Preservation Ordinance.
So thank you very much. It's been very successful.
Um, I would like to know, uh, if,
or if you can elaborate a little bit more about the impacts,
uh, from the shifting policies
and funding from the federal government to the department,
um, and how that impacted your department this year.
Um, and what are some of the projections
and things that we should be prepared for, uh, next year?
Thank you for the question.
Um, the Department of Housing is, um, heavily grant funded.
Most of those grants, um, really come in the form of, uh,
do H'S share of the CDBG funds, as well as home funds,
which come exclusively to Department of Housing
and are used to be, um,
to support projects directly financially.
Um, we as of this year have not yet felt anything, um,
but we are aware that there is a lot of back
and forth happening right now in Congress
around things like home funds.
Um, the House
of Representatives at some point was suggesting
that they would not fund home at all.
Um, the Senate's version of the tea HUD VI think came back
and said that they would, and so nothing has happened yet,
but we're definitely keeping a close eye on the
continuing resolution.
We expect that the federal government will pass, um,
at the end of this month, um,
and just remain, um, in high alert over all of these things.
Um, I know our federal IGA team has been doing an excellent
job of sort of staying on top of that.
We've worked with them to help some members
of Congress have some talking points as they've gone out
to defend, um, against any cuts
that would impact us, uh, deeply.
Thank you. Uh, thank you Alderman.
Uh, going back to the, um, um, federal, um, point,
I know Litech, we have our, we have a specific
allocation under Litech, I think, I think there were three
or four cities that have a litech allocation.
Is that something that has been, uh, discussed
or is there a potential of, uh, change in there?
Yes. Um, as part of, um, the, uh,
federal administration's first bill,
there was an expansion of Litech.
Um, in and of itself that is a good thing.
Our concern is that if there are no soft funds to go
with it, so say that they keep the expansion of Litech,
but zero out home funds, then it actually, it's a wash
because then there's more tax credits,
but there's not enough soft funds
to help close the gaps in projects
because, um, we are at a situation now
where tax credits alone cannot fund projects.
So, um, Litech is popular because it is a tax credit, uh,
but it is not enough.
Oh. So we still have the same, uh, $6 million allocation.
Um, and has that expanded in the legislation
or when you, when you said expansion, what is, what is that?
Um, they added, um, they added more money
for the tax credit essentially.
And I'll let Tamara talk about, um,
how much our allocation is.
Sure. Uh, we get an annual allocation of about seven
and a half million dollars in tax credits.
Um, we're looking and,
and the budget, I believe they were gonna increase that
by about 12%.
Um, but again, tax credits alone won't do the job for us.
If we do a tax credit only deal, it means we have
to put in substantially more tax credits,
which means fewer projects that we can do.
So we need those soft funds for sure.
Now, we, we pretty much limited projects
to about 1,000,005, if I recall.
Is that, is that kinda like the magic number
So that every year we look
and see what the average is
that we've allocated towards projects each year?
Um, so we just released our recent qualified allocation,
and based on what we've done over the last couple of years,
we increased our allocation to about $1.8 million
because we know costs have gone up.
And at 1.8, how much actual, uh,
cash generally gets syndicated for a deal at, at,
at 1.8? So,
So it's, it depends on what we get per tax credit,
the amount we get on the dollar per tax credit.
So right now, um, depending on, uh,
when the project came in, we might be seeing something
still at around 89 90 cents.
But we know that in talking
with our partners in the finance world,
that those amounts are going down some, so we're seeing
as low as 85 cents, um, on that.
So we're, in some cases,
historically we had seen like a dollar for dollar, um,
which gets you, you know, that full amount,
but now that's being drastically reduced over time.
And then also the 4% credits are
how do they, uh, and I,
and I'm starting, we're starting to see more deals
that have both the nine percents and the four percents.
How does that one, uh, work in
and are we in any danger of, of, of
that being stripped or, or is that being enhanced?
Uh, not right now.
Um, so a couple of years ago they fixed the 4% credits
to just be at the 4% level.
So we were getting a little bit additional
equity into the deals.
Um, but that also comes with, uh,
what the syndicators can provide in terms of, you know, uh,
on the, the dollar amount per credit.
Uh, so it, it's roughly this, it's the same in terms
of the amount
and how it impacts the amount
of equity that comes into the deal.
Um, but in this case, with the new QAP,
we are looking at trying to use, uh, 4% in taxes
and bonds more for preservation deals
and trying to limit the amount of what we used to,
what we call twin deals, where we're saying nine
and 4% on a single project.
Um, so for new construction,
we're really focusing on using the 9% for new construction
and the 4% for preservation
because we need to preserve all the previous investments
that we've made over the years.
Okay. Alright. Very well, uh, would like to, uh,
recognize, uh, alderman Walker spec for the, uh, purposes
of our quorum.
Welcome sir. Uh, we'll go to Altman Lawson.
Thank you chair. Appreciate it. Hi, commissioner and team.
Uh, I've been spent a lot, a lot of time with you guys, uh,
this year more, more than than typical.
So I don't have a ton of questions.
Um, I I wanna talk about the A RO and the timeline mm-hmm.
Um, you know, making sure we've just had
DPD time kills deals.
So what is sort of the timeline for the,
the point at which someone comes to you
with an Arrow application
to the point where they're approved?
And I, I know there's a lot of factors that go into that,
but what is sort of your average there?
We are working very closely with DPD so
that our timelines match there.
So the idea is that a RO isn't the thing
that is holding anyone up.
So our team participates in the intake meetings
and from the beginning says, if this is your proposal,
this is roughly what your um, obligation is.
If anything changes, we change.
And then we have timeline set so that, uh, ahead of going
to plan commission or CDC
or whatever else they might need, they are fulfilling all of
that so that we are ready at the same
time that DPD is ready.
So at this point, we consider DP D'S timelines
to be the same as our timelines.
Sure. One of the things, you know, I've got a project
that's, that's opening soon,
and one of their frustrations has been, um, with changes
and changed orders and
that maybe the departments are not working
as closely together as they can,
or there's a standard federally that may be different from
what we have locally or,
or buildings has a different standard
than, you know, affordable.
So how can we
help reduce the timeline on, on change orders?
And that's probably on the, the initial permit side too.
Yeah, absolutely. So I think you're shifting gears talking
about to a hundred percent affordable project
rather than an A RO project.
Yes. Um, yes.
And so that goes to the extensive, extensive work
that we have done this year on the architectural
and technical standards manual.
That is what governs
how the department addresses things like contingency
and change orders and draws.
We have participated heavily in the mayor's cut
the tape task force work.
Um, we had I think the second most recommendations
after, um, I forget what department in, um,
the cut the tape, uh, recommendations.
And we have taken all of that work very seriously.
Right now we are open for our second round of public comment
for the A TSM,
and it is specifically addressing things like pre um,
pre-construction and construction activities,
including change orders.
Um, we know that that has been a pain point
and we have taken it very seriously to look, um,
at our internal processes and make some big changes.
Frankly. Um, one of the changes
that we have already announced is
that we are putting in the full control of the contingency
of a project in the hands of the developer.
Um, which means that that substantially changes
how we deal with change orders.
And that will cut down on time on process, um,
keep us in alignment and get us to the ultimate goal,
which is getting families into the units as fast as
Possible. Excellent. And
that's, that's welcome news.
Um, just on the budget side, it, it looks like 8%
of our federal entitlement grant funds have been
spent. But that is typical.
That is typical because at the very beginning of the year,
there's usually a delay as we get our contracts out
to our delegate agencies, which is where most
of our federal money goes.
So we'd expect to be a hundred percent soon.
We would, yes. Great. And I, I know, uh, you know,
I'll go back to a RO right?
We talk about units versus in lieu of payments,
and for a long time everybody took, you know, the, uh, 20%
because they got the tax deal and now I'm seeing it's 15
and then they're buying out five,
which may be a better formula
for us if we still have to fund.
We still need those costs for low income housing trust fund.
Mm-hmm. Um, we'll talk about a RO broadly later,
but specifically on low income housing trust fund,
are we concerned about solvency?
Are we concerned about the deposits, um, for this year?
And then what are you looking at for next year?
Um, we are really fortunate that Cliff has a really set
of robust reserves.
Um, and so it gives us the time that we need to do work
with them on long-term, um, um, viability
for the organization.
Uh, they are housing, um, thousands of people
and we wanna make sure that they can maintain
and continue to be able to do that.
Part of the good news is
that their receipts from the state
ticked up a little bit this year.
They're at about a million dollars more than they got last
year, which is good news.
Um, and so even though they're still not getting a ton
of money from a h, they are able to, um,
they are bringing in a little bit more money.
I think sales have just generally been better in the state
of Illinois, which means
that they're bringing in a little better money.
Um, but we did seat a new board, um, earlier this year,
and we've been working very closely with them
to talk about like, what is the long-term strategy here
and where do we go from here?
And we feel really confident that between the reserves
that they have and the money that they're still bringing in,
we'll be able to sort of balance that out
before there would be any sort of emergency.
Great.
Um, you mentioned home funds.
I that's, it's about 200 million a year that we get
No. Home funds, um,
are at about $17 million a year. Right now
Is 200 maybe our total federal
Housing maybe? Yeah, because
Home is a, home is a,
a much smaller contract than that.
Okay. It might be, maybe it's
CDBG you're thinking about, but I
Don't know the, okay. I, I have 200 million
in my head for housing, federal,
federal money from housing.
Um, I, so I think that, um, last year's number
for our budget in terms of
our total federal is probably actually about 200 million.
Okay. Um, because between CDBG and Home
and, um, other like federal earmarks that we had,
we were again, heavily federally funded.
So I know that's, that's a concern we're all having.
Right. Juan Federal funds, you, you,
you said earlier in your
statement, we have not been hit yet.
Not yet, but we're keeping a close eye.
Again, we know that there's a continual resolution,
probably not a real budget, and we know
that there's just cuts happening at the federal level.
And so, um, we're keeping a close
eye to see what happens next
Year. Well, and I appreciate
you said, talking points
to the Illinois delegation
and on t hud, you know, whatever we can do to be helpful,
please keep us posted.
Appreciate that. Thank you.
Great. Thank you. Thank you, chair.
Alrighty. Any other questions
for the Department of Housing?
What did you say? Oh, okay.
Um, I, I, I do have, uh, I do have one other item.
Uh, this is relating to the housing
and economic development bonds.
Uh, where are you all with, uh, deals for that?
And I know that you all have a, um, a threshold
for council approval that's above $5 million, uh,
but what have you guys done under the $5 million
that we haven't, that hasn't come to us for approval?
And what do you have in the pipeline?
Um, we have not done anything under the $5 million
threshold because part of the sort of high, um, cost
of our projects means that we're putting in substantial
amounts of money into all the projects.
And I will let, um,
deputy Commissioner Stern talk a little bit about
where we are with each of our, uh, projects.
Thanks. Thanks, commissioner. Thank you Chair.
Uh, for the record, Matt Stern, uh,
deputy Commissioner, DOH.
Uh, so we've been very busy activating, uh,
the HED bond this year across a wide
variety of program types.
Um, what we often talk most
with this body about is the multifamily projects
that the Commissioner is referencing.
Those tend to be very large.
Uh, there are a variety of projects that,
that have closed we expect to close this year, uh, and,
and, uh, many more that will close next year.
And, uh, Tamara and the commissioner
and, uh, Esther on my right can all speak
to those in great detail.
Uh, we are also using these bond funds to support a number
of, uh, programs that we run.
Uh, things like the ES RO preservation program,
the home repair program.
Uh, this is where we work with the delegate agency or,
or third party partner, uh, with maybe a larger dollar sum
that then in that partnership gets divvied up
and distributed to, to many individual grantees
and much smaller dollar amounts.
And we have a handful of contracts
that have already been executed and,
and a number more, uh, that we're expecting
to execute in the next one to two months.
Uh, and then, uh, a whole handful more
for, for next year as well.
Um, could through the chair, could you provide, uh,
what those allocations have been and,
and what you've spent the,
thus far in relation to that this year?
Uh, secondly, uh,
what are we doing on the home ownership front?
Uh, I know we're doing a lot of, uh, multifamily rental,
but a lot of our, our,
our communities are either single family, two, two
to four unit communities.
Uh, and, and, and from my word for example,
the the average building, median building, my was two flat.
So, uh, what are we doing on that front as far
as new construction?
I know we do some preservation work,
but where, where are we looking at to build new,
uh, new homes?
Um, so there's a few ways in which we've been doing that.
This year. One has been through United Power
who has been building, um, it's some west
and south side communities.
Their goal is obviously the Reclaiming Chicago campaign,
which is a thousand units on the south side,
a thousand homes on the west side.
Um, second to that, we still have our city lots
for Working Families program, which, um, in conjunction
with working with DPD, we are able to sell lots at $1 for,
um, uh, developers to be able to build affordable homes.
And they offset the cost of that through building
of market rate homes as well.
We did a massive update to that, uh,
via council ordinance earlier this year,
and we hope to see some larger
production come in through that.
Um, we also have, um, our shared equity, um,
investment program where we've been working on, uh,
CLT Social Community Land trusts
or, um, uh, co-ops to work with them
to acquire buildings
to have more opportunities for home ownership.
And then the big thing, which you will see come through, uh,
city council as part of our housing
and economic development bond is
that earlier this year we launched an RFP
to find an administrator
for our new program called Homegrown,
which will be down payment assistance program.
Um, for across the city, we expect to give anywhere
between 40 and $70,000 in down payment assistance,
depending on the area of the city, um, in order to ensure
that we are building more opportunities for home ownership.
And our goal is that with approximately $21 million,
we would get to about 300 families.
Did you say 40 to $70 million? I mean 40 to $70,000? Yes,
Correct. Um,
it seems a lot, um, maybe I'm,
um, is that when, when I think of down payment assistance,
I'm thinking of like trying to fund a gap maybe two, 3%,
but the numbers that you're speaking of are like
a much larger, why, why, why such a large amount
for, for DPA,
As we did the math on both
where interest rates are right now, where the cost
of new homes is right now, um,
and the cost to buy in certain areas of the city,
which is why there will be a difference in
how much down payment assistance
families will be eligible for.
We really felt that the bigger number would make the biggest
impact, um, in making sure that families are really able
to truly buy down the mortgage to a point that is manageable
for them while still giving them the
opportunity for home ownership.
So is this, uh, will, will this be driven by, uh,
neighborhood or, um, a means test
of some sort or?
Yeah, we will be doing, um, a, uh, census tracked work.
We already do this on our other, um,
down payment assistance program, which is a smaller program
that's only like $3 million, which is called Bana.
Um, and that one, again, we do the same
where we look at census tracted information
and for, um, the higher, um, opportunity area,
like higher income census tracks, we will be able
to do a little bit more, we'll do a little bit less when it
is less necessary.
But yeah, we will be looking at, um, census track
by census track to determine the amount
that is most appropriate for families.
And then what would, what type
of recapture period will we be looking at?
Um, we'll be looking at somewhere
between five and to 10 years.
We'll still kind of like in the rules process of that,
and we'll do some of that with the administrator,
but the idea is that there would be some, um, amount of time
to ensure that families are truly, you know,
like putting down roots.
No, no, I, I see with that.
And my final question is around compliance.
Um, there's been a lot of conversation regarding
compliance from, um, needing to be
in under the CPO versus in housing on
construction, uh, related projects.
Uh, can you help us understand, uh, the role
and, uh, how that plays out?
What, um, penalties you guys have assessed
and, um, do we need to, you know,
really take a look at revamp the, uh, program?
So, um, thank you for that question.
So, uh, historically, uh, we have a, um,
construction monitoring compliance, uh,
division within the Bureau of Construction and Compliance.
And so these are the folks
that are specifically looking at the W-B-E-M-B-E
spend of every project.
This is not exclusive to any one kind of project.
This is for all of our projects.
So as you know, whereas we are monitoring some things
for sort of the DPD side, we also monitor our own, um,
our own multifamily projects.
All of them have to reach the 26 and six thresholds.
And so our staff works, uh, to diligently assess all
of these projects as they are ongoing
and then assess liquidated damages at the end.
It's the same process.
Um, and we work closely with the CPO's office, um,
because it's the same amount as the,
the formula is the same, it is simply that we do
that compliance work for, um, both department of, uh,
housing and department of planning
and development projects
through our division and through our work.
Uh, it is all done in conjunction
and under again, the same, um, uh, the same ordinances
and rules as the CPO's office.
It is simply that because we have
grant making authority separately,
because we are able to do things like our multi-family
projects, we also are able to monitor our projects.
Okay. And then, uh, uh, correct me if I'm wrong,
the per the liquidating damages
is like one 20th of 1%, is that correct? Yeah,
There's like a very specific formula.
I don't wanna misstate it, so I'm happy to provide it
through the chair, but yes, it is a very specific formula.
With that being said, that's, uh, if my math is correct,
it's for $5,000 per million. Is that right?
It, it might be about that, yes.
Okay. And, and,
and I'll, I'll raise this question, um, is that, well,
number one, what are we seeing in liquidated damages, um,
on, on projects?
And if that number is, uh,
I would say 5,000 on a million is, may be viewed
as a quote unquote cost of business
and not driving the policy, uh, change that we would like
to see, uh, uh, in looking at the data, might we need
to entertain raising that amount from, uh, one 20th
of 1% to something higher that would, um, be,
I mean, we, we we're calling them liquidated damages,
which means that we're looking for some, for some level
of compliance, but the amount that we set, the,
the rate does not give much incentive to,
um, do it. Right.
Um, that is certainly like a, a concern of like,
what that balance is.
Um, I'm happy to provide through the chair a list of like
how much we've assessed through this year, um,
in liquidated damages to the projects,
and we would be open to continuing a
conversation around that rate.
Uh, yeah, if you could, we,
we would greatly appreciate that.
I, I do believe we, that that may need to be revisited.
I I, I don't know if it's ever been adjusted
or if anything has changed, uh, about it since it's, uh,
uh, initiation.
Uh, but it just seems fairly small amount to have to pay,
uh, if you don't meet the, uh, meet the stated goal.
So. Okay. Any other questions before we close out?
You got a question? Okay. All
Right, I'll, uh, chairman, go
Ahead. Um,
just to comment, uh, wanna thank the commissioner
because we, uh, we actually covered several housing
development issues before the meeting.
Um, and I just want to say I appreciate
that we have been in communication about it
and, um, getting the answers
so far here have been very helpful.
So thank you very much. Thank you,
chairman. Thank you, alderman.
Thank you. That's what, uh, being around here, was it?
18, 19 years now, uh, gets you some,
uh, do stuff beforehand.
Very good. Alright, uh, with that being said,
we'll committee will stand at ease while we transitioned
from, uh, department of Housing to our final, uh,
final department for the day, uh, consum, uh, I'm sorry,
consumer Affairs, cultural Affairs and Special Events.
Welcome back before us, we have the Department
of Cultural Affairs
and Special Events, uh, commissioner Head spec.
If you could, uh, introduce the members of the staff here
with you in the well, as well as those that are in the box
after which proceed with your opening statement.
And from there, we will go into questions.
Happy to be here. Thank you.
Um, Clint Heads Beth, commissioner of the Department
of Cultural Affairs and Special Events.
To my right, you have to hear a obey Deputy Commissioner
of Finance and Development to her, right?
You have to hear or, um, you have Rosalyn Grimsby,
my first deputy commissioner.
Um, and then in the box you have Dr.
Maiden McNeil and she's the Deputy Commissioner
for Cultural grants and resources.
You have Natasha Parker, deputy Commissioner of Film.
You have Eric Madson, deputy Commissioner of Operations
and Permits, Yesinia Mota, program Director, special Events.
Frank Lewis, deputy Commissioner for Programming.
Um, who's back there? Melody Wang.
She's over cultural resources.
Um, and Monica Caesar, uh, who is over Director
of Finance. Alright,
Thank you.
Alright, um, good afternoon, honorable Chairman
and members of the City Council.
Um, it is my privilege to be here with you today, uh,
to discuss and reaffirm our commitment to equality,
creativity, and cultural vibrancy in the city of Chicago.
D Case is the guardian and steward of Chicago's arts
and cultural landscape supporting artists
and creative workers producing world renowned festivals,
creating public art experiences,
and expanding access to the arts across all city wards.
We oversee iconic venues like the Chicago Cultural Center,
where we host over a thousand diverse programs, initiatives
and exhibitions, welcoming hundreds
of thousands of visitors annually.
We also produce the city's largest anchoring events
and festivals like the Beloved Chicago Jazz Festival Taste
of Chicago, which draws millions of attendees.
We u we've utilized 40% of year to date budget,
and our forecasting a 30% revenue increase
for from 2024 projections are exceeding 50%
in 2026 by returning taste of Chicago to July.
Looking ahead, we're developing an aggressive 2026 growth
strategy focused on food, beverage, sales, private events,
and other venue generating opportunities.
We currently hold 63 full-time employees that set 79%.
Um, our staffing plan prioritizes reflecting Chicago's
demographics and this year 51% of management roles are held
by Hispanic and black employees.
Up from 38% in 2024 of the 17 vacancies.
15 are in progress with candidates,
selected interviews scheduled or postings live.
All are expected to be fulfilled by the end of the year.
Um, our, uh,
charge was very clear following the 2024 budget.
That is to safeguard creative expression,
strengthen cultural communities, develop
and implement cost-effective measures.
Thank you. And I look forward to discussing our data
and innovative plans in more detail.
Thank you, commissioner. Uh, to open, um, uh,
you mentioned the taste of Chicago
and it's go, it's going back to the 4th of July time period.
It's going back to July. We are still working. Okay.
See if it should go back
to the 4th of July time period though.
Uh, would it also is still in, in, uh, encompass the,
um, I'm sorry.
Include the, uh, neighborhood events,
the neighborhood taste events.
We are hopefully figuring out how
to make sure we make that happen.
Um, but right now we're just early in the
budgeting, um, cycle for that.
So, um, but that's the plan.
Okay. And in the past, I think couple of years, they, the,
the locations for the neighborhood,
for neighborhood taste festivals have been static.
Is there any, um, thoughts on, you know, moving those
around the city versus, I know there's one in Pullman,
I think one in Marquette Park, if I'm not mistaken.
I don't know if there were any others, but, um,
Yes, chairman. Okay. We,
we, we look at impact, we look at, um, needs and,
and, and, and there's kind of a methodology
and then also talking to the alders.
So yes, we are always open to hearing
that and moving it around
Like, like North, the Roosevelt Road.
Yes. South of Chicago Avenue. Yeah.
Yes. Some, somewhere around there. Yes. Okay.
Absolutely. Between Western and Pulaski?
Uh, yes. Okay. All right.
Okay. Noted. All right.
Um, the, um, so the taste of the neighborhoods
and then the neighborhood, uh, festival events,
could you walk us through the process of sponsorship
for neighborhood festival events?
Um, do you mean just, uh, like are we talking about, uh,
like the taste popups, or are we talking about like, if you
Like general, like general community organizations.
Uh, 'cause we, we, we get these, uh, requests and, um, and,
and our assumption, assumption is to refer them to you,
but also to the extent
that we can provide guidance on the ability to access, uh,
funds, resources in order to, uh, produce these, uh, events.
Yeah. So can I, if you don't mind, I'd like
to have Tira who's over sponsorship,
talk about sponsorships,
and then a little bit about the permits from
Yesenia. Very well, thank you.
Thank you. Um, so our sponsorship, uh,
section is really based upon our festivals and events.
And so we work really hard to work
with community organizations.
We do, sorry.
Uh, we are actively, uh, soliciting,
um, organizations, corporate organizations
to help us at our festivals
to support some of our programming.
Um, we currently are up about,
we're at $500,000 in sponsorship revenue thus far.
Uh, the process is really for us to go out
and beginning of the year, solicit organizations, solicit,
solicit corporate partnerships,
and see if they're willing to support our festivals.
Um, Yesenia, if you don't mind walking the council
through the permit process for special events.
Hi, my name Isia Mota.
Um, so if an organization is interested in having a,
an event or a festival in their, in their neighborhood,
they'll come to us and we'll talk them
through the application process.
One thing that we encourage them to do is always talk
to the older person and to the police commander.
Um, and then we walk 'em
through the application process online,
and we work with them to see if they have any questions
regarding waste pickup or, um, evacuation plans.
We work with them as far as making sure
that they submit the application and it's complete.
Once it's complete, we send it out to review
and other departments get to weigh in
and review the application.
So like, C-P-D-C-F-D, cdot, uh, CTA.
And so really it's, we count on them to, um, either deny
or approve the application,
and once it's approved, then we release the permit.
I wanna say also, um, chairman that we, in in council,
we have worked very, very hard in working
with other city agencies to make sure that the elders, um,
receive as much notification as possible.
Uh, yeah, and, and I also, um, as part of that process,
it does ask for, um, for acknowledgement.
And, and I, and I'm a little, uh, I'll say baffled on what
that term, uh, means as it relates to, um,
just is that
input, is it, is it just, or just checking the box
or, um, how, how, how
do we en, en engage, um, with the organizers,
with the various departments, um,
as it relates to planning and, um,
and the execution of, of, of these events.
So when a, um, organizer puts a permit through the team,
uh, quickly goes ahead and, and will upload the information,
but they call the alders directly.
And our hope is that the elders, um, then kind
of will sit with us and, and talk about their concerns
and share some of their ideas.
Um, and we are always happy to sit and have a conversation.
Um, but at that point, the, uh, city
agencies will go in the system and either accept it or not.
Um, you know, last year, um,
the body talked about changing the ordinance
to have a little bit more, um, oversight.
So, but as of now, this is where we are
and we, we work very diligently to make sure that we are,
um, uh, notifying
and trying to bring everyone
to the table, including the elders.
Does the system that you utilize allow
for more than one email
to be sent per, per ward?
So, for example, a lot of times
these things land in like Ward one Box
and, uh, versus an individual person
or persons, uh,
that would get notified should an application be submitted
in their respective ward.
That was an issue that was brought to our attention.
And so what we have done is we continue to update, um, uh,
contact information for the wards.
Um, and we are also doing that in the film, um, division
to make sure that more than one, uh, email is on file.
So we are calling more than one person in the office
and making phone calls.
Okay. And, uh, speaking of film, um, the, um,
there's been a conversation regarding a cost recovery, uh,
with film and, uh, D case.
Um, are you all, what are we seeing from a trend perspective
related to the film industry in Chicago?
Uh, how is its health, um, are we,
and what, what are we doing
or what can we do to attract a more, uh, film to the city?
And, um, where are we, uh, in that, in that space?
I was very excited to pass this on
to Deputy Commissioner Natasha to talk about some of the,
uh, new things that we have implemented already.
Natasha, deputy Commissioner of Chicago Film Office.
So the plan is to create a marketing campaign.
And so this marketing campaign will, we'll have outreach
to studios both large and small.
Um, and the goal there is to really
diversify the landscape that people see in terms
of filming in Chicago.
So we're going to have a best of the awards
and make sure the alders are engaged in terms of these gems
that are in your neighborhoods.
And so we'll take those gems.
We're sh we'll share it,
we're creating a pitch deck right now.
And then in the fall,
what we're gonna do is we're gonna take this pitch deck
and we're going to expand it.
And so the goal is to focus on incentive our
workforce as well as our infrastructure, as we found
that those were some of the issues why film
companies were not coming to Chicago in robust fashion
as they have been with other states.
And so we really need to push the fact
that we have very strong infrastructure workforce
that can handle well more than six to 10 shows.
And our incentive that the state offers,
I would like to say, regarding the permits
and where we are right now, we've issued, um,
910 film permits generating about 327 to date,
uh, a thousand dollars, and we're projected to do four 90.
Um, with permits, though right now, we, um, are working
with location managers to get even more notification so
that alders are notified earlier if someone
is scouting their area.
Okay. Yeah, I, I do know, um, I, I am, I am home to,
to center Space film studios,
and I can tell you that, um, it,
it's an interesting phenomena that, you know,
like maybe seven, eight years ago, oh, you know,
they saw whoever it was walking down the street and, uh, but
after like, day three is like, when are they leaving?
Right? You know, as this, as your street gets taken,
um, has there been conversation?
Because what I find is that, let's say you go on a block
and you use, let's say they use Altman Mitch's house,
and I live next door to Altman, Mitch Altman.
Mitch gets 20 grand,
and then I get nothing, even though I'm, I'm probably, I, I,
I'm, I'm inconvenienced not to the extent that she may be,
but you know, there seems the compensation, uh, of
how they manage
and operate just seems to be really focused on that, just
that one location while they're,
they've taken up the whole block.
I gotta park a block away.
You know, it's just, I just wondered, have,
has there been some conversations in the industry of
how do we make communities, uh,
more whole versus just the location?
And I think that stems to some of the fatigue that
certain blocks, like
there's certain blocks in the neighborhood.
I'm like, please don't go there
'cause why we're gonna get a complaints.
Right. And, and I get it
because I'm literally surrounded, you know, I'm, I'm there,
but have the, has the industry or,
or people put some thought into how they could be more,
um, friendlier to the community, uh, in what they're doing
because they do create, you know, some, uh, some, uh, area
of inconvenience for those other than the one
that whose house was the location
of whatever was shot at the time.
Yes. So, one thing, again, going to the idea of having you
and the, the, your colleagues in conversation early, um, to,
to make sure that the studios know, um, concerns.
Um, and then also, uh, even making sure that the best
of the wards so that one block isn't heavily utilized
or, you know, sought
after regarding, um, the, you know, equity
of who's getting paid and who, what, you know,
if your house is used versus someone else's house.
Um, I don't know about the industry.
Natasha can speak to that,
but I will say as a department we are
having a conversation about that.
There's not too much we can do,
but Natasha, if you wanna weigh in a little bit about some
of the conversations you've had.
Yeah, so I've been speaking to location managers
and we have a location manager Summit coming up soon.
And we're gonna talk about community engagement.
And so community engagement can be something
where there is food offered to some of the children,
or there's a ice cream truck.
It's things that's very simple
that I think we can improve upon in terms
of community engagement.
In terms of location fees, I think it's important
that we ensure that the block is
involved in terms of filming.
That involves communication that involves,
sometimes you can rent out someone's house for this type
of fee holding, those type of things.
So we wanna make sure that our location managers
and our film industry continues to engage
with the community in that regard.
And so in that way, there's a buy-in
and so they don't feel, film doesn't feel like occupiers
and more so partners.
Well, tha thank you. I I definitely AP appreciate that.
'cause again, the film industry does, you know,
does help our e economy and, and,
and there's a lot of money that's, uh, that's spent.
And we know that everybody's trying to create content.
And I think we're, I think, center spaces up
to 55 stages now.
So there's, there's a, a real need for, um, you know,
you know, for content and, and the ability.
But we also, I I, I just know we, we definitely have
to get more people 'cause we want people to be welcoming to,
uh, the industry, uh, again, so that they can, um,
produce more shows
and generate more, uh, more economic activity, um, for, uh,
you know, for the, for the city.
Uh, and the last point, uh, from a a,
just a special events DK standpoint is the,
uh, cost recovery.
Um, we, we have a lot of events that, um,
we, we talked about last cycle, um,
that utilize city resources
but may not, um, be paying, um,
for the utilization of things.
Uh, what work has,
has the department done on either a tracking, uh, some
of these expenses or b seeking cost recovery
of, of, of the same?
Yeah, so we are, thank you for that question.
We are working with, uh,
we are participating in the working group.
Um, and so providing some ideas so far as renegotiating some
of our, um, contracts with like transwestern with some
of our vendors to make sure that we are, um, getting exactly
what we need and what we want
and taking off some things that don't really, um, fit to
what, um, this body and the citizens have asked for.
Um, you know, we share information in the process, um,
but pretty much right now we are looking forward to, um,
you know, the budget office to figure out how we're, um,
going to implement some of their recommendations.
But, um, tehir can talk a little bit about some of the
specifics of what we've looked at and presented.
Yeah. Thank you. Um, so we have been part
of the special events working group, uh,
with other city agencies.
Uh, we've provided all the information that DKS could
and you said, yeah, you could
probably talk a little bit more about that.
Um, and other departments, primarily CPD is
where the biggest cost recovery is currently
sort of stuck at.
And so, uh, CPD
and other public safety departments are also part
of this, uh, initiative.
And so I think Ernst
and Young at this point have all the information.
We're just waiting on recommendations on next steps on how
to recover this money.
Um, in the meantime, um, to that point though, we are, um,
implementing new, um, you know,
generating revenue in the sense of, um, this year since, um,
before the pandemic, we put the 10% commission
on food vendors for taste.
So we are also simultaneously looking at ways to go back to
what, um, we were doing before
and incentivizing people to, um, pay a little bit more
where we can, where they can.
Okay. Cool. Uh, any questions for members?
Alderman Conway, follow Alderman Lawson?
Yeah, you know, um, the first thing at listening to your,
to your opening remarks, um, about the taste
of Chicago coming back, uh, you know, we're, uh, so,
so my ward, as you're probably familiar with, you know,
has Michigan Avenue from the cultural
center down south of that.
And, you know, we've had NASCAR there in recent
years and we're not having it.
And so that's why I presume the taste is gonna come back
in next July.
Now, NASCAR has publicly said and privately to, to myself
and colleagues that they anticipate coming back in 27
as we're, and I I make this an open-ended question
as we're thinking about potential contract
for NASCAR vis-a-vis the taste, vis-a-vis Grant Park,
what are some things you think we
ought to be thinking about?
And I do not mean that to be, if you have no response,
that's totally fine if you pop up.
So I was like, oh, that's a great thing
to actually think about.
I I will say that, um, overwhelmingly I think people, the,
the citizens want it back in July.
Um, and so, you know, we're excited to be able
to do that in 2026.
Um, this year was a huge success.
Um, but, you know, I think that's something that we,
your body will have to talk
to about the mayor's office will have to talk about, um,
you know, being that there was more, uh, participation on
who brought NASCAR and facilitated those conversations.
But overwhelmingly, I would say a lot of people would like
to see, um, taste back in July if we decide not to,
it will still be as successful in 2027.
Right. Okay. That's, that's fair.
And I guess as we get, I, I'll certainly reach out
as we get more on that.
I, I did, you, you talked about as well,
but I did want to thank you for your, uh,
experience D case initiative, noting that Grant Park,
you know, it, it's a wonderful place,
but it seems like every event in the city happens there
and my residents are the affected ones.
So the fact that it seems like your department has been
trying to get other parks
and doing other events, I think is,
uh, I think is, is great.
Um, also a lot, a lot of the ways that,
that my office will interact
with yours is through the permit process.
It seems like that's been going pretty seamlessly.
I don't know if that's just luck
or you've been putting things into it,
but I didn't know if you wanted to, to talk about that.
Yeah, definitely not luck.
Um, I would say, but thank you for the two.
I don't mean to say it like No, I know.
I heard there's work for you. I just
want you to get the proper
Well, thank you. Um,
no, my team, they're doing an excellent job.
Um, they're bringing new ideas, they're very, um,
active in wanting to communicate with the,
with your offices, um, and also, you know, talking
and flagging challenges that are overwhelming
to certain awards, such as as yours.
So we are, we're continuing to work very diligently
and happy to, you know, want
to hear feedback all the time. So thank you.
Oh, that's, that's great.
And of course, the cultural center is my ward.
Appreciate how you've been handling the many multitude
of events there and,
and, uh, I make as many of them as I can,
but I, you, you do a lot.
And I, and I appreciate that. And so, Mr.
Chairman, that's, that's all I have. Thank you.
Thank you. Uh, alderman Conway, uh, alderman Law.
Thank you, chair. Hello, commissioner.
Um, I, uh, want to give kudos to the event tracker.
Um, I'm a busy ward keeping track with our,
the updates you send, uh, Jessica in my office
as thank you a million times.
It helps us keep our head on straight as things change
as we see what's, who's late coming in, who's
who we're still waiting on who we still need signs for.
Um, so that, that has been a big help for, for all of us.
Um, I know there's been a lot of conversation
around cost recovery, um,
and the chair brought it up already.
I know there's a working group. I said to, uh, OEMC earlier,
it would be great to have some, uh,
conversations with the council.
'cause I don't think anyone from the
council's been involved.
Um, chairman of special events was here, uh,
yesterday or day before.
Um, or those of us that have large scale events
to it, it would be helpful.
Um, there is, in the, the midyear budget report,
there is sort of a chart on
cost benefit analysis toward the end.
And I'm not sure if this came from D Case,
if it came from budget.
Um, it's page 60
and 61, um,
where it looks at some downtown focused events.
Winter Classic is on here in my ward, um, and some others.
And I, I just, I wanted to know who put this together, um,
because I have some questions on it
that I won't go into today,
but we'll want to follow up on. Okay.
Um, yeah, it's OBM,
but we can, if you have a specific question you wanna, um,
ask me, I can follow up with you after or
Now. Yeah, like, so
it's just for the NHL Winter Classic,
the Department of Streets and Sand spent $168,000,
but they spent zero on nascar.
That's on the second page there,
like that, that doesn't track.
There was no snow during the Winter Classic,
except I saw the field.
So I just, I just have some questions about, I know some
of it's methodology, um,
but when we're being smart about events
and large scale events and what those real costs are, I,
you know, I, I kind of want to get
in the weeds on that with you a little bit.
Um, or with the, the, the group a little bit later.
Um, your vacancy is at 21%, I think,
or at 79% of, of the 80 budgeted positions, um,
that's maybe a little higher
than some of the others were seeing.
So wondered sort of who are we waiting on and,
and how can we get those filled? Yeah,
The 17, sorry.
Um, and it's gone up a little bit,
but at, at the, uh, we had, we have 17 vacancies right now.
15 are already scheduled.
Either people coming on board interviews are already
scheduled, um, or they're live postings.
And we, uh, are very confident
that 15 will be filled by the end of the year. Right.
Are they just sort of across the board
or are they concentrated in one specific area for market
or whatever reason? No,
I think it's across the board,
but, um, I will send this over to Lisa Ric,
assistant commissioner for hr.
Hello. Hi. Um, yes, our vacancies are across all city, all
of our, um, d case departments and divisions.
And we are actively and aggressively hiring
and we're doing a great job so
Far. Awesome. Keep it
up. Keep it up. Thanks.
Um, just the last question I had, I know we,
we sent you a letter, we had some damage, uh, associated on
with the air show, which was first for us.
And uh, I, I know, you know, you get to damage
with special events, you get cracks in sidewalks,
somebody breaks the mirror or
a light post, something like that.
But what is sort of the process maybe generally, um,
if there is associated damage with some type
of permitted event?
Um, I know this, this is a little bit more com complicated,
but certainly something we'd never experienced before.
Um, can you speak to sort of the, the general process
and then any specifics on this,
if you have any new in? Yeah,
Yes. Um, thank you for
that. Yes.
Regarding just Air, air Force specifically, um,
I think a response was sent to you,
but we worked with law, um,
air Force is still doing a active investigation.
The initial investigation came back that they're, you know,
they didn't hit Sonic Boom.
Again, we're waiting for them to give
that black box information.
Um, but they do have a portal for, um, damages,
but usually, uh, someone will go into 3 1 1, um,
and then, you know, we'll be flagged
and then we will contact like legal.
Um, and so that's what usually I think would happen if, if,
um, Yesenia wants to add in anything else,
um, regarding that, um,
Yes, as far as if there's an, an accident
or something at an event, the event organizer has
to submit a certificate, certificate of insurance,
so the event is, um, insured, right.
Maybe, uh, this situation is, is an anomaly.
What, what, right. What is the more typical sort
of damage claim or accident that that may come up?
Like what's something somebody falling?
Yeah. Like, like it is normally not a sonic boom and,
and yeah, it's not Sonic Window, it's probably an auto
accident or a broken, uh, curb or a sign.
What, what, what is sort of the,
the typical, so usually damage,
It's usually somebody tripping or falling at Oh,
An injury. Injury.
Injury, yes. Okay.
Not a, not like a physical property. Property. Okay.
Alright. And then if it is property, sir, if you, um,
you know, it would usually bypass us and go to like law
or some other city department, but we are flagged
and we, we do know about it. Right.
Okay. Great. Thank you very much.
Thank you. Uh, Ottman Vasquez,
Thank you very much, chairman.
Um, so I've got a list of questions just through the chair,
so no answers needed.
Just wanna get 'em on the record.
Um, so, and it's some similar questions
we've been asking different departments.
So, um, if you could share the cost benefit analysis used
for determining functions
and positions that are in-house versus
which ones go to third party.
Um, we kind of wanna get a sense of like
how those decisions are made per department.
So if you could just share what you've got.
Um, next is a list of internal review and expenditure, trans
or revenue and expenditure transfers.
So we're supposed to get quarterly reportings when things
move from line item to line item.
The reports have been somewhat insufficient
and so we wanna know internally if some funds are going
somewhere else, what that's looked like and,
and, you know, reasons why.
Uh, next a list of any FOIAs
that DKS received in 2025, as well as like
hours costs spent addressing them.
So we're looking to see if it makes sense
to centralize a lot of this instead
of having it per department
and if there's savings to be found there.
Um, these are more specific to D case.
If you could share, um,
any city arts grant program allocated appropriation versus
the actual disbursements, right?
So whatever funds you had compared to
what went out from the, since 2019, including this year,
uh, or January as well as January to today.
Just kind of a breakdown. Uh, and then two, two more.
Uh, if you could share the turnover
by position in the department since 2019,
that's kind of what that's looked like.
And then, you know, break into year over each year.
And then, and then the last one's like a three parter.
How many organizations have applied for grants
for D case in 2025?
How many grants have been awarded?
And who are the recipients of the grants? Uh, thank you.
Um, so I
think my colleague may have asked on some of this related
to the different events
and kind of what they generated,
what was spent on each of them.
How is that tracked? So for example,
if you've got a magnificent mile
that's doing all this amount of money
and you got no tracking for a Mexican Independence Day
parade, which is, which is sus for lack of a better term,
um, how is that determined?
How do you get that data? How is that compared?
Uh, Tira, do you wanna answer that?
Yeah, so the city service department who's actually
incurring the costs has that information.
So for example, if we're talking about CPD,
if we're talking about public safety,
we're talking about streets and sand.
That department is collecting all of that information.
And so that currently sits with them.
And I think this is the whole sort of point
of having this cost recovery group is
how can we collectively bring all of those groups together
so we can build these essen, these organizations. Yeah.
So in essence, if I understand correctly,
like the spreadsheet you guys show us that has some
but not the other is you all just getting some of that info
but not the other information.
So this was not, uh, put the,
the report was not put together by us.
So it was Ernst and Young and the budget office.
So they would have how they collected all
of the information, all of that data, not us.
Right? I'm gonna sound a little Chicago
'cause that chart looks spotty as hell.
And if we're trying to give them money
to figure out our efficiencies
and revenue as it relates to our larger budget,
there's real concern.
'cause again, if you're telling me you can't track at all
how much got spent on a Mexican Independence Day parade
or how much it made or economic impact,
but you can gimme to like the dollar which you think
Magnificent Mile did downtown,
there are inequities in even the tracking
that should really concern all of us.
And also we need to be tracking expenditures.
So for example, we've got Mexican independent
state parade coming right now.
It would've been great to have that data
to understand the impact now
that we have the federal government trying
to stop everything from happening if it relates
to certain communities, that we'd be able to not only
articulate the moral problem with it,
but also the economic one.
Right. And so I think that the more information we get
there, uh, the better.
Um, okay. And then, so per your midyear report,
uh, it said y'all had only spent 13%
of your budget within the first five months.
And I know you said the opening statement about
40% now mid-September.
Uh, is that typical
of the department's cash flow of how it's spent?
Is there a timing thing, like, just to get a sense of it?
Yes. Um, most of our festivities happen, um,
between August, September, so a lot of our, um,
uh, funds will, will, it'll be, we'll, we'll click shop
to the, by the time we have the full budget
hearing. So got,
It'll look more. And
then last one I got, which you know, I like is merch.
So there's a store, right?
The, uh, buddy storage is great,
but I do think there's an opportunity to create merchandise
and kind of use that as a way to license out
and get revenue, which might be marginal in relation to some
of the money we get, but it'll be something as well
as potentially license
or some level of, yeah, probably license
or permit for folks who use like the Chicago flag
or seal or anything else.
And so if we wanted to kind of start a pilot of like, Hey,
we're gonna do shirts, we're gonna do a couple things like
what funds could be appropriated to that to partner up
and kind of help like hashtag summertime
shy t-shirts or whatever.
Um, is there a pot
of funds we could use to start building that out
Currently? No.
Um, I, you know, um, I know
that's been a real pressing thing
and I, I definitely would like to see that happen too.
So, um, I mean, meeting with, um, law
and seeing what we could do just from an ordinance
standpoint, um, would be the first step.
But currently, no, there's not a, there's not a pot full of
Oh yeah. I mean, happy to,
like I said, I know we talked
so we can continue partnering, but also down the shoot ad
and be like, yo, private entrepreneurs,
you wanna put some money in, uh,
as a way to kind of start it.
'cause I do think you could grow it out the same way people
have, um, kind of that connection
with their sports teams and this city.
We have a commodity just by who we are that a lot
of these cities across the country
that talk about Chicago wouldn't ever be able to put up.
I ain't get, no, I'm not gonna name a city,
but ain't another city t-shirt I'm trying to wear.
Thank you so much. Thank you, chairman.
Yes, sir. Thank you.
Um, I think you raised an interesting, uh, point, uh, about,
you know, our, um,
likability in marketing of the city.
Um, I, I think we've been seeing these, um,
books being passed out by JC Deco
and how they're advertising our city, um, across the world.
Uh, believe it or not, you know, tourism
and our ability to market ourself is a, is a significant,
uh, economic driver, especially in our hotel, uh, rooms
and room tax, which is a portion of how you all, uh,
are able to put on so many events, uh, through the,
uh, special events fund.
So, um, I, I do think there's some value in us, you know,
really, you know, taking a deep dive in,
in marketing ourselves and, you know, the wares
and what, what have you.
Um, I know there was one conversation of, uh,
of selling Chicago Water, um, how we can market
and sell Chicago water, uh, throughout the country.
Um, ironically, I I, I spent some time in Arizona
with a cousin and I could not believe that, you know,
people go to a store with,
with like big jugs to buy water.
Like, I, it just, it just blew my mind.
And I, and I think about the water that we have and,
and how we can potentially, uh, work
and monetize some of the assets
that we have here in the city, given
that we're sitting on the largest fresh water, uh,
source in, in North America.
So, um, again, uh, again, we, we've gotta start thinking,
uh, how we can generate, um, you know, resources, uh,
on behalf of, uh, on behalf of the city
and continuing to, uh, be innovative in in our approach to,
uh, to everything that's, that's happening.
Uh, any further questions by members
of the body, Alman Moore.
Thank you so much, um, chairman, um,
to commissioner Head Smith,
and especially you, um, your entire team, um, again, uh, be
for being, always being responsible,
but even more so I, for the ones that be proactive, I like
to point that out because sometimes we don't know always
what's going on or things go to our emails, we get flooded
with emails, but you
and your team, you are a person who reaches out to make sure
that we are aware of things, um, that are happening,
um, throughout the city.
Uh, even more so, um, making sure that our, um, children and
otherwise residents that wouldn't normally have access
to some of the things that's going on can have access.
And that is very, very important, especially from a,
um, cultural standpoint.
So, um, thank you for that for so much.
My, my question that I've been asking everyone and,
and looking at, uh, first of all this year's budget
to 2025, then looking into 2026 first, um,
based on last year budget, did you have the resources
that you needed to accomplish the things that you wanted?
Um, since we're mid supposed to be mid-year,
but you know, we got a couple more months
and then going forward, um, making sure that we, uh,
we know we're gonna have possible cuts,
but as ultimate we're gonna fight, um, based on
what we need and whoever's honest with me about the these
question I'm, they're gonna make sure I'm advocating in the
best way that I can.
Um, what do you feel you need to,
so you could be, um, um, successful in the next,
um, in the next cycle year.
So one, the budget that you had this year, was it helpful
for you to fulfill the things that you needed to fulfill?
And two, um, going forward, what is it that you need, um,
in this 2026 budget so
that you could continue to be successful?
Thank you for that. Yes.
Um, you know, I think the, what was
the previous budget we had enough to fulfill
what we wanted to fulfill.
Um, and the big ask is just more money.
Um, no, but I think, um, I hope
that everyone here is advocating for arts
and culture to not be cut.
Um, with the funding that we receive last year, we were
to do extraordinary things, um, as, um,
funding pools shrink, um, nationally being able
to still maintain, if not increase, which we were able
to increase by the extra funding, um, that the council, um,
provided that it made a huge difference.
We were able to, um, step in immediately
and help other organizations that lost funding.
We were able to increase, um, direct to artists, uh, support
and um, have more people, our people in our wards,
in our community are able to stay here
because we are providing them
the resources that they deserve. So
Absolutely, and given the fact that, um,
to taste the Chicago schedule changed, i, i, I want
to again say thank you for doing the taste of, um,
you know, Marquette Park.
And I hope we could continue that until we get a sponsor
to grow that even bigger.
Uh, I think with this year coming up,
I think it's the 60th anniversary of, uh, Dr.
King's march on, um, Marquette Park.
So you know, how we do that I think for 2026 is going
to be huge and important,
but, um, I know for a fact, um,
people appreciated it.
And with the taste being sort of pushed back, the taste
of Chicago itself, the, the big one being pushed back, a lot
of residents, some didn't even know it was going on.
Um, I think it was just for, was it for a weekend?
Was it, or was it a week? It's not the normal.
I don't think it was the normal six days.
And so it, it, it came and went and I,
and I'm, I, I guess I'm concerned about,
and again, it's, it's, it's no, um, reflection of you,
but I think a policy that was some policy changes
and I know we're dealing with, um, NASCAR and all of that,
but I'm trying to think was it a benefit to even having it?
And I don't wanna lose it.
I think we're on that track
because there's a cost benefit analysis
that has to be done.
And I don't know if you have those numbers yet,
have not provide those through the chair.
'cause I want to, was it a benefit
to even having it versus the, you know, cost?
Are we talking about the popups
or the downtown? The downtown.
The Downtown, yeah. Um, thank you for that question.
Yeah, we brought in 2.8, um, generated 2.8 million in food
and beverages cells, um, from the three days.
And we, that was a 12% increase from 2024.
Um, and we had 57 vendors
and seven, um, food trucks or booths.
Um, and so,
but this was also the first year
that we imposed the 10% on commission on food vendors.
So it seems to be trending up.
Um, I think moving back
to July will be even more beneficial.
Okay. But, um, so,
but just provide, if you don't have it now,
'cause that's what we got in revenue.
I need to know what that cost was, so I'll know
what, unless you know the answer.
Did we make money? Yeah,
You have the an that, that Not yet.
Not yet. Okay. Not yet. We will get that to you, sir.
Alright, thank you so much. Thank you.
Alright, any other questions? Okay.
I see you have a gentleman in the back with a stick.
Um, we did not, uh, he didn't need to use his stick today,
so, um, he don't have to come down here and try to scare us.
You know, we're gonna treat you right,
so it'll be all right.
So, uh, welcome, uh, former deputy commissioner, Mr. Troy.
Thank you, sir for joining us today.
Uh, with that being said, uh,
the committee will be in recess
until nine 30
Tuesday. You're correct.
Thank You. Tuesday. Tuesday nine 30.
Uh, we will have, um,
I think we've on the infrastructure series then, uh,
the CDOT Streets and Sand Buildings and two fm.
So Tuesday the 16th at
9:30 AM committee shall be in recess.