Hi,
I'm Dr. Jennifer
Landa,
and
welcome
to today's video
where
I'll
be answering
the question,
"What is a TENS unit?" TENS stands for transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation. It's a non-invasive treatment that can be used for pain relief, muscle relaxation, and even some pain management after surgery. So what exactly is TENS? Well, it stands for transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation. This means that the needles are placed under the skin, and they send out small electric pulses that travel through the body. These electric impulses can help to reduce pain, improve muscle relaxation, and even promote healing. So how do you use a TENS unit? Well,
it can be used in a variety of ways. You can place it directly onto the skin, which can help with pain relief after surgery. It can also be placed under the skin near muscles to relieve muscle spasms after exercise or even just for relaxation purposes. TENS units come in various sizes and shapes, so you might need to experiment with different positions until you find one that works best for you. One common use for TENS is in the office setting where it can be used to help with headaches, migraines, and even some neck pain after sitting at a desk all day. Another popular use for TENS is in the home setting when you're looking to relieve pain from muscle spasms after exercise or even just for general relaxation. You can find TENS units that are battery operated, which means you don't have to worry about running out of batteries, or you can find ones that run off of a USB port, which means you can plug it into your laptop or computer and use it that way as well. Another popular use for TENS is in the dental setting where it can be used to help with headaches, migraines, and even some neck pain after sitting at a desk all day long. So what are you waiting for? Head over to our website, get your TENS unit today, and start feeling better today.
(Static noise)
The
meeting of the Committee on Pedestrian and Traffic Safety is now called to order
for December 3rd 2025. We will now have a roll
call vote to establish quorum. Chairman LaSpada, present.
Vice-Chair Cruz. Alderman
Hopkins. Alderman Robinson. Alderman
Yancey. Alderman Chico.
Alderman Quinn.
Here.
Alderman Moe will possibly be joining us online.
Alderman Curtis. Alderman Burnett.
Alderman Irvin.
Here.
Alderman Knudson be with you shortly.
Alderman Lawson. Alderman Martin.
Alderman Manahop- Alderwoman Manahopenworth.
We have, uh, eight members present.
We have a quorum. Alders Cruz, Moore, Curtis,
Knudson, and Lawson have requested to participate in the meeting
remotely pursuant to Rule 59.
I'm sorry. Did you say Moore?
I did in fact say Moore.
Thank you.
Yes.
Let's look at those panelists. Uh, Alderman
Lawson, confirmation?
Thank you, Chair. Yes.
Alderman Martin-
Alderman Moore, present.
... present there. Alderman Curtis.
Alderman.
Um, yeah. I'm here, yes.
Thank you, sir. And Alderman Knut-Knudson.
I'm here, Chair. Thank you.
Thank you, gentlemen. Uh, can I have a motion to allow Alders Moore,
Curtis, Knudson, and Lawson to participate remotely?
Alderman Chico so moves. All those in favor say
aye. Aye. All those oppose say nay.
In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it.
Uh, Alders Moore, Curtis, Knudson, and Lawson are present here
today by video conference and will be counted accordingly for the roll
call. At this time, we will begin the public comment period.
Out of respect for everybody's time, each speaker is limited to three
minutes. Speakers, in accordance with Rule 58 of the City Council
Rules of Order, please refrain from profane language, obscene
conduct, or disruptive comments.
Our first speaker is Pasquale
Giani.
Thank you, uh, Mr. Chair and members of the committee.
Here today just to speak on the, uh, proposed, uh, parking enforcement
ordinance. Um, and, uh, would- would like to give, uh,
the chair a- a terrific shout-out.
We've been working together, uh, on- on some language and appreciate the opp-
opportunity for today's, um, hearing.
So, uh, just would like, um, to fi- figure out a way to aid
our members that are out there writing these tickets.
Oftentimes, they're putting themselves out there in- in harm's way and are
subject to- to being attacked by, uh, folks and, you know,
we- we just don't want to put ordinary civilians, uh, in that
position as well. Um, I think that we're very close on reaching
a resolution which would include developing a technology so that
citizens can go ahead and take a photo or report, uh, a
potential violation that they're seeing which will get dispatched to
our, uh, enforcement officers so that they can, you know,
decipher, "Oh, I'm only 200 feet away," and- and report to the scene.
Um, I think that, uh, any way we could figure out a way
to, um, aid our, uh, workers to do a better job
as well as keep our streets safe, uh, and clean, we're all for it.
So appreciate the opportunity today.
You're gonna hear from one of our members as well, who will talk about some of her
experiences, uh, and look forward to getting this to the finish- finish line.
Thank you.
Thank you, sir. Uh, for context for members as well as public
commenters, that matter is gonna be solely a subject matter hearing today.
No votes will be taken. Um, noting Alderman
Robinson and Alderman Hopkins for purposes of
quorum, also noting Vice-Chair
Cruz with us, uh, remotely via Rule
59, may I have a
motion for Alderwoman Cruz to participate remotely.
Alderman Yancey so moves. All those in fa- favor, say
aye. All those oppose, say nay. In the opinion of the chair,
the ayes have it. Alderwoman Cruz, great to have you with us.
Our next speaker is Ashley
Johnson.
Hello.
My name is Ashley Johnson. I am a parking enforcement officer for Last
Parking.
I've been with the company for a year and a little
over a year. And in my experience,
sometimes
it can be safe and sometimes it's not very
safe. It's... We get various
issues from threats to
actual
incidents. Myself, I just, maybe a month and a
half ago, I was attacked personally.
I got......
a bucket of water thrown on me when it was very, very cold
outside. And
that's, we don't want to put citizens in the way of that. It's not safe.
It's not, it's not smart. We are
trained to do it
and
they,
they shouldn't have to be put in situations like
that.
Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Johnson. I'm, I'm very sorry for what happened to you.
Our next speaker is Mr. Michael K.
Harris.
Good morning, Chair, members of the gust body. My name is Michael Harris.
I'm here on behalf of the Illinois Retail Merchants Association.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak at today's, uh, public hearing.
Uh, IRMA is not in opposition to this proposal.
In fact, we appreciate the support and underlying purpose of improving
safety, reducing dangerous curb behavior, and making our street functions better
for everyone. Our goal today is simply to highlight areas where the ordinance
as drafted may unintentionally impact neighborhood
retailers, delivery drivers and service providers, and to
outline straightforward adjustments that would allow IRMA to reach
neutrality as the conversation moves forward.
The main challenge we see is that public enforcement pilot
treats commercial vehicles differently from all other drivers.
Non-commercial vehicles receive a first offense warning, commercial
dr- vehicles do not. And because the ordinance uses very broad
definition of commercial, almost every delivery truck or service
vehicle that supplies our neighborhood corridors falls into this
category. These vehicles aren't acting out of disregard, they are
performing essential functions, restocking shelves, delivering
time-sensitive items, repairing equipment, and supporting the everyday
operations of local businesses. At the same time, many
corridors are already experiencing limited curb access due to smart
streets, protected bike lanes, bump-outs, and changes in
pa- parking and turning patterns.
When curb space is tight, even well-intentioned drivers can struggle to locate
legitimate
l- legal loading zones. IRMA's goal is
not to exempt, uh, commercial vehicles, but to ensure the enforcement
tool operates in a balanced, realistic way that supports both
safety and economic activity. To that end, there are several adjustments
that would meaningfully improve the ordinance and help IRMA to
neutrality. One, provide the same first offense warning to
commercial vehicles, at least when they are in l- legal loading areas
or actively loading or unloading.
Add a clear codified defense for active loading and unloading when
the, when they, when the vehicle is not blocking s- crosswalks,
curb ramps or bus stops. Three, pro- prohibit
any financial incentives that w- could encourage over-reporting or
misuse of the system. Four, include
transparent reporting requirements so that we can evaluate how the
pilot access... how the pilot, pilot
affects safety, curb access and retail operations before
considering permanent adoption.
These adjustments do not weaken the ordinance, they strengthen it.
They ensure the program is fair, enforceable and in line with real-world
curb conditions in Chicago's commercial corridors.
IRMA appreciates the thoughtfulness of...
appreciate thoughtful work that has gone into this proposal and we truly want to
collaborate to make it successful.
We believe that the continued conversation between the city
community, business community and safety advocates
and delivery partner...
Thank you, Mr. Harris. Our next speaker is...
All right. Our next speaker is Ms. Jessica
Jackson.
So, um, in
business communications classes, they tell us about
non-verbal communication and body
language
and it's amazing to see that play
out in these
chambers. The body
language
of the aldermen
to the public speakers, and particularly
us,
that says that they could care less about what we're talking
about.
It's very disturbing
and you all continue to do it over and over
and over again. For you all to think
that we believe that you all are so
busy, that's why you have to look at your cellphones when we
talking, that's why you got to look down and talk to each other when we
talking 'cause see, you're, you're so busy, you're taking care of so much
business,
but yet, you all can't fix real problems,
you all can't stop the spending, you all can't
balance a budget, you all can't stop the
crime, you all can't control
illegal immigration, you all could care less about
the personal safety of the citizens,
but yet, you all want to make sure that you all send a
message to us when we're speaking that y'all don't
care. It's the most
disrespectful thing that you all could ever
do.Now, I was glad
to hear you say to the lady that got her, uh, that talked
about the water that was thrown on her, and I'm sorry that you had to go
through that. But what's more amazing is that he really
acknowledged that and said to you, "Sorry that you had to go through
that." Whereas I've been coming to this mic for three years
talking about how I was being treated in my property, how my
life and my safety was in danger, and none of you never
said, "Sorry that you going through that, Ms.
Jackson."
So,
once again, this is why
we coming for them seats,
because we're sitting in here watching you all give your undivided
attention to your contractor buddies that come to the mic when you
going to make your little crooked deal.
We coming for them seats. You giving us no
choice. It's not going to be about your big money
backers. Nah, it's going to be about our influence.
Okay? We coming for them
seats.
Thank you, Ms. Jackson. Our next speaker is Mr.
Carl
Gutierrez.
Uh, good morning, Chair and members of the committee.
Uh, my name is Carl Gutierrez speaking on behalf of the Chicagoland Chamber of
Commerce and more than 1,000 members of all shapes and sizes.
I'm just only here to kind of express a note of thanks to the chair and the sponsor
at regards to the parking violation ordinance for allowing for more time to kind
of give an opportunity to hone the, hone the ordinance to
kind of right, land at the right note.
Our concerns are more on the, um, kind of the human,
uh, judgment and practical implications and pla- practical
enforcement of this. Um, appreciate the opportunity to in- con- continue that
engagement, and look forward to working with everyone here and particularly the
sponsor on, on, uh, landing on something that's sound and appropriate and all that
good stuff. Thank you.
Thank you, sir. Our next speaker is Dennis
White.
Good morning. Um,
this is my, this is officially my first year s- speaking here in City
Hall. And what I witness
every time I drive
my car downtown Roosevelt, Michigan,
State Street, I see a group of these kids, these
young kids riding their four-wheelers all up and down
traffic. They riding their bic- their, uh,
motorcycles all up and down causing a lot
of problems. I've seen them on the Stevenson, the
Eisenhower, and the Dan Ryan taking over traffic.
So if you want to talk about traffic safety, then
you need to deal with traffic enforcement because
nobody is not trying to stop these illegal
ima- aliens
from riding their bikes. They over
here, uh, doing
what they want to do in the streets and nobody ain't doing.
Just like I see a few aldermans over here on their
cellphone. So my thing is this
here, you talk about m- if you want to
enforce the traffic safety, what you going to do when these illegal, when the f-
when the weather break and they ride their d- dirt bi- bikes, their
four-wheelers all up and down the traffic and stuff causing, running through the
red lights, almost caused an accident?
I almost ran over a illegal alien
last year while I was doing a share ride on Michigan
and Illinois when he cut his little, when he did pop his little
wheelie in front of me. Now, if I would have ran him over, then I
would be in the county for, uh, for, uh, him
running him over. So my question is, are you going
to enforce this safety for the citizen
or not? Because if you not, then say you
won't do it, but don't BS the voters now
about what y'all want to propose
and stuff. And another thing is this here,
Brendan Johnson has not took that, uh, that, um,
that, um, proposal out his budget.
He, he going to keep it there and then he going to wear you all out
until you all going to say yes at the next commit- uh, city council
meeting, and then here we are with another deficit.
I'm tired of paying things for somebody else when they paying their
taxes. If you want the budget to be, uh,
safe, then tax these illegals. We're tired of being
taxed. And that one point,
that $1 trillion he did, that's on
him. So
y- the committee need to start saying no to Brendan Johnson and stop being some
kind of a thick alliance with him, 'cause we're done.
Thank you. Our, our last public comment card is
admittedly not legible, but if the person who submitted
this... Oh, okay. It is, uh, Mr. George
Blakemore.
Good morning
to the empty seats that, that's
here. It's not Brendan
Johnson. It's not the aldermen. It's the
people.
The people don't know how
to choose elected officials.
The people are the
problem.We,
the people, allows this to
happen.
Look at the empty
seats. Sometime I get on
my phone, I want to go viral. I'm going to show the people
exactly what's happening down at city council.
I- I want hits. I want... (laughs) I want to
be noticed. I want attention.
I get no attention from the
people.
That's h- why you can get away with it.
You have sold the streets out to a private
company. Maybe not you, but, but the, the,
the Democratic machine. Now you're taxing and
fining and thief-... th- the people
with, with that, uh, snow
parking. Uh-huh. No other
city, because y- you need
revenue. The
people are corrupt.
You are corrupt. And
the tragic thing about it,
go red,
flip red,
blue will be here.
Now, uh, go for these seats. You won't
get 'em. Once the man is messed up, the
new state of the citizens of the cities of
Chicago has mental problem.
Joe Muonoia, you used to be alderman.
You see these empty seats? You see these empty
seats? (laughs) They are mentally
ill.
And you're not gonna flip it
red because you
are not reaching the people. These people are
complacent. They got fake news.
Everything is fake. Everything
is fake. They all in it
together. They all corrupt. The
people are corrupt, too.
The birds and the bees are all corrupt.
So I challenge you, just don't, uh, beat up on these
elected officials. Uh, go to,
the...
Thank you, Mr. Blakemore.
This concludes the public comment period.
Uh,
our first order of business is the Rule 45 report from October,
which was sent out via email and distributed to committee members.
Can I have a motion to approve the October Rule 45 report?
Alderman Hopkins so moves. All those in favor of passing the report, say
aye. All those opposed say nay. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have
it. We are going to go out of order to begin with the
routine items before the committee, starting with the direct introduction
ordinances on pages two and three.
Can I have a motion to recommend approval of all direct introduction ordinances on
pages two and three by the same roll call vote as was applied to
determine quorum?
Alderwoman Mina Hoppenworth so moves.
Hearing no objections, so ordered.
Let us turn to pages four through 13 for the recommended
portion of the agenda. Can I have a motion to recommend approval of
all recommended items on pages four through 13 by the same roll
call vote as was applied to determine quorum?
Alderman Yancy so moves. Hearing no objection, so ordered.
We will now turn to pages 14 through 23
for the no recommendation portion of the agenda, which are, which are items
that received no recommendation from city
departments. These ordinances were submitted as
overrides, are on the agenda at the request of the alderperson, or do not
require departmental approval. For items six on page
21, two and 11 on page 22, and three and
four on page 23, we received substitute ordinances that make
changes to the language per CDOT's recommendation.
These substitutes were emailed and distributed today.
Can I have a motion to accept these substitute
ordinances? So moved, Alderman
Robinson. Hearing no objections, so ordered.
Can I have a motion to recommend approval of all no recommendation
items on pages 14 through 23, including the accepted
substitutes for items six on page 21, two and
11 on page 22, and three and four on page 23
by the same roll call vote as was applied to determine quorum?
Alderman Quinn so moves. Hearing no objections, so
ordered. We will now return to page
one of the agenda, beginning with item
1O2025-0019980,
which is an amendment of the amu- Municipal Code Section
9-64-050 to authorize
erection of disabled permit parking signs in certain
RS, RT, and RM zoning districts,
among other changes. Uh, I will note that there is one
grammatical error in the first paragraph on page two
that will be corrected, changing utilizes to
utilize.
I am going to quickly walk through the amendments that this
ordinance makes to the disabled parking portion of the amu-
Municipal Code. First, I, I want to thank both the departments,
but also chief sponsor, uh, Alderman Ronnie Mosley and
Alderman Vasquez for their leadership on this
matter.
So, currently, our code allows for disabled parking
permits in R1, R2, R3,
R4, and R5 zoning districts.The problem being
none of those districts currently exist as named within our
municipal code. Amendment would allow for disabled
permit parking in the current residential districts:
RS-1, RS-2, RS-3,
RT 3.5, RT 4, RM
4.5, RM 5.0, and RM
5.5. Currently, any
applicant with a garage on their property will automatically be
denied. They can appeal through MOPD and subs-
submit a notarized landlord verification form confirming they
cannot access the garage. This amendment would allow
at that initial application to submit verification that they
cannot use their garage with that initial application via the form
or other evidence. For example, the garage may not be accessible,
maybe there's a lift, maybe you're unable to use it because you're a renter.
Currently, Department of Finance denies applicants on a block where
10% of the spots on the block are already disabled permit
parking. MLPT can recommend an override of the
denial, which they do if less than 20% of the block is
designated for disabled permit parking.
This codifies the threshold for transparency to applicants and
raises it to 15% while still allowing MOPD
to recommend an override and allow up to 20% where
needed.
Finally, uh, Department of Finance currently mails notification
of all DPP application denials and approvals to ward
offices. This amendment would allow them to send this information to
ward offices by email. Applicants would still receive
paper note. It also lengthens the
appeal window, which currently applicants have 10 days to submit
an appeal to MOPD if they are denied.
This amendment would lengthen the window to 30
days. I think as we go through those slides, I
think all- all of us, our staff can resonate
and probably empathize with a lot of what was on the
screen, and hopefully a lot of the motivation and the
benefits behind these changes, potential changes.
Um, if anyone has any questions, we have with us today in the box
Joel Flores, First Deputy Director, and Jean-Paul
Yael, uh, Deputy Director of Citation Administration from the
Department of Finance, Esther Gutierrez, Senior Policy
Analyst from the Mayor's Office for People with Disabilities,
and Shawn Wydell, Deputy Commissioner, Division of Citywide
Services from the Chicago Department of
Transportation. Do we have any questions or
comments from members?
Going once,
going twice, with no further
questions, can I have a motion to recommend approval of
this item
02025-0019980
by the same roll call vote as was applied to determine quorum?
The man in the front row with a subtle nod, Alderman
Chico so moves. Hearing no objections, so ordered.
Thank you all. I think some folks here are sticking around.
Uh, moving on to item two on page
one,
SO2024-0010993,
Amendment of the Municipal Code Chapter
9-108 by adding new Section
9-108-025,
establishing Public Enforcement Pilot Program for residents to
submit recorded evidence of covered parking
offenses. Via email this morning and in person, we've handed
out an updated substitute ordinance, but today, uh, this will be
a, we will not be voting on this item and instead we'll have a subject matter
hearing so that departments' and members' concerns can be heard
out. Before any questions, can I have a motion to accept the
substitute o- ordinance
as amended? Uh, Alderman Martin so moves.
Hearing no objections, so ordered.
I'm gonna move through the slides on this,
uh, ordinance. So
as committee members may recall, this ordinance was originally
passed in October 21,
2024, establishing a resident based reporting
pilot where residents can submit evidence of a bus or bike
lane violation. Um,
this evidence would be submitted via 311.
And for- for clarity on this, this is a
complaint all, categorically, these are complaints you can currently
submit through 311 either through the number or through the
app. Uh,
it, what would be changed is they would be reviewed by the Department of
Finance, uh, under the previous iteration,
reviewed by the Department of Finance.
If violation is found, driver would be issued an administrative notice
violation. There would be an opportunity to contest that
in the Department of Administrative Hearings.
This would be a citywide pilot active for two years
from the date of the issuance of the first notice of
violation. We received
concerns, questions related to this.
Based off of that and based off of, um,
the amount of substance in the proposed substitute, it felt
most prudent to re-refer to committee, which is what we did
earlier in the
year.
Proposed updated substitute ordinance
would rename the pilot from public enforcement to resident
based reporting. Again, this is a matter of
semantic clarity. We are not asking Chicagoans to go out and
enforce the law.We are creating a means for the
complaints that they can already submit through 311 to have
a different channel of governmental enforcement.
It would only allow for enforcement of commercial
vehicles, so we also received a lot of feedback that we do
not want to create conflicts
neighbor to neighbor, Chicagoans to Chicagoans, um, which is
why residential vehicles were taken out of this
ordinance. Parking in crosswalks included as
a covered offense. This was a suggestion made by
Alderman Lawson. Um, I, I can't speak for
everyone's wards, but I empathize with him when he talks
about the reality of seeing commercial vehicles blocking
crosswalks in his ward. Certainly, it's something that we see in the First
Ward as well. Uh, reports of
sidewalk, bus, and bike lane blockages would be made
th- made through the program, will first be routed to Department of Finance
Parking Enforcement Aides, who will have the opportunity to issue a
violation. If they, uh, do not do
so or are unable to do so, I think is a fair wording,
uh, the request will proceed through the Department of Finance
review and, if approved, to the administrative hearings
process. Um, this, again,
feedback that we received that we're not trying to take, uh,
workload, work responsibilities from any sh- City of Chicago
employee. We want to give our parking enfor- enforcement aides the opportunity to
do the job that they signed up for. And so being able to route
these effectively to them I think is important.
And in conversations with Comptroller Belski, who
unfortunately cannot join us today, he has confirmed to me that there's
no
logistical reason that that cannot happen.
Um, it removes option for education in, in lieu
of fines. Originally, that had been put into the ordinance as we
were considering residential vehicles.
We know that a lot of our residents...
W- we could talk about the, the quality and challenges of signage
and infrastructure in Chicago for our residents.
We wanted to create an opportunity for education
first with them. It also changes the effective date to
April 1st, 2026 from January 1st,
2026. Understanding this is probably gonna be shared some of
the, um,
logistical challenges, um, that have been stated in
terms of the, the startup of an ordinance like
this.
All of that said, um, for clarity, we're not voting today.
This is a subject matter hearing to discuss the
ordinance. We want to lean into these
concerns. I think we've... I think there's a
universal desire for safe
streets, for uniform, fairer, uh, law enforcement,
uh, on these policies. How we get there, um,
is a matter that is still up for conversation
where we want to really hear e- in, I would say some of
the, the feedback that we've received in the last 24 to
48 hours and make sure that it's fairly considered in any ordinance
that comes up for a vote before the committee.
That said, we have, uh, for any questions, Anthony
Rizzo, Deputy Director of Administrative Adjudication for the Department of
Administrative Hearings; First Deputy Director Joel Flores from the
Department of Finance. D- uh, uh, Dionne?
Dion. Thank you, Dion. Sorry. Dion Tate, um,
Director of 311 Services for the Office of Emergency Management and
Communication; Sean Widell, Deputy Commish- Commissioner,
Division of Citywide Services from the Chicago Department of Transportation;
and Commissioner Nick Lucius from the Department of Technology
and Information. Um, I might ask
by way of an initial question, if I
may ask, uh, permission as
chair, understanding that this is a not...
a new category of
complaints. So if I were and have gone on the 311 app to
date and can submit complaints related to
vehicles blocking bus lanes, blocking bike
lanes, blocking crosswalks, why is it that
currently these complaints are not routed
to parking enforcement aides in the field?
Good morning. Uh, Joe Flores, First Deputy Department of Finance.
So currently our... the 311 complaints that are submitted through the app,
we do, uh, take that data and incorporate it within
our, um, parking enforcement application.
And as part of our, uh, daily enforcement, um,
our parking enforcement aides know when they log
into their app and they're enforcing within their parking zone where
the troubled areas are. We take all the manic, uh, requests
that, uh, come in that are also included within the, uh,
parking enforcement, uh, data-driven application, uh, street
cleaning maps, expired meter maps, um,
rush hour maps. But when the parking enforcement aide
enters their zone for the day, they know exactly where they need to
enforce.
So certainly, we understand where the concentration
of complaints are, and our residents make us aware of that as
well. I... The... My question was, if it
is... A- and maybe it was misstated to me, but
if it is logistically and technologically possible for
complaints as they come in to be routed to parking enforcement
aides, why that is not current practice?
So because these are short-term, uh,
violations, uh, we do not have parking enforcement aides that
are around the corner. Technically when a, a parking
aide would receive that, uh, um,
complaint, if they're in the vicinity, they would be able to go
there. But they may not be in the vicinity.
And if they even go back to the, you know, around the corner to where the crosswalk
is, that car may be gone.
I think I, I think I understand it but I, I will let
folks follow up, but to suffice it to say,
it i- it is not an impossibility, it is not a technol-
technological impossibility for these complaints to be
routed in real time to our parking enforcement aides, is that an accurate
statement?
That is an accurate statement. I believe the only potential, uh, issue
may, may be funding because we would have to integrate it to be more
real-time to our application.
That's helpful. That, that's my
question that I would lead on. I, I would note 'cause we also
received from CPD,
um, some of their concerns related to it.
I, I want to name before we move to questions from the
field, something that has come up on internal
meetings as we've talked about this, the role of AI, AI
in the potential fabrication of
evidence. So number one, I, I had never gone on
ChatGPT before but I did in preparation for this
meeting. When I put in, "Show me
a Sysco truck blocking a protected bike
lane on Western and Milwaukee." The
first, first I scrolled through public images and the one that actually came up was
from a Block Club Chicago article, uh, thank you for the
reporting, uh, titled Life and Death in Chicago's Most
Dangerous Bike Lane. So that, that does speak to like this is, this is
not a ginned up concern. This is a, a real documented concern that
thankfully the, the media has helped bring to the public's attention.
I did from there manage to log in and
it created an image that
is... I'll, I'll have to share it with committee after the fact, um,
it is, um, comically
absurd, and maybe I, I, maybe I can work on how I'm generating
my AI images but certainly I can tell ChatGPT that,
um, the street is not Western going northbound and Milwaukee
going southbound.
Two separate intersecting streets.
This is definitely not what a protected bike lane looks like, and the license
plate and street signs and architecture are so
garbled, uh, that any rudimentary review of this image
would immediately disprove it. But again, just for folks'
awareness, that is why the administrative hearing piece of
this, the due process, is so important, um,
and why we've also included language for rule-writing on
this, that if there are habitual bad actors who are abusing
this, it does give the Department of Law a means for going after those
folks. Um,
that said, I, I did want to turn this over for questions and
comments from committee members.
If, if there are n- uh, uh, uh, I
see a, a late-breaking hand from Alderwoman Manaa Hoppenworth. Yes, Miss?
Thank you Chair. Can you go back and just
review again what, what brought this ordinance on?
I wa- I just want to understand. I have many commercial corridors in the 48th
Ward including Clark Street, Andersonville, Sheridan Road,
and Broadway, and when, and, uh, traffic is maybe
the number one thing that we get calls for service
for, uh, through 911, and, and
that's hard too, and, um, so can you just review for
me?
I'd, I'd be very glad to. So like f- folks who go online understand the
work of organizations bi- like Bike Lane Uprising who have
been documented bike and bus lane blockages
for years now. Um, it actually, uh, the genesis
of this actually goes back to a coffee conversation with our
previous CDOT commiss- uh, previous, previous CDOT
Commissioner Giobiagi, uh, where in our
conversation she actually outlined just what we're
talking about today, a world where complaints
could be submitted by our residents, could be adjudica-
adjudicated by, uh, administrative
hearings, and if a violation occurred, could result in a
citation. Uh, this is like recalling from three years ago
now. I just assumed that in our conversation that that was the
current pathway of enforcement. What we learned as we
dug deeper into this is it's- it's more in line,
uh, with what, um, Deputy, um,
Director Flores laid out. These complaints
are received, they are
logged, but that is as far as it goes.
Um, so currently it, it is, as was noted, not
directed towards parking enforcement aides, not directed towards
administrative hearings. There is neither a warning nor a
citation. I think the challenge of that is two-fold.
Not only does it create
consistent safety concerns, misuse of this
infrastructure, but
I have now on several occasions, and this might be true for others,
talked to
parents who have lost the lives of loved
ones, in several cases their children-...
because infrastructure was blocked, most frequently by commercial
vehicles, which forced them to abruptly take the
driving lane
unexpectedly, um,
unfortunately in several cases resulting in the loss of life
of their children. It is noise that, but it's
dangerous for the drivers who do not expect cyclists to
be coming out of infrastructure that's designed for them.
It's dangerous for our pedestrians who don't expect this to be happening,
who frequently, like when you see commercial
vehicles blocking a crosswalk, for example, have to
move around that.
Mm-hmm.
It's a concern for all of us. But if you think about this from an equity
perspective,
for our seniors that have to exit the crosswalk, for
our young children that have to exit around when we think about hood height
of vehicles these days, um,
I, I try not to be anecdotal
in the policies that we are bringing forward.
But I, I, I will take the moment,
um, for the times that there have been commercial vehicles,
delivery vehicles blocking the crosswalk by my house and
I have to bring my daughter around the side, who is
three years old and just hit 36 inches, bring her around the side of
this vehicle. No one is looking for her.
Mm-hmm.
They are looking for her to be in the crosswalk, which is where she should
be. People are looking for bikes to be in bike lanes, which we have
spent money to create, which is where they should be.
I believe that there are responsible means for
uniform law enforcement. And I, I would say 'cause we
also talked to Lieutenant Clark about
this, about the times that, like, we have had, um,
our officers come out who, unfortunately, on
several, uh, occasions refused to issue
citations to vehicles who had bla- parked half of their
tires in the bike lane, um,
and expressed to us that it was at the
discretion of CPD whether citations
should be issued.
Mm-hmm.
I think it should be a question for this committee and council whether that is
appropriate discretion. Um, but those are all of the concerns
that gave way to the ordinance we're discussing today.
Thank you, Chair. I appreciate that.
You know, I, I think of many intersections in the 48th Ward where I'm
frustrated by vehicles and, uh, CTA is not
exempt, sitting in the crosswalk at Berwyn and Broadway, and
I've talked to them many times about that.
But I also am thinking about the intersection that's right in front of my home
too, 'cause I live on Clark Street in Andersonville and
Summerdale. And that is an intersection that is
well-traversed, but the small business owner that has been there for a very long
time, um, it pains me every time I look down my window to
see them cross the street from their parking lot to their shop, because they, they
basically, they don't look left, right,
left. They just walk. They just walk through the intersection and sometimes there
is a UPS truck, most times there's a UPS truck sitting right
there in the intersection. So, this is an intersection that
is not, um,
it's, it's not different from many others in the neighborhood wherein
a lot of small businesses rely on cer- you
know, um, delivery trucks. And, um,
and there, I, I feel that there is no easy solution on where to
put these trucks in a space where we're trying to make our
streets more equitable, to make space for, um, everybody no
matter how they get around, including bicyclists who...
I am also bicyc- uh, I, I've used Divvy for the last
two and a half years and it's been great.
But there are streets that are absolutely, I have to go around the delivery truck
to stay on the road, um, and that means...
And, and, and it's in places where there, there's not a protected bike lane.
I don't think that there is an easy solution.
I just want to know how is it, along with
fining trucks who should absolutely not be sitting in our
crosswalks, how are we also addressing the
infrastructure to make it more equitable and also
allow for small businesses to get their deliveries or
services or hospitals or clinics or whatever?
Um, because that, that needs to be addressed too. It is about infrastructure.
Mm-hmm.
You know, where people loading and
unloading. Do we have to sacrifice parking spots for
that? I think, I think it is a, a part of the
conversation.
I think that conversation particularly as we can raise it up with our Chambers,
whether there's a, a version of shared loading zones that is appropriate
to be looking at on some of these major, major commercial corridors.
Certainly with the Smart Streets pilot that's happening downtown, there has been
loading f- zone reform that I think has been effective as part of that.
That's something that we can consider. Um, 'cause you're right.
There, there's a balance. The way our economy
operates has shifted fundamentally and we can take that into
account. That said, like, as we've talked about with other actors on
this, there is, there is nothing that is
currently... There's nothing new being made
illegal by this ordinance. Ev- ev- everything that
is in it is currently illegal based off of the municipal code.
We're only, uh, endeavoring to change the pathway of
enforcement.
Thank you.
Tha- thank you very much.
Thank
I appreciate it. Yes, Alderman Cico.
Thank you, Chair. Uh, real quick question.
Uh,
during the administrative hearing, I presume
if a resident reporter doesn't show up would that
then be tossed...
That is, uh, that is, uh, two points I would say.
Number one, we're enabling rule rate-
rule-making authority to go to our departments on that.
That would be my understanding and expectation.
Okay. So say it gets tossed
and we have, uh, multiple
resident reporters calling out a, a single vi- the same
violation. If it gets tossed here, would it still be
enforced here on the other case even though it's the same
violation?
It's a very good question because the, the way it is stated here
is multiple fines for single violation.
That's point number four from CPD.
I believe that's an inaccurate...
I, I would question that statement.
I would say you may have multiple complaints for a single
instance. I think no one's expectation would be that you would
be fined five different times for the, the same
instance.
R-right. But would you be, if it's tossed out,
the, w-we're talking about one single violation, if it's tossed out in one hearing,
does that necessarily,
uh, kind of move on over to the next hearing?
And we're talking about the same exact vi- violation.
It was already tossed-
Yeah.
... but now the n- the next resident reporter is -
I might, I might bring this to
either Department of Finance or Administrative Hearings, 'cause I'm sure that
there's something that we currently see, like
reporting, um, multiple 311s that may be
related to a single instance
of illegality. How is that currently handled by the city?
Hi. Uh, thank you for the question.
So as it relates to duplicate violations, uh, we have a backend
process. Uh, currently we have parking enforcement aides that
are issuing violations for the same
violations under Smart Streets where we use cameras.
So we have a backend process where duplicate violations
would get dismissed before it gets noticed.
Uh, but I'd like Tony Rizzo from DOH
to maybe discuss on if there's multiple violations
that may get through the process, how that may be
addressed at DOH during
hearings.
Uh, yes. Generally, the Department of Finance does not bring
multiple violations for the same incident.
Uh, there would not be multiple fines for the same time and
place violation.
Apologies. If you could, uh, also identify yourself for the record.
I know that-
Oh, I'm sorry.
... y'all did, but like...
Tony Rizzo, Administrative Hearings.
Thank you, Tony.
So, yes. Someone would generally not be found liable more than once
for the same violation.
I- if something occurred multiple days in a row, those, those are possible multiple
violations. But for the same incident, they would not be fined
twice.
Thank you, sir.
With there being no further questions, I, I wanted to
take a moment again, le- and, and they talked about it during public comment, but
to, to thank those whose feedback, w-
whether... Regardless of the timing that it came in, it
is practical and it is actionable and we're
gonna be working with the stakeholders whose work is
informed and impacted by this ordinance to come up with a
substitute of the substitute that can hopefully,
um, work effectively for all committee members and council.
Um, that said,
item two on page one will be held in committee.
Item three on page one will also be held in committee at
the request and consent of Alderman Quinn.
Uh, we will report these items out at the next regularly scheduled
city council meeting. With there being no further business before the committee,
can I have a motion to adjourn?
Alderwoman Maa-Hoppenworth so moves.
Uh, all those in favor, signify by saying aye. Aye.
We are adjourned. Thank you
all.