Get his book his notebook last time.
Uh, we, we gotta make sure we grab that when he's not here.
I, he puts his notes in there and I just would not Yeah.
You know what room, because he left.
I think I No, but I just meant, huh?
No, we, we don't move it. They probably might want
Good morning. And,
uh, welcome back to the Reconvened, uh, meeting
from yesterday of the committee on budget
and government operations, uh,
midyear budget hearings as customary.
We'll start out with public comment today.
Uh, we have two individuals
who signed up for public comment.
Uh, first we'll have Jessica Saxton, followed by
Awa Downing.
You may proceed, ma'am.
Good morning. Does this need to be on? Is it on?
Yeah, it is. It is. You're good. Okay. Thank you.
Good morning. My name is Jessica Saxon.
I'm a civil rights advocate
and litigator from Washington dc
I am here to provide notice.
This is in accordance with USCS Rules of Civil procedure,
as well as Rule 17
and Rule 20 of the United States Supreme Court.
The Constitution for the United States is the overarching
requirement that every state must follow.
I don't think that anyone here would disagree with that.
States are not able to enact their own alternative
legislation and substitute that
for the guarantees of the Constitution.
That would mean that your state laws are more powerful than
the Constitution, and that is simply unlawful.
Clause one of Amendment five
to the United States Constitution says
that no person should be held to answer for a capital or
otherwise infamous crime unless on presentment
or indictment by a grand jury.
Unfortunately, the state
of Illinois has enacted a law in its inferior constitution
that is permitting your prob public officials
and law enforcement officers to charge by way of information
as opposed to indictment.
And that is unlawful.
An emolument violation is when you pay public
officials to commit a crime.
There are two areas of the
Constitution that reinforces this.
The first is Article one, section 10.
That's where it states that no state shall create any law
that shall impair the obligation of contract.
So a contract is your police officers,
your prosecutors, your judges.
They're all under a contract to then,
that's based on their oath to perform, uh,
their duties based on the oath
or affirmation that they took to support
and defend the Constitution of the United States of America.
The second area of reinforcement
regarding the ment violation in paying public officials
to commit a crime is the 14th Amendment.
That's where it states that no state shall create any law
that shall impair the obligation of a contract, I'm sorry,
that shall abridge the privileges
or immunities of United States citizens.
So, privileges and immunities
of United States citizens are at a minimum, those
that are enumerated within the Bill of Rights
and the first 10 amendments, unfortunately.
Um, you have a state here
that has enacted a law in its inferior constitution
that is permitting the public officials that you all pay
to violate the constitution
and the supreme law of this land.
Mr. Tama Downing is preparing
to litigate this issue at the United States Supreme Court on
behalf of more than 700,000 people currently incarcerated
across America right now.
I'm here to provide notice that you cannot continue
to pay public officials to commit crimes against
the citizens of this city.
Doing so is a crime in itself. It is an ament violation.
It is illegal, and it is unconstitutional.
So, I'm asking your honorable individuals
to please take a look at Clause one Amendment five, confirm
what I'm saying to be true, and then direct your public
officials to act in a lawful constitutional manner
that is consistent with the obligations
codified in the Constitution.
I have a notice that I would like to put on the record.
Um, and last thing I'd like to say is that this is,
is being broadcast to about 500,000 people across the
United States, uh, with a famous podcaster right now.
So I appreciate that, and, um, I need
to put this notice on the record.
Thank you so much.
Thank you for your comments.
Uh, next we will have, uh, AWA Downing.
Good morning. My name is Tan Wood Downing,
and I'm the civil rights litigator that Ms.
Saxon was just talking about.
I need to step up and just provide a little bit
of clarification so we can understand what was just said
and what we're asking from you.
So, I have approximately 76,000 criminal affidavits on
behalf of victims that have been charged by way
of information as opposed to indictment as required
by the Constitution of United States America.
These affidavits, they identify a couple different crimes,
and I'll get to that in just one moment.
But if your police, uh, are going out
and relying upon an inferior state statute that permits them
or directs them to charge by way of information, as opposed
to indictment as required by clause one of Amendment five,
then they're actually committing a crime.
It's called deprivation of rights under Color of law.
This budget that you guys are proposing right here,
this budget's going to pay for, uh, those law,
those law enforcement officers to do that.
So, if this budget is being used to pay for people
to bridge the obligations
that they have codified in the constitu
of the United States, I'd ask you guys to go ahead
and let's go ahead and fix this problem,
because, uh, the alternative is, is I'm gonna have
to convert these criminal affidavits into criminal
complaints, and I don't want to do that.
You guys don't want me to do that.
Please don't make me have to do that.
Now, these app affidavits,
they identify two different crimes in particular.
The first is Title 18 USC, subsection 2.2,
which is Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law.
What that statute says is that any person who under color
of any state statute, ordinance, custom
or regulation deprives any person of any rights secured
by the Constitution, commits that crime.
Now, the second crime is Title 18 USC, subsection 2 4 1,
which is Conspiracy to Private Rights.
What that states is that when two
or more persons conspire with the purpose
of depriving any person of any rights secure
by Constitution commits that crime.
Now, the law is a criminal conspiracy
with regard to public officials.
What that states is that any person who having knowledge
of any of the wrongs conspired to be done,
and who have the power to prevent
or aid in the prevention of a commission
of the same neglects
or refuses to do so, may be joined, dispense the action.
So, upon having been
provided with this notice, letting you know
that you are paying agents
to abridge the obligations they have cod
by in the Constitution, United States, I'd ask you
to please stop this
because the alternative is once again, not very, uh,
not very good for, uh, the public or for you.
So I know that you're gonna go
and you're gonna ask the attorney as soon as we're done,
whether or not what I'm saying is true.
And that attorney's gonna point you to a case from 1884,
call her Toto versus California, and
before you choose to rely upon, that is the foundation.
I must remind you that the Constitution
of the United States, America is the
foundation, not a judge made ruling.
The Supreme Court of the United States has no constituted
authority to be able to alter men
or destroy any of the provisions
or guarantees of Constitution,
because that must be done by an authentic act
of the people in accordance
with the special amending procedure of Article five.
Furthermore, judges cannot legislate.
We know that 'cause Clause one, article one says,
all legislative powers
bested in Congress of the United States.
So I pray that you guys are gonna make the right decision,
but just to, to entice you, uh, in the proper direction,
I want to, uh, kind of close out with this
and say that the United States Circuit Court has identified
what an abusive discretion would be,
and they've identified a two part test.
The second part of that test is any erroneous view
of the law is an automatic abuse of discretion.
An erroneous view of the law would be
that in your legal contemplation, that the lowest form
of law a judge made ruling is legally, uh, uh, superior
to the Constitution of the United States America.
That would be an obvious erroneous view of law.
Therefore, an automatic
Thank thank you for your comments.
Uh, committee will, uh, be at ease while we, uh,
transition for, uh, department of Technology and Innovation.
These are the, these are the times where it gets,
you don't know what's gonna happen.
Looks real easy.
Good morning. Uh, we begin today with our,
our first department, uh, DTI, uh, if you could,
uh, Mr.
Lucius, commissioner Lucius, introduce yourself, members
of the team with you in the box, uh, in the well, as well
as those that are in the box
after which, uh, you give your, uh, opening statement
and, uh, want to recognize, um,
Alder, Samantha Nugents asked for Rule 59.
I know she was under the weather yesterday.
There a motion to allow, um, Alder Nugent
to participate remotely today.
So, move Vice Chair Lee.
Uh, all in favor signify by saying aye.
Any opposed any pen of the chairs ayes have
and, uh, all the newgen
participation remotely today is granted.
I see we have a few members here.
Uh, Mr. Quinn, I'm, I'm disappointed
that you were not here on time.
Um, oh, you are looking for me.
You know, I'm looking, I'm looking. All right. We got it.
So, I, I, the, you, you've always been, been here on time,
ready to roll, ready to work.
So, uh, we appreciate that. So, commissioner,
Thank you Chairman. Um,
good morning everyone.
My name's Nick Lucius, I'm CIO
and Commissioner of the Department
of Technology and Innovation.
Uh, and next to me here today is Melissa Clark, who is head
of planning for the department in the Box, uh,
Roderick Warren, who is Executive Director with DTI,
Kevin Kirby, who is head of support.
Robert Duggan, who is Deputy Commissioner Bruce Coffing,
who is the city's Chief Information Security Officer.
And, and, um, Andre,
um Johnson.
Andre Johnson, um, who is our Senior Pilots analyst.
So, uh, and that's the team with me today.
Alright, you can pursue your opening statement.
Thank you. Good morning, chairman Irvin, vice Chairman Lee
and members of the committee.
My name is Nick Lucius
and, um, I'm Chief Information Officer
and commissioner of the department.
Today I'm pleased to provide you
with DTIs midyear budget Report on the 2025 budget.
DTI is continuously monitoring its 2025 budget
with a 50 $56 million with cost controls
and progress reporting to ensure
that we have adequate funding for our operational costs.
DT I is critical in core services ensure
that all city departments have the software devices
and connectivity that they require
to perform their missions.
This includes the city's website, the three one one system,
laptops, cell phones, software,
and other technology services for city staff.
DTIs annual budget focuses on maintaining
and supporting current operations,
keeping the city secure from cyber threats,
overseeing modernization projects
to achieve improved services, efficiencies
and cost reductions,
and improving overall access to city services.
DTI is in the midst of its initial staffing effort
that began with the creation of the department last year.
DTI has completed a reorganization effort that ended
with new modernized job titles rolling out
to all staff from the previous department of Assets,
information and services.
DTI then hired administrative personnel to oversee hiring,
management, finances
and procurement for dozens of contracts used
by city departments.
The next hiring surge, DTI pushed was
to expand its cybersecurity team
to ensure Chicago is better protected from global
cybersecurity threats.
DTI is now finalizing the staffing of its teams
for maintaining and supporting current systems.
The final hiring surge
for DTI is continual is currently underway with the building
of its team for delivering modernization
and better services for residents and staff.
Although DTI is not yet fully staffed, we've been,
we've been able to pursue an aggressive
modernization agenda.
Our approach to modernization is based on achieving defined
specific benefits, such as documented cost efficiencies
and enhanced enhancements like faster hiring, contracting,
or reducing the hours staff spend on administrative tasks.
With that approach guiding us,
we've identified over $6 million in annual recurring cost
reductions through our efforts.
Large on the list of it modernizations for DTI is
what we call ERP or,
or our enterprise resource planning systems.
There are many systems that make up the city's ERP,
including human resources, finance, accounting, and others.
We continue a project to migrate
to a new core software system,
but we are already modernizing, improving
and migrating pieces of the system as we speak.
Before the end of this year,
we will launch a new ERP related system
that will speed up the city's process
for hiring management staff across the city.
We'll also reduce the amount of time it takes to work
with our technology vendor pool,
ultimately providing faster hiring
and it contracting to all departments.
We have other ERP upgrades in flight that we expect to lead
to more cost savings in 2026 and beyond.
These improvements to our ERP system are, in addition
to modernizations, we've completed
or are underway, such
as replacing the law departments case management system,
digitizing the building permit process,
improving the resident experience of 3 1 1, uh,
with upgrades to our mobile app
and our online portal for resident service requests
and a simple Amazon-like portal for requesting
and tracking IT support requests.
In addition to modernization,
we've also enhanced our software offerings
to enable city staff to take advantage
of the most advanced data tools,
workflow software process improvement tools
and AI enabled services in a safe cost effective manner
to allow departments to innovate
and create efficiencies in their operations.
Whether it's data visualization
and analytics, workflow app building
or resident facing portals, DTI provides access
to all the best tools for the job to allow departments
to thrive in building data-driven
and technology fueled operational practices.
We are staying attuned to developments in ai,
quantum computing, data center construction,
all while ensuring that the city
of Chicago focuses on quality digital services for residents
and effective and efficient operations for departments.
DTI is also working with the local ecosystem
of partners on workforce development
for the local tech industry with a focus on equitable access
to IT careers for underserved demographics.
We continue to see a demand for STEM jobs,
and we need to grow our local pipeline
for technology jobs within the public school system
and the community colleges.
DTI is supporting job training
and apprenticeship programs, CPS programs for STEM education
and using our contracts to help build these local programs
that provide a pathway to a secure job in it.
And with that, I will conclude my statement
and I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.
Thank you, commissioner. Um, first off, uh,
if you could give us an update on where we are with this,
um, ERP project.
Uh, it's something that's been talked about damn this since
I've been here and it's going on, uh, 15 years,
but, uh, what we haven't implemented.
So can you talk about
where we are in the process when we can expect
to see some fruit, uh, from this, uh, project
and, uh, you know, what, what the overall status is
and what the implementation time partners
and, uh, the end goal here?
Sure thing, chairman. So, um, one, uh,
major development this year is earlier in the spring.
We contracted with a minority owned technology firm
to oversee the entire project.
Uh, we kicked off with them and we spent the spring
and the summer, um, engaging in preparation workshops
to get departments, uh, prepared for the,
the upcoming technology to gather all the requirements, uh,
and to start to develop the technology and put into place.
And so we, in addition to, um, that we've,
we're also releasing new technologies this fall.
So we'll have, we'll have parts of the ERP system this fall,
um, that will, um, digitize the hiring process
for, for managers.
So they'll take it away from an email based process and,
and we'll have that in an app.
Um, and then we'll also have, um,
some technology contracting pieces put together as well.
This fall, um, next year, uh, we'll have, um,
more milestones delivered on, um, our payroll
and our time and attendance system.
Um, and then, um, and then in beyond,
after we're done with payroll and time
and attendance, we will, um,
move into other modules like finance and accounting, um,
and procurement and budgeting.
Okay. Thank you. Uh, chairman Vie.
Thank you. Uh, chairman, chairman, um,
with the ERP two years, right?
We've been waiting two years. It's been under contract
negotiations for two years. ERP
Well, um, there's, there's pieces of, so the software
for ERP, um, is in procurement status,
but the, um, that's a piece that's running in parallel
to other activities that have to happen
before you even need the software.
So, um, so yes, software is currently in procurement status.
Um, if we had the software procured,
we'd have to start paying for it.
Um, and so it's, right now we're preparing to, um,
get the software constructed and built.
Um, and so, um, you know, I think it's,
I think it's something that we continue to negotiate
and when we need it, we'll have it in place.
No, I, so I appreciate that answer.
But I, I think, I think, uh, to Chairman Irvin's point is
that your department came back
and I was a big, I'm a huge advocate for tech
because of the fact that there's cost savings there.
Um, but this is an example of why, uh, we need to do more
with tech because, you know,
to have a contract negotiation score for going on two years
and then around capital, you know, the capital bill
that we passed four or five years ago
had allocated $300 million for IT modernization.
Um, have you expended any of those dollars yet
for IT modernization?
Y Yes, we have. So we're using those funds for our ERP
um, project.
Right now we're, we're, we're in our ERP project
and we're expending funds for it.
Um, and we have, um, we have modernizations underway
in, uh, that we're putting into different technologies
that are rolling out now, um,
and that have already rolled out, um, which is
where we've got a lot of our cost savings from.
So we're already achieving now 6 million every
year in cost savings.
I expect to increase that for 2026.
So the 6 million we get this year, we'll get next year.
And some we'll keep, we'll continue to continue to build
that so that we can get return on investment.
So that's, we're,
we're using those modernization dollars always
so that we can get that return.
I appreciate that. So one of the low hanging fruits
that I've been pushing on is around time and attendance.
We know that the county implemented time
and attendance about three years ago,
and they have saved $40 million a year.
Now, at one point, pre previous administration time
and attendance had been, there had been an
RFP, A vendor was selected.
The new admin administration came in
and said, Hey, we're embarking on this ERP,
there's gonna be duplicative of services,
and it canceled the contract.
That's been three years already.
So we've lost $120 million, potentially hundreds
of over a hundred million dollars in savings.
So I say that to say is that your department, um,
is is not, it is not just a department to,
to have flashy things,
but more importantly, it's about creating efficiencies.
And we have to reimagine how we're delivering services
because of the fact that we just, you know,
we don't manufacture sell widgets like we provide a service.
And if there's ways that we can do it quicker
with technology, we should be taking a look at it.
Uh, I like the fact that you mentioned the Amazon portal.
'cause we need to start looking at
what companies are delivering services
and what can we do to replicate that from a, from a,
from a government standpoint, there's no way,
there's no reason why a vendor or
or developer that wants to do work,
or a citizen that wants
to put forward a a request can't use their phone to, to,
to initiate the the complaint, initiate the document,
track it, know that it's on your desk,
shoot you an email, Hey, do you need something?
And, and create this accountability on both sides.
Um, because developers, uh,
need predictability in order to invest in the city.
Uh, we hear that a lot that, Hey,
we're not gonna invest in the city 'cause it takes too long.
And, and that's, and,
and that's, we need to change that narrative.
And so we're relying on you that you're saying $6 million.
What do you think you guys can save, um,
once this ERP is rolled out, fully rolled out, um,
on, on an annual basis.
But before you answer that question, I I want you to,
um, elaborate.
You talk about a $40 million savings in time and attendance.
How, how, how do you, how do you,
how do they arrive at that level?
So to, to a number like that,
if you just kind of walk us
through Yeah. 'cause I'm interested in,
Oh, no, and, and, and,
and Chairman, just, just so you know, our,
our budget director, uh, who worked at the county Yes.
What had that she knows of this technology. Mm-hmm.
Which is the frustrating part
because, again, I've been harping on this for four years,
that there's money to be saved there.
And we got to the point under a previous administration
that there was going to, there was an RFP
and a vendor selected, then when the new administration came
in, they canceled the contract.
And I had told the previous comptroller, well,
you must have like a hundred million dollars saving idea
to cancel this contract because we need the savings, time
and attendance when you're, when you're modernizing the time
and attendance, um, the, the vendors that were,
that were selected at the county, um, there's just a lot of
leakage that goes on with work.
And so this allows with, with a 30,000 person work,
30,000 plus workforce,
you can imagine if there's an hour here, a half hour there,
it if, if it manualize, I'm sorry,
it takes away the manual component of it and,
and digitizes it
and makes it, uh, uses technology
to deliver, deliver the service.
And the vendors that's currently doing it.
Now, we had the ability to do a piggyback off the county,
uh, in order to expedite it,
in order to create these savings.
So the time and attendance is low hanging fruit.
That's 40 million I've been a proponent chairman of,
of really getting the tech ecosystem, the city's well,
I, I, I know that and I, I too support, uh,
the creation of efficiency.
I, I'm just, just trying to, uh, understand how the, what,
where the savings come from.
'cause it on its face, we get 40
millions from time and attendance.
And I'm just wondering like, well, how does that,
so how does that work?
That's, that's what I'm just trying to get. Yeah.
So, uh, chairman, I, I'm gonna be meeting with the CIO
of the county, Tom Lynch, to,
to talk about that time and attendance.
And I'll be more than happy to offer an invitation
to yourself or any member of the city council
Possible. Yeah, I, I'm interested. Yeah.
Whatever we, we can do.
I, I do believe that our processes are somewhat, you know,
a little old and, uh, outdated.
And the efficiency that we, we gain either a, does one
or two things, either allows our, our people
to do other things or allows us
to have less people working in the process.
Correct. A hundred percent. So, and that's why I'm just
trying to hone, hone in on, hey,
where's the efficiency or savings?
'cause you're correct. If we can have a $40 million
realization, we should have did that, you know, years ago.
Not, not, not, not waiting to do it now.
Yeah. I I, I agree. Go ahead. Go ahead. Yes.
So, so chairman, uh, uh, I'm, I'm having,
I'm having that meeting coming up.
I'm more than happy to, to invite you.
I have had invited, uh, uh, comptroller Belsky as well.
He's aware of this since
that technology ultimately falls in under his
Court. I'm, I'm game
my team
and the staff here, we'll, we'll make, make it work.
Um, so we're, we're relying on your department
to really find the efficiencies.
And so you mentioned that you're talking to the, the,
the government, um, strike that.
The, uh, tech ecosystem.
Can you explain a little bit more about like,
how those conversations are going
and like, what is actually being asked of
that tech ecosystem?
Because, um, a lot of times government,
we will ask people to solve a solution,
but really I think the question should be,
or other, the question to the tech folks would be like,
Hey, how would you solve this?
Right? And allow the innovation and r
and d that they spend millions on to deliver that service
to, to, to play out.
Is, is that what you're doing?
Is that what your department's doing?
Absolutely. So I'll, I'll cover a couple things.
Um, one is, um, we have a vendor in place, um,
who's got time and attendance in their purview.
And that's the, so we haven't canceled that project
that's going, we have, um,
and we expect to see efficiencies.
And I think to you, you all discussed, I think,
the good points about how
we've gotta figure out what those are.
Um, but to your question there, um, I, I am a, um, I,
I am a big proponent of, um, we have to talk to everybody
and figure out what all the possibilities are.
So, um, I did a fellowship years back at a major
ai, um, company here in Chicago where I, I worked there
for six months, um,
and got to see exactly how they solve some
of the biggest problems facing industry, um, and ai.
And, um, and in this role, uh, every large tech company,
um, I have deep relationships with, um, the folks
that work there and can always asking,
what can we do differently?
What are, what are other cities doing?
Talk to other city CIOs.
Um, and, um, you know, by
and large, the roadmap that we have
and what we're working on is what all agree,
what we need to be working on.
We need to, um, find efficiencies that we're finding,
find the cost savings that we are finding,
modernize our systems.
Not just, this is what everyone says,
not just to modernize them.
You'll, you'll, if you, if you approach it with a, the point
of view of everything that's old, we need to make new,
again, you'll spend a lot of money,
but you won't necessarily see a lot of return on that.
So the way I always here to modernize is
to do it based on what's the biggest return,
which is why I think it is important the way we're doing it
with starting with time and attendance,
because we know that that's an area where, um, you know,
the more automated it is,
the more time city employees will be able
to spend doing their jobs rather than, um, you know, uh,
working with their time edits.
So, um, and,
and another thing I always hear is, um, is data.
And we have a really strong, um, data approach.
We have a strong data team.
I think where we can improve as a city is getting those
advanced technologies that we have, um, out to, um,
our staff and departments,
which is really about enhancing capacity.
The tools are there, the technology is there,
and the more that we can, um,
upskill the whole city workforce,
it's just like when Excel rolled out originally, um,
and, um, and there were,
there was one per person in every department
that was the Excel person.
Um, now Excel is something that all staff are,
are, are, are using today.
Um, our advanced data tools should be the same way.
Um, instead of having just one person in the department
that's good at these things, we should, it's, it will start
to become over time something that everybody is good at.
And that's, that's I think, the next step to
Well, and, and, and, and, and we produce a ton of data.
Is there any way to monetize our data, uh,
to make the city money from data?
I think that our, our approach is
to make the data widely available.
And I think that the monetization of that comes from, um,
that there's not a burden to get access to it.
Um, I know that there are some, um, government offices
that will charge a fee in order to access the data.
Uh, I think that, um, that is a way
to create a revenue stream.
Um, but then it does, it reduces the availability of
that data to all the staff
that need it for their everyday jobs.
And I think we see a bigger return on investment when we
make our data widely available.
Um, and, and that's the city's approach.
Um, and I think, I think there are opportunities
to make more data available so
that we can get more efficiencies across the city.
And then lastly, around data data centers.
A city owned data center, is
that something we've looked at in order to try
to create some revenue, uh, where we can store our own data,
create some savings, but at the same time, uh, attract
other government entities that will use
a government run data center?
'cause they know that government's using it and it's secure,
but at the same time, we would allow
for some revenue to be created for the city.
It's certainly something I've heard about and looked at.
We, we have data centers that we own, um,
and that we manage, um, already.
And the, um, um, a lot of
where modern technology is going is in, um,
not buying data centers,
but rather buying software that the provider has buys.
The provider, takes care of the data for you on the backend.
Um, I think there is a lot of, um, um, there's a lot
of potential in the idea
of consolidating government resources so that we can,
um, reduce our costs.
It gets complicated when you try to do it with,
um, data access.
But I, I always love these kinds of ideas
and especially look for successful models
that have been deployed or ideas
that come from the outside that have potential.
And we're always open to that. Well,
Here, listen, you have on a quarterly basis,
we haven't met this quarter because we're waiting
for the mayor to appoint a COO.
But you have, at your disposal,
your department has at its disposal on a quarterly basis,
the tech task force that allows for you to, to,
to talk to subject matter experts,
not just from Illinois, but throughout the country.
Uh, and that, that also have vendors outside
of, out of the us.
So, uh, you know, I would encourage you, you
and your staff to, to leverage, uh, that pro bono, uh, work
that these people are doing for the city of Chicago.
'cause they wanna see the city succeed, uh, and,
and create a better e tech ecosystem for the, for the city.
So, um, listen, I'm a, I'm the huge fan of your department,
you know, how I feel about tech.
Um, we've gotta really start, um, working, uh,
a lot more expeditiously to get these these things in place.
And if they are in place, we need to start, you know,
tooting our horn that this is in place
and that, um, you can, if you're looking
to do work in the city, that you can do a lot quicker
because we have tech in place to, to, to make it easier
for folks to do business with the city.
So I would encourage you to start talking about it as well.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, chairman.
Thank you. Um, chairman Viegas,
um, questions from either two?
Nothing. Thank you for, uh, do it
DTI Okay.
On the Gardner.
Uh, no chairman, thank you.
Just thank you for the service you give to our city
and thank you for everybody in your department.
Thank you. Um, I do wanna follow up on, um,
the, the technology
infrastructure of the city.
So, uh, as, as we grow into this space, I'm actually, um,
of becoming intrigued.
Uh, I, I, I did not realize this.
Uh, however, um, this, this data, uh, I'll call it, for lack
of a better term, this data game.
We, we, I'm looking at 1, 2, 3 new data centers in
the 28th ward, uh, in the remap I inherited
to Core site.
And, um, another one, uh, all in the south
southwest corner, uh, of the loop.
And they are expanding, two of them are expanding,
and I'm getting a new, uh,
data center in the Illinois Medical District.
And it is also, it hasn't even broke ground yet,
but it too is expanding.
Um, I know we had
conversations around housing our data, uh, in the city.
Um, can you give us some thoughts on pros,
cons on, on doing that?
I know that, uh, chairman Viegas had the,
was it data transparency, ordinance, data resolution, oh,
lo the local data resolution.
Um, can you give us some, some clarity
and understanding on the pros and cons of, of doing such?
Absolutely. Um, so chairman that it,
I'm, I'm watching this with you.
I'm watching the development of this, um, this industry.
It's, um, it's changing so dramatically and so quickly.
The, um, the city's data is, you know,
our practice is we have, we have data centers
that we own here in Chicago.
And then over the last 10 years
or so, maybe a little longer, we started to see
technology turned into a service where instead
of running your own infrastructure,
when we buy Microsoft Outlook,
that's running on my phone right now,
when we buy any software, you buy a license in
that company that you buy the license from,
they have all their own data centers.
They're probably buying 'em from the big three,
and you're not in charge of the data.
You have access. If you, you own it, you can get a copy
of it anytime you want, put it on your own data center.
But those companies are managing all that infrastructure
for you, which, what is the modern model,
which makes it difficult to say, Hey, Microsoft
store all my data in Chicago.
Well, you're on a platform
that the whole country is sharing,
and they can't easily do that.
I know they're working on making that more possible due
to data residency requests from locals.
So that's, that's one thing I wanna say.
The other is that in the scheme of things,
we don't have a ton of data.
The what's driving the data center construction is ai, the,
and it's not just the stores of the data,
it's the running of the computers.
Every time somebody does a chat, GPTA co-pilot, a Gemini,
one of these AI requests, that's a computer running
and it's processing, um, that's what those data center,
that's why there's an explosion in data centers right now.
Um, they are, um, popping up.
They are rehabbing land that wasn't being used.
Absolutely. Um, they are creating some jobs in construction.
Um, there are also questions of, um, of, uh,
environmental, um,
and planning, um, issues around living near them.
The water that they take up.
Uh, the power grid is often at capacity.
And these are new big power draws that, um, the
electric companies say they don't have the power for.
Uh, that's why a lot of these companies that build them have
to build their own power centers when they build one.
Um, and, and so there's a, there's a lot at play here.
Uh, but I do think that, um, our amount of data is not a,
it's not a, it's a blip in the radar compared to
what the AI companies are storing and, and,
and using these data centers for.
Um, I, I get the fact that we don't necessarily,
uh, it may not be as efficient for us to be in the business
of storing our own data
and the cost of, you know, being on the cutting and
or bleeding edge of technology, as some people call it.
Um, but if there is an opportunity to
economically impact local businesses, um,
why wouldn't we want to take
that opportunity in an industry, um,
that we could just support our local businesses?
Um, especially not the, um, I know, like, for example,
on the core site is a large, a national organization,
I can't think of the other one that's in the ward,
but they too, most of these, they're,
they're large nationals.
And I believe that at some point in time,
like every other thing, there'll be four
or five players in the market
and it'll continue to dwindle down, down and down.
Uh, but even though it may be a
big web network of things, um,
wouldn't it pose an advantage to us to have our stuff local?
I think that the, the, the two incentivize
companies to come and build these things here, um,
that the strongest incentives are gonna be direct incentives
that give them a reason, a financial reason,
or a competitive reason to build that thing there.
Um, the, the stores of city data in the Chicago area,
um, I I, I don't know if that's the thing
that provides that incentive.
If it, if it does. Um, and if that is,
and if it's a, if we can do it from a practice,
from a technology point of view where
we're good cybersecurity wise, we're good operational wise,
and that's an incentive to the companies, then I think
that's absolutely a thing that can be done.
Um, I, you know, I think that whether
that's at an actual incentive of the company, I don't know.
I know direct incentives like, Hey, build this
and you'll get this direct, direct incentive
that you can see why you're gonna benefit from it, that is,
would help them build more locally.
But you definitely see this as, um, a,
a growing industry, uh, for, uh, for, for, for data.
I know you bring up some environmental concerns
and power draw concerns.
Um, but we are seeing, we are seeing a, a need for,
for this based on our own, our own use and personal
and, uh, professional, professional use.
So, um, again, this is a, a very interesting, uh, topic.
And we're seeing, uh, job growth.
We're seeing a lot of things come out as chairman.
Chairman, thank you. Just so you know,
I become a bit of a nerd on this thing.
So on a, on a, on a call,
and this year there'll be
$285 billion worth of data center construction.
By 2030, it's projected to be 982 billion
in data center construction, which ultimately means for us,
if we're able to attract them to the city,
proper property taxes.
Oh, no, I, I'm, That's why, yeah, that's,
That's why there's the lease there.
There's, there's a whole lot that could be, uh, taxed in
that, in that conversation.
Uh, and, and again, uh, I've asked the question as since,
since these are happening, like, well, why not build a,
a high rise or, uh, you know, I, I find
that these things are generally maybe 60,
80 feet, uh, in height.
I'm like, well, you've got, we're in a very, you know,
the cost per square foot
of land is much higher here than in other places.
Why not go, you know,
why not take these things higher in the air?
And I guess they're, the technology for them doing
that isn't quite where it needs to be.
But I would hope that in time that these we're, we're going
to have these big data warehouses
that they would take advantage, especially in the city.
I don't, I don't wanna see these, um, um, big clunky boxes,
you know, plop throughout communities.
But there, there does appear to be an advantage
where we can, you know, utilize our space,
go a little higher and, and make these things work.
And again, I, I'm a proponent of this.
I, when I look at the, the, the jobs, the, the access
and a lot of these positions start
with very minimal skill sets,
but give people an opportunity to grow, uh, in a, in a way
that they may not get in other circumstances.
And also what's an entree to our,
our schools from technical abilities.
So, uh, you know, I don't know how many
of these things exist in the city.
I'm dealing with five just locally for me.
But I do believe that this is an opportunity for the city
and an opportunity for our young people
to learn about the industry.
Everybody we got, we all had these things.
Everybody's got one of these things.
But we, I, I couldn't tell you how to operate
or what's happening besides what I see on the screen.
But we have to help our young people, uh, learn
and understand what's going on behind the scenes.
And these centers are proposing a great opportunity.
And I think we have to, uh, we gotta jump on that so our,
our kids can get the, the, uh,
the technical skills to take on these jobs.
'cause these are not, these are good jobs.
These are good paying jobs and decent jobs benefits 24 7.
I, I was just amazed that everything
that went into this operation after, uh,
after learning with this, what's going on with it.
So, and, and from the environmental standpoint, the, the,
the firms are also taking a look at, uh,
finding ways to minimize the impact as well, whether it's
through brown water or through different types of thermo,
thermo, thermo, uh, the thermo,
geothermal, geothermal rather.
Mm-hmm. Uh, to try to help cool some of these.
Yeah, I believe, I believe in time that that will get, uh,
will get figured out as to
how we become more efficient in cooling these things down.
And without the huge energy draws that are,
that are necessary for that to happen, uh, uh, just
as the technology is creating their, uh, need to exist,
I think the technology will, uh, evolve to help them, uh,
you know, be more efficient and,
and do it in a, in a more practical manner.
So, and it, my, my last question is, now
that we're focusing on quantum, has there been any move
by the city to, to try to take a look at utilizing Quantum
to solve something?
I've heard that qu quantum, uh, traffics traffic,
uh, city traffic, um, is something
that potentially quantum could try to solve it.
Have, have we thought about being the first city
to use Quantum to solve something?
It's a good, it's an interesting question. Um, well,
I, I ask because from a marketing standpoint, if we're,
if we're portraying to be the quantum capital of the world,
why wouldn't we lead by example, by having the city
of Chicago utilize quantum to solve something, right?
And I don't know what something is, you'd
be the subject matter expert in that. We
Are certainly working with our imaginations to try
to think of what that thing could be.
Um, the, um,
and I take part in, um, in, uh,
quantum exchange and groups and,
and researchers who are, this is,
we have such a great local ecosystem here in
Chicago developing around this.
It's kind of everybody's asking those question of
what are we gonna do with this thing once it's here?
Um, and, um,
and, you know, the ability, the, the, the speed
that these calculations are gonna be able to happen, the,
um, the type of computing that this is gonna be is, um,
if it, if it comes the comes forward the way that, um,
they're talking, um, it's unimaginable, um, what kinds
of possibilities that there are gonna be lots of medical,
um, possibilities around solving complex, um,
things in health and cancer that have never been solvable.
Um, once you can compute that fast, um, it, we're not sure
yet what that thing
is gonna be that we're gonna be able to do.
But once the, the first working quantum
computers come on board and you can actually start
to take the theoretical and put it into the practical, um,
we're trying to figure out what that thing
that we can use it to apply to.
I think traffic is a great example.
There would need to be a lot more infrastructure in place
to be able to, um, make changes based on
what you learn from that information.
Um, and, uh, I think, you know,
it will probably not be unlike other technology
where the analysis leads
to then improvements in infrastructure so
that you can then dynamically make changes.
But I'm, I'm excited to see what, what comes of it.
Thank you. Thank you.
Um, looks like, um, uh, is this, uh, chairman
and I the only two tech geeks in the, uh,
in, in the joint today?
So, uh, nah.
Well, well, I, I don't, I don't, I use that lightly.
We're, we're lightweights in comparison to you all
and the people in the box.
But again, uh, first off, and
before we close, we do want to thank the department,
uh, the staff and the team.
Uh, matter of fact, I get,
I think we had my computer switched outta my office either
day or tomorrow, they told me.
So, um, hopefully I don't know what I'm getting.
Uh, I can't operate what I have, so, um, hopefully
what I get, uh, I can operate.
Um, but again, we just thank you team for, uh, keeping us,
uh, on the, uh, where we need to be technologically, uh,
stated, at least from a council perspective.
I know you all support a lot of the work
that we're doing here.
The only thing that I will would like to advocate for,
and I, and I'll have this conversation with the clerk
and how our electronic voting, uh, if we can, um, you know,
I like to, you know, as, as long as Springfield's been
around, they've, they've got that pretty much down pat
where you can, you know, press to speak all the, all
of those different things that, uh, that we are, we espoused
to do, to, to be, uh,
a little more efficient in our working
in what we're able to do.
But, uh, I, I know that we, we have gone from the,
the yellow long sheet to, on a voting, passing it up
to getting a little more into the tech.
But I think we, we just need to continue down that path of,
of where things are accessible and,
and, uh, open to the public
and actually easier for us to, uh, manage and,
and get things done from the perspective of,
of counseling its operations.
So we appreciate the work that your team is doing.
Uh, we appreciate, uh, everything
that is, uh, that is happening.
Uh, I know that, uh, you all are working
to fill your vacancies, uh, so
that we can become a more efficient organization.
And I think, um, efficiency I think is more of the word
that we need to be thinking through
and thinking of, uh, as it relates to, uh, technology.
Damn. I thought I was gonna get outta here
before this guy came, but, uh, uh, I, I'll give you,
uh, come on.
I know you want to, I know you have tech tech on your mind.
I know. I'm sorry.
He's the other tech geek in the, in the council. So at the
Buzzer. Thank you. Go
Ahead. Um,
My question is more about process.
I know everyone's asking about the ERP
and movement, who from the administration checks in
and how often to see the process
about when this gets completed.
Because we as a council
find out maybe once a year, twice if we're lucky.
And I want to kind of see what
the progress is week over week.
What's, what's that like?
And is that, uh, alderman? Thank you for the question.
Is that it for ERP specifically?
Yes, but all the things as well.
So for example, you've got 38 different departments,
mayor's, office, office of budget management, all
that have different priorities,
all that want to get things moving.
I'm trying to figure out how that gets tracked,
how we know it's prioritized
and how we check progress week over week.
Understood. So that's, that's what we, that's what we do.
That's our, that's our every day,
every week life here at DTI.
We, um, for ERP, um, we are the department that
owns, procuring the contracts, procuring the software,
overseeing the developer,
overseeing the development, deploying it.
We have on ERP, we have, um, multiple department owners.
Finance owns a lot of processes there.
Budget owns some processes. DHR has some
For clarity. Who
does it with y'all? Meaning
like you guys do it with everyone.
You have contracts with who from the administration checks
with you all to make sure you know what the priorities are
because you're handling all of that at the same time.
So if somebody's the CEO of a business,
and I'm not trying to be, uh, diminutive,
you guys are tech support, great.
Still, the CEO's gotta tell you what you gotta work on.
And if you got 38 different departments,
everyone feels like their department's, number one,
someone's gotta tell you, Hey, you know what?
I need to go work on budget
'cause we are screwed this year on a deficit.
What do we need to do to get those tools in place?
Because we need that working to get everything else working.
Right. And so who from the administration is the one
that checks in with you as running the department
to help talk to what those priorities are?
I, it's, it's really, I, all
of the leaders in the mayor's office, we, I will have, um,
we have infrastructure departments.
Um, and I, um, I work very closely with the deputy mayor
of infrastructure as a department reporting in, um,
I will work on projects in public safety
and work with public safety deputy
or, um, community safety deputy mayor, I will work on
finance projects, work with the CFOI work on projects
with the chief of staff.
Yeah. Um, and we're reporting on all of those priorities.
Um, but I report into the deputy mayor infrastructure I know
Services. The, the reason
the,
you're answering my question and I appreciate it.
'cause no one's the decision maker.
If every department and every deputy mayor is telling you
what their priority is, no one's ultimately the boss to say,
Hey, I know they all think these are priorities.
But I mean, I would imagine looking at the
situation, you gotta start with money.
'cause if you don't have money, you got nothing else moving.
All these departments suffer for from it.
And if we don't get that system built
and set up, it don't matter how much you built the tools
for everything else, you got no money to pay for it.
And so that, like, I just don't know who that person is.
It the, obviously the mayor's got plenty of things going on,
but is it chief of staff who on the team says, Hey,
I know Nick, everyone's hitting you up.
Everyone's got issues. We got 3 1 1, we're trying
to fix CDOT needs portals.
Uh, CPD needs to get their overtime figured out.
There's a million things that all are,
when you're running a big city top priority.
And I know that they're blowing you up
and your inbox probably looks crazy
and AI's not gonna help you sort through that.
So here's what I think number one needs to be.
It appears to me from what I'm hearing,
that that is not happening.
I I can, I can answer a little better Ervin.
So we have, um, um, when it comes to the budget,
when it comes to allocating the resources in the first
place, we have a very, very ri um, um,
strong framework in place
that we fact are working on right now throughout the year.
We start early in the year, we ask departments
for all their requests.
They submit their requests.
Um, we vet them for technology, we vet them for alignment
with the administrative's priorities.
We vet them for all sorts of things.
And then work with the budget office
to determine which projects can move forward
and which projects need to wait until next year
and prioritize them all.
Um, and then, um, work with the, um,
the mayor's office in a, it's, it's not as, as,
as you were thinking there, um, um, in any way disorganized.
It's very organized. And then we can, um,
approve all those projects
and move forward then when those get approved
and then the following year we're working on them,
we're working on them in the prioritized way
that we, we set out Now.
Sure, things change as the year goes on when we check in
and we, we ultimately, um, I feel that we,
we prioritization is not necessarily difficult for us.
We can do it. It's just something
that we continually always have to be on top of
and have to make those hard decisions
to say, no, not this year.
No, not right now. Here's why.
Yeah. Yeah. And, and I, I'm,
it's not disorganized when you're talking 38 different
departments in the city this big.
It's just to your point, adjustments happening.
What are protocols? How's it communicated to the team?
So if through the chair you can share any documentation
related to protocols, workflows, decision making, all of it
so we understand it better, that would be helpful
to know kind of like not just your department,
but your department to mayor's office
and figure out what that pipeline and,
and process looks like.
'cause the other piece that I don't know,
and I'll speak for myself, is how often council checks in on
that stuff or how often we get briefings if it's just
during budget, um, for lack of a better term, we're screwed
because if we come here once a year,
we're never gonna get anywhere.
And by the time we get decisions,
everything you guys decide would be obsolete.
So I think there needs to be a process
where we are getting weekly, monthly,
quarterly updates on progress.
So that way we can make sure that whatever tools you need
or whatever impetus you need, we're able to provide
as a co-equal branch.
And I know that we all have a million things from potholes
to policy to everything else,
but if we don't get this sorted out, it's horrible.
Even being in, uh, having CPD out here
and the fact that we've talked year over year over year
about reporting people's time
is crazy when you can download an app
on your phone and figure it out.
And the fact that we can't move quickly enough on something
like that is really disheartening
because it's not gonna allow us to find
solutions as fast as we need them.
And so I would definitely love some level of commitment of
how regularly we as a council could get information on this.
You know, and it's not exclusive video,
it's why we did quarterly hearings for CTA or CPS,
because if any organization, any corporation
with anybody running it with any level of management,
management or executive experience would've regular
reporting to understand
progress and what we need to work on.
So that's all I've got.
We'll be following up, but we definitely wanna make sure we
get more regular reporting on the ERP and everything else.
Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you, chairman. Thank
You. Uh, thank
you Chairman Vasquez, anything for DTI? You good?
Alright. Alright. Well thank you sir.
Uh, I know that, um, um,
technology's always, uh, challenging.
Uh, but, uh, we will eventually get there
and as I said, uh, we don wanna thank your department
for the work they do providing, supporting all
of our operations across the city
for every, every department.
So again, uh, we appreciate your work
and uh, we will see you in a couple of, uh, couple of weeks.
Uh, I'll say. Alright.
Very well thank you much Camal standard at ease.
Uh, while we transition to, uh, YG,
uh, we're back to order.
Uh, our next department, uh,
for our midyear budget hearings is the
office of the Inspector General.
Uh, we have with us.
Uh, is this your, this is your,
this is not your last hearing with us, is it?
Uh, this, oh, this will be my last budget cycle, but
This is your last budget cycle.
Okay. All right. Well, we'll, we'll,
we'll, uh, we'll see you then.
Uh, later in October, or no.
Or November, maybe even December.
So nowhere I'd rather be, uh, we,
we are, uh, we're, we're rolling.
So, uh, be that as in May, uh, again, department of, uh,
the Office of the Inspector General.
Joining us is, uh, uh, inspector General Whitesburg.
If you could, uh, introduce the members of your team
that are here in the well as, as well as those
that are in the box, and then proceed
with your opening statement and
after which, uh, we'll go into questions.
Certainly. Thank you very much for having us.
Uh, with me today is Kayla Vasquez,
who's our Chief Administrative Officer.
In the box, we have Tabar Richardson,
who's our Deputy Inspector General for Public Safety.
Nate Wachman is our general counsel.
Melissa Villa is Deputy Inspector General
for information Technology and Analytics.
Darwin Jones is Deputy Inspector General
for Audit and program review.
Eloise Markham is Manager of Human Resources,
and George Lauder is Deputy Inspector General
for investigations.
With that, uh, chairman Irvin, members of the City Council,
thank you for the opportunity to appear
before the City Council Committee on Budget
and Government Operations.
For purposes of today's mid-year budget hearing exercise,
I'll focus brief remarks on the work of the Office
of Inspector General so far in 2025
and the present day, state
of our department budget coming into 2025.
In response to requirements in the annual budget process,
OIG significantly reduced our budgeted funds
for software maintenance and licensing,
and eliminated three positions in investigator position,
a senior performance analyst position in our audit
and program review section, and an investigative analyst
position in our public safety section.
At the point of adoption of the fiscal year 2025, budget,
OIG had five vacancies.
This was a dramatic reduction from 27 vacancies at the point
of adoption of the fiscal year 2023 budget.
Despite reductions to OIGs 2025 budget, the robust work
of the office has continued.
In the first half of the year,
we received more than 4,300 intakes.
Our audit and program review section has 17 ongoing projects
and has published two inquiry reports.
At the close of the last quarter,
we had 280 active misconduct investigations
and had concluded 47.
Our public safety section has 20 ongoing evaluations
and reviews, has published four inquiry reports,
and at the close of the last quarter,
had reviewed more than 580 closed police misconduct
investigations conducted by CPDs, bureau of Internal Affairs
and copa, our Center
for Information Technology and Analytics.
In addition to providing forensic
and analytical work to support our inquiries,
maintains the data dashboards on OIGs information portal
and supports our website, which we use to ensure
that the published work of the office is readily
available to our stakeholders.
To date in 2025, OIGs website has had more than a quarter
of a million views by more than 90,000 distinct users.
The most frequently visited dashboards on our information
portal have been the ones displaying CPD member overtime,
data City services by address and 9 1 1 calls by geography.
The most frequently viewed publications have been OIGs
Advisory concerning gifts accepted on behalf of the city,
and OIGs quarterly reports from the fourth quarter of 2024
and the first quarter of 2025.
We've continued our efforts to reach
as many Chicagoans as possible.
So far, in 2025, we have visited 31 wards
and 27 community areas.
Meanwhile, we've been working
to find efficiencies in our own
operations and to reduce spending.
We've worked with the Department of Technology
and Innovation to consolidate OIGs use
of certain information technologies into the city's
enterprise agreements, wherever we can do
so without compromising independence
and confidentiality to reduce costs for licensing.
Early this year, we discontinued a lease
for space in 69 West Washington,
where OIG had satellite office space for many years.
We've substantially reduced our expenditures on travel
and training canceling trainings this fall
for six OIG employees.
I also note that for a variety of reasons,
we've transitioned to a full-time in-person work schedule
with certain limited exceptions for telework.
It is, of course, a crucial part of OIGs mission
to promote economy and efficiency in all
of the operations of city government.
And much of our work has implications for the city's budget.
Earlier this month, we circulated
to city council members a document summarizing recent work
of the office, touching on unrealized revenue,
stagnant funds, or inadequate expense monitoring,
staffing technology or other needs
and corrective actions we've recommended,
which are budget dependent.
We also note in that document
that OIGs investigative work has resulted in the assessment
of more than $400,000 in settlements, fines, restitution,
et cetera, in 2024 and 2025,
and more than $26 million in the last 10 years.
Thank you for your time today. I welcome your questions.
Thank you. Uh, general Weisberg, uh, we'll open with, uh,
chairman, uh, Martin.
Thank you general, and good morning.
Thank you for joining us, uh, as well as
to your team members.
Um, I don't have much by way of questions.
I think a lot of the work that I've been focused on, uh,
gets to be spotlighted in our regular hearings in the Ethics
and Government Oversight Committee, so I really appreciate
you and your team, um, uh, uh, being prepared to come
to those, uh, hearings as often as we're able to have them,
typically on a monthly basis,
to talk about the important audits
and investigations that your team's doing.
I was wondering with in reviewing recently, the document
that you circulated to City Council a week ago Monday,
that kind of encapsulates a number of, uh,
relatively recent audit reports that have a budgetary focus.
Um, so maybe one
or two that you think we would, uh, do well to
focus on, um, when we reconvene
for budget hearings in a few weeks.
Um, I think the category of those reports,
which I might identify as most pressing
for conversation in the budget exercise are those where
we've identified solutions to problems in the operations
of city government, where, um,
those solutions would require some upfront expenditure,
but might serve the city very well from a spending
perspective down the road.
And I think many of those revolve around data collection,
information technologies, et cetera.
Um, where we have found, we have, we have made findings
of shortcomings, we've made recommendations,
and city departments have agreed with those recommendations,
but found that they've been unable
to implement corrective actions
because of some budget hurdle to doing so.
And as I say, I think many of those are in the kind
of technology data collection realm.
There are also a number of, of projects
that we touch upon here
where we have recommended staffing analysis
of various scales.
Um, chairman, I know you have been active in issues
around a staffing analysis in the police department
that continues, I think, to be a, a pressing need.
There are also other, other city operations
and other departments where we've recommended an assessment
of how many people we need to successfully carry,
carry out various functions.
So I think while each
of the projects we've identified here touch upon the,
the city's finances in some way, it's that category
of things, which strikes me as most pressing
for discussion in this exercise
where we're thinking about money we spend now
and what kind of return we get on that in the long term.
Understood. Um, my last question for now.
Um, this may be a little bit more
of a zoomed out question in terms of the scope
of the office's work particularly, um,
as we'll be transitioning in the next year
or to, uh, having a new inspector general.
Um, clearly we've been over the last two budget cycles, uh,
increasingly focused on efficiencies, uh, as,
as we should be in every cycle.
Uh, and what we've directed your office to do is,
is spearhead the sorts of audits that can help understand
where there are inefficiencies, whether it's, uh,
technology related issues like you had flagged, um,
inadequate resources, uh, particularly personnel, uh,
to ensure that we are, um, implementing aspects of the code
that exist, uh, but might be relatively new.
I'm curious, especially as you, uh, continue
to compare your office's work to other peer offices in,
in large cities, um, are there ways where
you think the, there's an opportunity to
expand personnel to do more audits so
that we can realize more efficiencies
or at least identify potentials for efficiencies?
Or conversely, maybe this is something
where it's not your office's, uh, uh, best role to play,
but instead we should be thinking about, um, embedding
more people within particular departments
who are having more of an audit focus,
or maybe even if it's not additional personnel
modifying the roles of existing personnel so
that audit functions, even if they're not performed
by the Office of Inspector General,
are nevertheless occurring within particular departments.
Yeah, I, I think this is a good question and,
and certainly one that we have given some thought to
as we try to prioritize our work against the
city's current landscape.
And a couple of things come to mind.
One, this is certainly an area where the fact
that we do performance auditing,
but not financial auditing is, is part of how we try
to sort out our role.
Um, I'll also say, you know, I have said this often about
OIGs role on the police oversight landscape, that
where there are many, many, many players on the field,
many entities on a landscape, it's important for everybody
to play their position, um, to maximize resources
and to avoid, you know, crossing wires
and reinventing the wheel.
I, I am also conscious of the need for us to kind
of play our position given
who else is on the field in inefficiencies and in auditing.
So as we look out over the rest of city government
and the city has some internal audit function, we have,
we have the, the Council Office of Financial Analysis,
we have various other, the city has an outside auditor,
which it brings in every year.
You know, I'm, I'm conscious of wanting to ensure
that our work is neither duplicative
nor in the way of those other efforts,
and kind of trying to make sure that, um,
rather than piling acronyms on acronyms
for duplicative functions that we're all kind of playing
to our institutional strengths.
So I guess that is all to say.
Um, I think that we are best positioned
to do the sort of performance auditing,
which we have been doing, um,
and by being mindful of the city's kind
of budget circumstances and our engagement
with stakeholders, including members of this body,
to make sure that when we are,
when we are doing topic selection, that that's, I think,
the best opportunity for our work to kind
of reflect present day needs.
I, I don't think we are well situated to be the kind
of day-to-day eyes on, on checks going out the door.
Understood. That's all I have for now. Thank you.
Thank you. And thank you Chair.
Thank you. Uh, thank you chairman.
Um, uh, next,
uh, almond Gardner.
Uh, thank you chairman. Thank you, inspector General.
Morning. Morning.
Um, can you briefly explain the standards
and rules EIG Office adheres
to while conducting an investigation?
Yes. Our work is conducted pursuant
to the Green Book standards.
That's the standards promulgated
by the Association of Inspectors General. Okay, good.
And how do you ensure the IG staff is getting appropriate
training to conduct those investigations?
We send our staff in our investigations legal, uh,
public safety and audit sections to the Association
of Inspectors general certification courses.
Okay. They become certified in the appropriate track
for their practice area.
That certification requires ongoing continuing professional
education of 40 hours every two years.
Our auditors who work pursuant
to Yellow Book standards have additional,
additional training hour requirements.
Okay. Um, and then on a triennial basis,
that is every three years, the office is subject
to a peer review conducted by the Association
of Inspectors General, where a team of peer reviewers
from offices across the country come and review files
and policy documents and procedures and interview staff
and determine whether the work
of the office complies with the
professional standards. It's
Good. Are there instances
when those standards are not followed,
and if so, what other procedures
to ensure those mistakes do not occur?
Again?
Um, there are certainly instances, um,
where we have found,
we have identified opportunities to improve our work.
Um, and our approach to those is the same that we ask
of other city departments when we identify opportunities
for improvement there, which is that we
strengthen policy and training.
Um, we have changed, um, certain
investigative tools, which we do and don't use.
We have offered additional training on certain topics,
and we have modified our internal procedures
and forms around issues like record keeping.
Okay.
Um, how do you most often become aware of misconduct
By city employees or internally
City employees?
Like would it be witnesses? Would it be supervisors?
What, how do you become,
Um, through a wide range of sources?
We have generally, um,
I mentioned the number in the first half
of this year is about 4,300.
We've received about 4,300 intakes
in the first half of this year.
Mm-hmm. Um, those come from a wide range of sources.
Some, some of those are from city residents, some
of them are from city officials
and employees, contractors, vendors, licensees.
Anybody who might interact with city government.
Sometimes they're from people
who simply read about something in the newspaper.
Mm-hmm. Sometimes those are self-initiated.
We're specifically authorized by a statute
to self-initiate intakes.
To be clear, not all 4,300
of those intakes are misconduct complaints.
Some of them are suggestions about city government
or observations or questions or whatever the case may be.
But those come from a very wide range of sources. Would
There be for former city employees?
Former city employees? Yes. Sure.
And, and how would, like,
if somebody was filing a complaint,
how does the igs office determine if
that in individual is a reputable witness
and not a, say disgruntled employee?
Uh, a credibility assessment would be part of any, um,
any process, uh, of interviewing any investigation,
which might include witnesses or subjects.
The, you know, we, in the same way
that witnesses would be subject
to credibility determinations, so
to our subjects of our investigations,
If we found out that, say, a so-called witness, um,
actually was found to be lying,
are they ever placed on a do not hire
list with the City of Chicago?
The procedures, the, the city's ineligible
for rehire policy would require a finding
of misconduct committed while
that person was a city employee.
Okay. But if they were a former city employee and that,
and they were, they were coming to the I'S office would
set information that said that there was some misconduct
with that individual, when they're found to be lying,
would they be, would they be placed on the, uh,
do not hire list for the City of Chicago?
I, that might be a question best directed to DHRI.
I am not aware of a mechanism under the ineligible
for rehire policy that will, would allow conduct committed
after someone's employment
to render them ineligible for rehire.
But that might be a question for
Commissioner Blakemore. Could
You refer that to the DHR?
Um, I think that that could be referred
to the law department, um,
because interfering with, or obstructing
or making a false statement would violate
the municipal code.
I, I, as I say, I'm not aware
of a mechanism under the ineligible
for rehire policy that would apply. There
You have, I I only have 30 seconds left.
Um, you have two years to complete an investigation.
Is that correct? From when it begins
Under the ethics ordinance.
So if we are investigating a violation
of the city's ethics ordinance mm-hmm.
We must complete our investigative work within two
years of opening the case.
Okay. Are the findings a part of that invest?
Uh, the investigation,
The findings, a part of the investigation,
the two year clock applies to investigative activity.
So the two year clock runs from when we make a decision
to open a case to when we conclude investigative
Chairman, am My Time's Up. Is it
You? You can, uh,
we're not, uh, flush with folks today,
so you can continue.
Okay. Um, so, and just briefly,
'cause I was distracted by the time, do the, do the findings
of the investigation, and I apologize if you answered that.
Are the findings of the investigation part of the two year,
does it have to be done prior to the two year time span?
The interpretation from the board of ethics is
that the two year clock applies to investigative activity.
So the clock starts when we make a decision
to open an investigation.
Mm-hmm. Which is to say we do some, we do preliminary review
and information gathering in the intake phase.
The two year clock, as it has been interpreted,
begins when we open an investigation
and runs until we conclude investigative activity.
So that does not include the period of time
during which we write an investigative report
and submit it to the ultimate jurisdictional authority,
depending on who that is.
Um, the two year clock has applies to investigative activity
between opening and conclusion.
Hold on, hold on. You're, what you're saying is that
you can have a, let's, let's just in, in time, since
you can open an investigation on January 1st, 2023,
close the investigation on December 31st, 2025
and present the investigative findings in July of 2026.
And that would be permitted under your two year window.
Um, it has never taken us a year and a half to get
Oh, no, no, I'm just asking, I'm just asking that,
that question that is, if you court of
Us, if you, Again,
start an investigation on January 1st, 2023 Yep.
You concluded. And on December 31st, 2025
in a two year quote unquote investigative window,
and then bring charges,
and six months later, that's,
that's considered legitimate under our ordinance. That
Has been the Board of Ethics interpretation.
Yes. That's, that's very interesting. I mean, geez. Okay.
This, I just want, I I, I understand your point.
I just want there to be clarity.
'cause I, I, I, I'll just say in general, that is not the
interpretation across the, the, you know,
from a quote unquote statute of limitations, uh, point,
that's generally not the standard that, you know,
you would generally need to bring action in the window
of occurrence.
And so that, that, that seems to be something
that committee may, may want to, uh, may wanna look at.
Go ahead. Go ahead, alderman. My apologies.
No, that's okay. Um, thank you for the clarity.
Um, so if you were to go over
that two year break, would you have to go to the Board
of Ethics to ask for additional time
then? Just so I understand
The way the Board of Ethics has treated issues like that
before, it's not exactly the same issue,
but the way the board has treated similar issues where, um,
certain evidence was gathered outside
of the appropriate window of time in an investigation, is
that the board considered the, the kind
of remaining evidence without the evidence
that was collected at an improper time.
Okay. Um, this was many years ago.
This was before my time,
but the precedent of which we are aware,
where the board board has looked at this
issue, that was the determination.
It used to be the case. It is no longer the case.
It used to be the case that OIG could investigate misconduct
by members of city council only upon a signed complaint.
And in that era, a case went to the Board of Ethics
where certain evidence had been gathered
before a complaint was signed,
and the remainder of the investigation was carried out
after the complaint was signed.
The board determined that it could not properly consider the
evidence that was gathered at the wrong time, which is
to say before there was a signed complaint.
And so it went on to consider the remaining
body of evidence without that.
So I, we have interpreted that to suggest
that if the board found
that some evidence was gathered improperly outside
of the two-year window for investigative activity,
it would not, it would, it would elect not
to consider that piece of evidence.
Hmm. So, uh, again, uh, my apologies,
apologies, alderman.
So you're saying that you would take what you,
what you received.
Alright, this just, so this, lemme follow me here.
So you say, all right, we,
we have a cutoff at year two, right?
So anything gathered prior to year two is okay,
but anything gathered after year two, I mean, is not okay,
is what you got before year two is okay.
But what you got after year two is, is not okay.
Is that, is that kind of what you're saying?
That's how we understand the board's rules. Yes.
And, and I, and I guess, and,
and if you would apply that same logic
and or standard in, um, a traditional sense
that people would no,
and understand, would that be permitted at all?
I mean, uh,
and I'll use, uh, I mean, if, if you were, I'm, I'm,
I'm assuming if there was a statute of limitations,
either you bring charges or you don't, and number one,
and even if you did bring charges that the consideration
of something that was time barred, uh, is that the standard
that we would, that lay people would understand and
or even in a criminal case, would that be the,
the, the standard?
That's how it works.
Because I think that's probably, you know, you watch TV
and that's, that's what everybody thinks, right?
So this is different.
Is that, is it fair to say
that this is a different process than
what people would normally experience
in a traditional sense?
Um, I think another process that this might be equivalent
to is in a, you know, in a criminal setting,
if there is some issue with the way a certain piece
of evidence is gathered, then that piece
of evidence might be excluded from consideration.
I think that is a similar, I think
that is an analogous process.
Okay. But not the fact that it's
either it is or it isn't.
I mean, you know, it's, it's kinda like one of those things.
Either it, it is,
or it's a, it's an interesting interpretation
and maybe it's something that in the ordinance that needs
to be cleaned up that so that there are clear rules
as it relates to, uh, what statute truly consists of.
So that it, it, it, it, it removes the ambiguity from it
and removes the room room for interpretation,
because it, in some respects, how does a, I mean,
as I understand, statutes of limitations are really designed
to, for a defense purpose.
Because if you start going 10 years back, I mean,
there's certain, certain things that
don't have a statute of limitations.
We understand that. But in general, if you're trying
to go back beyond a point of reason
where people can adequately defend themselves,
that has always been my understanding of why statutes
of limitations exist.
It is to protect the accused.
Um, so the kind of, what I would many
or myself would interpret as maybe a bending of that rule
for inclusion may,
may put the accused individual at a disadvantage.
Because again, the action that you bring theoretically and,
and what you're telling me could happen two years
after the statute is ran out on the investigator front.
But hey, I can still bring this action a year later
or two years later, because you may be either continuing,
well, you theoretically can't continue to investigate,
but you may continue investigating,
but can't use any information from that investigation.
That is, that is very convoluted
and does, doesn't seem to make a lot of sense.
And you could follow that train
and thinking, I will, I will hope
I, um, agree that there are, uh, opportunities
for clarification in the ordinance.
I would, I would happily work on
and support efforts to clarify, uh,
the procedural rules in the ethics ordinance
Because it just, and I bring that up
because it seems as if like, we're hitting pause, right?
During, while the game is going on, we're hitting pause,
and then we're continuing to do work or whatever it is.
And it, and it seems to be this two year time span statute
of limitations, if you will, is not really being adhered to
because it seems like when needed, we can just press pause
and, and it, you know, obviously as you know, time stops,
time stops for no person.
Uh, I, I hear that concern.
I think it is important to say that the,
the two year window in the ethics ordinance is not written
as a statute of limitations.
It is written as a, as a time
by which investigative activity must conclude.
So I hear what you're saying. I,
I'm sympathetic to that concern.
And as I say, I think there's opportunity to clarify that.
Um, it is not, I, I'm not sure I would go so far as
to agree that we are hitting pause.
The investigative activity stops.
It is pencils down on investigative activity
at the close of two years.
Okay. We have asked for
and received from the board in an interpretation of whether,
uh, our reporting
to the board must also occur within that two year period.
And the determination we've received from the board is
that it need not occur within that two year period.
I, I, I am sympathetic to the view that
that provides an opportunity for a delay in reporting
to the board, which may not
be consistent with the intention.
Mm-hmm. I, that I think could
and perhaps should be clarified in the
statutory language. Okay.
It, it just on a, in a two year investigation, what,
what would be, and I know there's nothing is average, right?
There's no average investigation, but just a range.
What, what is the cost that goes into
a two year investigation?
The time or energy monetary?
I, I think hard, hard to quantify.
Certainly dependent upon the nature of the allegations
and the complexity of the case and,
and the personnel involved and, and so on.
So I think it would be hard to, um,
it would be hard to identify.
We, we do track hours spent on certain investigations,
which involve, um, the city's water department
and the city's aviation department because of the way,
because we derive funds from those,
because we derive some funding from those enterprise funds.
Um, but we do not as a general matter track hours.
It's one of the things we've thought about doing
as we have worked to shorten investigative timelines
and improve internal efficiencies.
We have thought about, you know,
having people track hours the same way lawyers
do when they bill by the hour.
Yes. Um, it's not something we have done.
I I think we would learn some interesting things by doing
that, but it's not something we have started doing.
Okay. And my last question, chairman, if that, go ahead.
Last question. Prior to coming to a final determination
or recommendation, do you ensure transparency
by sharing all relevant information?
We have different discovery obligations depending on the
nature of the proceeding,
and we work with the city lawyers in each
of those proceedings to meet those discovery obligations.
If we discover some, if, if we learn of some issue, um,
then we, we disclose those issues
immediately to the city's lawyers
Exculpatory evidence.
Uh, if we discover, uh, if, if we learn
of any discovery issues, just, and, and I, you
and I have talked about this before at an ethics committee
hearing, um, this is similar to my experience
as a Cook County prosecutor,
where we would tender discovery,
and if we learned in the course of a criminal prosecution
that there was additional information which, uh,
either needed to be tendered
or couldn't be tendered, then we would, we would disclose
that immediately and, and the case
would proceed as appropriate.
Given that.
Okay. I have no further questions. Thank you, chairman.
Thank you. Um, Altman, Gardner,
Altman Viegas, you, you have questions?
I'm sorry if Vazquez Gamma vs. Mixed up. V
Uh, yeah, it, it, it won't be much.
I could send a lot to the chair.
Uh, one we don't want you to leave.
Just wanna make sure if anyone else hasn't said it,
I'm sure other people have, I'll make sure
to continue reiterating that.
Thank you. Um, I think what I've asked before,
and you've been very gracious in offering, is always
some nice recommendations to leave us with
so we can continue pushing.
Um, obviously you've given some and given direction and,
and we're really grateful for the partnership
with Chairman Martin and things that are been moving,
but some of that has been
more challenging than it needed to be.
And so through the chair,
that's all I would ask some more recommendations
and more work for us to do so we can get it done.
That, that's all I got. Thank you, chairman.
Thank you. Um, before, uh,
before, I just wanna, I wanna recognize, uh,
alderman Ramirez, uh, for the purposes of, uh,
quorum need a motion for her inclusion.
So, move, uh, alderman Viegas all in favor
signify by saying Aye.
Any opposed, any,
any chance Ayes having Alderman Ramirez has, uh, been added.
Thank you, chairman. Welcome,
Alderman. Uh, do you have any questions for Thank you
So much. No problem.
Do you have any questions
for Inspector General Weisberg?
Uh, n not right now. Thank you.
Okay. Very well. No problem. Okay.
Um, any other questions
for perspective General Weisberg?
Um, I just got two things.
Uh, one, uh, thank you for the report that you sent to both,
uh, chairman, uh, Martin
and I as it relates to, uh, some of the things
that you all have been working on.
I've always, uh, I've always viewed, uh, OIG as our,
uh, internal audit function for, uh, lack of a better, uh,
term for you all.
Um, I think that, um, I, um, I know we have, as,
as I recall, one internal auditor, uh, for,
uh, for the city embedded in the comptroller's office.
Um, you talk about, um,
not really doing financial related audits.
Um, why is that a statutory issue
or is that a policy decision?
Um, I would say financial
auditing in a, um, you know, any sort of balance sheet
that is not, I'm
Not, I'm not saying I'm not, I'm,
I'm not saying a financial audit from a balance sheet
perspective, but, um, again,
from an internal audit perspective, um,
that's still operational,
but more still financial.
I mean, um, you know, I, I, I guess
I've been out of the, uh, I've been out of the audit game
for a minute, but I, I know that there are,
from an internal audit perspective, uh,
there are certain risk
and certain controls that, uh, should be, uh,
tested on a periodic basis.
And I'm, my, my question is, are you all involved in that?
And if you are not involved in that, is
that a statutory declaration or is that a policy decision?
Well, I would say, um, kind of inherent
to Inspector general work,
and certainly our professional standards is independence,
which prohibits us from operating in
an internal audit sort of way.
We certainly do performance audits,
which focus on things like fiscal economy and efficiency,
and look at controls around spending.
We have, for example, an ongoing project looking at spending
on the city's new arrival mission, where we are looking at
how much money was spent and what controls were in place
around that spending and where
that money came from, et cetera.
Um, and we occasionally have opportunities to coordinate
with the city's internal audit function.
Darwin, I don't know if you
have anything you wanna add here.
No, we do. I'm not sure if this is on. Is it on? Yes.
Sorry about that. Um, yes, we do. Could
You hold on, could you identify
yourself for the record, please?
I apologize. Darwin Jones, deputy Inspector General
of the audit and program review section of the OIG.
And also, can you pull, I, it is hard to hear.
Can you pull the mic closer to you?
Yes, thank you. Um, we do coordinate in the sharing
of information so that we don't step
on each other, basically.
Uh, so, uh, each time we launch, uh, an audit,
we inform the internal audit.
We ask the same of them so
that we know when we're in the same house.
Um, we also, just in our audit work,
while we are focused on operational effectiveness,
efficiency, we also, any implications to effect
where there's a financial effect, we push into
that effect as well.
So where we see a financial impact on that, we,
we would include that in our audit work to say,
what is the effect of these operational say deficiencies?
Uh, what we don't do is the traditional financial audit
of checking transactions to ensure that every balance sheet,
you know, ROE is substantiated
because that's ddu duplicative of the,
the, uh, single audit.
I, I, I think I'm, uh, I think I'm more of a,
uh, risk and internal controls, uh, perspective.
Um, why the department does,
does not participate
or bring that type of work forward.
And again, um, I know you talk about independence, uh,
however, um, we're all under one arm umbrella.
And I, I don't necessarily think that the issue
of independence related to, uh,
this particular function is as much
as in play in when you're doing some of your, some
of your other work, it just seems like
you all have a set of expertise.
Uh, you have a, you know, the ability to do something.
And I'm just trying to understand why
we haven't had the focus on doing some of those types
of things because it could lead to operational efficiencies
and, um, and, and things in that category.
And that's why I was like, is this a policy issue
or is this a statutory issue?
And that's, that's what I'm trying to understand.
I think in, in terms of function, the kind of work we do
that is set up by ordinance, our topic selection, that's a,
that's a policy decision of sorts.
When, when we decide which areas of city government
to focus on which, which problems to address,
that's a decision we are making.
Um, and that we are endeavoring to make in partnership
with our stakeholders, all of you
and all of your constituents.
So when we talk about our outreach to Chicagoans
and our visits to, to city wards, 31 of them
so far in 20 25, 1 of the reasons we do that is
to get a sense from people of
what issues in city government they view
as most pressing and most concerning.
And we try to reflect that in our topic selection.
So, for example, I mentioned the,
the project we have ongoing,
looking at the city's new arrival spending, the question of
how much money the city spent on the new arrival's mission
and what controls were in place around
that spending is something
we've heard a lot of concern about.
And so we launched that project
in response to those concerns.
The, the project that are summarized in the letter
that I sent earlier this month are, are all
of those recent ones, not all of 'em.
They're selected recent projects which focus on exactly
these sorts of issues, controls around spending, um,
unrealized revenue, poorly controlled spending, et cetera.
Um, in an effort to kind of summarize the most relevant work
to the budget process for, for use
as a resource by this body.
Okay. Alright. Um, again, I, I, I do know that, um,
uh, I, I, I know that sometimes the, the work
of the office is, um, can be in
that respect, not, you know, the, the shiny object.
But I, I think that the, the real, uh,
return to creating more efficiency
and, uh, in the operations is what I believe is, is needed
for, uh, for us in this moment.
Um, our, our organization does need, um, we do need
to look at how we're, we're managing resources.
And I, and I think your department is,
that is really your charge to help bring those issues, uh,
bring those issues to bear.
I know that there are a plethora of ideas
and items that can be put on the table.
Uh, I just, I just hope that we can, you know,
zero in on some, what I would call high risk, high reward,
uh, types of things,
because that is what is going to drive our costs,
uh, our costs down.
Uh, and I, I go back to a point that, you know,
Altman Gardner raises to say, are we,
are we tripping over a hundred dollars bills
to pick up nickels?
And I don't want us to trip over a hundred dollars bills
to pick up nickels, uh, when we have some serious
major risk areas that continue to drive expenses
that we don't necessarily focus our energy on,
where we can really make that, that home run.
I know we like wanna get on base,
but you know, we're in a knife in it,
and we need, we need a grand slam to be, to put it mildly.
So that's why, that's why I make
that statement. So, particularly
Perhaps in a city full of White Sox fans, sorely needed.
Um, I think, uh, uh, chairman, we are,
we will shortly publish our, uh, our audit plan for 2026,
where we identify topics we're considering, um,
that will come out in draft form for public comment.
I would welcome an opportunity to review that with you
and your staff, um, for you to,
to give us any input about which, which
of those proposed topics you think look most pressing.
I, I, I welcome that.
And I, I would ask the question, chairman, uh, Martin, are,
is that an item for review at the committee
before this finalized the audit plan for 2026?
Is that something you all would take up prior
to it? Its implementation.
So we d if memory serves, we,
we don't approve an audit plan,
but we do talk about draft audit plans,
which we have done in the past.
So specifically using our monthly hearings as an opportunity
to flag what a tentative audit plan looks like,
and then solicit input from committee members.
What we've also done, uh, working with OIG is to share out,
um, surveys, uh, so that
before something is finalized, when they have the, the,
a proposed audit plan
that residents from across the city can fill out a survey
and weigh in on what looks good and what's missing.
Okay. Thank you. Uh, that I think that's, uh, a good,
I know, I know it comes out of you.
I just don't know if we publicly had a
conversation around it, so.
Okay. Very well, uh, again, uh, thank you,
uh, for your time and your service.
We'll be seeing you in a couple of weeks, uh, maybe a month
or two, but we'll be,
We'll be here anytime.
I understand that. Thank you.
Committee will, uh, stand at ease, uh, while we transition
to, uh, copa. Thank
You.
Good morning. Uh, we are back, uh, with our midyear
budget hearings with, uh, Copa, who is represented by, uh,
chief Administrator White.
If you could, uh, introduce yourself to the members
of the committee, as well as those that are here
with you in the well and in the box,
and then you could proceed to your opening statement.
Thank you, chairman. My name is La Kenia White
and I'm the interim Chief Administrator of copa.
Sitting directly next
to me is my acting Chief Deputy Chief
Administrator Shannon Hayes.
Sitting in the box, I have Deja McDaniel,
she's my acting Chief of staff.
I have Angela Snell, she's my acting General counsel,
and I have Justin, Justin Escamilla.
He's my, uh, deputy Chief Administrator.
So again, is it Morning staff? Good afternoon.
Um, chairman Urban and members of City Council.
Cope's vision is to be the leader of police accountability
by conducting thorough investigations, advancing the culture
of policing and building trust through civilian oversight.
I am a proud, I am proud of the work we have done
to further this vision our all while being responsible
stewards of taxpayer dollars throughout 2025,
we have prioritized this stewardship
by implementing department-wide controls
and processes that allow us to provide the thorough
and timely investigations the public expects
while staying committed to the transparency that lies
at the heart of our mission.
Currently, COPA has just over 600 open investigations,
a number that has remained relatively stable
since the completion
of our timeliness initiative in early 2024.
Internally, we have determined that maintaining a caseload
of roughly 600 allows us to provide investigations
that are both comprehensive
and timely with the staffing we have.
That said, since taking over as interim chief administrator,
I have challenged my leadership team
to continue reducing this number beyond investigations.
We have worked to improve the experiences for members
of the public who come to COPA seeking resources
as a agency with a robust transparency mandate.
We have historically received thousands of complaints,
compliments, and other transparency related requests
that consume significant staff time and resources.
This year, we rolled out changes
to several online portals to provide clear guidance about
what COPA can and cannot provide.
At the same time, we are directing people
to the appropriate channels for their requests.
As a result, we are receiving higher quality submissions,
stronger engagement, and more actionable inputs,
all while reducing the burden on our staff.
Our policy, research
and analysis department, which is our pride team,
has also begun important work,
aim at preventing police misconduct before it occurs.
Through pattern and practice investigations.
We can corroborate with the Chicago Police Department
to address root causes of misconduct, identify behaviors
and trends linked to problematic actions,
and intervene proactively By addressing these issues early,
we strengthen trust between the community
and law enforcement and prevent the significant financial
and societal causes of misconduct.
We are also excited about the progress we have made in the
community police mediation space.
After extensive engagement,
we are now finalizing the next phase of our mediation pilot.
Through this process, complaints
and involve CPD members can communicate directly about
the incident in question.
Not only does this reduce the investigative burden when
mediation is chosen, but research shows
that mediation often leads to more positive outcomes.
These are just a few of the ways we are assuring
responsible stewardship.
I want to reaffirm my commitment to being a partner
with important stakeholders like you.
My phone is always on
and I welcome any questions or concerns.
Thank you again for the invitation to speak,
and I look forward to addressing any questions you may have.
Thank you. Thank you.
Uh, administrator White.
Um, I have, I've been joined by, uh, alderman Nuen,
uh, chamber Vasquez Motion to allow him to participate.
Virtually, uh, been moved, uh, moved.
Alderman, uh, Vasquez all in favor signal by saying aye.
Any opposed? Pen says Ayes have it.
And Alderman Nuon will be added to our role
for corn purposes.
Alderman Nuon?
Yep. I'm on chair. Thank you very much.
Alright, do you have any questions for, uh, Copa?
Um, not at this time. Alright, thank you, sir.
Uh, we're open with, uh, chairman Vasquez.
Thank you very much, chairman. And
thank you, uh, chief Administrator.
Uh, I've got through the chair questions.
We've been asking for all the departments.
Just put 'em on the record. Uh, one, uh,
if you could share any cost, be benefit analysis used
for determining, uh, functions
and positions that are in-house versus third party
for every current contract the department has.
So we're trying to basically get an understanding of
how each department determines when they wanna do something
in-house or when they contract out.
That's that. Um, next is a share of the list
of internal revenue and expenditure transfers.
Meaning like if you had a line item for one thing
and you had to move it to do something else, we just want
that internally to know when it moves.
Um, we're supposed to get quarterly reports
that aren't showing us the level of detail
that we're looking for, and
so we're asking each department to share that.
Um, the other, which I imagine you probably have some, is,
uh, a, a list of FOIA requests that have come
and how many hours staff, uh,
cost is associated with doing that work.
Uh, so those are the, the through the chair.
Um, I think the, the only questions I have are related
to, you know, what we had a hearing about back in, uh, June,
July related to like, determinations
of which department does investigations related to, um,
like the incidents that are involved with ICE
that police might be involved in.
Right. And so, you know, we've,
we had the first one that occurred June 4th.
It was pretty unprecedented.
And since then there have been others like Know
61st and Kil there.
And as we're seeing more
and more incidents, we anticipate even more, um, situations
where Ccpd is being called.
And no one has an understanding at this moment
of what right looks like.
'cause these are all new experiences.
And so, um, I know we've sought to have, uh,
COPA be the one that does the investigation related to this.
And I know that there was language that kind of was broad
and didn't provide enough detail.
And so we, we are looking to have Copa be the one who takes
that on and just wanted to get your thoughts.
Should that be clarified in language as to your ability
to like do that process start investigations?
Yes. And thank you for that Chairman.
Um, so after that meeting, um, we did talk
and had discussions about getting
that added on to our ordinance.
Uh, we look forward to adding that on to our ordinance.
Uh, as you may know, uh,
I don't believe we received any more complaints
in regards to those cases.
Uh, as you know, those four cases did go
to OIGI will let you know that two stayed with OIG
and that was from the June 4th incident.
Mm-hmm. And the other two, uh, OIG sent back
and we had to unfortunately send those to BIA.
But in the future we do look
to investigate those complaints. Yeah.
And, and I appreciate that. I think when we were looking
at whether BIA or OIG
or you all, that you all would provide the highest level
of transparency as to what's happening.
And so I think in the interest of us having an understanding
as the public or representing the public, um, that's kind
of why I believe it should go there.
So it's, I I wanted to make sure you guys were
We agree. Okay. 'cause
we know we are very transparent.
One thing about us, uh, we are very transparent,
so we did agree to that.
Um, so we look forward to adding that into our ordinance.
Okay. Awesome. Um, that's really all I have.
I think, you know, like I said, we are in uncharted
territory 'cause of the federal government.
Um, well I guess, I guess this would kind of be an add-on to
that question, but in the situation
where you've got federal agents
and potentially the National Guard, uh,
where there could be protests
and CPD are all in the middle of the whole mix, um,
how do you feel about having
to deal with those kind of complaints?
And I imagine, I mean you guys already get that stuff
for protests in general,
but that added layer of the federal
government being involved.
Like is there any kind of reference point
or situation you look at another city to kind of learn from?
Um, so I think we are the lead,
the leader in police oversight.
I would definitely say that, you know,
kudos to, you know, copa.
Um, but I will say that, uh, any complaints that we get,
you know, as far as ICE
or the National Guards, we are prepared to help
as a resource for citizens to, you know,
send those complaints out
or provide the information in
order to make those complaints.
We already know that National Guard has their
own inspector general.
We know that ICE has professional re uh, responsibility unit
that looks over their, uh, investigations complaints.
So we are, we're we're used
and accustomed to actually referring cases out.
'cause we also get complaints from state
police, cook County.
So again, we're here to be a resource
and to help the citizens, um, in this matter as well. Yeah,
I appreciate that. 'cause it's
actually, as you mentioned, kind
of the federal government, it's,
it's pretty scary right now when we hear, you know,
over in Franklin Park where the federal
agents killed somebody.
And I have no confidence in any federal oversight
of what's happening over there.
To, for us to be a model, to show what
that looks like is even more important.
'cause if you got a situation where the federal government
has actively killed someone and they said, you know,
that this person tried to run over an officer
and you look at the video and it's nothing of that sort,
it is frightening that
we're in that kind of world right now.
And so I think it's, IM crucially important that you all are
as strong as y'all are as far as oversight
and anything you need from us, please let us know
so we can make sure you remain
that way and continue to grow.
So thank you very much and thank you Chairman. Thank
You Alder. Thank
you. Um, chairman, uh, I was about
to call you Vegas again, uh,
Vasquez getting my Vs my v getting my vs my vowels together.
Um, any other questions for, uh, Copa?
Um, let me ask this.
Um, I know that there's been some, uh, consternation
around the investigation of, uh,
police involved shootings
and qualifications of the staff that are doing that,
doing those investigations.
Can you clarify, um, the issue, number one,
what the statutory statutory responsibility
of the city and or its investigating agency
and how we handle, uh, those items?
Thank you. Uh, well first let me say this.
Um, my staff is more than equipped
to handle officer involved shootings.
I've been handling officer involved shootings
for over the last, uh, 15, um, 17 years.
I started off as IR as a shooting specialist at a time,
which, uh, officer involved shootings were at 60 a year.
So, and I went through extensive training just as well.
My staff has went through extensive training as well.
Um, as far as it relates to, uh, our mandates under akre,
which is the, uh,
policing Community Relations Improvement Act, um,
we're allowed to investigate officer involved shootings.
Um, CPD cannot investigate their own officer in
an officer involved shooting.
Um, and I also send this to Angie Snell,
who can talk from a legal perspective about, uh, Perria.
Sure. So, so you probably are talking about the lawsuit
that the FLP filed and,
and their issue, their arguments are
that the COPA investigators are not equipped with the type
of training, um,
that they believe is required under state statute,
which we disagree with.
Um, they also argue, um, that, uh,
we are attempting
to conduct criminal investigations into officers,
which they say is impermissible under pare, which we
coppa does not conduct criminal investigations
into officer involved shootings.
We conduct administrative investigations into
officer involved shootings.
Um, so that's actively being litigated,
but those are the central points that are in dispute.
Okay. Can I add one more thing? Go ahead.
And just to clarify as well that we, along
with the state's attorney, handle those shootings.
So the state's attorney handles the criminal aspect while we
handle the administrative aspect of it.
If, if the, uh,
from a law enforcement perspective,
if you all are doing an administrative investigation,
because if my memory serves me correct,
there are two different paths
or two different tracks, uh,
that exist in potentially in this type of an incident.
Who would do the actual criminal investigation?
Should there be a determination that that needs to occur?
Or does a criminal investigation occur
simultaneously while an
administrative investigation is going on?
Angie, if you wanna, So yeah, so right now, um,
I believe CPD is doing their criminal investigations.
There have been discussions about having ISP
do the criminal investigations.
I don't think they've reached agreement on that.
Um, but yes, they can happen concurrently.
Uh, administrative
and criminal investigations can happen at the same time.
Is it our policy that, um, someone
outside of the city of Chicago, our
government unit of government, makes that determination?
Or do we internally make a determination to say, Hey,
we don't believe that this requires, uh,
additional oversight
where it's purely just an administrative function.
So with our officer involved shootings,
we send all our officer involved shootings to the SAO.
So they make the determination if it's
gonna be pursued criminally.
How does, how does the state's attorney make a
determination without investigating?
They do their own investigation. Oh,
So they, so then they are the investigative arm that does
that in, in theory they make an investigation,
a criminal investigation.
'cause that's, that's, that's what they do into an incident.
Do they do that in every instance?
Or how does, how does that process work?
Because I think some of the things
that people are getting at is, you know, we have a,
a shooting and it's like
only the city is involved in theoretically policing itself.
Um, if there is another entity that is reviewing, uh,
the facts of the case
and making a determination that something does
or does not happen, it seems to be unbeknownst
to the citizens in the city,
which I believe would give some, uh, level of comfort
to say, Hey, the city of Chicago is not policing itself.
We're not investigating ourselves when it comes
to the criminal aspect of what's happening.
Now, administratively, that's a different conversation,
but from a criminal aspect,
we're not policing ourselves per se.
Yeah, I think I can answer, answer that a little bit.
Um, so we refer all of our officer involved shootings.
We refer them to the state's attorney's office for them
to review, and then sometimes they
will just use our materials.
They'll look at our interviews
and the videos that we send them.
Sometimes they will also do an additional investigation.
Um, either way they're determining whether they're going
to see criminal charges on their own.
Okay. Um, but again, a
somebody else is looking at this other
than, than us. Correct.
Yes. Okay. Now the, um, um,
what happens, let's, let's, let's come out as the city
of Chicago for a minute.
Let's go to Oak Park.
So if an officer involved shooting happens in Oak Park,
what happens in a, in,
and if you able to answer that, I,
I'm, I'm just asking a question.
I don't know if you guys have that knowledge,
but what's different about what they do versus what we do?
If you can answer that question.
So we will still handle the administrative investigation.
Um, recently we had a, a officer involved shooting
that happened in Hammond, so that's a different state.
So Hammond Police actually handled the criminal, um,
investigation and they also had their, uh,
state's attorney's office look into the case as well too.
Okay. And just to clarify,
that's when a Chicago police officer discharges their
firearm if an Oak Park police officer is
Involved in I was actually going toward that,
but I, I can deal with either way.
I, I think that's still good information. But go ahead.
So the same group at the State's attorney's office, um,
would also look into to that,
and I don't know what agreement they have
with the Oak Park Police Department.
The Illinois State Police has stepped in
and done investigations for a lot of outside of Chicago, uh,
officer involved shootings.
Is it standard practice that the Illinois State Police
investigate, um, officer involved shootings, um, outside
of the city of Chicago?
I, like I said, I'm not sure
what exactly their purview is.
I know that they have the done them in some cases,
they've also done the criminal investigations for some, uh,
officer involved shootings involving CPD
that happen on highways, for example, like on the Stevenson,
um, or on I 94.
They will do the criminal investigation for that.
Um, I'm not sure if they, um, are doing that
for every single suburb.
Okay. Alright. Um,
but again, we're not, I'll say, uh, double dipping in, in
that respect as to what's happening here
in, in the city of Chicago.
That's correct. They're, they don't do criminal
investigations for, um,
officer involved shootings involving Chicago police officers
that happen just for example, like on a city street.
It is your, it is your testimony
that the Cook County State's attorney does the investigating
for that incident that were,
that would occur in the city of Chicago?
Yes. Um, sometimes their investigation just consists
of reviewing our investigative materials.
Sometimes they do their own interviews
and other, uh, investigative steps
Given the same set of scenarios
with the officer in Oak Park, the, what you're saying is
that the Illinois State Police would conduct a criminal
investigation, however, the Cook County State's attorney
would still make a charging decision in that case.
That, I don't know. I believe that that's the case,
but I, I can't say for certain.
Okay. Um, that's, uh,
that's, that's, and you also are saying earlier
that there are, there are conversations
around the Illinois State police investigating
Chicago police officer involved shootings
from a criminal perspective.
Yes. That would be just the fatal officer involved
shootings, uh, by a Chicago police officer.
There is, there have been conversations about them taking
over the criminal investigation.
And that would be via the city of Chicago,
or would that be via the Cook County State's attorney?
I believe City of Chicago.
I'm not sure it's in
connection with the lawsuit, but I'm not
Exactly sure about the mechanism.
I guess, uh, we'll ask the, the next, uh,
participant about that then.
Uh, the Department of Law. Okay.
Um, again, um, I, I think that, um, we,
given the state
of what's has transpired in our city over numerous years,
uh, it is important for us as, as government to, you know,
make sure that we are going above
and beyond what's necessary in order to,
um, you know, meet the moment.
Um, we've had some challenges well documented,
and, uh, your, your office is an offshoot
of the challenging times that we've had.
Um, and again, we wanna maintain confidence, uh,
in the public space that cope is up to the job, up
to the challenge in getting things done, in efficient manner
and effective manner.
And also, um, looking at, uh, our officers, again,
our officers are under tremendous amount of pressure.
And, uh, I know it, it is a extremely difficult job.
We wanna be fair to them while we're also being
fair, uh, to the public.
So, again, I know your work is not easy,
and I know some of these questions, uh, may be difficult.
And also, we, we know that, you know, the,
this stuff happens and these are split second
decisions that are being made.
So sometimes it's very difficult for us, uh, to understand
what happened, how, and how the law potentially is applied.
I do think, though, that, um, it, it's really important
that our citizens understand use of force
and, uh, what, if anything,
has the office done to talk about use of force
and under what circumstances force can be utilized,
especially deadly force.
Um, I, I think
that people would be amazed at the circumstances in which
deadly force could be utilized,
and that our officers in many cases,
don't utilize deadly force in some
of these ca in some of these circumstances.
So I don't know what you all are doing to, you know,
help people to understand.
Uh, and I think that if people did have better understanding
it, it may, may help them to, um, deal with some of the,
some of the fallout from some of these situations.
Um, thank you for that Alder.
Um, first, let me say, we do recognize
that officers have a stressful job,
and at times it can definitely be, uh, traumatic, right?
They deal with a lot of stress, not just on the job,
but off the job as well, dealing with life
and family issues.
Um, as far as the community,
the community is hurting as well too.
Um, we hope to be that balance. We hope to bridge the gap.
We wanna be a partner as it relates to, uh, public safety.
One thing that we are doing to try
to educate the community is Copa Academy.
Uh, I'm sorry, Copa People Academy,
which will start next Tuesday at Kennedy King College.
It will go for six weeks every Tuesday.
And we encourage people to sign up.
Um, we ask that, you know, all of you in this room
that can pass that information along, um,
to your constituents so they can be aware.
But we are trying to engage.
I also go to as many as community, uh, community events
that I'm allowed to go to that time allows me to go to,
to try to educate the community as well.
Okay. Alright.
Um, with that being, any other comments, thoughts? Okay.
Uh, before I close you out, I do want, uh, wanna take a,
a motion to recognize, um, Manhattan, uh,
she's joined us virtually.
Uh, chairman, you have motion
to allow her to participate virtually.
So moved. Uh, all in favor seeking vote by saying aye.
Any opposed, any opinion chairs? Ayes have it.
And Alder Hatton will be added to our quorum. Alder.
Hatton, do you have any questions for Cowell
before we release them?
I do not. Thank you. Alright. Very well, thank you.
And we will be seeing you in fairly short order.
Um, um, I do think that, uh, we, we appreciate the work
that you all are, uh, are bringing to the table.
And, uh, I know there are some through the chair, uh,
requesting questions that need to be, uh, brought forth.
And, uh, we look forward to seeing you in the coming weeks.
Thank you, Alder. Alright.
With that being said, the committee will stand at ease while
we transition to the law department.
Good morning. Uh, we are, uh, back with our last department,
the Department of Law, uh, corporation Council, uh,
Richardson Lawry, if you could introduce the members
of the team that are with us here in the well, as well
as those that are in the box.
And then proceed into your opening presentation,
after which we will have rounds of questions.
So you may proceed.
Thank you, chairman. Um, thank you members
of City Council, uh, for having us here today.
On the dais with me is Michael Ello,
who is sitting in for Julie.
Um, uh, who is in the box somewhere.
Um, and, uh, Michael will help me, um, with the numbers.
He's from our administration division.
Um, sitting next to him is Michael Dechen, who will help
to navigate the computer.
In the box we have Asia Carr Favors first Assistant
Corporation counsel next to hers, Jim McDonald,
long longstanding, uh, member of the law department
and managing deputy of transactions next to him.
Uh, John Hendricks, managing Deputy of litigation, adjacent
to him, David Amp.
David Amp is the deputy over coal or
otherwise known as our collection.
Dominic Collections Division next to David is a new member
of the law department.
Um, it is Jackie Thompson.
Jackie Thompson is the new deputy of the public, uh,
safety reform division, who I want to introduce to, um,
the Alder Corps, and we'll speak about him
and more fully at our regular budget hearing.
Uh, adjacent to Jackie is, uh, Victoria Benson,
who is our returning, uh, veteran
and deputy of Mass Torts in complex litigation.
Uh, followed by Elizabeth Manion, our deputy that, uh,
who serves over risk management.
Um, behind her. Uh, Julie, uh, I referenced Julie Montgomery
before, who was the deputy, all of administrative hearings.
Um, adjacent to her is, uh, Steven Kane,
our deputy over affirmative litigation.
And finally, um, our, uh, PIO, um,
Christian Kaban ban.
I don't see anyone else in the box.
Um, standing, um, um, to the side is, uh, one of our, uh,
stalwarts from our legal counseling division.
Um, and in the back, uh, we have Shelly Sandoval who helps
with our recruitment.
Uh, Juan Bates, who, uh, runs, um,
well supporting cast in, uh, our administrative division,
um, atu, um, who is also with legal counseling.
I cannot see, um, uh, any others.
And some he, he says, don't say my name.
Um, but, uh, this is the staff that is present
for the law department.
Shall I begin? Yes, ma'am. Okay. Alright.
I'm gonna try to be efficient,
but I did want to take the time to, um,
just go over first the fundamentals in terms of our,
um, the department.
And on the first slide, you will see
our current makeup is 350 employees,
248 attorneys
with 102 support staff, 19 divisions.
Um, but to give you a sense of the volume that we have is,
um, 17,000
and beyond open matters, as well as our defense litigation
and transactions on the transaction side.
That's just to give you an indication in the amount
of transactions we've closed, uh, throughout the year.
In terms of the staffing we have, um,
the chairman was interested in this, um, last year,
and I'll certainly talk about it more in November.
Um, but we are at a demographic of 54, um,
0.1% on the female side
and with the balance on, uh, of males in the department.
So we still lean, um, heavy on the female.
Um, but, um, we have, um, each
of those individuals have contributed mightly, um,
to the department's, um, uh, direction.
And, um, I can certainly provide any, um, um,
ethnic break down through the chair.
Um, our budget, we are for 2025, we're at 45, um,
points, 92 million.
Um, and we'll be seeking, uh, same or similar.
Um, when we go into, uh, 2026, I wanted
to take the time for the der core to share with you.
Since this is a midyear
and this is a new approach to, um, the budgeting process,
I thought it was important
to have a reflective point in terms of the things
that we've accomplished as a body on your behalf
and on behalf of, um, our client departments as well
as the citizens of Chicago.
So, on the accomplishments, let's begin with a reference
to our counter-terrorism.
Um, many of you are aware
that the Trump administration had slowed, um, to a stop
of the payment of dollars to assist us
with counter-terrorism, um, measures.
Um, we are one of the 13 cities across the country, um,
in a program called Securing the Cities.
Um, that program helps to fund personnel equipment training,
um, in the event on a unfortunate event of a terrorism act.
Um, and the administration had, uh,
stopped making those payments.
We sued them. Um,
and subsequently, uh, the payments started to flow.
Federal funding freezes.
As many of you are aware,
we had federal funding freezes across the grant category.
Um, those affected basic services.
Um, certainly it affected, um, staffing
and by way of services.
That means each of your community would've been adversely
impacted had we not challenged, we did challenge.
And as a rule, the vast majority of those, uh,
funds were unfrozen.
And it means by way of one example at CDPH 519,
physicians were, um, uh, retained, um, countless, um,
tens of millions of dollars, um, um, to support those, um,
positions and the related services.
Those services impact each of your community.
And it makes a difference between, um,
health related services being provided.
Again, by way of one example.
Um, we also, um, through the department,
and particularly through the, um, division, uh, for, uh,
constitution commercial law,
we successfully defended the welcoming city ordinance.
As many of you're aware, we were challenged
by the Trump administration en sued, we won.
Um, and, um, we, uh, continue
to be in a prevailing, um, posture.
Um, we will see what comes next.
But what that means is that City of Chicago remains, uh,
a welcoming city for all those who migrate
Next, um, highlighting, um, in terms of accomplishments,
the, uh, special collections unit,
special collections unit is embedded in the, uh, division,
um, over we call coal.
Um, that unit has, um, been prolific.
It's a small but mighty unit,
and that's made the difference across, um, the,
uh, all city wards.
Um, in terms of collecting, um, when we have recalcitrant,
um, uh, landlords who failed to meet their obligations
or recalcitrant, um, property owners who failed
to meet their obligations, many of you are aware of, uh,
the success we had with respect to, um, the, uh, uh,
Wilson Litigation.
Um, and as a result, um, that individual, the LLCs
that she managed, um, forfeited lost, um,
based on our legal challenge, 800 plus properties,
we hope in time those properties will be back on the proper
tax roles and, um, certainly will be, uh, better
maintained of those, uh, properties that covered half
of the wards of this city.
Um, and each of the alders that were impacted by, um,
her actions and inactions, um, I, uh, met with,
uh, walked them through, uh, the impact
and told them in advance what we would do.
We have done that collective bargaining agreements.
Um, we have, uh,
negotiated 41 collective bargaining
agreements on behalf of the city.
Um, and, uh, we have, uh,
ultimately about three, I believe left.
Um, that in and of itself has been quite the lift
that was led by my division head, um, Cecily,
uh, Porter Adams.
Um, but it is something that again, uh, touches
about every ward and certainly every union, uh,
within the city of Chicago Law 1 0 5.
What does that mean? That is our preparedness
for the Ward Sip Sups.
We did a training across all 50 wards.
We worked in concert with Streets
and Sanitation, uh, with BACP.
Um, and the objective there was to better, um,
to provide a training mechanism for them in terms of
how ticket writing, so that I know that many
of you have wards where, um, uh,
lots are not being properly maintained,
or you have, um, um, uh, property owners who have failed
for many years to meet their obligations.
Um, we've been able
to train all ward soups across the entire city, um,
and the special collections unit I referenced earlier.
Um, um, we'll be, uh, servicing those through, uh,
legal services to help with, um, making sure
that we are properly finding
and holding to account those individuals who have, um,
been problematic, um, within your respective, uh, wards
light item, but important, um, we, um, negotiated, uh,
with, uh, CPS on behalf of CPL Department
of Library Department to ensure that, uh, CPL was able
to provide a, um, enrollment, um, mechanism
for CPS students.
And now all CPS students are automatically enrolled in
getting library cards.
That was our, a very protracted effort from our division
of finance, um, under which the managing deputy
of transactions, um, and his staff, um, told.
And, uh, we were successfully able to bring that to closure
so that all CPS students now have access to library cards.
MLB, um, many of you read with interest,
the 2027 MLB All Star Games.
I know Alderman Lawson knows this intimately.
Um, as it was, thank you, alderman, as it was a very long,
very long, um, journey, um, uh, to get to, uh, the point
of being able to, um, be in a position to host the games.
Um, but once we had clearance from the mayor, we were able
to begin the process of negotiating, um, uh,
for on the real estate issues, the infrastructure issues,
um, alleyway opening, um, solving for some
of the localized problems within, um, uh,
alderman Lawson's Ward.
But ultimately, um, those, um, solving for those issues ran
to not only the benefit of his ward,
but the benefit of the city, um, and ulti
and frankly, the largest of the city.
Um, uh, when this, uh, 2027 MLB All-Star game arrives,
O'Hare expansion, um, when, uh, we arrived, when I arrived
to the department, um, we, there was a, um, issue with,
um, trying to ensure that that expansion took place.
Um, many of you're aware there was a celebratory moment, um,
the city had out at the airport relative to that expansion.
Well, that reflected our good work.
Um, we stayed at the table, worked closely with, uh,
the Commissioner of Aviation at the time,
and had, um, much of my, my, um, um, uh,
A ERC as we call it, my, uh, airports division, uh, focused.
And I set with them
and we negotiated what they call it, MII, so
that the expansion of the airport could take place
that is in a business imperative for the city's growth,
and obviously a business imperative financially, uh,
risk management efforts.
As many of you, I shared with you
that we were gonna have head of risk management.
Elizabeth Manion is with us as deputy.
She has done yeoman's work in assessing the risk exposure,
particularly along our litigation.
Um, and that has informed, um, much of our operations.
Um, um, and we'll speak about that in more detail, um,
at our November meeting.
And then closing on the accomplishments, as many
of you're aware, um, we have put
before you, um, in, uh, finance committee, um,
the global settlement of, uh, the, uh, Watts cases,
um, a hundred
and, uh, 80 plaintiffs 176 cases.
The, uh, to the best of our knowledge, the first known, uh,
global settlement, um, of its kind.
Um, back in the summer of 2023, I set with the mayor, um,
talked about, um, some of the challenges that I saw.
Um, and he, um, supported going forward, um,
with taking a new revised approach for purposes
of these, uh, settlements of this nature.
Uh, recruited back Victoria Benson, uh, the deputy
of Mass tor and complex of litigation, who is in the box.
And, um, she, I
and John Hendricks, who the managing Deputy
of litigation worked together.
But Victoria Benson
of Mass Tours did a yeoman's job in sitting with the judges,
um, uh, our judge, magistrate judge, um, uh, Maria Valdez
and, and myself preceding with maggi,
former Magistrate Judge Sheila Finnegan.
Um, and ultimately we were able to put
before this body, um, through committee, um, a, um,
alma settlement, which will be
before the full, um, uh, city council, um,
on the 25th across the wards.
I won't go through reading all of these items,
but it is an indication of impact across the wards
to all the cases that we handle to assist with health
and safety measures.
Um, again, the Ward Superintendent training,
and I think, uh, the Department of Streets
and Sanitation as their commissioner ensure
that every superintendent for every ward was present
for each of those training sessions.
Um, and, um, we think the city is better positioned
as a consequence, and certainly, um,
your wards will likely reap the benefits.
Um, we have forced sales of blighted lots, um,
that we reference, uh, demolition, uh, costs, um, savings
of, uh, millions of dollars going to the revenue.
Um, I know sometimes people view us as a cost center.
I call us a cost savings, um,
because ultimately we're keeping the city, um,
from a certain amount of liability.
But I did wanna just highlight, um, some of the revenue
that this department has been able to generate, um,
over the course of the year.
And in each of those categories,
you'll see we're up in revenue generation
by 18% in one category, 22 and another.
Um, and, uh, certainly, uh,
anticipate ending the year well above, uh,
where we were last year.
Um, and it appears
as if we're on a good trajectory going into, uh, 2026.
And then, uh, for your final slide
before I open it up for questions, is just an indication of
what we've done, uh, with the people that we have.
City of Chicago, a population of, uh,
2,664,000 approximately.
We have 242 attorneys serving the city.
And 180 108, uh, support staff
compare by contrast us to New York City
that has a population of 8 million, um,
but has 760 attorneys, um,
within its law department
and Los Angeles, um, who has a population of 38,
um, sorry, 3 million, 800,000, uh,
and has an attorney population of 550.
So, while we may be lean, we are mighty,
but in being lean, it does mean that we have to have
outside counsel, uh, utilization.
And we have a chart on that, uh,
which we can talk about later if necessary.
Um, but you will see that I have been advocating
for looking at strategic ways where we can make, um, uh,
have additional s uh, staff come in, um, so
that we can lessen, uh, the impact
and the amount of money that we have
to spend on outside counsel.
The results of the Mass Torts effort, uh, alone, um,
it's, uh, uh, almost 25 million spend, um,
and 5 million this year, uh, expended, uh, with
outside counsel that goes away
with the solving of the cases.
Imagine what we can do as we, um, build out our staff, um,
in other strategic areas to ensure we are able
to deliver on behalf of the city.
Um, but we also are able to keep the talent in-house.
Um, we will, as we move forward,
have a strong f focus on return
of investment, uh, for the city.
I will focus on that, um, more intentionally in November.
But chair, those are my opening mar remarks,
and I hand it back to you.
Uh, thank you, uh,
corporation Council, Richardson, Laurie.
Um, you actually have questions after all of that? Yes.
I just, you know, um, let me, let me say this before I,
before I go to your Chairman Vegas, uh, number one, I,
I think the work that you all have done, uh,
this year in bringing closure to items that, that, that need
to be done, I think is, uh, is a good thing.
I think the global settlement, uh, of those Watts cases, um,
is, is something I, I think number one puts, um, a rather,
uh, sword history behind us in, in respects to what happened
to those, uh, young men in, uh, Ida B.
Wells and Stateway Gardens over in that area.
Um, but also allows us to move forward.
And the, uh, savings that we incurred by not having
to continue, uh, down the path of outside council, uh,
with everything else that is happening, uh, I think is, uh,
definitely, uh, something that, that your office
and your team is to be commended for.
Uh, I do believe
and hope that we will, uh, pass, uh,
settlement at our next city council meeting.
Again, the structuring of things
and, and bringing that forward.
And I, I, I think just bringing a, uh, different perspective
and running literally, uh, it looks like you're,
you're running this like a law firm versus a city
department, which again, uh, yields some, uh, benefits
that we generally just don't think about from a perspective
of being a, uh, being a city department.
So appreciate the effort
and work that you all have done in that respect.
Question I've asked just about every
department, uh, coming in.
Uh, I know that budget is asking for three to 5%
reduction in expenditures, um, in the 2026 budget.
Just want to get an idea of
how you all anticipate meeting that demand.
Thank you, chairman, uh, for your opening remarks,
and thank you as well for the question.
Um, you, uh, properly noted, um, part
of my background 15 years is that, um,
mayor Brown at a large firm law firm
where I was an equity partner.
So I bring that to the table
and furtherance of that, as opposed
to simply approaching this, um,
as a line item issue in which we would have
deductions on line items.
I think that is not in the CI city's interest,
and that is not the approach I'm taking
or have taken with OBM.
What the approach I have taken is the, the amount of money
that we've had to spend on outside counsel.
I can show a direct line of a budgetary benefit by a,
having the talent in-house
and b uh, solving for some of these legacy cases.
So that c we can have, uh, cost savings.
Again, an immediate example of
that is we spent 5 million just this year alone,
just on watts.
If I, that continues, my number of
outside council spend will drop exponentially.
That is approach I've taken with OBM.
And to date, they've been very, uh, receptive.
And the number, uh, your account year over year of, of,
of, of attorneys on staff, uh, what
what change have you seen there?
Um, and then secondly, uh, what is your, uh,
what are your vacancies in, in the same, uh, breath?
Sure. Uh, we currently have,
I think about 30, 35, 31.
We have 31 vacancies in the department that is reflective
of the ebbs and folds
of attorneys moving in and out of the system.
Um, I think we hired this year, um, all in, um, probably,
I don't know, 20, uh, plus or more attorneys.
Uh, we, um, compared to last year,
we will likely have a same or similar,
but we're asking for additional staffing, um,
as appropriate as we bring down our outside council spend.
Our budget number, um, is 45 million, just over 45 million.
Um, we will probably be slightly under that number,
um, but not by much. Okay.
What, um, this year, what did, what did we budget for
outside council this year?
Um, do you have that exact number? Our
Projections are gonna be around 60 million,
Right? Uh, 60 mil.
So we budgeted 60 mil, uh, for outside spending this year.
Where do you think we're gonna land on, uh, out outside,
outside council spending this year?
Uh, we will be very close to that number.
Okay. Even with the, uh, exclusion of the Watts cases,
Uh, that does not include the exclusion of,
of the wa once we draw down on the watts,
because that's this year, it will reflect in next,
next year's budget, not this
Year's budget. Got it.
Okay. Very well.
Um, but we definitely can see a correlation between
internal hiring and a decrease in outside council spend.
Uh, without question Alderman, uh,
that's an excellent question.
When we have to hire out, uh, depending on the nature
of the, uh, uh, legal services we're procuring,
we're at a one to four model that is, if I have
that staff in, uh, the cost is at a lower it,
it's gonna cost me four times the amount
if I have to go out.
And depending on the skillset,
sometimes it's six times the amount if I have to hire
outside counsel as opposed to having that talent in-house.
And with that being stated, which is, which is a problem
that we were seeing seemingly in CDPH
around a psychiatrist
and in, uh, the police department of OPSA around doctors,
uh, comparably, um, I, I,
my understanding is that when good talent comes,
it, it doesn't come cheap.
Right. And, um, how do you manage
getting quality qualified individuals
in an environment where they could literally go across the
street and double or triple their, their salaries?
That's an excellent question, chairman.
Uh, one of the things that we've done when I arrived, uh,
the city did not cover A RDC,
which is a licensing fee for attorneys.
Once we shifted the narrative,
we had a lot more attorneys coming
to consider us licensing fee.
We are obligated as attorneys to have, um, a license.
When I was in the private sector, it was covered, uh,
for all attorneys in the private sector.
And I, um, uh, frankly, um,
we had ample resources,
so we didn't necessarily need the coverage.
If one is making a, uh, the commitment
to public sector work, um, we should be able to
and are covering, um,
and are now covering the A RDC licensing fees.
Additionally, we expanded our CLE, um,
uh, uh, opportunities.
Lawyers are also obligated in rotating years
to have continuing education.
So we try to ensure that we cover all
of those continuing education dollars.
Um, and the law department is running a pilot now on a
three, two model, so that if an attorney needs
to work from home or work, uh, uh,
from another site, they can do that.
And they don't have to physically be in the office.
Also, um, just to stay competitive, frankly, we need
to begin that pilot and we'll assess at the end of the year.
But mostly it's the intangibles.
What we've tried to do, uh, chairman,
is create an environment where attorneys want to be,
where skillset sets are welcomed, supported, guided, um,
and I think that has helped us with having
this extraordinary group of deputies
and other staff you see sitting in the box, um, who, um,
lead on a daily basis and simply wake up and ask
and answer the following question, what do I need to do
to make a difference today?
How do I, that is harder to measure.
But we've tried to create an environment where those kinds
of things are not only, um, welcomed,
but, but nurtured.
And I think we have really a, um,
amassed a really strong leadership team.
Um, and, um, we've created some additional trainings
for new attorneys.
I was a Cub attorney and started my career here.
The things I learned prepared me
for the other experiences I had,
and I feel duty bound to ensure
that the young attorneys here provi are
provided the same, uh, efforts.
So, uh, Shelly Sandoval,
who really leads our recruiting efforts
and some of our, uh, training events,
has done a yeoman's job of ensuring that we're responding
to the professional development needs of attorneys.
I will tell you without equivocation this, the city
of Chicago has been the best training ground.
It is like no other, if you are a slow swimmer,
there's probably a lane for you to learn.
But if you are somebody who not only knows how to stroke,
and on occasion is viewed as stroking, well, in terms
of swim, this is a great place for you.
And we constantly remind people of the opportunities, um,
in terms of professional development.
And I think that's created an environment
where a lot more people want to come, uh, to the city.
We, we get that people can make more on the outside.
That said, if I were at a, they're still at a large farm,
my billing weight would be well over 2000 without exception.
We can't do that here. We can't meet that number here.
What we can do,
and what we do do is exceed in experience
the depth of experience.
If you're a litigator
and you want to litigate, got plenty of that here.
If you're a transaction attorney
and you want to have a substantive role in
transactions, we do that here.
The 9 1 1 center, I will close on that.
I negotiated as a cub lawyer here that, um,
people believed my skills were enough, uh,
to deliver the 9 1 1 center serves every ward in all 77
communities in the city.
I had no idea at the time I was just doing the work.
But to have that as a measure of the, the nature
of your work, we can give that to attorneys in a way
that they won't get that anywhere else.
So we're trying to create an environment
where people want to be.
Hmm. It will on Vasquez, thank you very much, chairman.
Um, to follow up kind of on, on part of your line
of questioning, which was something we've been asking all
departments, um,
and I appreciate the conversation related
to in-house versus outside counsel.
So if you could share through the chair, like
how those determinations are made, to your point,
like certain skill sets you need that we don't have
that are gonna cost more, just a, a greater understanding of
that through the chair would be great.
Um, so the question I have is related
to an answer I've been getting when I ask every department
about line item transfers.
Um, okay.
So do you think that, uh, the
OMS published quarterly transfer reports meet the letter
of the law item number five within two dash four dash 0 5 5
report on departmental budgets
and operations, which states
the budget director shall submit
to the committee on the budget and government operations,
or its successor committee,
a written report detailing the following item number five,
a detail of all transfers between line items
within each object
and purpose as classified
by 65 ILCS five dash eight dash two dash
four organized by fund.
And I know that I did a whole lot of numbers there.
So for clarity, what's written in the ordinance is that
whenever line items are transferred within object in
purpose, within the bucket,
we're supposed to get that reporting.
That is not what's been happening.
And so when we've been asking each department
to give us their internal line item,
the answer we've gotten back is, well,
it's within the same bucket, so we can't give it to you.
Which I would interpret as not following the letter
of the law if we're asking
for every single line line item transfer, especially
within each object and purpose.
Thank you, alderman for the question.
I appreciate the question.
Um, but in truth, I don't really have full line
of sight into the transfers that would happen in OBM.
I certainly look, um, as the law department, we work
with them to try to ensure that they, um, remain compliant.
But the truth is, I just don't have the kind of line
of sight into how, um, the, um, shall we say,
widgets sure are moved, um,
from one line item to the next. Sure.
Because I, I, I think I appreciate that.
I think the question is maybe a little less about that.
And so it could be a follow up through the chair, right?
Because if the intent of what's been written is
that every time a line item transfers,
especially when it's within the same bucket, then to agree
to that and to have that be codified means
that they're then responsible to give every change
within each bucket.
And so it is less about the widgets
and more about the intent and responsibility
as codified in the letter of the law.
Let me, uh, let me, I want to kind of,
um, split hairs here.
If, if, if I may, your question
is not about transfers.
Your question truly is about over expending, right?
No, extend no,
because if, if you don't have, if you
overspend a line item, so there are two things
that, that are going here.
You have line item in personnel, right?
That may be under expended where, and,
and let's use police overtime.
That's probably the easiest one to talk about. Yeah.
Police overtime that year over year,
we have shot over whatever that number is
in the appropriation for that.
However, the department has maintained, its in the
category, it's still under the amount
that has been appropriated in the, in the category.
I think that there is some explanation,
even though an internal transfer may not have occurred
to manage the over expenditure
of overtime in the appropriate bucket
that's designed statutorily, uh, your question goes back to
are we over expending on what's been appropriated?
And I think they're two separate issues.
And that's why, that's why I, I, I'm asking
and have, I will ask for there to be clarity on
what the statute states that governs us on the
expenditure or the appropriation authority,
or the ex exceeding of the appropriation authority
that's been set forth by his body.
So I, I do appreciate that.
But nothing in what's written is about expenditure
or appropriation or over under it is transfer.
So if somebody decides that they wanna spend 10 bucks on
staples and they wanna spend 10 bucks on paper clips,
instead, it'll matter if something's over
or under the fact that they transferred is
what we need to get in the reporting.
But as, as you've seen, there are no transfers.
The transfers are coming from us.
There are no transfers to meet those requirements that you
Sent. There are two different kinds of
transfers.
There's the transfers the council have to vote on
that we would then get, and transfers happen internally,
we don't have to vote on we want those.
Also,
I think you're, uh, well, lemme just say this.
Uh, I, I think that, um, I, I follow your, your, your,
your thinking and your thoughts.
Uh, I just don't believe that it occurs the way
that you think that it does. That's all. Yeah.
Yeah. I just, I just know that when we were negotiating
for budget, we wanted every single item of data.
We wanted special files.
And so I just wanna make sure, because it is within object
and purpose, that it's following the letter of the law.
And because we still want more specificity
and transparency as we start negotiating in this budget,
I want those things improved.
Thank, thank you.
You may have to have some
conversations with your colleagues.
'cause I think, uh, the, the room is indicative of.
Oh, I know. But you know, the
Challenges in, in the process here, and I, and I,
and I'm gonna be very frank with you.
Um, uh, if there aren't any additional changes here, uh,
I I think that, um, what, what we have done here,
while I think there's been some been informative, I, I,
we do have to ask the question related to the amount
of time, effort, and energy that's suspended
by the departments to find
Yeah. This
room, the way that it looks is, is,
is, is embarrassing.
I'm perfectly honest with you about
That. As we all know, when
you need 26,
every single vote counts. Thank you, chairman.
Well, um, I, I, I can, I can be clear on this.
We will not be operating in this fashion again, uh, related
to this level of hearings
and the level of resources that the departments have had
to put into these presentations to come forth
with the very small fraction of the body, even
of the committee and of the council.
So, while I, I understand what everybody, uh, wants, I think
that there, we need to read the room on these situations so
that we, uh, better expend the time efforting
and energy of this body and of the city and the staff.
So, any other questions? Go ahead.
Uh, alderman Viegas, follow Alderman Lawson.
Thank you, Matt. Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Uh, first of all, congratulations, uh, corporation Council.
I'm really happy to see that
the global settlement was actually completed.
Um, and, uh, um,
rooting on your department to do more of that.
Um, obviously, you know, we've been bringing attention
around this issue 'cause of the liability
and, uh, was very surprised.
And, um, very happy to see that the, what the number was,
uh, which in itself is cost savings.
Uh, so I'd like you to high make sure you highlight that,
um, given the, the history of those settlements that were,
the trend that it was going.
Um, so that's a huge win for your department.
So I wanted to say congratulations for Thank
You, Alden. Um,
of the 200 plus cases with Watt's, um,
accounting for a hundred
or whatever that number was, how, how many cases are left
between Guevara, Burge and,
Uh, respectively?
Guevara might be in the forties,
or bur, uh, only three Burge,
and then, uh, Boudreaux might be in the
thirties or something like that.
We have probably a hundred cases of very, uh, note,
but no one as prolific, um, as you probably know, intimately
as, uh, with the, uh, the Watts cases.
Yeah. Uh, which, um, when we began this journey was 185
and all, and in toll, um, some
of those cases came before this body.
Some we, uh, settled under the cap,
but obviously the global is 176 cases
and 180, uh, plaintiffs,
and I certainly wanna acknowledge Alderman.
Um, well over a year
and a half ago, we began to have this conversation around,
uh, solving for these kinds of problems.
And I know you've been very focused, um, on that very thing,
so I wanna publicly acknowledge you.
No, and, and I appreciate that.
I, we, we were, I was just nervous based on
what the settlement numbers were
and the cases outstanding,
what debt number was looking like.
So again, huge kudos to you
and your department for Thank you all for pulling that off.
Look and rooting again for you to continue doing that.
Thank you, Alden. Um, the risk, the risk, uh,
department that you have, um, has that department been able
to yield some savings as well?
A absolutely. Uh, Elizabeth Manion is deputy, um, of the,
our risk management area.
One of the reasons we were able to get to
that number was her good work, as well
as obviously Victoria Bensons.
Yeah. She does a case management analysis across
our entire platform now. Um, yeah,
If you could send us those numbers,
just like what it looks like.
'cause that's, it's a big deal. It is.
And it's a, it's a different approach than in our past.
Um, but in order for us to know what our liability is, as,
you know, we have to face it head on.
And Elizabeth has just done a yin's work, uh, to, um,
assist us in doing that.
Yep. So I'll be happy to provide it through the team. Yeah,
That would be great to look at.
Um, I saw a slide up there around collections. Mm-hmm.
Um, what are we doing around water collections?
Oh, a favorite topic. 800,
800 to $900 million enterprise dollars.
It's hard. Uh, my deputy of, uh, Cole, uh,
David Amp is in the, uh, box.
Uh, David would, do you wanna respond
to the water collections question?
Uh, sure. Fassan, State your name and,
Sorry. Uh, yeah. David
Holekamp, uh, deputy Corporation Council
for the coal division.
Uh, water collections is, I would say one
of our primary collections, um, uh, buckets.
Uh, it, we have been collecting
steady over the last few years.
Uh, it is one of the buckets that we are
really looking at on how we can collect more.
And we do have a, um, kind of an initiative
that we're rolling out to, to collect on that.
And I'd be happy to talk to, you know,
your office or your staff about that.
Um, it's, uh, I agree we could, we could definitely do more
to, or try to do more to collect on, on the water debt.
It's, it's, it's, it's a large pot of money and,
and we're definitely looking to, you know, uh,
collect more from that bucket
Alderman. Uh,
we have identified what we think is the city's, um,
opportunity, um, to, uh,
engage in a more robust debt collection in that area.
What, uh, David Holekamp,
uncharacteristically modestly saying is
that he has dedicated staff to, um, start to analyze
that going into 2026.
Um, we are, uh, we'll have an entire initiative
around that category.
I've established a meeting with D-W-M-O-B-M, finance,
comptroller, we're all working in concert.
We'll be in a better position to, um, speak more fully, um,
probably at the November meeting.
But we are launching an, in an initiative
around our, uh, water debt.
You are a proper, um, it is a keen insight to note that
that's an opportunity we plan to seize upon set opportunity.
Yeah. Well, I mean, we're, we need
that money in order to pay back the bonds.
Indeed, we do. So,
Um, and then, uh, you mentioned
this is more No worries, chairman, what was that?
I said go ahead. Oh, yeah. It's not even a question.
More of a comment. Uh, what, yeah, it is a question too.
Um, you mentioned the MLB uh, 2027.
Was your department also involved with the bears or no?
We are, I can't speak to that, uh, issue, um,
which is I'm sure point of interest.
Um, but we, it was working on the MLB
and I have to acknowledge, uh, alderman Lawson,
who really was diligent, he and his staff as we went back
and forth, um,
and we work with the state, um, as well as the cubs
and negotiations at time broke down, uh, resurrected,
broke down, resurrected.
And we were ultimately able to wrap in, uh,
to those negotia negotiations, uh, with the alderman's, uh,
full support, a host of issues that were impacting the city.
But what, to your point, alderman, it was a demonstration of
what can happen when we all work together.
Yeah. Should, uh, we have an opportunity with the team,
other team you've referenced, um, we'll be at the table, uh,
ready to solve for whatever the issues happen to be.
Um, but it requires folks to come
to the table for that to occur.
Okay. Cool. Alright. Thank you.
And again, congratulations to
Your department. Thank you, ultimate. Thank
you.
Thank Chair, uh, Alman Lawson.
Thank you. Uh, thank you Chair,
and, uh, good morning council. Good
Morning, Sir. Um, I will
just start with, uh, the All-Star game
and Wrigley, and, um, when, you know,
the chair mentions long-term issues.
This is an issue that goes back several administrations.
Um, and we kicked the can, we kicked the can during COVI,
but, uh, it all came to a head
because there was something we all, we all wanted and,
and, and worked toward it.
And, and it wouldn't have happened without your
leadership in the department.
So I really want to thank you for that.
Um, good luck with the other teams.
Um, I think, um, most people don't think the law department
as revenue generating,
and so your focus on that is, is appreciated.
Um, you know, if we don't have any other fund as close to
water when it comes to lake collections, do we, I mean,
what would be the next sort of closest fund?
Uh, probably in terms of collections opportunities,
probably in the parking area, but David, uh,
would you like to respond?
Sure. Um, David Holekamp again, uh,
Corp Deputy Corporation counsel for the coal division.
So, uh, water is, as you know, an enterprise fund.
So it's, it's separate.
The rest of the debt, most of the rest of the debt we would,
we would be collecting would be, uh,
I believe into the corporate fund.
But, uh, just types of debt, if that's
what you're asking. Yeah.
The Question. So types of, and how much
Do we think is a, in that universe? So
Of What types? And, and then what? So
The, the largest type of outstanding debt,
I believe would be parking, parking debt.
And what do we estimate that as?
Oh, Of a hundred million? Or
We can provide that information, um, through the chair so
that we are not guessing at that number.
Yes, it is a sizable number.
Um, uh, with respect to parking.
Um, the water debt number is an
extraordinarily large number.
Sure. But it is a sizeable number.
Well, and the water debt number includes, uh, customers
who are, I mean, not households, right.
We're talking about suburbs who are in arrears and,
and other, other entities other than, you know, Mr.
And Mrs. Smith. Right?
Correct. Right, Right. Hold
On, hold on, Jim.
I mean, uh, T
Point Chairman with that request for the,
the number of, uh, items outstanding,
could you just provide all of it through
Chair? We, we are happy
to do that. Okay, great.
We'll provide that information through the chair. Yeah.
Okay. That, that'd be great.
Um, I appreciate the focus on that, uh,
and to continue to be revenue
generating and increase that number.
I think that's, um, that's part of the solution here.
Um, I would love to develop our way into a higher property
tax base every year, uh, working on it.
Um, and, and, but collections are part of that too.
Um, I had a lot of questions I think I
submitted in advance about settlements.
Those have all been addressed and answered in a major way.
And I want to thank you for your foresight,
um, on those issues.
And you mentioned the culture of the law department.
I appreciate that too. 'cause I think in being
around a long time, I saw a lot
of different corp councils come
and go, um, that didn't have that focus.
Right. Um, or were so in the weeds on what they had
to get done immediately, that they didn't step back
and look at how we can do things better.
And, um, I've said we need to be recruiting in law schools.
I know that has ramped up.
And so I wanna appreciate, um,
that the only other last question I had is, I'm not familiar
with the ward superintendent trainings.
What did those look like? And you
said there were multiple sessions.
What did those cover?
We did, uh, we had two full days of ward suit trainings.
Um, the streets
and San department, um, commissioner, uh, Cole Scott,
he brought in, uh, insured everyone,
no exceptions was there.
Tommy was there. Um, you know who I'm, he's the best one,
Of course. Yes.
So he was, he was running command.
Uh, David Amp was present for those, uh, presentations.
Um, Christine ha of my department was present
for those pre presentations.
BACP was present for those presentations.
We actually have a presentation booklet that I'm happy
to provide through the chair.
Great. So you can see the details of it.
We put up on, you know, I think I've known for my slides,
um, and we went through a series of,
of really giving them id, uh, indications of how
to write a ticket in a way that's sustainable
because we, uh, know that there's a concern
of non suiting if the pictures aren't taken in a certain
way, if the report isn't written in a certain way,
et cetera, it, it, it means there's a lot
of work on the front end
and it doesn't, um, have a good payoff, if you will,
on the back end because the, we don't have enough evidence
or, um, it's not prepared in a way that's sustainable
and we have to dismiss it.
So we went through that entire process with them.
But I think, uh, alderman having the deck, uh,
'cause your ward soup was present Sure.
Um, is important, uh, for you.
And BACP, um, from a licensing standpoint, went through
and presented with their in-house counsel as well
as a supplementary basis, the things to do to sustain,
or our challenge, if you will, uh,
certain last licensing categories,
and frankly, the inspections that they do related to that.
Okay. So in addition to Streets Sand,
BACP has gone through this as well.
Uh, BACP was, uh, partnered with us. Okay.
Uh, and when we presented to all 50 ward soups. Right.
And it was done over two separate
sessions, two separate days.
Right. I set in on a good part of most
of those sessions as well.
Right. As, as my staff.
So I then I, As did I have to say, co standard
of streets and sand.
Right. Um, also, uh, was present.
Good. Good. I, I guess my, my follow up question to
that is, are there other departments
that we need to be doing that with?
We, um, Maybe all of them.
There are opportunities, um, that we are exploring, uh,
with other departments.
We put on a session for the Alder Corps, uh, I don't know
what the number was, 1 0 6 on bonds.
We did a session on settlements, so 1 0 7 on settlements.
Um, we are looking for an opportunity
to do some collaborative sessions that involve CDPH and
or streets and SAN or cdot.
And frankly, um,
eventually we are likely gonna have to do one with water.
Okay. Great. Um, thank you for everything.
We'll, we'll see you soon. See you soon. Take care.
Thanks, chair.
Thank you, Adam Lawson.
Um, again, uh, uh, we know that the, uh, work
that you all are doing, uh, is, uh,
definitely, uh, necessary.
And as you say, if you about saving money
and helping us to manage, uh, risk.
Um, I know that we've delved on the, uh,
police liability side.
Um, what other, uh,
items are you all looking at from a risk management
perspective that, that are, for lack
of a better term, loss leaders in our, um, exposures on,
um, lawsuits and other things we've talked about?
The one that keeps rattling around in here is trip
and falls trips on sidewalks.
Right. Um, how are we managing
and helping the departments, uh, through,
through an issue like that?
What is you all's role
and how are you helping manage their exposure on these risks
and, and kinda driving some operational change?
Sure. So I'll respond first
and then I'll let, um, a couple of my deputies, uh, expound.
Um, first, um, one of the things that approach that we've,
um, taken that's a little different, um,
is maybe a lot different.
Um, when we, uh, see,
because we inherit all the,
obviously we are handling all the legal matters.
When we see an act that repeats itself or we see in streets
and sand, there might be something relative to sidewalks in,
um, uh, cdot.
There might be something relative to light poles
and police department.
There might be categories we have established where we sit
with those departments and walk through what we're seeing
and talk about how, um, we might be able to operationally,
uh, make some adjustments
so we can minimize the city's exposure, um,
and liability that is now a standard practice
that is built into my department.
Um, deputy, um, uh, who has presented
to you on many occasions, um, um, um,
I call her Maggie, uh, Casey.
Um, she, uh, is over the torch division.
So when she came to the division to run that division,
it was an immediate observation she made
and she made, uh, an adjustment.
And now that is our standard practice.
Um, but I would like for Elizabeth Manion first to say more,
and then if, if John Hendricks likes
to expound, then he can do so.
Elizabeth Manion, deputy of Risk Management.
Hi. Good afternoon.
Oh, good afternoon everyone.
Elizabeth Manion, risk Management and Compliance.
Uh, alderman, to answer your question on
what risk areas we are focusing on, department
of Law has booked great efforts into data analytics.
As you may recall, from the last budget cycle,
we implemented a matter management system called Solidify.
And in our system, we are now in real time tracking
allegations, client departments, and ultimate exposure.
So we are able to target the high exposure areas
and look for trends.
Uh, you had referenced the police department, which, uh, is
of course a, um, a spend area for our department,
but we also look at Streets
and Sand, the Department of Water
and other client departments
to give them advice once these trends go in.
Thank you. Elizabeth, is there more you want to say?
John? John Hendricks, uh,
Thank you. Many
managing deputy for our litigation divisions.
Uh, I, I think that we look at risk management now.
We have, uh, really developed a more systematic approach
to risk management than we when we previously had.
And, and by that I mean,
we look at it both at a macro level and a macro level.
At a macro level, I think we've been focusing on data
analysis of the sort that
Elizabeth has just identified.
But that helps us translate and focus on our macro level.
Our macro level is looking at, um,
the system that we use in assessing cases
quickly, of getting information quickly,
and of reporting that information to client departments, um,
that provides a different type of risk assessment
that provides us with a way of saying, you know,
this has happened before.
This is happening now what can we do about it?
And that's something that we've done both with respect
to the Torch division and the police department especially.
Um, so there are a number of cases that we have
identified patterns in that we have actually talked
to supervisors and educators within each of those divisions
and departments to, you know, to share our observations.
And, um, that's one thing that we bring to it that we have,
I think not had in previous years,
or at least that I'm aware of.
Thank you, John.
Thank you, chairman. I, I appreciate using data
'cause that's really determines the trends,
and I appreciate the fact that once you see the trends
that you're bringing into departments,
when you're bringing into departments, what's, what's the,
what's the action there?
Like, like, right, so around sidewalks, for example.
Sure. Um, when we meet with the,
So we pass some legislation that requires
that now the city, if anytime a utility
rips up the sidewalks, it's more than 60%
and the city needs to do the whole thing.
So that way, you know, we're, we're minimizing any type
of risk of, of any squares that were not damaged
by the utility, but it's still there damaged and, and,
and, um, just makes sense from, from an efficient manner
and, and from a investment
in our, in our own infrastructure.
Um, so, so to that point, like if in sidewalks,
for example, then you'll tell the department, Hey,
based on the calls or from three one
or the, the potential lawsuits, you have an issue here.
And then, then what happens?
Uh, thank you for the question.
What typically happens is once we show, uh, the department
that an issue is they'll send someone
out and do a site visit.
Well, the other thing they do is analyze how many times at
that particular site they've had, same or similar issue,
and then they go to their maintenance schedule to see
where they are in the maintenance schedule,
it usually gets prioritized and
or put on schedule to have the issue solved for.
Um, what we hope to also, uh, be building out is the need
to have a more consistent across the platform maintenance
and review schedule so that, uh,
every operation department knows that if you haven't, uh,
reached a, uh, review, uh, or status of the sidewalks
or whatever, it's street poles
or trees as it were, um, within a certain, uh, amount
of time, then you make the adjustment in your schedule.
So your maintenance schedule.
Some of these, uh, this work as you may know,
is now contracted out by third parties,
so sometimes they also have to go to the third parties
to ensure they're compliant.
And if they're not, there's a way
to hold those third parties account
and then we repeat that cycle, uh, over
and over again until everyone gets aligned. Gotcha.
Yeah, because I, I just wanna make sure that
that last part of the execution
Is where I, that we're covering,
so I appreciate the question.
Um, the, um, going back to, uh, the risk management
question, um, how many people are,
well, number one, hey, you're, you're doing,
you're theoretically doing risk management
for the inter enterprise in this entirety, right?
We, I actually do not.
My, uh, my lens is, uh, through the legal lens
of a risk manager, um, and a legal lens only.
It impacts the operations,
but we are, um, not the risk manager
for the entire city in the, in the way that you expect. I
Understand. Understand that. What
interaction does your risk management
team have with the city's risk management?
And I am, I don't know where that is embedded,
where our risk management team is embedded.
Elizabeth, Yes.
Elizabeth Manion, risk management and compliance.
There are currently three risk managers
embedded across the city.
CPD has one as well as the Department of Finance.
The department of Law works very closely
with both risk managers, particularly with the Department
of Finance, as that's essential for us to maintain, secure
and work through our excess insurance
obligations in our program.
Would you categorize the city's risk management
as administrative or more operational?
That is a good question.
So as far as I can speak to the department of law,
I can't speak for the other departments,
but the department of law is very much, um,
I would say operational and policy driven.
So if we notice areas of opportunity that can be improved
that will service our client departments,
we implement a policy and a process update.
But to your, to your knowledge, and,
and based on what you just stated, uh, there's, you,
there's somebody in the police department
and somebody in the Department of Finance.
Yes. And, and I'm sure all three groups
have their respective teams.
I can speak for the Department of Law.
I have a direct report, another A CC,
but my role is to work across the other 18 divisions
within the Department of Law.
Understood. Uh, but you're not what,
or I guess what I'm asking or, or what I'm, and I,
and if you can't answer that, that's fine, is there is not
real operational risk managers,
or I won't say risk management,
but people who are dedicated on risk management
embedded in departments that probably have higher risk
or higher exposures from an operational standpoint,
I don't think we can respond to that, uh,
in the intelligent way.
I don't wanna speculate.
Well, previously it was, uh, as, as I recall,
it was more of an enterprise wide conversation.
And if I remember, the guy
who did it sat on the pension funds,
which I didn't quite understand, but it is what it is.
Um, but there is a significant opportunity,
I believe, from really dealing with,
uh, those issues.
And, and before, I mean,
she's in her department is getting the
after effects of a lack thereof.
Um, the goal here is
to be more preventative than, you know, reactive.
So I I, it seems like we, we have not,
government, I'll say, has not made the turn.
And this is not just City of Chicago.
It's probably multiple units
of government have not made the turn toward looking at risk
management from an active, uh, perspective as a way
to control cost
and, you know, overall, you know, risk reduction.
So, which again, it's about, about saving resources.
So, um, okay.
Um, I don't, um, Altman, man, Howorth,
thank you for joining us today.
You have any questions for the department of law?
Thank you, chair. I, I just wanted to come in
and, uh, send you
and your team appreciation for the law briefings that, um,
that you've put together for us.
They're very essential for us to understand what's happening
and, and what we need to vote on.
And, uh, I understand that there's so much work that needs
to be done, um, especially with many cases that have been
on the books for, for decades now,
and families are waiting for justice.
So I, I just wanted to come and appreciate you for that.
Thank you, chair. Thank
You, Alvin.
Thank you. Uh, one final request.
Uh, we've this issue regarding, uh, exp expense expenditures
and categorizations,
and, uh, what requires action by the legislative body,
uh, pursuant to state statute.
Um, can you all, uh, provide us with some, uh,
interpretations of the statute so
that we're all reading from the same hymnal, uh,
as it relates to what the law is, what, uh,
our responsibilities are, what the executive branches, uh,
limitations may be in relation to the budget
and the expenses, uh, expenditures, uh, in the categories
that they're allowed for?
Uh, I think a lot of us, we have some understanding of
what I do think that a full, uh, either a briefing and
or memo, uh, from, uh,
from your office would be very helpful.
So we could all be, you know, working from a base level for
That. Um, our, we'll,
we'll have our division on legal counsel begin to pull
that information together, working
with our division on finance.
Happy to provide it through the chair.
Okay. Well, we appreciate that.
And, um, uh, again, uh, thank you
and the team for, uh, joining with us today.
We appreciate the work that you all are doing.
We know that, uh, it is challenging in these, uh, in these,
in these times and, and all of the things
that are occurring, but we do appreciate the work
that is, that is being done.
And I think, again, that, uh, watt settlement, I,
I think is a, is a great thing that you all have done.
And I think it, uh, shows if we just take a slightly
different approach to how we manage,
and again, you coming from a, uh, being here
and going to a corporate firm
and then coming back here, you get
to see both sides of the street.
So, um, and,
and utilizing some of those best, best practices
to think is, is the right way to, uh, do things.
So we appreciate your, uh, your, your team
and everything that you all are doing.
Um, I see you all are, we didn't get a chance to, uh, uh,
properly, um, see him off.
But, uh, I know that, uh, Mr. Levine is no longer with us.
He's been, I think probably around most long.
He was here when I came here, so he is been there a minute.
So, uh, but we definitely appreciated his service to, uh,
to this body and everything that he's, uh, done to work.
And again, it's, it goes back to the professionalism.
We, it it is, we have, we get
and always receive from your department.
So again, thank you all for, uh,
for your participation today.
Thank you very much. And thank you for acknowledging, uh,
long stalwart, uh, career of Jeff Levine.
He was here in my first stint government,
my second senate government.
Um, and hopefully we have an opportunity
to acknowledge him properly soon. Thank
You. Thank you. And I guess,
who's the new Jeff Levine then?
Um, we are, it is, uh, open in, it's in the marketplace.
Um, so we have, we're meeting our obligation to open it up
and, uh, we'll see who comes,
but as you, I might imagine we'll need that position filled.
Um, and the, uh,
budget department has certainly been very receptive to, uh,
ensuring that we're able to do just that.
Thank you Alders for taking the time to be with me, me
and the staff today. Alright,
Thank you. Um,
if there is, uh, no further business, uh,
before the committee at this particular point in time, uh,
chairman Viegas, you have a motion to adjourn.
Alright, so moved. All in favor, second vote saying aye.
None opposed. And appear that chairs ayes have it.
And the 2025 midyear budget hearings are hereby adjourned.