Testing one, two. Testing one, two. One, two.
Test, test. One, two.
Mic check one, two.
Yeah. Five by five.
Public meetings 2023 to 2027.
Pursuant to Rule 58 of the Chicago City Council Rules of
Order and Procedure, the Sergeant at Arms sets forth the
following rules of conduct for members of the public.
These rules shall be in effect at all times that a viewing
gallery or room is open for a meeting of the City Council
or any of its committees. All individuals and their
belongings are subject to search at entry or upon
request. Individuals must remain seated at all
times except, one, when entering or exiting the
gallery. Two, when providing public comment during the
portion of a meeting set aside for that purpose.
Or three, when asked to rise and be acknowledged by a member
of the City Council.
Profane, threatening, harassing, abusive,
or defamatory behavior or speech, which in the
judgment of the meeting's chair or the Sergeant at Arms may
lead to a breach of the peace or disrupt the orderly conduct
of the meeting, is not permitted. Disruptive or distracting
actions, such as the stomping of feet, waving of arms,
throwing any item, whistling, booing, shouting,
or other loud utterances are not permitted when in the judgment of the
meeting's chair or the Sergeant at Arms, such actions are
disrupting or impeding the orderly conduct of the meeting.
Any item that poses a potential safety hazards, as determined by the
Sergeant at Arms, is prohibited in the gallery.
Such items include, but are not limited to, one, any
pointed objects, including knives of any kind.
Two, banners, flyers, or other forms of signage.
Three, food and beverages, including in glass or
metal canisters. Four, backpacks, large bags,
and sealed packages. Clear bags, not tinted in color,
that do not exceed 12 inches by 6 inches by 12
are permitted and subject to search.
And five, firearms, ammunition, fireworks,
laser pointers, stun guns, tasers, mace, pepper
spray, and toy weapons. Cell phones and other small
handheld recording devices must be placed in silent mode,
can only be used while seated, and can only be used in
a manner that does not interfere with the ability of other
individuals to view or hear the proceedings.
Individuals or groups failing to adhere to these rules
will be subject to removal from the remainder of the meeting by
the Sergeant at Arms.
City of Chicago City Council Rules of Conduct for Public
Meetings 2023 to 2027.
Pursuant to Rule 58 of the Chicago City Council Rules of
Order and Procedure, the Sergeant at Arms sets forth the
following rules of conduct for members of the public.
These rules shall be in effect at all times that a viewing
gallery or room is open for a meeting of the City Council
or any of its committees. All individuals and their
belongings are subject to search at entry or upon request.
Individuals must remain seated at all times except,
one, when entering or exiting the gallery.
Two, when providing public comment during the portion of a meeting
set aside for that purpose.
Or three, when asked to rise and be acknowledged by a member
of the City Council.
Profane, threatening, harassing, abusive,
or defamatory behavior or speech, which in the
judgment of the meeting's chair or the Sergeant at Arms may
lead to a breach of the peace or disrupt the orderly conduct
of the meeting, is not permitted. Disruptive or distracting
actions, such as the stomping of feet, waving of arms,
throwing any item, whistling, booing, shouting,
or other loud utterances are not permitted when in the judgment of the
meeting's chair or the Sergeant at Arms, such actions are
disrupting or impeding the orderly conduct of the meeting.
Any item that poses a potential safety hazards, as determined by the
Sergeant at Arms, is prohibited in the gallery.
Such items include, but are not limited to, one, any
pointed objects, including knives of any kind.
Two, banners, flyers, or other forms of signage.
Three, food and beverages, including in glass or metal
canisters. Four, backpacks, large bags, and
sealed packages. Clear bags, not tinted in color, that do
not exceed twelve inches by six inches by twelve are
permitted and subject to search. And five, firearms,
ammunition, fireworks, laser pointers, stun guns,
tasers, mace, pepper spray, and toy weapons.
Cell phones and other small handheld recording devices must be
placed in silent modeCan only be used while seated
and can only be used in a manner that does not interfere
with the ability of other individuals to view or hear the
proceedings. Individuals or groups failing to
adhere to these rules will be subject to removal from the
remainder of the meeting by the Sergeant at Arms.
City of Chicago City Council Rules of Conduct for Public
Meetings, 2023 to 2027.
Pursuant to Rule 58 of the Chicago City Council Rules of
Order and Procedure, the Sergeant at Arms sets forth the
following rules of conduct for members of the public.
These rules shall be in effect at all times that a viewing
gallery or room is open for a meeting of the City Council
or any of its committees. All individuals and their
belongings are subject to search at entry or upon
request. Individuals must remain seated at all
times except, one, when entering or exiting the
gallery. Two, when providing public comment during the
portion of a meeting set aside for that purpose.
Or three, when asked to rise and be acknowledged by a member
of the City Council.
Profane, threatening, harassing, abusive,
or defamatory behavior or speech, which in the
judgment of the meeting's chair or the Sergeant at Arms may
lead to a breach of the peace or disrupt the orderly conduct
of the meeting, is not permitted. Disruptive or distracting
actions, such as the stomping of feet, waving of arms,
throwing any item, whistling, booing, shouting,
or other loud utterances are not permitted when in the judgment of the
meeting's chair or the Sergeant at Arms, such actions are
disrupting or impeding the orderly conduct of the
meeting. Any item that poses a potential safety hazard,
as determined by the Sergeant at Arms, is prohibited in the gallery.
Such items include, but are not limited to, one, any
pointed objects, including knives of any kind.
Two, banners, flyers, or other forms of signage.
Three, food and beverages, including in glass or
metal canisters. Four, backpacks, large bags,
and sealed packages. Clear bags, not tinted in color,
that do not exceed 12 inches by 6 inches by 12
are permitted and subject to search.
And five, firearms, ammunition, fireworks,
laser pointers, stun guns, tasers, mace pepper
spray, and toy weapons. Cell phones and other small
handheld recording devices must be placed in silent mode,
can only be used while seated, and can only be used in a
manner that does not interfere with the ability of other
individuals to view or hear the proceedings.
Individuals or groups failing to adhere to these
rules will be subject to removal from the remainder of the
meeting by the Sergeant at Arms.
City of Chicago City Council Rules of Conduct for Public
Meetings, 2023 to 2027.
Pursuant to Rule 58 of the Chicago City Council Rules of
Order and Procedure, the Sergeant at Arms sets forth the
following rules of conduct for members of the public.
These rules shall be in effect at all times that a viewing
gallery or room is open for a meeting of the City Council
or any of its committees. All individuals and their
belongings are subject to search at entry or upon request.
Individuals must remain seated at all times except,
one, when entering or exiting the gallery.
Two, when providing public comment during the portion of a meeting
set aside for that purpose.
Or three, when asked to rise and be acknowledged by a member
of the City Council.
Profane, threatening, harassing, abusive,
or defamatory behavior or speech, which in the
judgment of the meeting's chair or the Sergeant at Arms may
lead to a breach of the peace or disrupt the orderly conduct
of the meeting, is not permitted. Disruptive or distracting
actions, such as the stomping of feet, waving of arms,
throwing any item, whistling, booing, shouting,
or other loud utterances are not permitted when in the judgment of the
meeting's chair or the Sergeant at Arms, such actions are
disrupting or impeding the orderly conduct of the meeting.
Any item that poses a potential safety hazard, as determined by the
Sergeant at Arms, is prohibited in the gallery.
Such items include, but are not limited to, one, any
pointed objects, including knives of any kind.
Two, banners, flyers, or other forms of signage.
Three, food and beverages, including in glass or
metal canisters. Four, backpacks, large bags,
and sealed packages. Clear bags, not tinted in color,
that do not exceed 12 inches by 6 inches by 12
are permitted and subject to search.
And five, firearms, ammunition, fireworks,
laser pointers, stun guns, tasers, mace pepper
spray, and toy weapons. Cell phones and other small
handheld recording devices must be placed in silent mode,
can only be used while seated, and can only be used in
a manner that does not interfere with the ability of other
individuals to view or hear the proceedings.
Individuals or groups failing to adhere to these
rules will be subject to removal from the remainder of the
meeting by the Sergeant at Arms.City of
Chicago City Council Rules of Conduct for Public Meetings,
2023 to 2027.
Pursuant to Rule 58 of the Chicago City Council Rules of
Order and Procedure, the Sergeant at Arms sets forth the
following rules of conduct for members of the public.
These rules shall be in effect at all times that a viewing
gallery or room is open for a meeting of the City Council
or any of its committees. All individuals and their
belongings are subject to search at entry or upon request.
Individuals must remain seated at all times except,
one, when entering or exiting the gallery.
Two, when providing public comment during the portion of a meeting
set aside for that purpose.
Or three, when asked to rise and be acknowledged by a member
of the City Council.
Profane, threatening, harassing, abusive,
or defamatory behavior or speech which in the
judgment of the meeting's chair or the Sergeant at Arms may
lead to a breach of the peace or disrupt the orderly conduct
of the meeting is not permitted. Disruptive or distracting
actions, such as the stomping of feet, waving of arms,
throwing any item, whistling, booing, shouting,
or other loud utterances are not permitted when in the judgment of the
meeting's chair or the Sergeant at Arms, such actions are
disrupting or impeding the orderly conduct of the meeting.
Any item that poses a potential safety hazards, as determined by the
Sergeant at Arms, is prohibited in the gallery.
Such items include, but are not limited to, one, any
pointed objects, including knives of any kind.
Two, banners, flyers, or other forms of signage.
Three, food and beverages, including in glass or
metal canisters. Four, backpacks, large bags,
and sealed packages. Clear bags, not tinted in color,
that do not exceed 12 inches by six inches by 12
are permitted and subject to search.
And five, firearms, ammunition, fireworks,
laser pointers, stun guns, tasers, mace pepper
spray, and toy weapons. Cell phones and other small
handheld recording devices must be placed in silent mode,
can only be used while seated, and can only be used in a
manner that does not interfere with the ability of other
individuals to view or hear the proceedings.
Individuals or groups failing to adhere to these rules
will be subject to removal from the remainder of the meeting
by the Sergeant at Arms.
City of Chicago City Council Rules of Conduct for Public
Meetings, 2023 to 2027.
Pursuant to Rule 58 of the Chicago City Council Rules of
Order and Procedure, the Sergeant at Arms sets forth the
following rules of conduct for members of the public.
These rules shall be in effect at all times that a viewing
gallery or room is open for a meeting of the City Council
or any of its committees. All individuals and their
belongings are subject to search at entry or upon request.
Individuals must remain seated at all times except,
one, when entering or exiting the gallery.
Two, when providing public comment during the portion of a meeting
set aside for that purpose.
Or three, when asked to rise and be acknowledged by a member
of the City Council.
Profane, threatening, harassing, abusive,
or defamatory behavior or speech which in the
judgment of the meeting's chair or the Sergeant at Arms may
lead to a breach of the peace or disrupt the orderly conduct
of the meeting is not permitted. Disruptive or distracting
actions, such as the stomping of feet, waving of arms,
throwing any item, whistling, booing, shouting,
or other loud utterances are not permitted when in the judgment of the
meeting's chair or the Sergeant at Arms, such actions are
disrupting or impeding the orderly conduct of the meeting.
Any item that poses a potential safety hazards, as determined by the
Sergeant at Arms, is prohibited in the gallery.
Such items include, but are not limited to, one, any
pointed objects, including knives of any kind.
Two, banners, flyers, or other forms of signage.
Three, food and beverages, including in glass or metal
canisters. Four, backpacks, large bags, and
sealed packages. Clear bags, not tinted in color, that do
not exceed 12 inches by six inches by 12 are
permitted and subject to search. And five, firearms,
ammunition, fireworks, laser pointers, stun guns,
tasers, mace pepper spray, and toy weapons.
Cell phones and other small handheld recording devices must be
placed in silent mode, can only be used while seated,
and can only be used in a manner that does not interfere
with the ability of other individuals to view or hear the
proceedings. Individuals or groups failing to
adhere to these rules will be subject to removal from the
remainder of the meeting by the Sergeant at Arms.
City of Chicago City Council Rules of Conduct for Public
Meetings, 2023 to 2027.
Pursuant to Rule 58 of the Chicago City Council Rules of
Order and Procedure, the Sergeant at Arms sets forth the
following rules of conduct for members of the public.
These rules shall be in effect at all times that a viewing
gallery or room is open for a meeting of the City Council
or any of its committees. All individuals and their
belongings are subject to search at entry or upon
request.Individuals must remain seated at all
times, except, one, when entering or exiting the
gallery. Two, when providing public comment during the
portion of a meeting set aside for that purpose.
Or three, when asked to rise and be acknowledged by a member
of the city council.
Profane, threatening, harassing, abusive
or defamatory behavior or speech, which in the
judgment of the meeting's chair or the sergeant at arms may
lead to a breach of the peace or disrupt the orderly
conduct of the meeting, is not permitted.
Disruptive or distracting actions, such as the stomping of feet,
waving of arms, throwing any item, whistling,
booing, shouting, or other loud utterances, are not
permitted when in the judgment of the meeting's chair or the sergeant at
arms such actions are disrupting or impeding the orderly
conduct of the meeting.
Any item that poses a potential safety hazards, as determined by the
sergeant at arms, is prohibited in the gallery.
Such items include, but are not limited to, one, any
pointed objects, including knives of any kind.
Two, banners, flyers, or other forms of signage.
Three, food and beverages, including in glass or
metal canisters. Four, backpacks, large bags,
and sealed packages. Clear bags, not tinted in color,
that do not exceed 12 inches by 6 inches by 12
are permitted and subject to search.
And five, firearms, ammunition, fireworks,
laser pointers, stun guns, tasers, mace/pepper
spray, and toy weapons. Cell phones and other small
handheld recording devices must be placed in silent mode,
can only be used while seated, and can only be used in a
manner that does not interfere with the ability of other
individuals to view or hear the proceedings.
Individuals or groups failing to adhere to these
rules will be subject to removal from the remainder of the
meeting by the sergeant at arms.
City of Chicago, City Council Rules of Conduct for Public
Meetings, 2023 to 2027.
Pursuant to Rule 58 of the Chicago City Council Rules of
Order and Procedure, the sergeant at arms sets forth the
following rules of conduct for members of the public.
These rules shall be in effect at all times that a viewing
gallery or room is open for a meeting of the City Council
or any of its committees. All individuals and their
belongings are subject to search at entry or upon request.
Individuals must remain seated at all times, except,
one, when entering or exiting the gallery.
Two, when providing public comment during the portion of a meeting
set aside for that purpose.
Or three, when asked to rise and be acknowledged by a member
of the City Council.
Profane, threatening, harassing, abusive
or defamatory behavior or speech, which in the
judgment of the meeting's chair or the sergeant at arms may
lead to a breach of the peace or disrupt the orderly conduct
of the meeting, is not permitted. Disruptive or distracting
actions, such as the stomping of feet, waving of arms,
throwing any item, whistling, booing, shouting,
or other loud utterances, are not permitted when in the judgment of the
meeting's chair or the sergeant at arms such actions are
disrupting or-
Good morning.
This joint committee,
meeting of the committee on budget and government operations and police and fire be
called to order. We'll take a quorum roll call, a roll call to establish a
quorum with members Irvin, Lee,
Solafaro, Lapada, Yancy, Harris,
Ramirez, Quinn, Moore, O'Shea, Scott,
Burnett, Cardona, Viegas, Nugent,
Napolitano, Riley, Newton,
Hatton, and Silverstein and
Mosley.
Also entertain a motion for participation via
Rule 59 for the following members,
Mitchell,
Sito Lopez, Rodriguez Sanchez,
Conway, Gardner, Clay, and I cannot
believe Sposato.
Sposato asked for Rule 59, you all.
So we'll deny...
Rodriguez as well.
Okay. So
moved.
Okay. All right. Very well. So, I'll entertain a motion for those
individuals we've just mentioned. All in favor signify by saying aye.
Any opposed?
In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and they will be
added remotely. Let me confirm, Alderman Conway?
Present.
Alderman Rodriguez Sanchez?
Alderman Sito Lopez?
Alderman Mitchell? Alderman Gardner?
Present, Chair.
Alderman Clay?
Alderman Rodriguez?
Here, sir.
Okay. All right. We'll check on the others as we move forward.
The time now is for public comment.
Public comment, again, is limited to three minutes.
We'll begin with Mr. Blakemore.
Alderman Mitchell present.
Who is that? Alderman Mitchell? We have you.
Yes.
Thank you. All
rightMr. Blakemore, you may
proceed.
Thank you.
You was the same chairman that put
these citizens out of the meeting.
You're Irvin,
and you come from that ghetto ward.
Nothing wrong with the ghetto, but no economic development.
No economic development, and the only economic development
that I see is on Madison and Pulaski.
All of them are Korean businesspeople.
Uh-huh.
Yes,
other Asian businesspeople, and no Blacks.
Millions and millions of dollars are spent
right there at Madison and Pulaski.
You're supposed to correct that.
You're supposed to help Black people that's looking like you,
getting that money.
It's something wrong with you. No, there's nothing wrong with Mr.
Irvin. There's something wrong with the Black community that he
represents.
You deserve the government you get, and you get the government you
deserve.
I'm Black here.
All these Black faces. Stop it, talking to her.
Leave her alone.
No economic development
in your ghetto ward.
Why is that?
Why are they taxing your
residents higher than they tax the rich area?
Why is that?
Can you answer this question? And why is it that you can be a
Chicago policeman and not even a citizen
of the United States? Why is this? Why are these seats
empty? Don't beat up on Irvin.
Beat up on the Black people. We old Black
people have dropped the ball. Mr. Blakemore, your generation
dropped the ball.
Your generation had bank, business,
hospital,
service stations, all kind of
ways of making money, even the lottery.
Go on with Black folk. There's something evil here.
There's something un-American here.
There's something funky here.
Now, I said it, you heard me. Now, look, he's going to run up.
"Mr. Blakemore, Mr. Blakemore, your minute is up." That minute should be
up. Always late.
Always 30 minutes, 10 minutes, an hour late.
Okay now, sit down, Mr. Blakemore.
You've been at this little dog and pony show.
Thank you, Mr. Blakemore. Want to recognize Alderman Clay.
Alderman Clay, are you on?
I'm here, Chairman. Thank you.
All right. Thank you, ma'am. Next, we'll have Zoe Lee,
followed by
Patrina Puentes?
Yes.
Patricia Puentes Blanca
will follow Ms. Lee.
Also recognize, sorry Ms. Lee. I'll recognize Alderman Vasquez for purposes
of quorum. Anybody else? Okay. You may proceed, ma'am.
You know, they call you triple third
murder, I think. Triple three murder, that's what they call you, Jason Irvin,
because all them murders that's over in Garfield that keep
happening. I don't know when we going to change.
But I will say this.
The Democratic party, the Black Democratic party needs to be broken
up because
you all have no solutions, and you all just never going to have no
solutions. The fact that I've been now here
for this long,
and you guys still haven't apologized for the city
knocking down the Sandpiper Lounge.
The Sandpiper Lounge, you all have all been to Sandpiper Lounge.
Majority of you all have been in the Sandpiper Lounge.
Marlene Hopkins, a crackhead,
David Moore, for sure a crackhead,
let the Sandpiper Lounge get demolished,
and did not pay
Leroy Singleton,
who's still alive to this day, and he had that business since
1967.
It was paid off.
This was a public safety, this is a whole public safety issue.
The fact that our
Black businesses can get unlawfully demolished, and we
don't get paid. Violation of the Fifth Amendment.
You all worried about the Voters Rights Act?
I know you all are not worried about the Voters Rights Act when
you all are letting businesses get demolished in our
communities.
And then you have pastor, R&B singer, Alderman
William Hall,
that wants to talk about the Walgreens.
We're losing more pharmacies,
but we get so
many fried chicken spots, so many
liquor stores, so many
convenience stores, high gas.
We'll get another gas station, but you all talk about it's Trump fault that the gas
is up. The gas is up
because you all brought in 22 million
illegal aliens, and then you all let Biden
and Biden's son
Hang out with the Ukraine man
and launder billions of dollars
all last term.
You think I'm worried about Iran?
You think I'm worried about Israel?
I'm worried about getting y'all out of office ASAP.
Thank you for your comments. Next, we'll have Patricia
Puentes Blanca, followed by Halton
Hawkins.
Without the S, Puente.
Good morning.
I had an issue on Saturday. Thank
you. I had an issue on Saturday
that it was, I called the law
enforcement
various times. It was 10:00, 11:00, 12:00,
1:00 in the morning,
regarding noise.
Cloud Gate Realty on 6435
unit F
had his loud music
on the parking lot. I called the law
enforcement, and the law enforcement told
me that an elder
man
from City Hall gave them a permit that
stated that they could do whatever they wanted,
that they were untouchable. And then I told them,
"I don't have a problem with them having a party.
Can you please just tell them to lower their music?
I'm trying to sleep." There's people in this building
that work
in the morning on Sundays that have
to get up at 4:00 in the morning,
and you are telling me that you are not allowed to tell the
people from Cloud Gate Realty to lower their
music? How hard is it
to tell these people,
politicians, that they were having a party on the parking
lot in an open space. Why don't they
have these parties in front of their house, in front
of their building, and see how their neighbors like it?
Thank you very much.
Thank you for your comments. Next, we're going to have Halton Hawk-
One minute, sorry.
The other reason why I am here,
I abide by the law,
okay?
I follow the rules and regulations.
Unfortunately, one of our police officers was
killed
by a man that had his weapon in
his panties.
That's how he was able to get that weapon inside.
I am asking all of you guys
that have the power
to please
allow for the law enforcements
to get some wands so that they could check
in the men's private areas.
Please invest this money so that they could stop,
so that our law enforcement can be more protected.
Thank you very much.
Thank you. Next, we'll have Halton Hawkins, followed
by
Quishonda Harris.
Good morning, and thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak today.
My name is Halton Hawkins, and I am
an employee of a company called Mark43 that
is currently a law enforcement records management system for a department
within the city of Chicago, the Crime Prevention Information Center.
I have spent the last four years since I started at Mark43 working to
expand the CPIC
RMS in order to address some of the challenges that Chicago Police
have with overtime and
time to write records.
Those time savings can be used to save up to $30
million in overtime, conservatively.
Those savings can be used to give officers time in the
community to build community trust, and those savings can also be used
to address officer mental health and well-being, which I believe is part of the
consent decree that you guys are looking to solve for.
Additionally,
Mark43 provides real-time data to officers as they do their
jobs day to day. That real-time data enables them to make
faster, better, more accurate decisions while lowering risk.
And then lastly, I'll hit on the fact that in my readings
online, I believe that you guys did an EY Ernst Young
study on how to save money across procurement.
I believe that study, in part, talks about expanding contracts throughout the city.
So,
I have an RMS contract for CPIC. We are in
negotiations with Chicago Park District.
We have also received a verbal award from Chicago Aviation
for a new RMS system. So,
we are here to help and try to expand and
try to alleviate some of the overtime, as well as driving relationships in the
community. And just here to help, and I'm a little
confused on what's taking so long and the challenges that you guys are going
through. Thank you very much for your time.
Thank you for your comments. We'll recognize Vice Chair
Robinson for the purposes of quorum.
Next, we'll have
Quishonda Harris.
Good morning. My name is Quishonda Harris, and I'm the founder and executive
director of Misty House, a proposed sanitation facility being
developed in Bronzeville. Misty House will provide individuals with
access to private shower stalls, hygiene supplies, and clean
clothes.I'm here not only to address the critical gap in our city,
but one that directly impacts health and hygiene.
We are facing a public health crisis that drives
preventable illness at an unnecessary cost in our healthcare
system. By lowering these costs, we are free up resources to
a city's priority necessities.
Therefore, I'm asking for your support to ensure that this sanitation
system is prioritized in the upcoming budget discussion.
Your support will help integrate this critical resource into our city's fiscal
framework, ensuring long-term stability, edible access, and essential
hygiene services.
Although the facility will be located in Bronzeville, just across from the
Chicago Police headquarters, it will serve as a key resource to
all of
Chicagoland area.
This model can expand as the facilities are being developed as a blueprint
on how to provide equitable access to hygiene services across the
city.
Thank you.
Thank you for your comment.
Next, Malcolm Weems,
followed by Janice Cannon.
Good morning to the committee, Mr. Chairman.
My name is Malcolm Weems. I am the CEO of Techquity Partners, a
local
government solutions company. I am a local and regional partner of
Mark43. I am just really here to kind of hammer home a
point related to the budget and how the records management system
can help the city with its budget issues without
charging more citizens more fees, right?
I spent a couple of years running the State of Illinois Budget Office, so I'm
very sensitive to budgetary issues for government.
But one of the things about the RMS system that Holton was talking about is
he talked about a conservative savings of about $30
million related to overtime. That is based on
hours worked. So it takes about four to five hours for
police reports right now through a number of different systems.
The current RMS that the city has access to through a
contract would reduce that to 45 minutes.
So if you just do the math over how many police reports you have, and you do
the hours, right, that you're relieving, you get to
about $30 million. On top of that, the City of Chicago
is not compliant with the consent decree.
It costs the city approximately, and this is based on a report by
WTTW, about $4 million a year for oversight
for not being compliant with the
consent decree. The issue with that, if you take $30 million
plus $4 million a year, that's $35 million approximately a
year that the city could be avoiding in cost by using a
contract that they currently have.
So as a taxpayer and as a business here,
we recognize that the city has to do more with less.
So before the committee talks about adding fees and things and
increasing budgets, we think it's really important to take a look at what you have.
You spent $3 million on an Ernst & Young report to tell you these things.
And so this is available to the City of Chicago right
now under contract. So we want you to consider it.
Even if you are to find a new RMS and you want to get another provider, you
are probably three to four years from actually having data from that provider
because they'll have to implement, do data migration, and all of those
things. You currently have that now.
So I just wanted to make sure I hammered home the point about doing more with
less and looking at
making
choices to use what you have and follow that Ernst
& Young report that you spent so much money on. Thank you very much.
Thank you for your comments. We also want to recognize for the purposes of
quorum,
Alders Tabaris and Quezada. Also, I see
that we've been joined by a former colleague from the 21st Ward,
Alderman Brookings.
Why are you here, sir? You going to come hang out with us today? Thank you.
Oh, okay. I got you. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Welcome as always.
And our final speaker, Ms. Janice Cannon.
Good morning.
I'm just here for a small complaint about my area, the
Chase Bank, which sits on 1130 West Taylor
Street.
I bank there, but the problem is this Busy Burger's across the
street, and when people park in Chase
Bank and run over to Busy Burger, not knowing that they can't park in
Chase Bank, their cars are booted.
I've seen people cry about this, just running to get a burger,
not knowing that they can't park in Chase
lot. Well, it says they'll tow it, but it doesn't say that you can't go
across the street. So my biggest concern is how can you change
this so that people get off of work, want to go across to Busy Burger, park their
car at Chase Bank, and then they come back with a $75 boot on their car.
I'm just asking how can we change that?
Thank you for your comment.
All right.
We have three items up today. We'll begin with items number one and number
two. We have from the Chicago Police Department, Ryan Fitzsimmons,
Deputy Director of Office of Strategic Planning.
Noel Flores, Deputy Director, Office of Analysis and Evaluation.
Allison Clark-Henson, the Executive Director of Office of Constitutional
Policing and Reform. Also joining from OPSA,
we have General Counsel Sandra Talbot and the Executive Director,
Eric Patterson.
Committee will now move to consider items one and twoWhich
are the 2026 overtime reports for January, February, and March.
Item number two is the EIS reports for the same time period.
I'll defer to
CPD for any opening remarks.
We have no opening remarks, Chairman.
We're ready to just hop into the presentation here, sir.
Right. Okay, very well. Malcolm, you ready?
Okay.
You all may proceed.
All right. Good morning, Chairman.
Good morning, aldermen and alderwomen.
We have for you today a brief presentation on our overtime
expenditures for quarter one. Next slide, please.
Looking at our expenditures for quarter one, we see
that we have two main categories of overtime
expenditures. We have reimbursable overtime and we have non-reimbursable
overtime. When I'm referring to reimbursable overtime, what
I'm referring to are those expenditures that we get reimbursed by
CTA, CHA, the federal government, those types of
expenditures. When I'm talking about not reimbursable, that is
the
funding that comes from the corporate budget from the city.
So we've come up with a way to estimate our overtime
performance. At the end of the quarter, you'll have the final
overtime payments will be reflected in payroll data provided-
Could you speak into the mic? The members are having trouble hearing you.
Yep. So final overtime payments will be reflected in payroll data provided by
Department of Finance and released by OBM on city's open data portal.
So we see our performance in January, an estimated expenditure
total of $17.3 million. February is
$16.6 million. March is $21.8 million, for a
total Q1 expenditure of
$55.7 million. Next slide.
What we're focusing primarily on here is the not reimbursable overtime.
This is the overtime that the city of Chicago taxpayer is having to
pay. This is what comes out of the corporate budget as is appropriated
on page 287 of the annual appropriations ordinance.
So if you look at that expenditure for January of
2025, we're down about 13% year over year.
February, we're down about 17% year over year.
March, we were up slightly at half a percent.
But our overall quarter one expenditures were down about
9.4%. Our
March expenditures were up, driven primarily by an increase
for memorial services for the Reverend Jesse L. Jackson Sr.
And final slide.
The strategies that we're using to make sure that we are keeping
these expenditures down, we're leveraging technology to increase
accountability. So one of the changes that we've done is we've
changed our overtime application to force a mandatory overtime tracking
code to be entered into the application.
So every single officer, when they submit a slip, they have to put in a
special code that will make that spending
traceable. Additionally, those codes all have a prefix.
So that prefix ties back to a unit number, so we can then
follow back up with the commander or commanding officer to make sure that
those expenditures are justifiable.
And then the last thing we've done using technology is we've launched a new
dashboard internally with clear budgetary expectations for units
and command staff so they know what is expected for them as far as
expenditures. Every week, I review those expenditures,
and I have conversations with various members of the command staff about things
that I'm seeing, and we escalate up the chain of command as needed.
Additionally, we're continuing to deploy staff from the training academy, public
safety headquarters, and other units to make sure we're meeting
operational needs using straight time in addition to any
overtime.
That is my presentation. I'm ready for any questions that anyone has.
Okay. We will have questions. Before we do that, my apologies.
I meant to-- We opened this meeting, I wanted to have a moment of
silence for Officer Bartholomew, who lost
his life serving us here in the city of Chicago.
So we can pause for a moment for Officer Bartholomew.
Thank you. Start with Chairman Telli Farrell, followed
by Alderman O'Shea.
Mr. Chairman-
Thank you, Chairman
... can you please acknowledge me to be included in this meeting
on roll 59? Sorry to break in like that, but I
want to make sure I'm counted.
Very well, Madam Chair. We'll entertain a motion to allow
for the participation of Chairman Dial. So moved.
All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? Hearing the chairs ayes have it.
And Chairman Dial, you will be added to the roll.
I'm assuming you have questions as well.
I may. I'll let you know. I'll put my hand up. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you. Chairman Telli Farrell.
Thank you, Chairman.
Just a couple of quick questions.
Is the patrol division,
is that where most of our overtime is
coming from?
Our overtime is split across a variety of buckets.
Patrol, of course, makes up a large component of that.
But we also see large expenditures followed by the detective division, Bureau of
Counterterrorism, and then special events are also part
of what we're tracking. So one of the big changes that we've done
with this budgeting system is we have given
everyone what we want them to hit for
expenditures. We've pulled out some of those larger
events, such as Mexican Independence Day, and commanders are no
longer having to worry about those expenditures.
Because we have a specific tracking code, those commanders now are
able to much more closely control their expenditures.
Do you know which special events are not reimbursable?
I believe that's currently a question for the legal department.
I believe Department of Law is currently evaluating where we can get cost
recovery.
For us,
our major cost recovery is Lollapalooza,
but my understanding is that's more of an exception as opposed to the
rule.
And I believe Lollapalooza has been reimbursable over the years.
Whether or not we've collected from them, I'm not sure.
And lastly, could you give us a district
breakdown of, or provide it through the chair, a district breakdown
of overtime use?
Yes, sir. We can certainly get that to you through the chair.
Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Chair.
Thank you.
Following up on Chairman Toledo-Farrar's question, your breakdown
by unit, is it also by function? Meaning,
how deep do you go into
what they're doing versus the unit?
For example, I see that the 11th District is leading in overtime.
However, what's driving the overtime?
What's the function that's driving overtime versus who's
driving the overtime? Do we have that level of detail?
Yes, sir. We have that level of detail.
So we've given each commander a budget.
Those commanders then are able to come up with sub-codes, so then they can
track the expenditures on beat car coverage, robbery teams, large
events, and then manage those appropriately.
So for example, 11 would be like 11-001,
beat car coverage. 11-002, robbery task force.
And then they can sum those to make sure they're within budget, but also keeping
accountability for those job functions.
Is that decision made locally, or is that something that...
Because, for example, is 11-001 the same as
12-001 or 15-001?
Not necessarily. So the commanders do have discretion on what lines they want to
create to allow them to justify and
customize their crime-fighting pattern and allocate resources as needed.
I'm not against the commanders having the ability to
locally control what's happening.
But I think from a reporting standpoint, I think it would
be advantageous for both you and us to know that if
beat car coverage is
something that's a universal code across the
board, then it makes it easier for people to track, because somebody's 001
may be different from someone else's 001. Do you follow my train of thinking?
Absolutely. So the beat car coverage, that is a pretty consistent one across all
the districts.
No, I understand that, but it sounds like there's no standardization
amongst the
types of overtime codes that is being used, and therefore, it makes it difficult
to understand. Because let's say, for example, in Area
Four, I'll just use that as the example, in Districts 10, 11, and 15,
that all of them have
issues with beat car coverage. Maybe they need more officers, or there may be
some other thinking that can come about if there's some
standardization across the board with coding for overtime.
Yes. Understood.
The second question I have is, and this is just the accountant in me, why
is there an estimate for March overtime and we're in May?
So the way that the system works is CPD, we see the
slips. We do not necessarily see the payroll.
So we can see what was submitted. We then join that with our overtime
salary data, and we're able to estimate what we think
is going to happen. But at a certain point, it leaves our environment,
and it goes to the Department of Finance, who then does the actual
payroll. So we
need to make sure that we're estimating this in a timely manner, but my
understanding is we don't get the final payments until well after the
period has elapsed.
Let me ask you this question. If
officer works overtime, what are we in? What period is this?
Nah, it's a period. We're in a period, right? Yeah.
So if a officer works overtime this pay period, when
does he or she see that money hit their check?
So I will get you that through the chair.
That technically goes within the Office of Public Safety Administration.
They handle our payroll.
I would imagine it should be the next pay period, but we'll get you that through
the chair.
When did you get paid?
Oh, you didn't work any overtime?
Yeah, you. You're a police officer, right?
So you work overtime today. When did you get paid for it?
Should've been on at least two checks later.
Two checks later. Wow. Okay. All right.
Very well. Alderman Dove.
Point of clarification.
Go ahead.
I'm sorry, Chairman, just quick question.
Based on the first half of what you asked in that question,
per district,
I'm just a little confused. Is there a recording measure that shows what each
district is utilizing as far as overtime?
It sounds like there is, but what it lacks is consistency across the board, and
it's difficult to manage. If
001 for everybody is different, then how do
we truly understand and know without the level of standardization?
I understand that we need to-
Yeah
... the commander in that various unit, or the commanding officer needs some
flexibility in how to code things.
But I'm sure there's some standard items across the board that we should be
seeing and where we can identify trends or items that are hitting a certain expense
level that should be made available across the board as a whole versus
every district picking what they want 002 to be.
No, I agree with you. Is what they do have, did you
ask can we see that through the chair, what they can show us?
I didn't ask for that. But if that's the point, then maybe
I will call the chart of accounts as it relates to overtime, if you could provide
that to the chair.
Thank you, Chairman.
All right. Very well. Alderman Dove.
Thank you, Chairman.
Morning.
How much Chicago police overtime is
attributable to officers being on the medical leave?
So at this point, we don't have a clear way to track that.
We do try and backfill as much as we can, but we do not have a clear
number for that.
Okay.
How does reducing medical leave duration
translate into overtime savings?
More hours available for officers to work would certainly result
in fewer hours needed for overtime.
What specific strategies exist to
reduce overtime
driven by medical absences?
So when we're looking at this, we do shift people who are not
on specific watches to try and backfill there.
Additionally, we make sure that we are deploying
members from units such as the Public Safety
Headquarters Training Academy to backfill as needed to use straight
time in place of overtime whenever possible.
Okay.
Are current leave policies structured in a way that
encourage timely return to work for our officers?
So I think it's a tricky question because some of this isn't--
There's the CBA, which is negotiated heavily, and then there's the
pure policy. At this point,
there will be the hearing, I believe, after Executive Director Clark
Kensen. We'll have Executive Director Patterson, who will then present on
this, and she would probably be better equipped to answer that.
Okay.
What safeguards exist
to prevent the abuse of medical leave?
So we have the Medical Integrity Unit within the Bureau
of Internal Affairs. They work to make sure that
officers are adhering to medical integrity.
We're always checking up to make sure that officers are recertifying
that they need to be on medical leave.
So we do have a number of safeguards to try and ensure that those
things aren't happening.
But at the same time, trying to be respectful of those officers who have been
previously injured in the line of duty,
we
try and strike that balance. It's a difficult balance to strike.
Okay.
How are Chicago police supervisors involved in monitoring
leave status
and facilitating a return to work?
So one of the things that's nice about the workforce allocation
study in pursuing unity of command span of control,
ideally, we start getting the consistent supervisors who have an idea
of their teams, their people, and they can better understand
who is an individual who maybe are exaggerating their medical
illness, and who is an individual who really does need to take that time.
By ensuring that we have consistent supervision with supervisors who actually have
a personal relationship with our members, we can get much more out of
them than just adhering to a policy.
I think it's putting the staffing in place to make sure there's a
fertile environment for those relationships to take hold.
I want to switch a little bit here to data and transparency.
What real-time data systems are in place to track medical
leave
and a return to on-duty status?
So I don't have insight into that from where I sit.
That primarily is within the Bureau of Internal Affairs and also within the
Office of Public Safety Administration, but we can get you that through the chair.
We may also get a better clarity once
Director Patterson comes up as well.
So
I want you to re-ask that when she comes up with that too.
Okay.
Does the Chicago Police Department have access to the system?
A system that would track employees?
That we'll get you through the chair. That I'm not sure.
Okay.
In instances where it is believed that
medical leave abuse is going on,
who investigates those situations?
My understanding is that the Bureau of Internal Affairs will investigate
those.
Does the Chicago Police Department
Medical Integrity Unit have access to the data systems that track
medical leave
and the return to duty status?
That I don't know. We'll get you that through the chair, sir.
Okay.
Thank you, Chairman. Thank you.
A quick question. An officer who is
on medical,
are they still assigned to their unit, or are they
assigned to another unit while they're out on
medical leave?
So I think there's a variety of situations that can occur.
One of probably the more common that we see is the limited light duty where you
might have members who are going from their field
assignment to another assignment, potentially to help
us handle some other functions. So you might see them shifting from
one unit to the other in those sort of situations.
But an individual, let's say, that is not eligible for light
duty that is either IOD or
not,
where do they report to, or who is their,
quote-unquote, supervision?
Yeah. So in that case, they would stay within their unit of assignment
Okay. All right.
Alderman Moore? I'm sorry. Vice Chair Leader and Alderman
Moore.
Thank you, Chair.
Can you go back to the first slide, please?
The second slide. Okay, we're here.
So
the not reimbursable amount for the first
quarter,
$41 million. How is CPD
budgeting for the year? It's $200 million for the year for
overtime. Do you have this sort of
split out on a quarterly basis, on a monthly basis?
Because I imagine some seasons are going to be more intense for
overtime than others. So I'm just wondering how this compares to what we
budgeted for the quarter.
Yeah. So we're actually in a good shape for what we're budgeting.
The way that we did this is this body in 2024 helped us invest
in a data science team. We've since educated those members, so we actually
are able to do some of these projections.
Essentially what we've done is we've looked at historical expenditures, and then
we've broken it out by job function and put things into different
buckets, right? So unit expenditures, event
expenditures, those sort of things.
We then break those out by day, and then we put them throughout
the course of the month. So every single day that goes by, more funding
becomes available. And then since we've already looked at historical
spending, we're able to track that very closely.
We've made a few tweaks here and there for programs that were
sunsetting from previous years, and then reallocated that money as needed.
So every commander has been
allocated an overtime budget that's going to vary based on historical...
Based on what you just said, right?
So it's based on-
Yes
... historical performance. So it could be that,
if the Ninth District commander, where most of the 11th Ward is,
is able to manage the schedules and everything where they
have,
Alderman Quinn always likes the term I use, a good guy for the quarter, where
they have some additional budget. Does that just roll forward?
That's not being drawn back for anything?
Yeah. At this point, we're not drawing it back.
I think what we're trying to do, this is the first time we've really introduced
this level of tracking.
Mm-hmm.
So we are seeing some success here in the first quarter.
But this model is only going to get better as we continue to gather data
and as expenditures are occurring, especially throughout the summer.
So ideally, by getting more granular, our models will
tighten up as we move into the future.
Is there a process by which-- Okay, so let me back
up for a second. Let me ask this first.
What was police overtime expenditures for 2025?
Do we have a final number on that?
Let's see.
That
I will get to you through-
Through the Chair
... the Chair, yeah.
Okay.
There's probably a few more things I'm going to ask you for through the Chair, but
I'm wondering how much overtime is tied to scheduled events
versus unplanned incidents. Obviously, you can't
predict unplanned incidents, but I'm guessing that, from
a budgeting perspective, you have to leave a little bit of wiggle room in there for
things that will just come up. So what does that look like
for the year? Can you give us a breakdown?
Yeah. So and I think we use the word event and initiative a little
bit differently-
Okay
... than you use event and initiative.
So for us, an event, an initiative might be
teen trends or civil unrest or protests.
Those we're tracking as events, right?
So everyone citywide are going and responding for those.
So for example, year to date for our planned
gathering/march/civil unrest line, we had
budgeted
about 2.1 million and we've expended about
1.5 million.
So year to date for our event and initiative,
we had about
6.7 million budgeted for that, while the units we
had budgeted about 45.2 million
for year to date.
Can you just repeat that one more time?
You said you had 6.7 million budgeted.
Is that for the quarter? And then what's the 45.2 million?
So the 6.7 million, that is from January 1
through the end of April.
Okay. And then the 45.2 is for the year?
The 45.2, that's for
units.
Okay.
And that's from January 1 through the end of April again.
Okay.
So the unplanned,
just for your definition, events and initiatives are those protests,
things like that that happen.
Did I get that definition correct?
And then for planned events then, for street festivals, for
parades that are approved by the city, how do you categorize those?
So those we're condensing into one thing because if you're a commander and you're
asked to go to,
let's say, Bud Billiken, or you're asked to go to a teen trend-
Uh-huh
... functionally, your people are going either way.
You don't really have much control over that.
So we're putting them in the same bucket.
So those we're having start with a prefix of 122.
Uh-huh.
So when the special order goes out and the members are submitting
their tracking codes, they'll use those 122 numbers
as opposed to if it was expenditures within the district, they would
use their unit prefix.
Okay. Got it.
So then that way when we have that conversation with the commander about their
expenditures, they're not saying, wellYou had all
my guys downtown for Mexican Independence Day.
How are you going to hold that against me? So we're not holding it against them.
You've separated that out, but I think that this goes to what you were saying
earlier, Chair.
It seems to me that I would be interested as a council member to know the
difference between things that were permitted and approved by the city versus
things, and I mean planned events.
Obviously if someone's planning a protest or a march, they have to get a permit for
that as well. But things that happen in the normal course of a year
event-wise, the Bud Billiken Parade, the Lunar New Year Parade in Chinatown, the
Chinatown Summer Fair, those are very different than things that have come up
that the officers have to respond to at the district level and
citywide. And I'd be very interested in knowing what those are, the
things that come up, because I think that that is
what I hear, at least from
officers and
just around the city, is when our officers are
pulled to have to cover events downtown or
protests or a march or something like that.
That does put a strain on the resources in the
district. And we want line of sight into that.
So it's something that I would encourage you to break out somehow.
I appreciate that you're not holding it against them, but I think treating all
events the same misses the point on some of this.
Quick, before you jump to the next question, does that account for straight
time, or is this purely overtime? So on a case in point,
our TAC officers will get pulled out of 11 to come
downtown. They're not on overtime. They're on straight time.
They're on their regular tour of duty.
Is that categorized any time they're outside of their unit
to say, "Hey, I'm not in the district"?
So is that accounted for similarly to a special event, or is that
specifically just going after overtime?
So the way that we've addressed that is, let's say your TAC team from
the 11th District goes downtown for an event.
They're on straight time, but you're the commander of the 11th District, so you
then buy back officers to cover those TAC officers that
are downtown. Those officers that you're buying back would then use
the event tracking code, and then they'd submit that overtime slip, and
then in a dropdown, they'd put buyback so we can capture the
total cost of that event. Because but for that event, we would
not have had that expenditure.
But the
officer that was deployed to that event outside of the district, that is
also a cost for that event specifically that
too is not being captured because they're out of the district, and we had to
buy somebody back to work in the district in order to
provide the basic coverage.
So it seems like it needs to be accounted on both sides, whereby the straight
time and the overtime. Understand we're talking about overtime, but at the same
time, that cost associated with that specific event, if there is
an event code, it should also categorize the straight time as well as the overtime.
Yes. Understood, sir.
Vice Chair.
Thank you. Through the Chair, can you provide how much was
spent for the New Year's Eve
event, and May Day protests or the rallies that
were happening?
Yes.
Okay.
And then-
Well, let's expand that too. You've got event codes, and again,
this should go with the chart of accounts that you all will provide, so
that there's some consistency to look across
all events.
Yeah. So within the code that they have for events, and what we'd be looking
for is a breakdown of the individual events.
Okay.
If you can do that, that'd be great.
Can you talk about controls, or are there
controls to prevent unnecessary extension of tours?
Because I know that that's also a source of overtime cost as
well.
Yeah. So one of the features of our internal dashboard is it
shows when the expenditures are occurring.
So one of the big things that I'm looking for every single week is
when those expenditures are occurring.
So if I'm seeing a pattern of expenditures in the
afternoon, right, where if you look at our calls for service data,
you look at our crime data,
they're not really happening between 1:00 and 3:00 PM.
But if I'm seeing expenditures there, it's going to prompt me to make a phone
call to that commander to help me better
understand why we're expending money there.
And then if we continue to see that pattern, then we escalate with
their
commanding officer to continue to move up the chain to make sure that those
expenditures are justified.
Okay, so you're looking at that across all the districts.
You're getting regular information on that.
Yep.
Great. Thanks. I just have two last questions, Chair.
Mm-hmm.
What do you consider an extreme level of overtime by
officer? Like is 20 hours a week
extreme? I'm just wondering what...
I don't have a good enough understanding of how big the overtime problem is at the
officer level, because what this is leading into is going to be wellness
questions.
Mm-hmm.
So.
Yeah. So one of the things that we do have in our internal dashboard is
we can see the total number of overtime that the average officer is
working, along with how much overtime individual officers
worked. I think it depends on the unit.
So if you see an outliner or outlier in district law where they're
working a very high amount of overtime, you might want to have a
conversation with them like, "Hey,
maybe take a day off, take a break." There are some things with
contractual rights where they're able to bid for some of those opportunities,
especially for CTA.
But we do have that figure in the dashboard, so the watch operation
lieutenants, the commanders can see those
people who are consuming a high degree of overtime.
Are there, and this might be a really ignorant question, so forgive the ignorance
here.Are there
caps on overtime? How much is too much, I guess, and
that's what I'm trying to get at here as well.
The need is one thing, but the
ability for an officer to
do their job in a way that is
healthy-
Mm-hmm
... I think does need to balance out the number of hours.
I just don't have a good sense of what's the
highest level of overtime you've seen on a single officer basis.
We've seen officers who have had dozens of hours of overtime in
a single week, but that's in civil unrest or DNC
or some sort of outlier time like that.
I think it really depends on the officer's family situation,
too, because you might have someone who, young family at home,
any overtime might be too much for them.
Then you might have other people who are young, just starting their career, they
can do 15, 20 hours, no problem. But it's going back to those
sergeants, those lieutenants, making sure that they have those relationships with
their people to better understand what their people can
actually work in a healthy way.
Do we have any officers that are working 40 or more hours
in overtime in a week?
That I'm not sure. We would have to check.
I imagine if we do, it's a very small number, though.
If you can provide that through the chair, I'm just interested in the levels of
overtime we're looking at. And you've already covered the questions
about just safeguards and preventing fatigue related
performance issues.
Thank you.
That's all I've got, Chair. Thank you.
Thank you, Vice Chair. A question that
she brought up raised another question.
What impact or
could the schedule be
in creating overtime?
So
sometimes scheduling impacts
overtime, and are we
looking at scheduling models? Do we have the flexibility to adjust
scheduling in order to deal with anticipated
things around overtime? Are we looking at 12s?
Are we looking at 10s? What are we looking at to try to
alleviate overtime from a scheduling aspect?
Yeah. So I think what we're trying to figure out is that fine
line between what's collectively bargained and what we can do.
Obviously, our first response is always to use our
fourth watch personnel to move those around.
We
do have the fifth district, which are on 10 hour days.
They have some unique challenges, some unique benefits.
And I think as we continue down the path of the workforce allocation study,
that's where we're really going to have to dig into what makes the most sense for
our staffing, along with what's allowed with our CBA.
Through the chair, could you provide a
list of staffing
models that is permitted under the
CBA? And what is the standard
tour in the department today?
So our standard hour, I believe, is eight and a half.
So it's eight hours on and a 30 minute lunch.
Okay. So that's the standard. And what other schedules is it?
I've heard of a 10 hour schedule. Some work a 12.
I guess if you could just let us know,
what are the
types of schedules that exist in the department as well?
Yes, sir.
Okay. Very well.
Alderman Moore?
Thank you, Chairman.
Who's ultimately
responsible
for police overtime?
I think that is somewhat
a philosophical question. I think you could say the superintendent is ultimately
responsible. This body is ultimately responsible.
The individual officer.
Hmm.
I think we-
I know I asked you the question. When you say this body, I don't control those
police officers.
Yes. Understood, sir.
So I'm going to ask this question. You take us out of it, you can go down the list.
Who's ultimately responsible for police overtime?
That if it's too bad, that's who I'm going to and saying,
"What's going on?" Who is that?
That would be the superintendent of police.
Okay.
Does anyone else have control over
overtime besides the superintendent of police? Any other department?
Not to my knowledge, sir.
So does anybody in the Office of Public Safety
have any input on what the superintendent
decide about any overtime?
Not to my knowledge, sir.
So strictly the superintendent of police.
He is our executive. He's the one who decides
how we're going to conduct our crime fighting strategy.
Okay.
And our resources need to follow that strategy.
All right. No further questions, Chairman.
Alderman Burnett, then I'll come to Alderman Quinn. Do you have a hand up, too?
Okay. All right. Followed by Alderman Newsome.
Alderman
Burnett.
Thank you.
So my line of questioning follows my colleagues similarly, but I want to
focus particularly on districts that continuously have high
levels of overtime spending. And I know you've noted that this is
a new system of data tracking and figuring out how we are going to
address some of these high levels of overtime.
But what I see over the first quarter in the last three months
11th District is consistently the highest
or in the top three of spending. In addition, Area 4, which
is also covering a similar area, is a higher overtime spend
than other districts. When we see these type of trends, what is
the method that you all are using to try to
address
this overtime allocation? When we're thinking about the area
overall, are you considering more police officers in that
area? Can you talk about what you're seeing for the
specific reason why certain areas have more overtime spend than
others?
Yes, absolutely. So when we budgeted, we looked at historical spend, and
then one of the things that we have done is we've examined the amount of
crime, along with the calls for service in a lot of these districts.
And what we're seeing is there is a very strong correlation
between overtime expenditures and crime,
along with calls for service. One of the things that we do
do to make sure that we are optimizing our expenditures and getting the biggest
bang for the buck is looking at the time of day of those
expenditures, and focusing on those to make sure that
overtime is being incurred when crime and calls for service are at
their highest.
That's awesome. It'll be great if we can see that data, what that
correlation is.
Yeah.
I do know that the 11th District is typically one of the higher districts for crime
and reporting, so that makes sense.
But to your point, if we can allocate resources more effectively
so that we're covering the times and
the number of calls so it's not overtime based and more
standard flow, that would be awesome to see.
I know Alderman Lee mentioned some of the year-over-year reporting.
It would be great if we can see that with these reports quarterly.
If we can just include for districts particularly that are
high on overtime spend, what is the year-over-year change?
Whether that's growing, declining, just so we can track very
clearly each quarter how things are changing.
Yes, sir.
But that's all for me.
Do you have a follow-up to that?
Oh, to me?
Yeah.
Oh, no. We can certainly get that to you. Yes, sir.
Okay.
Alderman Quinn, followed by President Pro Tem Nugent.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Can you shed some light on the month of May
forecast for overtime?
So-
What's your estimate?
Let's see.
So I don't have May right in front of me right now, but it will
be higher than April.
So usually we see ourselves going up through the summer.
We see a slight dip in August. We spike again in September with all the
events there, and then we kind of move down October, November, December.
Do you have a sense,
like for Memorial Day weekend, will days off be canceled?
That is not my call. I just crunch the numbers.
That would-
Correct. I would presume, though, being the number cruncher, that that would be
something you'd be building into your-
So we-
... model
... we would've built in previous expenditures for that date and the cost
for that date.
Whether or not we make that operational call,
that's beyond me. But we have built in
previously canceled days off as expenditures in the model.
Okay.
In your testimony a few minutes ago, you talked about the workforce
allocation study.
Hypothetically, how much could the
implementation of that study have on
overtime?
Maybe it's a positive or, as Alderwoman Lee would say, a good
guy for the city.
Yeah. I think anytime that we're looking critically at our allocation
of resources and thinking about how we can get more
resources out of our finite amount, that would be
positive for us. So we will be looking to see how we can move things around,
how we can use civilian personnel for certain roles,
but making sure that we're thinking through all of the secondary implications of
that.
And is the implementation
started?
Yes.
And then perhaps
you may have commented on this.
Trying to get my arms around the
unpredictable overtime cost.
Any idea of what that is citywide?
We can look at events that were one-off last year
versus different events that were one-off this year.
So you can never predict a war in the Middle East, but
you can never predict a large funeral, but
you're going to start having things that occurred that you didn't predict in
2025 that aren't going to incur in 2026.
But you'll have different events that take that up.
Right. Just sort of a ballpark.
Yeah. So we can get you that through the chair and look at that.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you.
Alderman Nugent.
Thank you, Chair.
Do you have
numbers for what the overtime was for Q1 last year?
Yes. I believe if we go to the next
slide.
So we were at...
Okay, so we're down
this year a bit, which is good.
Yes.
So January...
So we actually went down $2 million this year, even with New Year's Eve this year?
Yes. So one of the big things is when we force this overtime
tracking code-
Yeah
... it really shines a spotlight on what people are doing.
And once there's a spotlight on the expenditures, we tend to see people be a
little more
cognizant on what they're approving and what they're expending.
Okay. That's helpful.
You had mentioned earlier that the superintendent
controls the overtime, but
I would just ask if you explain it a bit more, I would guess that
he's not controlling each commander doing all-
No. Absolutely not
... I mean, does he just give the green light to-- Kind of talk me through how that
looks operationally a little bit.
Yeah. So kind of just taking a big step back, over time, we come
to this body in October, we're going to put forward a figure for
overtime that we want budgeted that we think is
justifiable based on our crime fighting strategy.
This body will then debate it.
We'll get allocated whatever amount we get allocated, and then
the budget office will put that together, and then we'll start spending on
that. An officer, when they go into
overtime, they'll enter a slip. That then will be
reviewed by their supervisor. Then that will be reviewed
at another level by a,
could be a lieutenant, could be a commander, another level of supervision, and
then that will then move to payroll to get paid out.
Simultaneously, I'll be looking at these macro trends to make sure
that we're seeing the expenditures as they add up
are aligned with whatever our crime fighting strategy is, and then brief up the
chain as appropriate.
Okay.
Let me stop. Real quick question here.
Is that before the event or after the event?
It's after the event, after the expenditure has occurred.
After the expenditure's occurred, then it's approved?
Yes.
Okay.
Something sound off with that?
It would be great if we could always predict the need for
overtime.
I think with planned events, we can kind of calculate how many people
we'll need, but all too often
there might be-- So look at Pride, for example.
We have a plan for Pride, and then there's the after Pride event.
And that, we kind of see some extensions and expenditures there
which are more difficult to predict.
Let me just ask one question. How many members of the department have been
disciplined
for unauthorized overtime or,
I won't call it unauthorized, but
what's the right word?
It's not even unpredictable, but it's
frivolous, for a lack of a better term, overtime.
Yeah. So I don't have the exact number.
I do know some people have been disciplined,
because I've kind of shone some light on a few of those.
But
we can get you the exact number.
Okay. Thank you.
How long does it take on average for
an officer to file a report?
That I'm not sure of. The figure that
I've seen and heard is several hours.
And I know this isn't the hearing for this topic, but do you
think if we finally implemented a better records
management type system or upgraded that technology?
Absolutely. A better records management system, better technology
that brings fields from one previously submitted
area of the report to the next area of the report, that would be incredibly
helpful.
Do we have any data that shows how many hours we would
potentially save if we had a better system?
In your opinion, what do you think would happen to overtime if we had a better
system on records?
Overtime would certainly go down if we had a better system.
I think what we struggle with is you
come up with an estimate for how long the report takes, right?
Mm-hmm.
And then the vendors will promise you, "Oh, we can make sure this
happens in 15 minutes." "Oh, well, they said 15 minutes?
We can do 10 minutes." And then no one's actually built the
system. So you don't have a good sense of how realistic some
of those promises are.
Sure.
Then additionally, we still need to work
hand in hand with the Department of Procurement, the Office of Public Safety
Administration, to make sure that we comply with all of the
very
stringent regulations around contracting and-
Sure
... putting these together. But yes, absolutely.
Better systems would cut overtime down.
Okay. And then I know some of my colleagues had brought up
Memorial Day and things like that.
We look better than last year. Was last
year a particularly offensive year for overtime?
Were we average? Where were we last year?
Because I only know this year and last year.
Yeah. So we've been trending down since 2023.
So we spiked in 2023.
Mm-hmm.
We've gone down in 2024. We're down in 2025, and we're
below in 2026. So we're
continuing to trend in the right direction, and a lot of it is just these
small little tweaks, and by emphasizing these conversations
with our officers and our supervisors,
letting them know that overtime is not the answer to everything.
Got it.
Curious,
do you have numbers for how much overtime you guys used on May 1st?
So I don't have that number right now.
Usually, it takes us about eight days to
get an aggregate figure. So I believe it's
somewhere along the lines of seven days out, you have about 70% of the
data. Fourteen days out, you have about 90% of the data,
and as you get further out, the more accurate the data gets.
But at a certain point, you have to strike that balance between timeliness of the
information and accurateness of the information.
Sure. Can you get us that through the chair?
I'd just be curious, and then would you have considered that a planned or an
unplanned?
For me, that
I guess would have been
a planned event because we knew it was coming,
but it's certainly not
something that we can always predict and calculate.
Would you say, and I'm just-- I'm
assuming planned is the Lollapaloozas of the world and the things you
know are regularly occurring each year versus ad hoc.
Correct. Yeah.
Okay.
Do you think there's things we should be doing to help with-- I know there's been,
in one of your comments you had said, "Hey,
overtime pertains to city council and OPSA
and others."
What do you think?
Is there something we should be doing differently to assist?
I think we're doing it now. We're having a discussion about the
expenditures. You guys are bringing your concerns to us.
We're trying to explain what we're doing, and I think as long as the dialogue
continues, we'll be able to resolve a lot of these
obstacles we're trying to figure out.
Got it. Thank you. Thanks for the questions and my
condolences on Officer Bartholomew. Thank you, Chair.
Thank you. Any further questions on item one?
Go ahead.
Question.
Let me go to Napolitano, I'll come back to you. Go to Alderman Napolitano.
Thank you, Chairman. I just have one question.
Is there a record or is there any sort
of document that is kept on
how much is paid to or overtime or funding towards any officers
that's, what's it called, ad minimis, that's sitting in a
hospital
with an offender that could actually be a county offender or covered
by the county? Do we
document that? Do we show that?
Because that happens a lot, and we get a lot of officers that are-
Are you talking about a late arrest or?
No. So it would be a offender that is taken into
custody and that is in
custody, but has been charged, has been processed, but is in the
hospital for whatever reasons. We got officers that sit on those-
Mm
... offenders in the hospital when they actually could be turned over to
county.
Is there any documentation on that?
Do we have-- And I believe it's called a minimis, if I'm not mistaken.
That's the terminology for it.
Yeah. I'm not aware of that. But that is something that we could look at
creating a code for to begin tracking, if
we're
expending a significant amount of funding for that.
If indeed-
That would make sense.
Absolutely. Appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you, Chairman.
Alderman Moore, followed by
Alderman
O'Shea. I'm going to call you Quinn again.
Just going back to my last question.
I just want to make sure, because I spoke it in terms of
overtime, and you answered it in terms of overtime.
I
know the Office of Public Safety, we have this officer.
I just want to make sure, are there any
personnel decisions that they make within CPS that
could lead to us
having overtime?
Or do all the personnel decisions as it relates
to CPD is
under the superintendent's
jurisdiction, if you will?
Oh, I see what you're asking. So yes, we do have some
officers who are detailed within OPSA.
What I'll say is, let's look at technology, for example, right?
With cameras and those sort of things.
Hold on. I think what he's asking is-- I understand what you're saying.
I think what he's trying to get at is does the policy
impact of what OPSA is doing driving overtime
in the Chicago Police Department?
I think that's what he's really asking you from a policy perspective, not
about the officers or the detail. Yeah, somebody's detailed OPSA,
the
superintendent does not control their overtime per se, but does the policy
of not bringing back an officer in 10 days versus
20 days, and that's not the decision the superintendent is making, is that driving
overtime on that end? That's-
With the medical time
... what he's asking.
Is that basically what we're getting at?
Yeah. Okay. So that's a
policy that the superintendent got to abide by no matter what,
and are there other policies like that?
Thank you, Chairman, for clarifying that for me.
Yeah. So I think with medical time, it's very prescriptive in
the CBA what needs to be done.
Obviously,
people spending less time on the medical would then make them eligible to
work, which then means that we'd have fewer overtime expenditures because we have a
larger workforce. I think what gets tricky is when you're trying
to figure out is this genuine medical
leave.
That is a very hard distinction.
And who ultimately making that decision, the superintendent or OPSA?
That is OPSA. The medical section is run by OPSA.
And how much of that
can you provide through the chair is attributed to overtime, if you will, if I'm
asking that question right?
That we don't calculate.
Well, it kind of goes back to the earlier point of
manpower. So if your unit is short and you've got to buy
back for extension of extend tours or you got to buy back
tours, then that may be the actual root cause of
that overtime is the fact that you got some people clogged up in medical, right?
Right, wrong, or indifferent, but that may be the root cause of
why some overtime is occurring. I think
everybody's trying to understand, is that the case? Is it medical?
What's really the root cause of the overtime?
And it
may be, but it's not generally what that code is indicating, and I think that's
where you're trying to drive another same point that I agree with you on.
Absolutely.
CoolAny other overtime items? I'm
sorry, Alderman O'Se.
Thank you, Chairman.
Who decides
if we're going to have Lollapalooza?
That one, I'd have to get you through the chair.
With a lot of these events, there's many different parties involved
in actually getting that permitting through.
I know the parks districts are involved with some events.
CDOT are involved with other events.
DCASE are involved with other events.
So we have a very complicated way of approving special events.
So I know there is a special events working group that's trying to streamline this.
But at this point, I don't know exactly who is
in charge of approving Lollapalooza.
And how about who decides whether we have
the Pride Parade?
Again, it's going to be that coalition of different city departments
that make a decision.
How about street festivals?
Same answer. It'll be a different coalition of different departments.
CPD is only responsible for providing the security plan.
And all these events I just mentioned,
they require
significant deployment,
large scale overtime.
Correct.
Okay. Thanks, Chairman.
Any other questions?
All right. Well,
this has been
interesting conversation around overtime.
And I think
as we get to a better understanding, I think you said it
earlier, as we begin to look at stuff,
people may make some different decisions, and as we can get deeper into the
data around
this particular issue,
we may be able to make some recommendations, or you all may see some
recommendations that need to be made around this.
So
with that, we will close out item number one.
We'll go to item number two, which is the early intervention system, and Chairman
Toby Farrell is going to take it from here.
Thank you, Chairman.
Next item on the agenda is item number two, the CPD 2026
EIS report for January, February,
March.
If you could state your name for the record before you take us through the slide
deck, and that'll be followed by any questions and comments that members
of the committee or council may have.
Absolutely. Thank you. Good afternoon. My name is Allison Clark-Henson.
I'm the Executive Director of the Office of Constitutional Policing and
Reform.
Okay. We could put the slide deck up.
Okay, the department has been working with Benchmark Analytics in the
development of our early intervention support system.
This was co-developed with the University of Chicago and partners that include
American Institutes for Research and the Joyce Foundation.
It might be helpful if we go back to the slide deck so they could see the slides
that I'm working off of.
Thank you.
Okay. Right there. Thank you.
So the purpose of this briefing is a high-level overview of the
CPD's early intervention and support system,
to explain how the system meets consent decree requirements, summarize key
findings, safeguards, and outcomes, and then to highlight oversight,
auditability, and limitations.
So what is the EISS? It's a data-driven
early warning system to identify officers at elevated
risk. It's designed to enable early
non-disciplinary intervention.
It supports supervisory decision-making. It does not replace it.
It's built using CPD data and continuously updated,
and it combines elements of both a traditional rule-based management
tool with advanced predictive analytics.
The machine learning tool identifies those officer behavior patterns
that led up to an adverse incident.
The purpose is early awareness, not discipline.
So what the EISS is not, again, as I stated, it is not a disciplinary
tool. It is not used for promotions or punitive actions.
It is not automated decision-making.
The EISS flags trigger review and support,
not punishment. The goal of the system ultimately is prevention.
Evidence shows risk is concentrated in a small group.
Intervening early can reduce serious incidents before they
occur.
Again, this is a requirement of the consent decree.
Specifically, it aligns with paragraphs 583 through
605.
In summary, these requirements
require statistical data-driven methodology, peer group
comparisons, supervisor dashboards and alerts,
auditability and annual review, and adaptability over time.
It also requires for the interventions to be documented to best support
officers with additional resources and their progress during these interventions.
Next slide. So the department anticipates that approximately
4% of officers will be flagged for data-driven EISS enrollment
annually, and these officers generally account for about
23% of all investigations and approximately
30% of serious priority-level cases.
So again, the data is confirming that overall risk is concentrated and not
widespread. The findings show that a small percentage of
officers account for a disproportionate amount of investigations and serious
disciplinary cases.
In addition to the data-driven predictive alerts, the EISS
will also include two additional alert mechanisms.
The first are policy alerts. This replaces the department's
current rule-based trigger performance
legacy management programsIt will automatically flag
members when their profile exceeds predefined thresholds
such as attendance, medical misuse, summary punishments,
and complaint and disciplinary findings.
There are also command-initiated, that's your human element of supervisor
alerts that are generated at the request of a member's exempt level
command to address a pattern of professional conduct that
suggests referral may be warranted.
It's important to note that this system is for both sworn and
non-sworn. So all department members are eligible for
policy and/or command EIS referrals.
So in the system, every alert is explainable, every record
access is logged, there are role-based access controls.
The annual independent review,
with Benchmark and CPD's audit division, will assess accuracy,
fairness, and outcomes. The annual audits will evaluate the
overall effectiveness of the system.
It will assess whether and to what extent the department is providing
interventions and support in a timely manner, and if those interventions
provided are appropriate and are effective.
Consequently, they'll make any recommendations of any changes that are necessary to
improve the effectiveness of the system.
So what happens after an officer is flagged?
Supervisory review is required. Supervisors review the alert.
They meet with the member and devise a course of action report.
This is documented, and it may include training, counseling,
mentorship, wellness support.
And again, I just want to emphasize here, the system is a risk management tool
that identifies patterns early to provide intervention and
support to minimize future adverse behavior.
This system does not replace existing disciplinary
processes or systems.
So just to talk a little bit about progress and next steps.
So at the end of 2025,
the vendor, Benchmark Analytics, was selected and engaged by the city.
Initial data review and modeling was completed in October of 2025.
And in the first quarter of 2026,
the initial application platform customizations were completed.
Preliminary governing policy documents were drafted.
Agreement with BIA and COPA regarding complaint notifications.
And we also conducted a notice of job opportunity
to staff the officer support section, which is the headquarter
level section that'll have oversight of the system.
Some of the more next steps, we're going to begin beta testing the
data-driven alerts. The beta phase is designed to validate system
functionality, data accuracy, and user workflow
before full deployment.
We'll be developing and providing comprehensive training that will include
scenario-based training to all sworn and non-sworn supervisory personnel
prior to any citywide implementation.
Excellent.
So ultimately, CPD just continues to diligently work on the development and
deployment of an early intervention system that is compliant, that is
targeted, preventative, transparent, and adaptive.
The system is data-driven program to identify, support, and guide
officers early when patterns suggest risk and performance
concerns. The ultimate goal is prevention, accountability, and
risk reduction, not punishment. And CPD is hoping to be
positioned to launch department-wide at the end of quarter two next
year.
I thank you for the opportunity to present today, and I'm happy to take any
questions anyone may have.
Thank you, Director Clark Hinson.
Just a couple of questions that I have for you.
Once an officer is flagged,
how long is he placed into that system?
So the notification, when an officer is flagged, so once they cross that threshold,
it's within the 45 days that that notification, that alert, comes through the
system. And then immediately at that point, the members
of the officer support unit review that, and within
three to five days, then they reach out to the supervisor of the unit, and then
they're placed into the system, and the supervisor then has another week to meet
with that officer to begin the program.
Okay. And do you also use data that's collected from
internal affairs
as a basis for referring an officer to that system?
So the model is based on complaint register
information, so it's kind of a four-pronged approach.
So when there is a flag, the first is do they have enough information on
the officer, meaning can they go back 365 days of the adverse
event to see behavior that occurred during that time?
And it identifies those patterns.
And the other piece that's important, again, this is all coming from the complaint
register that would come through BIA, where they identified statistically
significant
data. And then from there they do a peer comparison. So they do like to like.
So for example, they would not compare a sergeant that works in the Office of
Constitutional Policing with a sergeant who works in 11.
So they ensure that that peer comparison is valid, and then that's ultimately how
the alert is generated.
Now, when an officer has an unfounded complaint,
I'm sure... Well, I should ask because I'm not sure.
If an officer has an unfounded complaint,
does that stay a part of his record that can possibly
lead to his being flagged or his or her being flagged?
So yes. The way that this model
has been established and has seen great success is that it is
not waiting for final disciplinary positions.
It is based on a complaint register that is currently still under investigation
for that timely predictive model to be effective.
So ultimately at the end, if it is unfounded,
the weight of where they are is modified, but that does
not inhibit the ability of that initial alert being
conducted.
In civil suits. Is that the same for officers that
are sued civilly in the performance of their duties?
It would be the same. If a complaint register was made because of some type of a
civil suit or a complaint of that matter, then it would still feed into the
model that ultimately, potentially, will generate an alert.
Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions or comments?
Ald. Wily.
Thank you, Chair.
And thank you for the presentation.
It's good to learn a little bit more about the early intervention system.
Can you tell me again, what's the current timeline for full
citywide deployment?
We are hoping to be able to fully implement at the end of quarter
two of next year.
And so where are we today as far as progress towards that?
So we currently have a draft policy governing the
system. We are beginning to develop the training material around
that, and our plan is to initiate beta
testing in the fall.
And I'm sorry for not knowing this piece of it.
It seems to me that this has
been a long time coming, right? What have
been your biggest barriers to implementation?
Well, our first one was having the vendor Benchmark Analytics.
Okay.
So once we had them onboarded last year, we began immediately working
with them, providing CPD data that they needed.
And so we kind of had to go through that exercise first before we could even begin
moving forward with policy, and then ultimately training.
But that was our biggest hurdle, was obtaining a vendor.
So in the meantime, what
current systems are in place while we're getting the technology
on board? What do we do today?
So there are some legacy systems. They do not include the sophisticated predictive
model, but our behavioral intervention system and our personnel
concerns. And these are legacy systems that are now going to also be
included in this far more sophisticated digital platform.
Got it.
You mentioned pilots.
Did you mention pilots earlier?
I did not, but the beta testing we referred to?
Yeah. I'm sorry. Beta testing.
Okay. Yeah, same.
I'm using the wrong term.
No, no.
That's okay.
Just want to make sure I was understanding.
Yeah. No, no, no. Where are we beta testing?
Where do we plan to-
One thing that we're doing differently than I think maybe what people would
associate with other pilots is that we do not want to compromise the
predictive model. So we are just going to heighten the thresholds just to
ensure that it's working as we expect it to. So it can be from anywhere.
It'll be a member who hits that threshold during the beta testing that will be
filtered. So it could come from any unit, any district.
So it's not necessarily district by district.
Correct.
Great.
I think that's all I've got for right now.
I'll let some of my colleagues ask-
Thank you Ald. Wily. Ald. Elshahy.
Thank you, Vice Chair.
Thank you.
How does the system distinguish between high activity
and problematic behavior?
So that, again, I'm not the expert of the model, but as I
understand it, that kind of goes into that peer
comparison. So individuals who are working in a
very high activity would be compared to their peers also working in those
similar capacities.
Because as we know, the assignments are impactful in
the workload, and that does impact
the number of, for example, interactions a member may have with the community
versus a member who's more in an administrative role.
So that's a big piece of this predictive model of ensuring it's comparing the
like to like as they explain it.
When a Chicago police officer is flagged-
Mm-hmm
... what interventions are
triggered?
So once the alert is there,
they'll be reviewed first by the officer support units.
We'll then reach out to the supervisor in whatever area
or district that the member is assigned to.
And from there, they're to sit with that individual and have a course of action
completed. And that could include reinforcement training, that could
include referrals, potentially to the professional counseling
division.
That could include supervisory check-ins that are weekly.
So there's a number of different interventions based on the
situation that they may decide to employ as a result, and that will all be
documented in the system.
So would these interventions be
standardized, or would they be customized to a particular
situation?
I would say that we're probably going to see some standardization around
reinforcement training. That'll be a likely referral.
But I would also say that there will be some customization that will be important
based on the individual officers and the particular
adverse behavior that we're wanting to prevent further.
What would happen
if a supervisor
fails to act on a flagged officer?
That would be addressed then through higher command.
That's not an option in the system, and that is why the
oversight by the officer support section at headquarters, they will be in complete
contact from start to finish until the completion of the
intervention is done and documented.
So we would be aware of that at the headquarter level and be intervening.
How does the Chicago Police Department determine
the system is preventative as opposed to
punitive?
So again, it is intended as a support, so distinct and
separate from any disciplinary systems or processes that are already established.
And the idea is that with that additional training, maybe some potential
additional check-ins with the supervisor, potential
referrals to some wellness programs, that as we work through that, we document the
progress.
And ideally, we would not see these officers as being continued to
receive repeat alerts. So ultimately, that would be the goal that we would no
longer see that.
How does the Chicago Police Department measure
that these interventions are actually changing the behavior of
officers?
So again, one of the things that we have
identified through the model is that it is a small number
that tend to be the drivers of
some of these issues. So again, although this is intended
to be a support, if we are seeing an officer who is continuing to have high
levels, for example, of complaints,
especially if ultimately the final disposition is they're sustained, then
we would conclude that the interventions that have been conducted
were not sufficient. Again, this will also be something
that will be extensively looked at in those annual audits because we want to look
at it certainly at that micro level of officer, but also more globally
macro level to see if these types of interventions that have been regularly
employed, were they effective in changing behavior.
When we talk about police officers, we have certainly some districts
that have a much higher rate of crime and some
districts that have a lower rate of crime.
Do we
identify are officers flagged disproportionately at
a district that is considered much busier?
In this new predictive model, no. It is taking into
consideration activity level, assignment,
to ensure that we are not inappropriately over-flagging
particular officers based on their geography assignment
or function assignment. They
protected against that in this updated
model.
As we're talking about all this,
is it safe to say that we are several hundred
supervisors short right now in the Chicago Police Department?
In terms of an exact number, I couldn't
really speak to that precisely. I would say that there is critically, in
any
assignment, we need to have appropriate supervision for any system to
function properly to ensure that accountability mechanism is sound and
effective.
Thank you.
Thanks. Thank you, Alderman Shea. Vice Chair Lee.
Just a follow-up question to that, and you might not be able to answer this, but I
know we've got the workforce allocation study that does indicate we need more
supervisors, and it seems to me that
the ultimate sort of success of this early
intervention system relies heavily on
having a better supervisor to officer ratio
in order to feed the data, and to
feed the observations into the system.
Can you speak to at all what actions are happening
simultaneously while as you're getting the system up,
to ensure that we've got the departments moving
towards increasing the number of supervisors that are then trained?
Having a supervisor is one thing, but then also providing the training so that they
can recognize what these
attributes are, where the warning signals are.
Yep. So there's kind of two parts because we've got two activities occurring
simultaneously. This training will be provided once
it is completed and approved through the consent decree process to all
supervisors, sworn and non-sworn.
To I think your earlier point is also we are working actively
in identifying priorities for the implementation of the
workforce allocation, which does speak to optimization of resources, and it
also speaks directly regarding the importance of appropriate supervision,
especially around unity and span.
So that's also being worked on as a priority as we continue to move forward and
expand the unity of command and span of control to ensure that that ratio is
appropriate so that supervisors can in fact know their members well, be able
to identify potential problems or reinforcements or mentoring that
they may need. But ultimately also being able to effectively, as an alert
comes through, to address that and identify the appropriate recourse
that they should be taking to ensure that that behavior is eliminated, and that
they see success and progress with that officer.
And
final question here, just on this topic.
Is there something built into the system where
maybe it's a new supervisor is taking over
a group and
somebody's partner observes that there's some things that might
be of concern. Are there mechanisms built into the chain of
command to get that information into
the universe, I guess? Not necessarily directly into the
system, because I'm assuming it's designed for supervisors
generally to
put those inputs in. But I'm wondering just what the process would
be if I have a partner who I'm really concerned about, and it's not necessarily
being picked up by somebody who's new, necessarily.
How does that-
So if a partner would go to a supervisor to just make that
notification of concern, whatever that may be,
there is then the ability, and again, it is very dependent on what-
Of course
... you're saying.
Yeah.
For example. Because it may just be that maybe they need a wellness check.
Mm-hmm.
It may not necessarily-... need to be elevated to
a behavioral intervention per se.
But again, that human element that I spoke just very briefly about, that's what
that's intended to do, where we're not just relying on a predictive
model or this digital threshold being hit, because we
really need to make sure we're mindful of that human component where I just
know that someone is not behaving, they're late, they never usually are late, and
we're catching those things, and that allows for placement into the
system through that human identification.
And I think that's really important to amplify here, because we don't want to
eliminate that because that is a critical piece.
Got it. Thank you. Thank you, Chair.
Thank you, Vice Chair. And one final question from me before we move to item number
three. I'm assuming that
this program, after full implementation of it,
will somehow
reduce police or reduce
legal settlements that
we've paid out over the years. What's a timeline that
we will likely feel the benefits of this program when it comes
to
lawsuit settlements and police misconduct?
Ideally, once we fully
implement and there is this mechanism that is
sustaining and routinely identifying officers
whose behavior is just indicative of a pattern that is
problematic. I think once we start working with those officers
one-on-one in this type of an intervention, I certainly would hope
within a couple of years after that, that we would be seeing that
preventative component
showing success there, because we are now avoiding repeat issues with the
same officers.
Thank you, Director. We appreciate you being here today.
Thank you.
Before we move to item number three, let me welcome and
acknowledge It Takes A Village Leadership Academy, who've joined us in
chambers. We certainly welcome you and
thank you for engaging civically with us.
So we welcome It Takes A Village Leadership Academy.
Oh, what's the school?
Somebody set me up.
Oh.
Okay.
We didn't get the-
Okay. Say it so I can...
Okay. Well, the same speech with Kershaw Magnet
School.
Thank you, Alderman Shea.
I have to work on my quick comebacks.
If you didn't hear Alderman Shea, he said,
"No matter what, it takes a village." So,
we welcome you guys to the chambers today, and thank you for joining us.
We appreciate it.
Item number three.
Item number three is the
first quarter 2026 Office of Public Safety Administration,
Medical Service Section Audit quarterly report, and Chairman Irvin will
chair us through this item.
I got committee.
Alderman
Siversing, what time do you start?
12:30?
Then
I question that, sir.
Where is your school located?
Kershaw? Where is your school located?
6450 South Oak.
Okay, Englewood. Okay, very well. Thank you guys for joining with us today.
What grade do we have?
Eighth grade. Okay. All right. Well, congratulations to all of you graduating
soon. I know you all are glad to be out of the classroom today.
But hey, this is another classroom, the classroom of life.
So, we appreciate you joining with us today.
Even though your alder's not here today, but thank you for joining with us
down here at City Hall, so...
Director Patterson.
Good morning.
Are you ready?
I'm ready. Can you guys hear me?
Okay. All right, you may proceed.
Okay. Good morning, Chairman Irvin and Taliaferro,
and members of the joint committee.
My name is Aara Patterson, and I am the executive director of the Office of
Public Safety Administration. Thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today to provide an update on
OPSA's progress during the first quarter of
implementing the recommendations from the audit of the Medical Services
section, which was published and shared with council members last
October.
Joining me today is General Counsel Sandra Talbot, who
has been instrumental in coordinating this
work on behalf of OPSA.
I also want to acknowledge our partners in the Chicago Fire
Department and the Chicago Police Department, who have been working
hand in hand with OPSA over the past several months
to address the audit findings.
We appreciate their continued engagement and
collaboration. This is deeply interdependent
work, and progress is only possible because of that
partnership.
The audit identified 20 recommendations spanning
policy, operations, technology,
staffing, and oversight.
These recommendations reflect long-standing
operational challenges, many of which predate the
creation of OPSA and the centralization of the Medical Services
section in 2020.The issues that have been
highlighted in the audit are not simple issues that were created
overnight,
nor can they be easily fixed overnight.
OPSA has been tasked with doing a comprehensive
overhaul of how the city manages medical leave for police
officers and firefighters.
That kind of structural transformation
requires more than quick changes.
It requires us to rebuild systems, put clear
policies and procedures in place, and strengthen how the
system operates day to day in a way that is sustainable,
compliant, and effective over the long term.
While we understand the urgency and share the desire to
address the issues identified in the audit as quickly as
possible,
we are also being very intentional and deliberate in our
approach.
We are focused on doing this work thoughtfully,
collaboratively, and strategically to ensure we are
not just making short-term corrections,
but building a strong and durable foundation for the
future.
At the end of the day,
we all want the same thing, an effective, efficient
medical services section that ensures that police and fire,
first responders, are receiving the medical care they need to safely
return to work as soon as they are able.
Since the release of the audit, OPSA has made steady and meaningful
progress toward addressing its recommendations.
We have established regular working groups with CFD and
CPD, and we meet and communicate regularly with other
key stakeholders, including the Department of Finance Workers' Comp division,
the Department of Law, and the pension board to improve
coordination and eliminate silos that historically contributed to
inefficiencies.
We developed and have begun implementing new policies and
procedures to bring greater clarity,
consistency, and accountability to medical section operations.
We are modernizing our processes
and implementing critical technology improvements, including laying the
groundwork for an electronic medical records
system and transitioning away from paper-based systems that have historically
limited efficiency and data integrity.
We are also leveraging our contract with Concentra to streamline medical
clearances and improve timeliness and consistency in how services are
delivered.
At the same time, we are investing in the people and structure
needed to support this work.
We have onboarded six new staff into the medical section and
are conducting interviews to fill additional medical section
vacancies this summer,
while also evaluating our long-term staffing
model with guidance from a pro bono advisory group of
occupational health physicians that we convened to
provide us with independent expertise on appropriate
structure and staffing.
Their expertise has been invaluable and has reinforced
several key audit findings, most notably that the section
has been historically understaffed,
lacks sufficient supervisory oversight, and
requires a more appropriate clinical leadership
structure. For example, the medical section
previously operated with two physicians, one supporting
police and one supporting fire.
But at some point, this was reduced to a
single position. Based on expert guidance,
the current staffing model is not sufficient and must be
corrected. We also need to build out a stronger
supervisory structure to ensure appropriate
oversight and accountability in service delivery.
We look forward to continuing to work closely with the Department of Human
Resources and the Office of Budget and Management to address our
critical staffing needs in a thoughtful and fiscally
responsible way.
More broadly, much of the work we've done during the first quarter has
been foundational.
We have taken the time to closely assess and
understand medical section operations, draft
policies aligned with legal and contractual requirements,
define roles and responsibilities, improve data
systems, and transition key processes from
paper-based to electronic, and leverage technology to improve
efficiencies.
This type of foundational work is not always immediately
visible in terms of outcomes, but it is essential
for laying a strong foundation from which to build a more appropriate
structure. This foundational work is what will
ultimately allow us to achieve the long-term outcomes we
are all seeking, greater efficiency, improved
accountability, better service delivery to our members, and
responsible stewardship of city resources.
In closing, I want to reiterate that we are making steady,
meaningful progress. We have met the first audit milestone
and remain on track for upcoming deadlines, with the majority of the
recommendations progressing as planned.
This work cannot be done in a vacuum.
It requires continued coordination across multiple departments
and stakeholders, and we will continue to be relentless in
our engagement to help ensure success.
This is a significant undertaking,
but we are approaching it with urgency,
disciplineAnd a clear focus on long-term
success.
We are committed to getting this right, and we will continue to
keep this body informed as the work progresses.
At this time, Sandra and I are happy to answer any questions you may
have.
Thank you, Director Patterson. I have one question.
You appeared before
Committee on Budget and Government Operations back in, it was
October, November, for your annual budget hearing.
I think I said then that
you were kind of the last hope over there.
Can you tell us exactly
what has happened between then and
now as it relates to this single issue,
which many of us believe has been one of the largest
cost drivers
in the department, is the number of individuals who
are unavailable for duty.
So, two things. Number one, what are the numbers like from when you
started to where you are today? And the second thing is, what
specific items have been done to correct this
issue?
Sure. So, as I alluded to in my opening remarks,
we are really trying to take a comprehensive approach to this.
For me, one of the very first steps in ensuring we do this right
is actually taking time and observing the operations.
Sandra and I have both spent several hours
shadowing staff, trying to see firsthand
how we are delivering services to the members.
Looking at those processes,
I think one of the things that we realized very early
on is the structure, right?
There really wasn't the
policy
procedures. We really needed to sit down and take time
to think about those really important
foundational aspects that
frankly did not exist.
That includes listening to
staff. That includes meeting regularly with
the police department and the fire department to
understand what their needs are, and how
we've measured in terms of meeting those needs, and
trying to ensure that we are strengthening our partnership with them.
It's looking at the resources we have from a technology standpoint
that are already available to us that we could leverage in
order to build efficiencies into our workflow.
It's working very closely with Concentra, who is the
vendor who provides our medical services, and getting a sound
understanding of exactly what that contract requires.
And having regular meetings with them to make sure that they understand
what that contract requires. It's looking at how our
processes work together and identifying opportunities
to improve efficiencies in how we share
information and how we communicate.
I could go on and on. We have been very
deliberate in
drilling down into the brass tacks to get a
sound understanding of where things were
back in October, and really thinking
comprehensively and strategically about the
foundation that we have to lay in order for us
to achieve some long-term successes.
In terms of numbers,
I can tell you that from April of
last, what is it? April 30th of last year
to April 30th of this year,
as it relates to the fire medical role, we went from
7.1% of the fire department being on medical
role to 8.2%. So about a
1% difference over the last year for the fire
side. As it relates to the police side in that same time,
we're trending about 0.3%. So we went from
5.7% of the department being on medical
to about 6%. So in terms of
the numbers, the variation really hasn't changed that much, and we
don't expect it to, because we are still laying the
foundation of our operations. And so we are
still assessing what the appropriate steps
forward should be before we implement and
finalize our plans.
So,
I don't know what
direction you received
walking in the door.
But if I were to tell you that if there
aren't any measurable differences by a point
certain that this may not exist,
would there be some different steps that would be taken or...
Because what you're telling me is that you guys are doing a lot of
evaluating, and it seems like
we're in that analysis paralysis, right?
And what I'm looking for is what are some actionable things.
Like for example, we talk about we've got one doctor that's overseeing
what? 15,000 people, theoretically, right?
Have we hired a second, third, or fourth doctor?
Are we
looking at objective concrete steps that we can
take to get a better handle
onOn this. I'm going to give you a story, and this is kind
of what it sounds like to me. In my previous life, I was a city manager, and it was
the biggest issue they had was meter reading of water meters.
Well, guess what? They had no meter readers.
So how can you read water meters if you have no meter readers?
And I'll equate that to how can we adequately talk
about medical services or doing some work when we only
got one doctor that's overseeing literally thousands of people.
Where are we on hiring or contracting out
a second doctor or a third doctor or
somebody else that can help us get through this, my
assumption of a backlog of cases, because I can imagine that
it's only one person is reviewing
at least hundreds of people actively on the roll, but managing a whole two
departments.
So in terms of thinking about these types of structural changes, and
as a city manager, I'm sure you can appreciate how complex and
entangled everything that we do is with multiple
departments. And so in terms of a short fix,
as I indicated in my statement, there is no short,
simple, easy solutions. We are working in parallel
to identify things that we can do in the short term to try
to provide a little bit of that relief in the short term.
But the reality is, we have to do this
analysis, we have to do these assessments because we work with
other departments who also have their own general
orders and their own policies and their own
CBAs that impact our operations. So we
have to do a bit of a coordinated dance with all of the key
stakeholders to make sure that we're not violating any
of those statutory requirements,
contractual requirements, ordinance requirements.
There are a lot of things that we have to be mindful
of, that we have to navigate, that we make sure that we do in a really smart,
thoughtful way. So yes, this is going to take time, but we
do feel the sense of urgency, and we are working on this diligently.
In terms of short term, regarding the doctors, we have two
doctors now that are on contract
via Concentra. That is one of the things that we have been
able to do in the short term while we work with our city
partners to identify additional
vacancies that will enable us to hire two medical
doctors. We currently do have a vacancy for one doctor.
I would say that we probably need to look at the classification for that
position in order to ensure that we're able to recruit
a good qualified pool of candidates and
compensate them at a rate that a medical doctor would expect
to be compensated at. And so that is something that we are currently
evaluating and looking at, for example, and we hope to be
able to present
a fuller comprehensive staffing
plan based on all of these nuggets of information that we're gathering, all these
observations that we're doing. We're not doing it just for the sake of
doing it. We're doing it with the very
intentional goal of
implementing something that actually makes sense.
I really hear you
and hear what you're saying.
But it sounds like there's some very specific
choke points in a process,
and if we understand those particular
points,
while we are continuing to do analysis, while we've got
probably plans on the shelf for analysis,
addressing some of those very critical objective
points would, I think,
this is just my opinion, create a sense of
that something is happening as far as the urgency of trying to get
something done. I
don't necessarily feel
a level of
like a,
let's get costs down. We're having these
high-level conversations, but I'm just trying to understand and drill
down to, hey, what are we doing to
bring down the numbers, which are, in fact, you're telling me, are now trending
upwards, albeit very slightly, and I'm not going to say that to...
But we're expecting those numbers to go down, and we actually need those numbers to
go down so that we can redeploy those resources back
to critical city functions. And I think that's the
one thing, I think, that many of us in this body
agree that is a driver of cost. And I
understand your desire to make
it perfect, but we cannot let perfect be the
enemy of the good. That's a Joe Moore statement.
I didn't have that one. Alderman O'Shea.
Thank you, Chairman.
Good afternoon, Director Patterson.
Good afternoon.
I'm going to ask similar questions to what I asked
prior.
What real-time data systems track medical leave and
return to duty status in the Chicago Police Department?
So we use the CLEAR system. It's a system that both
the Chicago Police Department and OPSA have access to to help
track the medical
status of CPD officers.
Does the Chicago Police Department have access to the system
to track their own employees?
General counsel. Good morning. My name is Sandra Talbot.
I'm the general counsel of OPSA. The question was, does the
Chicago Police Department have access to CLEAR? And the answer is yes.
So they have the ability to track their own employees?
Yes.
Who,
what entity, what organization investigates
allegations of medical abuse on the Chicago Police Department?
The Bureau of Internal Affairs.
Does the Chicago Police Department Medical Integrity Unit
have access to the data systems that track medical
leave and return to duty status?
Yes, they do.
How much
overtime in the Chicago Police Department
is attributable to officers
being on medical leave?
As was noted earlier, there is no direct
way to track that data right now.
But we're working on trying to identify that?
Yes, we are. OPSA has been in contact with
DTI to see if there's a way that we could embed that into the
existing system.
And how would we say
reducing
medical leave duration
translate into
savings with overtime?
I believe that would be a more appropriate question for Chicago Police Department
because they do manage their operations, and so
they would be the ones that would determine staffing and
whatnot. So that's not something that OPSA would be able to answer.
Can you
list specific strategies to reduce
overtime driven by medical absences on the police department?
Can you repeat the question?
What specific strategies
are at your disposal now to reduce overtime driven by
medical absences?
The strategy that we have is as it relates to OPSA's operations,
right? Looking at how we can streamline
how we're managing cases and helping ensure that officers get back to
work
as soon as possible, as soon as they're physically and mentally able to do
so in a safe way.
Are current leave policies on the police department structured in a
way that encourages
officers returning to work in a timely fashion?
I think that there's a generous leave policy
that officers are entitled to
that
impacts the amount of time that they
remain out on leave.
What safeguards currently exist to help
prevent medical leave abuse?
We are, as our report that was submitted April
15th indicates on page two, we have taken a number
of steps, including formalizing draft
procedures that we believe
lay the foundation for proper escalation that will
ensure compliance metrics and deliverables are met.
This is very much a work in progress, and we are working hand in hand with
CPT to ensure that their
needs are met in this process as well, and that we're doing it in a
way that's operationally
aligned throughout the departments.
But we are taking a very close look
at our internal procedures to make sure that we are regularly reporting
non-compliance and we are escalating appropriately.
And if and when the need arises that
OPSA
provides the support for decertification of
the medical role, which means that an officer is
removed from medical payroll status.
And when we talk about
medical leave status, are Chicago Police Department supervisors
involved in monitoring leave status and facilitating return
to duty?
Currently, there are several Chicago Police
Department members who are detailed to the medical section.
And to my knowledge, that is one of their responsibilities, is
reviewing time spent on medical.
And you mentioned earlier
that
Chicago Police Department
can utilize CLEAR.
Does HIPAA impact the ability of what the police department supervisors
can see in CLEAR?
HIPAA would.
Under the current version of the city
HIPAA policies and procedures, OPSA Medical
is designated a HIPAA component,
healthcare-like component.My understanding
is that designation is going to be
removed in an upcoming version of the HIPAA policies and
procedures. I have not yet seen the update as of
today.
So in the past, the police department
could see that information. Currently,
it cannot? Is that fair to say?
I
could see what information exactly.
Had access to
the status of officers who were off on medical.
The CPD has always had access to CLEAR, and
certain levels of CPD officers and
up the chain of command have access to
work statuses, day counts, everything needed to monitor
employee workforce.
What has been
limited to OPSA medical staff,
including some CPD officers detailed to OPSA
medical,
is the permission
in CLEAR
that relates to confidential medical information.
So CLEAR is used by OPSA Medical
to document conversations about
medical information,
and also to document information received by a
member's personal physician in support of
continued medical leave.
So what is the city's policy as we speak on that?
As I indicated, I don't have a revised
version of the city's policy. My understanding,
if it has not been changed already,
it will be changed to remove the
OPSA medical designation
that requires OPSA to comply with HIPAA.
So
when we talk about HIPAA, we could change city policy on that, correct?
My understanding is a determination is made by the city's privacy
officer. And as I've indicated, I believe
the policy is going to be changed if it has not been
changed already. But the answer is, that determination lies
outside of OPSA Medical.
So the Chicago Police Department has a medical integrity unit
currently, and has had that for
as far back as I can remember.
But they don't have access to medical information on
their officers who are off on medical?
As I mentioned earlier, there are
CPD sergeants and officers that are within OPSA
Medical that have access to everything that any OPSA
Medical employee has access to. Under
HIPAA,
under city policy that was in effect in October of last year,
protected health information could not have been
shared outside of OPSA Medical.
And so steps have been taken to protect
protected health information
that didn't have an otherwise authorized use under HIPAA.
Point of information,
Alderman Newton.
How do you appropriately staff, or how
is CPD
expected to appropriately deal with staff
that might be on medical if they have to be on a limited duty or placed
perhaps in a different role if
they don't have access to the medical, though?
I'm just trying to follow it, and I'm having a hard time.
Thank you, Chair.
It sounds like the department does have access, but is limited to a very small
number of people that are detailed to OPSA, is what it
sounds like.
My question is,
if CPD's tasked with overseeing how
we handle the medical, and it
doesn't sound like they're given complete access, and if you're trying
to figure out how you
work with folks that might be on light duty or limited, but you don't have
access to the file,
how is CPD supposed to do that appropriately?
So as it relates to limited duty,
officers still have to perform the essential functions
of their job. So all of the essential functions you have to
do as full duty, you have to
comply with or meet on limited duty as well.
You're just able to do it with some
restrictions, but you still have to do all of the things.
So
in terms of the information that CPD has access to,
they do get access to information in order for them to
know when someone's on medical leave, when they're coming off medical leave.
All of the things that Ms. Talbert mentioned earlier,
there's tiered access
depending on the role and responsibility someone within the Chicago
Police Department has. And so there are officers who
have access to everything, there are sergeants who have access to everything,
and then there are other individuals in the department whose access may be
limited in order to protect the confidential
medical information of employees while also giving them
access to the employment
records that that information might
inform.Thank
you.
Alderman
Kaiser.
Can anyone who's not assigned to OPSA
see the medical information on CLEAR?
There is a permission for OPSA medical staff.
Mm-hmm.
And that permission is only available to people who work in
OPSA medical or have an integral support
function for OPSA medical.
It would seem to me
that we have a real problem here,
and the numbers
aren't trending in the right direction.
And I say that, we have almost 2,000 less officers than we had just a few years
ago, yet the problem's worse.
I think we need to figure out a way to put OPSA and the police
department in a room and figure out
what's the best way
to attack this problem,
to get people back to work
and identify people who are medical abusers.
But the system we have now,
it's not working.
And I think the same would go for the Chicago Fire Department.
Thanks, Chairman.
Thank you, Alderman.
Point you made earlier about
the fire department. The fire department has
minimum manning, so
if a member is out for medical, is there
a classification
that would say, "Hey,
we had to buy back this shift because
firefighter X was unavailable for duty." Is
that classified in such a
way?
I
believe what you're getting at, and please correct me if I'm wrong, if there's a
way similar to police department that we can track
overtime expenses or expenses allocation,
expenses,
contract those in line with a medical
percentage. Medical-
Straight or overtime. For example, there are
relief
lieutenants, relief engineers that are in it because of the minimum
manning. The police department could very well say, "You know what?
We're not going to staff that function today because Tom's out on medical leave."
There's no contractual obligation for
us to do that. But there is a contractual obligation to have minimum manning on a
rig or a piece of equipment. So that is slightly different in how those two
things can be approached. I'm just trying to,
I guess, further quantify the financial
impact of the medical section, and
it's a greater impact than just the guy who is
out on medical. There is an additional cost of potentially straight and/or
overtime in order to compensate and cover for that individual
member's absence on a fire piece of equipment.
Different conversation for the police department, but I think we could,
with some certain level of finality, understand what that cost is in the fire
department.
I think that's something that we would be happy to look into.
I don't have those numbers here with me today, but it's something
we could certainly look into and get back to you through the chair.
Okay. All right. All right, I had Vice Chair Lee,
and I want to add Alderman
Gardner to the roll. I think, did we add Alderman Nugent to the
roll? And also saw non-member Walker Speck
as well, so we'll add them to the roll. I think everybody else we got.
And then I see Alderman Clay is in the
building. We'll add her to the roll as well.
Vice Chair.
Thank you, Chair. And thank you, Director Patterson, for being here today.
This is not an area of expertise for me, so I may ask some real rudimentary
questions, so please bear with me.
I imagine that there are a lot of different reasons people go out on medical leave
for any number of things. Slip and fall, getting into the car,
injury in the workplace if they're shot while they're on duty,
or
any number of reasons. So I want to break this up in terms of
two pieces. What's the average time to sort of evaluate
an officer? And then on the back end, once someone is through the
treatment period, if there was a surgery and anticipated time to
recover from surgery is, let's say, four to six months.
What's the
time period then from the time that their recovery is expected
to be done before someone is cleared to go back to work?
So
there are guidelines available
that
have those types of time frames associated with different types of
injuries. So an injury to an ankle, depending on what it is, there's
a minimum kind of time that you would expect somebody to receive treatment and be
able to heal and recover. There's an average, and then there's
a maximum. So there is that data that is
available. One of the things that we are proactively working on
right now is really looking at our operations and how we're
leveraging that data in terms of managing
treatments and working with the officer.
So there's definitely opportunity for improvement that we have identified,
and we are working right now to figure out a way to
operationalizeMaking sure that we're meeting those
minimum timeframes where appropriate, understanding that
everybody's recovery journey is going to be
unique, and so there are going to be some outliers.
But really, to the extent possible, trying to ensure that we have that
oversight to come as close to those guidelines as possible.
So if someone's injured, and let's say they go to the emergency
room to be evaluated and treated,
but what point does the
physician that we have working for us, or the two contracted ones,
where's the handoff? And then
from the acute triage piece of it, to the
treatment, to recovery,
I'm trying to get a better sense of what it is these physicians do that work for
us in the unit.
And what's the
sort of timeframe for
individuals to be evaluated by the physician?
Because I get every indication that what we have is not quite enough
to serve the needs that we have today.
I'm just trying to get a more clear picture of what that looks like in practice.
Sure. So I think the two departments have two very
different operations, depending on the collective
bargaining agreement.
Chicago Fire Department has nurse practitioners on staff
that are actually seeing and evaluating, they're medically
evaluating all of the members that come through on
medical layup. Chicago Police Department
does not. They do not have
nurse practitioners or physicians reviewing them at any
point in the medical section.
What Chicago Police Department
medical staff are doing is evaluating
third-party doctors, a member's doctor, or a treating
physician.
They're evaluating their notes against some of the guidelines that
Ara mentioned to determine when
a member is safe to return to work. So there are regular
checkups
that is designed to ensure that the member
is following the treatment plan, that they are providing supporting
documentation that justifies the medical leave
that they are on. And if and when an adjustment is
needed,
our staff within OPSA Medical will make those
determinations. To answer a question you have about the
physicians on staff,
so the medical director, depending
on the case, the complexity of each case,
has certain specific responsibilities
relating to medical within OPSA, again, outlined under the
collective bargaining agreement.
So any time there is a police department member
who believes an injury is a recurrence of an
injury on duty,
our medical director will review all the underlying
paperwork to come to a decision as to whether or
not the injuries are related.
There are something called an MRO, a medical review officer
requirement that has to be a physician
for any positive drug tests that come back within
the Chicago Fire Department.
That is one responsibility. Some of the
requirements leading to a pension case that
goes before the pension board, the medical director is responsible
for reviewing case files to render an
opinion.
And I think, depending on the staffing model that we
eventually
will propose,
what we have heard is that the more involved a medical director can
be in the member care on a day-to-day basis, and being
there to triage questions and concerns that come up
through non-physician staff members, the
better that will be for the ultimate outcome of a case.
So a lot of communication is required between a medical
director, OPSA's medical director, and outside providers.
That medical director will be the first to challenge any
medical determination that seems a little suspicious or not in line
with medical practice guidelines that we've referenced.
And so they also serve as somewhat of a steward of
OPSA's and the city's resources and medical
time.
Got it. So the medical staff that are evaluating the third party doctor
information,
who are those individuals? Are they themselves medical professionals?
Are they officers? I'm just-
Sure
... trying to understand that.
Yeah. Some of them are case managers.
So these are people who may not have
a defined medical background, but
have experience
doing this type of work, evaluating medical paperwork.
Both of our medical offices, both fire and police, are overseen by a
medical administrator in both cases.
One is a nurse practitioner and one is a nurse who has a lot of
experience in insurance adjustments.
And so they are overseen by medical professionals.
Did
the audit produce any interesting findings about just the--
I know that each different group, CFD and CPD, are
governed by their own collective bargaining agreements, but as the function of
OPSA, trying to find these efficiencies, if you
will, and synergies in how to do this in a
way that serves the city better as a whole.
I wonder if the audit opined at all about opportunities
for-I guess,
I don't know what the right word is.
Is
making some changes to these systems that would
reduce the amount of time or paperwork.
I know we're talking about things on the margin here.
Right, so knowing that they're two different systems, I just wonder if there was
anything that we gleaned from that that would be useful in
maybe suggesting some changes to the way that it's done today.
Yeah. So I can certainly speak to that.
There are
some findings and recommendations in the audit about
timely case note updates. And so as a result,
our current draft policy
offers within 24 hours, a case note is updated so
that the rest of the staff know when the timing can be set for the follow-up
appointment.
So there
are also medical override recommendations,
basic memorialization of certain policies and
procedures that are in place that haven't been really written down in
any formal fashion in the past. And
so we are tightening up in
our house. We are certainly
adding elements of quality control and regular reporting on our
end. And that is all part of this early phase
procedure and policy development that we are hopefully going to be
finished with soon.
I appreciate that. And my last line of questioning is just back on the
subject of overtime. Again, there's lots of different
reasons
people are on medical leave. There's lots of different reasons
that the police have to use overtime.
So this assumption that there's some direct correlation
between overtime numbers and medical leave, I get that it's a
contributing factor. Have there been any studies done to try to
look at the number of people and hours that are lost
on people on medical leave versus the overtime that
is
expended?
I do believe this was kind of addressed in the audit.
I think because our systems are
not all necessarily easily connected and talking to each other, it
does make drilling down to an exact number very
challenging.
And so at this point, we really don't have a
credible way to have that kind of direct correlation.
Yeah, it just seems to me that would be a lot of supposition, right?
I mean, you'd be making an assumption if somebody's out on six months
leave, you can't necessarily just assume strictly that
they would've worked
just a regular shift or every day during those six months.
So these are both complicated
issues. I just wanted to try to get a little bit more clarity on
what we know versus what we don't know,
and how we
get to an overall better situation. So that's all I've got.
Thanks, Chair.
Thank you.
Thank you, Vice Chair. Well, I think your point is that
either one of two things occurs. Either we replace the
individual or we forego the service, right?
So
let's take it out of police department, let's put it in CDOT and say
we're missing a crew for medical reasons, so
that means that we fill X number less of potholes.
So if we were at a standard to say we want to fill 1,000 potholes a
day, and we're missing a crew that takes our productivity down to
800, we got to make a decision. Either we're going to reach 1,000
by putting additional resources in, or we're not going to hit the service
standard. So those are the trade-offs, and I think
it's difficult to quantify that because we just don't have the data.
Now, the fire department, I think is different because of its requirements.
We always in other departments can just say, "You know what?
We're just not going to do that particular function or provide that particular
service at that level for the day." So there is a cost
of that, which comes down to productivity, or it comes down to
the extension of time to get something done.
So it's just trying to
quantify that. Now, the fire department to me is the easiest example because of
minimum manning.
Right.
Other parts of it, we just don't know because we don't have the, I'll
call it the benchmark data to say, "Hey, our standard is X, and we
didn't meet the standard, and we are looking at why we did not meet that
standard." And this could be a reason or could be other reasons, but-
Yeah
... I just don't think we have the
ability to drill down to that level of figuring.
Agreed. I don't think that we have that, and the other thing that nobody's talked
about today is just hiring, right?
Someone mentioned earlier we're down 2,000 officers from-
Well, that's a different issue. But
hiring is a
challenge, and I do believe that
ultimately all of these processes have to be
streamlined, have to come into modern day compliances.
How do we get people
to work and back to work in a more efficient manner?
Then I think that's the overarching
piece of the conversation. I think we just drilled in on this particular
point because of the numbers in comparison to the department as a
whole, and the fact that they have what I would
deem to be liberal, but in some cases, necessary policies
relating to their ability to be off work because they're not physically able
to perform. So
there are some other policy things that are outside of
OPSA's control that may also need to be addressed as part
of this overall conversation. But I think that we have
to force and push the issue on utilizing our
available means that do exist to get people back to work in a
much quicker and a much more efficient manner.
Now we address those issues, now we can go after the other stuff.
But we haven't masteredJust within the confines that we do
have of getting people to get back to work in an efficient and reasonable manner.
Thank you.
Any other questions?
Vice Chair Robinson, you got anything?
Okay.
With that being said, I
just think that from this aspect, this is something that's on our
radar. I do believe that, as I was going through the
report, we've got to fix
what we can. And I know there's some things that are outside of your control
as it relates to the policy, and those things will have to be addressed
through collective bargaining and some other methods.
But I do believe that some of the things that are within our control as a
city, and then management's control, we've got to
hone in a little more on that. So,
we will see you back next quarter.
Same
bat time, same bat channel.
That's right.
And again, I don't mean
to
sound harsh on this, but I do know that we
can and should be doing better in this category.
And we're counting on you to drive the
necessary components to make the change that this
organization needs in order to achieve a greater level of
efficiency around this issue. Because
we don't know it,
but we feel that it is a very costly issue.
And anecdotally, when we see the numbers of the people that are out and not
getting back in a more efficient manner, that just bothers us.
We could be
in left field on this, but anecdotally,
maybe you'll tell us we're wrong, and I'm okay with that.
I hope I'm wrong. But I don't feel that right now.
But hopefully you'll get me there. So, all right.
With that being said, Vice Chair, motion to adjourn?
All right, move that we adjourn. All in favor, signify by saying "Aye."
Any opposed? Any opinion of the chair's?
Ayes have it, and we are adjourned at exactly 1:00.