Okay.
Good morning and welcome to the Committee on Budget and Government Operations.
We apologize for the delay and start this morning with the technical difficulties.
We have so quickly, we have had to bring out the box as it relates to public comment.
We have 31 people who have signed up for public comment here.
And I have another three people who have signed up online and are there.
I'm adding the three people who signed up online.
These three will go into the box as well.
We will pull 15 names who each will have two minutes.
That will take up our 30-minute public comment section for today.
That is the only difference.
Generally, we allow for three minutes per person.
Go through that.
Alderman Lopez.
Thank you, Chairman, and good morning, members of the committee.
Would it be possible if we reduced it to a minute and a half so that everyone would at least have a chance to speak today?
You didn't hear what I stated.
There are 34 people now.
So if we cut it from three minutes to a minute?
Give everybody 30 seconds.
No, no, no.
A minute and a half.
No, we will.
Okay.
Again, is that person okay?
Nope.
She okay?
Good?
Okay.
All right.
Okay.
So, again, we will pull the individuals out.
We'll have 15 public commenters.
Everyone will be given two minutes apiece for public comment, and then we will proceed from there.
I'm going to ask the sergeant at arms if they will come and begin to pull individuals out and pull up to 15 names out of the box, and then we will proceed from there.
Pick them up.
10, 11, 4, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15.
All right.
Thank you, sir.
All right.
We'll begin.
Our first public speaker is Zoe Lee, followed by Nahil Wajidi.
You may proceed.
Yeah.
Thank you.
Good morning.
How do I want to start this?
Yesterday, I was here for the procurement and inspector general to hear about their budget.
And their recommendations and what's going on.
And before it started, the session started, there was a worker who has been on a job for a while, and his job was getting cut.
And I know that this mayor is saying that he wasn't going to cut any jobs, but he's a pathological liar.
So he'll say anything, but he's cutting these five analyst jobs.
And I remember the man, the gentleman saying, you know, he couldn't find any money or anywhere else to actually keep these jobs.
And it's like, well, he has 150 detail.
He can cut those jobs.
1.8 billion dollars in epidemiology that I saw last year for the last four years in public health.
They can get a forensic audit and see where all that money went, because that's a billion dollars right there to see if they can get that money so he can keep his job.
Um, we have the Beatrice Ponce de Leon immigration and refugee rights job that needs to be cut.
I mean, there's a lot of things that needs to be cut.
And that's my recommendations.
And also the FBI to come.
He wants a general strike.
I want the FBI to come to for him to really look at all this money that's been stolen.
Thank you, ma'am, for your comment.
Next, we have Nahil Wajidi, who was a phone in.
Yes, that's me.
Can you guys hear me OK?
Yes, we can.
You may proceed, ma'am.
You have two minutes.
Thank you, sir.
Hello, my name is Nahil Wajid.
I am a volunteer medical advocate with Resilience, formerly known as Rape Victim Advocate.
I'm also a survivor of domestic violence and attempted homicide due to that violence.
I'm here today advocating on behalf of every survivor who deserves safety, dignity, and most importantly, resources.
As a survivor, our team ensures survivors at 12 area hospitals receive immediate care 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
When someone arrives at our ER after an assault, we are the first safe person they encounter.
If this funding is cut, there will not be enough trade and paid staff available to continue to operate this life-saving program.
Our survivors will be left alone in their most vulnerable moments.
The proposed 43% cut would devastate BIPOC, LGBTQ, immigrant, and low-income communities such as the south and west sides of Chicago, also my home, that already face the highest barriers to safety.
We cannot say that Chicago is going down in crime when domestic violence homicides have happened.
increased by 32 percent, and fatal DV shootings have increased by 56 percent over the past year.
Survivors are reaching out for help at record-breaking levels, and our community is
responding with everything we have. Now is the moment to expand support and not abandon it.
I'm asking you to maintain and increase the funding for the gender-based violence prevention
budget so community organizations like Resilience can continue delivering the 24-7 crisis care
that helps save lives. Survivors need to be met with help and not empty budgets and closed doors.
Thank you. Thank you for your comment. Next, we will have
Imogene Tenochik, followed by Emma Maley. Good morning, everybody.
Dear City Council and Mayor Johnson, thank you for the opportunity to share more about our programs
on behalf of survivors of gender-based violence and the needs of survivors throughout Chicago.
My name is Imogene Tenochik, and I am part of the Survivor Fund team at the Network
Advocating Against Domestic Violence. The Network is the leading anti-gender-based violence
partnership organization here in Chicago, bringing together over 45 gender-based violence
service providers across the Chicagoland area to advocate for better funding services, systems,
and laws for survivors of DV, sexual assault, and human trafficking. We also operate the Illinois
Domestic Violence Hotline for the entire state and coordinate the Survivor Fund, which is the
country's largest cash assistance program for gender-based violence survivors. Through the Survivor
Fund, which has been historically funded predominantly by the city's Department of Family and Support
Services, our team was able to disperse almost $4 million of city funds to nearly 4,000 survivors.
This took place last year via one-time $1,000 cash assistance payments. Most often, these funds are
used for rent payments, food, utilities, and transportation. To put this into context, through the data we collect
on the program, we are able to confidently say that the most recipients were parenting women of color
in their 30s who rented or owned their home, but living well under the poverty line. What we know is
that the demand from survivors for our services is only getting higher. Nearly 12,000 survivors attempted
to book appointments for the Survivor Fund last year, but only 3,223 were appointments were able to be
booked. We could not meet the needs of 72% of survivors who contacted us for help. In short,
this is not the time for the mayor to be proposing a budget with a 43% cut to gender-based violence
support services. Thank you for your time. Thank you for your comments. Next, we'll have Emma
Mealy, followed by Tenny Gross. Good morning, all. My name is Emma Mealy. I am a resident of the 33rd
Ward here in Chicago, a volunteer medical advocate for resilience, a nonprofit focused on the empowerment
and healing of sexual assault survivors, and I am a victim of sexual assault. I'm here today to
address the proposed 43% funding cut for gender-based violence services. The currently allocated
funding that we have represents less than 2% of the city's total municipal budget and supports
critical, life-saving programs. A cut of this nature would be devastating, not only to those in
need, but for the city itself. These programs are not optional. They are essential public safety
investments that save lives, reduce long-term costs, and strengthen communities. Losing the funding in
question would mean gutting or erasing altogether prevention education, trauma-informed comprehensive
case management, counseling, legal advocacy, and what effectively shutter the doors of domestic
violence shelters that are already at capacity. The need is there. We as a city and a nation are at a
precipice where we must decide and declare what and who matters. As women, we have already experienced an
unprecedented slash to the rights to keep our bodies ours. Illinois and Chicago are seen as sanctuaries
for those whose states have already declared that a woman's personhood does not matter, that our rape
does not matter. I am proud to live in a city where we're supposed to stand up for our neighbors.
I believe that is what America can be, and we must be held accountable. You all are meant to be our
protectors, our allies, and frankly, we need you in our corner in order to hold hope for a more tolerant and safe
tomorrow for all. The whole world is watching us, and a cut of this nature would be a clear message
that despite what we may hear on the news, that our elected officials are unwilling to put their
money where their mouth is. This will have a ripple effect that will echo outward for decades to come,
and my question to you is what legacy will you leave? Thank you for your comment. Next, we'll have
Tenny Gross followed by Jose Pazaro. Good morning, Tenny Gross, Institute for Nonviolence Chicago. I'm
speaking on behalf of the community violence intervention groups in the city. I'll start with
some numbers. Usually I don't, but from 2016 till today, year to date, we had in 2016, we had 429
shootings in Austin. We're this year at 139. That's 290 families less shot this per year. West Garfield, 140
down to 73. That's 47% reduction. Austin was 67. New City, 130 down to 42. That's 67.7. We do not claim we take
all the credit at all. There's a lot of forces in it, but a lot of hard work responding 24 hours a day
to the hospital with outreach workers, victim advocates. In Austin alone, we have 52 rival groups
that we created non-aggression agreements, hard to maintain. With your help, we created workforce
programs. We have clinicians. So now it's actually cool to get mental health treatment by young people
involved in the streets. They're doing workforce. They're moving on to jobs. It's a slow process
where no one here is celebrating. I heard that sometimes in the media, we're celebrating the
reduction. We're pleased it's going in the right direction. We know we have a lot of hard work
ahead. FLEB participants mediated about 1,500 disputes just in a period ending in 2024.
So I'm asking you, this city supports about 10% of the total budget of CVI. In other cities,
it's 90%. So please hold on to the 10% that you are investing. A lot of it we got from foundations,
the business community, as well as state and county. We need to keep the part that the city is putting
into this employment program for about 2,000 people with criminal backgrounds who are getting
now to be peacekeepers. Thank you. Thank you for your comment. Next, we have Jose Pizarro,
followed by Katrina Wadi. Good morning, everyone. My name is Jose Pizarro. I am the director of
Safe Streets for the Alliance for Local Service Organizations. I'm here in support of the CVI
initiative. Our initiative, to Tenny's point a moment ago, supports our underserved areas in
the most violent communities and most violent pockets. What we do with our outreach teams is go
out, mentor these young people, get these young people to stop being violent, to give them alternatives
like jobs, mental health, supportive services. The impact, the impact is if we're, if the funding is
cut, then we lose some of our outreach workers, our case managers, our victim advocates, the people that
are in community, the same people that live in that community, that support that community, the same
people that we need, that are effective, that can stop the shootings, that mediate the conflicts,
that come out and they're out there 24-7 at the hospitals, in the community, supporting victims of
violence. Without them, the direction that the shootings are going to go is up, not down. And right now,
in our flip hotspots, last year, we were 84% down in victimizations. 84%. Unheard of. If you take the
funding away, then that number goes away. And then we're back to having our people being victimized and
traumatized in spaces where they should be safe. The kids should be able to come out into the community.
Our outreach teams create safe spaces through our lightning night events. They allow them to come
in and have fun and eat and get resources. Thank you. Thank you for your comments. Next, we have
Katrina Wadi followed by Tulsi McDaniels. Good morning.
I'm Katrina Waddy, Public Education Director for Aclavis.
We're a community health organization that's focused on violence prevention.
We also serve as the co-lead on the city's CVI grant and are proud of the thousands of violent incidents that we've successfully mediated and ultimately prevented by our street outreach teams and our sub-grantees that work diligently in hotspots across nine high-violence communities.
We support the proposed CVI funding in the city budget.
However, we do understand how difficult it is for small community-based organizations to front, you know, services without, you know, payments.
So we are calling for an advanced payment matrix in the next RFP.
Thank you.
Thank you for your comments.
Next, Tulsi McDaniels, followed by Carla Johnson.
Hello.
Hello, my name is Tulsi McDaniels.
I'm here as a member of the Chicago Healthy Homes Coalition.
Chicago's legacy of residential segregation, poor rental housing conditions, and high rental costs have all have had a disparate impact on health, stability, safety, and success of black and brown low-income households.
From a Healthy Homes Coalition member and a full-time community organizer at the Metropolitan Tenants Organization, I'm working with hundreds of tenants across the city.
I speak with residents across Chicago every day who do not know the name and the address of the individual that owns their property.
If we want stronger tenant education, if we want tenants to be able to advocate for themselves, if we want tenants to be able to exercise their full rights under the RLTO, which is the Residential Landlord Tenants Ordinance,
in order to access safe and equitable housing, we need information that is easily accessible to them about who owns their property.
Slumlords should not be allowed anonymity and or be able to evade public scrutiny from the individuals that sustain their living, their livelihood.
Today, we are asking that the city prioritize the creation and maintenance of a rental registry that uses publicly available data.
The city currently has a grant for a software program that uses publicly available data to provide a skeleton for a rental registry.
A rental registry would not only lay the groundwork for a proactive rental inspection for my coalition who's seeking it, but it would do a few other things.
It would enable the city to gather substantially more information.
Thank you.
Thank you for your comments.
Next, we have Carla Johnson, followed by Zachary Zingual.
Good morning.
My name is Carla Johnson.
I am a member of the Third Ward and also a member of the Chicago Coalition to End Homelessness.
I'm here to speak on the flexible housing pool.
My experience of being unhoused showed me how the lack of housing was a beginning of my downfall.
The flexible housing pool is a program that is supportive of people that are homeless and is making it not only possible, but is compassionate.
The flexible housing pool has showed that homelessness is not only possible, but is the most compassionate and cost-effective way to support our city's most vulnerable residents.
The flexible housing pool is a collaborative effort of the city of Chicago and other entities across the Cook County, which started in 2018.
The long-term stability of the project could be at risk if the project is not funded to keep pace with the rising costs of rental housing, labor, construction, and other costs.
Behind every number is a human story.
We are asking for an $8.6 million increase in the funding to continue this program.
The flexible housing pool has served over 1,500 participants, including 500 children, as well as youth and adults and families.
The pool also reduced the cost of the crisis system by $1.4 million over the two-year period, compared to a similar group of people who did not participate in the flexible housing pool.
An evaluation of the flexible housing pool found that 19% and 37% reduction in several areas, including reduced mortality among the participants, reduction in patient delays, and visits to the east.
Thank you for your comment.
Next, we'll have Zachary Zinguel, followed by Tessa Kuipers.
Zachary, you may proceed.
Zachary, is he on?
I know.
Star six, don't mute yourself.
Hello.
This is, hello, everybody.
Hello, City Council.
Appreciate you hearing from me today.
My name is Zachary Kemple.
I am the Director of Corporate and Foundation Relations at Swedish Hospital.
Swedish Hospital is a safety net hospital located in Chicago's 40th Ward and a grantee of the city's domestic violence counseling and advocacy services program for survivors of gender-based violence.
I urge the mayor's office and the city council to maintain funding for survivors of gender-based violence at the same level in 2026 as in 2025.
In the last three years, city funding has allowed Swedish Hospital to serve approximately 450 survivors of domestic violence, including overlapping forms of violence such as sexual assault and human trafficking.
In 2024 alone, more than 100 survivors received counseling and case management to help them survive, escape, or build resilience to gender-based violence.
Swedish Hospital is willing to pay for some of the costs of this program.
We already do.
However, we are highly uncertain if we can continue the program without the city's continued assistance.
Services for victims of gender-based violence did not cause the city's structural budget deficit, and cutting funding for them will not fix it.
Once again, I urge the mayor and city council to continue funding for gender-based violence services at the same level in 2026 as in 2025.
Thank you for your consideration.
Thank you for your comments.
Next, we'll have Tessa Kuipers, followed by Megan Trevi.
Good morning, everyone.
My name is Tessa Kuipers.
I'm Family Rescue's Legal Advocacy Program Director and Policy Advisor.
Since 1981, Family Rescue has provided high-quality and comprehensive domestic violence services to survivors and their children.
We're located on the south side of Chicago and support survivors through five programs, housing, emergency shelter, counseling, and legal advocacy.
We're also a recipient of four different grants funded through DFSS by the DV HomeShares and CDBG Grants.
I want to talk a little bit about what we're able to do with those grants.
First, we have five staff who work at our 36-bed, 24-hour shelter.
Our shelter is a safe and serene place where survivors flee their abusers and walk towards healing and long-term housing.
Last year, our shelter served 222 survivors and their children and provided over 11,000 days of shelter.
These five staff are instrumental to our shelter, not only through the care that they provide, but because the shelter can only run with a set number of staff on-site at all times.
So the risk of losing these positions means the risk of our shelter closing.
Our legal advocacy program has three grants with advocates stationed both at the Domestic Violence Courthouse and at the 3rd District Police Station in Greater Grand Crossing.
We provide services to high-risk survivors, those most at risk of homicide, systems advocacy, and law enforcement training.
Last year, these advocates provided services to over 2,000 survivors.
Lastly, our community outreach program is a pillar of the South Chicago community.
The four advocates funded by these grants provide free domestic violence education, counseling, and community outreach to the community and survivors.
Last year, we served 363 survivors and provided 35 free trainings to the community.
These advocates and the services they provide are crucial to survivors and the Southside communities they serve.
As the number of calls to the Illinois Domestic Violence Hotline rise, as well as domestic violence homicides, we can't afford to lose these life-saving services.
We ask the city to continue funding at levels from last year as well.
Thank you for your comment.
Next, we have Megan Treve, followed by Dennis White.
Taylor Trevi, and I'm the communications manager for Ascend Justice.
We receive funding from DFSS to support legal services for survivors of domestic violence, sexual violence, trafficking, and stalking.
Our clients come across the city of Chicago, and we rely on funding from the city to help people navigate the legal systems so that they can obtain orders of protection, divorce, parenting time with their children, visas, work permits, citizenship, debt relief, and other kinds of legal protections.
Legal tools that can help them stay safe, but that may be out of reach for people without attorneys.
We also help connect survivors to resources like shelters and housing and food assistance and mental health services provided by our partner organizations, many of whom are here with us today.
Without the help that Ascend Justice provides, some of our clients, some of the most vibrant, active members of our community today would not be here.
We provide a safety net for survivors that literally does not exist anywhere else.
With funding from the city of Chicago, we help people like Rosa, an immigrant from Central America whose American husband regularly beat her in front of their three children.
She wanted to leave, but he kept her with him by threatening to call ICE and have her deported.
Then she found a gun in his car, and she knew she had to get out, so she came to Ascend Justice.
We helped her get an order of protection, a divorce, protection from the debt he had racked up in her name, and legal status.
We help people like Rosa every single day, and we are able to provide that support because the city of Chicago stepped up.
Decreasing funding means fewer attorneys can help clients like Rosa.
We already have a wait list for our services.
The need already upstrips the capacity.
Many survivors are not familiar with the legal systems or their rights.
They need attorneys now more than ever, and our clients are already facing uphill battles, financial and material needs, health care needs, child care needs, and trauma.
If the city decreases this funding, survivors will have fewer options, which will make them more likely to stay with their abusers, more likely to be injured, more likely to be killed.
So I ask you plainly, please keep our funding intact.
Thank you for your comments.
Next, we have Dennis White, followed by Kelsey Kieran.
Good morning.
We have a spending problem here in Chicago, and every time Mayor Brandon Johnson doing all these spending last year, this year we're in a $1 billion deficit, and his only recommendation is tax, tax, tax, and more tax.
And we don't know officially where this money is going to, yacht tax, social media tax, corporate tax.
Last year he wanted to hit us with a $300 million tax on property.
So the only recommendation that needs to be done is more cutting, unnecessary cutting, and start with that 150 police detail that he got around here.
Start doing all these budgeting much better than what he'd been doing since he became mayor, because he ain't doing a good job.
Now, if everybody wants all this money for these other programs and stuff, you need to start asking him, where is my money going to when he's starting hitting us with these taxes around here?
Starting off with one thing.
In order for you to curb the homelessness for the veterans and black, get these illegal aliens out of Chicago for a start, and that will freeze up some of the money here.
Second of all, you can boo all you want to.
You can boo all you want to, but yeah, go ahead and boo me.
So the next thing is it needs to be a forensic audit for where all this money coming from, where it's going to.
And thirdly, it should be an investigation on when Brandon Johnson get out of office, he got a $5 million pension through CTU.
That needs to be investigated, but mainly these illegal aliens need to go.
Maybe they'll freeze up the money.
Thank you for your attention.
We will not have that type of language in this chamber.
If that type of language continues, we will clear out the public component of this.
So please, let's not have that type of language in the chamber.
Thank you.
Next, we have Kelsey Karen, followed by our final speaker, T. Engin.
Hi, my name is Kelsey Karen.
I'm here today with the People's Unity Platform and the Public Health and Safety Coalition.
Anyway, so basically, like we've been hearing so much about these life-saving services, like as a survivor myself, like we cannot be cutting these services for gender-based violence and aftercare when someone experiences domestic or sexual violence.
And we're talking about where is that money going to come from, like it's very cut and dry to me, like we just had a trillion dollars over 10 years handed out to corporations by Donald Trump while he's defunding violence prevention, while he's defunding gender-based violence care.
And I'm just calling on your conscience, like tax these corporations.
They have the money, they can afford it, they just got billions and billions in tax breaks, don't cut our services.
If you want to operate in Chicago and you want to profit from Chicago workers, you need to invest in those workers.
They need to do their fair share.
And we're talking about taxing social media companies so that we can have mental health centers for young people who are like being impacted by social media.
We are seeing here live, like in the public comment gallery, what the effects of social media are.
I do have a whole mask on because there is a pandemic, because there is a pandemic.
Well, could you hold the time, please?
Could you allow her to make her statements?
No one interrupted you when you made your statements.
Please allow her to make her statement and then we will conclude.
You may proceed.
The budget is a moral document and you are telling people in this city every single day what you care about.
Do you care about the services that help us survive or do you care about giving corporations more tax breaks?
You're worried about who's going to leave the city.
You're worried about corporations leaving the city.
They're not going to leave.
They need us.
They want us.
They want a public safety structure.
They want workers who are taken care of.
They want young people who are taken care of.
Put your money where your mouth is.
Tax the big corporations.
The community safety surcharge could be increased.
They can afford it.
We can't afford to lose these services.
People are going to die.
Thank you for any comments.
Our last public speaker is T. Nguyen.
Morning, everyone.
My name is T. Nguyen and I'm a vice president with the Chinese American Service League, also known as CASEL.
We're a not-for-profit that serves over 7,400 people across all of Chicago.
Today, I'm here to focus on the Child Care Assistance Program, CCAP, and early childhood education.
Currently, CCAP does not provide extra funding for providers that CASEL serve children with special needs.
Providers receive a flat reimbursement rate of $46 per child per full day with no adjustment for children with IEPs who require additional support.
In reality, the true cost of inclusive care can reach up to $200,000 per child annually.
When you factor in a special education teacher or a paraprofessional, nurse, or other supports essential for inclusive and quality care.
At CASEL, we currently serve about 25 students with IEPs, and demands from families with children with special needs continues to grow greatly.
We are one of the few bilingual, culturally competent daycares in our neighborhood, but without dedicated CCAP funding or sustainable staffing, we cannot expand to meet this need.
So, as an example, let's call this individual Sally.
Her mother joined CASEL's Home Visiting Program, which helps parents support their child development and strengthen their relationship.
Sir, you stop.
This is number two.
Will you please refrain from your comments while the gentleman is making his comments?
No one interrupted you while you made your comments, so please give him that same respect.
It's number two.
Sir, you may proceed.
Thanks so much.
In closing, I urge the Department of Family Support Services to work with the Illinois State Board of Education and the Illinois Department of Early Childhood to create a tiered CCAP reimbursement system for providers serving children with IEPs.
This investment would enable providers like us to serve more children equitably and help children fulfill its commitment to inclusive education.
Thank you very much.
Thank you for your comments.
Community will stand at ease while MOPD comes in.
We've got to make a few technical adjustments for Commissioner Arford.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Okay, we will begin with the Mayor's Office of People with Disabilities.
We'll begin this session with an overview from the Council Office of Financial Analysis being presented by Director Oda Gray, after which we'll have Commissioner Arfa give her opening statement and introduce the members of her team that are with her today.
Director?
Push the button.
There you go.
Okay.
Chairman Irvin, all the persons and guests.
Good morning.
My name is Janice Oda Gray, Chief Administrative Officer for COFA.
Today we're going to look at a brief overview for the Mayor's Office for People with Disabilities.
Give me just one moment.
It's not moving.
I hope the next one goes.
Thank you for your patience.
The proposed FY26 budget for the Mayor's Office for People with Disabilities, MOPD, totals $9.18 million, a decrease of $5.26 million, or 36.4 percent, from FY2025.
The Department is 35.5 percent funded by the Corporate Fund, with the remaining support primarily from grants and entitlement funds.
Spending breakdown, we have non-personnel at $4.7 million, personnel at $4.47 million.
Workforce and staffing, we have 40 FTEs budgeted, and that is unchanged from FY25.
Looking at appropriations, the contractual services, which is a primarily pass-through funding for delicate agencies, make up the largest share of spending, followed by personnel services.
All other categories, including travel commodities and materials and equipment, show decreases from FY25, while transfers and reimbursements remain flat.
Funding sources, MOPD's funding includes a corporate fund of, again, 35.5 percent, and various grant funds.
The grant sources decreased in FY26, except for the entitlement fund, which increased, and now represents more than half of the total budget at $5.3 million.
MOPD's budget saw consistent increases in prior years due to temporary pandemic-related funding.
The FY26 proposal reflects a significant reduction from $14.4 million in FY25 to $9.18 million in FY26 proposed, returning to pre-pandemic funding levels.
FTE staffing, FTE staffing, MOPD's staffing levels increased slightly, in part due to pandemic relief funds.
However, the current staffing for the FY26 budget proposal remains unchanged from the FY25 levels.
In conclusion, the FY26 proposed budget for MOPD reflects reduced grant funding and a decline in federal resources while maintaining their core staffing.
This concludes my report.
Thank you, Director.
Commissioner, you may proceed.
Good morning.
I'm Commissioner of HR Life at the Mayor's Office for People with Disabilities.
At this point, I thank each member of my team to introduce themselves in their title.
I'll turn it over to you, Weston.
Hi, everyone.
My name is Esther Gutierrez, and I'm the Senior Policy Analyst.
Good morning, everyone.
Antonio Washington, Director of Finance.
Good morning, everyone.
Christina McGleam, Deputy Commissioner.
Thank you, Director.
Good morning.
I'm Lauren Huberman.
I'm the Director of the MOPD Career Center.
Good morning.
My name is Tom Cieschelsky, Deputy Commissioner.
Hello.
My name is Mark Nabriga.
I'm our HOMOD Program Director.
Hi.
I'm Nina Campbell, the Executive Assistant to Commissioner ARFA.
And my name is Matthew Cepanik.
I'm our Architect in our Accessibility Compliance Unit.
Thank you, Chairman Irvin, Vice Chairwoman Lee, and members of City Council.
I am honored to present the 2026 Budget for the Mayor's Office for People with Disabilities, otherwise known as MOPD.
Our budget represents the Johnson Administration's investment in supporting and upholding our commitment to serve our disability community.
This is yet another example of how our city government protects its residents, including our disability community, in light of the devastating attacks and efforts to chip away at federal disability protections.
This year, Mayor Johnson and I brought our disability community together to honor the 35th anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act, creating space and joy to celebrate disability through showcasing disabled youth employment and through arts and culture.
We also mark the 35th anniversary of MOPD as the city was inspired by the ADA to form MOPD.
Chicago's MOPD continues to be the largest in the nation among other cities.
This summer, we honored disability pride by raising the disability pride flag at Daley Plaza, at the Disability Pride Parade, and displaying the disability pride flag at City Hall Elevators, Building New Traditions.
This year, we also celebrated 25 years of MOPD's Home Modification Program.
This summer, we completed our 2000th Home Modification.
Our Home Modification Program remains an integral way to help people with disabilities who live in every one of our 77 communities.
This year, we are on track to complete over 160 home modifications and plan to continue to build on these successes next year with the support of the fiscal year 26 budget.
We also saw great success with adding a new service of providing free.
We also saw great success with adding a new service of providing free.
repairs to maintain lifts for a longer period and have repaired over 100 lifts, helping to extend
this investment long term. MOPD remains a strong partner in Mayor Johnson's Cut the Tape initiative.
This year, MOP added a second Architect 4 to our team, which helped to further streamline our permit
process. Our permit process, housed in MOPD's Accessibility Compliance Unit, provides a
critical public service in assessing all pre-permits and permit requests, and working with architects and
developers on ensuring that all accessibility guidelines are met. In 2024, MOPD completed 530
permit reviews, and as of September of this year, we have increased that number to a total of 959
permit reviews. Our Accessibility Compliance Team has also completed 234 assessments of city buildings
through our partnerships with 2FM and PBC. The MOPD Career Center also continues to expand on our
success. This year, we have served over 298 job seekers with disabilities and provided career
readiness and job retention services. We launched our first-ever Employer Champions Committee, co-chaired
by World Business Chicago, which includes exemplary employer partners committed to advancing disability
employment. Our Career Center's holistic model supports both job seekers with disabilities and employers.
We provide technical assistance, mentoring, computer skills training, and collaborative job networking
events, such as our event we hosted with Ada S. McKinley Community Services and the Illinois Department of
Rehabilitation Services. We also provide benefits counseling to support individuals with disabilities who
want to better understand how to navigate employment and maintain SSI and SSDI benefits. Our department is increasing
disability access within our city's workforce. In partnership with DHR, MOPD recently launched a
Citywide Disability and Access Training, now an annual mandatory requirement for all city staff.
We also conduct an annual point-in-time survey to assess and establish benchmarks on disability employment.
Our Access Officer Program, which designates a member of each department's leadership team,
has a point person on disability, and continues to expand disability access.
This summer, several department access officers achieved important milestones on accessibility initiatives.
Additionally, MOPD staff also provided over 39 trainings this year to automatic offices
and external organizations training over 1,557 people. Disability access is now more visible
than ever. You see ASL interpreters here at today's hearing and also at mayoral press conferences,
summer festivals, community engagement events across our city. This year, our ASL interpreter team,
made up of four American Sign Language interpreters, provided over 1,662 hours of ASL interpretation.
In sum, MOPD's critical programs, services, and staff will continue to be funded in our 2026 Protect Chicago budget.
Thank you for your support of MOPD and the disability community. I look forward to continuing to partner with you in 2026.
Thank you. Thank you for opening statement. Might you all introduce yourselves? We see you all all the time, and all of our sign language interpreters, if you introduce yourselves.
I'm Jen McElroy. I'm one of the sign language interpreters. My primary role is designated to Commissioner ARFA.
Good morning. My name is Esteban Amaro, sign language interpreter to the Career Center.
Good morning. My name is Samantha Tafflin, sign language interpreter.
Good morning, everyone. Walter Matthews, sign language interpreter.
Thank you. We'll open up with questions, beginning with Alderman Riley. Any others that want questions?
Very well. Alderman Riley, you have a seat.
Thank you. Thank you, Chairman. I don't have a lot of questions. I do have praise for the department and specifically the commissioner. I appreciate all the work that you're doing on behalf of the city.
I noted the $5 million or so reduction in this year's budget submission, and I see that that is tied to the expiration of ARPA slash COVID relief funds, the federal money that we received.
Just to refresh our memory, could you just illuminate this body on how that money was spent, the federal dollars, in a short description, maybe a minute or less?
And of course, thank you, Alderman Riley. We used our open money through our cash assistance program to get $500 grants to over 8,000 students with disabilities.
If we administered that program completely in 2024, but because of the voucher and payment process, that money, the payments were still continuing for 2025, but the program completed in 2024, and it was a run-time cash assistance program to students with disabilities.
Thank you.
And I don't really have any other questions related to your budget. I do have a policy question for you.
Since the pandemic, obviously, our small business owners across the city are trying to find creative ways to crawl out of the financial ditch they found themselves in, and we're seeing a proliferation of sandwich boards on the public right-of-way.
And I have a sensitivity to that in the central business district, just because we have incredible pedestrian foot traffic.
But I remember when I first joined this body back in 2007, I was educated on just what a hazard these sandwich board signs can pose, especially for those people who are blind.
And thankfully, we have a prohibition on sandwich board signs in the central business district, but I'm aware that you can get permits for these things in the neighborhoods.
And again, it's a delicate balancing act here.
We certainly want to do all we can to support our locally owned small businesses, but I do fear for the safety of folks who are sight impaired.
Could you speak to that at all?
I'm happy to talk about the A-frames and the way that the rules were put into place was to make sure that they were not providing cleanly gaining accessibility to barriers to the path of travel.
And then I believe there's also making sure that they are able to detect the problems from the sandwich boards as well.
But if there's a business that's a violation, people could let us know if we're happy to partner with the business to address any accessibility to barriers that may have been created.
Yeah, unfortunately, sometimes these signs do actually land in our ADA crosswalk accommodations, which is the last place you want to see these things.
And maybe in the future, not for this budget, the body could consider dedicating a portion of the fines that are written for these violations specifically to MOPD to assist you in your mission educating business owners.
That said, I have no questions for you. I'm very familiar with the great work you do.
Access Living is a longtime stakeholder in the downtown area. I know you work very closely with them.
But thank you, Commissioner, for all the great work that you do and your entire team here.
And I wish you well in the coming year.
Thank you, Alderman. Alderman Conway, followed by Alderman Gazzotta.
Following up on Alderman Riley's question, what, as a result of losing, I was trying to look in your 2025 budget and 2026 budget, as a result of your budget going down by about a third, what did you have to cut to make that happen?
Are you talking about the ARPA?
So we budgeted this year to snadding through the $5 million from the ARPA fund, which is what you might be looking at because we administered the one-time cash assistance program in 2024,
and that the expenses will still be paid out in early 2025.
And that we did identify some efficiency to streamline.
process by using technology and looking on how we provide same language interpreters
and then also that we take the city's summer internship program
and our partnership with the Department of Families for a service here for summer Chicago.
So did the one-time cash assistance program get eliminated then?
We spread out that the first city was designed as a one-time fund to provide support to students
with disabilities impacted by COVID-19, so we decided as a one-time program, yet we successfully
completed that.
That's great.
Thank you very much, Commissioner.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
That's all I have.
Thank you, Autumn.
Autumn McEzada, followed by Autumn McEzada.
Thank you, Chairman, and good morning, Commissioner and team, MLPD team.
Thank you so much for all the great work that you do for the people of Chicago.
I have a couple of questions.
One, if you could just lay out what are some of the most pressing challenges to our communities
that have disabilities in the city of Chicago today?
What are some of the biggest challenges that we're seeking to address?
I just need to, as I mentioned in my, thank you, Autumn, for your question.
First, I just need to mention that I have been monitoring what's been happening at the federal
level in the efforts to weaken our federal laws and protections for people with disabilities,
and that's why I'm so proud that MLPD is virtually staying the same.
We were able to continue providing programs and services and support to our disability community
here, and I think that's going to be more important than ever before.
Okay, but then, the landscape that we are currently in our program to services help people with
disabilities to them independently in all of our communities.
I mean, that is a big philosophy of the disability rights movement, to be able to them independently
in the community, for example, not in a nursing home, for example.
So, we provide key supportive services to be able to allow Chicago folks with disabilities to do that.
Thank you.
And, yeah, that leads me to my second question.
How is the department thinking about, you know, the various challenges from the federal government?
You know, what are some of those challenges that we should be prepared for in terms of budgetary
impacts or rollbacks on, you know, different rights for people with disabilities?
What are some of the threats on the horizon?
The big relevance of the threats are not at the horizon.
They're already here.
There have been efforts to attack Medicaid, a better best.
There have been efforts to weak at the United States Department of Education,
efforts at the Justice Department.
Many federal disability rights, which we will continue to monitor the long-term impact of that
and how we committed what we have here.
So, that we still have absolutely close for people here in the city of Chicago.
Excellent.
Thank you very much.
I think it's abhorrent that we would have any form or level of government that would do anything
to put our most vulnerable community members at risk of losing the benefits that they need to thrive.
So, thank you very much for your leadership and work, and you can always count on the support of the 35th Ward.
Thank you, Alderman.
Thank you, Alderman.
Alderman Sposado, question for your chairperson, Rosanna Rodriguez-Sanchez.
Is this in your jurisdiction, this committee, MOPED under your jurisdiction?
Under my jurisdiction?
Yes, it is.
Okay.
All right.
After Alderman Sposado, then you'll proceed.
My apologies with that.
You okay?
Okay.
It's a jump ball.
Okay, cool.
Go ahead.
Go ahead.
I can go.
I can go.
Very well.
Thank you, Chairman.
I wanted to see if you could share with us what has been the most successful initiatives where we have been able to reach the most people through the office.
And then I also want to know what are the things that we are not going to be able to do any longer or things that the office would like to do that we're not going to be able to do because of constraints in the budget?
And how can we, as elders, partner with community to be able to provide whatever we can do through the office right now?
Thank you, everyone, for your question.
I'm going to jump to the second question, which is that our budget is that we're able to provide all of the supports and services and programs under this budget.
That would not change under this budget.
And that means that we're going to be able to provide such an important program, including our modification program, which helps to make homes accessible.
The most common modification is adding a theme to the in and out of the home.
But we can also make a bathroom accessible, for example, by replacing a bathtub with a roller shower or modifying a kitchen to make it accessible.
We also have a career center that helps the support job seekers with disabilities and finding jobs here in our city.
It's creating meaningful opportunities and creating meaningful opportunities and that we also partner with and collaborate with the players at these partnerships.
And then our accessibility compliance unit continues to do permit reviews to make sure that accessibility guidelines are being met in all of our pre-permitted permit reviews.
Not just a little bit of a highlight, but we really, we know that our services are important and I'm proud of the work that we do.
Anything that we can do on our end?
I mean, we really want to work with them.
It's one of you to make sure that people know about MOPD for services we provide.
And we're always happy to find new ways to partner and knowing that the city is here, if we can provide these services.
Thank you. Thank you, Chair.
Thank you, Chair.
Alderman Sposato, followed by Alderman Lopez.
Thank you, Chairman.
Good morning, Commissioner.
Always a pleasure to see you.
Thanks for all you do and your staff.
I don't have any budget questions and I didn't even come prepared with this question, but something came to my mind.
And that's something that turned to be something very controversial in this city.
And that's the handicapped parking situation.
So all I'm asking for is if there is a...
...point person or somebody that we can have as alders to speak to.
Some people are getting these spots that shouldn't be and many that do need them aren't getting them.
But, of course, we could override that.
So I'm just wondering who the name of the person is that I could call or any of my colleagues could call, and I have some ideas what we could do to better serve the community.
So that's it.
Just a simple question.
Who's in charge of the handicapped parking override or whatever you want to say?
Thank you, ultimate, for that.
Yes, so MRPD plays a role.
As many of you may know, the accessible parking process, which is managed by the Department of Finance, but if somebody's application is denied, residents can come to MRPD, file, and appear.
And if the person disagrees with our interpretation, they can always come to you as their city council member.
But I would love for Esther to share them.
Yes, definitely, Alder.
I can read the point of contact for that.
But I do want to note that when it comes to the appeal process, there are very specific things that we're looking for, specifically in the survey assessment that's conducted by the Chicago Department of Transportation.
And so we, of course, review the reason for the appeal and the reason that in the CDOT survey to determine whether or not we can support the appeal or not support the appeal.
And there are various reasons we cannot support the appeal at times, and that could include zoning requirements are not being met.
It's within Arterial Street, within 15 feet of a bus stop, within 15 feet of a fire hydrant, within 20 feet of a crosswalk, and various other reasons.
But other reasons that are not in the municipal code, we can support the appeal.
Right.
So I'm familiar with that.
I'm just looking who – I know finance.
I know it goes through finance.
And after that, it's denied, and the appeal comes through you.
I'm just wondering, is there a point person, a name of a person that I could contact or any of my colleagues could contact?
Maybe we have some more information.
This stuff has been all over the news.
No fault of your office.
I mean, it's just like the doctors give these placards away like, I don't know, like what.
I mean, you know, so as a guy in a wheelchair, I get more frustrated than ever now, you know.
And, you know, I see some people in my community, I'm sure every community, they have handicapped parking signs in front of their house, and they jog.
They ride a bike.
And then, of course, the neighbors are coming to me and saying, you know, why does John Smith have a handicapped parking spot?
He's out jogging all the time.
He's out riding as...
He's out riding as...
He's out riding as...
bike, so, and many of them have been overrode, you know, or given to by your office, so just
any certain person that we could talk to is all I'm looking for. Yes, definitely. I can be the
point of contact for that, Alderman. Okay. Thank you. I'll catch you and get your information at
the end of the meeting. Thank you so much. Thank you, Chairman. That's it. Thank you,
Mr. Pozzotto. Alderman Lopez, followed by Alderman Nugent. Thank you, Chairman, and good
morning, members of the committee. Good morning, Commissioner. I'm disappointed you didn't bring
my favorite service animal with you. I know we have one, but I have my favorites. I wanted to touch
on a couple things from last year. In particular, we were talking about the ASL support, both in terms
of city council and committees. Have we been able to make any progress in either, I know we don't have
personnel showing up most of the time, but are we doing a better job with regards to the
closed captioning or other things so that individuals are able to fully participate and
engage with committee and council? Thank you, Alton Wood. Yes, we do have one service talk here. I think
I'm a pretty early department that had at least one service talk in a bunch of hearing, Christina,
Jean. Jean is not participating. Oh, she's sleeping. I put her, yes. That's not a reflection, I think.
Um, so we, um, I'm, I'm, what I'm really proud of is that, um, our signing, Richard Torbertois,
worked tirelessly, um, to cover, um, uh, kinds of, um, the classic partnerships that we have,
bring city departments, including, um, including, um, the press conference, um, including, um, summer festivals,
um, so then anyone could come and participate in a jury, um, or city services, and one of
one services, um, and we'd be able to provide us, I think, Richard Torbertois, a city culture,
if we're happy to meet any requests, so, uh, uh, and, um, if there's anybody that has a request,
we would love to work in providing that, um, and I also want to, um, think there's somebody that you
can't see on camera, but, um, she's providing the over-captioning for today, and her name is
Turner Dillon, and she works with a friend of the city using with Kamal, um, so you can't see, um,
turn up, but right now, she is captioning every single word, then I say, and she is for captioning,
uh, uh, the button hearings, um, so now we, as a result of conversation we had at this party
two years ago, um, um, we partnered with the city director's office, and we are now using, um,
a real-time captioner, um, and I, let me know where to be back, I'm always happy to work with you,
but I know that it is displaying, yep, it's displaying here, but that is, we try to read a
prior-time captioner, and then, so, I can't get into all the nuances of that in some time frame.
No, it's okay. I'm, I'm happy to allow you to celebrate successes and, and things,
because it's not, it's, it's something that we've been talking about for quite some time,
and I know that, um, my next question is, when it comes to the departments that are engaging with
individuals with disabilities, how are we able to ensure that every department is able to communicate
adequately and correctly, um, on their own with regards to the various requests or walk-ins
issues that they may have? So, um, we, um, launched a, so, number one, um, is so important
to, uh, provide training and education opportunities, and since we are a large workforce of approximately
33,000, we looked at any strategies to be able to reach a physical city through a, so this year, um,
um, Christina, um, here, who was on our team, worked very hard to develop a disability and access
training, and that is now with the impacts of FEC, because city, um, and who now must
complete that training, FEC, because by the end of the year, we launched this training, um, about three weeks
years ago, and over, over, um, 16,000 people have taken the training, so we're very energized
by that, and I think that that is just an important tool, um, in FEC could be on us on how to communicate
and provide services to people with disabilities. If we look forward to continuing, then we also
work with our access officers at, um, providing both accountable ways to engage, and make sure
we have disability access and inclusion in our city's public basic programs and services.
Does every department have a disability access inclusion officer?
Um, every department has a, so the way it works in, FEC's access officers, a member of each
commissioner or department has leadership team, and at the equivalent of a deputy commissioner,
at that person, um, comes, represents their department, and we host, um, monthly meetings
at different topics, so yes. If you could provide through the chair who that individual is for all
the departments and what their specialty is, I would appreciate it. Is ASL covered under the
city's language access ordinance? I would love to set that through the chair. Okay, if we could just
check out, if we can double check that, because I think that I know language access has been an issue
overall in terms of communicating with people in their native tongues, but I'd like to see that we
also included in, uh, include, include ASL, uh, in that as well, because I think we need to make that
part of our, our overall operating standards. Um, I will say, commissioner, that I would love to,
and piggybacking off of what my colleague from the 38th Ward stated, love to work with you and CDOT to
see what we could do to streamline the disability parking permit applications. Um, one of the things
that I think that we need to focus opportunity on is when people relocate. Currently, you have to file
a $75 fee, uh, if you are applying for a handicap parking disability parking permit in front of your
property, and it's a $25 annual renewal. However, if you move, you have to start all over again,
and it's another $75, even though you may have been approved for disability parking for a decade.
So I'd love to see what we could do to try to make it easier if, uh, location permitting,
we can simply just relocate polls when people move as opposed to making them pay all over again and
start the process from scratch. Um, as well, when it comes to the, uh, housing, uh, the, the housing,
uh, the MOPD housing, um, I'm drawing a blank, uh, the accessibility when we upgrade houses,
we currently pay for that through bonding issues. Is that correct? We bond out for that? Or what is the
funding source for the home modification program? I'm the more correct way to ask that question.
Uh, yes, the home mod, uh, program is funded to three different funding sources. The larger
is the community development block grant. We also have corporate funds and a grant from the Chicago
Housing Authority. How much of our corporate funds are allocated to the home modification program?
Uh, we have $4 million. And that is through, uh, just the corporate fund or is it from, uh,
general obligation bonds? Uh, it's just a corporate fund. We don't have any bond funding in our
department. Okay. So then my question commissioner is, has there been any conversation with the
commissioner of housing to look at using some of the housing bond money to help
upgrade homes for persons with disabilities? Um, I have a, um, struck, um, um,
collaboration with commissioner Castaneda and, um, we've collaborated over the years
around that in, um, different ways to make sure that we're partnering together. So we are in contact
with each other. I would love to, quick question. Um, historically, there's been a backlog on, uh,
home mod, um, programs. What, what does that look like now? Um, so we, um, we, um, so we, um,
still have, um, high demand if we could do that number through the chair because, um, um, so Mark
is, and our team is, um, manages the program and is so efficient that we have identified, um, which
it gets counted as many projects as we can through the cluster disease. And if they were already starting
to look on which projects we could work on in 2026, so we'll carry that number through the term.
So if I remember correctly, last year we did increase funding to
decrease the backlog if i remember correctly yes um so have you and this is anecdotal
would you all did you all do you think you did more home odds this year than in 2025
or on track to do more this year than you did in 2024
okay um the reason i ask is that um i think the point that alderman lopez brought is valid as
relates to the utilization of hd money toward decreasing the backlog of home mod um request
so uh we definitely would like to know and understand what that looks like uh as we may
need to amend to increase funding again to bring in uh additional uh units to be done under the
program thank you jama go ahead all so chairman i may remind the committee that last year we were
informed that the department did um 188 home modifications last year and in the commissioner's
testimony today it was 160 for this year so i i would definitely like to see what we can do to
get through some of that but i also want to ask as well we have seen where other departments notably
the department of planning and development will award someone a modification or home repair and
then find out the cost is more cancel their application and then move on to the next person
so how much of that do we see when it comes to the uh mlpd's home modification program as well
are we making awards and then canceling their opportunity because of costs and moving on to the next
people um i would have my answer that or you could provide that through the chair like how many
were originally awarded um hold on go go ahead no words go the answer is pretty simple there are
zero that we go out to see that we don't provide a home modification for it's simple in our process
we actually do a um i'm sorry that's for me you're okay go ahead we do a home assessment for each home
so we're well aware of um what the costs are before we go in um our vendors are kept to those costs we do
have certain issues when we go in let's say that we open a wall and there's some plumbing that needs to
get fixed or repaired those are small things that add up to a little bit of money but there is never
an instance where we go in and don't provide the modification we say we're going to based on uh
the funding and the estimates we do so then chairman if we could also get excuse me through the chair
excuse me we had 160 completed this year if we could have identified how many more we have and what
the associated costs would be for the remainder that didn't get it um because i think definitely
there's a very foolproof way to address all of those outstanding uh requests so that we are fully
caught up if we are able to submit to the department of housing help and funding to make that a reality
so that we could start next year being at zero now that's that is uh that that is something we
can do sir could you identify yourself uh for the record please my name is mark nobrega i'm our
program director for home mod okay and i just got one one question um are you all are you all on track
or because the numbers that that you just gave lead me to believe that you all are not increasing
the number of home mods that you're doing in fiscal 2025 is that is that a fair statement
um the we are on track for what we had predicted um the predictions come from cost estimating from
various other uh things we track around the environment some of those things can be tariff
costs they can be raw material and supply costs they can be prevailing wages are increasing so
those things counteract the total amount of projects we can complete from year to year
and then of course we use efficiencies on the back end such as our purchasing power to renegotiate
the cost of our products that we provide our clients to make up a little bit in that sense
that sounds real good um however i'm just trying to understand are we doing more units this year
or less units this year than we did last year knowing that we allocated additional funding
for more units for this year we are providing less units this year than last year and the reason
you're telling me we're providing less units is because you've had cost escalation is that your
primary point that's correct to what extent have we had cost escalations if you could just put it in
mildly in percentage terms versus your cost last year versus your cost this year i would have to get
those figures through the chair okay all right that's uh that's not what i wanted to hear uh that
it's um that does not appear the desire of uh of this body uh when we advocated and delivered
additional funding uh for the for the home modification program uh i think the goal was to do more units and if
more units are unable to be done i think we need to know that more units are unable to be done
and so if you want to look at an average basis what was the cost last year and what is your cost now
per unit um so the the the cost has increased slightly um from an overall perspective we do track
and i'd have to get this to the chair also but we do track the difference between uh costs averages of
let's say the difference between a lift the bathroom kitchen other modifications door widenings those
kind of things each of those separate averages are different when we look at as a total i think this
year is roughly a little over 25 000 per client as the cost of a modification and that cost typically
increases slightly each each year and that is based on the figures i mentioned previously
okay and and the if we're using cdbg dollars for this isn't 25 000 the cap as to what you can put in
a home um the the cap has increased over the year i've been with the department for quite some time
um the program started off many years ago but okay with a with a lower cap um the the cap increases based
on um what i do is a cost analysis through our means pricing guides to determine what a fair value
is to pay our contractors for these types of project based on the type of projects that's done so we do
those calculations yearly and we do the average assessments of each type of home modification so
that we can come up to a fair figure that tends to become our cap for the year so that we can monitor
and be responsible with our spending and looking at and this is uh for you or the commissioner uh
looking at the spend i noticed that um your mbe and wbe spend is very little uh however unless it's
being captured elsewhere um you've got a four or five million dollar program rolling um you talk about
lifts uh plumbing and other activity in the home uh are there any mbe contractors
in the group of people that you're utilizing before many of these services
um i don't and if the question was to me i can tell you that the one of our vendors in the past had
been but they have since sold to a secondary company a larger company and i don't believe and i'd have to get
this to the chair but i don't believe that they are currently qualified to make that statement
anymore um are there different vendors that are utilized to do different components of the pro of the
modifications or are or are all of the modifications made by one vendor um so both of our we have two vendors
currently to that administer this program uh both vendors are required to do all parts of all program
elements in all parts of the city and okay if you could uh provide who and how um in the fact that there
should be some level of participation that is done on the contract via some methodology um sub or
somehow to complete that work and to meet the goal that's been set forth by by the city of chicago so
you can provide that information and appreciate it um lopez you had anything to close with thank you
good okay very well alderman nugent followed by augerman walker speck do we have any others for
or immobile
P.D., Audemann Sparta, your father, Audemann Walker-Speck.
Go ahead, Audemann.
Thank you. Thank you, Chairman.
I just want to take this opportunity to point out something that I think is really lovely about this department, and it is that you are literally everywhere.
I see Dr. Arfa and her team all over the city engaging and promoting the work that they do, and I continue to learn so much from Dr. Arfa and her colleagues.
By being out with them in the community.
And so I just want to thank you all for that.
And the other thing, I want to applaud you and your team for putting together the 35th anniversary ADA event earlier this year.
I thought it was tremendous to learn about employment opportunities.
I know I sat and watched the panel with Eli's Cheesecake and their employment programs and opportunities, which I thought were just tremendous.
I was able to meet with artists in the community and learn about the work they do and how they do it.
And so I just want to thank you.
It's been an education for me, too.
And I just took the new training about a week ago because I know I have until the end of the year, and I will keep up with my training.
But I just want to thank you for your continued work and your commitment.
And I think it makes us better as a city.
You know, when we learn from others, I think that that's how we grow.
So I appreciate it.
And I also recognize that you lost some significant funding in your budget.
But it's not lost on me.
And I think my colleagues that you're able to keep doing so much work, even with the loss of some of the COVID funds.
So thank you.
Keep up the great work.
Thank you, Chairman.
Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman Nugent.
Alderman Walker Speck followed by Alderman LaSpada.
Thank you, Chairman.
Good morning, Commissioner.
First of all, I also want to commend you and your staff on all the great work that you do throughout the year and over the last several years.
One of the concerns that I just wanted to talk a little bit about was the issue of ADA ramps and sidewalks.
And as you know, 20 years ago, we had a lawsuit that came in at about $50 million for the city to repair ADA ramps in specific areas of the city.
I think a good portion of that work was done, but now we're back to square one with another lawsuit.
And I don't expect you to comment on the lawsuit.
But my question is, you know, when we as aldermen see sidewalks or ADA ramps that go unrepaired for several years after multiple complaints,
where we see contractors, where we see contractors, third-party contractors damaging ADA ramps by driving over them to do other work,
whether they're private contractors or contracted out by the city, the state, or county,
what coordination efforts does your office take on with CDOT to look at those issues, A, to get them fixed more immediately,
but B, to change city policy so that we can see more effort on making these repairs
and making it safer for people with disabilities to get around the city?
Thank you, Altamon.
And so would we get a request about a sidewalk?
We work together with CDOT at that, but because there is now the indication that there's, I'm not able to comment further.
Yeah, I know that's a tough one.
So that was kind of the gist of all my questions.
I had a long list of them about how we would address that issue.
You being an attorney, I know that's probably a good direction to take.
But I just hope that we can continue as, you know, as the council to find ways to change that program for the better.
And maybe, you know, as we move forward, we'll reach out to you for possible policy changes that we can do in the future.
Thank you.
I think I'm happy to hear if there's other issues that come up around specific sidewalks, you know.
People said them to me, including the members of this party.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you, Chairman.
And thank you, Commissioner, for all your work.
Thank you, Altamon Waguspeck.
Altamon Laspana, followed by Altamon Napolitano.
Thank you so much, Chair.
Commissioner, thank you so much for being with us here today.
I really appreciate the collaboration with your team.
I will say to, like, Altamon Waguspeck's point briefly, we were even told that CDOT does not do ADA ramps at alleys anymore, which is really disconcerting when you think about the speed that people come out of alleys these days.
But I wanted to talk about – let me ask some budget-specific questions, because the main decrease in your budget looks like it's related to an increase in requested turnover from $123,000 to $247,000.
But the vacancies that you're carrying over, those five positions, which, to my understanding of it, would fall under the city's year-long hiring freeze, total $389,000.
And if we're not hiring for any of those positions, including a training officer, including half of our accessibility inspectors, the one disability specialist under the executive administration, is the decrease in your budget higher than it looks on paper based off of the hiring freeze?
Because we're not going to fill these positions next year, right?
So, first, we have – we actually have – as of now, a total of six vacancies, and hiring is sort of way for two of them, because they are grant-funded.
So, we expect the furthers this year before the end of the year – we're on track to further before the end of the year.
And we also partner with OPM and DHR at a plan to further remaining position.
Sorry, I'm just – okay.
It all makes how we talk about hiring freeze is very confusing, although I'm glad to hear that information.
Despite a hiring freeze, we're still hiring for these positions.
I did want to ask –
Just hold on one second.
Keep in mind that the hiring freeze did exempt positions that were in process.
So, if the process had already started, which is what commissioners are alluding to, that was not included in the hiring freeze.
So, I hear your point, but there were some exceptions to the rule of the hiring freeze, and that was one of them.
You know, on this front, I'm always glad to be mistaken.
I wanted to ask also about – it's page 287 in the budget for the employment of students as trainees.
That's an item that looks like it's being zeroed out under this budget.
I was curious why, because I – actually, when we did the Disability Pride Month resolution, I got to meet some of your really phenomenal students.
And it feels like a really great opportunity that we were presenting to them.
Yeah, thank you, ultimately.
I've spent so much of my career working as an intern, and these were such impactful experiences.
And I am so committed to continuing to create opportunities for students in intern.
So, what you may not realize is that this summer, we had an intern from the McVill Challenge.
And then we also partnered with DFS in one summer, Chicago, to have – if we have a few students from there, too.
So, we've been able to partner across the city and leverage some of these other opportunities.
So, I don't expect that that will be a deficit for us at all.
And it is so important to me to continue to predict that next generation of students.
Because if we – we will continue to do that through our city-wide partnerships.
Okay.
I'm hoping that's a program that we're able to restore in the future.
I – my clock's in.
I wanted to ask about the relationship between CDOT and MOPD, where infrastructure is concerned more generally.
So, as we look forward to the next capital improvement plan, how does MOPD work with CDOT to ensure the accessibility of our infrastructure generally?
And specifically, because we can talk about lawsuits that have been settled.
When it comes to accessible signalized crosswalks and as CDOT works to ramp up that work, do they look to MOPD for counsel and guidance in terms of – in terms of how we're scheduling?
out those accessible
crosswalks. Do you help
them with the prioritization of those
locations?
So we work
very closely with
Commissioner Craig
Turner and at that
issue of APS
so as one of the requirements
would be set up a community
advisory group so I'm a
PDAC that are partnering with that
advisory group because it's so
important that we got that community
input. I know that Christina and Tom
are working at that. I don't know if you would
say anything about the advisory group
but we worked with
to make sure that there was
diverse representation of the
disability community including
individuals who are blind,
their vision, and multiple
disability through me rely on
APS to navigate in
communities.
Do you want to add anything about Christina and Tom?
Okay, you're checking.
So that advisory group
has already been set up?
The advisory group has
been set up.
That will be included
from there, yes.
Is CEDA making the
most of the existence
of that group? So I'm glad that
they're advising on the
accessible
crosswalks. Are they being
utilized to think more broadly about
accessible infrastructure across the
city?
I'm sorry, can you repeat the question?
Wait, like I feel like the advisory group
may have been set up
specifically to support the rollout of
accessible signalized crosswalks.
I think a group like that can do more
than that. I would hope that CDOT is
utilizing their expertise and experience
on infrastructure more generally.
Thank you for that feedback. I think that's a great
suggestion.
I hope they take it.
The last question I'll ask with my time is I know that
MOPD had created a housing locator to track
affordable accessible units to make sure we were
understanding where they were going, that they were
getting to those who would actually benefit from the
accessibility in those units.
Can you share with us or from a member of your team how that
housing locator is going, what we're learning about
access to those accessible units?
Tom, do you want to talk about the housing locator?
Tom Cieschowski, Deputy Commissioner.
Alderman, thank you for your question about the Chicago
housing locator.
This is a housing locator that MOPD launched in April of
2024.
It is active and it is being used in a very good way.
We have some numbers we can provide through the chair about
the number of searches.
It is limited to the city boundaries.
So it has been branded Chicago, but it is a very experienced
vendor who has worked closely for over 10 years with the state of
Illinois.
So we have confidence in that team, the vendor team.
What we're focusing on as a department and what my team is
focusing on is looking at this holistically.
What that means is our accessibility inspectors who go to housing
under development, affordable housing that is being constructed through DOH
programs.
We go into these during construction multiple times to inspect for
accessibility.
We're trying to very hard and comprehensively to tie this in well with
the housing locator.
working with property managers who take over these buildings and having
outreach so that they're listed properly and then searchable.
However, the locator itself, in my opinion, has good search tools for the
community looking for affordable, of residents looking for rental housing that is
both affordable and accessible, and those tools work well to narrow down their
searches by rent, for example, rent levels, accessible features in apartments, and also
in their common areas, parking, et cetera.
So we feel like this will be and is and will be a great tool to develop further, and we will work very
closely, as we do with the disability community, to receive and implement their feedback.
I appreciate that.
I wanted to ask, does housing locator also apply to accessible ARO units in private
developments that do affordability on site?
ARO units, if they're part of an affordable development that we did outreach to, will be
included, yes.
That is to say, like, private market rate developments that, based off of the affordable
requirements ordinance, do 20% affordability on site, oftentimes, hopefully, always with
accessible units in that mix.
Are those included in the universe of units that the housing locator is tracking?
We have begun the process by focusing on projects developed with some degree of government funding.
While that is the majority of projects, we're aware that some ARO projects are strictly privately
funded, and we are going to include those in the future if they haven't been yet.
Okay.
We can follow up on that.
Thank you, sir.
Thank you, Commissioner.
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you.
Alderman Napolitano, Father Alderman Manahoppermore.
Thank you, Chairman.
Good morning, Commissioner.
I appreciate you being here today, and I'm a big fan of your department.
I got a couple of two quick questions for you, and actually, one of them has been touched
on by three of my colleagues already, Alderman Riley, Wagesbeck, and Spada.
Two parts of it is we kind of are all asking the same question.
Do projects come through your department prior to development?
And what I mean by that is, you know, past the crosswalk portion, when it comes to divvy
bikes or bike racks, or even at the federal level, mailboxes, does anybody come across
your department and say, by us putting these projects here, are we still making a safe and
accessible sidewalk or walking area for everybody in general, and especially for anybody with
disabilities?
And the second part of that question, too, before you answer it, do departments come,
does any department come to you on just the makeup of a sidewalk or a walkway?
Let me just start there.
Does any, like, if a walkway is not accessible for anybody, especially people with disabilities,
do any departments come through you for that as well?
So, thank you, Alderman.
So, we work together with the CETAD, and I know that we are out of control with CETAD
on different issues.
Tom, do you want to talk more about that?
Tom Ciesielski, Deputy Commissioner.
So, maybe I can start with the sidewalk question.
I think that was the last one, Alderman, I heard, right?
So, our team does not design sidewalks, does not design elements of the public right-of-way,
and I would defer to the CETAD engineers for those specific questions.
The difference I want to highlight is that MOPD's Accessibility Compliance Unit, and today
you have me and Matthew Sapanek, the architect here present from this team.
We are very involved in assisting the Department of Buildings with issuing building permits,
which include a variety of regulations that we review to ensure that buildings and alterations
of buildings are constructed accessible.
The reason I'm bringing that up is that it is a separate process from permits issued for
the public right-of-way.
The city, this is historical, I suppose, has set up two processes.
One for private or government properties within the property line, which requires building permits.
We are involved in that.
And the second process is permits issued by CDOT for public right-of-way.
And while we really strive to work and partner with CDOT on right-of-way issues, sidewalks, ADA ramps,
we are not involved in issuing permits for those elements.
And I'm just bringing this up as a difference in the process.
Thank you for that.
And please, no way, shape, or form.
I love what you guys do.
I'm not...
I'm not...
I'm not pitting departments against each other.
I couldn't come in here wholeheartedly and do that because it's a major city and we've got a lot going on.
The only reason why I ask these questions is in some cases we do have bike racks that go in and they're not done with accessibility in mind.
It's kind of just to fulfill a request.
And sometimes we have the divi bike systems that go in that isn't done with everybody's accessibility in mind.
And when it comes to sidewalks, too, there's many sidewalks throughout the city of Chicago that aren't accessible and some of them that aren't made for any type of accessibility, but they're considered a sidewalk.
And without pitting department against department, because that's not the right way to do this, is there a way that we can come to your department for a ruling on this?
Because I know that goes back to what I said I didn't want to do is pit each other against it.
But it comes to a point where when you have a sidewalk that I don't know what the standard is.
I think it's 3.5 feet is a standard sidewalk somewhere in that given area.
I could be completely wrong, but we have some sidewalks that are less than two feet wide.
And it's something that I do believe other departments want to fix, but it doesn't seem to make that priority list.
And I think what a lot of us are asking, can we come to you for rulings on this?
And is that a possibility?
Thank you for that suggestion, Alderman.
I can say that our team has the right makeup, sitting with Matthew Sapanek, who's one of our experts, plan reviewers, on developments that are, for example, planned developments that go through the Planning Commission.
These are very large developments that include sidewalk work on the property, ramps on the property.
We do offer the expertise of our unit and team to developers through our pre-permit reviews.
So we do offer some degree of that expertise at the appropriate time and through the appropriate process.
So that's what I would like to offer to you today.
We'll leave it at that.
I don't want to put you – you're taking a deep breath, so I'm assuming I'm putting you in a bad spot here.
But I just think – I think all departments' concepts and ideologies is the betterment of the walkway for everybody.
I just – sometimes I think we're not all getting the same visual look at how this affects people.
So any help we can get on that.
And I'd just like to point out another thing to your department that I've noticed citywide in my ward and my surrounding wards.
Is there's this concept now of the crosswalks where we're putting the bump outs in there and we're putting bump outs on major streets that is giving a sense of security for somebody to cross because traffic could see them a little bit better.
But a lot of these crosswalks are crossing without stop signs or stoplights, which with not all people crossing, whether you are a person with a disability or a person without a disability, whatever it is, it is a completely false sense of security because it's a crosswalk.
And by state rule, it's – you must stop to the crosswalk.
But these are crossing multi-lanes, and we're seeing what I believe is an uptick in accidents and issues that are happening.
And I would wish – I'd hope that maybe your department as well can look at these a little bit more because if I could set the picture, it's a – it's a larger street.
It might not technically be a two-lane street, but it's used as a two-lane street.
Bump out comes right up to the first lane and gives the person the sense that they're in a crosswalk traffic that's got to yield.
The first car yields, but the one on the inside track does not yield, and that's putting all of our residents at major, major risk.
But we're putting these bump outs in all over the place, Milwaukee Avenue, Nagel Avenue, Nagel up on the northwest side, and we're seeing people that are struck.
And it's putting especially a lot of our residents with disabilities at a kind of a false sense of security because when you get out there, car one stops, and you're not seeing if car two is stopped or not.
So I'm hoping that we can kind of reconsider or look at these bump outs, especially on these wide lanes, and that can come through your department and give an overall ruling as well like, hey, this isn't going to be safe because it's really getting out of control.
People are driving faster.
There's a heck of a lot more traffic on the road, and it's just – it is very, very dangerous.
And I consider your office and your crew pretty much the authority and the, you know, could be the brains behind the operation.
You're very intelligent that can make this a lot better, but there's an uptick here with these accidents, and I'm hoping that you can be maybe a little bit more a part of these designs in the future.
So my first one was a question.
Second one was a statement.
I do truly appreciate all you do.
Sorry to put you in that situation, but I'm hoping we can kind of collaborate because I'm going to send you stuff, and I'm going to need some rulings here because I have a sidewalk that's, like I said, less than two feet wide, and it's not safe for anyone to walk down.
So I appreciate it.
Thank you, Chairman.
Thank you for the opportunity.
Ultimately, I'm happy to take a look.
Please know that you can always say that because you're also the executive here and professional.
You know, I just want to make sure you know that we're happy to take a look at talk with you further about that because it's so important to me to understand what's happening in the city, what concerns people that are having with their experience.
Thank you.
I hate to make your workload bigger, but I really appreciate it.
Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman.
And close, Alderman Manohap from work.
Thank you, Chairman.
Hi, Commissioner.
Hi, team.
I wanted to extend a note of gratitude to Deputy Commissioner Tom Salisky for all your help in the 48th Ward.
We really appreciate your being accessible and as a resource, especially with the most egregious ADA violations.
So thank you for that.
And, Commissioner, I want to commend you on all your work that you do for the City of Chicago.
I had a couple comments and then a few questions, but I wanted to point out to the Forbes article that came out in 2024 that listed the top 10 and the top bottom most and least accessible cities in the nation.
And I was glad to not be in the top bottom, but I would love to be in the top 10 at some point.
But listening to the hearing today, it's very clear that accessibility is, and for you, and how we do in the City of Chicago is so interdependent across departments.
It's CDOT, housing, finance, Board of Elections, which I'm going to ask about later, parks, CTA, and walkability, how we build new buildings, like how accessible our old buildings are.
So I was just curious, I would love, again, to be in the top 10 at some point, and hopefully it'll be sooner than later.
But do you see in the future, like where Chicago might land in any of those buckets?
Like I said, again, some cities are championing, you know, new buildings.
Some are accessibility across, you know, sidewalks and nature trails.
And like, where would you see Chicago leading in any way?
Thank you so much, ultimate.
First, I think we need to call the Forbes people.
I think we need to call them.
I'm sure the property to have here in Chicago, because our city has had a decreased commitment to accessibility across the city that has been intentional.
So I agree with you, right, with them, too.
I think that we are not recognized for people to offer.
And one of the people that I met this year was someone who actually, with a physical disability, who came to Chicago last summer.
And she was so blown away by all the accessibility that she decided to move here.
And it's a contrast of where she moved from.
And so I think that motivated me, because they remind me that we do have a strong city with a strong infrastructure where people can live in our city.
And I think that's absolutely such a top priority.
It's so important for everybody.
And then, yes, I think then, you know, I don't do this work alone.
I have this incredible team here that I'm so grateful to come to work from.
But we also work with and collaborate with city departments, but then also with you, members of the culture, to come to work together, because I believe it takes all of us.
Absolutely.
And I do want to shout out to Access Living, because they are doing so much on the ground.
And in the 48th Ward, we would love to be the most accessible ward in the city.
But I think that Chicago truly can lead. And so thank you for pushing all of our departments toward that.
And I wanted to ask first, can I get a list through the chair of the number of the home modification applications from the 48th Ward?
Is that possible? Yes, that's possible. We will provide that with the chair. Yes.
Thank you. And then regarding the disabled parking process improvements, I would also like to be included in any conversations of how we are making that better for people.
I know that other colleagues have pointed that out already. And do you want to comment on any, like, what is your, what do you feel is the role of MLPD in making that process better?
This is us, sir. So we are currently working very collaboratively with the Department of Finance, and we made some changes this year.
And we continue to work with the Department of Finance and hopefully continue to work into 2026 on that.
And really, one of the things that we would love to do is leverage the existing technology to be able to move some of the administrative functions into that to automate it and make it easier, but while maintaining the accessibility component of it.
Terrific. Thank you for that. And then regarding the, I believe that everyone should have access to voting and polling places, vote by mail if they can, but if they want to, they should be able to go to their nearest polling place and it should be accessible.
Can you speak on any way so that we could work together to make sure that every polling place is accessible in March for our next elections?
So we work very closely with the board of elections, with two of them at the Park District and the citywide efforts to make sure the polling places are accessible.
Thank you, Commissioner, yes, I confirmed that, and we really think that this is a very, very high priority.
We've engaged with and partnered with all the departments and sister agencies that have facilities with polling places.
As the latest example to expedite a process of projects that are in basically going to construction very soon, our team met directly and in person with Chicago Park District to let about 15 projects go into permitting ASAP.
So that's just one example of where we can help, I feel.
Terrific. That's really good to hear. And again, if there's anything that we can...
I also want to mention Chicago Public Schools, too, but a great partner at this, too. I forgot to mention them as well, and I did want to miss that.
Terrific. That's great. I would love to be able to say all of our polling places are accessible.
Terrific. And that's it. I want to thank you for the visit that you took to our beaches on the north side, and we would love our beaches to be accessible for everyone, not just that one time a year when Gus organizes his friends to be on the beach event, but every day.
So thank you for making that event happen, to make it so special, and for all that you do for Chicago all year round. Thank you, Commissioner.
Thank you. I want to thank Gus, who was your coach, by Kastenstein, who worked so hard to play at the beach day at Osterman Beach every year in August.
It was, I believe, the second Saturday of August, and it was such an incredible turnout. It was one of my favorites.
I've worked this year, and unfortunately, the weather was to not cooperate, which was a bummer, but I really want to thank Gus and his incredible team, and see them for making that collaboration.
I'm very proud of that work, and I'm very proud of that work that he does.
Thank you. Point of information, Audemars Lopez.
Thank you, Chairman. Would it be possible to expand the Alderwoman's, through the chair request, to be for all wards, the home modifications for all wards, not just one word?
Thank you, sir. Your ask was a numbers ask, numbers of applications. That's fine. We'll ask the department to give that by word.
Thank you. Vice Chair Lee?
Thank you, Chair. Hello, Commissioner. Thanks for being here and to your team.
Really appreciate the partnership throughout the year from your department.
Alderman Lopez asked my one through the chair question, so I don't need to ask that, so I'll just make a couple of comments.
That's okay. Hey, it was important to get asked. That's all. I won't waste time doing it.
I want to say how much I appreciate the work that your department does, along with CDOT in particular.
I know we were talking about ADA ramps. There's a rather significant project going on in Chinatown right now to improve the ramps
and put some bump outs in to improve the safety for pedestrians and the public, and also for the many seniors and individuals with disabilities
who come through the neighborhood. And as someone who has recently had a surgical procedure
and has needed to wheel around in a scooter, I have a much greater appreciation for how important it is for our sidewalks
and ADA ramps to be smooth services that are not trip hazards.
I haven't fallen yet, knock on wood, which I appreciate.
But a disability is something that can befall anybody at any time, so I think it's all the more important for us
to pay attention and ensure that we're making sure that the city is accessible as possible.
I know that doesn't happen overnight, and we're inching towards it slowly, but really applaud the efforts
and appreciate your outreach to my office as well to ensure that we are reaching out to individuals
who don't typically apply for the programs that we have through your department,
whether that is installing chairlifts or the porch stuff, doing specific outreach to non-Native English speakers
in my community is really important, so I look forward to really enhancing that
and making sure that people are aware that this resource is available through the city.
That's all I've got, Chair. I just wanted to say thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
I think there's a couple things.
Number one, as I think Alderman Nugent stated earlier, you all are everywhere throughout the city
providing services for the community.
I always go back to when I saw – forgive me, I forgot your name that fast.
We were at the Taste of Chicago, and you don't have to hold your head down.
You were having a wonderful time signing Dougie Fresh at the Taste of Chicago.
So to say that you all are everywhere is an understatement.
You all provide a service, again, to a challenged population in our city.
Do you want to follow up on those points as it relates to the home modification program
and getting some clarity and understanding on average cost
and the ability to clear out the backlog that has existed, it seems like, for a number of years
via some level of funding if we're not using CDBG money,
some level of corporate or bond-related funding.
I'm going to have to see about the qualifications under capital.
So with that being said, we thank you for your work.
If you all can get those through the chairs back to us as soon as possible,
we would greatly appreciate it.
Our community will stand at ease while we bring in our next department,
the Department of Family and Support Services.
Mr. Blakemore, please grab a chair and relax.
All right. Thank you, sir. All right. Next up, we're going to have our Department of Family and Support Services.
We're here with the commissioner.
We will have overview by KDO2 from Department of Family, from the.
The. Council Office of Financial Analysis, followed by an opening statement from the commissioner and our and her team.
So, Katie, you may proceed.
Right. Thank you. Good afternoon, chairman and members of the city council.
My name is Katie O'Toole. I am with COFA.
I'll provide a brief overview of the proposed budget for the Department of Family and Support Services.
The recommended budget for fiscal year 2026 is six hundred and thirty two point five six million.
This is a seventy two million decrease or 10 percent from fiscal year 2025 revised appropriations.
The department receives both local and grant funding with 18 percent of the appropriations coming from the corporate fund.
Out of the proposed funding for 2026, the majority over five hundred and fifty million is allocated to non personnel costs with about 80 million for personnel.
DFSS is budgeted four hundred and thirty three full time equivalents for fiscal year 2026.
This is ten fewer than the revised appropriations or the appropriations for 2025 or a two percent cut.
Here you can see the breakdown of the recommended budget.
The percentage change between 2026 and 2025 is compared to the 2025 revised appropriations.
The revised revised appropriations are below the budget ordinance due to lower than budgeted grant funds by about two hundred and thirty three million.
Looking at spending categories for next year, DFSS is budgeting for slightly higher personnel, expenditure, travel and commodities.
The biggest decline you can see is within the nine thousand purposes as specified.
These are related to various.
programs supported by grants. Contractual services are slightly below 2025 appropriation,
but this is three times higher than the revised appropriation from last year.
As you can see, most appropriations are coming from grant funds. Grants are expected to support
over $439 million of the department's appropriations, but this is $300 million
less than originally budgeted for in 2025. The corporate fund is also down about 30%.
This is due to lower spending in personnel services, but that's evened out by grant funds.
Looking at the historical trends, we see increased funding for the department until last year,
especially with the revised appropriations, and again in the proposed budget this year.
The share of corporate funding, though, has increased slightly, except for this year in the
2026 budget. And lastly, looking at historical trends for FTEs, we see less variation in DFSS staffing
than we see in the funding levels. FTEs for the department have consistently been above 400.
That concludes COFA's summary.
Thank you, Katie. We'll begin. Commissioner Green, welcome.
This is your first time. We'll be gentle, so maybe. Maybe. All right. Well, if you could introduce
yourself as well as the team that you've assembled with you today and also provide us with your opening
statement. Thank you. Good afternoon, Chairman Irvin, Vice Chairman Lee, and honorable members of the
City Council. Thank you for the opportunity to present the Department of Family and Support Services
2026 budget. I want to start by recognizing and thanking Mayor Johnson, his team, the Office of Budget
Management, and the council members here today. These are definitely uniquely challenging times for our
city, with many of our residents and their families facing incredibly difficult situations. And as elected
officials, our residents look to you in their darkest moments, I want to say thank you. Thank you for staying
strong, for showing up, and for protecting Chicagoans. We see you, and we deeply appreciate you. Here with me
today are several DFSS colleagues who can share much appreciated expertise in their respective areas. It is my pleasure to
introduce those with me on the dais. To my right is Harley Jones. He's the first deputy commissioner.
Andrea Chapman, the deputy commissioner of homeless services. Raymond Barrett, managing deputy commissioner.
And in the box, first role is Serato Burgess Burnett, our deputy commissioner of children's services.
You have Daniel Castaneda, deputy commissioner of human services and gender-based violence.
Margaret Laravie, deputy commissioner of senior services. Mahita Cizak, deputy commissioner of finance.
Kathy Kulik, deputy commissioner of youth services. Mark Sanders II, deputy commissioner of workforce.
And in the second role, to the left, Christine, Christina Medina, deputy commissioner of human resources.
Yolanda Curry, deputy commissioner of senior services. Kevin Givens, deputy commissioner of contracts,
IT, and programmatic monitoring. Sylvie Sinakwe, senior director of strategic policy and equity.
The department's work is dedicated to serving the most vulnerable in our city. And I thank you for
your continued support of our mission heading into 2026. You will see strategic investments in this
budget that will continue to help connect Chicagoans to programs and services that they need to thrive.
You will also see renewed evidence-based commitments to the programs our data show are transforming lives and
helping reduce violence and crime in the city. DFSS and our partners collaborate and innovate to
continuously improve upon the programming and services we offer to our clients. We pride ourselves on both
providing efficient and effective services to Chicago's most vulnerable residents, working to ensure our
our city is just equitable and inclusive for all. This budget prioritized programs that have invested in
powerful, life-changing outcomes for Chicagoans. I would now like to highlight some of our department's
achievements in 2025. This year, our One Summer Chicago Youth Employment Program, led by our Youth Services
division, hired more than 31,000 youth, connecting them to learning opportunities, the chance to earn a paycheck,
and for many, a foot in the door toward a career. Ninety-five percent of our youth participants reported
the program helped them feel a sense of safety in their community and created a space where they felt like they
belonged. Additionally, we've reached 15,000 youth through our MyShi, MyFuture Safe Spaces program this year,
which employed 200 youth to plan and execute safe, fun, affordable, engaging social events for our youth
all over the city. Our youth participants tell us that having these options plays an important role in helping
youth stay safe and make good choices about how they spend their out-of-school time. For more information
on the many achievements of our youth program participants this year, please see the summer 2025
Summer Youth Impact Report that we've included in your materials. Separately, our seniors division remains as
active as active as ever, connecting thousands of Chicago seniors each year to programs, events, activities, and support.
DFSS has 21 senior centers, which last year saw 700,000 visits from 18,000 participants.
Our department's Senior Fest, held this year in August in Millennium Park, is a life-affirming annual festival
that brought approximately 8,000 seniors downtown for live music, dancing, senior resources, raffle prizes,
free catered lunch, and camaraderie with their peers on a gorgeous summer day in Chicago.
We also continue to protect our investment in early childhood education. In 2025, the city and DFSS were
proud to invest $7 million to increase compensation for early childhood professionals.
The influx of support is bringing an estimated 3,000 workers closer to parity within the early
learning workforce, benefiting 86 early learning providers across Chicago. This investment is
increasing salaries by an average of 5% to 10%, bringing pay closer in line with the broader K-12
education workforce. Additionally, this investment is helping get critical staff into our early
learning classrooms. With this investment protected in the FY26 budget, we can sustain these increases in
salary and teacher presence and ensure increased economic stability in the year to come for the vital
early learning educators. We are also excited about our community reentry support centers, overseen by workforce services
division, which provide a range of resources to support individuals returning from incarceration
and getting back on their feet, in addition to supporting their families. These resources include food and housing
assistance, employment assistance, education and training, mentoring and support groups, connecting to counseling
services, information on sealing and expunging criminal records, family reunification and child support assistance, and more.
Another way that we are providing effective and critical care to Chicagoans facing homelessness is through our Rapid Rehousing Program,
which has housed more than 3,350 households since October 2020. I am pleased to be able to say that the FY26 budget
protects 5.1 million investment to maintain housing and supportive services for 1,000 households in 2026,
including newly housing 360 households, according to or through our accelerated moving events.
The success of this program shows us the importance of ongoing investment in flexible,
adaptive housing solutions to ensure long-term stability for Chicago's most vulnerable residents.
Finally, I want to take a moment to recognize our department's brilliant, driven and compassionate staff.
They make this work possible. The box today is filled with people who many days work
late into the night and over the weekends to ensure that our services are available to those that need them most.
They, along with DFS staff who are not in the chambers with us today,
are deeply and personally invested in serving the people of this city, and we are so lucky to have them.
So thank you again for allowing me the opportunity to serve this great city and support our residents from birth to seniors
in accessing resources that help to sustain, enrich, affirm, educate, and inspire them in their lives.
I look forward to taking your questions.
Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner. We'll begin with Chair Rodriguez-Sanchez.
I'm here. Thank you, Commissioner, and thank you again so much for saying yes to this very challenging position
in a very, very challenging moment in our communities.
I thank you so much for the pit count.
It's very helpful to be able to see this in a graphic form.
How much do we spend in doing that kind of survey?
Does anybody know?
And if you don't have the number in front of you, you can send it through the chair.
I just want to know.
I can start off.
I can get you.
So it's around.
It definitely varies per year, but it's somewhere between like $10,000 to $40,000 is around where the evaluation comes in,
and that's part of the process throughout the year of them actually going through the data that's retrieved
and figuring out the exact statistics of it.
But it's somewhere in the ballpark range of $10,000 to $40,000.
It's very, very helpful.
I hope that we can continue doing it because it gives us very valuable information on how to care for people.
Can you tell me how many living rooms we have in the city of Chicago that are in part supported by the Department of Family Services,
and if they are not supported, what kind of relationship do we have with them?
And I'm asking this question because as we see all of these resources that we're going to be short on
and all the cuts that we are seeing, we are going to need a lot more supportive structures in our community,
and we don't have enough.
So I would like to learn a little bit about what our relationship is with those living rooms
and what are the opportunities that we have with the new budget to maybe stand more structures like that.
Andrea Chapman, Deputy Commissioner.
Thank you for that question, Alder.
Currently, DFSS does not fund living room programs,
but we do fund many of the providers that operate living room programs,
and we connect our residents to those services and those resources through the existing partnerships
that we have with those agencies where we fund other work.
Our residents and all the clients that are served in our existing programs,
like, for instance, our homeless services outreach programs,
they do connect those residents to the living room programs for support.
I know Renaissance runs a very successful living room program,
and we tap into that for shelter waiting at times,
but also the living room support and services to bring down that trauma and the respite
that we use those living rooms to really hold folks stable until we can connect them to greater services.
But we don't fund that directly, but our program participants and our unhoused neighbors
can connect through those, through the delegate agencies that we do fund,
and many of those living room programs, we fund those delegate agencies for other areas of work.
Will you be able to send through the chair where these living rooms?
I have visited some of them,
but I don't think that I have a count of how many there are in the city.
I think that it would be great for us to be able to quantify the people that we're serving on those living rooms
and the kind of services that they're getting.
And then the second part of that is how do we try to build more partnerships in this moment
so that we can encourage more of that.
I have talked to you before about what I'm trying to do at my office,
standing up a form of living room for unsheltered people in my ward
because we don't really have resources.
And I think that we are in a moment where we need to sort of pull together community resources.
We need to use all dramatic offices.
We need to use any institutions that there are in the community.
And sometimes there are opportunities to do that for not a lot of money.
So what are the opportunities for us to create partnerships where we can care for people intentionally?
Because I'm very, very concerned.
On that vein, where are we right now in this budget with how we are going to be taking care of the needs of people as SNAP
is not an option for people, at least for next month.
How are we planning to support people in this moment?
What are the partnerships that we have standing?
And how do we foresee that next year, if we are still in a situation like this,
we're going to be able to take care of people?
Thank you for that question, Alderwoman.
I'll start with the last question in terms of where are we with SNAP,
because it's so current and a current situation that we're in.
I know on Monday you all received the email.
I want to try to get some information up to you as quickly as possible for resources for residents
that can access food assistance.
At the Department of Family Support Services,
we do provide food and nutritional support to a number of highly vulnerable groups across Chicago.
For older adults, we provide home-delivered meals as well as daily group dining options through our city.
For seniors seeking these offerings,
they should definitely contact our Senior Services Information and Assistant Call Center at 312-744-4016.
But we also have our early childhood education programs that provide healthy, nutritious meals and snacks
for our enrolled children from the ages of zero to five during their program hours.
Also, through our emergency assistance program,
we provide funding to Greater Chicago Food Depository to support their food pantry network,
our network of homeless and DV shelters, and we provide them with fresh produce,
and we make different meals available for families in need through our community service centers.
We also encourage Chicagoans to seek food assistance resources.
The best way to do that is to call in 2-1-1 or even texting their zip code to 898-211.
We have the Greater Chicago Food Depository also maintains an up-to-date directory of food pantries on their website.
Also, once again, you know, the people of Chicago have been showing up,
both with their resilience and their care for their neighbors.
But federal programs like SNAP provide critical support on a scale that no city can match.
And I think that's critical to remember,
that this demand places a strain on all of our city support services,
including our community-based organization, our faith-based organizations,
our clinics, our broader service array network.
The mayor's office is coordinating across departments right now to respond in real time.
We remain committed to doing everything that we can to locally,
that we can do locally while looking to the federal government to ensure access to health insurance, SNAP,
Medicaid for the residents who need it and deserve it.
Thank you for that.
Shifting gears a little bit,
can you tell me about what are the opportunities for partnership that you see with the CARE program?
I think that we are sort of like right now in the process of figuring out some of the mechanics of how to dispatch.
But there is a lot of outreach that I believe should be a part of the functioning of an efficient crisis response system.
A lot of it is responding to emergencies,
but I think that a lot of it should also be preventing emergencies
and trying to find people where people are most likely to be dysregulated and go into crisis.
And we know the reasons why people go into crisis a lot of times, right?
We know what are those causes.
So what are your thoughts or how do you envision a possible collaboration with the teams that already do outreach
at Family and Support Services and CDPH?
I see our strongest connection is with our homeless population, our unhoused population.
They are out there with us during our time of giving resources and support.
I do believe in talking to Dr. Ige, I thought it was a CARE team that was coming out with us,
but it's actually her encampment outreach team.
But they're similarly the same thing, but in the moment they provide mental health and substance abuse.
resources and treatment. So we do work with them.
We work with the public health department in that capacity.
Make sure there's anyone.
Yeah. And then
you mentioned rapid rehousing.
I'm sorry to
beat this up a little bit more.
But I mean, we all know the needs that we have in our communities. We want
people to be safe. We want people to be sheltered. Winter is coming.
Where are we at
in being able to do some of that work
to make sure that we can bring people to safety?
Thank you, Alderwoman, for that question. You're absolutely right. This time of the year is
exactly when those resources and our focus continue to ramp up.
And so as it relates to this budget in particular, you see that investment
so that we can continue our rapid rehousing at the same level from the
previous year, supporting 1,000 households over the course
of that year. At the same time, as weather continues to get colder,
we see a couple of different things happening.
Both our hot teams are
redoubling their efforts to make sure that we're getting as many resources
in front of unhoused neighbors as possible
to try to get them inside during winter weather.
But simultaneously making sure that we are activating
our winter surge bed plan so that we can also make additional
beds available within the existing shelter system
for the course of the winter. Thank you.
Thank you. I think that's my time. Thank you, Chair.
Thank you, Alderwoman.
Thank you. Could you, the last two speakers
identify themselves for the record, please?
Yeah, Harley Jones,
First Deputy Commissioner.
Okay. Thank you very much.
Andrea Chapman, Deputy Commissioner of Homeless Services.
No worries. No worries.
Any others for,
I have just a couple of people on my,
I have you, Alderman Sposato,
two, three, four, five. Okay. Got you.
All right. Next, we're going to go to Alderman Sposato.
Also, before he starts,
I want to recognize
Alderman Sawyer
is with us today.
Thank you for joining us.
Must be lonely.
You come down here.
Damn.
You didn't even tap me on the shoulder and say hi.
I'm offended.
No, that's good.
All right. Go ahead, Alderman Sposato.
Thank you, Chairman.
Good morning, Commissioner.
Thanks for stepping up and taking this
very difficult job in difficult times.
I know you just got here,
so I did.
I'm not ambushing you,
as everybody knows,
because I'm not about ambushing anybody.
I did give you a heads up
about my one budget question
that I do have,
and that's about
One Summer Chicago.
So I'll just say it
so that everybody hears this.
So I'm not sure
if I'm a fan of it or not.
I think it might be
a little bit too much for us
in order of financial constraints
right now.
But I had an experience
with a kid in my ward
that thought he was getting the job,
and he gets a letter
saying he didn't get the job,
and he was a little bit bummed.
And the next day
or two days later,
he gets an email saying,
if you don't put your hours in
by 4 o'clock today,
you're not going to get paid.
So literally,
I don't remember
if it was 24 or 48 hours later,
you know,
you want his hours,
you didn't get the job.
So, but with that,
I offered,
I'd let you know my suggestion,
and you don't have to answer me now.
We could get back
and we could talk about this.
I think if we are going
to have this program,
every one of us has parks,
and every one of our parks,
I believe,
gets filled.
It's a great program.
It's a cheap deal for parents.
We're stressing that
we want to give kids jobs
and we want things
for kids to do.
Our parks can't handle,
they don't have enough staff
to bring in all our kids,
certainly on the northwest side,
and I believe
it's probably everywhere.
So my suggestion to you is,
publicly,
I wanted to state this,
that we give,
with these one summer Chicago kids
in these camp jobs,
we give them to the park district
and minimum,
you know,
five kids per park,
and that'll enable us,
that'll enable the park
to make more money,
hire more people.
It's a win-win for everybody.
So that's just one thing.
That's the only thing
I wanted to say,
and I just wanted
to say it publicly.
Like I said,
I don't expect an answer now.
I know we could talk
about this at another point
with Carlos Rosa
to work something out here,
and I know he was on board
with this great idea
that I have.
I have to call this
spot on the idea.
Everybody's on board
when they don't have to pay.
Right, exactly.
We get jobs for our kids
in our community,
know the community,
and then our kids
in our community
get to go to day camp.
But with that,
that's all.
I just want to wish you the best.
I know it's a very,
very challenging job,
once again,
in challenging times.
Any way I could help you,
or I'm sure,
well,
49 of us,
other allers
that are more than willing
to help,
communications,
I believe all of us
have email addresses
and everything,
emails that we put out.
So just let us know
if you need us
to blast something,
and appreciate you
stepping up once again,
and I look forward
to meeting with you
about my great idea.
Thank you.
Thank you, Chairman.
I don't think I've heard
Alderman Spazada
want to send money
to another unit
of government,
so I'm flabbergasted,
be that as it may.
Alderman Spazada,
could you all
hold your hands up again?
I did not write down.
Go ahead, Alderman Spazada.
Oh, keep him walking.
Thank you, Chairman.
Alderman Spazada
has also got my hand up.
I got you, Alderman.
Thank you, Chairman,
and thank you, Commissioner,
and DFSS team
for being here.
Thank you for all
the great work
that you do
to keep many
of our communities,
all of our communities,
safe.
Your work does not
go unnoticed.
35th Board
has had a great relationship
with DFSS
over the past 10 years
in having a humane
and compassionate response
to our unsheltered population,
so we are very grateful
for your time,
compassion,
and patience
as we work
to help people
who are being ravaged
by poverty.
My question is
getting some clarification
on a technicality
with the budget
that was proposed.
There were some concerns
regarding the
Chicago Legal Protection Fund,
and I believe
there was a clerical error
or I don't know
what it was,
but it was reported
as only being funded
with $1.5 million,
but it was supposed
to be $3 million.
Can we get some clarity
on what is the full
budgeted amount
for the Legal Protection Fund,
and where is that money
coming from?
Thank you for that question,
Alder.
I'll start with this.
Our department
recognized that
the ARPA funds
that represent
that one-time
historic federal investment
to help Chicagoans
through COVID,
we did try
to strategically
use those funds,
and now those dollars
have been fully invested
in our residents,
and we remain committed
to sustaining
and protecting
and protecting
our corporate investments
in the budget,
particularly around
Legal Protection Services,
as well as
the Criminal Justice
Legal Service Initiative.
For the 2026 budget,
both programs
are recommended
to receive
the same level
of corporate funding
from 2025,
so that is
the $1.5,
or I should say
$1,550,000,
and that program
means that we are
losing roughly
$3,000,000 annually
from our ARPA funding
that was there,
and so we are
looking at ways
to right-size that.
So just for clarity,
I'm sorry,
so are we,
it was previously
at $3,000,000,
are we going to bring
it back to $3,000,000?
The budget I was presented
was at the $1.5,000.
Okay,
so I believe
I had heard
that we were,
that that was
just an error
because of,
yes,
in recognition
of the loss
of ARPA funds,
but I think
we need to speak
with the administration
on making sure
that we have
that fully funded.
I have spoken
to many
of my constituents
and advocates
like the Resurrection Project
that are working
diligently
to protect
our undocumented
communities
from the lack
of due process
with civil
immigration enforcement
right now,
and the Legal Protection
Fund is an
essential tool
to protect
some of our
most vulnerable
neighbors right now
from these
immigration policies.
So if we can
continue that conversation,
I would like
some more clarity
because it was
communicated to me
that we would be
bringing it back
to the $3,000,000.
A number of advocates
and community residents
came earlier today
to talk about
gender-based violence.
Can you talk about
what impacts
to gender-based
violence services
and programs
there are
in this budget
and why?
Thank you
for that question,
Alder.
Again,
during COVID
when our
home share industry
was really hit hard,
we were conservative
in how we spent
those home share
surcharge funds.
It allowed us
to build
a small reserve
to help
with that recovery,
but now those reserves
have now been used.
So what we're seeing
and we're returning
to our regular funding
with the
home share
surcharge,
but even with
that adjustment,
our current
$4.5 million
investment
from corporate funds
for GBV
services
remain well above
the pre-pandemic levels.
Nearly doubled
what the city
invested back
in 2019,
which was 2.3.
Nevertheless,
for 2026,
our gender-based
violence budget
is decreasing
by $3.3 million
compared to 2025,
largely due
to the changes
in the home share
surcharge.
Even with
these reductions,
we are committed
to supporting
all of our
current programs,
although they will
have to operate
at a reduced level.
I know Mayor Johnson
introduced the
Community Safety Fund.
to shore up funding for community safety programs, including GBV-related programming.
It's there to really protect and hopefully have a dedicated ongoing annual revenue for them.
Yeah, and that's why I'm a huge proponent of making sure that we are expanding that community safety fund
by increasing the rate for the corporate head tax.
So my question is, so with that $3.3 million reduction, how is that going to impact services
and the amount of people that we can help out?
Yes, sir.
I'll give you a couple examples that I have data on that we did our background research on this.
Our emergency financial assistance program, it will serve about 850 survivors next year
compared to over 4,100 that we expect to expend by the end of this year.
Rapid Rehousing program will serve 90 households in 2026 based on this funding compared to 150
that they serve just to up to September 30th of this quarter.
And the Legal Services program will serve approximately 1,000 survivors in 2026 compared to 1,260 households
that we've been able to serve by this third quarter.
That's just a couple examples of you seeing the impact.
Got it.
So going back to the home share funds, so what is the percentage of home share funds going toward GBV?
Just if I could have some numbers on that.
The home share fund is going down by $3,327,862.
This year the home share amount will be $5,688,138.
This 2025 year, so you have that comparison just in numbers, it was at $9,016,000 from 2025.
Got it.
And then a question that I got from a community member who is a survivor asks,
why are there additional funds being allocated towards the Office of Victim Services
when survivors and advocates have reiterated that the Chicago Police Department is not a resource for survivors,
especially now at the current state of immigration enforcement?
I will say the proposed budget does recognize the cuts that are happening with gender-based violence,
and we've seen outside of corporate a decrease over time.
In example, one of the funding changes that we saw happen was a hotline transition to the state,
so it came off of our corporate funding.
We saw the sun setting of ARPA, which was $5.6 million.
We saw federal cuts from Victim of Crime Act funding that hasn't been restored since 2024.
I do want to emphasize that every program we support is essential.
These services, safe housing, legal help, financial assistance,
deeply help survivors regain their stability and safety.
While this funding is lower, it is my hope that our department will be able to still focus on making sure
the critical resources that we have with the resources that you all provide will be able to reach those in need.
Thank you, Commissioner.
And, yeah, I mean, I want the record to be absolutely clear.
You know, I think that this is not the fault of your department whatsoever.
I think that this is the reality that is being forced upon us,
this forced state of unnecessary austerity and damaging cuts to essential services.
Of all the departments that we've heard during these budget hearings,
my heart sinks to the ground the most with this department
because of its role and its responsibility of assisting the most vulnerable people in our communities.
And so when we're having these discussions around how do we fund our city and what we're funding,
this needs to be top of mind and heart for all of my colleagues here
because we know what our communities are experiencing.
We know what it's like for our communities to have to worry about, you know,
starving or not having a home or not having the support that they need if they're, you know, a survivor of violence.
So, again, I commend you.
I really want us to work together closely.
I would like some clarity through the chair about the Legal Protection Fund.
But, again, I commend you for the work that you're doing in this moment of crisis.
Thank you.
Thank you, sir.
Thank you, Alderman Cazada.
Next we will have Alderman Lopez followed by Alderman Nugent.
I'll wait till you'll find me.
Don't worry.
So good afternoon, Chairman.
Good afternoon, Commissioner, members of the committee.
Actually, before I begin, I just want to say, Chairman, I too was flabbergasted by Alderman Sposato's comments
because he called us alders and he didn't say aldermen.
So I'm shocked.
But I just want to touch on a couple of things.
And, Commissioner, I am going to send you through the chair because I don't want to belabor with some of the more technical stuff.
But I do have a couple quick questions for you.
First off, with regards to the overall department, when we look at the reflection of your workforce personnel,
we see that it is not exactly representative of the demographics of this city.
As I have you here today, and since we didn't bring this up during your confirmation,
is there any intentionality on your part that we can expect moving forward to have a department that's more reflective
and robust in terms of matching the demographics of the city of Chicago?
Thank you for that question, Alderman.
Please know I just turned my head to cough.
I didn't want to cough in the mic.
But in terms of our staff positions and the breakdown, the racial breakdown, it is not reflective of the city,
but it is reflective of the vulnerable populations that we serve.
So you look at those percentage of Chicagoans that are living below poverty, which is our population,
then you see a better comparison, a more proportionate comparison.
An example, Asian Pacific Islander represents 5% of our staff,
and when you look at those who are living below poverty, they represent 7% of our Chicago population.
When you look at African Americans, they represent 50% of our staff,
and when you look at those living below poverty, they represent 46% of Chicagoans.
When you look at Hispanic Latino, they represent 22% of our staff.
When you look at living below poverty, they represent 28% of those Chicagoans.
When you look at Caucasians, they represent 20% of our staff.
When you look at those living below poverty, they represent 22% of our staff.
So there's some comparison that's closer to the line with the population that we serve
as opposed to the greater population of the city.
Does that match the actual client base that you deal with?
Not the populations, but the actual individuals who are looking for your services?
I don't think I have – I don't have enough.
Do you have that?
Thank you, Raymond.
Yes, Oliver.
I can give some of that.
So I can say – and this is just focused on our community service centers.
I don't have the demographics for all of our programs,
but I think it will highlight some of the discrepancies that you're mentioning
but also some maybe alignment with the commissioner.
And so I'm just going to do some comparisons.
Like I said, these are just people who are served at our community service centers,
which are typically people who are trying to find public benefit assistance
or other rental housing assistance.
And so when we look at – I'm comparing the – what we have data for for the population
versus the CSEs.
For white, the population of Chicago is around 39%.
CSEs served in 2024 was about 12%.
Black, 28% in population of Chicago.
Those served at the CSEs was 66.5%.
And then Latino, the one that we need to get a little bit better on,
it's about one-third of Chicago or 29%, and at the CSEs it's 26%.
And that's exactly why I'm bringing this up because I think that the overall Latino population
in the city of Chicago does not use your department as well and as robustly as I think it should
in relation to its population and the challenges that it faces.
One of my colleagues just mentioned about the outreach and meeting people in this moment,
but it's hard for individuals to go in, especially when you might have a senior center
or other departmental location that doesn't necessarily reflect the clientele walking in
or the ability to correctly speak with them in languages that they are familiar with
and therefore makes them less inclined to go in.
So I think that I would love to see some effort by the department moving forward to rectify that
because I think we have a lot of, as you've just articulated, a lot of need in terms of categories.
We may not necessarily know it, but we also know Chicago being Chicago,
you know, it's what people are comfortable walking in and talking to and relating to,
especially when they are in their most vulnerable moment.
Switching gears a little bit, I have two main questions that I just want to get to.
First, with regards to the grants to your department.
It says that we are anticipating $68 million in carryover funds.
from last year to this year. Is that correct? That's correct. Is there any particular reason
as to why we have such a high carryover when that was 68 out of $518 million from this year
that's going to be carried over into next year? Yes. Those are long-term grants, so they're more
than one year. Raymond, can you? Yes, Alder. So the two biggest ones that you see in there,
one is for about $44 million. It's through the Home ARP grant, which lasts until 2030. It has to deal
with development, rehabilitation, or acquisition of facilities to be converted to either non-congress
shelter or permanent supportive housing. And then the other one- Is this the Home Investment Partnership
grant? That is correct, Alder. Home Investment Partnership ARP. Okay. And then the second
biggest one is about $14 million. It is for a senior center in Bronzeville. Once again, that one will
take a few years to be spent down. So those are the two biggest carryover funds.
Okay. That'll also be referenced through the chair, but I was just very curious to see and want to make
sure that we're not leaving money on the table with some of these items. Lastly, with regards to
homelessness, when we deal with homelessness, we've had some challenges on the southwest side in
particular, and the south side as a whole, as many people on the south and west side who deal with
vacant properties always have challenges when it comes to this time of the year. If you can briefly
explain for our edification, what is the process when it comes to dealing and addressing with
homelessness in the city of Chicago as of right now? Because I feel as though it's an overly layered
production because I have to have streets and sand involved. I have to have you involved. I have to have
housing involved. I have to have police involved. And oftentimes it's getting to the point where it's
now. We're doing like that Spider-Man meme where people are all pointing at each other before we
actually start doing something. So can you explain to us what it is and then what we are doing to
address that? Because I think twofold. Well, answer that in a minute and then I'll go on to my next
one. Thank you, Alderman. I'll start at a high level in particular and talk a little bit about our
approach from the Homeless Services Division, which is really always and has been a three-pronged
approach for quite a while. So we always focus on prevention. We always focus on crisis response
for those facing homelessness. And then we focus on rehousing. In particular, anybody that is in need
of housing in the city of Chicago calls 311 to request that shelter and to do an intake assessment
so that those resources can be identified and provided to our homeless outreach and prevention teams.
I think some of your question got a little bit more into encampments. And so I'll turn it over
to our Deputy Commissioner Chapman to talk a little bit more about the approach to encampments in
particular. Thank you. Thank you for your question. Keep this speed. I like that.
Do you identify yourself for the record? We do this work in collaboration with many city
departments, sister agencies. Do you identify yourself for the record? Sure. Andrea Chapman,
Deputy Commissioner. Just for the record, anyone that speaks, we need you to identify yourself for
the record before you begin speaking. Thank you. Again, your question is a really good question. We
do this work in partnership with many departments, many sister agencies, and community-based
organizations. One, because it's the shared knowledge and resources of how to best support
this population of very vulnerable residents. We can't do it alone. We have to have, for our
coordinated cleanings, they're really coordinated the way they are with CPD for safety of the encampment
residents and the staff that operate in these encampments. It's done with streets and sand because
of some of the larger structures that are erected. So yeah, coordination that has to happen. We do this in
partnership with a lot of providers and partners. Understood. So my question is with regards to
that, in particular, when it comes to encampments, is that you have communities who are looking for
these individuals to not only be relocated or rehoused somewhere, but oftentimes we have
weeks or months where action actually takes place. And my concern is that roughly 18 months ago,
the mayor decided that we are going to now operate under a one shelter initiative, correct?
We said that all of our federal housing and all of that, all of those funds that we've gotten from
HUD and all that under the previous administration and this administration, we're going to go towards
housing under this new system. We even said, seen recently as this year, where pronouncements were
being made by the chief homeless officer, that we were investing $30 million for rehousing purposes.
But yet we still seem to struggle with getting homeless individuals off our streets.
And there have been times where I've reached out to the department, not under your leadership,
but I will just say that I've been told that, well, Alderman, all of our resources are going
towards the new arrivals. Don't shake your head at me. Don't shake your head at me because I know for a
fact that roughly six months ago, this administration said the migrant mission was over and now everyone is
considered homeless so that they could start being put into housing, start being addressed in that
manner. That being said, we know that our own indigenous homeless are suffering right now because
we don't have a place to deal with them. So I'd like to know what is your collective goal to address
this as well as to realign and calibrate what we need to do. Because when I have individuals I can't
place because every shelter is filled with individuals who have just arrived here. We need
to have a new discussion on what it means to deal with homelessness, especially when I see grants for
creating housing. Who's going into those houses? Who are we putting up? And in what priority are we
recognizing that there were homeless on the list before 2023 and they are still out on the street in 2025?
Thank you, Alderman. You will see people that have been housed and come back into being unhoused.
It is individuals' choice to self-determine that. We have multiple people that we have seen. We have
taken the opportunity to house them. They've been in our housing. We have up to 24 months of rehousing that
we're able to provide them. And they may leave after so many months because this is the individual
choice. If it's not feeling comfortable or want to go back to that encampment because that's where they felt.
I don't want to give multiple reasons because there's a myriad of reasons.
We got it.
You understand. But our one system takes in each person. It's not identifying if they're a new arrival
or if they've been in Chicago for 20 years. When we're out on the street and we're doing assessments,
we're doing assessments for everyone. And if they're willing, they're coming to our spark and they'll hold
and they'll wait three days and they'll find shelter. So that is happening to every...
I can't make up a new process. That is the process now that I walked into that I've seen.
So I can speak to what I've walked into. And just in case you want to add anything to that,
I'm maybe missing something.
Yeah, I mean, I think... Thank you, Alderman. Harley-Jones, first deputy commissioner.
I think the one thing I'll add in going back to the start of the one system initiative is you're absolutely correct.
We leverage the resources from that humanitarian response to create more shelter resources
and one unified system to serve anyone.
So when individuals call 311 or they speak with our homeless outreach teams, they are assessed for vulnerability.
Equity is a priority for us. Vulnerability is a priority for us.
So when you ask the question about how do we decide who goes into housing,
it's about the most vulnerable populations and looks much, much different than it did a year or two ago
when we saw high numbers of individuals coming from the border or on those buses.
It's a much, much different system now. Thank you.
You're done. Thank you.
Thank you.
Okay. Next we have Alderman Nugent, followed by Alderman Hatton.
Thank you, Chairman, and welcome, Commissioner and team.
I probably work with these three people more than anybody else in the city,
and so I'm grateful to everything that you guys do for us.
Thanks. You know, I want to follow up on something that Alderman Lopez was talking about.
What do you guys say?
So, for example, I recognize and understand why we have to coordinate with the partners we do,
but, for example, if we post, I believe, 14 days before a cleanup, 14 or 10 days, what is it?
I can't remember.
Seven.
Seven days.
Seven days. Okay, seven.
Seven, let's just use simple math, right?
Post on the first, cleanup on the seventh, and then the eighth, everything's back there again.
But we can't pick it up because we didn't notice.
Like, what do we say here?
Because now that's in somebody's, my constituent's backyard,
because people are being, they are manipulating the rules that we have created in a way that is,
quite frankly, making a lot of people's lives really difficult.
There's garbage.
In my ward, specifically, I can speak to Legion, there's garbage, there's feces, there's meth.
Like, I know that there's processes there, but what do you guys say?
Like, I know that there's garbage, there's garbage, there's garbage, there's garbage.
So, I could've put bogus up, could've done the path in a way to do anything that I gave you,
I don't know, but you may just write that flat as well, but I could've put two things like that.
Mike said, well, I hope that we can help better as only as well.
to situations like that like what do you think we do to to try to be able to kind of get ahead of it
or to be able to address it because we all know oh my gosh like we just we just cleaned this an
hour ago but we can't clean it now because oh we just we got to post again and do 12 cartwheels
and four skips like what do we do you are correct there is a process and that process can be um
seem like a bureaucratic process that takes too long um we do honor um that when we are putting
up signs even as to at the parks for example putting up signs of clothes i can't that we need
enough time leeway to start talking to our unhoused neighbors to try to have them move into um do
move into stability and move into a shelter um so we do need lead up time when we are posting signs
like that because all the other mechanics that happen um along with that um but there are those
regulations and rules that they are following in terms of when they can put signs up and um what
we need to do when that is activated so i recognize that i'm a lawyer i get it um but i think we have to
start looking at this differently nobody knocks on any of the neighbor's doors and asks them about
their experience nobody posts on anybody that lives on kedzy or around gompers park or eugene and says
i'm going to be dumping feces in your backyard heads up um like this doesn't make sense and i think
insanity is the the definition is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results
i i think we have to go back to the well and figure out how we can serve the unhoused but also be
respectful to community i i believe that community loses all the time in this scenario um and i think
your department does more than anybody so it's not i i am not critical to to you guys and in the folks
in the box like you guys are on the ground with me and my staff all the time but like i need us all
to recognize the absurdity of the fact that we go through all all of these hurdles and and then
they get to oh go ahead i'm sorry um but we go through all these hurdles and then what do we tell
community like be back in seven days sorry leave that leave that pile of feces in your backyard
is that okay and like where is cdph in this equation did they work with you guys i've asked cdph
to come out and look at properties across the ward because i am concerned i have rats everywhere
feces everywhere meth everywhere and i'm saying are we testing the soil are we testing the water
are we is this safe kids are going to play in the jungle gym touch the jungle gym touch your face
lick your finger like where are they in this equation we do partner with cdph um in our encampment
even when we're doing a part of a closure um they are a part of assessing with us and providing the
services on the ground um have they ever come to an encampment and said we got to shut this down or
we got to clean this up we've got a hazmat here anybody ever experienced that i don't they haven't
responded to my emails or let me let me take that back they said we we sure i believe to paraphrase it
was we need to ensure um you know we we do the best we can for the unhoused no mention of my community
okay i understand um understood listen well alderman napolitano had a point thank you chairman just a
quick point of clarification on and what my colleague had mentioned because we talked about this in our
office as well can't these incidents be held as an instant number and doesn't have a sunset date like
instead of taking an incident at a time and closing it out and it's over with and it starts back over
again every time a new complaint comes in and you have to wait a 10 uh seven day period why aren't
these kept hey that's the incident at that location this is the incident number it's open indefinitely
because there's an issue there i mean because we we see that too and i i feel for my colleague that
it could be cleaned up at eight o'clock and then starts back over at nine and then now it's a new
incident i mean there's there's better more efficient ways to do this so i i do agree
um and i know i have been um working with alderman nugent in terms of looking at do we continue
patrolling those spaces after that what are other things that we could do to ensure that we are able
to retain um the success we just had of being able to you know house those individuals and move them
out of the encampment um i do believe we have to strengthen our strategies and i'm definitely open
to hearing even recommendation you have because you're on the ground you're seeing it and you're
hearing it um i want to factor that in but um please know um at the current state um i'm exploring
different ways to make this more uh long term um but also recognize you have to balance uh the the
those who are unhoused and you have to balance the need of the community um so i'm trying to make
sure we're respectfully doing that for both camps thank you chairman thank you sam thank you uh and
chairman i i i actually think that we need a multi-pronged approach i don't i don't look at dfss and say
you guys you guys own this whole issue just you like this is bigger right this is this requires
it is dfss but it's also the park district it's the chief homelessness officer it's the department
of public health but this also requires us to enforce code as a city um you know part of the
problems that we're having in enforcement is that and it's baffling is that we have to provide all this
notice to folks and notification um for people that have established their homes on the public way
which the code also says that that is illegal to establish structures on the public way it's illegal
uh to be in the parks after 11 p.m it's illegal for open container public consumption public nudity
public intoxity and intoxication part of me and so it is it is baffling to me to try to work through
these scenarios when we already have illegal activity happening and i know that your team is
again i am incredibly grateful to you and your team i just i ask that you help me in trying to come up
with some some ways that we can move the needle in the right direction that is thoughtful um works
with the folks that are unhoused but also um i have not seen one policy that ever considers the
neighbors and so i think we need to add them into the equation that that would be my ask moving forward
thank you thank you thank you mr chairman thank you uh alderman nugent next we will have uh alderman
hatton alderman are you there yes sir thanks chair followed by uh alderman uh brunette
awesome um hey and uh let's see keep track of my time hey thank you commissioner um for you and your team
um congrats on uh making it to your first budget and i'll congratulate you after you make it through
it um i've a couple couple things i just wanna just wanna note um i appreciate uh the last several
colleagues and their kind of questions and and concerns and um you know willingness to work with
the department around ways we can better um serve and address our city when it comes to neighbors
experiencing homelessness um you know encampments and and the issues that that arise there um i do want
to note um having had you know the experience and working with your department and the park district
on how we kind of manage encampments and work to get people housed um uh funding is a large issue
you know i know a lot of my colleagues didn't support bring chicago home and ultimately um voters
uh you know voted it down at the referendum um but here we sit um post-ARPA um with huge budget
deficits and people still wanting uh services to um help to alleviate and and end homelessness um this
is not going to go away it's going to get worse the economy's terrible um we've known this it shouldn't
be surprising to people um this department's taking funding cuts right department's taking funding cuts
um so just want to note out there um you know city council um we need to fund the work that works
um rapid rehousing those accelerated moving events permanent supportive housing um proven things
they're working um we were able to innovate and really uh bring forth programs using the ARPA dollars
and uh then worked on efforts to continue to support those things um with a dedicated source of revenue
um but we still have it in our power of course to allocate funds to the work if we want it done
um people experiencing homelessness are not going to go away um rounds of tens of thousands of layoffs
this week from around the country um you know the end of snap benefits um i know we're all living in
the same world and in some ways this is preaching to the choir but to my colleagues i'll just say
it's not going away and enforcement
you
isn't going to end the issue either um so i appreciate uh commissioner you and your team on
that um uh also just switching gears a little bit as we get into a budget question on a couple of
the programs near and dear to constituents in the 49th ward um i do want to note um really
have had some great experiences um with one summer chicago with um the student placements
and our aldermanic offices with the program with mick the challenge as well um uh we had such a
wonderful placement um this summer and so just you know here to be a supporter of those continued
youth employment opportunities um especially as we try to support young people and moving into public
service um i am concerned about some of the cuts um i'll say you know it appears that
um the workforce for target populations program uh childhood education and violence reduction
are experiencing the biggest cuts um that i can see at 77 percent uh 21 percent and almost 17 percent
respectively um you know can you talk about how many how many seats or kind of participants uh reductions
we might see in participants for those programs based on this um and how do the cuts to
the workforce program impact uh our re-entry community thank you for that question
auto woman hadden um in workforce we have the 1.4 million dollar um it wasn't a cut but it was actually
moving that from corporate to the cannabis fund um so we were replacing that with 1.8 million
um so our crcs um offer you know the range of supports and this will help to keep those going
and in regards to i believe you mentioned children's services did you mention early childhood
early childhood and uh violence reduction okay thank you um there is um we're maintaining study there you
do see a reduction of 2.3 million out of corporate but that actually represents us moving our funding
um for our cds cares which is our database entry system we need to develop that it system so that
that 2.3 was projected cost for a vendor and for infrastructure setup and development to address
that new system so with the remaining 8.7 million um represent our historical investments in early
learning so there's been no change there i i know that may um look like there may have been but we're
going to be moving forward um with what we're doing in that area as well as um our early learning
workforce scholarship program will maintain um this year alone we had 117 degrees um for early learning
professionals i just want to tout that as i had that opportunity um is there another area as well i'm
sorry um violent the violence reduction program okay thank you yeah i i can this is raymond barrett
managing deputy commissioner of administration um alder that's a good question so that movement
you can probably see it it's switched between violence reduction to the after school programming
so there's no impact on services this happens sometimes between years where in this case let's
say my shy my future safe spaces which can also be seen in both ways as an after school program
but also as a violence reduction we're just trying to align it but overall that money was just moved
from one account line to the other and there's no impact on the opportunities for youth
thank you for that and um on the on the um workforce for target populations program i know you mentioned
um that's going from 1.4 million to 1.8 but it's going to be funded by the cannabis fund i'll just say
at least in the way the book is laid out i don't see cannabis fund dollars going to dfss so that looks
like that program's moving to the mayor's office so is dfss not managing that program anymore
this is uh raymond again uh thank you alder no we are managing the that process uh alder um i
definitely we would have to defer to obm exactly on the line item of where that is within the
cannabis fund to be very transparent to you but that funding will definitely be administered by us
this is uh somewhat uh normal sometimes so for example we do um as you may know the neighborhood
street up program program which right now is ran by the cara program it's that great program where
individuals who are returning residents can you know clean up the streets during the summer
that funding is actually primarily coming from streets and sands but we administer that program
we develop the rfp we manage the process with the delegate so that is the expectation is that we are
the subject matter experts for community re-entry and so we will be the ones administering those programs
thank you for that and maybe through the chair then um i'll ask for some clarification from
the department on where the employees will be what the management and the structure looks like
because right now in the book it just looks like it's uh part of the you know 2.7 million dollar
increase in the mayor's budget um thank you for that and then just going back then to also um for early
childhood um that makes sense commissioner i hear you saying that the reduction isn't going to be in
kind of funds for service delivery um but is related to um sounds like an it program that was meant to
help improve so are we just not doing it then no we actually have an it system we need to database
system we actually need to build upon we have one that is not working appropriately and we it's i have a
desperate need to make sure we get this uh it system up and running effectively but the funding's not
there to do that anymore like i i'm just trying to understand it is so this is this is raymond
barrett managing deputy commissioner of administration alder i know you're not in the room so we'll have
to make sure we get one of these packets sure those funds uh did get moved uh to very specific lines
so for example uh some of it got moved to the zero 140 professional and technical services line
and then another one got moved to but the uh overall just it did not decrease it's part of obm dti's
process they wanted anything it related to be in an it related line so i apologize whether it's 0159
if you look under that or somewhere in the 0100 series you'll see a significant 1.9 million increase
it is that moving of the software funds from early learning to the appropriate line all right thank you
that's a helpful clarification um uh moving on a little bit i i know some of my colleagues um asked
about some of the gender-based violence funding i just want to flag you know i'm also concerned about
um reduction and and those investments as we're seeing rates of gender-based violence go up but
i do also want to just name um that you know we're seeing a lot of these core programs and again
dfss you guys are um home to um some of the services and engagement with the city that our constituents
most associate with services right when we talk about city services we know we've got a lot of
departments a lot of hard-working public servants um from from hr to mopd to administrative hearings
right there are things that constituents don't know anything about they're just like i pay taxes the
city's supposed to provide these services but the things like if you ask the general person
they're like oh help with housing help with food assistance youth services senior services right
and so much of that lives in your department um in this current proposal um a lot of the important work
that our constituents most care about are proposed to be funded through um the community uh safety fund
right um the new fund um you know looking at uh reinstating uh head tax um and i know this morning
several of my colleagues um released a letter asking a a breadth of questions but i know that there are
some who are skeptical there are some who are getting calls um i think uh saw something on the news about
mcdonald's ceo complaining um about uh you know corporations be demonized but i'll just say um wherever
people land um could you talk about what type of cuts and services we would see if we're not able
to come up with a revenue source right um in order to meet the needs of chicagoans right like this is
what you're presenting now um what kind of cuts could we see in services if we are not able to find
adequate revenue thank you for that question all the woman had and um when we look at the community
safety fund and what portions of my programs are on that fund if it fails there will be 104 000 youth
who participated in our dfss youth programs not being able to do so there'll be over 49 000 youth
between the ages of 14 and 24 who took part in one of our five different employment
and the career development opportunities that won't have that opportunity there'll be 17 000 youth
in year-round and after-school enrichment programs that won't be able to have access to that there'll
be nearly 16 000 survivors that have access dfs funded programs for gender-based violence supports
that would not have that access anymore um that's the impact thank you for that um you know
i
know that we're still early in our discussions. I know that myself and my colleagues are all
committed to passing a balanced budget. We want to make sure that we are serving our community.
I know we got a lot of things going on in the city and the country right now,
but I also just want to reiterate while, you know, we need to do something different.
If we want to, as a city, be able to provide the services that are most important to our
constituents. And yeah, I just want people to keep that in mind as we go forward.
Last question here is, switching gears, a home share fund. Could you tell me how much of the
home share fund was expended in 2025? This is Raymond Barrett, Managing Deputy Commissioner
of Administration. We'll have to get that through you through the chair, Alder. I apologize.
All right. No, it's okay. Thank you. And thank you, Commissioner. And thank you, Chair. That's
it for me. Thank you, Alderman Hatton. Alderman Burnett, after Burnett, we're going to take our
lunch break. So Alderman Burnett, you may proceed. Thank you, Chairman. Commissioner, it's an honor.
I've had the pleasure of talking with you. I'm super excited to have you on board and super excited to
work with you and your team. As everyone has indicated, you all do great work and super important
to the challenges that we're facing as a city. And one of those challenges that we're seeing pretty
directly is the current defining of SNAP. And I know you all deal a lot with early childhood education
and making sure that these kids have a meal. Can you talk about the impact of your team
on that service? And then as these cuts, however long they last, what does that do to your
department and the work that you all do and how are we preparing for this drastic change?
Thank you. Thank you for that question. Overall, it's going to impact all of our programs.
Because when a family cannot supply food, sometimes they're making a decision, do I feed
my family or do I pay my rent? Do I pay this light bill or do, you know, the decisions they make
sometimes end them in the worst situation they ever thought they would be in? And that could be
unhoused. So the impact of this is a ripple effect across all of our programs. Specifically, you asked
about early childhood development. And I would like to ask Saretha Burgess-Burnett, our Deputy Commissioner
of Children's Service, to respond for early childhood.
Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you, Commissioner. Thanks for the question.
In our early learning programs, the food that is served every day, and they're required to do at
minimum, you know, two meals, a breakfast and a snack. What we know is we are required to do 70% of the
nutritional needs of each of the children that we serve when planning those meals. And so we know
that's intact. That's not going to be impacted by SNAP, meaning that our agencies are not funded
through SNAP. They're not going to be impacted. The impact will be when parents are going home
if they're not able to have resources that takes care of, for example, that evening meal. And my most
concern is over the weekend when parents on their own are trying to make sure they're supplying those
needs for their families. We're hearing those concerns from families. We're doing everything we can
to give them all of the access that we know about food programs, Chicago, you know, food
depository and everywhere else where there are meal opportunities so that our parents can go and do
what they can on their own, which really is participating in and going to food banks right
now to get them through this. It's not what we want to do. It's not what we want to say. That's what
we're offering. But our programs can't do any more. They don't have the resources to make the gap.
There's really no way, state or national, that we're going to be able to fill that hole that our
residents will feel through the lack of SNAP benefits. It's the same thing for our early
learning programs. They can't fulfill it either, but they will continue to serve those meals.
Many of our providers are hubs and community, and they have food banks within their organizations,
and they're going to do everything that they can to continue to supply those needs in the
communities that they serve. Thank you for that answer. It's truly sad. I appreciate everything
you all are doing, and I know you're resource constrained, and you're doing your best to
make sure that these kids have a meal. So thank you for doing that. It is really just a terrible
situation that we're in with the federal government. So again, I appreciate you for your
work there. When regards to some of these challenges that might occur, given the food scarcity
situation being presented, the next thing you said is that people tend to forego rent. And we're
looking at an environment where there's a possibility that our unhoused population will
increase. Can you talk about, and apologies if this was answered already, but I know we have
shelters outstanding. What is the current, what is like the average occupancy rate of these shelters
in place today? And on top of that, when we think about getting people back into a stabilization
practice, how have we been successful in terms of reducing the unhoused rate to date?
Thank you, Alderman, for this question. Harley Jones, first Deputy Commissioner.
You're absolutely right. Our biggest concern continues to be the stressors that people feel
and what that might do in impacting individuals' housing in particular. As we mentioned before,
a couple of times, our homeless outreach and prevention teams are out and working along with
11 outreach providers across the city, having those individual conversations and providing resources
to everyone in need of housing. It's also a great reminder that anyone in your ward or across the city
to request an access shelter within that system for the assessments that we talked about before is
to call 311, and that's the best way to be able to do that. Over the course of this year,
we made additional investments in opening the shelter placed in a resource center for single
males and females where they can access physical space, where they can access shelter, and then
the EHARC Center for the Salvation Army as a place for families who are in need of shelter to be able to
access. But we work diligently every single day, not only continuing to make sure that we have enough
shelter space, but that we're also identifying and working across the city to make sure that we have
housing available, housing that is not only suitable for individuals experiencing homelessness,
but is in their own community. So we continue to look forward to working with your offices in the
future to make sure that we're identifying opportunities for new landlords in your wards
and in your communities to join the Chicago Rents Program and make sure that we're identifying
additional housing in the face of these challenges. Thank you.
I appreciate that answer, and I know we're all working to make sure that these people have a
place to stay, but I want to really understand the severity of the situation that we're in.
On a day-to-day basis, what is our current occupancy rate of shelters in these rental programs? Where are
we? Is it 70% occupied on a day-to-day basis, 90%? We need to know if we're going to expand,
how much do we need to expand by, or how much room do we have left to continue to meet some of these
needs? Andrea Chapman, Deputy Commissioner for Homeless Services Division. Elder, that's a very
great question. What I'd like to really help folks visualize is that we have always and historically
had supply and demand issues as it relates to shelter capacity and shelter beds, especially for single
individuals. On average, daily, we receive close to 150 service calls for shelter from Chicago residents.
And for single individuals, we may have no more than about seven beds available. And that's the reality
of our system. But we know that that demand will go up as we're starting to talk about food insecurities
and people not having access to those vital services and benefits. They will use, they will have to use
other means to supplement that for food, right? So we are strengthening our prevention portfolio
through our rental assistance program that's available at our community service center. So
those that are housed, but may have some vulnerabilities because of income, because of the loss of the SNAP
benefits, making sure that we have those dollars for rental assistance, but those that are housed,
making sure that we keep them stably housed so that they don't have to enter our crisis response system,
because that is not something that our crisis response system, our homeless services system can
absorb, because there has always been challenges with supply and demands, especially for single
individuals. As it relates to families in our shelter system, we do have the availability for shelter
beds to meet the needs for families. And we're not seeing long wait times. We're not seeing families
turned away. We have that ability to absorb a small number of those families that will need to come into
our system. But again, the goal is to prevent folks from having to access our crisis response system
and keep people stably housed as often as we can through rapid re-housing and permanent supportive
housing. But really, right now, we're seeing about a 12-hour wait time from the time people make a 311
called families, that is, make a 311 shelter request to the time that they are placed and transported to
shelters, about 12 hours for families. But for single individuals, that's days. So our SPARK,
our shelter placement access and resource center serves as overflow capacity for people to go there
and wait. But there's also limited capacity to that. And then EHARC, if there aren't family beds,
the Salvation Army Shield of Hope can also absorb the families. But we would never be able to fully
absorb the impact of what we could see.
because
The goal is to make sure people stay housed, and there's a threat to that with what we're seeing with some of the federal challenges in this environment.
Well, thank you for that.
You're basically saying we're north of 95 percent for individuals in terms of occupancy on a day-to-day basis.
That's a pretty critical function dealing with the unhoused population.
You know, in my ward, we continuously have encampments where people tend to go back to, whether it's because they feel comfortable there or they have nowhere else to go.
So that is something that definitely concerns me.
It is good to know that we have a little bit of a better cushion for families.
But to your point, we are really trying to make sure that families and individuals don't continue to have to reuse the system and get out of the unhoused population.
And to that extent, can you talk about our efforts in terms of getting people rapid response housing and keeping them out of this system?
How have we been performing over the last year in terms of reducing the total population of our unhoused?
Again, Andrea Chapman, Deputy Commissioner for Homeless Services.
What I will say is that when we get people housed, we are able to sustain folks at a little bit over 70 percent rate.
So we work very effectively to make sure that the support services are there.
We don't just want the rental assistance dollars or the rent dollars for the folks that we are housing.
We actually make sure that every housing unit has the critical support services to sustain individuals to make sure that they do not have to return to our homeless services system.
And we're seeing we're along the lines of the national average, but also performing a slightly higher rate of about 70.
I believe we're between 73 and 76 percent of these individuals that stay housed even after the subsidy.
So we work really hard to make sure that the resources, the support and our provider, our network of providers are able to sustain folks so they don't have to reenter our homeless services system.
Well, that's awesome.
And thank you all for answering the question.
73 percent of making sure people stay out of the system is great.
We'd love to figure out ways that we can continue to boost that rate up.
And looking forward to working with you all in the future.
Thank you, Alderman.
We will take a break.
We will return at 2.15.
Committee will stand in recess till 2.15.
Thank you.
Still working through Department of Family Support Services.
Next up, we'll have Vice Chair Lee.
Thank you, Chair.
Good afternoon, Commissioner.
Welcome to your first full-on budget hearing.
I know we were just there, it seems, like a few weeks ago together, right, for mid-years.
So nice to see you back with your entire team.
I appreciate all of the hard work that your team does.
I know everybody's already sort of acknowledged just you all are some of our biggest workhorses.
I don't mean that in any sort of bad way.
You're out there for the residents of the city of Chicago, and we definitely appreciate it.
There's a couple different topics I want to touch on.
I'm going to start with domestic violence and GBV, right, gender-based violence.
I know that a good amount of the funding from last year's budget has been moved to this community safety surcharge budget.
I think there's a lot of concerns about, well, two things, that the budget has been cut, essentially, overall, year over year.
Can you tell me what the total, by my count, it's about 43% that track with what you guys are tracking in terms of dollars?
This is just spend, not necessarily a head count.
Thank you, Alder.
Raymond Barrett, Managing Deputy Commissioner of Administration.
That 43% is if you're factoring in ARPA funding.
So if you factor in the $5 million of ARPA investment that we had last year plus the loss of $3 million in revenue from the house share surcharge, it would be the percentage that you mentioned.
Okay, got it.
You know, at a time when we know that crime is down citywide, violent crime is down citywide, and that's great.
We don't want to let our foot up off the gas on that one, but we know that gender-based violence and domestic violence is up, like way, way up.
So as the chair of the Women's Caucus, I would be remiss not to sit here before you and really make the case for why it's so important for funding to be held.
And I know that in this budget environment, that's very difficult.
So I want to talk about what does this look like?
Is there a backup plan should things not come through the way they're planned for currently as it's proposed?
And you're correct.
We do have gender-based violence in our community safety fund at the tune of $3.5 million.
One thing that, and it is still a decreased amount, but the positive or advantage of it being in the community safety fund is that it would be protected investment.
But then your question really is to the point, how can we secure additional funding and where can we get that funding?
One thing we do have is we have our grants director here.
We are constantly looking at different funding streams and applying for grants.
We have to lean into that even more.
But right now, in terms of the corporate funding, in terms of what we have in a community safety fund, that is where we are.
But we recognize the need for additional dollars across, actually, our portfolio.
But yeah.
Has there been any consideration for raising the DV home share tax from 2% to 4%?
To my knowledge, the questions have been whether we will allow one day home share rentals.
I believe they believe Airbnb said it might bring an additional $4 million.
I know there's been conversations on that.
I can't tell you where it's landed.
Yeah, I mean, look, all of the entire amount for gender-based violence makes up less than 1% of this budget.
But it's so impactful at the end of the day that I hope that there's room for additional conversations about how we really fortify this work
and make sure that the funding is there, especially because as the budget is proposed today, there are, I think, still a lot of – many of us.
I won't speak for everybody.
I'll speak for myself.
I still have questions about how solid this funding is going to be.
Many of these things are new.
So if we come up short someplace, that leaves these services short.
And I would assume, and you can tell me if I'm wrong about this, that if we find ourselves in a position of, let's say, not collecting enough on it,
on a head tax, like how does – where does that hit?
Like, does that hit – this is not a question for you necessarily.
Part of this is just rhetorical.
But, you know, that comes up, let's say, 30% short.
Does that apply 30% across the board?
You know, that's going to mean jobs.
That's going to mean services.
I hear all of my colleagues when we talk about, you know, where we're going to find money.
I think that's where all of us need to dig in and make sure that we're really turning over every stone
to make sure that we're doing right by the people that need it the most.
I'm going to move to – let's see.
Can you tell me currently how much does the home share tax generate each year?
This is Raymond Barrett, Managing Deputy Commissioner of Administration.
Sadly, that is a question I would have to defer to the Office of Budget Management as they are the revenue.
Well, I'll get some of these things then through the chair just because I'm about halfway through my time,
and I've got two other sets of questions to kind of hit here.
I'm going to switch gears to, you know, earlier today we had representatives from the Chinese American Service League from Chinatown,
and I hope you got a chance to see them or at least hear their questions.
You know, they are one of the premier social service agencies in the Midwest.
They serve not just the Chinese American community in the 11th Ward,
but they serve constituents in every single ward of the city of Chicago.
You know, a lot of what they do, you're very familiar with, right, because they are a delegate agency.
I'm interested in understanding the Golden Diners program being one.
What does that look like year over year?
Is there a decrease in that programming funding, or is there an increase?
What does that look like?
Thank you for that question, Alderwoman Lee.
I'm going to ask our Deputy Commissioner of Senior Services, Margaret LaRavie, to respond.
Margaret LaRavie, Deputy Commissioner of Senior Services.
So the funding for our Congregate Dining Program, that's primarily received through federal Older Americans Act, and it's typically flat.
And so that funding is about at $3 million.
We have about 48 sites.
And so that funding provides financial support for the majority of those sites.
How worried are we?
Are we concerned about potential cuts from the federal government?
I know it's so unpredictable, but I'm just trying to take your temperature.
Honestly, I'm keeping my hand on the pulses as well, because truly it is unpredictable.
It's not an understatement that you had.
But right now things are on level, but I am concerned of, you know, the Medicaid restrictions and what that might cause.
So there's ripples.
effects of things that are not even our direct funding that will still impact our services.
Thanks for that. So the Child Care Assistance Program, CCAP, currently CCAP doesn't provide
any additional funding for providers who serve children with special needs or with individualized
IEPs, individualized education programs. Can you talk about whether or not DFSS intends to review
the estimated costs? And I guess through the chair, if you don't have it, I'd like to know what the
rates have been over the last five years. What I'm trying to get at is when was the last time
the rates being paid to delegate agencies increased? We will get that to you. Thank you.
Thank you. But are you looking at, because there's a big difference between providing the service to
a child with special needs and not. So are you looking at that at all?
Raymond Barrett, Managing Deputy Commissioner of Administration. So that program is definitely
in collaboration with the state. So we do follow the lead for the Child Care Assistance Partnership
Program. And so we are in constant conversation about the state. I don't know the details about
that specific population group. Okay. Fair enough. Can you talk to me a little bit about how you deal
with data? Obviously, I represent a ward that has a lot of non-native English-speaking people
in the Asian American population is by far not monolithic. I'd like to know how you currently
collect data on race and ethnicity beyond the standard U.S. Census categories for participants
in programs such as homelessness prevention services, child care assistance programs, senior services,
or workforce initiatives.
Yeah, I'll start and then I'm going to pass it over actually to. So Raymond Barrett, Managing
Deputy Commissioner of Administration. So we are 71% grant funded, which means that every
single dollar that we receive, we need to make sure we're delivering quality programming that's
impacting the most people for all of our programming. It looks different based off needs assessments,
et cetera, for each of our divisions. But I'm actually, we have a director over strategy, impact,
and planning that I want to pass over to Sylvie just so you can give a little bit more detail
about that. Thank you. Thank you. Are we on yet? Yep. Sylvie Sinaki, Senior Director of Strategy,
Policy, and Equity. I think much as Managing Commissioner Raymond said that we do vary some
of the ways that we collect those data points depending on the division and the funding source
and the need of that particular team. So often it is collected, as you stated, aligned with the census,
but there are also programs for which our funder requires a different mode of collection or we've
opted for a different structure to have a better understanding of the population.
Yeah. I'm going to be really interested, not for today, obviously, but in an ongoing conversation
about data disaggregation because it's not just in my community, in the Asian American, Native Hawaiian,
Pacific Islander community. But while we're on the subject of budget, what sort of budget impact do
you think, and just opine about, I'm not going to hold you to it, all right, how much more would it
cost to, or how easy would it be to sort of disaggregate more of the data so that we have
more narrowly focused data on the pockets of communities that need the most help?
Yeah, I think at this time it would be, we have, it would not be terribly troublesome to do more
disaggregation based on the categories we currently collect. I do know we've had a number of programs
where we've been specifically looking at the Asian American population and trying to make sure we're
serving that population equitably. And that's a little bit trickier because I think, as you suggest,
there's a number of pretty distinct populations that are represented under that label. And so I think it
would take more work to think through how we would appropriately collect information in a way that
would enable us to disaggregate at that level.
I'd love to get a meeting with you to talk about how we do that. I'm very interested in data
disaggregation and, you know, Chinese American Service League has a big program called Change
Insight that is really making a big difference, leveraging data disaggregation to ensure that we're
serving the populations that need it most and really being, doing that in a targeted way. I know I'm
out of time. Anything else that I've got, I'll submit through the chair. Thank you, Chairman.
Chairman. All right. Alderman Viggs, you have one question?
Thank you, Chairman. Commissioner, I'm looking at the fund codes that fund the department. I was just
curious, since your department is dealing with homelessness at the airport and then also homelessness
on the streets, has there been any consideration of trying to tap into those enterprise funds of
aviation as well as any other enterprise funds that may be applicable so we can try to shore up your
workforce there?
Thank you, Alder. Raymond Barrett, Managing Deputy Commissioner Administration. We do actually utilize
$1.275 million from aviation specifically for CTA outreach, I believe, on the red and blue line.
Or sorry, the blue line. Blue line. I apologize. But yeah, we do get some funding from our aviation fund,
$1.2 million. It goes all to delegates, so I want to be clear. Not for our workforce, but it goes
all to delegates.
Okay. Okay. That was my only question. Thank you, Chairman.
Thank you, Alderman Clay. Your mama named Clay. I'm going to call you Clay.
I appreciate you.
All right. Thank you, Chairman. Good day, DFSS.
Hey.
Hey, y'all. I get to talk to them like they my family. Y'all be trying to scream at them, but these my people.
So back, back.
Okay.
Commissioner Green, it's a pleasure to see you. I'm glad that you're getting your feet, toes, elbows wet,
because we need you. I want to first start off by saying thank y'all so much for this work that you do
tirelessly every single day. I don't think people realize that the key word in your department is
family. You all are an extension of the family that we have in this city. So I want to commend you for
showing up as good family members and trying your best. Not just trying your best, but meeting the mark.
Every day you are met with a different challenge that you ain't never seen before.
And guess what? We like fix it now.
Wow. You never say no. You never turn your backs. And for that, I am extremely appreciative on behalf of
every neighbor in this city, especially in my ward. I want to give my shout outs. I got a list of shout
outs first. Okay. Because y'all know how we roll. I want to give a shout out to Andrea because baby,
she'd be working. Okay. I want to give a shout out to all of our DFSS street team.
The squad is amazing. I just seen them Tuesday. We had an encampment cleanup. They got out there
and got to work within 15 to 20 minutes. Everything was clean, sanitized, and people were ready to receive
keys to their houses, which I know we have a shortage of housing in this city.
So Commissioner Green, I would love to hear from you if there are any additional needs that you see
to getting our neighbors into housing and how to get you more funding to be able to do that.
Thank you, Alderwoman Clay. And thank you not only for your support, but your recommendations and your
constructive feedback. I appreciate that. We do have a housing shortage, and I do believe there's
an opportunity for you all as alders to provide some support. That's when you hear of landlords that's
willing to be a part of our Chicago rents program. We really need to boost that up and get more people
to come into that space. So we have housing because a lot of our encampments, those individuals really
want to stay in your ward. They value the resources and the camaraderie and the feeling of belonging in
your ward. So if you can increase that, that will be definitely a help on our end.
And Chicago rents means that they give you your rent. We just need you to sign up for the program to be
able to have our neighbors stay in the communities that care for them the most. So anybody that's
listening to the sound of my voice, I hope that you are pushing your landlords to sign up to become a
partner in this growing problem. People are about to go hungry in the matter of hours, coupled with not
having a roof over their head is detrimental to all of us. So please, I'm begging you to please join this
effort and not just throw all the weight on DFSS to be the saviors of our city. Put your hand in this
and put some skin in the game and get out there and ask these landlords to join our program.
Okay, I'm not done. Let me get the rest of my shout outs. Okay. Natalia. Love you, Natalia. Love you,
down. Okay. Lorenzo and Lachelle. Baby, you deserve a huge shout out. Okay. I've had the pleasure of
I've had the pleasure of working with y'all real closely because I have a beautiful shelter in
my neck of the woods. It's grown us and stretched us as a family. Danny, I'm so proud to see you in
that box, baby.
you
OK, because I don't think people understand the intention that goes into this hard work.
And you all have, again, met the mark when we have had unprecedented times.
I want to talk through what you see as being your future around our shelter system when it comes to not just decompression.
Right. But how are we going to make sure that we have enough stable shelter beds for the future need?
When I look at what we currently have in place, I do recognize that we need more shelters for singles, for individuals.
And depending on how the federal government supports our public benefit programs, if that begins to shave off,
then I want to see more families, I believe, coming into our system and needing our system.
But my priority right now is starting to forecast how do I build more shelters for individuals and low barrier shelters for individuals?
That's where my need is right now.
Harley Jones has been phenomenal.
Yeah.
Got to name him when I see him.
OK, I want to go to this page that we have that has the 2025 Department 311 request and fulfillment time.
Are you familiar with this?
It's in the Department Budget Hearing Documents book.
I'm on page.
It doesn't have a page number, but it's right in your section.
So it's the last page.
I wonder I just wanted to see if you could talk us through this page to give some more context.
So on here, it has the service request types and then the average days or age.
Can you just speak to what this table represents so that we have a better understanding of the 311 request?
Thank you, Alderwoman, for that question and your shout out.
It's great to see you.
Always.
I think this is a really important question because this is something we we monitor regularly.
And so when you look at that shelter request number, that is reflective of the number of individuals who are calling 311 over the course of a year and making that that shelter request, whether it be a family or an individual.
The average days there, which I think is reflected to 11 there, I think one of the things I want to point out is that this is very much a system, a report coming out of that system and is reliant on that individual kind of administrative switch that gets checked off when these boxes get closed.
What I can tell you is that as we monitor those wait lists on a day to day basis, that we can tell you that the average wait list or wait time for families when they call 311 to that opportunity to be placed in shelter is about 12 hours.
Deputy Commissioner Chapman talked a little bit about that family capacity earlier.
But then going back to that need for single individuals, both males and females, we know that that average wait time floats somewhere between three and three and a half days.
So we know that that's really that opportunity where we have to provide additional shelter for those individuals.
Got you.
Through the chair, and this might just be a little bit of extra homework, but I would love to see this broken down by ward.
I think that this is extremely impactful, right, to just give you, all of us, a snapshot of what the 311 requests look like, how long are they there.
I think it's also a good conversation starter about the needs of different wards, right, and how do we make sure that we are aligning with those needs.
Pivoting.
Catherine Wiggins over there.
Where's Catherine at?
Is she here?
No?
No.
Okay.
All right.
I'm giving my heads up to Catherine, okay?
One of the things that I know all of us talk about is encampments, and it's because our neighbors are experiencing homelessness.
I think that we can be honest about that and saying that we have an entire country that is in a housing crisis, right?
With that, however, I know that no one intends to have an encampment or grow an encampment.
Can you talk through, are there any intentional efforts, because I know you have to treat everyone uniquely, are there any intentional efforts going into the next year about how do we use the tools that we've seen work when it comes to our encampments,
and also are there other things that you need to make sure that they are connected and people are actually housed?
I'm taking it as a two-part question, the first one really being what's our encampment strategy going forward.
And I know Chief Homeless Officer Cindy Soto is developing the five-year blueprint for us, and every department has given some input into that.
We're waiting for the outcomes of that.
So not getting ahead of that citywide strategy, I'll let you know that we're expecting that to come out.
But in terms of the resources and the needs that we may have in regards to our resources of addressing our neighbors who are living within an encampment,
I'm going to ask Deputy Commissioner Andrea Chapman to respond to what she sees firsthand.
Deputy Commissioner Andrea Chapman, one, just wanting to always lift that housing is definitely a critical need for not creating a bottleneck in our system,
because even if we are increasing, which we are through our shelter infrastructure initiative,
the number of beds that we add to our system, non-congregate ADA accessible beds to our shelter system,
we have to make sure we're not creating a bottleneck to that.
So we have to have housing as the long-term goal, but also the support services,
the substance abuse, substance use treatment facilities and services need to also align with the housing resources,
as well as the extensive case management, the trauma-informed care and services and support to keep people stable.
Those are always going to be vital resources as we do this work.
But really, the housing is key.
Appreciate that.
Oblige me for 60 more seconds.
Thank you, Chairman.
I have the pleasure of sitting on the CCUO board.
Where are my folks at that held me up?
Right?
You see that beautiful black woman right there?
Yes.
Amazing.
She is a dynamite.
She answers so many of my wacky questions to the T, and she does it with a smile on her face.
So I just want to say kudos, because I don't think that they understand how intricate we are with our Head Start program.
We go over grants.
We go over applications.
We make sure that babies have access.
You're always looking for better providers.
You always are trying to get people to throw their hat in the ring.
And I want to just say thank you for your hard work that you put into that, because that has been an amazing, amazing program for our babies here in the city.
Last but not least, I got to be selfish and ask you, what are your plans for my beautiful temporary shelter on Urban Park and Marine Drive that has been a stable force for the last two years?
I know that we have done above and beyond our outreach to everybody in this city, y'all.
People from all over the world has come across my ward, and I'm proud of that.
But we're moving into development phase, Ange.
So I'm just asking you as a friend and as a neighbor, what are we doing?
I want to ask my first deputy to respond to that.
Yo, thank you.
I'm sorry.
Andrea, okay.
Thank you.
Hey, Andrea.
Andrea Chapman, Deputy Commissioner of Homeless Services.
As you just said, you know, that facility is moving towards development for an upcoming project.
And so we are working very hard with the delegate agency that operates that shelter site and all of the residents.
And we'll work on decompression, but we'll do it in phases, because we've got to make sure we do it with the least amount of impact for especially school-aged children so we don't disrupt their school year.
Absolutely.
As well as their living environment.
But we are going to do a three-phase approach to what that looks like.
We're beginning our conversations next week with that delegate agency to talk about what that's going to look like.
So we lessen the impact, but we want to make sure our system has the beds to absorb the number of families that are currently at the shelter, and we have the resources to continue to support them.
But we want to do it so that we are addressing the families that have infants and non-school-age children first, and then the school-age children as we get closer to the school year ending.
But it is definitely a very intentional strategy so that it's less impact to them, but they have enough notice to be able to self-resolve for those families that are able.
I, again, appreciate you.
Thank you for meeting this moment.
Cleo, shout-out to Cleo, my delegate agency in my ward, okay?
Shout-out to all of my shelter agencies in my ward.
The 46th Ward is very special that we actually appreciate the work that you do.
So I just want to say thank you.
What?
Thank you.
You cutting my mic off?
Yeah.
Okay.
Yeah, we got two more departments to get through today.
We appreciate your questions, and you're as wacky as they were.
We appreciate your questions.
Alderman Lopez, a question?
I just want to remind everyone, a former budget chairman outlawed shout-outs like six years ago.
She did, and, you know, I've been a little lenient with you all.
This is year three, though, but we're going to get there.
We're going to go to Alderman Taylor, who's online, follow Alderman Scott.
All right.
Alderman Taylor. I'm here. Thanks, Chairman. Sorry. How are you doing, Commissioner?
Good afternoon, Alderman Taylor. Yeah, I'm behind you. Don't don't even try to look back there because I'm not about to be politically correct.
And a bunch of questions. Can you talk about what are you all doing as far as the senior budget for this year?
I know there was a conversation around we spent 15 million on seniors. Can you tell me, has that budget been cut?
And I don't know if the question was asked about child care, but that budget as well.
OK. This is Managing Deputy Commissioner Raymond Barrett.
So out of our senior services division, just to be all I want to be like very transparent about it.
On the corporate side of things, we have about one point eight million for our senior services division.
We use a portion of the CDBG grant, which is two point nine million.
And then the rest of it, it comes from various federal and state sources, around 55 million from those sources.
The one carryover grant that's probably the biggest is 14 million for the senior center in Bronzeville.
How much is that money going towards staff? And I'm not talking about the staff at the senior centers.
I'm talking about DFSS staff. How many people and what is that rate?
And if you don't got it now, you can get it through the chair.
No, thank you, Alder. I can give a general estimate.
But if this doesn't satisfy, we can definitely give exact details to the chair.
So out of our senior services, we have 82 full-time staff.
This is not factoring in those staff at our satellite centers because those are through our delegate agencies,
although we do provide direct service staff at both the six regional centers as well as our call center at Interformation and Assistance.
So it's 82 staff.
And it's about, I mean, I'd say around five million.
But if you want me to get an exact number through the chair per year of how much it is, yeah, we can definitely do it for you.
I'm concerned that we're asking for the Office of Aging and what the amount of staff that you all have, we could do it.
And if y'all need an office, y'all don't know me and mine.
We don't got to pay for it.
We ain't got to get a new space.
But that's a different conversation.
I see you looking, Commissioner, don't.
And so it's a later conversation.
Can you tell me how much you all are spending on homelessness and how are you all working with these shelters?
What I get from people when I send them to the shelter to tell them to get on a waiting list to help with housing,
they talk about how despicable and how deplorable those shelters are.
What role does the city play in making sure they're clean and safe?
Are they examined?
Do we send the buildings in there?
Is the health inspector in there?
Can you talk about it?
Thank you.
Thank you, Autumn and Taylor.
When we look at our homeless services, we have $62.5 million going into from corporate for our homeless services.
We do have a portion of that from our house share surcharge.
That's $11.1 million.
We have some CDBG funding, $11 million going into our homeless division.
And we also have grant funding, which is, sorry, $109 million going into our homeless services.
And the second question was in regards to the cleanliness of our shelters.
We do have required services in terms of how they need to make sure our shelters are meeting certain expectations in terms of reducing bedbugs, reducing any type of infestation.
So there are requirements that we have for this.
And, Andrea, if you could speak directly to how we look at that with our contracts and how we follow up and monitor those.
Andrea Chapman, Deputy Commissioner for Homeless Services.
And, Commissioner, yes, you're absolutely correct.
In our contracting, we do active contract management with all of our homeless services delegates.
And that includes technical assistance, capacity building, and also compliance and monitoring internal from the program division to make sure that they are properly utilizing all of the beds in their facility.
They are also accountable to health and safety standards, food services standards.
And our project managers that are funded and staff of the DFSS Homeless Services Division meet monthly and do monthly site visits with all of our homeless services delegates, including our homeless shelter delegates, to ensure those compliance.
But I do want to lift the $40 million investment that we have from DOH, and that is really to improve the infrastructure and the quality of the facilities that our shelters have been operating in for years.
So, with that investment, we're bringing on five new non-congregate shelter facilities.
One is online now.
It came online in December of last year.
We have another provider that will be closing in December of this year, and then three more that's scheduled to open.
And those are newer buildings that have been renovated so that they are better quality facilities for the service delivery and more trauma-informed spaces.
But then we also have seven other delegates that are part of an infrastructure initiative where it is improving.
It is really renovations to existing facilities to bring on over 750 new non-congregate beds, but also to improve the quality of the facilities that, you know, our residents have to access.
We want to make sure that there is a standard to not only the service delivery but to the actual facilities.
When people have to entrust us with their care and access our services, that is the DFSS priority to make sure that we are delivering a quality end product.
And we do that by the active contract management and support to our delegates to make sure that they are delivering an end goal that our Chicago residents want to access and can access.
But, again, we continue to work on quality improvement, not just for service delivery but facilities as well.
We use $40 million to invest in shelters.
How much money are we investing in actual housing?
Because it's nice to go to a shelter.
And shelters are temporary.
I want to see the city do more with working with organizations who are developing building housing.
How are you all working?
How much money are we investing in that?
Yes, Sage.
This is Raymond Barrett, Managing Deputy Commissioner of Administration.
We do not invest funding in the development of housing that is with the Department of Housing.
So that is not something that is in our portfolio.
So while I understand it's not in your portfolio, how are you working with the Department of Housing and CHA to reassure people get out of these homeless shelters?
Andrea Chapman, Deputy Commissioner of Homeless Services.
What I will say is we work in partnership.
Department of Housing is at the COC, the Continuum Care Table with us.
They're actually board members, and they make sure that as they are developing permanent supportive housing, that is part of our homeless services stock that is also a part of the Continuum of Care.
So as people are being assessed through our Chicago Coordinated Entry System for housing resources and being matched and connected to housing, DOH is a partner at that table.
And their permanent supportive housing stock is also a part of that body of work with us and our Continuum of Care.
So when you answered that question, what conversations are you all having with CHA and HUD knowing what's coming down the federal pipe to hold these buildings accountable when they have folks in them?
Thank you for that question, Alderwoman Taylor.
I know in regards to DOH that has 43 senior buildings, and we have CHA that has 65 senior living facilities throughout the city.
And I know you have raised the question of how do we really hold them accountable for ensuring that those living in those facilities have adequate housing and living conditions.
And that is critical, especially for us in terms of making sure that our residents are safe.
We are communicating with DOH as well as engaging in conversations with CHA as we're looking at the proposal that you have presented so that those conversations are happening now.
So last two questions, what are we doing?
Can you all talk about violence prevention dollars and One Summer Chicago dollars?
Have we lost any?
What's the difference?
Are we looking to fund more summer jobs and violence prevention units?
And through the chair, I would like a list of every delicate agency that we supported through One Summer Chicago and violence prevention.
I'm sorry, give me that question that you want through the chair.
Once again, please.
The number of delicate agencies that we fund through One Summer Chicago and violence prevention.
Thank you.
Sorry about that.
Thank you, Audowoman Taylor.
So in regards to our youth services division, we saw an $8.3 million increase, and the portion of this is for our One Summer Chicago to account for the raises of minimum wages.
But we are looking at an opening report.
overall impact in our youth services division for this 2026 recommendation is 80 million
or 80.7. When we look at what we're going to get through that investment, we're looking at
youth employment. We're looking at our SCAN program, which is an intensive case management
for youth at high risk of violence. We have our youth intervention pathways, which is trauma
informed diversion services for youth ages 11 through 17. And we have, of course, our MyShi,
MyFuture Safe Spaces, which is a safe, engaging out-of-school activities, which are led by youth.
And then we have our anchor orgs and our micro grants, which are connecting youth to enrichment,
mentorship, and local engagement opportunities. And we'll definitely get through to chair
the name of those agencies that we're working with directly.
Well, I know it was your decision to get rid of the Juvenile Detention Center. What are we doing
on MDFFs to help those young people who we're not trying to see go to the county or to the
federal prison?
Yeah, that's our youth diversion program really helps with that. We are actually connecting with
our Chicago Police Department as well as Illinois State Police to look at our youth intervention
pathways to ensure that we're deterring them from going into or deeper into the systems. We're looking
referrals for them. We're providing them with trauma-informed interventions to divert them.
And the age group that we're looking at in that program is 11 to 17 years old. While we're trying
to also expand our referral pathways, we want more people who have their hands on our youth to be able
to help bring them to this type of productive and influential program. And so we're making sure our
referrals are going out to community-based organizations as well. And we're asking for our schools to become
a part of that referral process as well.
How do you all work with the Office of Reentry?
The Office of Reentry, we're quite excited of the five community reentry service centers that we have.
This next year coming, we're going to have one that's going to focus on women because of the unique
needs that women have when they're coming out of incarceration. And I'll ask Deputy Commissioner Mark
Sanders II to talk a little bit more about what the community reentry centers are providing,
and even with our new one that we've focused on women, what are some of the special needs there?
Thank you, Commissioner. Mark Sanders II, Deputy Commissioner of Workforce Services.
So our community reentry support centers over the last several years have been going through a
transition, whereas primarily they were just places where people can call and get referred to
different services. Since about 2022, we started providing what we call reentry navigation
to actually partner with individuals and identify what their primary needs are with regards to reentry.
And so those services will continue. We'll have four geographically-based locations throughout the city,
plus, as the Commissioner Green mentioned, one women-focused center that will provide a variety of
wraparound supports for women returning from incarceration. We plan to engage with 12,000
individuals per year, whether it's regard to phone calls, referral services, but we plan to have
intensive case management and reentry navigation support to about 1,500 individuals throughout that network.
Last thing. Lately, we've had organizations that want to open up reentry housing for
returning citizens. What role do you all play in that?
This is Mark Sanders, Deputy Commissioner for Workforce Services. At this time, we are not offering
reentry housing services. However, we are working with the Continuum of Care at the reentry line of
action table to understand what are the most salient barriers that prevent returning residents from
accessing the available housing resources. And so from those conversations, we are looking to
identify ways that we can support returning residents as they transition from incarceration into halfway homes or
short-term housing placements and help them get into permanent housing opportunities.
However, those conversations are still ongoing, but DFSS is at the table participating and identifying
opportunities to support returning residents, especially those that have been recently released.
Thank you for that. Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you, Chairman.
Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman Taylor, Alderman Scott, followed by Alderman LaSpada.
Thank you, Commissioner and all of the other great people of DFSS. You know, I know that your jobs are always
challenging as like ours, but I wanted to thank you for the work that you've done for me in the 24th Ward.
I know that I'm adamant and I continue to email and continue to call and email, but the work was done. And so I want to commend you for the 2100 block of Marshall Boulevard and also the Keillor and just as recently St. Louis.
Thank you for your service. I know it's not easy, but I think just stay impatient and know that you all are working on it and the job will get done.
On your first day that we talked, you know, we got that woman off the corner who was there for at least six months. So I appreciate you all. I appreciate the work.
I want to especially thank Selena Ruiz because I'm always emailing her and she always comes to come to bat with me, even with Streets and Sand. Debbie DeLopez helps out tremendously.
So thank you guys for your effort. And I appreciate the work that you're doing for me in the 24th Ward.
All right. Very well. On to the spot.
There we go. Commissioner, thank you so much for being with us today.
Really appreciate all the work that your team does.
I will say this will be a quasi shout out.
I see you think you know where you're going.
No, when when there was a neighbor of ours taken last Friday, an undocumented neighbor over on Superior, your team was there so immediately with compassion and empathy and professionalism.
And I deeply appreciate that from the bottom of my heart.
I also say many people have not acknowledged that Danny Castaneda has the best beard in city government.
Something that the city should acknowledge more.
Consistently, I would say, and I know that he would agree that that said on the topic of the actual budget.
I did want to understand the vacancies that are carrying over in your department.
My read on them is that some of them seem to be grant funded.
Many of them seem to be corporate fund vacancies.
And we know from talking to the last department that it's it's not always an accurate representation of where you are at this particular date and time.
Can you give us an update on where we are with these vacancies?
Excellent. Excellent. Thank you.
Thank you, Alder.
Currently, we have 43 vacant positions.
Thirty five of them are grant funded, which means we can still continue to hire even though there's a hiring freeze.
Thirty five are grant funded.
Thirty five are grant funded. Yes, sir.
Yes, sir. And eight of them are corporate funded.
Now, we do have a 12 percent vacancy rate, which is very low for us.
And it's been kind of low for quite some time.
And I'm going to get Deputy Commissioner Christina Medina to make sure she could go down the weeds.
I don't want to mess up on how many of those thirty five grant funded positions are we currently maybe possibly looking at hiring?
We may have some people in the queue at this point.
And I know you know those numbers.
Christina Medina, Deputy Commissioner for Human Resources.
Thank you for your question.
That's correct.
We currently have approximately, I would say, you know, 43 positions that are currently vacant.
Thirty five are grant funded.
Out of the ones that are currently vacant, I'd say about 20 of them are at some stage of a hiring process with the expectation of at least half of them to have a start date before the end of the year.
So being grant funded positions puts us in a great position because we're able to move forward with the hiring process with less of an impact.
Christina, did you say a 12 percent vacancy rate?
Correct.
That is not where DFSS was a few years ago.
That's a real win for this department.
Like, I really want to take a moment to acknowledge and applaud that.
Thank you for that.
I wanted to ask also, as I'm looking at pages 292 into 293.
Like, functions, categories that are either not being funded or have moved elsewhere.
I'm looking at 3008 contracts and compliance, looking over at 3009 grant development policy and planning.
And they don't look like functions that have moved over to the community safety fund.
I'm wondering if they're they've been moved into procurement.
Can you speak more to that?
Thank you, man.
Thank you, Alder, for that question.
This is Raymond Barrett, managing deputy commissioner of administration.
First off, thank you for looking at the 292 and 293.
It's a very good detailed work.
37.
Positions came off of corporate and went on to the 0075, which is the Grants Management Fund, which is those teams that you exactly pointed out.
So we didn't lose those positions, but contracts, monitoring, and a little bit of our grants slash impact teams did go to the Grants Management Fund, which is 0075.
So if you request from OBM or look in the budget book, you'll find them in the 0075 fund.
0075?
Yeah, it's the Grants Management Fund.
I'm not an Office of Budget Management person, but I think it has something to do with the indirect cost rate of grants being charged for things that maybe, like in this case, are contracts and monitoring teams where they are doing exactly what the grant compliance is required, but they just might be charged to the overall indirect rate of a grant necessarily than a direct charge.
Is the Grants Management Fund new?
I do not recall that.
I am not with Office of Budget Management, so sorry I can't.
I just can tell you that they were moved.
37 positions were moved from our 0100 account to our 0075.
Okay, duly noted.
Appreciate it.
I have two questions related to gender-based violence.
So a colleague was talking earlier about the need for shelter spaces for singles.
I kind of want to swing the pendulum for a second and acknowledge that in 2024, we had 130 days of the year where there was not a shelter bed available if you needed a crib as well.
As someone with a three-year-old and another one coming in March, if I were trying to escape a violent relationship and I couldn't find a bed with a crib, that means I'm staying in that violent relationship.
I wanted to ask, what are we able to do to try to increase the number of nights that we have cribs available in our shelter system?
Andrea Chapman, Deputy Commissioner for Homeless Services.
What I would say is, for sure, there are definitely times that our gender-based violence and DV beds are filled.
Those are the quickest going beds because of the need.
But anyone that's experiencing gender-based violence or domestic violence can access our regular general population shelter beds for families.
And when a DV bed comes available in a DV shelter, they do have the option of transferring so that they have that support service directly available.
But we also connect anyone that's a survivor of gender-based violence in our general population beds to the same DV resources that they could get in a domestic violence shelter.
Do you feel like you have sufficient cribs, pack-and-plays available for the children that they may be bringing with them?
Absolutely.
So it is a requirement that any child in our shelter facility that is three or under is sleeping in a pack-and-play.
They are not allowed to sleep in the same bed with the parent or a sibling.
They are all given pack-and-plays.
And it was one of the things that we implemented many years ago.
And that resource for shelter placement sits with the Salvation Army, EHARC.
They are the delegate agency that does shelter placement.
And anytime there's a family identified, they also send along a pack-and-play to that shelter.
And the pack-and-play actually belongs to the family.
So when that family leaves that shelter, they take that pack-and-play with them.
They don't reuse those.
That pack-and-play is assigned to the family that we are placing in shelter.
So that goes along with them.
And then Salvation Army will replenish another one for the next family that needs it.
That's fantastic.
That's great to hear.
And the last thing that I'll touch on is related to gender-based violence more generally.
There's not a question here because I've heard enough from your team, particularly as they spoke to their work,
I think just about a month ago in the Committee on Health and Human Relations.
It's clear that our investments work.
It's clear that we're listening to survivors and advocates on what they need to be healthy and safe and thrive.
I say this acknowledging the fact that this past year in Chicago, one out of ten homicide victims was a victim of domestic violence.
We're coming out of a year that has seen a 30% increase in domestic violence, homicides.
I acknowledge what the numbers are in front of me.
I'm also going to acknowledge for myself personally the unacceptable fact of that number.
And I'm willing to – I've said this in an email, so I'll say it in person.
Whether it's through the Community Safety Fund, the Corporate Fund, expanding the base of the domestic violence surcharge,
I will do whatever is necessary to fulfill the full budget ask made by the task force
because I will not enter into a 2026 that costs the lives of more women.
That is a moral calculation that I refuse to make.
I'm so very glad to be working with your team, with the whole of my colleagues on this as well.
Thank you.
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman Laspata.
Do we have any others?
Go on once.
All right.
Very well.
A couple things that I have.
Excuse me, Mr. Chairman.
I thought you told me I was next.
You got it.
I got it.
You're right.
Out of sight, out of mind, but I got you.
Thank you for saying something.
Alderman Dow, please proceed.
Chairman Dow.
All right.
Hold on one second.
Now I got to wait.
No.
Hold on.
Go ahead.
My phone rang before I could pick up.
All right.
Hi, Commissioner.
How are you?
I'm doing well.
Thank you, Alderman Dow.
You almost threw your first budget hearing.
Yes, ma'am.
First of all, I want to thank you for the information that you sent out about the resources on food this week.
It was very timely to receive that.
And I think just an idea on the other side, maybe to have a member of your staff reach out to the alderman or just send out an email so that you're aware of the initiatives that we might be having in our ward so that there's some cross-pollination of these resources to help people.
So that's just an idea.
Thank you.
All right.
I know when I heard the conversation about no thank yous, but I just wanted to thank Eddie Cata at the King Center and Margaret LaRaviere for all of their work in servicing the third ward, along with your homeless staff as well.
So just to be clear, what are – if I asked you to tell me your new initiatives for 2026 and the dollar amounts, what would you say?
Just new initiatives, nothing that you had last year, just things that are brand new for 2026.
Yeah, I'll go with that.
Raymond Barrett, Managing Deputy Commissioner of Administration.
So this is a very tough budget year, Alderman.
So overwhelmingly, everything is just a continuation.
I'd say there is a very small one initiative that is completely new, although it is based off of a lot of practices that we learned through all of our programming.
Well, actually, sorry, there's two.
There is two.
Sorry, I apologize.
There's two.
One, I'll start with a smaller one, which is with our community services block grant funding, we have a very small portion of funding that we are piloting in cooperation with our community rentry centers.
There's – it's $350,000 for our rental assistance program, but dedicated specifically towards returning residents.
So it's right now only planning on impacting around 30, let's say, households, but this will do the exact same thing that our RAP program currently does for anyone.
But in this case, they'll be connected to support services, specifically at our community rentry center.
So we're very excited about that.
It's always a dark day, but this is just a little light of hope for some of the things that we do try to carve out of our budget.
I would say the second actually completely new investment, which is not always clearly aligned in here, is there is $15 million for disaster relief funding that we received from the Office of Budget Management very recently for us to support disaster relief efforts on the west side for those individuals or families that experience that disaster during, I think, 2023 and 2024.
All right, and how is that money going to be used, because I thought that there was more money for that flood relief on the west side?
The $15 million?
Not just the west side, but, yeah, I think it's just for the west side, but many communities on the west side.
Yes.
Is this different or is this in addition to?
This is a new funding.
I'm sorry.
I'm sorry.
It is new funding.
It's 100% new funding, Alder.
I think the only one thing to just be very point of clarification is that the city received, I think, over $400 million of disaster relief.
That's what I'm talking about.
Yeah, we received $15 of that $400 million.
Okay, that's fine.
Yep, sorry.
All right, got it.
I wanted to also add my voice to the need for the Legal Protection Fund.
I stand with Alderman Kezada on that request.
I represent the Organization of African Unity that works with the Resurrection Project to help their constituents, and I think it's important that that funding be maintained.
So I just wanted to say that.
I'm sorry to interrupt you, but I do want to let you know during the lunch break I was able to have a conversation, and we are working to try to restore those funds.
Okay, great, great.
There is a $2 million increase in your software line, which is up from almost no funding.
What is that for?
That's in the children's services.
That was to – we moved it out of our normal corporate line and moved it to IT because it's going to be for our new software system.
We need to develop – we need to procure and develop new technology for our database system and CDS care.
Okay.
These questions might be repetitive because I wasn't on for a lot of your presentations, so I hope that they're not.
Tell me if they are.
That's okay.
Do you have any kind of audit process to make sure that the delegate agencies that are funded by DFSS are in compliance with your program requirements?
Oh, yes, ma'am.
Yes, Autowom and Dow, excuse me.
When we look at all of our delegates, and I know Andrea spoke earlier about our active contract management program, ACM, we do have a process that we ensure that –
and a tool that we use through our active contract management.
And it's definitely resource-intensive, but it's a strategy of working more closely with our delegate agencies to identify if there are any key areas that are falling or lagging behind.
And we're looking at that data in real time, so it helps us to monitor whether or not we're doing well.
We actually have frequent collaborative meetings with our service providers and agencies when we see there's areas of concerns or any red flags that might pop up.
And we have ability to really improve those services in real time based off the data performance that we're seeing and assessment of the trends of their performance.
Sorry, I just also want to add, this is Raymond Barrett, Managing Deputy Commissioner of Administration.
To your point, Alder Dowell, we have a system here where we have a fiscal monitoring team, a programmatic monitoring team, and they work in collaboration with the programs division.
Our programmatic monitoring team alone monitors over 500 contracts a year.
That's not just what the fiscal monitoring team does in programs.
So just letting you know, a lot of this stuff happens behind the scenes where if a youth employment, let's say agency, we find out for whatever reason they're not paying someone at the appropriate rate,
they actually initiate what we call the high-risk procedure, and we get all of our monitoring teams together to try to audit that person.
So we're just constantly in communication and ensuring that our delegates are being held accountable.
Okay, thank you for that, because I had reached out because there was a complaint about one of the agencies serving my community,
and I just wanted to make sure that there was a system in place.
Can you let me know if there are other agencies in what the delegate agencies are located in the ward and what their ratings are with DFSS and if there are areas of, you know, challenges for them or areas that they're really performing well?
Well, I'd like to know.
You want to get through the chair?
Through the chair is fine.
Yes, ma'am.
Thank you.
All right.
Let's see.
I noticed earlier you sent out an email, I think this week, about we're changing the centralized shelter, intake, transportation, and crisis response program from the Salvation Army to a safe haven.
What is necessitating that change?
Is the Salvation Army pulling out?
We can answer that, yes.
Thank you, Alderman, for that question.
Harley Jones, First Deputy Commissioner.
As with all of our delegate contracts, there is an extensive RFP process every time funding for these programs comes back up.
So this change was a direct result of that highly competitive RFP process, and that change in a delegate agency was a result of that process.
Okay.
Do you know how many agencies applied?
Andrea Chapman, Deputy Commissioner for Homeless Services Division.
Yes, Alder, we had three applicants for that particular RFP for centralized shelter, intake, transportation, and crisis response.
Okay.
Thank you.
I want to add my voice to the gender-based violence and domestic violence funding, that this is not an area that I'm really steeped in, but I understand that there's been an increase in domestic violence homicides in the city.
And this is an area that I think we need to try to do something about, so I am concerned about that.
So I'll add my voice to the chorus of other people here who have requested that that program be supported.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Alderman Dow.
Thank you, Chairman Dow.
Alderman Manor-Hoppenworth, you have a question?
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you, Chair.
I also wanted to add my voice to make sure the Chicago Legal Protection Fund is fully funded.
We want to make sure that those who are facing deportation don't have to do it alone.
I'm thinking of Central Romero that's in my ward and, of course, the Resurrection Project that we are talking to.
And I also wanted to express my curiosity, actually, about the gender-based violence funding.
And can you tell me that I have this right?
The home share surcharge is the dedicated funding source?
Yes.
But have we considered what kind of funding sources are sustainable?
Because I understand that that's decreasing, right?
Correct.
If I can, just to make sure there's an understanding of why it decreased.
During COVID, because during COVID there weren't a lot of people using vacation rentals, if you recall.
But we began to retain some of that money.
And so we had a cushion, if you will.
And that cushion now has resolved.
We've used all the reserves.
So you're actually seeing what the home shares amount would have been if it wouldn't have done some reserves.
So that's why there's such a stretch.
And we see that decrease, that major decrease.
And then the community safety budget, we have money from there going to gender-based violence?
Okay.
Okay.
What happens to that funding source, including violence prevention initiatives, if we do not pass the head tax, for instance?
Do we have a plan?
If the head tax does not go through, there's not another revenue source within our department that could absorb, I think it's $62 million.
That's dedicated, our programs are dedicated to the community safety fund.
All right.
And then I had a question about the, I'm glad we're doing so much with youth, but is there a decrease in the number of youth coordinators in your budget?
This is Raymond Barrett, Managed Deputy Commissioner of Administration.
There is, I would say, a slight decrease.
I can't give the exact number.
Majority of anyone who is currently, there's some YSCs or youth service coordinators that were moved to the community safety fund.
We did have more ARPA staff, and those vacancies are being cut.
So if there's any vacancies that is a youth service coordinator that is still existent, that is a vacancy that is ARPA funded.
And so it is time constrained, and so those positions are being cut.
But right now, the NEU service coordinator positions are either on court.
corporate or on the community safety fund. Okay. So we have not cut any
youth safety coordinator positions.
No, we are not cutting any youth services coordinators on this
budget. Okay. Thank you.
Thank you to your entire team, Commissioner, your
HOPS team, your senior team,
you know, everyone who's in the box, who's helping to
make our communities stronger and safer. Andrea, thank you
so much. And there's
so much ahead of us. So I appreciate your work and
thank you for being here. I appreciate you very much. From the 48th, let us know what we can do
together. Okay. Thank you, Chair. Thank you.
Thank you, Autumn and Amanda Hopworth. And before we conclude, any other
folks for Family Support Services?
Okay. Just a couple things for myself.
I do think
the funding decisions around
gender-based violence need to be
revisited. As
has been stated earlier, we're
seeing a dramatic increase
in gender-based
violence, especially around
homicides. When I look
in the 11th and 15th police
districts, I've actually had more
conversations around
domestic-related incidents
with the police department than actual
traditional, I'll call it, incidents of
violent crime.
So there's definitely
something there
that we need to be trying to
ferret out. And I don't think
that the decrease in funding speaks
to us moving in that
direction.
overall, I will say
you've got a great team
of people.
I know you guys
meet people at some of their lowest
points in life,
but also
some of our
seniors, I've never
seen such excited
group of people
as the
Central West
Center is actually
located in the
28th
War. So I do spend a little
bit of time over there with
Chevette Lovemore and our team
and they're doing over there doing a
great job
and the activities that are
brought forth.
But I think we have to
focus more
on what we can do to help
create stronger
people in our communities,
our young people,
especially those that are in
crisis, while at the same time
allowing our
seniors to enjoy the golden
years of life.
So I know you all have a lot
of challenges and
I know your
funding, third-party
funding coming from the state
and the feds is
decreasing
and we're trying to fill in that
gap. While we attempt
to do that, we definitely
need to make sure that we're
maintaining some very
critical
services. One of those
around gender-based
violence, it seems like we're
doing a pretty good job on
our own house, but
you know, we always
can stand to do more, but
we have to work within the
confines that exist. But
you have
made it through your first
hearing.
The next one probably
giving you a little grace
this time is the first
first round, so
get you prepared and
linked up for the next
round. So
again, I thank you all
and continue the work that
you all are doing on behalf
of the citizens of this
city.
The committee will stand at
ease while we transition
for CDPH.
Oh, but next year, I know
y'all gonna get
no, we come with better
service next year.
That's what we do.
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
Good afternoon. We have the Department of Public Health before us, Dr. Ige and her team.
And then Chloe from COFA will do a brief analysis and introduction, after which we'll have a Dr. Ige.
Yes. Dr. Ige will give her opening statement, followed by introduction of the staff members here with her. Chloe.
Thank you, Chairman. Good afternoon, Chairman Irvin, Vice Chair Lee and members of the City Council.
This is Chloe Utimane from COFA. I'm here to give a brief summary for Department of Public Health.
For fiscal year 2026, the Department's proposed budget is $314 million.
Compared to fiscal year 2025 revised appropriation, that is a $224 million decrease, which is equal to a 41% cut.
With the Department's budget, it's supported by local fund and grants fund. Specifically, 18.23% is corporate funded.
With the Department's budget, around one-third, which is $103 million, is allocated to personnel, and the remaining $211 million goes to non-personnel.
For a staffing level, the Department's budget is budgeted with 764 full-time equivalent positions.
Compared to the previous year, it is a 282 positions fewer, which is equal to around 27% cut.
This slide provides the detailed breakdown for the Department's appropriation by category and fund.
From the first table, we can see that the personnel services has decreased by $30 million, and another main decrease is in category 9,000.
Purposes as specified, which is around $300 million.
These are related to various programs supported by the grants fund.
The second table provides the details in funding level, and we can see there is an $18 million decrease in corporate fund,
a $52 million decrease in ARPA fund, and $201 million decrease in 925C COVID-19 grant fund.
Looking at the historical trend of appropriations for CDPH, the Department has received the highest level of appropriation in 2022, roughly $1 billion.
But since then, its grant funding has steadily declined.
By fiscal year 2026, it has fallen to $314 million.
Lastly, looking at the Department's position level, this year it has decreased to 764 positions, and that is around 300 positions less than previous year.
This concludes my summary.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Chair Irving, Vice Chair Lee, and members of the City Council.
Thank you for the opportunity to share with you how the resources that have been committed to us has been used and are planned for the future.
The summary indicates that there's been a lot of change in public health.
Those changes will continue, but today I want to start with what $700 million was able to accomplish in 2024.
Before you, we shared some papers with you to show you the work of public health in supporting the health and vitality of Chicagoans.
In this paper, you will see vaccination, at least 20,000 doses that we administer.
You will see sexual health and the work that we do there, testing and treating for sexually transmitted infections.
You will see violence prevention, substance use prevention, tobacco cessation, breast health to prevent cancer, emergency preparedness, infectious disease, food protection, air quality, mental health, supporting new families, healthy homes, etc.
This is what public health is about, protecting, safeguarding the health of thousands of Chicagoans.
In 2025, you will see from the summary, the resources we had diminished a little.
Yet in the year 2025, two weeks ago, the Guardian newspaper reported that, and I quote,
among U.S. counties, counting, containing the nation's 10 largest cities, Cook County, Illinois, where Chicago is located,
has seen the largest reduction in opioid deaths since national peak of the crisis in 2023.
Summer of 2024, I came before the Health and Human Services Committee, and I said we wanted to tackle overdoses in Chicago.
And we presented the plan to you, and you joined us, and you rallied all the aldermanic offices.
We did trainings with you, and this is the outcome of that effort, where we are now number one in the country
in reducing preventable overdose-related deaths, reduction by 38%.
So I want to thank you for your partnership in saving the lives of Chicagoans.
Last summer, I also came before you and talked about our violence prevention plan,
our plan to prevent West Nile virus, and our plan also to address, continue to address opioid overdoses.
And again, you joined us, you supported us in that effort, we went door-to-door, you supported us in our campaign.
I came before you and talked about the air sensor network and said, in summer, we will deploy that air sensor.
And again, it has been reported, we have the largest air sensor network in the entire country,
and some of the largest in the world.
So, 10 different areas of successes that I want to highlight for you for 2025.
I will start with crisis response.
I know there has been a lot of questions about the care team and the crisis response team.
And I will start with a story.
This is real emails that I got from people who have benefited from our programs.
This person said, when I called for help, I didn't know what to expect.
I was scared, overwhelmed, tired, or feeling alone.
And when the care team arrived, they didn't judge me, they listened.
They sat with me, they helped me calm down, and connected me to a counselor the very same day.
For the first time, I felt seen as a person and not as a problem.
Our care program is a priority for those who are experiencing crisis.
This year, December 2024, the care team fully transitioned to the public health department.
Since then, we have expanded the care team from four police districts to six police districts.
We have staffed and are backfilling the vacancies of all care vans.
We have launched two citywide teams to respond to a wider range of events so that our work is not restricted to police districts.
We have launched an encampment outreach pilot with DFSS this summer, which has reached over 1,000 people and connected them to resources.
We have joined the crisis hub.
There is a behavioral health crisis hub that has been set up by the University of Illinois in Chicago.
We have joined that to coordinate with state-funded, mobile crisis team, and crisis stabilization center.
So in your hand is a service map.
It says Chicago Department of Public Health, city-funded, mental health services continuum, and then behavioral health crisis response.
In this map, you will see how we have laid out all of the crisis response services in the city of Chicago.
Our singular goal is to ensure if you have a mental health crisis in the city of Chicago, you are connected to services.
And these are the options available in Chicago right now.
You will see the city-led services, the state-led services, the county-led services, and the national-led services.
The 911 service space where we occupy, we have eight teams, and these eight teams will now be able to operate citywide.
I want to share with you our plan for 2026 because people want to know what is the plan.
The care team will expand to reduce unnecessary hospitalization.
You all know we are in a very difficult time in terms of Medicaid coverage and hospital beds.
So we want to decongest the pipeline.
We want to decongest emergency department by preventing...
preventing hospitalization for people who don't need to be hospitalized and ensure that people in
crisis do not have to rely on emergency services from other sectors and so that we can increase
access to community-based care. So this is our plan for 2026. We want to launch a citywide 9-1-1
coverage with expanded hours. We want to launch the care street psychiatry to serve areas of the
city with a high density of unhoused people. Our lesson this year is we take services to people.
We are taking vaccination to people. We're taking mental health services to people where they are.
We are not asking them to come to us. We are going to them. So this is our plan for the expansion of
care street psychiatry. When people are on the street, they don't call for help. We will go to
them. We want to launch a community support services to help people experiencing serious mental illness
following discharge from hospital. People get discharged, no support, no community safety net,
and so they keep cycling in the hospital. We have to address that. So this is an example of what that
looks like. This is the story of a resident of the Des Plaines and Hubbard encampment who was
approached by a peer support team with a life-changing request. He was ready for treatment.
This was a product of months of watching the team's consistent presence at the encampment. It took
months of repeatedly going to this encampment to build trust. This resident found the courage to ask
for help and believe that recovery was possible. The peer support team understood that when someone is
experiencing homelessness and there is addiction that is related, it is hard for them to be stably
housed and supported without tricking that substance use disorder. So our team connected them to Haymarket,
got them in residential treatment, followed up with this person every day for several weeks to be sure
that they were doing well and followed up until six months later to be sure that this person is doing well.
This is what severe mental illness and long-standing substance use disorder require. It is a long-term
case management support. So and that is the infrastructure we're building. So in this document,
you will see how we have mapped this out. There is a north zone and there is a south zone.
In the north zone, we will have teams who will be able to cover those areas, whether they are called
through 911. In the south zone, we will also have teams that will cover the south zone. The red dots that
you see on this map are the crisis stabilization center. There's two in the north that is funded by
the state and there is one in the south that's the Providence Hospital that is funded by the county.
So that there are places to take people to to get stabilized. In addition to this, we will work with the
mobile crisis response team. The state is funding 50 mobile crisis response teams. We have eight. So we
want to always ensure there is coverage between our teams and their teams. There is also now a new
program NAMI Chicago that is supported by the county for behavioral health crisis in addition to 988. So
this is the landscape and coordinating among all the different stakeholders is one of our top priorities
so that we are ensuring a seamless comprehensive safety net for the care team. We have mental health
services that you're also concerned about. In 2025, we have worked very hard to improve the quality of
mental health services. We are serving 28,000 clients through our mental health clinics and other city funded
partners. We will continue this work and to expand it in 2026. Communicable disease response is a big
priority for us. We're in the middle of a monkeypox outbreak and I am very pleased to tell you that for
the first time in the last three months, we are beginning to see a decline in the mpox cases. This has taken
outreach by several staff who have volunteered their time to distribute resources. We're working with 69 health
care partners to ensure there's vaccination going on and we have begun to see a downward trend. Our lead
initiative serves more than a thousand children every year and we will continue that effort. Mertanol and
infant mortality continues to be a problem. There are far too many babies who are dying from sleep-related
issue. That is going to be a priority for us in 2026. Chronic disease. Heart disease is the number one
reason why people die before the age of 65 in the city of Chicago. We have funded play street events.
We have funded tobacco cessation events. We will continue to work with our community health workers
to connect people to services and this will continue to be a priority in 2026. I will end with the 3-1-1
work that we do. This is how Chicagoans reach out to us to request for services. This year we have
received 8,500 service requests. We have completed 85 percent of them and our Office of Environmental
Health has responded to the most number of requests. That's 4,000 requests and 98 percent of their service
requests was completed on time. Our lead prevention team has responded to 99 percent of their request
and we will continue to aspire to get to 19 percent or more of a service request within the timeline.
CDPH has to be resilient. Our communities need us and there are far too many health-related issues for
us to stop working. So our resilience strategy is to, as we navigate the uncertainty in federal funding,
is to work closely with IDPH and Cook County Department of Public Health and Cook County Health
to map services, to coordinate better, to ensure that our communities are served and to minimize
service disruption. And finally, there is a document that has plenty of numbers and words on it. And I want
to use the example of Ward 10. In Ward 10, you will see all of the different ways CDPH supports your ward.
In Ward 10, we did a 164 food inspection in this year alone, environmental inspection 186,
care responses 17, family connects 105, lead paint hazard inspection 32, home visits to lead exposed
children 31, home lead abatement 2, play streets 12, food inspection 355, etc. So this is by breakdown by
Ward, you can see how we work to support your constituents in your ward and overall how we support Chicagoans.
And I have in the box my entire team of senior leadership who are every day on the front line
doing this work, and I want to appreciate them for being flexible and adaptable as we continue to
navigate the uncertainty in federal funding. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, Dr. Ige. I will start with
Audra Manhattan. Thank you, Chair. And hello, Dr. Ige. I'm sorry to not be there in person to see you and
your team. But thank you for all of your all of your hard work during challenging times. So a couple
questions. One, you know, not being there in person, I'll say, just through the chair. I know we always
get the documents that you've brought in person. But if we can get those digitally, that would be
really helpful. As you spoke about the CARES team, and it's really where the bulk of my questions are.
Um, you know, we've seen through through this year, um, that the, you know, there was a 40% vacancy rate.
Um, there were, there were lots of positions that were funded, um, where, where funds were available,
but vacancies were left. So, uh, with, with CARES, you guys, you didn't post positions for most of the
year. I know the questions have come up, but like, you know, what was, what was the decision making
around that? And then I would also add, what you're describing of CARES for 2026 seems, um,
different than the CARES program that we had, uh, been working on and initially, uh, created.
Thank you, Chair. Um, in December, 2024, uh, we hired, uh, to staff eight vans. Uh, we have eight
care vans and each van has an EMT and a mental health professional. So, we had 23 staff, uh,
for those eight vans in December. Uh, we have had a bit of staff turnover since then. Uh, and we have
only recently posted vacancies to backfill those vacancies, um, as it is the case for me.
Many of our public-facing roles you will see in our vacancy list.
Our clinical services have a high rate of vacancies.
Our nutritionists, our public health nurses, our mental health professionals, our sanitarians,
we always have a high level of vacancies and ton over there.
So we have been working very hard with DHR for the Employee Assistance Program
to see how we can better support our staff who are front-facing
so that we can have some more longevity in these roles.
But we have posted those positions, and our hope is that the aid vans are fully staffed and operational.
Since January, these are the new additions to the crisis response landscape that we are also navigating.
Thank you for that.
And, yes, again, I'll look forward to diving into the document there.
Thank you.
So looking through the budget here, you know, obviously we know grant funding was hit you with a big decrease,
but obviously we're seeing some corporate funding decrease here, about 7%.
The mayor said that there were going to be expansions in public mental health services,
but I'm not seeing, you know, this budget doesn't recommend, like, any increases in headcount for the care teams
or kind of positions around the city-operated mental health clinics.
So I don't know if you could speak to that, and I would add, and I ask this of DFSS as well,
if the proposed community safety fund and kind of revenue, new revenue source there were to go away,
how would that impact your department as currently proposed for 2026?
Thank you, Chair.
I am deeply appreciative of the investment that has been put into mental health services by this administration.
The mayor has been very emphatic about mental health being a priority.
Mental health services as a whole, in addition to substance use and violence prevention,
make up about 31% of CDPH's corporate budget.
So we are very grateful for that investment.
In the document that I have shared with you, you will see, again,
what we are thinking about city-funded mental health services continuum
and how we can leverage the network that exists and also work to fill the gaps.
So we've been doing a lot of work this year to understand where the gaps are.
So right now, and, you know, this year the OIG published its report on the assessment of our mental health services.
We have seven city-run services.
We have 37 partners.
So a total of 44 city-funded mental health service points in the city.
And you will see the spread across the city, how that is working.
So this year we are doing a deep dive to ensure that those services are optimized and are working well.
We have introduced Healing Arts Program.
We have introduced Community Health Response Corps, who can help people navigate and connect them to resources.
This year the health corps, that's community health workers, have helped to connect more than 400 people to mental health services.
And we have also started the suicide prevention training, trained more than 500 people to do that.
So we are trying to look at where the gaps are in the mental health continuum, the prevention space, the treatment space, and the post-treatment space.
So those are all of the areas that we're looking at.
And our hope is that we can coordinate with county and state to fill gaps where necessary and to continue to make visible to the city where there might be opportunities for additional investment.
And helpful, and I'm just kind of following up then, though, maybe to expound a bit about the last part.
And I know as it relates to the Community Safety Fund, you know, do you, are you able to give us a number?
So I'll say DFSS was able to share, like, exactly how many youth would not get served, right, if we didn't have this head tax or Community Safety Fund.
So I'm wondering if you could speak to that.
And then similarly, I think as currently proposed, I think the CARE team program is tied to this SMART, the new SMART tax.
And I know that OBM said that they're going to be ready to start collecting on that January 1st, but it's never, you know, it's never happened before.
I think it's a great idea, to be clear, but just thinking that there might be some hiccups.
So, again, you know, what, how would your department be impacted if they're not able to collect January 1st for the SMART fund or if the Community Safety Fund is not funded?
Thank you, Chair.
On our 2024 report that's before you, where you will see Healthy Chicago is violence prevention, the funding that we have for violence prevention supported more than 5,000 mediations to prevent violence incidents.
That is more than 1,400 people who were enrolled and served via the street outreach case management.
And the funding that we have supports at least 18 organizations who partner with CDPH on Street Outreach.
So the funding that we have now, that is what it supports.
If the funding is not available, these are some of the gaps that we will have going forward.
I believe that the details around the taxes and et cetera, we can get you through the chair, but this is what the funding supports.
Thank you for that.
And, yeah, I just, you know, I think the SMART, that's the SMART, you know, social media tax, I do think it's a good idea, supportive of it.
I just worry that implementing something so new and banking on collecting day one and then tying something as crucial as our CARES team,
as its kind of primary funding source, is a little troubling to me.
So, yeah, through the chair, you know, whether it's through your department, Dr. Ige, or in combination with OBM, a contingency plan would be appreciated.
And thank you so much, again, for your work and for your team.
And thank you, Chair.
That's it for me.
Thank you, Alderman.
And just for the record, the SMART tax revenue is not contemplated initially to support the CARES team, as there may be some challenges to such.
And as you just stated, did not want to put or link such critical care to a revenue source that, you know, maybe have to go through some challenges.
So that is still anticipated, even though in the future the revenue source for it would be the SMART tax.
Gotcha.
Thank you, Chair.
Okay.
All right.
Artemis Fusato.
Oh, batting off early again.
Thank you, Chairman.
Good afternoon, Commissioner Doctor.
How are you doing?
I know we never speak.
That's because we don't have to speak, because your IGA person is always communicating with us.
I appreciate them.
And also, I think I only talked to two people in your office, and that's your IGA guy.
And you're one of the ladies.
I don't know if she's in the box over there or not, but I just want to have a talk to her in a while.
Well, Virginia, if she's there, her boss is there.
Virginia is awesome.
So she's like the only person I ever need help from, her and Alfonso.
So kudos to both of them.
Just one question.
Commissioner, you gave a pretty thorough opening statement.
And I don't know if you know, but I was a fireman before I was an alderman.
And I see what Narcan could do.
And I don't believe, I believe we provide Narcan to libraries, and that's it.
We don't provide them to schools or parks.
So is that something we can maybe look at, or do they provide their own?
Do you know the answer to that?
This is truly a question I don't know.
I know it could be good.
And I know some alderman offices get Narcan.
I don't know why we don't give it to all of them.
Certainly, I don't live in a drug-addicted ward or community, but certainly you never
know anything could happen.
I mean, it does happen on the northwest side.
So what say you about those couple of suggestions I have?
Thank you, Alder.
We are always happy to get Narcan out.
Dr. Hua?
Can you hear me?
Jenny Hua, Medical Director, Deputy Commissioner for Behavioral Health at CPH.
Thank you for the question.
We have partnered with CPS in Narcan distribution.
We have actually purchased Narcan on their behalf.
We actually, CPL, the 81 branches of the Chicago Public Library, make up about 40 to 50% of
the Narcan that we distribute.
We actually have a request process whereby community-based organizations, hospitals, parks
can request Narcan, and that makes up another 50% of the Narcan that we distribute.
Okay.
So if parks can, can the alderman request them for?
My parks, can I say, give me five Narcans for my five parks, or how can we do that?
Absolutely.
We're happy to share the link with you for our request form, and we can get that sorted out.
Okay.
Well, I'm an old simple guy, so rather than emailing it to you, I'm verbally asking you,
can I get six Narcans, one for my office and five, one for each of my parks?
You got it.
And then I will show them how to use it.
You need more than just, you know, than one.
Yeah.
I think.
I mean, it's an amazing drug.
I mean, I've seen it in action.
Oh, no.
I've administered it, so I know what it can do.
What I would say is that the staff and other people in these places need to know and understand
and be trained on it.
I think it's a lot easier.
I remember my first training with Narcan was when you actually had to use a needle.
But it has since grown to where we just have.
And you're done.
Yeah, so I think CDPH is amenable to that.
Just need to set up with the park district.
Well, I do have a firehouse across the street from my office, too.
So, but that's it, Commissioner, Doctor.
I appreciate you.
Like I say, it's good to know I don't ever have to bother you with anything.
I know you haven't been here long.
And hopefully I'll never have to bother you.
But appreciate whatever you're doing.
I know we got to figure something out to help you with some of your cuts there.
I don't know that we can.
I know I don't know a lot of its federal government stuff.
But that's about it.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you, Chairman.
Thank you.
Alderman Nugent.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Commissioner, Dr. Ige and your team.
I have several questions.
The first I want to start specifically in my ward.
I had written to you and your team early in October about Legion Park.
My colleagues have heard me talk about this all day.
It's covered in feces, terrible stench, methamphetamine, rats.
I'm worried about leptospirosis.
I've asked your team to come out.
I have not heard anything back.
I apologize, Alderman Nugent.
And we have been coordinating with the department so that we can come with a comprehensive plan
so we can get back through the chair with what that plan is.
CDPH, the cleanup part of it, I think will require collaboration with DSS.
We have done it before.
We provide the mental health services and substance use support.
DFSS has some of this relationship.
So we're trying to make it an interdepartmental coordination.
So I apologize for the delay in getting back.
It's the 30th.
I reached out 24 days ago that the park is filled with feces and rats and drugs.
And we haven't had a freeze yet.
It's warm.
24 days?
We need something quicker.
While I would love to have a multi-department event, I need somebody to get out there quicker than that.
And I need something quicker.
How do you – I would consider this a bit of an emergency.
How do we respond?
What can we do to get this to move quicker?
Yes, the cleanup, the feces, and the rats component of that, I believe, I don't want to talk out of turn, is Department of Street and Sanitation cleanup.
So that's sort of what we were trying to coordinate, like who can do the cleanup.
The Chicago Department of Public Health is –
But do you test, for example, if there's –
Leptospirosis?
Yeah.
Yes.
Yes.
So the leptospirosis investigation will coordinate with DSS for that.
If there's rodents that needs to be abated, that will be DSS.
If there is an infection, that will be us.
Okay.
So does my community hear from you?
Yes, I will follow up.
Okay.
I think this is embarrassing.
My community – like, Chicagoans deserve better.
This is terrible.
Like, you guys are the experts.
I'm very uncomfortable with this type of response.
I apologize for the delay, and we will get you an answer, Asa.
Okay.
The other thing I wanted to talk about is what our emergency preparedness capabilities are out of CDPH.
Some of you that are here, I worked with years ago when I was with County Homeland.
We prepared for Ebola in 14 to 16.
We prepared for COVID, and we prepared for Ebola again.
What are our preparations like right now for what a future pandemic would look like,
and are we doing tabletop exercises?
Are we training?
Yes.
Medical Director for Emergency Preparedness is here,
and our Chief Medical Officer also is here.
Dr. Black, if you'll talk about some of the responses, examples that we have this year,
and then Dr. Sloboda, some of the trainings that we're doing.
Yeah.
Hi.
Stephanie Black, Chief Medical Officer, Disease Control Bureau.
So we have a team that works directly with hospitals and also with skilled nursing facilities to be ready to respond.
We also are able to monitor travelers.
So when there has been an outbreak of viral hemorrhagic fever, for example, and like the Democratic Republic of Congo,
we do track returning travelers on occasion when there's concern for control of that outbreak in country.
And in terms of tracking for the next pandemic, sorry, go ahead.
No, you were on it.
I didn't mean to interrupt you.
I apologize.
Yeah.
We have many methods of surveillance to look for novel influenza, for example.
Right now, we're even tracking potential exposures to H5N1 avian influenza.
And we have mechanisms to test wastewater and also do surveillance of the types of influenza.
So severe cases that are admitted to the intensive care unit, we make sure that those are typed.
So we're able to detect if there's a novel strain appearing.
So we do have mechanisms in place through various surveillance programs to detect a pandemic and be ready to respond.
Do you feel like, do you feel that with sort of the, I guess, an encouragement to not vaccine right now,
do you feel as though we're prepared to enter these winter months?
And like, what are you worried about leading into this winter, I guess,
based on the status of the world right now and the resources that you have?
Let me say a little.
So the vaccination and the misinformation and all of that has been front and center to us
because we saw firsthand what Emizu's outbreak could do and what he did in Chicago last year.
So we have been doing a lot of work on sentiment surveillance, looking at what is on social media
and what people are saying about vaccines.
We have done a poll to assess how Chicagoans will respond to vaccination.
The good news is that in Chicago, people are still open to vaccinations.
And we have been tracking what our vaccination coverage is relative to last year to see if we're dropping off
and if we need to do a little more work there.
But the messaging issue is real and is deep.
So ethnic media, I am always out there.
Doc Sloboda, podcast, TV shows, anything that we can do to help people understand how important it is to be vaccinated is important.
But Dr. Sloboda, the vaccination coverage.
Sure. Hello. I'm Dr. Alex Sloboda.
I'm the medical director for immunizations and emergency preparedness for Chicago Department of Public Health.
Just touching on the exercise question, we do a lot of both tabletop exercises as well as real-world exercises
with health care partners and city partners to help prepare for a variety of emergencies,
such as infectious diseases and outbreaks, as well as chemical and radiological emergencies.
So we've done numerous of those throughout this year.
In terms of immunizations, in terms of childhood immunizations, such as MMR for measles, mumps, and rubella,
and other routine childhood vaccinations, we work closely with Chicago Public Schools.
And we have seen over the last couple of years that their protection rates against those infectious diseases with vaccine protection has begun,
is increasing, which we're very hopeful about and is a good sign.
We just started our respiratory virus season vaccination campaign for flu and COVID.
So that just started early September.
But we're seeing a lot of uptake and a lot of interest from the community to get both flu and COVID vaccines.
So we'll see over the coming months how those rates compare to last year.
But our clinics...
are extremely busy. Our weekend city college events have been very busy.
Thank you. I appreciate it. I'm not trying to cut you off. I just have some limited time and lots
of questions. I want to get into some financials for a second. Obviously, Ernst & Young came out
with their study and did a fines and fees analysis. A couple were related to CDPH that
were named in there. Does this FY26 budget include any changes to food violation citation or recycling
fees? Yes, we have been in conversation with OVM about the possibility of increasing our fees
for licensing, I believe, from $250 to $500. So that is a proposal that we're exploring right now.
Is it in the budget right now? Is it actually in the budget written?
Not. I don't believe so. No.
Okay. If the budget were to be amended and include that, would you guys be supportive?
Yes.
Okay. What about recycling fines, fees?
We are in the middle of finalizing what transition to DOE would look like. So we haven't really
finalized where that will land in terms of budgetary support. But it is an option, the
recycling fees and fees. We would have wanted it in the budget, for the budget. Okay. I think that's
something that we can explore as a council. We're just looking for revenue. We're looking to make
people safe and have revenue. Chairman, may I proceed with a couple more? Also want to move on
to hemp. I know there's a lot of conversation about taxing an unregulated product. I have some
concerns about that. Will the city create a retailer registry or a minimum inspection cadence if this
were to become effective? Kate, do you want to? Kate McMahon, Director of Policy for the Department of
Public Health. In terms of the Health Department's role in the proposed hemp regulatory framework,
we have advised on what we think are good public health practices. So reducing sales to minors,
for example, making sure people have to be 21 or above to purchase. The Health Department would have
the authority to inspect food retailers just as we do now. And the Health Department has also
recommended that there would be warning signs at point of sale, which would provide some basic level
of education about the products themselves. Okay. Thank you for that. Dr. Yee, are you comfortable
with us taxing an unregulated product? The taxation component of it, I will take through the chair.
It's not the way I'm most comfortable. But our hope is that if there is revenue that is generated here,
it goes towards increasing the operational capacity for enforcement and for the licensing of this so that
we really have a robust system to ensure that the regulatory compliance is in place.
Okay. Chairman, thanks for giving me a little extra time. Appreciate it. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Dr. Ige. Thank you for all the work that you do. And I just wanted to follow
up on my colleague regarding hemp. All my questions are around hemp, given the fact that the administration
is looking at taxing this and there's just been a lot of multiple states have taken, you know,
different view on this. And some have even banned Delta-H and THC and similar hemp-derived intoxicants
entirely, recognizing that these products pose public health risk that are difficult to regulate.
Within Illinois, you know, several municipalities have moved to restrict or ban these products rather
than an attempt to regulate them within the existing unregulated market. So to that point, how will you
confirm that the product is what it says it is? Because your department is going to really be
a department that validates this. And when government taxes something, the public are of the mindset that
it's a safe product or else why would you be taxing it? Yes. One of the concerns that we have now is that
many products that are being sold as hemp and not actually hemp. So one of the concerns that we have
is to verify what it actually contains. So most products have what we call a certificate of analysis.
Uh, usually there's a QR code that you can scan and find out what is in it. Um, that QR code usually links
you to the laboratory. Um, if it is an authorized manufacturer that should be present on the product
and then you can scan the QR code and find out what is on it. The potency of the THC component is one of
the things we're worried about. And also if there are other contaminants, if there are other things in the
product that are not supposed to be there, and that is a wide range of products. So that certificate of
analysis, and if we see a discrepancy and ability to verify what is actually contained in it. So those are some
of the areas that we have been in conversation in terms of what the regulatory infrastructure will look like.
And, and if I understood you, you said that some of the revenue that's going to be generated from this,
will go to staff, some of the people that are actually going to police this. Is that accurate?
Um, that is one of the requests that we have made. Uh, as you all know, our infrastructure,
operational capacity is very, very limited right now.
No, no. And that's, that's what I wanted to get to because, so how many positions do you think you
would need in order to police that across the city? Uh, can I take that through the chair?
Yeah. Yeah. And, and the reason why I'm saying that, because I don't want to create a new tax to
create new positions to regulate something. You, you see what I'm saying? If we're going to generate
20 million, 30 million, and then we're spending 10 or 20 million to regulate it, it doesn't make sense
because, because we're trying to create revenue in order to fund, um, some of the deficit that,
that we're all facing here. So just, but yeah, I'll be interested to see that through the chair.
Um, so with the, with the certificates there, and that's, and that's, I'm glad you brought that up
because like licensed cannabis is tested for potency, solvents, pesticides, microbes, and it's
tracked from the seed to sale. Right. Right. So we know exactly what's in there. Hemp derived THC
sold in Chicago typically is not. Um, will the city require validated laboratory testing
and batch traceability before these products can be taxed and sold or formally recommended that the
state set those standards first? Yes. Uh, this is one of the areas where we have been exploring
options, uh, setting up the testing capacity in the city right now will take time. Uh, the city pH
laboratory does not have that infrastructure. Uh, so one option is to, and you give me the cost of that
to what that would cost as well. Will do. Thank you. Uh, one of the options will be to ensure that
hem is only purchased from approved wholesalers, um, and coming up with a list of approved wholesalers
where this can be procured or working with the state to see if laboratory facilities or capacity
exist to where the test can be done. Um, during licensing is when we will be required to validate
what is in the product that is being sold, same as we do for food and beverages that are sold in our
city. Um, if you're applying for a license, you will be required to disclose what's in your product
and us being able to verify that it is actually what it says it is, uh, is an infrastructure we don't
currently have, but we, um, options to address that is being explored. How will you arrive at those
standards that you're going to impose? Um, right now, hemp products should not have more than 0.3%.
Um, we, even on the labeling of some of the products, like we shared with us with at the
subject matter hearing, it is written there that it is more than that. So that in effect moves this
from being hemp to being, you know, a cannabis. So once that threshold has been crossed, then it is
no longer hemp. Uh, so those are some of the areas where, you know, the regulatory framework is really
important. Uh, the assumption right now is people are selling hemp, but what is being sold is not
actually hemp. Gotcha. Okay. And I think, uh, hold up. All right. So if you're saying that what is being
sold is not hemp, what is it? Yes. So that is where the licensing comes in. So you tell us you're selling
hemp. We look at your products. Is it below the threshold of the THC that will make this hemp?
If it is, then it is hemp. If it is more than that 0.3% THC content, it is intoxicating. It should
not be sold as hemp. We cannot give you a license to sell this product.
At the top 10 percent, we have an Pelican Guide.
So
Um,
So these are some of the regulatory framework that we are hoping can be put in place.
And if you're selling hemp, again, age restriction, if this is an intoxicating product, it should not be sold to children.
It should not be available near the same restrictions that will go to any other intoxicating product.
But to verify that this is actually hemp and it is what it says it is, that licensing process, I think, is one of the first steps in ensuring that that is what it is.
Wait a minute. So if it is above the requirement or above the threshold for hemp, then is it still hemp?
What is it? Is it? It becomes cannabis. It becomes cannabis.
Okay. And if it's cannabis, then how is it sold as hemp?
Then it should follow the framework for cannabis.
Are we are we allowed to strike that is someone allowed to sell hemp over three, whatever the number is, as hemp?
I know the answer to that question is no.
But then is it something that's got a whole nother regulatory scheme attached to it?
There is not a regulatory scheme right now for hemp.
So once you say it is hemp.
But it's not hemp.
There's not any.
So nobody is checking for hemp at the moment.
In your professional opinion, when you go to test or you go to see what is actually contained and what is being sold, do you anticipate it to be hemp or not?
From the photos and the pictures and some of the samples we've seen on sale, including gummies and candies, it contains much higher.
There are some that have as much as 18 percent THC being sold to children.
That's gummies.
And saying that it is hemp.
Hemp has less than 0.3.
Right.
So.
I'm a little bit of it's a little bit of a quagmire here.
So if people are selling cannabis.
As him.
Then how could he be certified as him?
If we're going to go to a regulatory scheme and have independent testing or have some form of third party validation of this,
how do we say it's hemp or allow it to be sold as hemp?
The number to remember is the 0.3 percent THC.
If it is less than that or at that threshold, then it is hemp.
If it has higher level of 0.3 THC, delta 8, 9, whatever delta it is, then it is not hemp and it shall not be sold as hemp.
So our hope is that with a regulatory framework, there at least is some opportunity to review what is being sold,
issue a license and say that that is what you're selling.
But right now, because it is a free for all and there is no regulatory process,
people just say it is hemp and the consumers don't know any better.
And they buy it as hemp and then people are intoxicated because they don't know that it is not hemp.
So will we allow with this license, would we allow for someone to sell something that had greater than the 0.3 percent stuff?
THC, there you go, THC.
No.
So I'm going to just ask this question then.
What's the purpose?
I think people, my assumption is that I don't use the stuff,
but my assumption is that people are buying this stuff as a substitute for cannabis.
And if it's at 0.3, which my understanding is a fairly low level, is not designed to intoxicate, where are we going?
I just, in my mind, I think that potentially the revenue derived from this may not be much
because who's going to buy 0.3 hemp if you're looking for cannabis?
Or are you looking for, I don't know, can somebody educate me?
I'm low.
Yep.
Well, I'm sorry.
Go ahead.
The people who are looking for cannabis, they are licensed cannabis dispensaries.
And so our assumption is that if what you want is cannabis, there are pathways to get that.
It's legal.
You know, there are approved dispensaries where that can be got.
But what we worry about is this false advertising and almost predatory marketing of something that is supposed to be relaxing and safe.
And it's a candy and it's for children and it is not.
So that's where we worry that people are falsely consuming things that they believe to be hemp.
That is not quite true.
Is there a natural, again, I'm not in, this is not a space I'm in.
Is there a natural market for people that utilize hemp?
Oh, yes.
Okay.
So people could actually utilize this stuff.
They're not looking for the kapow or the TAC or cannabis, but just want to use hemp.
That is correct.
So we believe that most users of hemp actually want to buy hemp, which is in its natural form, quite safe.
And people use it for many, many different reasons, for skin, cannabinoid oil, et cetera.
But right now, many, many people are being deceived that they are purchasing hemp and it is not.
But that's not what it is.
I mean, I'm just a lame.
I don't know.
Go ahead.
Go ahead.
Mr. Chairman, I think to, as a point of clarification, I was following where you were going.
My understanding is that whilst we say we'll card or have a certain age, this is an opportunity for kids to purchase hemp products that whilst might be marketed at that point three,
they're often much higher and they look like candy and the vendor who sells those doesn't always have to go through the same rigorous requirements that a cannabis has been.
I get all of that.
I'm just, in my mind, I'm not seeing a market here.
I'm looking for a market, right?
And if everybody that I continue to hear is doing this stuff, trying to create another cannabis piece, and we're telling people that, hey, you're not going to be able to buy what you think is cannabis, really.
But being sold, you know, in a lot of offshoot spots on the south and west sides, that market, you know, that somebody think there may be a huge ton of revenue in may not have any at all when you weed out all of the non-hemp products.
I can't speculate on that.
I might let other colleagues.
Well, yes.
So, Chairman, and I think that's why, you know, our Attorney General, Kwame Raul, along with the National Association of Attorney Generals, sent Congress a letter asking Congress to clarify the mess that, in essence, they've made.
They've made this loophole.
And, you know, although it may be 0.03, we know that UIC has provided some testing on these things.
It has been as high 70 times the amount.
And so that's why, you know, the structure that is currently in place where we see seed to sale is something that has worked within the cannabis space.
And I think in order to allow a level playing field where the end consumer would be assured that the product that they're consuming is safe, should follow that same suit.
And so for us as a municipality, and I stated before, municipalities throughout the state have banned this, why would we want to take on this endeavor of creating a lab, having it tested, if we wanted to do it correctly, right?
Because anyone could self-certify and say, yeah, the label says 0.03, and then they consume it, and the next thing you know, it's 70 times that amount.
But if we want to do it correctly, we would have to follow the state's process of getting the actual from seed or from synthetic or whatever materials they're going to use from that point all the way to the sale and track it,
which would mean that we would be competing against cannabis.
But if the consumer is looking to, as an adult, looking to have a cannabis effect, then I don't, as the chairman mentioned, I don't know if there's a market for that.
Because the reason why people are buying the Delta 8 now is because it is higher than the 0.03, but it's labeled in that gray area.
So that's why I just think that we're going down the wrong path as it relates to finding revenue here.
And as you as the doctor, the city's doctor, if you're having concerns, then hell, we're having concerns too because we don't want to put ourselves in a position where we pass something that we're saying is safe and the public is thinking, hey, you know what?
The city council, CDPH has vetted this, and we feel safe to consume it and then find ourselves and children being injured as over 2,800 cases were reported last year across the country by the poison control.
Yeah, so that's what we're trying to get at.
And again, we value your opinion because you're the subject matter expert in this area.
And to put together a whole new process here, I think, is the juice is not worth the squeeze, in my opinion.
Thank you, Alder.
I just want to say for the record that, yes, CDPH is concerned about how hemp is being marketed right now.
It is false marketing.
It is targeted to children, and that is a concern for the health department.
We also believe that having a regulatory framework has value so that markets don't go underground and these things continue to be sold, as we see for many other substances.
So if the revenue generating potential of it is not exactly our area of expertise, but the regulatory framework and how do we reduce poisoning to children and false advertisement
and all of the negative results that we have seen from just children buying candy, we would like for there to be a framework to address that because kids really are being deceived into buying these things.
And at least the children component of it, point of sale, restriction, et cetera, we feel at a minimum needs to be in place because there are far too many kids ingesting these things and getting poisoned.
Right.
And kids as well as adults as well, given the fact that there is – are you going to be allowing synthetic hemp as well to be part of this process?
So how the product is manufactured doesn't really change the impact.
There are some synthetic – the synthetic process is really to concentrate the THC in its natural form.
Hemp naturally does not contain high levels of THC.
So the synthetic – the manufacturing process then adds the synthetic layer to make it more potent.
So –
Make it more potent than the point –
Yeah, and what occurs naturally, right.
So that is the concern.
So the bean synthetic in itself is not the real concern, but the synthetic products are to concentrate the THC to make it more potent.
And it is the potency that we worry about.
So regardless of how it is manufactured, if it is more potent than what it is allowed to be, that is a concern.
Yeah, and I would just, again, for the record, reiterate that many states have banned synthetic TH – synthetic hemp as well.
Yeah, right.
Yeah, so, again, you know, obviously we'll continue to have this debate.
I am concerned and would love to see the numbers around what you think a full-blown process would be,
similar to what the state does from the THC to sale, to see what that looks like, how many employees you would need actually to police this area,
to make sure that we are – that the end user is actually getting what is said on the label.
And then we haven't even talked about the impact of the social equity cannabis owners when you're seeing, in essence,
they've gone through this whole process and the city comes and undercuts these cannabis owners.
But that's not for your department.
That's more for the budget.
But, again, if we can continue to dialogue around this, because I do have some concerns,
and there's a reason why many states have banned this.
Again, the Attorney General and the Attorney General Association have sent letters to Congress asking them to clarify
and clean that loophole that's there.
So thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Alderman Villegas.
Alderman Conway.
Thank you, Mr. –
Followed by Cito Lopez.
Mr. Chairman.
You know, I come at this – the hemp – I'll start with the hemp issue.
I come at it from a little bit different area.
I have a five-year-old, four-year-old, three-year-old.
My five-year-old has pointed out the Jolly Ranchers laced with hemp as something that she wants to buy.
And so I appreciate that we are starting at a status quo where there is no regulation on hemp at all
because of the failure of the federal government and the state government to do something.
So I actually appreciate that you're trying to do something because it is – and maybe the solution is not perfect,
but it is better than what we are facing now where we are putting children at risk with the deceptive practices mentioned.
Now, but I will ask, based on some of the challenges, do you think that this is an area where,
with the resource at your disposal, you think you can even improve the situation?
We have brainstormed what can we do at the moment at least to restrict access to children.
And so we believe that, at least at a minimum, point-of-sale restriction is viable.
Putting up warning signs saying this cannot be sold to children.
Even now, whatever the content is, children should not be buying it.
So at a minimum, we feel like that is something that is within the capacity of the city to do.
To have a comprehensive regulatory framework, we need some resources and some, you know, collaboration to figure out what is feasible.
But there are some low-hanging fruits, I believe, that can be done now, again,
to safeguard children's health and to limit, you know, sales to minors.
Yeah, as a, I say, more than as an alderman, as a father, I really hope that that's something that we can handle,
get a handle on if the state or federal government can't seem to step in in this area,
and they simply have not been able to.
So somebody's got to do something, and I appreciate you trying to be that, potentially that someone.
Thank you.
Second question, perhaps less of a softball here, but turning to the Ernst & Young report,
there was a part about organizational analysis, and, you know,
and there was a sentence that said, managerial spans of control emerge as a key area for improvement.
In several departments, managers oversee fewer than three direct reports,
which is below the leading practice ratio of six to eight.
And then on the back of that, Mr. Chairman, I think I handed you a piece of paper that if you could, oh, great.
And you'll see kind of on page 63 of the Ernst & Young report,
in the column with supervisors with one to three direct reports,
CDPH is having 115 supervisors with one to three direct reports, is an outlier on that,
and perhaps wanted to give you an opportunity to respond to that.
Yes.
So before the Ernst & Young report, we had done some analysis as part of our sustainability planning.
During the COVID pandemic, we had to expand really rapidly to meet the moment.
As the funding have gone, you know, the structure of the department has continued to evolve.
This year, we've had more than 300 people transition.
So that has sort of – things have become a little lopsided.
So we are working on a restructuring now that will go live in January to –
the standard for the industry is six to eight in terms of span of control.
So we've started with, you know, the senior leadership team, the deputy commissioners.
We've gone from 13 to seven, you know, the medical directors that has also reduced in number,
and then the assistant commissioners, and all the way down.
So we have been consolidating and rolling up our staff transition.
By the end of the year, when most of our funding will be over,
we will be able to tweak all of that and become a bit more compact.
Yeah, and I'll ask the question in a slightly more pointed way.
We had – which I think I know where you're going with it – is that –
so in the Ernst & Young report, it looks like we agreed to do it one year,
and there's, like, an option to do the same report again next year.
If the city does undertake the report in a year, do you think it will look different than it looks today?
Oh, certainly.
It's already different now.
Okay.
Mr. Chairman, that's all I have.
Thank you very much.
Thank you.
Thank you. Given where in light of that, where are you now in relation to this band?
I believe as I today we've gone from. Do you have the numbers? I will get you through the chair, but we we are going to be around.
I'll send you the numbers through the chair, but we started that work a year ago and we are we've made some progress.
So it's not 115. No, it's certainly not. OK, very well. We'll we'll we'll take that once you have that available.
Thank you, Chairman. And thank you, Commissioner, for for your efforts.
I'm grateful for the partnership, especially when it comes to crisis, as we have had several.
And when it comes to vaccination and public health, I'm grateful for your partnership in that line.
And, you know, in terms of, you know, I think that you have a drastic loss of funds.
I mean, it's 42 percent. Most of them is federal, if not almost entirety of it.
My concern is with the growing need. Right.
We have a quality of life, especially among black and brown communities that for the first time, I think, has gone back drastically as well.
So with that in line and with a trend that I think will say that perhaps we should increase the budget for the Chicago Department of Health.
My concern is in critical nature and critical aspects. Vaccination, for instance, I saw the report, I think, that you had, if I'm not mistaken.
Yeah. 20,000 doses there. Yes.
You see, just given the lack of response, inadequate or plain and simple, corrupt response of the federal government at declining to respond to the issues of public health, especially around vaccination.
What could be the impact of the thing that you look into and how we can mitigate?
I'm really concerned about the growing needs that we have in our communities, the ready issues and quality of life that we have in a budget that does not reflect the needs, in my opinion.
Thank you, Chairman. Vaccination is a big concern that we have.
Vaccines for children. We receive funding from the federal government.
They are beginning to change the recommendations for vaccines for children, which means we probably need to buy our own vaccines.
So these are areas where additional resources will be helpful to us.
Vaccines for adults have always been a problem.
When we had the measles outbreak, he was, you know, begging and pleading across all the counties to donate vaccines to us for us to be able to meet the moment.
So these are some areas that we are really worried about.
We've leaned a lot on the federal government for emergency response.
And we are, you know, in conversation with the city, county and state for how do we ensure preparedness.
I already shared with you this year alone, we got more than four thousand last year, more than four thousand notification of outbreaks that we had to respond to senior centers, long term care facilities, daycares.
These are not things that we will say, oh, we'll come back in three weeks or come back in four months.
People will die.
So we need to have an emergency source of funding for the city that we can tap into.
We're negotiating with the state.
They've come in with an additional one million this year for the special pathogen treatment centers to ensure that the hospitals are prepared.
But the vaccination is a gap that we have.
We don't have additional resources for that after the upper funding expires.
Thank you, Commissioner.
I love that.
And I remember and I think that I've seen you advocating and trying to find vaccines and, you know, make almost miracles happening with the lack of resources.
I'd love to work with you around working with the Department of Health at the state level and try to see how we can mitigate that.
The next question is around mental health and behavioral health.
We just met early on with a group of constituents, especially, as you know, among immigrant communities, we have a situation where anxiety, panic attacks and the need of mental health.
And even people unable oftentimes to even reach those resources.
Right. So we deal with literally an occupation of our city that is creating a lot of unrest and anxiety.
Grateful for the mental health clinic that you reopen in many parts of the city, including our ward.
How can we help in terms of coordinating efforts?
I think I'm concerned about, especially today we had a visit from Castle, Chinese American Service League.
They're worried about accessibility of these resources, just given complete neglect in this area from the federal government.
How can we help make sure that in this moment with the lack of, you know, with limited resources, we can ensure.
I know that we've been working closely on Spanish and other ways that we can reach out in our community and that there's some good progress.
How can we reach out other communities?
Thank you, Alder.
We just did a presentation to UNIDOS last week because we're worried that we are already beginning to see the drop off in use of services because people are worried.
People don't want to come out in person.
They don't want to come to the clinic.
And we have had situations this year where people are coming to our clinics and filming people and scaring patients away even.
So, one of the priorities now is how do we expand telehealth services so that people can call in.
We are in the conversation right now around language lines so that we can have the language facilities so that people can call in and have video, you know, telehealth services if that was they prefer.
We have also been in very close communication with the mayor's office around how do we get information to people so they know services are available.
That they don't have to pay for these services, that they will be safe.
We will not collect their data.
They will be protected because these are really – people are afraid.
And when they are afraid, they don't want to use the services.
So, how do we get the services to people?
So, we will need your support.
We shared some of the materials that we've developed with, you know, Chairwoman Rodriguez Sanchez.
We are willing to share the, you know, the resources we have available.
Some of our partners that have relationships with immigrant communities where they feel safe, how can we get services to them there?
So, this is where we will need your support.
How do we get services to people?
But we know now that asking people to come to us may not be sufficient.
Yeah, I agree, Commissioner.
I'm really concerned about the state of mental health and the quality of life of a lot of the immigrant communities.
My last question, and I thank you for all your efforts, is around the new Department of the Environment.
I know there's some crossover in terms of – and I know that, for instance, letting inspections are really critical, preventing people to get sick and let poison save, you know, funding and money in the long run.
And I'm grateful, and I think that it speaks volumes of when we have a corrupt federal government, the need to reinforce local government is so essential, and I hope that we all make that the priority.
In terms of, like, that crossover of environmental inspections and some of the coordination, I know we met or talked yesterday with the Department of the Environment, and I'm glad to see now a fully-fledged department.
What are the conversations in terms of coordination, and what are the duties that maybe are now given to the Department of the Environment versus your department?
Yes, Aldo, we're still working out the details and how the responsibilities will be best coordinated.
So we would like to get you through the chair what that finally would look like.
But we stand ready to see – again, our main deliverable is health, health impact.
So what has the potential to impact people's health?
How do we assess for that?
How do we mitigate that?
So we work very closely with the Department of Environment on this issue.
So we will – we're still trying to finalize what that will look like, what responsibilities will be theirs,
where can we continue to support, and the resources that are necessary to solve for this problem.
So – thank you, and I commend you and your team, you know, for doing all you can with limited resources
and whatever we can do to partner.
Let us know.
Thank you, Chairman.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Alderman Lopez.
The original is over here, Doctor.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Chairman, Commissioner, and members of the committee.
A couple quick questions, and none of mine are hemp-related.
So we could take a deep breath, no pun intended, and focus on a few other things.
First and foremost, last year when you were here, Doctor, you mentioned the three Ps of health care.
Preventing disease, protecting from health risks, and promoting health and well-being.
How would you say we've been doing within the framework of what you described last year as a – since we last talked to you?
Yes.
For prevention, disease prevention, I will say my biggest success story this year is preventing measles.
You've seen how measles has just been making the rounds all over the country.
You have not heard that there is a measles outbreak in Chicago.
and that is because we've been working very hard since last year
to get vaccination coverage, especially in public school
and collaboration in public school, to that 95% threshold to prevent an outbreak.
We have also been looking at childhood vaccine-preventable diseases,
especially whooping cough.
Last year it was more than 27 times what we expect for normal,
so we've been working a lot on those issues to prevent food-related diseases.
This is another area.
This summer, more than 231 events.
We've had some foodborne outbreaks.
We were able to collaborate with IDPA to get them under control.
So I would say in terms of prevention, we are in a good place.
Would you say that also applies to our HIV, STI, and getting down to zero?
We see HIV is on the rise here in the city of Chicago.
Getting down to zero, we are not on track.
And I would remind the body that both in last year's statement and this year's,
we are not even discussing HIV anymore.
So how has that fallen off the radar?
Because I know that even from one of our very first conversations,
it's been about prevention.
It's been about getting male and female condoms out into communities,
particularly where we see sex work happening and prostitution are running rampant,
and yet we're at a 38% increase, I believe, in HIV.
Yes.
How do we refocus ourselves on that?
Thank you, Alder.
And I agree with you.
The strategy for HIV prevention is 95-95-95.
95% of people are aware of their status.
When people are aware, then they are taking appropriate precautions,
so they are not spreading the disease.
95% of people are on PrEP, so that, again, they are not spreading the disease.
And then 95% of people are, you know, retained in care because treatment is prevention.
On all fronts, we're not at 95%.
So we are rethinking our HIV prevention strategies.
We've had new HIV infections since the pandemic.
We've gone from 500 new cases to 800 new cases, so that is a problem.
And we are falling short of those 95% targets that we should be at.
One of the challenges that we have realized that there has been a lot of emphasis on the treatment
more than there has been on the prevention.
So how do we increase spread of uptake?
How do we get more people condoms?
And how do we get the resources for that?
A lot of the resources we have for HIV is in the treatment.
The prevention part of it is not as well resourced.
So when will we be seeing a preventative program and keeping the answer relatively concise?
Yes.
I won't say short.
I'll say concise because I think that we're not – I feel like I'm having Groundhog Day
every time I talk to you on this subject.
Yes.
It's the resources constraints, Alder, to mobilize the additional resource.
So what we've done this year is redirect some of the money that we're using for other areas
in treatment.
The part of it that we can restructure, we have $3.5 million of city dollars.
So we are trying to rethink how we use that for the prevention.
The federal dollars that we get is mostly for treatment so that we are very restricted there.
But the money that we get from the city after the contractors end, do we need to restructure
those funding to do more in the prevention?
So that's sort of where we are.
So then if you could share through the chair where the nearly 900 new cases are, because I know you could show us
like the heat map of that without getting too specific, but also share where those city dollars are being spent
and allocated and how, because if we're seeing that money meant for HIV prevention is not going to the neighborhoods
that are seeing the biggest spikes, which I'm going to probably go out on a limb and say they're not,
then that should be an immediate recalibration by your department, because I think that we are setting our own children
and young people up for failure and a lifestyle that they're not quite frankly prepared for if we are not focusing our energies
where they need to be focused.
With regards to play streets, my number one complaint this year, you shared this document which lists all the play streets locations
and on my ward and several other wards that have play streets, we see disparities which you and I have discussed
with regards to why you are choosing who gets what.
But in my ward, it says that I have had 12 play street events.
2024.
So this is not, so we don't have information that's accurate for year to date.
Year to date, we're still collating our results for this year.
So we will have that at the end of 2025.
So this report is for 2024.
But I have good news for you, Alder.
We were able to get a grant for an additional $300,000.
So we will be able to scale back in 2026.
All right.
Good news.
Yes.
Glad to hear it.
If you could provide through the chair a year to date of where we're at so that we could get a look and see how we are doing,
how our wards are doing, I would appreciate that.
But violence prevention programs, I am a fan of violence prevention programs when they work.
But we've also seen numerous times where individuals who oftentimes are in what they call the flip zones,
where individuals who are still one foot in, one foot out, oftentimes are still committing crimes while on the city's dime.
I was told previously under the manual administration that we had a three-strikes-and-you're-out policy
when it came towards individuals who were part of any kind of CVI program and engaging in criminal behavior.
Is that true still?
And how are we ensuring that our participants are not getting paid to cause the very violence that we are asking them to interrupt?
Thank you, Alder.
That is not something that I'm aware of, that they are participants.
Dr. Y?
Well, it's been well documented that we've had violence interruption individuals who are part of organizations whom we fund that are committing crimes.
Most famously, there was an individual that was in a picture with the governor doing a smash and grab right down the street on Michigan Avenue.
So I understand how difficult it is to try to provide an out for people to break that cycle.
But at the same time, what are the metrics that we have in place for when major slip-ups happen and people cross that line and go back to the wrong side of things?
And if that's something that you want to provide through the chair, that's fine so that we can see what and have an idea of what that policy is.
But I just want to state that that behavior hinders the good work that we see that we know is critical in many of these communities.
Lastly, I would just like to ask, does the Department of Health have for its medical teams a pharmacy benefits manager?
No.
So when it comes to the various drugs and things that we provide, how do we acquire them?
Because I know that our own benefits office for all of us here in this room and not only in the city of Chicago, CTA and so on, all of our sister agencies,
are covered under a multimillion-dollar drug pharmacy benefits agreement that I think currently CVS, I believe, is in charge of.
There are 22 different, excuse me, there are 38, 42, excuse me, several, many points required for that organization to meet
in terms of the distribution of pharmaceuticals to clients.
Your department has thousands of clients across the city of Chicago, whether in person, through telehealth, or what have you.
How do we manage the pharmaceutical needs of those individuals whom we are dispensing?
And two, why are we not using a pharmacy benefits manager to address in order to get a better deal,
as well as access many of the rebates that would be open to us in terms of cost-saving measures for the department?
Yes, we do not do a lot of procurement of pharmaceuticals, TB medication, a little, and we have, you know, 60, maybe 100 patients for TB.
Other clients that we serve, they fill out their prescriptions in other places.
So our clinics don't stock medication.
There have been a lot of challenges with medication management and maintaining a pharmacy from the city department.
We have a medical countermeasure stock, which is, you know, to address biological...
threats, radiological threats, et cetera, but actual treatment medication, we don't stock it
in-house. Mary, do you want to say more in terms of procurement? Yes. So in terms of procurement,
thank you for the question, Elder. Mary Emanuel, Deputy Commissioner of Finance Grants and
Contracts. So typically what we do is we have a nationwide contract known as the Minnesota
Multi-State Agreement, and it is usually through this agreement that we procure many of our drugs.
All right. Thank you. Thank you, Alderman. We're going to go to Alderman
Walkerspeck, followed by Alderman Lawson. Thanks, Chairman. I'll be brief. I think
everything's been asked already in terms of the management to staff and a few of the other
questions that my colleagues already asked. So, Commissioner, I just want to weigh in on this
hemp issue as well. You know as well as all of us, we've had hearings on this. We are seeing
these stores open up selling all sorts of stuff right next to us, but just outside the boundaries
of our schools. And I just don't see how we can put this, this administration can put this in the
budget. And essentially what seems to me like promoting or enabling kids to get their hands on
this unsafe, toxic garbage, we know that's already out there. I understand that you want to put
regulations in place. But don't you think you're putting the horse before the cart by saying they're
going to get $10 million out of this before we have regulations in place, before we have an
enforcement mechanism in place? And we've gone through this before in committees where we've talked
about this and said this is outrageous behavior by these people trying to sell our kids Oreo cookies
or something that looks like it or Doritos with the slight name change. And there's no way you can
enforce this. At least from what you've just said, you have no enforcement mechanism in place
for January 1st to roll out and go after this. So, I'm just having a hard time trying to figure out why
this administration would put us in an unsafe position more than we are right now.
Thank you, Alder. My interpretation of this process is really to have a safety net to protect the
children. The regulatory framework, again, the revenue part of it, how much will we make from it,
et cetera. I don't know enough about the revenue part of it, but we need to stop kids getting access
to these things. We need to stop that. We have numbers of kids who are buying candy and are getting
poisoned, et cetera. So, stopping sale to children is a component of this, saying you cannot sell this to
children. We have to have warning labels on this product. The licensing part of it, you have to have
a license to sell this, just like you have to have a license to sell tobacco or you have to have a license
to sell liquor, you know, as an opportunity to really review what has been sold and where you're
selling it and where you are located, et cetera. So, I, my view is that it is a step in the right
directions to start curtailing access to this product, especially for children. So, I feel like
the regulatory framework that is being proposed is a step in the right direction. Will we make money
from it? Will we not make money from it? I don't know enough about that, but having checks and balances
in place, saying before you say you want to sell something, you have to apply for a license. That is
the entry to at least reviewing what you're selling, and then you have to put up signs and you cannot sell
to children. And if you do sell to children, then you can get a ticket and violation for that. I think that
that is a good thing for us to consider. I understand that, and I understand you're coming
at it from the health aspect. Unfortunately, I don't see the positions in this book that should
be reflected in the amount that the mayor claims we're going to bring in terms of revenue. And,
you know, we have $800,000 plus going to the mayor's office already under the cannabis tax, but
are they regulating anything from that office? Are they seconded to your office to do enforcement
of cannabis? Not at this time. No. And so, what we see when we're trying to regulate our cannabis
operators is the police have to go in, and the police have no ability to look at something where
people are doing illegal acts at these places to say, are you really selling marijuana? Are you selling
hemp or whatever it might be? And obviously, the state has to weigh in. Why are we, after what we
went through this past year, and discussions in this chamber, why has there not been a regulatory
framework coordinated with the state on this? Look, it's, to me, it's, again, putting the horse before
the cart saying that you're going to bring in $10 million and there's no framework in place. You
don't even know how many staff you need to regulate this. And that should have been something that was
discussed in this chamber, put forward weeks, if not months ago, for us to look at and say this is a
worthy cause to move forward on. Or, as my colleagues have discussed, do we need to put, I guess, continual
pressure on the state or the federal government to say we need regulation on this? And I understand
maybe it'll help, but again, we don't even know. You can't tell us how many people are going to be
out there on the street and what tools they're going to use to regulate this stuff. And that's the
problem I'm having with this, throwing $10 million into this budget as if it's going to solve the
problem and we have no tools in place to tackle that. So this is not against you. This is against
the fifth floor throwing something in here without having the appropriate discussions and tools in
place before this is voted on. So I apologize if I'm going hard at it with you because I know what you and
your staff and how you feel about this. But again, it's just something I think would have been appropriate
to bring to the council to have discussions about and really focus in on what the needs are before
just throwing out a number that looks really great but may or may not solve any problem at all. So I don't
expect you to answer because I think somebody has put you in a really bad spot here and it's really
unfortunate. But I think you get the sense of what a lot of us are feeling. And I mean, I hope it comes to
fruition. But again, it's just backwards. Thank you very much. Thank you, Chairman.
Thank you. Audubon Lawson.
Great. Thank you, Chair. Hello, Commissioner, Dr. Ige. It's good to see you. I feel like you have been in
this room maybe more than some of your counterparts testifying before the Health Committee. I know we
had a conversation on hemp about six months ago. I'm not going to go too deep into that because I agree
with what a lot of my colleagues have already said. But I just want to ask real quick. So what
what staff in your department right now has any interface with the cannabis industry in the city?
None. None. What about the liquor industry in the city? None. Okay. And that sort of proves my
point is that I know you do food protection really well, but you do not inspect or regulate or
help to regulate intoxicating products right now. That's correct.
So what do we test in the city lab right now? So what sort of products are we testing there on a
regular basis? I'd like to see this lab, too. I think it sounds cool.
We work with community partners for opioid drug surveillance for opioid. We collect the samples.
We're sent it to forensic laboratory for the testing to know what's in it. Okay. So that's the
So we're still sending out to a forensic lab as well. Okay. We don't do we do inspection if we have a
food prep factory here, right? Not a restaurant, but someone who's doing large scale production.
Do we inspect those facilities? Or is that something that state or feds do USDA?
Yeah, we do. Maribel? Maribel Chavez-Torres, managing deputy commissioner. We do, depending on
the size of the manufacturing. Some of the wholesale manufacturing, that would be a jurisdiction of the
of the
of the
state. Okay. Okay. And is it just food products or personal care products? Are there other products
that we make sure we look at? It's food. Just food. Got it. All right. We don't play a role.
The department has an inspection role with tobacco at all. Obviously, smoking cessation is different,
but do we inspect tobacco? Yes. Smoked indoor tobacco. Yes, that is correct. So we do for
indoor smoking. We do follow up with complaints that come in, but not like the selling of the
product. Not retail. Not retail. Right. Because BACP does that, right? Correct. So that's a clean
air violation, right? If I'm smoking in the bar when I'm not supposed to be anymore. You guys
are called on that, and that's an air quality thing. All right. I will move away from hemp because
we've talked about it a lot, but without more parity, I think it's going to be really tough
just on Narcan. We've had it in my office since before I was alderman. We use a lot. I know when
we talked mid-year, we were concerned about supply, that we would be good probably through maybe half
of next year, then after that. So let's talk about supply. And then are we the only ones really
supplying this to folks in the city, or do we have some private partners or other government agencies?
Some private partners get their own supply, but we are by far the major supplier. So we are
negotiating with the state. These are some of the collaboration to meet us halfway and give us
supply so that we don't have to bear the cost alone. So the state is providing Narcan to us now.
State is to us. We're not buying it on our own. Yes. Okay. You are one of the departments that does
not go through procurement for purchasing, I believe we learned yesterday, right? Yes. Okay.
So that's something we're taking a look at. Real quick, I know just in the materials, it looks like
we had a major correction in federal grant funds last year. The ordinance was $252 million and the
revised appropriation was $110. So that's $140 million short from where we thought we were going to be.
I think we all knew that was coming maybe this in 25. And then we are expecting more in 26. We're back
up to 146. Can you talk just briefly and quickly about those specific grants, the largest ones that
were lost? And is that something that was expiring because it was ARPA? Or is that something that Trump
got? It's a combination of both. So early in 2025, we got notification to cease spending on COVID-related
funding because, you know, they were saying it was the end of the emergency. So a lot of the funding
that we thought we will have for two more years became very narrowly restricted in terms of what we
could use them for. So that is the major driver of that. We had some reduction in funding for
immunization also that were unexpected. That's it. Some emergency preparedness. No, that came
eventually. So those were mostly COVID-related restrictions.
Great. No, that answers it. I have the CARES team in my entire ward because my entire ward is in the
19th District. And I think we really appreciate it. We see them. We know they're busy. A little
busier with my friends to the north, but we keep them busy too. So with the eight teams, did I hear you
correctly say that they have the ability to respond citywide?
That is correct. That's the negotiation that we're in right now. So there should be no ward,
any community area that requires care support that should not be able to get it. We have citywide
teams for those who don't have district-specific teams that can be mobilized through email. And now
we're trying to integrate that into 311 as well. Excellent. Excellent. Whatever we can do there,
I think is important. The 15 mobile crisis response teams from the state, are those specific to the
city or to the region? To the city. To the city. So between R8 and their 15, what do their teams
look like? Is it still two people in the van or what? Yes. Two people in the van. They are assigned
to different areas. I think we included that in the map. Across the city, they have specific
zip codes that they are assigned to. Oh, okay. It's a lot of them. I didn't even notice. There's
only a few spots they don't go. Yes. Good. They should be everywhere.
Okay. I'll talk about HIV with you. Thank you for being at the AIDS run walk. I had the
unfortunate pleasure of following you and speaking. And I don't have your charisma when it comes to
this issue. And I know you have a strong personal story and you got the crowd going, which is not
my thing, but I tried to keep up. I think I did okay. But next time I will go before you.
I think it's concerning to see our numbers go in the wrong way, right? And some of that I know is
prevention because we're the only ones funding prevention, right? There's no federal money for
prevention. Does we have some state money for prevention or is it just? No.
Okay. Because, you know, it's condoms, it's prep, it's talking about these things in an open way,
which we are really good at. And then we've just sort of gone the other direction. And so
I think we need to refocus with our state partners and county partners to talk about where we're really
missing out. Because this doesn't end if there's new infections and we need this to end. And so
I know we've talked about grants, which are going to get very tight, if not in 26, certainly for 27,
right? And that's going to exacerbate the problem we're having already. So whatever we can do to
refocus, whatever we can do, if that's a media campaign, again, we've done them all before.
We've got private partners that hopefully we can leverage some private dollars, some pharma money,
but really to have a better coordinated campaign in the state that's targeting those vulnerable
populations. Because, you know, the MPOX outbreak very recently did not get the same kind of
coverage that it did a couple of years ago. We were all a little more public health in tuned right
after COVID anyway. But in the gay community, I didn't see signs on Halstead, right? Or in queer
businesses or a lot of conversation. Was it as widespread? Or was it more localized? As I believe
probably new HIV infections are too, right? Yes. This one, it is really due to the power of
surveillance because we just started to notice. We get, you know, a few cases and then the numbers
started to tick up and like something weird is going on. So initially we had requested additional
support from CDC for epidemic intelligence. Like what is going on? Do we have COVID-1? Where are we
seeing these numbers? They initially said they were going to send us EPIs, but it didn't send us EPIs.
So we just had to mobilize across the department to. So we have this genomic testing capacity to like
what is driving this new upsurge in MPOX cases. We found out it was local transmission. And so our
staff just started to go out. They went to. Sorry, it was what transmission? Local. It's not new. It wasn't
coming from that party in Spain. So we, our assessment is that we have a new pool of people who have come
into the city since 2022 who are not immune, who don't know about MPOX. And so there is a new pool of
susceptible people where this transmission is happening. So, um, go ahead. Sorry. Who were those
new people coming in after 2022? Uh, we saw an uptick in cases among the Latino community. Um, would those be
the new arrivals, new arrivals, uh, but also local transmission because we saw more cases in the
north, uh, side of the city. Um, so what we did is a very tailored targeted outreach, going to all the
public restrooms, going to steamworks, going to bathhouses. So 72 venues that we've covered took the
vaccinations to those locations, work with Howard Brown, et cetera, to start getting vaccines out.
Uh, so in the last, uh, month or so, we have started seeing the numbers come out, but what is
different this time is in 2022, we had a lot of funding this year. We don't have one additional
dollar. So it's been blood and sweat of the staff. Staff are volunteering to take the materials.
They're going door to door on their own. These are not, we don't have community engagement staff
anymore. So it's been, um, quite tricky to, uh, to get out there. So, but the good news is that we
have a lot of friends and a lot of partners who were able to rally and help us with this. So 69
healthcare partners, we went to them, they're doing vaccines. They got their own vaccines. We
complemented where we can. And so we're very happy to see that coming down. So we need to do, you know,
the marketing budget is very limited. Uh, so the same challenge we have with HIV, how do we
do more in terms of communication and marketing, uh, with no resources? Sure. Sure. Who is your,
um, communications director, your PIO? Um, Hernan? Testing, testing. Hi, I am Hernan Frato,
um, director of public affairs, CDPH. Great. Cause I think whatever our offices can do, uh, to put the
word out, obviously I, I, I know.
a little more unique position, as is my colleague from the 48th Ward, but even the 15th Ward.
There's need and there's resources and there's people who can help spread the word. So
please view us as a partner for whatever we can do there. I'll just wrap, if I can,
just one more question. Antonio King had been the LGBT liaison in the department. I understand he
has transitioned to a promotion role. Who is, have you hired for the LGBT health liaison
or is that something open or is that something that's subject to the hiring freeze?
No, they are all grant funded positions, so not subject to the hiring freeze. So our hope is to
backfill that position. We are hoping that, you know, with all of the grants ending that, you know,
some staff might be able to step in and support in some of these roles instead of starting a new
hiring sequence. So we're, we'll work with the unions on that, on what the possibilities are.
Great. Someone who's local, someone who knows the community really well. You don't want anyone with
a long learning curve here in that job. So thank you. I know you're juggling a million things at once.
It's a department that wears a lot of hats and always will, even when things go over to
environment. So I appreciate your willingness to work together and all your staff. Thank you.
Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Alderman Lawson. We're going to go to Alderwoman Mana Hoppenworth and
then to Alderwoman Taylor. Thank you, Chair. Hi, Commissioner. I want to thank you and your
care team for coming to the 48th Ward. We had, we have an SRO that we need to vacate and you all
stepped up with your care team and we really appreciate that. We need that right now to make
sure that people can stay in the, in the ward. Um, I just have a, a comment about a hemp, um,
proposal and I, I'm a little bit confused about it, honestly. And so I hope that we can, I'm not
sure, Chair, what it means to have more briefings on it, or, um, I would love to have more public
hearings on it because it seems to me if it, if it has the ability to generate up to $35 million in
annual revenue, I'd like to understand a little bit more about it. Um, and also I'm, I'm concerned
about hemp generally. My, my dad is one to go online and just try things. And I found a bottle of,
of hemp tinnature in his, in his, uh, cabinet. And I said, do you even know what's in here?
This is what I worry about. You know, they, they try to self-heal themselves. So I hope that we can
talk more about that. Um, thank you, Alder. I do want to say something, Vice Chair, which is to
correct, uh, on record that the legislation is a bridge to a broader, a broader regime being
discussed at the state. Um, we know that this could take years to come to full implementation
legislation and the city is trying very hard to ensure that children are protected, uh, in the
interim. So the, the collaboration with the state is going on, uh, the revenue, uh, potential of this
is there, but from the public health perspective, it is about protecting the children and protecting
adults who don't really know what is in the products they're consuming.
Absolutely. Thank you. Um, I wanted to go back to a couple of people's points about frontline
management ratios. And if you could provide through the chair, your organizational chart,
you know, and then can you also provide, or if you have it now, um, the number of people lost
from our grants that are being moved to the corporate fund, do you have that number
available? Um, when you say moving to the corporate fund, um, either from ARPA or other grants.
Okay. Um, thank you, Alder. Um, Mary Emanuel, Deputy Commissioner for Grants, Finance, and Contracts.
So, um, this for the FY26 budget, we have, uh, total 45 FTEs moving over from ARPA to, uh, the
corporate budget. Thank you. Can you clarify at what cost for those 45 FTEs? Yeah. Close
to $3 million. $3 million. Okay. Got it. Thank you. And then, um, can you, can you just speak
a little bit about how you made decisions on which programs to keep and expand and which
ones you needed, you felt you needed to cut in this budget? Yes. Uh, so the, the number
one restriction we have is funding. Um, if the funding goes away and there is no alternative,
then the options available to us is work with the county, work with the state to see what they
can take over. Um, the shortfall we have this year is 224 million. Um, at a time when the
city, uh, is exploring how to fill budget gaps, we know that we cannot, um, continue a lot of
the things we're doing. So what we've done is number one, look at what already exists in
the county or state. So programs like violence prevention, we are signing an MOU. This is what
we can do. This is what county can do. This is what the state can do so that we are filling
gaps and not duplicating. Mental health services, you know, we had a lot of that for APA. Um,
what can we continue to do? What can the state take on? What can the county take on? So we mapped
all of this out so that you can see where are there gaps? And that's where we will focus.
Um, family connects. This is the home visitation program. We visit 4,000 families. We are going
to, you know, it's going to be a shortfall of many millions, uh, when APA ends. What do we do? Uh,
there are some communities where we have the highest rate of maternal and infant mortality.
What can we continue to do? The state is giving us some dollars there. Uh, we have a federal grant,
um, and then we're exploring the 1115 waiver. So some of the hospitals that we were funding
before, we're working with them to connect with Medicaid waiver to cover those expenses.
So these are the, some of the areas, the big ones, uh, the air sensor network is also funded
by APA. Uh, we wanted to be sure that that sense, uh, the network was set up before the end
of the, the funding ends. So we have procured the sensors. We are setting it up. We will be able
to use it for the next five years at no additional cost. Uh, so these are some of the ways that we
have been trying to braid, um, the resources we have so that we minimize the service gaps. Uh,
so this year has been a lot of asset mapping and collaborating with the county and the state
to bridge resources, um, so that we can continue to have a footprint. Um, it may not be as,
as big as a footprint as we had before, but we want to make sure that we are filling gaps and
if the state and county are in other places, coordinate better with them.
Can, can I get through the chair just a little bit more about how you filled in those gaps,
especially for, uh, violence prevention, um, programs, um, that's very important. Um,
and of course, family connect. Yes. Um, thank you for your work. I appreciate it. Thank you to your team.
Thank you, Alderwoman. We're going to go to, uh, Alderwoman Taylor, who's online. Uh, and then
Alderman Lopez has asked for a brief round two. Oh, and then, uh, I'm sorry, Chair Irvin
before Alderman Lopez. Go ahead, Alderwoman Taylor. Alderwoman Taylor, if you can hear us,
you're on mute. Okay. Why don't we go to- Thank you. How you doing?
There you go. There you go. Go ahead. Here I am. Um, good evening, doctor. Um, so I want to go back
to the hemp thing and it's not to beat a dead horse. So two summers ago, I had some young ladies,
um, buy the gummies that were hanging inside of a store. Those young ladies went to the emergency room.
They were high for two days. Why have we not at least put in legislation to say that you could
only buy it as smoke shops? Cause let's say people's door for me. We, we shouldn't be able to sell them
in any other place, but smoke shops. And that's the low hanging fruit because what happens is,
this is what's true. When you go in those stores and see them, A, you don't know if they're candy or
not, but B, what you'll find so they could sell them and not get in trouble. They put a little label
on it to fool you of how much THC or Delta aid is actually in it so that you don't know that you're
buying higher. Can we at least right now say you can only purchase it as CBD and smoke shops. And let
me also say, these are the same people who sell cigarettes and tobacco to children.
Nothing exempts them from selling our kids these drugs.
And so what could we do?
Thank you so much, Alder Taylor.
These are the things that really worry me.
We have seen these numbers.
We have seen kids buying these things.
People are going to emergency departments.
So we feel like there is a sense of urgency around this issue that it needs to be addressed.
This is a federal loophole.
So we've been waiting on the state.
So if the city can take the lead in doing something to restrict access to hemp products,
I think it will be a good thing.
We do executive orders for everything else we can do on Monday,
where you cannot buy any of those products in stores,
because they're at our convenience stores that are there at our gas stations.
And if you look at any of most communities on the south and west side,
they're full of it.
And so the thought that my child or anybody can go right in the store and look at it,
and you know it's not candy.
If you actually read the package, it tells you, right,
they have one that's called Reese's Weeces.
Not Reese's Pieces, Reese's Weeces, which means it has cannabis in it.
And so I want us to move a little expedient on putting this in place now to have a conversation about you can't sell.
Because they are getting away with it, and the people who seem to work.
So through the chair, I want to know how many cases have you all gotten ward by ward with young people under the age of 18
who have gotten hurt from purchasing these products.
My second question is, how many the numbers for HIV have gone up in black women?
How many black-led organizations are you all funding in the city through CDPH?
Thank you, Alda.
We will get you the details through the chair.
We have a QINDS initiative that is an initiative to work with black women.
You know, for a long time we have noticed the increasing trend in new HIV cases among black women.
So that is an initiative that we have that's doing the outreach to connect with the communities.
The details of how many organizations we fund, we will share with you.
Alda, we, you know, black-led organization for non-profit is a little tricky.
It's not like businesses that are owned by people.
So most non-profits have a board.
So the city doesn't have a clear definition of black-led, but we can get you details of organizations that are located in the communities that serve the communities that are most impacted.
So I had this same argument with Dr. Awadi about we say that they work in the black communities, but they are not serving black people.
You do know that there is a distrust of black people when it comes to vaccinations and medicines, when it comes to other people.
You all do understand that.
And so what we say definitely in the last administration that I don't want to see is those organizations who actually work in our community and do community work, get the money that they need to do AIDS.
Because it seems like when you all put out the money, it never goes in our communities.
And that's what a higher numbers are.
Let's move to STIs.
What are you all doing around STIs when it comes?
Because in the last couple of years, the highest STIs have been in senior buildings.
I have 18 senior buildings in my ward.
And so I don't see the city there.
Every now and then I'm able to bring organization there.
I'm able to have the conversation.
But what is the city doing making sure that we're protecting our elders in these buildings when it comes to STIs?
Thank you, Alder.
Our 2024 report, you know, shows some of the work that we do around STI.
Testing for sexually transmitted infection is one of the areas.
We have three STI clinics.
They do about 20,000 tests a year.
And we also have a network of partners that we fund for the services.
I will look into the senior centers and services there and how we can better support.
We have not been taking services to the senior centers for STI clinics.
But Dr. Sloboda provides education, goes to the senior centers in collaboration with DFSS.
So it is an area where we can easily add on sexual health issues if necessary.
But we work very closely with the senior centers for vaccinations.
So the senior center that's on the south side is in Eaglewood.
I've been in office since 2019.
I can count on one hand how many times I met the lady.
And so, and I'm in no senior buildings.
As a matter of fact, I'm having a senior event tomorrow at DuSable Museum where 450 people, seniors, will show up.
And so, I'm not sure who doing the work, but it's not turning over to in the communities.
And so, I need to know that person.
I would like to meet that person.
What do we all, we made the mistake.
And I'm saying we, and not even talking about COVID and ignoring it.
But we're starting to see fluent COVID numbers going up now.
Dr.
What is her name?
Dr. Awadi.
She taught way more than I liked.
But I don't hear from you at all.
And so, I want to see you on TV talking about how we take, and it was the same thing I said to her, I'm going to say to you.
I want you on TV talking about how people make themselves healthy, how we take care of ourselves, because folks are not getting COVID vaccinations.
They're not getting flu.
They're not getting pneumonia.
How are we teaching people to take care of themselves outside of vaccinations?
Thank you, Alder.
Yes, I actually have a TV show on Monday to talk about flu and COVID.
Right, Hernan?
That is true.
So, we will do better.
We have a regular spot on WVON with Rufus, because we know that that's a preferred channel for black communities.
So, I'm always there as well.
But the TV work and getting the word out is an area where we are working on actively.
Thank you, Alder.
So, when it comes to those groups around HIV services, through the chair, I want a list of everyone that we fund and what their numbers look like when it comes to people they're serving and who is actually working in those centers.
My last question is around health when it comes to these businesses in our community.
Too often, I'm calling BACP for something that's actually CDPH work.
How are you all collaborating and work together?
So, I have stores who have little stores inside them.
So, they sell fast food, Italian beef, cheese with nachos, but they're never clean.
And so, how are you working with BACP to inform when their business is closed, how do we open back up to make sure to hold these convenience stores and gas stations accountable for some of their bad habits?
Because I've seen people get sick, I've seen people bring the food back there, and I don't even know why they even have a license to serve food when there's no really person checking on them other than BACP.
That is a health problem.
That is a health hack.
Thank you, Alder.
You're right.
That is CDPH territory, food safety.
Maribel?
Well, thank you, Alder, for the question.
So, we do respond to complaints when we get 311 complaints regarding businesses.
So, we do send out our inspectors out.
We also, if necessary, do close businesses.
This year, we've had 63 closures.
So, our goal is not to, you know, close the businesses, but work with the businesses as well.
But if they've had multiple violations, we will close the building and reopen them.
We do work with BACP on any closures.
If they are doing any emergency closures, we will go in with them as well.
We do have limitation with staffing.
So, we do, you know, our best to address the complaints that have, you know, health impact, especially when we get complaints about pests, insects, you know, rodent.
Those are some of our priority inspections that we do.
So, in 20, it's some of the same bad actors, and they're closed for a couple of weeks, and they're right back open.
Why is the goal not to just say, you can't, you all can be convenience stores, but you all can't serve food?
Because they're the same actors.
They're never anybody different or anybody.
They're not everybody different.
But we allow them to keep harming our community, and that's no CDPH.
Alder, we would like to follow up with you on this particular location so that we can look into it.
We do close down because these are real health risks.
So if there are multiple violations, we do routine inspections, but, again, we're limited.
There are 17,000 food establishments, and we only reach about 70% of them.
So complaints will help us know which ones are bad actors,
and if we have records to show that they have had repeated violations, then we will shut them down.
I'll believe it when I see it.
How many inspectors, did you all lose any, or were you all not allowed to put more in the budget?
It is a combination of factors.
Like I shared earlier, public-facing roles are just extremely difficult to recruit for and retain staff for.
So at any time, we have maybe 10, 12 vacancies in terms of our public health inspectors and a high turnover.
It's a very challenging job.
People get verbally and physically assaulted in this role.
So it is quite difficult to recruit and retain people.
So we have vacancies there.
Every time we have a vacancy, we share with all of the old demonic offices.
We're working very closely with city colleges to see how we can bring people in.
And then there are very strict, you know, certification requirements from the state for who can be a public health inspector.
So that's also a hurdle to overcome.
But we have just about it.
Who have y'all worked with?
Because I've never gotten an email from your office.
I've never talked to anybody from your office about hiring.
So y'all love y'all.
Y'all biggest thing is we can't fill vacancies.
Where is the hiring plan?
How are you working with DHR?
Yes, we are.
We are working very hard with DHR.
One of the changes we made this year is change from the title sanitarian to public health inspector to make it clearer what these rules are.
And we are exploring all options.
And part of that is also support from the AFSCME Mental Health Group and also the EAP so that people can just process, you know, being in contact with the public.
People don't like to see government officials now in uniform for any reason.
So it's become a little more challenging these days than it's been in the past, especially in the days of ICE.
So we, DHR has been very supportive.
We're exploring all options.
How do we staff and keep people in public health inspector roles?
It's a priority.
So I'm having a hard time believing this because there are 50 elders.
Who are you all?
So is there a recruitment program from city colleges or CPS?
Maribel?
Maribel Chavez-Torres, Managing Deputy Commissioner.
We are working with the city colleges.
We do not have a formal agreement or training to employment.
We do share our openings with city colleges so they can disseminate the information to the, especially our Kennedy King College, who has a culinary program.
I know, it's been 20.
I'm sure I'm clear about the programs.
I'm saying is there a direct pathway for people to get in a program to be able to work for CBPH so that we can fill these positions?
And I've been looking.
I don't see it get posted.
Y'all send out emails.
It never really comes.
And so I need for the things that y'all say to actually be done.
Right.
Because we have people who come to these employment fairs who are dying and looking for jobs.
And if training is the issue, do you all train?
Right.
Right now, we don't have a formal training to employment program.
That's something that we can, you know, look at.
And right now, I think one of the big issues that we are currently, you know, having is I need our supervising sanitarians to also be onboarded.
And that's been a challenging, you know, tie to our management staff.
So if I bring in 12 to 15 sanitarians, I do not have the management capacity.
Our staff goes through a rigorous, you know, training in the field.
So we are working on hiring our supervisors in order to be able to, you know, to onboard our sanitarians.
We did make some modifications a couple of years ago to the job description where the sanitarians who were coming on board, they did not have to have their food sanitation certificate.
We would give them 60 days before, after hire, you know, to complete that certification in order to increase, you know, the poll.
Yes.
There is a hiring freeze at the moment.
So you will, Alder, you will not get notices for a while.
But when there are notices, we will, Alfonso, I think he does a good job of getting it out to the Aldermanic offices every time we have a vacancy.
So when is the last time he sent it out to the Aldermanic offices?
Okay.
Thank you very much.
I said when.
Oh, sorry, go ahead.
I know.
When?
When is the last time he sent it out to the Aldermanic offices?
This morning.
Thank you, Vice Chair.
No problem.
Thank you, Chair Taylor.
Dr. Ege, you and I have talked about this very recently, in fact, the challenges with these positions.
And, you know, I think it's worth asking here in the hearing, you know, how often do you have these vacancies?
I know, like, what is the current number of vacancies in the food inspector category?
Maribel Chavez-Torres, Managing Deputy Commissioner.
We currently have 11 sanitarian positions vacant and three supervising public health inspectors vacant.
And we have one support staff open.
And what's, from a span of control perspective, how many inspectors is a supervisor supervising?
With the nature of the work that they do, anywhere from six to eight max.
And right now, with the current supervisors that I have, they are managing 10 and plus employees.
So, currently, we have how many working in the category?
Sanitarians or supervisors?
Sanitarians and supervisors.
So, sanitarians, I have 35 sanitarians, you know, working.
That's corporately funded.
And 11 supervising, seven supervising sanitarians.
We just, one was newly hired.
And the requirements by FDA is what?
How many sanitarians to, how many facilities?
I think it's one to 50?
One to 50, yes.
Yes.
So, it's one supervisor to every 50 sanitarians?
No, one sanitarian to, like, 50 establishments.
50 establishments.
So, we have 17,000.
So, we have less than a third of what is required to even cover the existing facilities.
So, it's not just the vacancies.
Like, even with the vacancy fully filled, there are so many food establishments in Chicago.
We have 17,000 licensed.
That is minus the food trucks, minus the special events.
So, it is a big need that we have in public health.
Got it.
Thank you.
And you said it's six to eight sanitarians under the supervision of a supervisor.
I just, I couldn't read my own writing there.
I apologize.
Okay.
I got it.
So, this is a place of great need.
I'm just trying to figure out the math on the, so we have seven supervisors currently.
So, it's like a five to one ratio right now.
No.
With seven supervisors and 35 sanitarians?
We have, yes, we have right now seven supervising sanitarians.
One was just recently hired.
Uh-huh.
And so, we have three, you know, vacancies.
So, we have some field supervisors that go out.
And then, we have our sanitarians, supervising sanitarians that support some of our complaints
and licensing, you know, section.
So, I need to pull some of my supervising sanitarians out of the field in order to support some of
my in-house operation, which includes complaints and licensing.
Got it.
It's just, based on, you know, if they're supervising sanitarians, then, you know, by my math,
and I thank you for the supplemental explanation, because if we're hiring 11, if we've got 11
vacancies and in sanitarians, and I think you said three, four supervisors, that would
take us to 46 and 10.
So, that seems a little off in terms of the number, but you're pulling other people, you're
pulling some of them to do other duties.
So, there's field operations, and then there's licensing and complaints.
So, the supervising sanitarians who are doing licensing and complaints are not on the field.
So, only three of them are on the field of supervising the work.
Ones who are on the field.
Four.
Four.
So four are in the field.
How many sanitarians are in the field then?
Then that's the distinction I need.
The sanitarians?
All the sanitarians are.
All of, okay.
So you have four for the 35.
Yes.
Okay, that makes a little bit more sense.
Right.
Got it.
Okay, I'm sorry.
Chair Irvin.
Thank you.
Check, check.
Hold on.
Thank you.
Dr. Ige, a couple things.
Number one, I want to commend the work that you all have done in the space around opioid abuse, primarily in the West Garfield Park community.
We've seen dramatic decreases in deaths.
We've seen uptick, I know, in the use of Narcan.
And I was very surprised when you first brought those stats to us in health and human relations and the age and the gender disparity that existed around the opioid abuse amongst older African-American men.
I don't know if I told you this, but when you gave the profile, I didn't have to look very far to see it.
And it was in my own family.
And I lost a relative in that same way.
Really opened my eyes up to what was happening as it relates to the group that you're speaking toward.
What additional supplements are you all looking at around the group?
And this may not even be through CDPH.
It may be through DFSS that we have to look at, especially in these senior buildings.
I've got a senior building that the ambulance is at.
I get a call out of there every week.
Somebody's overdosed.
Somebody's, you know, something's happened in that space.
Besides the disorder, substance abuse disorder treatment, what other activities can we start thinking about to help people before they get to that point?
Yes.
Some of the things that we shared with you now, the immediate overdose reversal is step one.
And then connecting people to long-term recovery is another area that we are expanding.
So last week we had the bridge program.
Again, hospitals on the west side, hospital on the south side are feeling the brunt of this.
But they don't have the resources to start people on treatment at the emergency department.
So it is possible for one person to overdose several times in one week.
So if they are not initiated on the medication-assisted recovery to at least start the conversation about long-term recovery support, that is a missed opportunity.
So that is another layer that we've added on this year.
Now, the other part of this is many people are ingesting substances that they think is something else is also happening here.
So we have, I believe, one of the largest community-based drug surveillance system in the country.
We retrieve this sample test, what is in it.
And I can tell you now that many people think they're taking dope or heroin.
In almost 90% of those cases, that is not what is in it.
It is fentanyl or other adulterants.
So that is also a problem, educating people on, like, this is not what it is, testing strips and all of that.
Now, the upstream education with young people, these are all predatory marketing.
You will see people on the corner pushing this thing, telling the kids this is the way to solve your problem, this is the way to, you know, relieve your sorrows.
How do we better engage young people who might have other pressures, home conditions, not having enough to eat, and feel like, okay, I just want to forget my sorrows for a day or two, and let me take something to help me forget my sorrows.
And support them with mental health support and other services that can help people process their emotions.
So that youth engagement piece of our work is, if you look at the spectrum of the services that we have laid out, this is one of the areas we want to expand to in 2026, engaging early, helping youth have better coping skills to at least decompress this pipeline of people using drugs as the way to cope.
And also people knowing that these drugs are not safe.
And the reason you're seeing 42, you know, middle-aged men is they think it is heroin, they think it is dope, but it is not, and then they are overdosing in droves.
So the, all right, so we have our young people taking the, popping the pills, and we come to find out that's not what it is.
As I talked to resident service providers, and I found this to be very odd, that some of these folks are turning to this out of boredom.
Um, I was, just, threw me a little bit, but I know that whatever we're doing is, it is helping.
Um, I, I know that, um, we've finally seen the life expectancy gap to begin to shrink and not continue to grow.
So, um, I, I do definitely appreciate the work.
I know we've got a long way to go in that, but we are trending at least in the, in the right direction.
Um, the, the second point, and I think, um, from earlier, we've been talking about this him so much.
I think we're all confused, um, relating to, um, what, what we're looking at, what we're taxing or what the regulatory scheme will look, what can look like.
Can, can we kind of clear up a few things from earlier in, in relation to that and a, what the regulatory scheme may look like be, um, revenue derived from it.
And, and what do we feel the long-term play is going to be here?
Thank you, Chair.
Um, the regulatory framework, uh, the public health and safety component of this is age restriction, uh, restricting sale, uh, to 21 plus warning signs, labeling standards,
bans on products mimicking candies or, or, or snacks that appeal to minors, um, regulating on-premise consumption, uh, by establishing a licensing process for cannabis, uh, requirements or the additional requirements if there's going to be on-site consumption, security, insurance, hours of operations, health warnings, et cetera.
Um, controlling the location and zoning, um, of this establishment, restricting hemp and cannabis establishment from locating near schools and childcare facilities, establishing clear zoning, uh, classification, setting distance requirements to reduce neighborhood conflicts, uh, creating a licensing structure that requires hemp retailers and consumption businesses to obtain city-issue licenses.
With strict eligibility standards, background checks and operational requirements, uh, for compliance, uh, and then enforcement tools, granting BACP, CPD, and CDPH authority to inspect issue fines, confiscate illegal products, and revoke licenses for repeat violation.
So this is the full regulatory framework, uh, uh, that's been proposed.
Okay. Um, it turned over, uh, vice chair, uh, turn over the sheet with the attendance on it.
I wrote two things down on it. I know one was opioid. What was the other item?
The attendance sheet?
Yeah, just turn it over.
Oh, uh, opioids and care and then GBU.
Okay. No, that was, we talked about GBV, uh, the care, the care team. That was the other item. Um, now the, the service is being, is it, we're flat level. Are we expanding at 2026?
Uh, so care for 2026 goal fully staffed advance, um, like other, other, um, clinical positions we've had turnover. So backfilling and making sure those advance are fully staffed is priority. Those positions have been posted. Um, the other priority is doing more outreach. Um, we have noticed that where we're getting calls,
and where people are encampments and people experiencing homelessness are, uh, the areas of concern that people have and why they're calling us.
to come. So proactive outreach to encampments, we piloted that this summer with DFSS. We went with
them to the encampments. We did an assessment. Mental health is a big issue. So we want to also
expand to outreach and not just waiting for people to call us. So that pilot this year,
we were able to do a thousand encounters just over the summer. So we feel like there is real
potential there to be proactive and then layer onto that to street psychiatry. There's street
medicine now where people are doing wound care, reaching out to folks on the street.
If we start proactively canvassing areas where there are people on the street who might be
dysregulated, that is an opportunity. And then you will see in our spectrum, we also have night
ministry where on CTA, we are working with partners to do outreach to people who might have
mental illnesses and who need support services. So we are trying to build this crisis,
comprehensive crisis system, also collaborating with our city and state and county counterparts
to coordinate so we know where they are, we know where we are, we know where we need to fill the
gaps. So that is our plan for care for 2026.
And you were going to be in, you got eight teams, what type of geography are you going
to be able to cover with that?
They are going to be citywide. Because right now they need to be able to get to any location
within 30 minutes. And we don't need them to be restricted to one district, they can go
citywide. So that is what we're working on, making sure they citywide cover it. Right now we have two
citywide teams, six teams restricted to police districts, but the one team can cover two police
districts, we can go citywide. But coordinating with the mobile crisis teams is another thing that
we want to finalize so that we are not duplicating efforts. But citywide coverage is the goal and
ensuring that, you know, there are no service gaps.
And to, is that sufficient or is that, what does a, what I, for lack of a better term, what
would a full program look like? Is it eight teams? Is it 10? Is it 12? What does that look
like? Or is what we're doing sufficient for the need that we have?
Yes. To determine the need, we're looking at the numbers and the demand. And where are
we missing people? So based on the numbers that we have, you know, with the teams that
we have right now, two to three calls a week, we feel like the teams that we have can respond
to the needs and the calls that we're getting. And the 24-hour coverage, mapping that out also
with the state-funded teams so that, you know, if you're covering this area and we are covering
this area, do you need to cover these hours? Do we need to cover these hours so that we are really
maximizing the city's resources for where it is most needed? So these are the things we're trying
to finalize. Now, is it state funding or is it state delivering the service? They are funding 590
mobile crisis teams for the city of Chicago. They have 15 teams that they fund to provide
similar services to care. Okay. But you also stated that there are some teams that are restricted
geographically to a police district. That is our team, the care, the city teams. Okay. And how many
districts are we in now? Six. We're in six districts. My assumption is that we would move those along to be
into all 22 districts. And to do that, we have how many teams in each of the police districts?
One team per district. One team per district, which means are they
24-7? Are they, is that one team 40 hours a week? No. The teams are Monday to Friday, 10 to 4.
PM or AM? I'm sorry? 10 PM to 4 AM or? PM. 10 PM. 10 AM to 4 PM. 4 PM. Yes. So they're tailored for
looking at the care eligible calls. Those are the preferred hours of operations where we get the
most calls. So that's where we started, 10 AM to 4 PM for the six police districts with the highest
number of calls. What we have seen change this year is as more teams came into the field, the number of
calls we were getting in those police districts have been low. So now the teams we have don't have as
many calls in the districts that they have. So we are asking them to cover more districts so that they
are fully engaged. So that is why we want to know what the state funded teams are covering so that we can
come up with a final plan of what additional teams we need to cover whatever is left. So the state funded
teams are 24-7.
Okay. Thanks. That's all that I have. But again, I appreciate the work. Last point, closing the death
gap. Um, what else is, um, what else are we doing besides the opioid work to help close that death
gap? Yes. The number one cause of premature death, uh, in Chicago is heart disease, cardiac arrest,
high blood pressure, diabetes, and cancer. Um, we have started conversation with the hospital partners,
um, along that area. Um, the meeting last week with some of the rush and UIC is they are now taking
services to barbershops so that people can get their blood pressure monitored and they can get their
medication dispensed in the community. Uh, so we are working with them on that with our community health
workers to getting information out, to getting more people screened. So our breast cancer screening
program, we are rethinking that and how we can better leverage that. Um, and then the diabetes,
uh, program also in collaboration with UIC. So the chronic disease space, we don't have a lot of
investments there at all. Our tobacco control budget is 200,000. So really working with, um, partners
across the city to respond to that is one of the priority, but that is the number one cause of death.
Second to that is gun violence. So making sure that that work continues and is not impacted is a
priority. Number three is opioid overdoses. Um, no, I'm sorry. Opioid overdose is second because it's
overtaking, um, gun violence. Uh, we are seeing progress in those two areas. So it's sustaining gains.
Then maternal and infant mortality is next. So that is another area where we are seeing 42 babies die
every year, um, in Cook County from sleep related issues. So we need to do some work there and then
infectious diseases, HIV and other infectious diseases. So those are the primary causes of
death in Chicago. Um, our strategic plan is to accelerate progress there, uh, and continue the
momentum to close the gap. But with 38% reduction in opioid related overdoses, we're on the right track
and, um, 22% reduction in violence prevention. Thank you. Thank you, uh, doctor. Um, I'm, I'm,
I'm finished, vice chair. Thank you. Uh, thank you. I've got some of my own questions. I'll let,
uh, no, Alderman Lopez, why don't you go do your round two first and I'll close things up.
Five minutes, please. Uh, she was saving you. Um, thank you, uh, vice chair. Just real quickly,
um, a couple of things with regards to the Senate, uh, food inspector sanitarians. So by my rough math,
we would need to fill about 200 or to create 290 positions in keeping with, is that the state statute?
FDA. Yeah, the FDA state requirement for one for every 50 establishments, roughly $22 million
would need to be appropriated for that. Kate, is that correct? That's the number.
Uh, so Kate McMahon, director of policy. Could you repeat the question? Uh, the ratio.
So you said the ratio was FDA. One per every 50 establishments. The sanitarian ratio.
Uh, we have to give you that. I'm just going to take that as a yes. So roughly speaking,
we're looking at $22 million. Is there any discussion or thought on how we can, like we do with buildings,
make this, because I'm assuming that the 40 plus 10 individuals that go out and issue citations do
generate revenue for the city of Chicago, correct? Because all, how much revenue is generated by your
department in the enforcement division? Um, if you, do you have that handy or? Yes.
Mary Emanuel, Deputy Commissioner for Finance, Grants, and Contracts. So the year to date that we have
generated out of fines and fees stands at $1.6 million. So our, our band of 50 has generated $1.6 million.
1.6 million dollars. So one would imagine that if we extrapolated that, we could probably make it
almost cost neutral if we were to elevate fees while increasing the hiring, correct?
Would you say that's a fair assessment? Yes, I think we generate about three million a year
from food. Okay, so food's three million. Okay. So I think that definitely is probably a
conversation all of us should push forward because if we can use enforcement to pay for the added
health benefits, because I would fear that we know that lawyers are looking for new ways to sue the
city of Chicago, and if they find that we are deficient in our FDA responsibilities, then it's
only a matter of time before somebody and somebody start suing us for health code violations that we
did not fully enforce. Second, I just want to ask a question with regards to the very lengthy
can't avoid hemp discussion. Do you find, as a doctor, those products to be unhealthy and dangerous?
Hemp in its natural state can be used safely.
And the others?
What we're seeing right now is not hemp in its natural state, so it is dangerous, can be dangerous,
especially to children, pets, and even adults.
If we were to say, what are the, is there any measurable or quantifiable data on the impact of the
synthetic on our residents? Do we have any information? Like, what's the health care cost
so far that we've seen?
Yes. At the subject matter hearing, we shared some of the information that we've had. There's been
advisory issued from FDA. There's been advisory from the state. What's the dollar amount, if I could
just put it at that? We will have to get that through the chair to look at the poison control
number and the emergency department. Anecdotally, would you say it's more than what we generate from
the tax revenue? So if we are expected to generate $10 million in tax, would you say that the financial
cost of the overdoses and all the medical-related incidents regarded to the synthetic probably
outweighs that $10 million?
I believe the proposal right now is $2 per product. You need hemp tax and $10 to $14 million for the
first six months and maybe $27 to $34 million in annual revenue total. We will have to see through
the chair what the costs are right now to create this framework, but I believe that's the projection.
I understand what the projection is, but I was asking with regards to the health-related costs
associated with it. So for example, we know that there's health-related costs associated with tobacco
use, but yet we still have a syntax that deals with per pack. And we know that we spend more on
the health than we gain. So one could extrapolate that we're probably going to spend more money as it
is allowed to be sold than we're going to ever generate in tax revenue.
So on that regard, would it be worth even pursuing this in a legalized manner if it's going to wind up
costing us more money than what we generate?
As the public health folks, we look at the health benefits. And I do believe that there is benefit in
regulating this and stopping people and children from getting access to this. I believe that the public
health impact of it is significant and regulating it and reducing access to it will be beneficial.
I would just end with saying that I feel like probably the same conversation was said with
R.J. Reynolds at one point, and we know how that turned out. Thank you, Chair.
Thank you, Alderman. Okay, my turn. Not to belabor hemp stuff. I just, one of the things that I may have
missed, and I apologize if this was already asked. Under the current proposal, would CDPH be responsible
for testing? Yes. And do we have the capacity currently, or are those new positions that were
going to be created in order to facilitate that function? We do not have the capacity currently.
It will need to be a new setup. And what is that going to look like in terms of headcount and
the types of positions? We will get that through the chair for you. Is it currently reflected in the
budget book, though, these new positions? No. No. Okay. Got it. Okay. That was my only question
about hemp because everything else was asked. I want to go back to a question that was just raised
by both Chair Irvin and Alderman Lawson about the care teams. I just want to clarify because
you made a statement to Chair Irvin saying that the citywide team, that there were teams for all 22
districts and that they were citywide. We only have eight care teams in the city, all right? The rest
of the teams are state funded. Is that right? Yes. Okay. I just want to make sure we got that on the
record. Okay. Is there, we've had conversations a little bit just between, you know, Alders and others
about consolidation of work between different agencies. And I think you spoke a little earlier
about some work that the state was doing. Can you speak about any other work like that,
work that the city or county, I'm sorry, that the county or state are doing that we are not
currently doing? So are they filling in gaps that like we're no longer, if we were grant funded in
one area and we're no longer doing that work, is that being picked up in other places by another
branch of government? Mental health is an area where there has been a lot of state investment
and county investment. This new civilization center, for instance, opened this year. The county
is investing significantly there. The mobile crisis team, also, this is something that the states picked
up this year. Starting in January, they are funding the 590 grantees to provide mobile services. So
the mental health space is an area of priority across state and county that we've been working on.
Disease control is another area where we've made a lot of noise. You know, we've been inundated for the
past how many years with infectious disease outbreaks? How can the state support us? So vaccination,
additional vaccination coverage, staffing, when we've had outbreak, county is able to deploy some
staff to help us with that. So those are some examples. Then the violence prevention, we have
the gas committee where there is a signed agreement. It makes it transparent to what county is funding,
what we are funding, so that we can better coordinate and we're not duplicating services. And that way,
we can spread dollars further. The areas where, you know, this year we have let some things go to other
departments, for instance, the supportive housing. During COVID, we ran supportive housing for people
with infectious diseases who had complex medical needs. The funding for that expires. We had acquired
some spaces that could be used that transition to Department of Housing, so they can use it for single
room occupancy kind of services. That's an example. This work encampment audit that we're doing with DFSS.
They have case managers who have been doing a lot of work in encampments. What would it look like if we
tag along with them and then bring services to support what they're already doing so that we don't have to
introduce new staff, start the program from scratch? Public Library is a fantastic partner in many
different ways. We find that people are more likely to go to libraries than they are to come to our clinics,
so why don't we take services there and take our Narcan there? The most used vending machine that we have is at
Harold Washington Library. It is not in our clinics. You know, so these are some of the collaborations why we're
rethinking the model of our services. How can we use existing structures? We have this wonderful
collaboration with Older Woman Clay, where, you know, they suggested using newspaper stands for Narcan
distribution. The community-based organization who are hosting doesn't, they don't, we don't have to pay them,
we don't have to stop them, we just provide them Narcan. So that saved us hundreds of thousands in operational
expenses. So these are some of the ways we're looking at efficiency so that whatever little
dollars we have, it is filling gaps. It is not duplicating whatever the hospitals can bill for
and get Medicaid for. We're encouraging them to do so so that we're a payer of last resort
for many services. So we are working very hard to reduce overlap, to reduce duplication, to be more
efficient. But there are some areas where only CDPH can do, like food inspection.
I'm very familiar. We have a lot of restaurants in the 11th Ward. I'm going to shift gears. I'd like to
talk about, obviously I represent the only Asian majority ward in the city of Chicago, so I have a
very keen interest in language accessibility, how it is we're providing services in different languages,
languages, as well as how, you know, cultural competency, as well as data dissecting.
which I talked a little bit about earlier with DFSS. So can you talk about what steps CDPH is taking to ensure funding for culturally competent and language accessible, sorry, language accessibility for mental health services?
So we have a contract with language line. So, for example, our mental health clinic in the North Park, it is one of the most diverse communities. There are maybe 20 different languages. So I actually went there and saw how this was happening. There was a patient from Southeast Asia who spoke a language. They were able to call the language line.
For mental health, because of the confidentiality, you can't bring a family member. You cannot bring someone from the outside. So having the language line has been a lifesaver because you can get real-time translation on the language line. So we have a contract with that, I think, about 70 different languages that they can support. So that is how we navigate in the mental health clinics.
Getting culturally competent staff has been a challenge in the mental health workforce. So that is sort of how we're bridging the gap at the moment.
Yeah, and I think that from a pipeline perspective, we all need to come together more to make sure that we're encouraging young people to go into this field of study because nothing, I think, language line is great because that is better than, like, holding up Google Translate, right?
But to sit face-to-to-face with a provider who is familiar with your customs and speaks your language, I think, goes a lot further.
And that probably would be more like the gold standard.
As part of the city's equity initiative, how is the Department of Health currently collecting and reporting race and ethnicity data for city-funded programs?
All metric is disaggregated by race and ethnicity.
We have 400 health indicators on our health atlas.
You can go on it right now and see.
Every single metric that we have that is health-related is disaggregated by race and ethnicity.
So with Asian American, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders, is that one category or is that – oh, that's one – see?
We're going to get that broken up into the many, many, many, many more.
And I just – I want to make it a point that, you know, the average uninsured rate for AANHPI – I know that's a big alphabet soup – is 5.5 percent in the United States.
But it's four times higher for Mongolians at 21 percent.
And the Chicago area actually has the largest population of Mongolians in the United States.
And when we're talking about living in poverty, 10 to 15 percent of AANHPIs live in poverty, but some subgroups face even higher poverty rates, 35 percent among Burmese and 26 percent among Bangladeshis.
So I think it's really important.
I think you would agree, right?
We want to be able to get to the core of it.
And I would love to continue to work with your – dig deeper with your policy people to figure out how we can look at data disaggregation.
We have great organizations that are working on a lot of data disaggregation so that we can really target the needs by community.
Yeah, that's right.
Thank you for that.
I think that was my last question.
With that, I want to say thank you for all that you and your department are doing.
I have a great relationship with our local food inspector, Todd.
He's great.
I call him all the time.
Give him a little shout-out here.
Look, we've got a lot of restaurants in the 11th Board.
It is really the backbone of commerce in our community.
And we're going to be working together to ensure that we're setting these businesses up for success and sustainability over time.
So thanks for everything.
And I know these are challenging times.
I appreciate all that you're doing.
Thank you so much.
Yes.
Correction for the record.
Maribel Chavez-Torres, managing deputy commissioner.
You asked how many sanitarian positions we have.
We have 46 sanitarian positions, 35 corporate, and 11 grant-funded positions.
Okay.
Thank you.
All right.
Well, thank you very much.
We're going to go ahead and have the committee stand at ease for a few minutes while we transition to our last department of the evening,
Chicago Commission on Human Relations.
Chair, you come.
Debbie Miller.
Yeah.
Okay.
Because I'll also do it.
Okay.
Great.
All right.
So you can do it.
Then I'll do it.
We'll do it together.
Yeah.
Ready.
Ooh.
I like it.
Good evening, everybody.
We are on our last.
The committee is going to come back to order here.
We've got our last department for the evening.
We have the Chicago Commission on Human Relations.
We have Commissioner Nancy Andrade and her staff.
In the interest of time, we're going to waive the reading of her statement and enter it into the record.
We're good.
We're good.
I didn't hear a second on that, so we're just going to keep going.
Commissioner Andrade, would you like to introduce your staff that are here?
Yes.
Well, I am Nancy Andrade, Commissioner for the Commission on Human Relations.
To my right, I have First Deputy Commissioner Ken Gunn.
And to his right, I have Deputy Commissioner Joanne Newsom.
And to her right, I have Daniel Serrano, who is the director for our intergroup relations.
It is a pleasure to be here with you all this evening.
And thank you for – I think we saved the best for last, I'd like to say.
So I want to say, again, thank you.
And we are here to answer your questions.
Before we get to your questions, I forgot I was out of order.
We have COFA here to provide their evaluation of your budget.
Okay.
Thank you.
I'll be quick.
I'm sorry.
And I don't have everybody's name here, so I apologize.
I'll say my name.
Please.
Thank you.
Good evening, Vice Chair and members of the City Council.
My name is Katie O'Toole.
I'm with COFA.
I will be brief.
The proposed – thank you.
The proposed budget for 2026 for the Commission on Human Relations is $2.77 million.
This is a slight decrease of about $20,000 from last year.
The Commission receives both local and grant funds, about 60% of its funding coming from
the corporate fund.
The majority of the proposed funding is allocated to personnel, and the Commission has budgeted
20 full-time equivalents for fiscal year 2026.
This is the same as last year.
Here you can see the breakdown of the recommended budget for 2026.
Spending on personnel increases slightly.
Contractual services and travel see the biggest change, though still in relatively small amounts.
The Commission's grant funds are from the Entitlement Fund or the Community Development Block Grant.
You're seeing about a 16 percent decline in that compared to 2025.
Looking at historical trends, we see relatively steady funding for the Commission with increased funding between 2020 and 2024 due to higher grant funds.
And then for FTEs, the staff has remained pretty consistent, split between grants and corporate fund.
Thank you.
Thank you, Katie.
I'm going to assume everybody who's left in the room has some sort of questions.
So I'm going to go over here to our most senior.
Oh, sorry.
Are you the most senior?
I mean, there's only four of us.
Scott, go ahead.
Alderman Wagesback, please.
I actually, yeah, I don't have any questions, but I do appreciate all the work that you've been doing over the last couple of years.
Your whole staff, that's, I know, very small.
You know, when we're, I think when we were looking through the work that you've done on hate crimes and hate incidents throughout the city
and collaborating with different departments, a lot of people don't realize that it was you who really drove the effort to collaborate
with different police departments, different municipalities to address this issue of hate crimes
and to find ways to collaborate more closely with more of Chicagoland than just what people think of as happening here in the city.
So I first wanted to say thank you for all the work on that, and I give you a lot of the credit for doing that and pulling people together.
And then I think the only other thing that I had was, you know, we've gone through, we've looked at the numbers.
I think they say a lot for what's happening in our city.
But if you, as you move forward into this upcoming year, I think always feel free to reach out.
I know it's a two-way street, and your staff has been excellent whenever we needed help.
So I think with that, I would just, I would hand it back to the vice chair and say thank you for all the fantastic work that you
and your entire staff have done.
You're very receptive to calls.
You respond very quickly and kind of set an example for how the whole city should be.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman Wagesbeck.
Alderman Lopez.
All right.
Thank you, Vice Chairman.
Thank you, Committee.
Good evening.
And to the commission members that are here, everyone, thank you for bearing through a wonderful long day here.
A couple things.
First off, I want to touch on what I think is, you know, we are all very familiar with the hate crimes and things of that nature,
but you are all so very integral with neighbor-to-neighbor issues.
I'd like to touch on that a little bit as a change of pace because I feel as though I'm sure what I'm seeing in my office is also reflective in other offices
where we are seeing a rise in neighbor-to-neighbor complaints.
Can you discuss what you are doing with regards to that?
How are we finding better resolutions?
Because I feel like this is a growing trend amongst our service calls.
So our neighbor-to-neighbor conflicts that we – our team works.
We have a certified mediator who responds to community tensions, and community tensions include neighbor-to-neighbor incidents.
We respond to those incidents when they are based on a protective class.
So if it's something that's affiliated because the tension is due to someone's religious – their religion, their sexual orientation, their gender, their race,
that is one of the – that is a key reason why we go and to assist.
So we are peacemakers in a sense, but we also are cognizant that mediation only works if both of the parties are involved,
meaning the person who is expressing some sort of an issue or argument with another individual.
And if both parties are unable to want to talk to us as a mediator, there's not much we can do at that point.
Is there any thought or opportunity to expand beyond that?
Because I feel Chicago being Chicago, you could have two neighbors who are angry about one issue,
and if it's left unresolved, it turns into another issue, which might fit with that latter category,
but because we didn't nip it in the bud in the beginning, it's now devolved into something else.
Is there opportunities where we can have those kind of early engagements outside of the scope that you just described?
We do try – as soon as possible – I'm sorry, Kenneth Gunn, First Deputy Commissioner.
As soon as we get information, we try to get in the community before they escalate like that because we want to hopefully get people talking to one another.
Like the commissioner says, sometimes we can't get a full-blown mediation, but at least if we can have the conversation,
we can try to de-escalate the tension.
And we have seen it on the other side where it was allowed to go on and go on and go on,
and unfortunately, violence is the end result.
So you're right.
We want to, as soon as somebody hears something, to let us know so we can get out there immediately.
Okay.
Because I think it would be beneficial if we can explore options in the coming year,
what that may look like, especially bringing in other departments,
even if that includes cross-training other departments to be aware on mediation techniques,
particularly as we see with the Department of Buildings, which we always seem to have issues,
which are neighbor-to-neighbor, sanitation, as well as the Department of Housing,
when you have landlord versus tenant and individuals who are habitually trying to demonize their landlord,
and then that ensuing fiasco becomes something else.
So I think it probably would be a great support if the commission could,
if it can't directly get involved, maybe to help give departments some clarity
and appoint someone to be like a mediation attache on your behalf until,
so that things don't escalate beyond what they are originally starting with.
This year, I had the pleasure of joining one of your commission meetings.
I believe that the commission does its best when it is operating in a fully independent,
uninterrupted way from outside influences.
And I have to say that I am somewhat disappointed with what I saw
when we were discussing the rise in Jewish hatred here in this body
because we did not have a conversation that was fair or balanced.
We had something that was quite, in my opinion, orchestrated
and tip the scale unnecessarily.
I would hope, just as a rule, that in your capacity as a collective,
that you're able to exert the independence you need
because if we are not able to address things in the manner that provide for a fair and robust conversation,
I think it does a disservice to the conversations that we are having.
You don't have to respond, you don't have to, it's, I'm just, my two cents on that
because I see what was mentioned in your statement.
I also would like to ask your opinion on something that has come up
from a number of community ethnic organizations,
which is the resurrection of various ethnic advisory councils here in the city of Chicago.
Some may remember when Mayor Emanuel was first elected
that he did away with many of those various advisory councils,
whether it was the Mexican advisory council, Puerto Rican, Jewish, Arab, Asian, African-American, religion.
He had, Mayor Daley had a slew of them, and then they were done away with.
So there seems to be a resurging desire to bring some of that back, to give a voice to communities.
I'd like to know what your discussion, what your thoughts would be on that,
and if that is something that should be housed and kind of corralled within the commission.
I first want to respond to your comment about the public hearing with regards to the rise in anti-Jewish hate crimes.
I just want to state for the record that the commission is an independent agency in the sense that we are able...
to work freely and directly with the community. The hearing consisted of a diverse array of
voices from the diverse Jewish community as well as the community itself. So I do want to stress
that we are proud of the diversity that was represented. For the witnesses who spoke at
the public hearing, I just want to state that for the record. And chosen by the administration. But
continue on with the advisory council. The advisory councils, there are engagement councils,
some of which do have some members of ethnic groups. There's the African, there's the African
Engagement Council. Those are housed within the mayor's office. And it is not a council. So
the Commission on Human Relations is the umbrella for the five advisory councils.
Engagement councils, which is slightly different. Engagement councils do not require
approval from the mayor's office. This is an engagement process is engagement council is separate
and apart. And there are some currently in existence, which reflect some of the interest from
ethnic groups.
What are the five engagement councils, if you don't mind?
The five advisory councils is the, so we have five advisory councils. There's advisory councils that
are part of CCHR. Engagement councils are part of the mayor's office of engagement. You want to know
about advisory councils? Yes, because I think we're starting to, the terms are starting to
interact. So the ones that are under your jurisdiction, yes.
It's the advisory council.
The advisory councils. Thank you. And they are?
They are. It's the Veteran, the Council on Veterans Affairs, the Council on New Americans,
the Council on Women's, Women Advisory Council, the Equity Council, and the LGBTQ Plus Advisory Council.
Okay. And that is obviously very much different than the different things that are under the
mayor's office. So would it be beneficial for those various ethnic councils to have a house
under your commission, especially considering you deal with hate crimes and things of that nature?
Or would that be something that should be relegated to the mayor's office?
Yes. And if you could provide through the chair the minutes for these various councils for the last
year, we'd appreciate it. We will. We will provide that to the chair. Someone-
Am I getting an answer? Yeah, an answer to your last-
But you want to repeat your last question. Go on.
Yes. So again, with regards to ethnic advisory councils, is that something that should be under your
jurisdiction as maybe a sixth advisory council with either subcommittees or
have it for the various ethnic groups or however you want to classify them? You could do Latino,
African-American, MENA, Asian-American, or AAPI, however you want to do it. Is that something that
you think should fall under your group considering that we also deal, that the Commission on Human
Relations deals with the hate crimes that are most likely going to be impacting those specific groups
and communities? Those groups are represented currently in the equity council.
And how is that, if you could describe that? Because I don't think most ethnic groups or ethnic
leaders understand that they are lumped into the term equity. So if you could expound on that,
because I think that all of them feel as though they are not currently with a voice in any kind of
ethnic council committee or representative body. So I'm just trying to see what we could do to get
clarification and a better understanding when it comes to this.
Well, Alderman, and I think it's been a while, so people kind of forgot, but the equity council was
made up of the different councils, including Arab, African, Asian, Latino. So when we put the equity council
together, all of those communities were represented on that council. And with the appointment...
And I'm sorry, when was that?
Pardon me?
When was that put together?
This was in 2012, as you mentioned, when Mayor Emanuel revised the councils, when he reconstructed the
councils. The equity council was developed that way.
Okay. So I would repeat my question, then. Do you think that that's something that...
I'm trying not to take a... But I feel like this is like pulling teeth to get an answer on this
question. 13 years ago, this was reformulated in a way that most people did not agree with, but went
along with. Here we are 13 years later, and the question's coming up. Should we have specific
ethnic advisory councils in the city of Chicago? And my question to you, while you all are here,
is should this be under your purview? Because I think whether it's ethnic or religious,
to just blanket everyone under equity does not necessarily give people the same sense of belonging
or ownership, because now they are just lumped into one thing that they don't realize that they're
a part of. And when we've seen various hate crimes on the rise, I mean, LGBT has its own, but every
ethnic group just kind of gets lumped into something else. So I think that that's the question right now
that I'd love an answer to, even if it's just an opinion. Should this be something that is
bifurcated and put back under your purview? And it totally depends on what will be the purpose of
the advisory councils. Now, when they were under the commission, they were specifically tasked to do
the work that we do to help us deal with discrimination, hate, and prejudice. Very narrow.
Now, it worked, but a lot of the councils kind of felt like, you know, there are other issues we want
to deal with. And they really wanted to work directly with the mayor's office on some of these
issues that were beyond our purview. So that was always kind of a give and take with the councils
and the commission. So the idea when moving them to the mayor's office would give them a little more
flexibility to work on some broader issues rather than just, you know, the work of the commission.
So then lastly, if you could provide through the chair, what those actual previous iterations of
those councils look like when they were under the commission on human relations before they were
removed, if we could see what that was like, that framework, I would appreciate that. Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman Lawson.
Thank you, vice chair. Good evening, commissioner and team.
Thank you. I just have a couple of things that I want to go over real quick. There's 20 full-time
employees in the department. How many vacancies do you have right now?
None.
Zero. Congratulations. You're the only one.
Thank you.
So a hiring freeze doesn't apply, but it would apply if you did have a vacancy or you would be
subject to the hiring freeze if you had someone retire.
Tell me when he can't retire. Sorry.
What's that?
Sorry.
No.
I was out of order.
Well, you're in the chair. Not really.
Um, I, uh, you, you're all personnel. You've got about a hundred thousand dollars, I think,
for contractual services, which, um, I want to ask about, if I'm reading that right, correct me,
but I want to ask about outreach. You know, I think I still have a think before you hate
poster in my office. I know you guys are doing the podcast as well, but in what ways are we
proactively getting the message out? There's a lot that's on the back end after something happens,
but what are we doing on the front end as far as outreach?
We have our foot, we have our feet on the ground and we are constantly out and about meeting directly
with the community, um, and different fact, different factions of the community, meaning
with the ice, the presence of ice and federal agents here in the city of Chicago, our team,
our intergroup relations team has been going out and, um, meeting and meeting with business owners
in Little Village, as well as Pilsen, as well as Belmont-Craigan and in the uptown area, uh,
distributing flyers, letting people know that we work directly with Imer, uh, and with Deputy Mayor
Beatriz Ponce de Leon. Uh, folks have reached out to us, uh, to the CCHR because of the outreach,
they, uh, the, uh, the outreach they have received and we connect them directly with the, with Imer
and for any resources. I'm sorry, Imer being. Imer being, uh, the, uh, mayor's office, um, for
immigrants, uh, immigrants, refugee and immigrant, immigrant, immigrant, immigrant, immigrant,
migrant, refugee rights. Yes. Great.
Great.
Okay. There's a trans-femicide working group I know that has come up.
I see that there's a report due in November for your opening statement.
You want to give us a little teaser of what we might expect in a couple weeks?
So it's a compilation.
So we had three community meetings during the course of the summer,
specifically targeted in different parts of the city,
the far north side, the west side, and as well as the south side and south shore.
And the report has – it's a wonderful compilation of needs, concerns,
as well as some triumphs that we were unaware of.
We are very proud of the collaboration with our departmental working group partners,
the Chicago Police Department, DFSS, and Department of Public Health.
The four of us were at these community meetings.
It was a very robust exchange of information.
The community learned about resources that are available and that do exist.
A lot of effort was made by our team to get the word out,
and we were successful in getting strong, robust attendance for our community meetings.
The Chicago Police Department did a great presentation on what it does
with regards to community building with the trans community.
It has received a lot of suggestions of how to improve that,
but just the knowledge exchange that the community learned about what the Chicago Police Department
is currently doing was nice to hear for both members of the community.
There was a lot of suggestions for DFSS with regards to shelters,
specifically accommodations for trans, the trans community.
We're focusing on the trans community, and the trans community –
we've gotten a lot of positive feedback from the trans community
because they are hearing – their voice is being heard.
We are taking proactive steps to really – not only to address them,
but to continue collaboration with the trans community.
We have gone out to the trans community and have done not just Know Your Rights presentations,
but also hate crimes presentations, and it is a resource that has been well received.
So it has been a successful rollout so far.
It's an 18-month process from start to finish,
so we will not conclude with our work on this until February of 2027.
This came up earlier with MOPD.
There are a number of trainings that city employees and supervisors have to engage in.
And, you know, the trainings for supervisors of people with disabilities was very informative.
I think it was the first year for that.
How involved are you with the EEO trainings that the city is putting together?
We're not.
Just all through DHR?
Because I think they're very helpful to look at things in new ways.
And I know when we spoke probably over the summer or the midyear, we're trending –
our hate crimes are trending down overall, or at least were, and you can give me an update –
but up for anti-Semitic and anti-gay, specifically gay male, crimes and incidents.
I think those two areas are maybe not addressed in those EEO trainings and should be.
But wanted to just see where – so that's a comment, right?
I would like for you to follow up on that with your small but mighty staff.
But also, just as far as trending goes, are we continuing to see those two groups going up
while others are going down, and is there anything alarming in some of those numbers?
The numbers are down this year, thank goodness.
They're coming down.
Those are crimes versus hate incidents, though, right?
I want to just – since we have the distinction legislated, if you can clarify that as well.
Sure, and I think it's important to distinguish between the two,
but I don't think there is as far as the two groups seeing increases.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
I'm sorry.
So hate crime versus hate incidents, I know you guys are tracking both,
but I think both the Jewish community and gay males are both seeing increases in both categories,
incidents and crimes.
Correct me.
But again, I'd like you to share those numbers.
Yeah.
We can give you the hate crime numbers.
Sure.
This is as of October 22nd.
There were 158 hate crimes reported in Chicago compared to 240 last year.
All of last year or at this point of last year?
All of last year.
Okay, got it.
All of last year.
And anti-gay, we have 40, there were anti-Jewish hate crimes compared to 79 last year for the full year.
Anti-gay, so far this year, we have 33 for sexual orientation compared to 64 for last year.
And anti-gay is going to have to get that to you because the number is not very high, thank goodness.
Can I then just formalize here through the chair request for a breakdown of the number of hate crimes and incidents per ward and by category?
Okay.
You can do that.
Great.
I think that's helpful as we understand that.
The only other thing I'll say is I was also disappointed in the hearing on anti-Semitism.
It was a long day.
There were some of us who were here.
I think when you introduce elements and witnesses that have nothing to do with the Jewish community, you're deluding what anti-Semitism is.
I had a swastika drawn on a school in my neighborhood on an equality mural.
That is not an anti-Jewish hate incident.
It's an anti-LGBT incident in my mind.
And you had witnesses that were not Jewish that had been victims of hate crimes equating that to Jewish victims of hate crimes.
And I think we lost the point there.
I know there was a lot of motion in the room.
I know we had a lot of different viewpoints.
But from the curated witness standpoint, I think it was not good because it did not give a full picture of what we're talking about.
I think there were only two actual Jewish witnesses that had been victims of hate crimes, three, including Deborah, our colleague.
And if we want to shine a light on something, we can't distract it with other things that are also problems but maybe aren't the problem that we're seeing so acutely right now in our city.
And so I hope if we do that again that we have a more focused conversation on that specific area, unless it's supposed to be a broad conversation.
But that was disappointing.
I know we've worked together a lot.
I've worked with your teams.
You do a lot of work again.
Small and mighty, I know that.
But hopefully we don't have to have something like that again, right, if our numbers keep going in the right direction.
But if we do, I think it's got to be more collaborative and more focused so that we don't lose the point of what is really a problem of keeping people safe in our community, which I've said for the last two years.
And sometimes I feel like I'm talking to the wall.
But I know you're with me on that and keeping everyone safe, and they should all feel safe in every neighborhood, no matter who they are.
And so let's keep on that goal and keep going forward that way.
So that's what I have today, Vice Chair.
Thanks, Bennett.
Thank you.
Thank you, Kirsten.
Thank you, Alderman.
I have a couple of questions.
I want to first and foremost thank your amazing team.
You're one of my favorites, and I will say that on the record.
Because every time that I've been in the unfortunate position of needing to call upon your office for something like a hate incident or a hate crime, it's always met with lots of care and support.
Your team regularly pops into the office to check on us as well, which we greatly appreciate.
We had an incident earlier in the year that involved two young ladies that were shopping in Chinatown and were really wrongfully kept in the shop and accused of stealing.
And that really turned into – it was a big area of concern for the parents.
And so they reached out, and I immediately brought in the team, and I think we came to a really great resolution.
And we're working on – and I know we're still working on – formalizing a training about biases and things like that for business owners.
When we talk about cultural competency and making sure that business owners, especially ones that maybe are non-Native English speakers or they come from different cultures,
need to understand what their rights and responsibilities are as business owners, the things that you can and cannot do,
just to raise awareness for that sort of sensitivity so that you're not inadvertently or –
and inadvertently discriminating against people that are coming into your business.
I was really happy with the outcome.
I know we're going to get the rest of the way there with the training, with everything that's been going on.
I know that's been a little bit more slow going, but we're looking forward to closing the loop on that
so that we can deploy this training, working with our local Chinatown Chamber of Commerce
to bring our business owners together to get the training.
We asked the question through the chair already about hate crimes and hate incidences,
but looking back on this year, what do you feel like were the biggest wins?
And as you're looking forward to next year, what are the biggest areas of concern or improvement?
So the biggest win is we brought on a new staff member this year,
and this is our second hate crime victim advocate,
and this person has turned out to be a wonderful asset to the team.
This person has a lot of experience with the court system,
having worked with the state's attorney's office,
and brings a whole new way of streamlining some of the work that we do,
the administrative work with regards to keeping track of cases that are going forward as a hate crime
in the state's attorney's office.
Two hate crime specialists are a dynamic dual.
They are really making much more inroads in the community,
as well as with our counterparts at the county level,
with the Cook County State's Attorney's Office, with the Sheriff's Office,
and with other municipalities in the suburbs.
So it's that cross-pollination of information and just relationship building,
which is imperative for the work that we do.
And, of course, our strong relationship with CPD is always an asset.
We lean on them heavily, and we are very grateful that we have a great relationship with them.
Our work with the Trans Femicide Ordinance has been, like I said earlier,
a watershed moment in the sense that we as a commission learned so much from the trans community,
but we were also able to feel proud of the fact that we do offer some services already for the trans community.
Our situation now is that we need to really uplift that information for the community
to make sure people are aware of that.
With regards to the hate crimes in the Jewish community,
a strong inroad was with working with diverse community members from the Jewish community.
We have Jews of color.
We have the LGBTQ plus community from the Jewish community.
Those are communities that have expressed to us that they have not necessarily had a strong voice
when it comes to talking about needs and concerns of the Jewish community.
And we want to make sure that every person is included at the table.
And so that is a big, strong win for us, and we are building on those relationships that we have built.
Our podcast has been a wonderful success.
We have about maybe 18 episodes so far,
and it's highlighting individual stakeholders, community leaders about their work with civil rights,
their work on working on social justice.
It is a great way to get the messaging out.
And who knows, we might be reaching out to some of the elders here to be on one of our next episodes
and talk about your communities.
Only if they stayed for your hearing.
So I feel like we're at the top of the list right here.
So that has been a wonderful opportunity.
Our investigative team, this is something I really, really want to highlight.
We talk a lot about, you know, the trans-femicide ordinance
and the rise in hate crimes in the public hearing.
And those are very important topics and matters for the commission.
But I really, really, really want to give a strong round of applause for the unsung heroes of the commission.
And those are the actual investigators who do a huge portion of the work of the commission,
which is actually investigating complaints of discrimination.
You all have to remember that we were formed as a commission to investigate discrimination
and complaints of discrimination.
Our history on that is very important, if I may digress for one second.
I was watching a Channel 11 WTTW documentary last week on Marshall Fields.
And I was engrossed as the history of Marshall Fields and its impact ahead in Chicago.
In it, they mentioned the Chicago Commission on Human Relations.
It was the Chicago Commission on Human Relations in 1953, which addressed issues of discrimination
that was brought forward by African-American applicants to positions at Marshall Fields.
Marshall Fields is blatantly discriminating against the African-American community.
So when I saw that, I felt so proud, so proud of our work.
And it gave me an idea of we need to really be focusing and highlighting that history that we have paved here in the city of Chicago.
So I want to give a shout out to the staff and the adjudication division.
Our docket person, Wessie Johnson, just completed 50 years of service to the city of Chicago.
To say that her job is a commitment, a passion, it is a calling, is an understatement.
We have our directors of compliance.
We have Joanne here, who supervises our adjudication commission.
And it is the investigators who field the phone calls and will listen to someone recount the worst day of their life.
It is hard for someone to come to talk to a complete stranger about a humiliating experience, about being discriminated,
experiencing sexual harassment.
It is hard for someone to do that.
And I really want that to come across in this budget hearing that I'm very proud of the work that we do.
And that is a huge portion of the work because right now, in this given point in time, we are a beacon of light.
We are a last bastion for civil rights and civil rights enforcement here in the city of Chicago.
And it is important that people know that people are aware, people are coming to us, not just because of that is the work that we do,
but because of the professionalism, the care and the empathy that our investigators have when they field these calls,
when they do conduct the investigations.
And it is always, for me, a very proud, proud moment when we are able to finally close an investigation and officially call it a case.
And it becomes part of our precedent because it means that we have given someone justice when they experience an injustice.
So I just want to state that for the record.
That was great.
Great.
Yes.
Alderman Wagsbeck.
Thanks.
Just a point of information.
Commissioner, you were talking about the investigators.
So you have three of the investigators and then you have victim advocates.
Could you just differentiate between the two, like, what more specific tasks they do?
You were starting to go into the work that the investigators do, but I'm assuming the follow-up is with the advocates.
Sorry to keep you, but since you kind of opened that door about how important this is,
I've done some of that work in the past as well with war crimes, and it is very difficult work.
So I thought maybe if you could expound on that for people.
I'm joining you, Deputy Commissioner, over the adjudication unit.
We actually have six investigators, four who investigate primarily housing cases and two who investigate employment and public accommodations cases.
And as the commissioner was saying, it starts with a phone call from someone in the public or someone just knows about our office.
They come into our office.
They sit for up to two hours with an investigator to lay out everything, every issue that they've had, that they've had, that they have.
And it takes a lot of patience.
It takes a lot of asking questions to get the whole story.
When people have been discriminated against, what they face is they're coming in, they're telling their whole life story.
Because it's a horrible thing that's happened to them.
They've been denied housing.
They've been denied employment.
They've been mistreated at a public accommodation.
And they come in, and their whole life story comes out.
And we have to rule that down to a complaint.
And that takes time.
After that, after we've served the respondent and we conduct the complaint,
There are interviews, there are sometimes site visits, and that culminates in an investigation summary, after which we decide whether there's substantial evidence of discrimination.
If there is not, we dismiss the case, and they have a right to appeal.
If we decide there is substantial evidence of discrimination, it goes forward to first a settlement conference and then an administrative hearing.
During the investigation, there are phone calls, there's back and forth, there's us trying to get the respond to respond.
Sometimes they don't respond.
We have to threaten them, you know, with default or dismissal if a complaint decides they want to stop participating in the investigation.
It's a long process.
Some of our housing complaints, which seem to take the longest, can be well over a year just trying to get people to participate.
Employment and public accommodations don't take as long because employers typically cooperate or participate in investigations.
So going back to once it goes to a settlement conference, if there's a settlement, which is great, then, of course, the investigation stops or the case is closed.
Others go straight to administrative hearing.
Our settlement conferences are conducted by independent mediators.
Our administrative hearings are conducted by independent administrative hearing officers, all of whom are attorneys.
And it's a litigation.
It's a long that can take.
We have cases.
We just finished one that was a span of three years because once it goes to the investigation, the administrative hearing process is a long process.
There's continuances.
There's pre-hearing conferences.
Discovery, all of that is encompassed in the Ministry of Hearing.
It is essentially litigation.
That's what it is.
We essentially operate like a mini court.
Like a mini court.
We really do.
A mini law department.
It's informal, but it's still a trial.
Thank you.
Thanks for that.
You know, one of the things that I've discovered in the short time that I've been an older person is there's a lot of folks that just don't know what their legal obligations are as landlords, as business owners.
I'm really hopeful that this training that we're going to put together for the businesses could lead into more things like that.
I'm actually talking to realtors, brokers, building managers about putting on workshops for landlords.
Because one of the very regular type of complaint or issue that gets raised to me at the ward office is, you know, I'm a property owner.
I have tenants that, you know, aren't – I have a tenant that moved out, but before they moved out, they subleased the apartment.
And I don't even know who's living here right now.
That was just two days ago.
So I think that there's something that we should be doing to make sure that we're educating the public on what their responsibilities are and whatever capacity that is.
Because I think otherwise we end up with a lot of cases like this and a lot of folks that just get really frustrated with the system because they're frankly ignorant to it.
And I don't mean that in like a pejorative sort of way.
They just don't know.
And obviously just not knowing is not always a good defense to the things that are happening.
But I think your work is invaluable for this city.
We're very proud of the work that you do and appreciate all of it.
I know we asked for the – through the chair stuff, in particular because I've asked this question about data disaggregation to other departments today.
Just as we – as you're tracking statistics by ethnicity, I'm assuming AAPI is just one category.
We're not disaggregating data further than that within Asian ethnicities.
No.
No.
Okay.
I'm going to be coming back to you on that.
Okay.
All right.
If there are no other questions for the commission, I will declare this meeting is over for tonight.
The committee is going to stand at ease.
We will reconvene on Tuesday next week at 930 a.m.
Thank you, everybody.
Thank you.
Thank you so much.
Thank you.
Thank you.
The term is cat.