Good morning everyone.
We will get started shortly, as soon as we reach quorum.
Good morning, everyone. Happy Monday.
The Committee on Finance is called to Order.
We will now have a roll call to establish quorum
Vice Chair Conway Alderman Hopkins.
Alderman Hall. Alderman Mitchell. Alderman Lee.
Alderman Ramirez. Alderman Quinn. Alderman Lopez.
Alderman Curtis. Alderman O'Shea. Alderwoman Taylor.
Alderman Mosley. Alderman Rodriguez. Alderwoman.
Scott Alderman. Ccho Lopez.
Alderman Irvin. Alderman Talia Farrow.
Alderman Cardona. Alderman Wapac.
Alderwoman. Rodriguez Sanchez. Alderman Cazada.
Alderman Viegas. Alderman Sdo.
Alderman Vasquez. Alderman Riley. Alderman Knutson.
Alderman Martin Alderman Silverstein. Chair.
Doel is here. We have a quorum. We have 15 members.
Alderman Moore, Lata Harris, Beal,
and MIT have requested
to participate remotely at today's meeting
for reasons stated under the provisions of Rule 59.
Can I have a motion to allow these alderman to participate?
Participate. So moved by Alderman Lee.
All those in favor signify by saying Aye.
Opposed in the opinion of the chair.
The ayes have it and the motion carries.
I would like to confirm
that Alderman Moore is on the line.
Alderman Lata, present with you. Alderman Harris.
Alderman Beal. Yep.
Alderman Mitt, our president have joined today's meeting.
Alderman Knutson is here and will be counted towards quorum.
At this time, we'll begin the public comment period.
The public comment period is limited to 30 minutes.
Out of respect for everyone's time.
Each speaker is limited to three minutes.
We have no callers that have called in
to speak this morning.
So everyone that wants to speak is here.
The first speaker is Reverend Dr. Wallace Gator. Bradley.
Bradley,
Please begin with your comments. Reverend Bradley?
Yes. Good morning, chairman. And this is August Body.
I'm glad that this, uh, came
before the finance committee finally
about the $90 million global
group settlement, but
because of police misconduct,
and I'm glad that this body hopefully will agree
because it's going to save taxpayers money
to the tune of maybe $500 million
because of bad corrupt police officers.
I'm speaking because, you know, I came
before this committee numerous of times.
The last time I was here was
because of Mark Maxon, an individual that was tortured
by Chicago police that was wrongfully convicted,
had a life sentence, I aided and insisted him
and under contract, and he got freed
and the body gave him 8 million, some hundred 50,000.
But don't get it twisted.
I gotta still go to court to fight him to get my money
up under contract.
So did it be, but I'm glad
that this body understanding, for those that don't know,
Chicago got a messed up history of
how the police department tortured African American men
to confess the crimes that they know they didn't do.
They had a state's attorney
that ended up becoming the mayor.
Okay? So it ain't Brandon Johnson's problem,
it was already there.
So I'm glad, chairman, that this body is going
to vote to do that.
I'm in full support and I wanna say to God, be the glory.
Uh, thank you Reverend Bradley.
Um, I want to acknowledge Alderman Riley
and Alderman Quinn will be counted towards quorum.
Alderman Vasquez is asked
to participate remotely under Rule 59.
Can I have a motion to allow him to participate?
So move by all the woman Rodriguez Sanchez.
Uh, all those in favor signify by saying aye.
Opposed in the opinion of the chair. The ayes have it.
Uh, alderman Vazquez, are you with us this morning?
Alderman Harris is president. Chairman,
I have you Alderman Harris.
Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker is Mark Hopkins.
Good morning. Good morning. I'm Mark Hopkins.
I'm the Executive Director of the
Chicago Central Area Committee.
Uh, for those of you who don't know us, we're a think tank.
We focus on the long-term strategy for the built environment
of the central area of Chicago.
And some of our better known projects resulting from our
studies are Millennium Park, which was a result
of the 1983 Central Area Plan
and the Riverwalk, which was for 20 years
of work from 1972 to 1992.
I'm here today to support both. Actually.
I came to support, uh, the funding for 1 0 5, uh,
west Adams Street, the, the,
the TIF money being spent on
the redevelopment of that project.
As you may know, our group was involved
with both the Johnson administration
and the Lightfoot administration on putting together the
plans for LaSalle Street Reimagined
and for their implementation.
It scares me every time I walk by the corner
of Washington Street
and Franklin, whether it's a big empty lot covered
with gravel where the Chicago
Mercantile Exchange used to stand.
I'm afraid that some of the buildings
that are classically beautiful on our orange list are gonna
be torn down if we don't do the appropriate,
uh, adaptive reuse.
So I'm just here to support the projects
that are coming up today, both 1 35 Southwest AL
and 1 0 5 West Adams. Thank you for your time.
Thank you Mr. Hopkins.
Our next speaker is George Blakemore.
Good morning. This previous
speaker talking about these old buildings rolling the sale,
they're gonna try to re uh, make 'em residential
and they using chip money.
These owners are lo are losing money.
And I asked this question
and I heard you madam say that some of these units will cost
a million dollars.
One unit for a million dollars.
Somebody is doing voodoo economics here.
Somebody is doing, making the rich richer.
I was told by someone, a developer say that they have
to have ventilation
and they, you going to, uh, lower your standards anyway.
They have a building called the re rico,
they need Tiff money.
And I see one of the theaters are getting Tiff money.
So, uh, I I, I have one of these hats, uh,
make America great again.
I was paying over that.
Uh, make America great, uh, that again
and say, make America great.
She's never been great to black people.
She was founded by racist people.
The the first president
of the United States was a racist.
He had black slaves.
So I want America to be great,
make America great.
America is rich off of slave labor.
I can't just get mad at white folks, Hispanics or Asian.
I got to get mad at some of these Black kin folks who voted
for sanctuary, another person to come in
and get things that we never received.
We never got our 40 acres and a mule.
If we did, they took both the acres and the mule.
So again, we have black faces
in high places selling black people out.
So, uh, it's something evil here.
It's something on America here. They all Democrats.
No check and balance, no Republican, no,
no socialists, no problem.
A multi-party system would clean this.
Do, do up, up.
It's disgraceful.
It's, I painted that hat, but it's still kinda wet.
I said, make America again.
I painted over that and I say, make America great.
She can be great
by including everyone.
Thank you, Mr. Blakemore. Our next speaker is Ward Miller.
And while he's coming to the mic, I want
to acknowledge Alderman O'Shea, who's joined us
and will be counted towards quorum.
Good morning, Madam Chair.
Uh, ward Miller, the Richard h Treehouse, executive Director
of Preservation Chicago, uh, Chicago based nonprofit
advocacy organization, uh, that encourages preservation
of historic buildings
and reuse of these as working landmarks.
Uh, we're here today, uh, for two buildings, uh,
1 0 5 West Adams,
otherwise known as the Clark Adams Building
and the 1 35 South LaSalle Street Building,
also known as the field Building.
Formerly the Bank of America Building.
We're here to encourage that, uh, funds be set aside, uh,
to support these buildings.
Uh, we understand that they will be, uh,
conversion from office for the most part,
office to residential.
Uh, these are amazing projects.
There's also an affordability component
that's being worked into this, uh, idea, this vision.
So really, the Chicago Loop will be
everybody's neighborhood.
Uh, one building, 1 35 South LaSalle is already a designated
Chicago landmark.
And investment in our landmarks is
really something worthwhile.
Uh, the 1 0 5 West Adams building is
in the landmarks process.
We hope to see that building, uh, landmarked
and funds dedicated, uh, to these projects.
So we ask the support of all members
of the finance committee, of the Chicago City Council, uh,
to approve these monies for these two really amazing
and transformative projects.
It'll be cornerstones, uh, for, uh, the Chicago Loop
and also address the idea
of these buildings suddenly become, uh,
becoming working landmarks once again, uh, inhabited
by many, many Chicagoans.
So two very exciting projects
and preservation Chicago supports them both. Thank you.
Thank you Mr. Miller. Our next speaker is Thomas McIlroy.
Mr. McIlroy, you signed up to speak on both projects.
So can you speak
to both projects in one statement?
Please vote for both of them.
Madam Chair. Um, yes, of course.
I had a speech ready for each one,
but I'm gonna figure something out here.
Thank you. Th this is a one.
This is a great opportunity.
Both of these buildings will have their technology
and their technology infrastructure substantially enhanced
for, for, uh,
individuals who are living in low income housing,
will have the same kind of technology access as anyone else.
Individuals who are working second
and third shift will be able to walk home.
Uh, this is profound, uh,
going on here in the city of Chicago.
And these are the kinds of things
and the kinds of investments
that the city needs to be making.
And I am very, very happy
and thankful to support both of these projects.
They're well deserved.
They will create, they will create many, many jobs,
both short term and long term.
And the idea of revitalizing the loop
and turning it into a neighborhood
is something I think will be to the benefit
of all Chicagoans.
And I thank you for your time
Today.
Thank you, Mr. McIlroy.
This concludes public comment
and we will now move into the regular agenda
of the finance committee.
We'll begin with the approval
of the July 20, 25 monthly Rule 45 report
and the August, 2025 monthly Rule 45 report
for the Committee on Finance.
Uh, and the July, 2025 monthly report
for the Committee on Finance.
These reports for the committee, I'm sorry, uh,
subcommittee on revenue.
Uh, these reports were sent electronically to everyone.
Is there a motion can I get for these reports?
So moved by Alderman Irvin.
All those in favor signify by saying Aye. Opposed?
And the opinion of the chair.
The ayes have it and the motion carries.
We have a total of 11 items on the agenda this morning.
We'll start with item number one,
which is from the Department of law.
It's a communication transmitting reports of cases
and which verdicts judgments
or settlements were entered into for the month of July, 2025
and August, 2025.
You all received these, uh, list of payments electronically.
If there are no objections,
this item will be placed on file with the clerk.
Item number two is from the Department of law.
We have four proposed orders
authorizing the Corporation Council to enter into
and execute settlement orders in the following cases.
Two A, which is Danielle Young versus City of Chicago,
case number 2023 L 66 88,
and the amount of $125,000, which will be presented
by Margaret Mendenhall.
Casey, uh, good morning. Good
Morning chair and good morning.
Committee on Finance. Plaintiff Danielle Young,
who was then 47 years old,
tripped on a staircase at 500 North Michigan
and fell down 10 steps.
Ms. Young subsequently underwent three surgeries.
There are at least two other trip
and fall lawsuits stemming from the staircase.
The same staircase. The Department
of Law recommends settlement in the amount of $125,000
at 8:30 PM on August 1st, 2022, Ms. Young
and her family were heading to their car.
The group walked to a staircase on the west side
of Michigan Avenue that went to the parking area
beneath Ms. Young stepped on the second stair from the top.
Her right foot stepped into a hole and her ankle buckled.
She slid down 10 steps and landed face down.
She did not see the hole as she was looking ahead
because it was dark.
Her husband observed Mrs. Young's fall.
Uh, as to prior incidents, uh,
the first prior incident is in August of 2016
when a individual by the name
of Carol Charlie fell on the staircase leading
to the Billy Gold Tavern at four 50 North Michigan.
In response to Ms.
Charlie's lawsuit, a sidewalk survey was requested
for four 50 North Michigan
and then the address was subsequently changed in 3 1 1 2 500
North Michigan for an unknown reason.
A survey was completed in December of 2016.
It is unknown which set
of stairs CDOT inspected four 50 North
or 500 North, which is our subject address.
This lawsuit settled for 250,000 in 2019.
As to the second incident on June 22nd, 2022.
So about a month before our subject incident, Ms.
LaDonna Smith tripped
and fell while walking down the stairs at
500 North Michigan.
On July 20th, 2022,
her attorney submitted a set settlement demand to the city
and identified the subject step.
This case settled for $30,000 in October of 2024.
As to the third incident, three days after, um, Ms.
Young's fall, Nina Hunt fell on a staircase at 500 North
Michigan and a lawsuit is currently
pending as to that matter.
A-C-D-O-N employee fixed the subject staircase in 2023
and he testified that the subject step was a tripping hazard
and need needed to be repaired.
The plaintiff retained an expert who concluded that the
hole in question form years before the occurrence
and was a tripping hazard.
Ms. Young was transported by ambulance from scene, uh,
from the scene to Northwestern
and providers placed her in a shoulder sling,
wrapped her ankle and gave her crutches.
Um, she does have a prior, um, history of issues
with her shoulder, shoulders having surgery on both of them.
In 2009 in August, she followed up with an orthopod.
He diagnosed her with a right ankle sprain
and gave her a cam boot.
An MRI revealed a right shoulder tear.
In September, she was, uh, diagnosed
with a left leg hematoma in December, uh,
the hematoma was removed.
Then in January, 2023,
her left shoulder MRI revealed a tear.
In February of that year, there was, uh, shoulder, uh,
shoulder surgery performed on her left shoulder.
Uh, then in June, right shoulder surgery.
Her treaters testified that she, um,
may still experience occasional pain
and need additional steroid shots or physical therapy.
She also has an inch
and a half scar on her left leg
where the hematoma was removed
and an inch long scar on both shoulders.
Her, uh, medical bills total 143,000.
The city did retain a medical expert
and that expert links the hematoma
and ankle sprain to this accident,
but said that the shoulders were related
to her pre-existing condition.
The plaintiff initially demanded $975,000 on this matter
and at trial the plaintiff would seek, uh, damages
for passing future pain
and suffering, as well as loss of normal life,
emotional distress, disfigurement and medical bills.
The Department of Law recommends settlement in the amount
of 125,000 on this matter.
Uh, thank you Margaret for the summary.
Um, I want to acknowledge Alderman Ramirez
and Alderman Mitchell will be counted towards quorum.
Are there any questions on this settlement?
Seeing no question Alderman
Conway recommending Do pass all those in favor of the motion
signify by saying aye.
Aye. Opposed? And, uh, in the opinion of the chairs,
the ayes have it.
The do pass recommendation with the exception
of Alderman Lopez will be reported out at the next
city Council meeting.
Item two B Vincent Miller versus Danny May
and the city of Chicago.
Case number 23 L 71 30 in the amount
of $350,000.
Also reported out
by Deputy Corporation Counsel Margaret Mendenhall.
Casey
Thank you Chair.
On August 11th, 2022 Streets
and Sanitation employee Danny Ma made a left turn
and struck the front of plaintiff Vincent Miller's car.
Mr. Miller sustained back injuries resulting in surgery.
The Department of Law recommends settlement in the amount
of 350,000 for this matter.
At around 1:00 PM Mr. Miller, who was then 54 years old,
was driving his van northbound on Damon
approaching 80th Street.
At the same time, defendant mine was driving a city pickup
truck southbound on Damon Streets
and Sanitation employee Catherine Serta was a passenger
and defendant MA's truck.
The intersection of Damon
and 80th has no traffic control signals.
Defendant Maya attempted
to make a left turn onto 80th Street
and the front bumper of defendant MA's car connected
with the front driver's side of Mr.
Miller's car. There is no evidence about each party's speed,
but there is nothing to suggest either party was speeding.
Mr. Miller's airbags deployed
and both vehicles were totaled as a result of the accident.
There is no video footage of the accident.
CPD Officer Daniels responded to the accident
and labeled defendant my as the at-fault driver.
His body-worn camera captures the vehicle's positioning At
the time of the accident, Mr.
Miller's vehicle made it through the intersection
before coming into contact
with defendant MA's vehicle which
had turned in front of him.
As to injuries, Mr. Miller went to the hospital.
The day of the accident was diagnosed
with a soft tissue injury
and discharged a September MRI revealed neck
and back protrusions.
Mr. Miller received physical therapy from August
until December and then in May
of 2023 when his pain did not resolve,
he underwent back surgery
and then returned to physical therapy.
Mr. Miller eventually went
to work without restrictions in December of 2023
and his doctors will testify
that he experience he will experience future pain
and arthritis due to the accident.
Mr. Miller incurred $163,000 in medical
bills in this matter.
Uh, liability favors the plaintiff
as the plaintiff will argue Mr. Miller made it
through the intersection when defendant may
turned in front of him.
While defendant may claims, um, Mr.
Miller's blinkers were on
or turned signals on, Mr. Miller denies this and Mr.
Radar passenger does not provide supportive testimony.
Officer Daniels also concluded
that Defendant my was at fault for the accident.
The plaintiff initially demanded $1.4 million
and at trial the plaintiff would seek damages
for passing future pain
and suffering as well as loss of normal life,
emotional distress and medical bills.
Therefore, the Department
of Law recommends settlement in the amount of 350,000.
Thank you, Ms. Casey. Any questions from,
uh, alderman Ramirez?
I did count you already. Any other any questions?
Alderman Hopkins? Uh,
Move approval if there's None.
Thank you. Uh, motion made by Alderman Hopkins.
Recommending Do pass all those in favor
of the motion signify by saying Aye.
Aye. Opposed? And the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it
and the do pass recommendation will be reported out at the
next city Council meeting.
Item number two C Jerome Tillis versus City of Chicago.
Sean, how and Ette Fountain
case number 22 L 50 89 in the amount
of $350,000.
Um, Margaret Denal Casey
On June 12th, 2021 Paramedics Sean, how
and Ette Fontain responded to a nine one one call
for plaintiff, Jerome Tillis,
who was then 56 years old at Van Buren in Michigan.
While the paramedics were trying to provide care, Mr.
Tillis's friend yelled and took cell phone footage.
The paramedics enlisted
by standard assistants and lifting Mr.
Tillis from the ground to the gurney. Mr.
Tillis alleges the paramedics acted willfully
and wantonly when they failed to immobilize him
with a cervical collar and backboard
and allowed a bystander to assist
and lifting him at the hospital.
Mr. Tillis was diagnosed with a spinal cord injury. Mr.
Tillis currently suffers from a condition called incomplete
quadriplegia, which means
that he has weakness in his arms and legs.
The Department of Law recommends settlement in the amount
of $350,000.
On the day of the accident, Mr.
Tillis drank alcohol
and smoked cannabis at his friend Steven Burns home
around 9:00 PM Tillis
and Burns left the apartment on bicycles.
Burns was riding ahead of Mr.
Tillis when he heard a bike hit the pavement.
Burns did not see Mr. Tillis fall and Mr.
Tillis does not remember falling.
A bystander called 9 1 1 and female paramedics hid
and Fang were dispatched to the scene.
Paramedic Kyle testified that when she approached Mr.
Tillis, he complained of shoulder pain
and asked her to help him stand up.
He admitted to being intoxicated.
However, when the paramedic assisted Mr.
Tillis, he could not bear his own weight. Uh, Mr.
Tillis's friend Burns yelled at the paramedics
and took cell phone footage while they cared for Mr.
Tillis. Both paramedics testified that they were unable
to complete their assessment
because Burns caused him to fear for their safety paramedic
how enlisted a bystanders assistance and lifting Mr.
Tillis from the ground onto the gurney.
Uh, plaintiff will argue that the video shows Mr.
Tills being tossed onto the gurney in an
uncoordinated fashion.
During this time, burns can be heard on cell phone footage
telling the paramedics to use a backboard because Mr.
Tillis could have a spine injury. Mr.
Tillis does not recall any care that the paramedics
provided as to the relevant policies.
Um, CFD policy requires
that paramedics provide an initial assessment
upon arriving on scene.
The initial assessment entails observing the scene
for evidence regarding the mechanism of injury
or how the patient was injured,
assessing the patient's breathing
and their blood circulation.
After completing the primary assessment,
the paramedics are required to ascertain
if the patient can be moved, if they are intoxicated,
or if they have an altered mental status.
Patients showing signs of intoxication,
altered mental status
or neurological defect are required to be placed in a cco.
And, uh, use of a backboard CFD policy allows the paramedics
to forego completing an assessment to secure their
and the patient's safety.
CFD policy is silent
regarding enlisting bystander health in this matter.
The paramedics were not disciplined for their care of Mr.
Tillis. From June 12th into June 24th, Mr.
Tillis was admitted to Northwestern Memorial Hospital.
Upon intake, he had a BAC
or blood alcohol level of 0.227
and cannabis in his system.
He was diagnosed with spinal fractures
and a damaged spinal cord.
Surgery was performed from June 24th until August 11th. Mr.
Tillis was admitted to Shirley Ryan Ability
Lab as Shirley Ryan.
He learned to walk again.
He was in a wheelchair for a month after the accident,
but at discharge, he was able to walk on his own.
From August 11th, 2021 to May of 2023,
he lived at a skilled nursing facility.
At discharge, he was able to independently get in
and out of bed, walk a couple blocks with a cane,
and use the bathroom and shower on his own.
Since May of 23, he has lived in an apartment by himself.
His aunt assists him with cooking, cleaning,
and household chores, and he continues to be under the care
of a physical therapist, neurologist, and pain specialist.
Before this incident, Mr.
Tillis was employed part-time
and he performed household tasks for clients.
Mr. Tillis passed medical bills total
540,000 in this matter.
The plaintiff disclosed three experts in the city,
also disclosed three experts.
The plaintiff's expert opines that the paramedics willfully
and wantonly care for Mr.
Tillis. Um, as to, um, the plaintiff's expert neurosurgeon,
he does conce that the plaintiff injured his spinal cord
when he fell off of the bike
before the paramedics arrived on scene.
However, the expert says that the failure to use a CCO
and backboard when lifting Mr.
Tillis exacerbated the injury caused
by the fall off the bike.
He also says that the paramedics failure to immobilize Mr.
Tillis calls him a lost chance at a better recovery.
Um, and I'll go into more detail about what
that lost chance means for our case.
The, uh, city's expert agrees
that a spinal cord injury should be considered if a patient
has symptoms consistent with a spinal cord injury.
However, he opines
that a cervical collar is not required in every instance.
In total, there is between 2.1
and $2.4 million in economic damages in the record.
Specifically, that's 540,000 in past medical bills.
Um, approximately, um, 1.1 million in future lost wages,
278 in future loss benefits
and 500 in lost household services.
Plaintiff alleges that the city's employees willfully
and wantonly exacerbated Mr.
Tillis's injury from falling off the bike.
As we discussed, when they failed
to recognize his spinal cord injury, did not use a CCO
and backboard and enlisted a bystander
to assist in moving him at trial.
The city would contend
that the paramedics were not willful and wanton.
Given the threat post by Mr.
Tess's friend, the paramedics could forego an assessment
to secure not only their safety,
but also the safety of the patient.
The city will argue that there's no evidence of trauma
or spinal cord injury When the paramedics arrived on scene,
however, they were given a history that Mr.
Tillis had fallen off a bike. Um, as well.
The EMS policies require CCO and PA
and, uh, backboard be placed on patients
who show intoxication, which Mr.
Tillis admitted to being intoxicated,
having an a altered mental state.
Um, he was in and out of consciousness
and an inability to move Mr.
Tillis could not hold his own weight.
All of these were observed
by the paramedics before they placed Mr.
Tillis, uh, on a gurney. Finally, regarding causation.
We will emphasize that Mr.
Tillis cannot prove to
what degree the paramedics treatment exacerbated the injury
he sustained from falling off the bike.
However, the lost Chance doctrine lessens
plaintiff's causation burden.
The lost chance doctrine is a argument
that a plaintiff can make when allegations are raised,
that a defendant's treatment
decrease the overall effectiveness of potential recovery.
In this case, plaintiff does not have the burden to prove
that he would have had a greater than 50%
chance of, of better recovery.
However, rather any lost chance, no matter
how small is enough to allow the jury to award damages.
The plaintiff initially demanded $2 million in this matter,
and the Department of Law recommends settlement in the
amount of $350,000.
Uh, thank you Ms. Casey.
Uh, alderman Mitt, your hand is up.
Alderman Mitch Alderman Spto. Yes.
Yes, yes. I'm here. Yes. Alderman mit.
Yes. Someone should be recognized. Come on.
Let me, let me get in.
Thank you. Alderman Aldo.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh, thank you Maggie.
Uh, question for you.
Uh, the guy on the street burns, was he, was he with Tillis
or was he just a bystander?
That was, uh, certainly, um, certainly he was aggressive
and, and, and bothersome to the paramedics.
Um, was he tillis's friend or were they together
or was he just, just the guy on the street?
Sure. So Mr. Burns was taking the cell phone footage,
was a friend of Mr.
Tillis's. Uh, the city, um, would certainly argue
that Mr. Burns was a aggressor
and an instigator in this matter.
Um, however, the plaintiff would argue that that paramedic,
how, um, what was an aggressor.
So I don't believe in the video
that they solicited help from the citizen.
I believe that person just jumped in and helped him. I did.
They, did they ask that individual, can you please help us?
We can't lift him up, or did he just jump in?
I've been on scenes before I've been there, done it.
I mean, so, uh,
and these aren't, these aren't two slugs of paramedics.
These are well-respected individuals,
and it was an intense situation
that they felt they needed a high tail outta there.
So what was, again, burns.
Burns was very bothersome to me in this, uh, in this video.
Uh, I'm, I'm sorry. The question was the
what did the bystander, um, did the bystander,
was he assist on their owns
or did he, was he requested to assist
by the paramedics? Is that the question?
I don't think it was burns, but the person that helped,
did the two paramedics ask him, Hey buddy,
can you help us lift this guy?
We can't lift him up. Or did the person
just jump in and help 'em out?
So the bystander was requested
by the paramedics to assist.
And just so we, we are clear, there really, uh,
were five actors on the scene.
Um, Mr. Tillis, the plaintiff,
Mr. Burns, who was a friend of Mr.
Tillis, the bystander, um, who is an unidentified,
we don't know his name as well as the two paramedics.
So, um, the bystander, the unidentified bystander was asked
by the paramedics to assist in lifting Mr.
Tillis.
So in the briefing, we were told
that there was only two things that, uh,
Jerome Tillis remembered.
And that was, um, that he told the paramedics he was drunk
and that they made a derogatory statement, uh,
towards him when they, when they, when they got there.
Sure. So in terms of the statements that were made by Mr.
Tillis, or I think the larger question is, what does Mr.
Tillis, um, recall? Mr.
Tillis has a very limited recollection of what occurred
during this incident.
Um, during the majority of the incident, Mr.
Tillis will say that he, uh, was blacked out.
Um, however, neither the plaintiff
nor the city of Chicago's, uh, case
regarding the the treatment of Mr.
Tillis is based on his testimony.
Aldo, Thank you. Amano.
Okay. Alderman Conway,
Just say, uh, for the benefit of my colleagues, it's,
it's clear this guy was bombed
with a 0.227 BAC high on weed.
But the fact of the matter is, um, you know,
he sustained $540,000 in medical bills,
at least a million dollars in economic wages loss.
It's an open question whether the bystander was a threat
more than open question about whether the paramedics should
have used a back break back brace.
The fact that we're getting out of this
for $350,000 is a win for the taxpayers and mm-hmm.
Uh, would move to pass
after Alderman Lopez goes. So please vote
Yes. Thank you. Vice
chair.
Uh, can you explain, um, Margaret the
city's bystander policy?
Yes, chair. The Chicago Fire Department's policy is silent
as to if the paramedics are allowed to enlist
bystander assistance.
Um, both the city as well as the plaintiff retained,
uh, EMS experts.
The plaintiff's EMS expert will say
that it was against the, the standard of care
or what, uh, is standard for a paramedic to do to enlist
bystander assistance.
The city's, um, expert will say that it,
that the paramedic was allowed
and following the standard of care when they enlisted
by standard assistance.
Um, I think another relevant part of the policy here, chair,
is about if a paramedic is allowed
to essentially, um, skip
or deviate from steps in the policy
to ensure their safety.
Um, and the real question in this case is going to be, uh,
essentially was paramedic.
How the aggressor was, um, the,
was Mr. Burns the aggressor
and did Mr. Burns behavior justify the paramedics in,
um, skipping steps in the policy in order
to secure their safety as well as, uh, Mr.
Till's safety?
Right? Um, alderman Lopez, thank you.
Thank you, chairman, and good morning.
Members of the committee. If our
paramedics had to make a decision to keep themselves safe
and skip steps,
and we're going to approve a settlement today that says
that they were wrong for trying
to restrain somebody that was drunk high and whatever,
and that we're willing to say that it's more in our interest
to just pay out these settlements than
to defend our employees.
We're gonna see the same response to applications,
PO application postings for paramedics as we do
for CP for CPD.
No one's gonna wanna work for us.
And as I look at the agenda, we have this
green lined document, everyone, seven pages of settlements
and verdicts of this year, year to date.
And if you look through all of them,
you'll see every department has had to make settlements
for damage or for incidents or whatever.
This is the new niche cottage
industry replacing Chicago police settlement lawsuits.
And we are feeding right into that again
and again and again.
I said no earlier to the woman who tripped in a hole,
as I've said no before, to people who've walked into a tree
or didn't see the streetlight was out.
We have to start saying no to these settlements
because what we are doing is continuing the trend
of helping lawyers get rich
and people taking advantage of situations
and operational issues
that we have here in the city of Chicago.
Anyone who has a bruise now
from an EMS is gonna sue us saying they were attacked
or that it was a volatile situation.
This reminds me of a few years ago when we had the godinas
lawsuit, when you had a coked out gang banger
with burns on him that we were trying to settle with,
even though the burns were from him trying to slide under a,
a, a car with the engine running.
It was our fault. He got burned.
And now here we are doing the same thing,
but in a different, with a different set
of characters, same plot.
We have got to start saying, no, this is ridiculous.
The taxpayers are not an endless fountain,
an endless gravy train for stupidity
and criminality in this city.
I'm a no, and I hope everyone else will
consider their no as well. Thank you, chairman.
Uh, thank you Alderman Lopez.
Just because you say no, doesn't mean
that the lawsuit goes away.
Um, sure
No one thinks the lawsuits go away,
but sometimes we have to defend ourselves.
But what is more important is that we say no to the people
who think that they could keep submitting
and filing these lawsuits against us.
Because if they know they have us on the ropes
and we're just gonna cut and cut the check
and run, they're gonna keep coming after us.
So at some point, we've got to stand up
and on our own two legs
and say, enough of this crap and fight back.
Thank you. That's why we, yes. Alderman Spaza.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Just one thing I forgot
to say when I gave my thing.
And listen, I, I know these are all not never easy
and I'm not asking you to vote.
Follow me. Do whatever you want. I have a problem with that.
This individual is also three times the legal limit, drunk
or high, or whatever he was.
So, thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. Alderman
Vice Chair Conway renew his motion to do pass.
I'm sorry, alderman. Chairman Irvin.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I, I, I think, um, it, it begs the question on, um,
risk management practices.
I, I think that, um,
when we repeatedly see a specific type of
claim come to us, it begs the question of what are we doing
to help prevent these types of, uh, activities.
Now granted, I haven't seen many along this line
with this same set of facts.
Um, I do think there are some cases that,
that we can evaluate.
And I'm, I'm hopeful and I see some of the things
that are on the agenda today, um,
that are leading us in that direction.
I think that we have to refocus our energy on helping
departments, uh, find best practices in order to not
continue to have these types of cases
to come before us again.
Uh, other than the, uh, than the sidewalk,
which I think is a, is a good point to talk about
what are we doing with sidewalks,
how quickly we're getting them out.
But I, I think some of these, uh,
run-offs are not necessarily running the mill types cases.
I do believe that we can make some, uh,
some traction on some of the ones that we continue to see,
but this is a highly, uh, unusual set of facts
and, and the situation.
So, um, that I just wanted to add that that point.
I, I will support this. Again, uh,
we are a municipal corporation
and as part of the game of being who we are, uh,
everything from any levels of liability
and we want to take some of this stuff up, uh, we,
we probably need to find, get on the bus
and go to Springfield and deal with that along
with the other myriad of issues
that we need help with from Springfield.
But the way the laws are written, it, it, it pretty puts a,
pretty much puts us on the hook for things that many
of you may find to be frivolous
or the general public may find to be rather frivolous,
but under state law, it caused us to be responsible.
So just wanted to add that. Thank you Madam Chair.
Well, thank you, chairman Urban, um, hear you on that.
This is a one-off.
And Margaret, you might wanna speak
to the risk management component of his, his remarks.
Sure. Thank you, chair. Um, as to this specific case, uh,
I believe it's, uh, vice Chair Conway who noted the,
the risk management involved in
recommending this settlement.
Um, there are between 2.1
and $2.4 million, um, in economic damages
that the plaintiff would present to the jury
that does not account for all of the non-economic damages.
So loss of normal life, emotional distress, pain
and suffering, um, that the plaintiff would be asking for,
uh, compensation for, for from the jury.
So that's why the city has made that recommendation
of $350,000 as
to larger risk management per uh, procedures.
Um, I'm reticent to speak as to specific cases, um,
and don't want to breach that attorney client privilege.
But I, I would note just, just last week, um, due
to conversations that I had with, um, the Office
of Legal Affairs within the Chicago Police Department, um,
we were able to identify something as you you've noted, uh,
chair Irvin, where we're seeing repeat issues happening
with repeat cases, um,
and intervening to ensure that
that repeat issue did not occur.
Um, and I am not exaggerating
and saying that, that stepping in
and, um, helping to assist with that decision has saved the,
the city millions of dollars.
So now, and being in this role and seeing
and spotting as you're talking repeat issues
and having the good relationships
with the client departments, I can pick up the phone,
tell them about what's happening,
and then we can work together to ensure that
that issue doesn't reach you guys.
Thank you. Uh, alderman,
vice Chair Conway renews his motion recommending Due Pass.
All those in favor signify by saying Aye. Opposed?
Uh, so I am counting Alderman Cardona,
alderman Quinn, alderman Lopez.
Did I see a hand over here?
And Alderman Spaza two hands, alderman Spto.
Uh, the do pass recommendation, with the exception
of those aldermen will be reported out at the next
city Council meeting.
Thank you, Ms. Casey. Um, item 2D in Ray,
former Sergeant Ronald Watts, Northern District of Illinois,
in the amount of $90 million.
We're joined by, uh,
the Deputy Corporation Counsel Victoria Benson for this one.
Uh, Thank you Chair and Alderman Ccho
Lopez. We count you towards
Quorum.
Uh, thank you Chair and good morning Committee members.
Um, Victoria Benson, deputy Corporation Counsel
of the Mass Torts and Complex Litigation Division.
I am here today to request your approval
to enter into global settlement
to resolve 176 lawsuits filed on behalf
of 180 plaintiffs each seeking to recover damages
for the prosecutions arising from their arrests
by former Sergeant Ronald Watts,
former Officer Kala Mohammed
and Chicago police officers assigned to the tactical team
of which Watts was the sergeant.
Plaintiff's allegations include claims
that they were maliciously prosecuted,
that officers fabricated evidence against 'em,
and that they were unlawfully detained pretrial.
Each plaintiff also makes Monell responding at superior
and indemnification claims against the city.
The law department recommends the city council approve a
global settlement that encompasses these 176 lawsuits
pending against the city, Watts, Mohamed,
and other officers for a total of $90 million.
The terms of the settlement include that payments
of this settlement by the city will be made
to plaintiffs in two installments, both
of which will be made in 2026.
Plaintiff's arrests took place over a period
of nearly 10 years, from 2002 through 2011,
beginning in September, 2004, the FBI jointly
with CPDs Internal Affairs Division began investigating
allegations that Watts Muhammad
and other members of Watts's tactical team were engaged in
acts of corruption that included collecting, quote, unquote,
street taxes from drug dealers that would allow them
to continue their business without being arrested
and arresting sometimes falsely those involved in the drug
trade who refused to pay the tax.
That investigation culminated in a federal indictment in
February, 2012, Warren Watson Mohammed were federally
charged with theft of government funds based on evidence
from a sting operation that occurred a few months earlier.
Both WATS and Mohammad later pled guilty to those charges
and both served sentences in federal prison.
Additional integrity checks were done to see if any
of the other members of Watt's tactical team were engaged in
corruption with negative results.
Plaintiffs then used Watts
and Hamm's convictions is newly discovered evidence to,
in support of their petitions, seeking
to overturn their respective convictions.
The Cook County state's attorney's office's conviction
integrity Unit then reviewed plaintiff's cases,
and in some instances, agreed to move
to vacate plaintiff's convictions themselves.
While in others, their office simply agreed not
to oppose petitions seeking
to vacate a plaintiff's conviction.
Plaintiff's convictions from arrest by Watts Mohammed
and other members of the tactical team,
of which Watts was the sergeant, were vacated.
And nearly every plaintiff has been granted one
or more certificates of innocence in total the time these
plaintiffs spent in custody pre
and post-conviction ranges from 182 years to 204 years,
between 2016
and 2020 five, a hundred and eighty five lawsuits have been
filed seeking to recover damages
for their prosecutions arising from arrests
by Watts Mohammed,
and certain other Chicago police officers assigned
to the tactical team of which Watts was a sergeant.
To date, the city has spent nearly $25 million in
outside counsel fees and litigation expenses,
including the cost
of expert witnesses since 2016 when the first loss, first
of the lawsuits against the city, Watts Mohammed,
and other officers was filed.
Should the litigation continue, we can expect those figures
to increase, especially as the defense teams begin
to prepare for and proceed
to trial in any of these lawsuits.
This settlement will result in the closure of 64%
of the reverse conviction cases and lawsuits.
The city is present presently defending against.
Given the risks associated with proceeding
to trial in these cases, including the risk
of attorney's fees, the law department recommends settling
these matters globally for $90 million.
Thank you, Ms. Benson. Chair Irvin.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh, first off, I want to, uh,
thank you all for your diligence, um,
in, in doing this work.
Uh, I, I know that, um, um, what this
represents will be a overall savings
and actually closure, uh, on this issue, uh, regarding,
uh, Sergeant Watts.
Uh, again, um, I'm, I'm hopeful
that this strategy can be utilized in other cases, uh,
because again, we see the legal bills
and all of those things individually continuing
to run on many of these cases.
So I just want to thank you all
and kudos to the, to your team, uh,
and to corporation counsel for, you know, working
to get this all together, uh, so
that we can have this global settlement
and also structured, uh, in a way that does not have it,
while it will impact our, our, our, our, uh, financials,
but in a way that we can manage, uh, over the course of, uh,
over the course of time.
So, again, just want to, uh, thank you all
for your hard work in getting this done
and the coordinated the,
I'll call the new coordinated effort
that the law department is doing on many cases
with similar fact patterns around the same,
uh, same individuals.
Wish we had this during the bird's time,
it would've probably saved us a ton of money.
But again, new people knew innovations,
and so really appreciate the
hard work you all put into this.
Thank you Madam Chair. Thank
You.
Vice Chair Conway.
Yeah, I, i, to echo some of that,
I almost think not enough is being made about
what a staggeringly good outcome this is
for the taxpayers, the city of Chicago.
You know, as we look at these cases, you know, we have
to right the wrongs of the past while trying
to make sure we have a fiscally responsible future
for, for the taxpayers.
And here we have a situation. We have 176 tax, 176 cases.
You have, uh, you know, Sergeant Watson, Mohamed,
our federally convicted felons.
They all have, or nearly all of 'em, have,
have certificates of innocence.
This was a large unknown future liability on the balance
sheet of, of the city of Chicago.
And the cost to litigate this would've been enormous.
And also a situation where liability was,
was almost a hundred percent assured.
So, I, I really wanna commend the law department,
the mayor's office, and,
and individually, Ms. Richardson Lowry
and Ms. Benson for, for putting this together to improve the
fiscal responsibility of the future of the city of Chicago.
Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. Thank
You. Vice
Chair Alderman Lopez.
Thank you, chairman. And again, members of the committee.
Um, you know, it's rumored
that I'm sometimes rough on a law department, um,
but it's a, a rarity that I get
to both applaud the department
and join my colleagues
over there, over there.
Check my mug.
It only happens once a year.
Yeah, Christmas came early. Take it for what it is.
Um, but I know that we've been talking about this
for several months, and I'm glad to see
that this is coming to fruition.
Um, and I thank, uh, the Corporation council, her team, um,
everyone for working on this so diligently
because I think that all
of us were very much concerned about a $200 million bill.
So being able to do this at this rate, uh, well,
either way, this is way less than
what we are all planning for.
I think my only concern is that, uh, when it comes to
the meetings in October, that we're going
to see this specifically
how we're gonna specifically see this delineated.
Um, because payments will not start
until next year. Correct.
Uh, payments will not start until 2026.
And what is the schedule?
Is the schedule something that you, the payment schedule,
something you could share through the chair?
Uh, I certainly, or yeah, I can certainly,
I can certainly share that information through the chair.
So I think that that's part of the, the other part
of the equation that I think that will concern us later.
But knowing that we're able to put some
of these dark chapters behind us,
I think will help us be able to focus on some
of the other issues that, like the ones
that we just talked about, where the lawyers are now
circling for their next set of victims
to capitalize on. So thank you.
Thank you. Alderman Lopez. Alderman Spaza.
I'm chair. Uh, I joined my colleagues in the line
of high praise for Corporation council, uh, Victoria.
Glad you're back. I know you are at,
I'm sure you took the lead on this.
Um, so I, it is, I don't know.
We'll never know how much we save. It could be 500 million.
It could be a billion. I don't know.
We don't know how long this was gonna go on for.
Um, I do wanna say one thing.
People though these weren't honor roll student choir boys
that are getting this money, um, you know,
through some screw up with some bad people, um,
screwing up the way they handled bad people.
That's the reason we're paying these people.
But, uh, I support it 100%. It's a great move for the city.
Uh, great job from the law department.
Um, and I'm 100% support.
Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair,
Alderman Riley.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Um, I'm also gonna add my, my name to the list
of people congratulating the law department.
It's hard to celebrate paying out $90 million to anybody.
It's a lot of money that could be
spent on much better things.
Um, but here we are.
Um, I, I'm curious, the judge, uh,
that was presiding over some of these cases,
did the judge encourage us to come to this settlement?
Was that, was that part of the suggested route?
I'm sorry, I don't think I understand your question.
Is the, was this part of the, the
Judge encouraged us to bundle these up and,
and tidy up the,
In, in large part?
Uh, yes. There were, as I mentioned, 176 lawsuits, um,
all filed in federal court.
Um, nearly every judge in that building, uh,
had a Watts lawsuit.
Um, the settlement discussions were overseen
by a single magistrate judge
who certainly helped us over the course of, uh,
15 separate sessions to be able to come
to this resolution in large part
with her recommendation to both sides.
Okay. All right.
Well then, it sounds like this, uh, this should bode well.
Um, and I assume the department is also looking at other
types of jackpot cases like this, where we have folks
that have, that have multiple cases
pending based on misconduct in the police department
or some other city department.
Um, as you can see, I've been joined
by the Corporation Council here,
who might be in a better position
to answer what I'm doing next.
Um, 'cause this has cleared my docket.
I want to, uh, thank you Alderman Wright for the question.
Um, I wanna first acknowledge the two
judges involved in this process.
First, former, um, magistrate, Sheila Finnegan,
also a former partner of mine from Mayor Brown,
started this process.
Um, then, uh, magistrate Maria Valdez closed this process,
15 case conferences for EZ Valdez
and a very long case conference with me for, uh, Finnegan.
They helped us to get to this place.
It was, and a concerted effort.
I did ask, uh, Victoria Benson to,
uh, come back to the city.
And when I asked her it was with this case,
particularly in mine, I'd love to be able to say,
this is the end of our journey.
It is not. There are other cases,
but this is the most prolific, historically of any, um,
series of acts by, um, related CPD members.
So it really does quite close the chapter.
That will be a next chapter for Victoria.
I will give her a break. I have a, a next group
of cases in mind.
Uh, sadly, as a city of this size, we have other
scenarios we have to solve for.
But what we've learned in this process, we will carry
that forward and apply it.
Whether we can do a global, it would be inappropriate for me
to say, but you can rest assured we will take
what we've learned and look
for those opportunities going forward. That's,
That's encouraging to hear.
And I'm, I'm glad to hear that from you Corporation Council.
And again, many of these headaches
and problems we have today, we inherited, right, these,
these, these balls were set motion
Years ago.
Uh, just fla that we have to check out at 10 o'clock.
Alderman the spotter, please mute.
My dad's here on the, the lodge.
Alderman LaSpada, please mute your, there we go.
Thank, thank you.
Anyway, um, I just wanted to thank you
for your hard work on this
and, um, you know, doing your best to make lemonade out
of a whole lot of lemons.
So thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. Alderman Riley, alderman O'Shea.
Thank you, chairman.
I think it's important to note that, um, Sergeant Watts,
officer Muhammad and Commander Burge
before them, what's a dark stain on the history
of our Chicago police Department?
You know, last Wednesday I was over at Sora Field
at the annual candlelight vigil, where we spent a lot
of time with surviving members of officers killed in line
of duty, and officers
catastrophically injured in the line of duty.
And to think that these names, Watts, Mohammad, and Birds
before them could take away
a more than 600 men and women have given their lives serving
and protecting our great city.
This settlement is a gift.
And I think it's important to note
how lucky we all are in this room
to have Mary Richardson Lowry yes,
as our corporation council.
But being as humble as she is, I think it's also important
to recognize the team that she's assembled.
They don't get enough credit. Victoria, nice work.
We're lucky to have you. Please don't go anywhere.
Thank you.
See, we love you, Mary Alderman Vasquez,
followed by Alderman Lee.
Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Um, I greatly appreciate, uh,
really the work that was done here.
I, when I saw the amount and given the number of cases.
Um, again, I, I like, like everyone else, want
to commend everyone that worked on this case.
I think I do wanna kind of send her a couple comments.
I know we, uh, so one of our colleagues mentioned like
the victims of the lawyers.
If we're talking about what really what's happening, it is
that we have people who should not have been officers
who are truly victimizing people,
which is why you have the set lawsuits to begin with
that have led to such settlements.
And so, um, as challenging it is as it is, my hope is
that we're learning from this as to how to spot people
who shouldn't be officers and be engaged in misconduct.
Um, I guess the only question I had,
and it might be through the chair
or as possible, could be shared.
If my understanding is $90 million for 176 cases,
how does that break down what each person
who filed a lawsuit would be getting back based on
what they were all asking for and how that settles out?
I was just kind of curious because there could be people
who have very legitimate reasons to sue, who
as we know about the cases of these officers
and trying to see what justice looks like to them in light
of what this, um, resolution is.
Uh, certainly, um,
I can certainly provide some more specific information in
terms of what the breakdown is,
but just to tell you generally in large part, the numbers,
uh, the settlements that each individual plaintiff will be
getting is based in large part amount, the, the amount
of time that they've spent in custody pre
and post, uh, conviction.
But I can give you a greater breakdown of
what those figures look like by, uh,
individual plaintiff through the chair.
Yeah, that'd be great. Because, you know,
I think having the comparison of what they asked from
what they got, obviously I think those
that suffered more would get more,
but just, just wanted to get a sense of what that was.
And so I think looking at it from, you know, the perspective
of some of the victims, that's kind
of why I wanna get a better sense of that answer.
Looking at it from our positions as fiscal stewards.
I think this was really great work.
'cause I know every time these cases were coming up
and we were set having to do a settlement for each one,
I had no idea how we were gonna get to
figuring our larger challenges when it comes to deficits,
knowing that it was going continue.
So it is commendable work to have this be the resolution.
So thank you all so much and thank you Madam Chair.
Thank you. Alderman Vasquez.
Alderman Lee, thank you Chair.
And I'll join the chorus of accolades, uh,
for your corporation council.
Uh, and for you, Victoria.
Um, this is an incredible, um,
settlement that we're getting.
I, I too did the double
and triple take when you gave us the number.
Um, just so that everybody's got some sense of
how big a deal this actually is,
how much has the city paid out for cases that we've settled
for Watts thus far before this global settlement?
Um, sure. So we've settled nine cases since, uh,
beginning in July, 2024 through, uh, June of 2025,
and that figure is 11.8 million total.
Um, four of those cases were presented, uh,
to you all for your approval.
Um, five of the cases we were able to settle at, uh,
a hundred thousand dollars each,
and then our legal costs, um, nearly $25 million in,
um, I'll take counsel fees as well as expert costs.
And that's through roughly the end of June
of this year for six cases?
Seven, or for, this is for, that's for the 185
cases in total is the $25 million figure.
Got it. I can give you a breakdown per case
through the chair if
that's something that you're interested in.
Um, yeah, that, that would be great.
I, I think that would be good to know.
Just the numbers are staggering.
Um, and the thought of what this was going to cost us,
I know was looming for many of us as we thought about,
you know, sitting through these month in
and month out, that there really
wasn't going to be an end to it.
So I really applaud you for, um,
the innovative idea then seeing that through, uh,
and really breaking new ground, it seems like in this
unfortunate field.
I'll put it like that. Um,
but really, uh, grateful for all the work
that you all put into this and,
and that we'll be able to at least this chapter
of it be put away and we can move on to others.
So thank you. That's all. I've got Chair. Thank you,
Alden. Thank you Alderman
Lee, um, Mary
and Victoria, I too want to, uh, thank you for the work
that you've done on, on this, uh, case.
It helps us to, uh, close the door on Ronnie Watts
and the bad things that he did it, Ida B.
Wells and, um, helps us move forward
with the police department in helping us think through
how we can make sure that we maintain a good relationship
between the police department and our communities.
I think it's also a, uh, way a testament
to what you do behind closed doors.
You know, the fact that you guys are focusing on risk
management, um, which is something
that we talk about in this committee a lot.
And, uh, this is an example of the work that you're doing,
and I just want to thank you and thank you team.
Thank you Chair. Um, with that, uh, alderman,
OSHA moves do pass.
All those in favor signify by saying Aye.
Sitting in front of him. Didn't
Know what those opposed in the opinion of the chair.
The ayes have it, and this will be reported out at
the next city council meeting.
Thank you. Thank
You. Thank you.
Alderman Mitts, can you put yourself on mute?
Item number three is from the Department of Housing.
It's the substitute ordinance authorizing the issuance
of tax increment financing assistance
to the field building revitalization partners, LLC
for the adaptive reuse of the building,
located at 1 35 South LA South Street in the
34th Ward.
Um, there's a substitute ordinance, which was prepared
and sent out electronically to everyone.
Is there a motion to accept the substitute ordinance?
So moved by Alderman Irvin.
All those in favor signify by saying Aye. Opposed?
And the opinion of the chair.
The ayes have it, and the substitute ordinance is now
before the committee and will be explained by Ryan Slattery,
financial Planning Analyst for the Department
of Housing. Good morning, Ryan.
Good morning chair. Thank you.
Uh, good morning, chair doo.
I'm members of the Committee of Finance for the record,
my name is Ryan Slaty.
I'm a financial analyst for the Department of Housing.
I'm here today present 1 35, uh, Southwest Cell Projects,
uh, project, part of the Loop Revitalization initiative.
I'm gonna turn over to Cindy Rubik of DPD
to speak on the overall loop revitalization initiative.
Good morning for the record. My name is Cindy Chan Rubik.
I'm Deputy Commissioner in the
Department of Planning and Development.
I'm summarizing the overall loop initiative, uh,
in the LaSalle Street Corridor
and some of the contextual background to date.
So how did we get here?
Of course, the COVID pandemic in spring of 2020,
significantly exacerbated already high office
and retail vacancies.
Challenged by aging older structures, the rise
of e-commerce and work from home.
The city convened over 150 stakeholders
and identified 90 action items in the Central
City Recovery Roadmap.
And these recommendations included repositioning the loop
and its historic financial core to be more vibrant,
equitable, and a mixed use environment.
DPD then sponsored additional studies, which recommended
that the city provide financial assistance
for mixed income housing.
And the city announced an invitation
for proposals in the fall of 2022 for proposed conversions
of underutilized office space into residential uses.
For consideration of the city assistance, a minimum of 30%
of the units had to be
for affordable households averaging 60% a MI.
After we evaluated the proposals,
we continued the underwriting process
for the selected proposals,
and in April, 2024, mayor Johnson announced support
to proceed with four adaptive reuse projects,
and that we would continue
to evaluate two additional conversion proposals.
And these are the two buildings that are before you today.
Each of the redevelopment agreement terms
for these projects will need approval by city council
before closing and construction can begin.
Finance committee and city council has already approved
three at 79 West Monroe, one 11 West Monroe,
and 2 0 8 South LaSalle Leasing is expected to start
for the first completed project in 2026.
In addition to the Adaptive Reese component
of the initiative, the city is also providing small business
improvement grants for the first time in the loop
to address unprecedented high levels of retail vacancies.
And last year, the city also engaged the public on the
LaSalle visioning, uh, street visioning to gather feedback,
feedback on how we can improve the public realm along this
historically significant corridor.
Collectively, these six city assisted conversion projects
represent 900 million in total investment,
over 2 million square feet
of vacant office spaces being removed from oversupplied
inventory and a total of
1,765 new residential units including
538 affordable units.
Plus, within a redevelopment agreement,
the projects will need to adhere to the city's minimum
minority and women-owned business participation goals.
An estimated 2000 construction jobs will be created.
Finally, all six buildings are either already city
designated landmarks
or seeking landmark status as part of their projects.
Adaptively reusing buildings is also very sustainable
as it provides significant embodied carbon savings compared
to demolition and new construction.
Before presenting this item, Jeffrey Cohen
with DPD will speak to the rationale
for the substitute ordinances.
Uh, thank you Cindy. For the record,
my name's Jeffrey Cohen, deputy Commissioner with Department
of Planning and Development.
Uh, the purpose of the substitute ordinance, uh, today is
to address changes in the federal tax code
that negatively impacts municipal grants.
Specifically, city funds are now treated as taxable income,
and the receipt of such a significant amount
of funding associated with these deals
by the developers would create a tax liability
that would jeopardize their financial stability.
The projects are addressing
that this project is address addressing
that in one specific way.
Uh, in the case of 1 35 South La Salle,
this substitute ordinance identifies an additional
not-for-profit entity as part of the developer
that will receive TIF funds
and subsequently provide those
to the primary development entity.
This structure provides tax relief by either smoothing
or eliminating federal tax income liability.
Additionally, both approaches have been utilized
with success by DBD
and DOH for previously approved projects by this body.
Uh, with that said, Mr.
Slaley will now present the the project's presentation
You.
Uh, so the request to action
before you is to authorize an execution
of a TIFF redevelopment agreement
with Field Building Revitalization Partners LLC for the use
of up to $98 million from the LaSalle Central
tiff, um, districts.
The project location is located at 1 35 South Las Sale,
the 34th Ward Loop community area in la
South Central TIF District.
Uh, here's the neighborhood context for the field building.
Uh, the property borders Clark Street to the East LaSalle
to the west Marble Place to the north,
and then Adams to the south, uh, for nearly a century,
the field building is, um, anchored LaSalle Street,
Chicago's financial Corridor,
and was designated as a Chicago landmark in 1994.
The applicant field Building Revitalization Partners LLC
plans an adaptive reuse and conversion
and intends to spend $241 million for the project
that will convert 350,000 square feet, located levels five
through 14 into 386 residential units,
of which 116 will be affordable for households
with an average income, um, at 60%,
60% A MI projects will also feature residential amens
and levels five through, uh, five and 25.
That will include 16,200 square feet
of indoor amending space and 26,800 square feet
of outdoor amening space.
Uh, the Commission on Landmarks Commission on Chicago's
Landmarks Permit Review Committee reviewed
and approved the proposed scope
of work at their July 10th meeting
on the lower level of the ground floor.
Um, and level two, the project will feature 92,000 square
feet of commercial space, which is attend
to include neighborhood
and amens, such as a small four brochure,
health fitness center, medical office,
and complimentary uses a D nine parking spaces will also be
located in levels three and four.
The 1.35 million square foot building is a, um,
has a large four plate that also has over, uh,
1.179 million square feet,
or approximately 89% vacancy, mostly due
to the Bank of America headquarters.
Re relocation at one 11 North Wacker, one 10 North Wacker.
Apologies. Uh, the construction timeline
for this project is anticipated to start in Q1 of 2026
with a completion date of q um, Q3, 2027.
The development team is a joint venture
between Riverside Investments, AmTrust Realty,
and DL three Realty.
The owner is Field Building Ization Partners, LLC, the arc.
The architect is SCB, uh, attorney is DLA Pep, um, Piper,
and the gel contract contractor is a joint venture
between WE O'Neal and GMA.
Uh, the permanent lender is Draper Kramer, who is assisting
with the HUD two 20 1D four loan, uh, HUD two 20 1D four.
The program is a government backed loan
that helps developers build
and renovate apartment buildings
by offering long-term low fixed financing.
Uh, here is the building's breakout.
It'll include commercial, um, space that's shown in pink,
uh, parking, shown in light green
residential shown in orange.
The office space is in blue.
Indoor main space is shown in a tanish color,
and then the outdoor main space is in a darker green.
Uh, here's a similar, uh, renderings of what the, uh,
exterior and interior will look like.
Uh, this is the anticipated breakout
of the sources and uses.
Sources include owner equity loans for the projects
to funds, uh, and historic tax credits.
We also have an, um, included, uh,
the uses which include acquisition, hard and soft costs
and financing and closing related costs
that total 241.5 million.
The unit cost is approximately 315, uh, thousand dollars per
for a studio 4 35 for a one bedroom
and 500, uh, 89,000 for a two bedroom.
Uh, there are a number of factors.
There are driving the cost of the projects,
which include, uh, conversion costs.
Cost of conversion projects are similar
to new construction projects due to extensive mechanical,
electric and plumbing, hvac
and other code required modifications.
Uh, the four plates, uh, offices, buildings, uh,
office buildings are larger, deeper four plates
that are more inefficient in terms
of rentable and non rentable spaces.
Uh, this reduces the feasibility,
the building size, uh, similar.
Uh, office buildings are often too big to fully convert
to residential resulting costly building modifications, uh,
financing costs, interest rates are still fairly high
and making financing more expensive
and reducing the fi feasibility of the projects.
Uh, there are structural challenges.
So office, uh, buildings are mostly,
they have many structural obstacles,
including the Windows column placements,
excessive elevators, sprinklers means of egress.
Um, also the affordability requirement,
the 30% affordability requirement lowers the rental income,
creating financial complexity.
And then finally, the historic preservation.
So conversion of a historic building requires a higher
standard of care and specialized expertise.
Uh, the unit mix, which includes studios to two bedrooms
with 30% of the units at, um, at affordable, uh,
at 40, 50, 60, and 80% a MI.
Uh, this slide shows you the sense of the anticipated rents.
Uh, for example, affordable studios will range from 753
to 1000, um, $538 for market rate, uh, for affordable units.
And then for market rate units, it'll be $2,100.
Uh, this slide gives you a sense of the anticipated rents.
Oh, sorry. Uh, here we have monthly
rent comparison per unit.
Uh, the Purple Bar shows the estimated, uh,
class A units in the loop.
The light blue bar shows the average market rate
for LaSalle projects.
And then the gray column shows you the average 4 billion
unit for LaSalle projects.
Uh, we have the community benefits, uh, which include 116
to 4 billion units for the loop, uh, 386 units,
uh, total of housing units.
Uh, all of the 4 billion units will be
type A accessible units.
Uh, there'll be 92,000 square feet
of neighborhood oriented commercial space.
Uh, the development team is working with, uh, a,
their general contractors A MBE
and veteran owned small business, um,
as part of the joint venture.
Uh, also this is a stabilized, uh,
Chicago Landmark building comply
with sustainability development policies using the National
Green Building Standards, which will include new, um,
new energy efficient mechanical
and electrical systems, LED lightning throughout new
insulated glass windows, green roof, landscaping,
energy star appliances, and indoor water reduction.
There also will be indoor outdoor, uh,
tenant amending space.
They have committed to 26, um, MBE and 6% WBE.
There'll be seven one hundred and seventy two full-time
equivalent permanent jobs and 500 construction jobs.
Uh, the TIF to, uh, TIF disbursement schedule.
There'll be three cash installments during construction,
and then there will be one at certificate of completion.
The city will also mitigate risk
with a subordinate recapture mortgage.
Um, the developer is subject to a flip provision
and profit sharing arrangement upon sale.
A 10 year commercial occupancy
and operations covenant will also be included within the RDA
and then a 30 year inclusionary housing agreement
for the 116 to affordable units, um,
will be in the project as well.
Uh, typical construction compliance requirements, uh,
prevailing wage, MWBE,
and C residency will also be included.
Uh, here we have the timeline for the projects.
Uh, if it is approved by city council, we anticipate
that deal closing in Q1 of 2026
with construction starting in Q2 of 2026, uh,
construction completion at Q3 2027,
and then thereafter residential
leasing the state previously.
The requested action before you is
to authorize a TIF redevelopment agreement
for Field Building Validation Partners LLC for the use
of $98 million in the sale Central TIF district.
Uh, in closing, Derman Conway and Riley have
provided letters of support for this project.
Uh, we thank you for your time today.
And then Cindy, Jeff
and I are here to answer any questions along
with the development team of Riverside AmTrust or DL three.
Okay, thank you, Ryan.
We do have letters of support from
Alderman Conway and Riley.
Just want to ask the question.
Uh, you mentioned 60% of a MI for the,
uh, housing, but there are 38 units that are
below 60%.
Those are baked in those baked
in as
Sorry.
Well, I, sorry, I didn't know the question
In your remarks. Yeah,
before we got to the slide,
you talked about 60% a MI was the focus.
I just wanna make sure that those 38 units that are
below 60%
Are part of the 30% Are baked in.
Correct. Okay. Thank you Alderman. Uh, Irvin.
Thank you Madam Chair. Um, this is, uh,
looks like a almost, uh, almost quarter billion dollars.
And my, I my question really is, uh, how is the, um,
you've got a JV here.
What is the percentage of the JV between the two partners?
The JVs, uh, w need will be 75%, and then GMA is 25%,
So 75 25.
And the developer is what?
The development team for Riverside
and AmTrust is 37.5% each, and then DL three is 25%.
Um, well, well, for starters, um,
I I'm trying to understand why those numbers on the
development team side don't mirror our, uh,
requirements at 26 and six.
Uh, number one. Number two, um, how does that, how will
that play out in the work being, uh, allocated, uh, to,
uh, contractors especially want to get clarity on
what African American contractors
been lined up to do this work?
Uh, Jeff Cohen, DPD, uh, the ownership percentages
for the entity that owns the fields building LLC isn't
necessarily something that's subject to the MWBE.
There is the construction component of the 26 and six.
So there is a minimum standard
of having 26 minority business enterprise and 6% women.
Uh, that still is in the process at this point in time.
This, this, uh, approval will help solidify a lot of the,
the project unknowns
and then go out to contract as part of DVD's plan and,
and their construction compliance.
We do require a, um, a minority business utilization plan
as part of our meetings with pre-construction, as well
as do H'S construction compliance team.
So has that, has that been given to date,
The utilization plan?
Yes. No, not yet.
Um, so I mean,
there's gotta be some idea of what's happening here.
I mean, you guys are asking us to give up $98 million in,
in city funds without clarity on
where the money really is going.
Um, I, I do have some challenges with challenges with that.
Furthermore, um, the way the, the JV in,
in my opinion, this is, this is my opinion, um,
if it's a jv, uh, you know, JVs are, you know,
joints where, where people are, have some,
some equitable components
unless there's some overriding reason
as to why that cannot happen.
So I'm a, I'm a little concerned about both of those,
uh, items specifically.
So, um, thank you Madam Chair.
Uh, thank you. Alderman Irvin. Alderman Conway,
If I, I just asked a question.
If, if they present, if the developers present a,
um, set of contractors, it doesn't meet that 26
and six uh, requirements, will you disperse the money?
No. Right.
Um, so, you know, broadly, I would simply say, you know,
coming to these LaSalle Street projects, you know, every
city in the world has had to rethink.
Its, its central business district effort,
global pandemic, you, excuse
Me, alderman Conway, before you close,
I believe Alderman Mitchell had as a question.
Oh, okay. I would rather, alright, great.
Yeah, alderman Mitchell.
Um, it's actually clarification on,
uh, alderman Conway's question.
Um, you guys say if it doesn't meet the 2016,
no money will be dispersed.
At what point is the 26 and six reviewed?
Because 'cause based on your, based on your slides, um,
there'll be multiple disbursements.
So where in this process?
Yeah, that's correct. In the process,
when you hit the certain milestones as progress payments,
the WMBE compliance, along with the city residency
and prevailing wage, are also looked at
by do H'S construction compliance group to make sure
that either they have hit those metrics
or are on their way to get to those metrics by the time
of certificate of completion.
So the main priority is to get to the 26
and six by certificate of completion,
and that is a standard operating procedure
of receiving that.
So can you offer what percentage
of the money would be dispersed prior
to the last dispersement certificate of completion?
Because if we're down to certificate of precincts only 10%,
and I don't know, and I'm just pulling that out, then
what that would
Be 80%, how much 80%
of TIF funds will be dispersed at the third milestone
with 20% retained upon issuance of certificate of completion
and compliance with all the metrics
contained within the RDA.
So we could literally be paying out 80%
and not be making our, our, our, our goals,
but not know it until they,
We would know for sure if they were in
any jeopardy of not hitting those.
There's also liquidated damages
and restitution that would need
to be paid if they were not able to meet those metrics.
I don't know if I would like to know
how you, how, how would you know that?
Um, I don't know if we have the time here,
but I would really like for you guys
to give me a nice little deep dive into
how you actually would know that.
Absolutely. Okay. Um,
Thank you. Thank you. Chairman
Alderman Riley,
Alderman Joe Lopez has to speak.
I'd like to be more on the closing side of remarks
with Alderman Conway since this is part of my Tiff
Alderman Riley, please your supporter of this.
So just sure. Give
Your, then I'll speak.
Uh, 57% of, of the, of this TIFF is actually in my ward.
Um, and I bring that up.
Neither of these projects are, um, they used to be.
Um, but I think it's worth noting that, um, over the history
of this particular TIFF district, I have been in incredibly
sparing, uh, with it.
Um, this is one of the tiffs that the city
historically has surplused
to balance budgets under multiple mayors.
Um, some of my colleagues have accused me of from time
to time using this as some sort of piggy bank.
But if you look at the history of this tiff,
it's only been used for those projects
that can pass a very strict but for test
and in order to deliver the types
of programming in these two properties
that the city has prioritized as policy,
meaning delivering affordable units in the central business
district, which is a herculean task in and of itself.
Um, that is, is how these projects pass the,
but for, um, and so
because we prioritized affordable housing, the CBD
and frankly, these two properties
and a few others are critical, uh, components
to the revitalization of the downtown area post COVID.
Um, I just wanted to remind my colleagues that
these are input impactful projects, not just
for the 34th ward, but for the city as a whole.
Um, and it is the prospect of projects like these, frankly,
that are helping commercial, uh,
real estate folks tenant out Class B
and aging Class A buildings in
the central business districts.
So just the prospect of these projects is already breathing
new life into the downtown area.
I know Alderman Conway has done a masterful job, uh,
negotiating, uh, with the developers
and the administration to make this happen.
And I know that this started under Mayor Lightfoot,
but I want to congratulate Mayor Johnson for, um,
carrying this forward with his team.
Um, but we cannot afford to see, um, the downtown area
and the central business district continue to languish
in real estate development and new investment.
Um, these are the catalyzing projects we need to, um,
encourage and invest in.
I don't look at this as giving away money.
I look at it as investing money.
Um, and I think these projects are gonna show a great return
on investment when it comes to, um,
springing new development
and reinvestment across the downtown area.
So with that said, I do fully support, um,
the TIFF allocation, um,
because without it, uh,
these projects could not move forward.
Uh, thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. Alderman Ccha Lopez.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, and thank you.
Just, just, um, so I have the numbers right.
This, um, the tfa the t uh, um,
funds go to subsidize about 40%
of the project is, that's correct.
Is, uh, $98 million outta $241 million
total for the project.
Is that correct? Correct. Mm-hmm.
In terms of, um, in terms of, I'm, I'm glad
and I'm, I think it's very good
to see more than the minimum in terms
of like the 30% affordability.
Um, my question is around the, the breakdown on the units.
You know, it seems like, you know,
you have like studios one beds and two, two bedrooms.
Um, my biggest concern continues to be
around family size units, how we continue to spread, uh,
diverse populations across the neighborhoods in our city.
That has a huge issue right now for families to find that.
So one of the breakdown,
and again, in terms of that, the 30% affordability,
I think is good that we gotta continue pushing for that,
that you're receiving a 40% subsidy.
So I think it's important that,
I think Eco Alderman Mitchell's question about local hiring
and other components that are, that are very important,
the component of fa family size units,
but also around affordability.
This is like 60% a MI.
Can you break down a little bit
of the affordability rates for this?
Sure.
Um, so the, the breakdown is, uh,
there'll be seven at 40% a MI 31 at 50% a MI 55
at 60, and then the remainder of affordable 23 at 80% a MI.
Um, the, the breakout between the studios ones
and twos is we, we did hire a, uh, consultant for us
to look at what was really needed within the area,
and based off their mar market analysis,
they really saw the, um, studios in one bedrooms were, uh,
were a priority within the area there,
but, um, obviously we do wanna still have the two bedrooms
available for essentially having families come in
that are able to, um, be located there.
But, yeah.
Yeah, and not just, just to end that, I think that when I,
when you mentioned about priorities, I think
what you're needing is the priorities of the market
that are defer to what is actually needed citywide, right?
Right. But I do think like it is important
because I do used to represent the West Loop a while ago,
and it is really hard for families to find places
where they can continue post, um, you know, if they,
their family grows,
if there's like another member of the family.
So I just wanna distinguish what you talk about, priorities
of the market versus priorities of the community.
Very different. And, um, I like to just, um, urge, you know,
I think my colleagues to talk about a little bit about those
priorities that adjust market
prioritization, I do think is important.
There's a huge issue with family size units,
and when there's 40% subsidies, I do think
that we can do more local hiring and other components
and affordability rates.
Um, but a again, I think
that is an improvement, I think is a lot of work ahead.
Thank you. Right.
Thank you Alderman Conway,
Thank you very, thank you very much.
I won't, uh, belabor this too much, but this, this project
and the one that follows it, are really a big part
of the transformation of downtown Chicago
after a global pandemic.
You know, uh, our central business district,
like every central business district
of every city in the world, can't just be a place
where people work anymore, has to be a place
where people can also live and, and shop and eat.
And this project is a big part of, of making that happen,
and especially comes in an opportune time where we have
significant amount of office vacancies as well as, uh,
as well as the Google project coming, coming online,
hopefully shortly before this.
So, uh, and we're des in desperate need of,
of workforce housing,
and this project has be, has been in the pipeline
for, for a good bit.
Um, as Alderman Riley mentioned, you know,
he did significant work on this as did the,
the Lightfoot administration,
and I certainly want to thank the Johnson administration
for bringing this forward and, and, and, uh, moving on it.
Um, so it, it essentially has the, it has the support
of everyone involved, and I really want to thank Riverside
and AmTrust and,
and DL three for their investment
in, in the city of Chicago.
And I ask you all for your support. Thank you.
Uh, thank you Vice chairman, uh, motion made
by Alderman Ccha Lopez recommending to pass.
All those in favor signify by saying Aye. Opposed?
And the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it,
and this will report it out at the next
city council meeting.
Thank you very much. Item number four,
a substitute ordinance approving the execution
of a redevelopment agreement, an issuance
of tax increment financing funds
to 1 0 5 Adams development LLC
for improvements at the Clark Adams building,
located at 1 0 5 West Adams.
In the 2030 fourth ward,
there is a substitute ordinance, which has been prepared
and sent electronically to everyone.
Is there a motion to accept the substitute?
So move by Alderman Cardona.
All those in favor signify by saying
oppose in the opinion of the chair.
The ayes have it. The substitute ordinance is now before us
and will be explained by Michael Carey from the Department
of Planning and Development. Mike,
Thank you, chair.
Good afternoon, chairman Dahal
and members of the Committee on Finance for the record.
My name is Michael Carey, financial Planning Analyst
with the Department of Planning
and Developments Bureau of Economic Development,
and joined by Jeffrey Cohen,
the Deputy Commissioner for the Bureau.
We are here today seeking your favorable
consideration and approval.
Approval of a tax increment financing re redevelopment
agreement between the city
and 1 0 5 West Adams Development, LLC authorizing the use
of up to 67.5 million in TIF funds for the purpose
of the redevelopment of 1 0 5 West Adams Street.
As part of the Loop Revit revitalization initiative
before presenting this item, Jeffrey Cohen will speak
to the rationale for the substitute ordinance.
Thank you, Mike. Uh, again, Jeff Cohen, deputy Commissioner
with the Department of Planning and Development, uh, similar
to the last item, the purpose
of this substitute ordinance is
to address the federal tax code
that negatively impacts municipal grants.
Specifically, city funds are now treated as taxable income,
and the receipt of such is, is a significant, uh,
burden on developers within
TIF districts in receiving grants.
Uh, in the case of 1 0 5 West Adams,
the substitute ordinance modifies the financial structure
to provide funds as a forgivable loan with a portion
of funds annually forgiven over the matching 30 year per
term of the RDA reporting period
and inclusionary housing agreement.
Again, this structure provides tax relief
by either smoothing or eliminating federal
income tax liability.
Additionally, both approaches, this approach actually has
been utilized with success by DBD
and DOH for previously approved projects by this body.
Uh, with that said, Mr. Carey will now present the project
details for this agenda item.
Thank you, Jeff. The Clark Adams building located at 1 0 5
West Adams Street is located in the 34th Ward, represented
by Alderman William Conway,
the Loop Community area Central planning region,
and LaSalle Central Tiff District DPD has received letters
of support from both Alderman Conway
and Alderman Brendan Riley, whose ward contributes
to the LaSalle Central Tiff District.
In addition to the Alderman letters, alderman letters
of support DPD has also received letters
of support from BOMA Chicago,
Chicago Central Area Committee, Chicago Loop Alliance,
landmarks, Illinois, and Preservation Chicago.
Here's an aerial view of the neighborhood context
with the project site highlighted in red,
situated at the southwest corner of Clark and Adams Street.
The project is highly transit accessible with access
to the brown, orange, pink, and purple lines via the Quincy
and LaSalle Van Buren stations,
and the blue line via the Monroe and Jackson stations.
The location is also served by multiple bus routes
that connect the loop to nearly all
of Chicago's neighborhoods.
The Clark Adams building, also known
as the Bankers Building, was constructed in 1927
and designed by the Burnham Brothers.
The building was constructed to cater to the city's
growing financial service firms
and professional sector during that period.
Shown here is the existing conditions
of the Eastern facade of the property.
The exterior of the building is comprised of largely brick
and limestone with terracotta accents.
The building facade is largely, um, well,
facade is largely comprised
of granite and limestone at the base.
While the upper stories are highlighted
by buff brick cladding with decorative stone
and terracotta reflecting the art deco
and classical revival design motifs.
The building exterior varies from fair to good condition
with isolated areas of the sod and poor condition.
In addition to masonry repair work on exterior walls,
extensive cleaning of the brick is needed.
The property is listed on the National Register
of Historic Places as a contributing property
to the West Loop, LaSalle Street Historic District,
and a city of Chicago orange rated property.
Additionally, the development team is currently in the
process of seeking a city
of Chicago landmark designation for the property.
The developer of the project is 1 0 5 Adams Development,
LLC, a special purpose entity created for the purpose
of the re redevelopment of 1 0 5 West Adams.
Its members include Gabriel Martinez, Zach Wakeman,
and Mark Calabria Primera Group,
which is serving as lead developer, was founded in 2011,
having experience with both built to suite developments
as well as the rehabilitation
of multifamily properties serving affordable
and market rate tenants.
The developer has also assembled an extensive
and diverse interdisciplinary team for the project
that includes Toro Construction as general contractor,
Papa George Hames as lead architect
and morally construction advisors
as the primary owner's represent representative.
The development team also includes experts in their
respective fields, including TAF law firm,
Fitzgerald Law Group, Johnson Research Group,
empower Strategies,
and KM Capital, ensuring the project meets the city's stated
goals and compliance requirements.
The project consists of the adaptive reuse
and conversion of approximately 400,000 square feet
of functionally obsolete office space into 400 new
residential units, 30%
or 121 units
of which will be affordable at a blended 60%
area meeting income.
The office to residential conversion will also feature
amenities on the 24th floor, including a fitness center,
communal space, and an outdoor patio.
The developer will also reposition space on the ground
and mezzanine levels for commercial or retail use.
The total project cost of 183.5 million is proposed
to be supported by 67.5 million in TIFF assistance from the
LA Sales Central tiff.
The project is estimated to begin in the first quarter
of 2026 and ready
for first occupancy in the third quarter of 2027.
The project will be financed through a mix of equity debt,
historic tax credits, and TIFF funding.
Nearly 75% of the anticipated cost
of the project is dedicated to hard construction costs
directly related to the conversion of the property
and an associated contractor general requirements,
conditions and insurance.
This includes the creation of an amenities floor,
the full restoration of the entire property's facade,
modernization, or replacement of all mechanical, electrical,
and plumbing systems, as well
as delivering the commercial space for tenant improvements.
The floor diagram presented on this slide provides a visual
to the floors that are included in the project listed on the
right, and the hotel on floors three through 10
that are not included in total 34
of the 42 floors will be renovated as a part
of the adaptive reuse of this building.
This slide provides a comparison
of the current exterior facade
and the restore facade presented.
Here is a bird's eye view rendering of the rooftop patio
that will be located on the 24th floor of the building.
Landscaping in multiple sitting areas, along
with a fire pit, will be installed along for, uh, allowing
for terrace views in every direction for all tenants.
This rendering is of a one bedroom unit.
All units will be outfitted with a full bathroom dishwasher,
and in unit washer dryer, a portion
of units will also be a DA compliant.
As mentioned, the redevelopment will total 400 units, 121
of which are designated our A REO units.
The proposed a RO unit mix presents a range
of affordability options from 30% to 80% a MI averaging
to 60% a MI across 59 studio, 37, 1 bedroom,
and 25 2 bedroom units.
The remaining 279 units are designated as market rate
and will consist of 136 studio 85 1 bedroom
and 58 2 bedroom units.
In total, the redevelopment will deliver 195 studio
one hundred and twenty two, one bedroom
and 83 2 bedroom units.
This side provides a sense of the anticipated average size
and asking rents for both market rate and affordable units.
For example, studios will range in size from 400 square feet
to 600 square feet with asking affordable rents
between approximately 750
and $1,200 with market rate studios renting
for approximately, uh, $2,250.
This, this slide shown in the previous item represents a
monthly rent comparison per unit of current asking rents
for market rate and affordable units.
The Purple bar shows the estimate
of class A units in the loop.
The light blue bar shows the average market rate unit
for the LaSalle projects,
and the gray column shows the average affordable unit
for the LaSalle projects
for this project up
to 67.5 million in TIF funding will be structured
as a forgivable loan with the funds made available
to be dispersed to the developer
during the construction period at predetermined milestones.
In return, the developer will be subject to a flip provision
and profit sharing arrangement upon a capital event, along
with ongoing occupancy
and operations covenants for the com uh,
commercial component of the project.
Over a 10 year compliance period
to ensure long-term affordability at the building,
the developer will be held
to a 30 year inclusionary housing
agreement for the affordable units.
The developer must also meet the city's standard
construction compliant compliance requirements for MWBE,
prevailing Wage and City Residency participation,
the redevelopment of 1 0 5 West Adams provides numerous
public benefits, including the repositioning
of 400,000 square foot of function, uh,
functionally obsolete and vacant office space into 400 new
residential units, creation of 121
type A affordable, uh, residential units provide a range
of pricing options for potential tenants
that can service multiple socio economic strata
stabilization of an architecturally significant property,
and proposed Chicago landmark creation
of 15 permanent full-time jobs
and approximately 300 temporary construction jobs
with additional job creation.
Upon securing a commercial tenant commitment to an inclusive
and diverse interdisciplinary team of minority
and women business enterprises plans to exceed the standard
of 26% MBE and 6% WBE participation,
and also comply with the City
of Chicago's sustainable development policy using,
using National Green Building standards.
For these reasons, DPD is in support of this project
and request for the committee's favor, consideration,
and thank you, uh, to the committee for its time.
In addition to myself and Mr. Cohen, we are also joined
by representatives from 1 0 5 West Adams Development,
as well as representatives from the interdisciplinary team.
We're happy to answer any questions
that the committee may have at this time.
I figured you were going to have a question.
Must be clairvoyant. Hmm. I say you must be clairvoyant.
Uh, I, I'll ask the same, same series around the questions
that we asked on the first project.
What are, what are the percentages look like
and, uh, what, what are the,
and I saw this one, it was interesting enough,
you had 30% in bn 12% WBE.
Why the change in this one versus the other one?
Uh, Jeff Cohen, DPD, uh, it's not necessarily a change,
but it is the developer's election to try
and achieve greater than the minimum 26 and six,
and they wanted us to acknowledge that publicly.
Okay. And then the, uh, development team
and the, um, construction, uh, jv,
what do those percentages look like? Uh,
Toro Construction is the sole general
contractor at this point in time,
The sole general contractor.
Okay. And then the development team again,
Uh, the development team of 1 0 5 West Adams Development,
LLC, um, is a joint venture between, uh,
pre group and Mark Calabria.
Um, I don't have the exact percentages off the top
of my head, but I can respond through the chair with those.
Okay. Alright. Thank you very much.
Thank you. Any other questions for members
of the committee before we have Alderman
Conway Close, alderman Conway.
Thank you Madam Chairwoman.
I won't repeat my rousing comments about
how valuable a sail street is to the future of Chicago,
but, uh, I I will only say that, uh, you know, this,
this brings about union construction jobs at a time when
they're, when they're sorely needed,
and a time when, when housing downtown is sorely needed.
So I certainly want to thank, uh,
thank the Johnson administration, DPD for your,
for your work on this, as well
as Alderman Riley's historical work on this and the,
and the developer for, for moving this forward
and for investing in the, in the city of Chicago.
Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
Thank you. Vice chair. We do have a letter
of support from Alderman Riley.
Um, I wanna acknowledge Alderman Talia Farrell, he was here,
but I forgot to read him into the record.
I believe I did the same for Alderman Moseley,
alderman Vice Chairman Irvin,
I'm sorry, Madam Chair.
Uh, so we got two, uh,
for lack of a better term, we call 'em twin deals, right?
And we've got one deal that's got
25% black participation on construction
from a JV perspective.
We've got another deal
that's got a hundred percent
Latino participating on construction.
Can somebody help me to understand why is that the case?
We got 25% on one end and a hundred percent on the other.
I mean, at the end of the day, I mean, these,
these are taxpayer dollars
and I'm just looking for some equity in this conversation.
Um, and, and what I'm looking at, I, I just don't,
I just don't see the parody that I would like to see.
Again, uh, we understand the importance of these projects to
central business district, to the city as a whole,
but the impact of these projects need to be felt in Austin,
Garfield Park, Roseland, south Shore.
And what I'm seeing is a very limited impact beyond
where the projects are,
but we're being asked to support these projects as a group.
And so I, I'm, I'm a little perplexed and,
and I just need some, need some help here.
And again, I, I'm glad
and wanna see this type of stuff happen,
but at the same time, I will also, you know,
put a brick on something if,
if my people aren't participating.
And that's, that's, that's the essence of where
the conversation is.
And, and all, all I'm asking for is just, hey, let's,
everything can just be straight and,
and we all can, can move along together.
But this 25 and we pieces
and nah, I'm, uh, I've been around here too long
to be sitting up here talking about
scraps, you know what I'm saying?
We, we really, you guys really need
to understand the dynamics of what's happening in our,
our city and everything.
You know, we talking about, you know, public safety,
we're talking about a whole lot of issues,
but a lot of this, the root of a lot of this comes back
to economics and,
and on its face, I, I'm not seeing how this really works,
you know, for the black community.
So somebody gotta help me understand that.
And, and again, I want, I, I want these things
to move forward, but not if our folks can't eat off of them,
it's just not fair.
Uh, more than happy to respond to that.
Uh, it is worth note that two
of the previous approved projects are 50 50 partnerships
between, uh, prime Group and Capri Interest.
Capri Interest is a who, minority owned,
black owned business by Quentin Primo.
So there is additional, uh,
diversity within the ownership groups here.
Uh, and to address your, your comments about getting back
to the neighborhoods, I believe that the stabilization
of the LaSalle and the loop specifically
through this program, is gonna benefit all taxing bodies in
the future when the LaSalle Central TIF
district expires currently.
So everything that we're doing today is going to solidify
and stabilize the tax base for future increases
that will be the benefit of all
taxing bodies across the city.
Um, to that end,
there isn't gonna be any specific direct investment in this,
but I do think that there's gonna be a plethora
of individuals who come across the city to live
and experience the downtown
and then take those experience back to the neighborhoods
and bring that, that initiative or those ideas and,
and concentration of ideas back into these neighborhoods
to help facilitate further development in the neighborhoods.
Y you, you know what that sound, that sound like with, uh,
with, with Ronald Reagan, they called
that trickle down economics and, and,
and our folks didn't spare farewell in
that conversation. So
The other thing, I think, uh, chairman Urban, we have
to look at it all in, in the aggregate too,
because there are a number of projects going through our
respective communities that also receive TIFF funding.
And we should look at that question in the aggregate.
I, I'm, I'm, I'm, I'm for that too.
And, and again, I, I'm just,
when you see just these large dollars, I mean,
we're talking about, you know, nickels compared
to what this is.
So Yeah. Mad chair, I respect your, uh, position on that
and, uh, I just, I just had to raise that point.
Thank you.
Noted Alderman Ccho Lopez.
Thank you Chairwoman. And,
and just going in, in that the note just to follow up
who are, what they, because they were like,
we talk about 160 plus million dollars in subsidies here.
Who are the contractors? I mean,
I think you've talked a little bit about like who are the,
the, the general contractors, the equity.
I, I mean you clarified about the, the black owned business,
but I think there was not a lot.
I mean, I think to your point, the consistency too
between the, you know, the, um, the local hiring piece
with the affordability, these are massive subsidies.
And in terms of like, you know,
disclosing a little bit like general contractors
experience that they have doing that.
'cause I do think, I think I agree, uh, chairwoman
that you look at, at the aggregate,
but also maybe you can little,
little bit more detail about the general contractors with,
with this and the experience,
because these are the local hiring, these are the projects
that I think, yes, they should have a, a, a significant, uh,
public benefit, you know, and,
and we look for the aggregate.
And also think, I will be curious
to lear learn a little bit more about this contractors,
especially in this last one.
Yeah, the general contractor,
Touro Construction is very familiar
with the city's compliance,
construction compliance, uh, procedures.
Having already fulfilled these on past projects, um, again,
we have not had any issues, I believe, with compliance
for any of the projects that they've been general
contractors for and do believe
that they would be successful in compliance with this.
Uh, I guess the other piece that I would also mention is
that similar to the last project, this is a major hurdle
to getting additional, uh, subcontracting awarded
and having that bid out, knowing that we have financing
and support from the city allows the development team
to go secure the additional debt financing as well
as gives this project a, um, sense of, um,
I guess the, the right word to use was, uh, realness.
Um, again with city council support, this is a major hurdle.
Um, I think it's also be been, uh, good to mention that
between all six of the LaSalle projects,
there's nearly $160 million that's gonna be bid out to
minority and women business enterprises across the entire
city, which everybody is open to.
Um, these are citywide contracts
and aren't very specific to any individual that
or group that's located within the loop, so to speak.
And the development, what is the developer
in this, in this one?
The 1 0 5 West Adams
Street? Yeah, it's a, a
joint venture comprising Premera group.
Uh, Gabriel Martinez, Zach Wakeman,
and then Mark Calabria. Mm-hmm.
And how much experience do they have?
A, uh, a lot of track record.
I mean, you mentioned Toro,
is there also another development?
Yeah, they, they have experience redeveloping
and repositioning both market rate and affordable housing.
Alright, well Bar chair, I would love to have part of
that conversation about making sure that we have an analysis
of the aggregate around this project
that I I welcome your inquiry
and I I support it as well. Thank you. We
Definitely can take that on.
Um, I would also suggest that, uh, uh, perhaps Chairman
Irvin you and have a discussion with Vice Chair Conway
and Toro to talk about what their track record is regarding,
um, M-B-E-W-B-E
subcontracting, um, as this is a lot
of taxpayer dollars.
You would be open to that,
would you not Alderman Vice Chair Conway? I,
I, of course. Yeah, absolutely.
And I appreciate the concerns of,
of my colleagues, uh, of, of Chairman Irvin and,
and Chairman Sigil Lopez in that.
Uh, and I, and I also would note
after speaking to, uh, to Mr. Walker on, on the, um,
uh, on the economics of the, of the first project,
it's actually the GMA is 35%, 35%,
uh, black contractors.
And DL three does have shares in 25% of the liabilities
and guarantees, but has an equal vote on the rest of it.
So it's, it, it, the economics are more favorable than
what was presented as all or was led to believe.
But I would welcome that conversation with Chairman Irvin
and, and Chairman Sigil Lopez and,
and any of the, uh, folks involved in this.
Uh, so noted, is there a motion
to recommend approval of this item?
Number four. So moved
by Alderman Cardona recommending Due Pass.
All those in favor signify by saying Aye.
Opposed in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it
and the Due Pass recommendation will be reported out at the
next city Council meeting.
Thank you. Item number five is from the Department
of Planning and Development.
It is an ordinance approving the execution
of a redevelopment agreement
and issuance of tax increment financing funds
for Afterschool Matters Inc.
For the renovation of 10 65 North Orleans Street
in the afterschool matters Orleans Teen Center.
Um, in the 27th Ward, uh, we're joined by Michael Carey
from the Department of Planning
and Development in Jeff Cohen.
Thank you again, chairwoman Doll.
Good afternoon, chairwoman Do,
and members of the Committee on Finance.
Again, for the record, my name is Michael Carey,
financial Planning Analyst with the Department of Planning
and Developments Bureau of Economic Development
and joined by Jeffrey Cohen,
deputy Commissioner for the Bureau.
I'm here today to request your approval
for a redevelopment agreement between the city
and Afterschool Matters Incorporated for the purpose
of authorizing the use of up to 5 million in t assistance
for the renovation and adaptive reuse of the property.
Located at 10 65 North Orleans Street into the afterschool
Matters Orleans Teen Center.
The property is located at 10 65 North Orleans Street,
which is within the 27th Ward,
the near north side community area,
the central planning region,
and within the near North TIF district.
The project highlighted in red
is located on the southeast corner of North Orleans
and West Hill Street.
This location is transit accessible with access to the brown
and purple lines via the Chicago Avenue station
to the south, and served
by multiple bus routes in close proximity.
This this photo shows the exterior condition
of the project site prior
to the acquisition by afterschool matters.
Afterschool matters is renovating the 36,000 square foot,
70-year-old former Catholic school building
and commercial retail space into a youth teen center,
providing approximately 21 paid 2100 paid out
of school time programs that include culinary arts,
various trades, and STEM education.
The center will also provide access to a cafe
and fully refurbished gymnasium.
The Orleans Center will be afterschool matters third
permanent satellite location along with the LUT Center
and the Belmont Craig neighborhood
and Galee Park and the Pullman neighborhood.
As M's. Flagship programming space is the Gallery 37 Center
for the Arts, located within the loop.
The total project cost is 25.9 million, supported
by 5 million in Tiff from the near North TIFF District.
The project is estimated to be completed in September, 2025.
The project will be financed through equity debt
and Illinois DCEO grant and T assistance.
A SM has also secured a credit facility for the purposes
of bridging both the DCEO grant and TIFF assistance.
The project budget consists of the property acquisition
with the remainder dedicated to hard
and soft costs associated with the renovations
and adaptive adaptive reuse of the property.
The next several slides will show
renderings of the completed project.
Shown here is the renovated facade
and exterior inclusive of new signage
and entrance vestibule.
The gymnasium located on the main floor will be the most
unique feature of the new a SM building.
The 4,800 square foot gym includes a new full court
basketball court, lighting and sound upgrades
and the creation of locker rooms.
Additional improvements include space dedicated for teens
to learn and enhance skills
and multiple art disciplines taught
by part-time consultants.
The project will also feature dedicated spaces for youth
to learn a wide range of trade skills.
Teens will be able to learn from
and interact with leading professionals in their fields,
while also exploring career opportunities.
As stated, the developer
of the project is After School Matters Incorporated a 5 0 1
C3 nonprofit, founded in 1991 with a mission
to provide afterschool programs
for Chicago public high school teens
to explore their passions, develop their talents,
and gain critical skills in support of productive futures.
Today, a SM offers more than 24,000 programs every year
across 362 sites,
and three afterschool matters own facilities.
The developer has also assembled an extensive
interdisciplinary team for the project
that includes Ujaama Construction, Eckhoff Saunders,
Saunders Architecture firm, Cadden Chen, uh,
Roseman Law Firm and Bank of America.
The TIFF assistance will be dis, uh, distributed
as a single reimbursement payment upon the issuance
of a certificate of completion.
Requirements for the use of city funds
during the five-year compliance period include recapture
mortgage, a flip provision in the instance
of a capital event, ongoing operational
and occupancy covenants
and typical construction compliance requirements
for prevailing wage MWBE
and City Residency, the redevelopment
of 10 65 North Orleans Street into the afterschool matters.
Orleans Center will provide numerous public benefits
to the local community and city,
including the rehabilitation of 36,000 square feet
of vacant commercial space into a use center,
a diverse gen general,
and subcontracting team led by Ujima construction
opportunities for local teams to earn a stipend
or minimum wage by participating in an estimated 2100
programs offered by off afterschool matters
and the creation of 15 permanent full-time jobs,
55 part-time positions,
and approximately 150 temporary construction jobs.
For these reasons, DPD is in support of the project
and request the committee's favorable
consideration of the project.
I'm joined today by representatives of afterschool matters,
Michelle Zi, Drake General Counsel,
and Kate Shriner, VP of Institutional Giving.
And we are happy to answer any questions you may have.
We do have, uh, letters of support from former alderman,
uh, Walter Burnett,
and a letter
of support from the Second Ward alderman as well.
Um, but I would ask
the representatives from After School matters
to come forward and just speak
to your project in their absence,
Morning or afternoon.
I'm Michelle Cozy Drake and my colleague Kate is joining us.
Um, our project is a
$25.9 million capital project
and we used approximately $12.2 million
to purchase the building.
And then of course, the rest is remaining for renovation.
As you all know, we offer teen centric buildings
and programs for our teens, um,
throughout the city of Chicago.
We're in 77 different communities.
We offer programs throughout the summer school year
for fall and spring.
And currently just this past summer,
we had 10,000 teens in programs.
Um, as you noted from the screen, we have 1500 teens
that we'll see on an annual basis.
With 2100 opportunities in the programs,
teens can take more than one program at a time.
They will receive a stipend anywhere from 250
to $1,200 for completion of the program.
They're allowed to explore opportunities
and move forward, uh, discussing
learning any practical skills, trades arts,
culinary arts, et cetera.
Thank you. Okay.
Alderman Urban. Yep. Move, do pass.
Move Do Pass from Alderman Urban.
All those in favor signify by saying Aye.
Opposed in the opinion of the chair of the ayes.
Have it and we will report the Do Pass recommendation out at
the next City Council meeting.
Item number six, an ordinance approving the execution
of a redevelopment agreement
and issuance of TIFF Funds to Steep Theater Company
for the renovation and construction of a new theater
and venue and community space.
Located at 5,300 through 53 18 North Kenmore Avenue
In the 48th Ward, we're joined
by Robert Bumpers from the Department
of Planning Development
and Jeffrey Cone from DPD remains with us
as well. Mr. Bumpers.
Thank you. Good. Um, good morning Madam,
or afternoon Mor, uh, Madam Chair
and members of the Committee on Finance for the record.
My name is Robert Bumpers, financial Planning Analyst
and Department of Planning and Development.
Joined today by, uh, with, uh,
deputy Commissioner Jeffrey Cohen.
Uh, I'm here today to request your approval to an amendment
to the ordinance for a redevelopment agreement
between the city and Steep Theater.
The purpose of the amendment is to authorize an increase
of 880,000 to the amount approved by this body in June
of 2023.
The total TIFF assistance
of
$3,868,535
will allow steep to commence renovations
and construction of a new addition to the existing property,
reactivating a vacant property into a 70 seat black box
theater and headquarters for steep.
The project was previously approved for TIFF assistance,
totaling $2,988,535.
However, increases in project costs totaling 1.3 million
halted the progress of the project.
The developer has spent considerable time
and effort to secure additional funding of 420,000,
yet a gap remained
and the need for additional city assistance is required
to advance the project.
Subject property is located at 5353 18 North Kenmore Avenue
within the Edgewater Community Area 48th Ward,
and the Hollywood Sheridan Tiff District
Alderwoman Manna Hop Penworth is in continued support
of the project, the increased request for city assistance,
and has provided a letter of support.
The subject property, uh, location
is on the northwest corner of West Burwin
and North Kenmore Avenues.
Shown here is the property in its current condition.
Uh, the one story brick,
3,500 square foot slab on grade building is 25 years old
and was most recently used
as a Christian science reading room, which closed in 2021.
The building has remained vacant since that time.
The project team is led by Peter Moore, managing member
and artistic director for steep, steep theater's.
21 years of productions have earned it a reputation as one
of the Chicago's most acclaimed theater companies producing
over 70 shows that have met with critical
and commercial success.
Steep also prioritizes community service
and has distinguished itself
by supporting its local food pantry.
Creating supply drives for Chicagoans in need
and donating its facility for community meetings.
Maintaining and deepening these community relationships will
be paramount importance in their new facility.
The team also includes NorCon Incorporated
as general contractor and civic Projects architecture.
The proposed project will result in the repurposing
and expansion of the existing building into a new theater
venue, community gathering space,
and headquarters for the Steep Theater Company.
The scope of work of the project includes modifications
to the existing building as well as improvements to convert
and expand the building into a 70 seat black box theater.
With modernized theatrical
and technical capabilities,
an 1800 square foot single store expansion
will be constructed to address artists and audience
and organizational needs by allowing for dressing rooms,
production and support workspaces, a DA accessible bathrooms
and offices or steeps administrative team.
Total project cost is approximately $6.3 million.
The project will be financed with equity debt,
charitable donations, and the requested TIFF assistance.
$3.7 million or 60% of the project is for site preparation
and direct hard cost.
These are renderings of the
finished outdoor of the building.
If approved, the redevelopment agreement will reimburse the
developer for up
to approximately 3.9 million in TIF
eligible construction cost.
The reimbursement will be
provided as three progress payments
during the construction and a final payment.
Upon issuance of certificate of completion,
the city's investment will be protected
by provisions in the RDA that require the project to be
occupied and operating for no less than five years.
If these conditions are not met, the city has the right
to recapture previously dispersed funds.
Additionally, the developer must meet the typical
construction compliance requirements of prevailing wage
M-B-E-W-B-E and City Residency.
Overall. DPD is highly supportive of the project.
The project strongly aligns with the community's desire
for longstanding cultural assets to remain in Edgewater
and establishing a long-term home for an entity
with a history of community outreach and service.
In addition, the project will repurpose a building
that would have presented, uh,
redevelopment challenges for other users.
Uh, also this will create new and full-time, new full
and part-time positions, as well as contracting 200 artists
and technicians annually.
Alderwoman, manna, Howorth
and the community support the project.
For all these reasons, DPD respectfully requests your
favorable condition of the project.
I, as well as Peter Moore, managing member
and artistic director for steep are happy
to answer any questions the committee may have. Thank you.
Thank you. Mr. Bumpers.
Uh, yes, alderman Mana Howorth was here.
She has submitted a letter of support,
but in her absent, I would ask Peter Moore if he would like
to step to the mic and just speak to
the steep theater companies,
Uh, Programs.
Thank you Madam Chairwoman.
Uh, we are a theater company
that's been in existence for 25 years.
Uh, from 2008 to 2020, we occupied a storefront,
just a block and a half from our current location.
Uh, we enjoyed enormous success there.
We were an active member of the community.
Uh, when we lost our building
to commercial redevelopment in 2020, uh, we were able
to find this building, as I said, very close
to our old location, and, uh, identified it as a, uh,
fantastic opportunity to, to remain a part
of the Edgewater community and reengage
with our our audiences and community.
Thank you, Mr. Moore. Thank you.
Motion made by Alderman Quinn.
Recommending do pass all those in favor
of the motion signify by saying Aye.
Opposed in the opinion of the chair.
The ayes have it and the do pass recommendation will be
reported out at the next city council meeting.
Thank you both. Thank you very much.
Item number seven is a miss is mis under miscellaneous
is a proposed ordinance authorizing the payment
of various small claims to the city of,
against the city of Chicago.
This was a direct introduction.
Um, what was sent electronically to everyone.
If there are no objections, these will be placed
on the omnibus.
Item number eight.
Also, under miscellaneous is a proposed ordinance denying
the payment of various small claims
against the city of Chicago.
Also, a direct introduction,
which was sent electronically to everyone.
And if there are no objections,
these two will be placed on the omnibus.
Item number nine, under miscellaneous is a
proposed order authorizing charitable solicitation on the
public way permits a direct introduction
for the Salvation Army North
and central Illinois division for citywide
November 1st, 2025 to December 24th, 2025.
If there are no objections, the permit is approved.
This will be placed on file with the clerk.
Item number 10 is an ordinance introduced
by Alderman Jeanette Taylor from the 20th Ward,
amending Title five of the municipal code
by adding a new chapter five dash 2025
called the Senior Bill of Rights.
This item will be re-referred
to a Joint Committee on Housing and Real Estate
and Committee on Budget and Government Operations.
Um, alderman Taylor was here this morning
and she supports the reintroduction
or the re-referral of this ordinance.
Is there a motion to re-refer Item number 10
to a joint committee.
So moved by Alderman Cazada Kada.
Oh, now you're gonna say you don't want it
did, alderman Taylor did not speak to you.
Don't be so petty.
Is, uh, motion made by Alderman Kada?
All those in favor signify by saying Aye.
Opposed in the opinion of the chair. The ayes have it.
I am number 11. Um, I am going
to hold this in committee, uh,
because we really don't have enough time to, uh,
go over this, uh, item, this resolution,
which I introduced, calling
for a subject matter hearing on the current state
of Chicago's pension system, um,
And there being no further business before the committee.
Can I get a motion to adjourn? So moved by Alderman Spto.
All those in favor signify by saying I
opposed in the opinion of the chair.
The ayes have it. The Committee on Finances hereby
adjourned.