We're just waiting on one
personOkay,
everybody, thanks for your patience. We are going to get going.
Good morning. The Joint Committee on Ethics and Government Oversight
and the Committee on Police and Fire will now come to order.
We have one item on today's agenda, a subject matter
hearing regarding the Chicago Police Department's workforce
allocation study. Going to ask folks to take their seats
as we begin with a roll call. Please note that your
yes or present response will be deemed a yes vote when this
quorum call is used for a reference vote for later items.
Chairman Martin is present. Chairman Taliaferro.
Vice Chair Hadden.
Vice Chair Robinson. Alderman Hall. Alderman Mitchell.
Alderwoman Lee.
Sorry, Gavin in officially. Okay. Alderman Curtis. Alderman O'Shea.
Alderwoman Taylor. Alderman Mosley.
Alderwoman Tabaras.
Alderman Irvin is remote. We'll get to that in a second. Alderman Cardona.
Alderman Waguespack. Alderman Spizzano. Alderwoman Nugent.
Alderman Vasquez. Alderman Napolitano.
Alderman RileyAlderman Knutson.
Alderman Lawson. Alderman Gardner. Alderwoman Clay.
Alderwoman Silverstein.
Remote.
We have a number of alderpersons-
Clerk, she came out.
Oh, okay. We have a number of alderpersons who
have requested remote participation under Rule 59.
That's Robinson, Sigcho-Lopez, Irvin, Vasquez, Riley, Gardner,
and Silverstein. Is there a motion to allow them to attend remotely?
Chairman Taliaferro so moves. All those in favor signify by saying "aye." All those
opposed. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and these
alderpeople are allowed to attend remotely.
At this time, we will begin public comment.
This period is set for 30 minutes. Out of respect for everyone's time, each
speaker is limited to three minutes of public comment.
We have, by my count, six people, I believe, signed up
for public comment, five or six.
The first is Patricia Puente,
followed by Jessica Jackson. Ms. Puente, please
start when you're ready.
I have a question. This is for committee for
policing, for firemen, and what else?
Ethics and government oversight.
Who are the policemen here? Who's representing the law enforcement?
Who's representing the firemen?
So then
I have a concern. If they are not here,
do they care what is going on?
Or were they told not to attend?
My concern is for five law
officers being run over by a
teenager.
Now, my other concern is,
does the mayor want that legacy
to be out there
for eternity?
Because
what is it that they are stating? That he's not doing a good
job? That he's letting these
teenagers take over the city?
Are they being
told to do it because they're minors?
I remember, I'm old school. I remember if you did something
wrong or you join our service,
Navy, Marines,
Air Force, or you go to jail.
Don't just give them a slap because you are provoking
for them to say it is okay to
do what you guys are doing, running over
innocent people.
And that's it.
Thank you. Recognizing Alderwoman Tabares and non-member
Conway.
Alderwoman Tabares for purposes of quorum, which we have.
Next up, Jessica Jackson, followed by Tawon Sims. Ms.
Jackson, please start when you're ready.
So I agree with everything that Patty just
said. Where are the police? Where are the police to
represent a concern for what's going on with the
safety of our city? How are you sitting here as the chairman of
ethics
and allowing all the things that you allow?
You're a big part of the problem.
This morning I got here and I tried to go over there to that meeting, and the
police told me that I couldn't get in that meeting, that the meeting was
full.
But then people came into that meeting after I did.
This is abuse of authority with the police, and they can
parade around in here
and flex their authority that they get from you all
to misuse us. Now, that's another Open Meetings Violations
Act that I'm going to file.
Apparently, you all like getting those because now Deborah
Weisberg, what is it, Deborah Weisberg, Diane Weisberg, whatever, is over
there with Kwame Raoul. You all know that she's not going to investigate, just
like Kwame Raoul doesn't investigate anything.
So now I'm going to report you, just like I'm going to
report Alderman Conway to
the ARDC because you all are attorneys and you all
sit in here, and you allow these unethical things to take
place. The line has
to be drawn somewhere.
The citizens of the city are not getting any type of concern or
respect.
The property owners of the city aren't getting any type of concern or
respect.
The law-abiding citizens of the city aren't getting any type of concern
or respect.
Our money is not getting any type of concern or respect.
So people like you,
Brandon Johnson,
Conway, you all have to go.
That's at the top of the list.
You have to go because you know about my case.
I gave you the documentation. You're a civil rights
attorney,
and I saw you break your neck to come over here to get this white
man's pink slip
because you wanted to make sure that he could public speak.
But I've seen you attempt to violate our right to public speak,
Mr. Civil Rights Attorney
And you think you're not going to get a charge for that?
You really think that?
You're the most unethical person in the room.
Next up,
Mr. Sims, followed by
Charles Spence.
Good morning, committee. Good morning.
Yeah, the whole thing with this being an ethics and
police committee was one of the reasons that I came this morning in
regards to the case
25120458301,
when I was wrongfully arrested or falsely arrested on April 16th, 2025,
and also
25120869201,
when I was then, once again, falsely arrested on June 3rd.
However, I was also arrested on
September 10th, 2025, for the same
issue. Now, this case was SOL on, what,
May 30th, 2025? So from that
time, would've been SOL stricken off the court leave,
would've placed that case in a dormant state unless they reinstated it.
But for one whole year, I had to suffer under false or illegal
enforcements carried out here in 121 North
LaSalle by the unit 121.
And
that is an ethics issue because we want ethical policing,
we want constitutional policing, right?
But it's also a police issue to address.
And I would say, Chairman Tyler-Farrow, that's why
as you asked me about those documents and everything, sir, I've been putting
something together so that you can get a better picture.
So I don't want to send you something half done.
So I'm not ignoring your request, sir.
However, what took place also this weekend
when Ms. Fuentes talk about the five officers that were ran over, this
gentleman was out of playing field.
So we see these players
coming into the city.
What I would say,
either they are initiating or they're paid or whatever it
is, but it's a hindrance to us.
And when we don't have individuals who are set up to make the proper
decisions, we don't have individuals who understand security
and how to put roadblocks up to
stave off what's going on. Because we won't blame the children because they're
children, young adults and whatnot, so they're going to be rambunctious.
They're going to run through the city. But however, we have law enforcement.
We have containment.
And that's not the issue right now.
So now we have the news exploiting this moment,
but we should also have provisions set up to not be exploited as a city.
We should also have
provisions set up to where individuals can't manufacture information,
can't disregard FOIA requests,
can't seem to just do whatever they want because they've masqueraded
themselves as law enforcement,
and then attack the communities or individuals like myself.
So when she's saying that you are a great part of the issue, Mr.
Martin, you are a civil rights attorney, and this was a grave civil
rights issue, and it still hasn't been addressed.
Next up, Charles Spence, followed by David Melton.
Good morning, committee. Thank you for this opportunity to speak.
We're here to discuss the police department workforce allocation report
as am I, specifically the Bureau of Patrol.
Please consider this.
Starting on page 44, there's some real interesting data on the number of
calls, response times, and handling times.
The busiest period is Saturday 10:00 PM to Sunday 3:00
AM. Every week, on average,
1,020 calls come in, 205 per hour,
three per hour per district. Doesn't seem hard to
handle, except the average handling time is
40-plus minutes.
Plus, those averages are spread evenly across the city.
The reality is if you are District 8, you get three times the
calls of District 20. Good luck with that.
Of even more concern is response times.
The four worst districts have a 15-plus minute
response time to priority one calls.
So what do you do with that? Well, starting on page 67, there's more
data regarding net available hours and proactive
time rates.
The bottom line in the report
is a reallocation of officers is needed among the districts.
Now, everyone here already knows that,
but everyone here also already knows that no
alder in District 7 or 20 is going to give up 50
officers so Districts 8 and 12 can gain
65.
Their plan B, hire 270 officers to fill the gaps.
That's $40 million annual expense.
And with overtime sure to be over budget and misconduct
settlements already over budget, that's
not happening.
So I say, surprise, surprise, expand
the drone unit. Right now, they do no
patrolling at all and aren't even on duty
Saturday 10:00 PM to Sunday 3:00 AM.
A drone can get to a call location and provide
advanced tactical information, perhaps reducing the
handling time and freeing up an officer.
Perhaps
It allows for the adjusting down of the call priority so
an officer can be refocused to a different call.
Perhaps,
who knows, perhaps. So let's find out.
Use 1% of the Bureau of Patrol's budget for this year,
$1.6 million, expand the drone unit,
and run a pilot in District 8.
Officers on the street need help. This is
an effective, efficient, and affordable way to do
so.
Please. Thank you.
Thank you. Recognizing joint committee members O'Shea and
Waguespack. Last person signed up for public comment is David
Melton.
And then we have someone on the phone who we will recognize for public
comment shortly.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
My name is David Melton. I'm a retired attorney.
I am acting executive director of the Chicago Council of Lawyers and
co-chair of the Civil Liberties Committee of Chicago Council of Lawyers.
I'm here today on behalf of an informal working group led by
Lauren Jones and Amy Thompson at Impact for Equity.
I believe they have submitted a letter that had some of the
questions that have arisen in our working group about this workplace allocation
study.
First question. We have a series of six questions.
Question one is why was the reallocation of
officers dismissed out of hand
and not considered as part of the study?
It seems to us that there
are differing needs in different districts, and simply ruling out
reallocation out of hand doesn't necessarily make sense.
Second question, who at CPD is taking the lead and
responsible for evaluating and implementing this study?
We don't know who that is.
Third question,
the study recommends hiring 600 additional officers.
We understand there are 1,000 officer vacancies already
provided for in the budget. So our understanding would be
that additional 600 could be covered out of those 1,000 existing vacancies
so that no additional budget allocation would be required for additional officers.
We would also assume that the 400 other vacancies could be used to
cover some of the civilian salaries, but that's not clear from the study.
Fourth question, the current budget calls for 10,000
patrol officers, yet the study recommends
7,300 patrol officers. We don't understand the difference.
Perhaps it's special types of officers not
considered under the patrol, but we just don't understand that and would appreciate
clarification.
Fifth question, the study recommends that 40% of patrol
officers' time
be uncommitted and be used essentially to advance community
policing. We would like to know what steps are being taken
to assess how uncommitted time is used by officers and whether it is
being used effectively.
Sixth question,
what are the barriers proposed to the use of civilians
that the study recommends? Are there restrictions under the
existing labor unions with the
FOP and the existing officer unions?
And then finally, are there
comments or objections from other city unions, from the FOP,
from CPD leadership, or from CPD rank and file?
Thank you very much.
Thank you. Our last public commenter is a person who I
believe is on virtually, Amy Thompson.
Ms. Thompson, can you hear us?
Yes. Good morning. Can you hear me?
Yes, please go ahead.
Okay, great. Good morning. My name is Amy Thompson.
I'm Staff Counsel at Impact for Equity, and I'm here representing a broad group
of advocates, community members, grassroots organizations, and government
stakeholders dedicated to increasing public safety, police accountability,
and government efficiency in Chicago.
I'd like to begin by thanking this joint committee, particularly Alderman Martin,
for working to pass the ordinance that mandated this hearing on the workforce
allocation study. I'd also like to acknowledge the philanthropic groups who
sponsored this work and CPD for entering a historic new phase of transparent
and evidence-backed staffing.
The study makes some significant recommendations, a key one being
civilianization. Specifically, the study recommends that CPD transfer
604 sworn officers from desk jobs to work the beat and to
replace them with civilians. If CPD were to transfer all those officers to
the beat, they'd only need to hire an additional 57 sworn officers.
Alarmingly, the department has already indicated that budgetary constraints may be
a barrier to implementing the study's recommendations.
But after careful review of the study and public records, we believe that CPD can
implement most, if not all, of the proposed staffing recommendations without
increasing the department budget by implementing one or more of the following three
strategies. First, redesignating and filling vacancies.
During the time the study was conducted, CPD had over 1,000
sworn and 300 civilian vacancies.
The first option would be to use these vacancies to hire recommended sworn and
civilian officers. The idea that money allocated for these
positions was intended to account for overspending in other areas rather than
funding the positions themselves can't be a justification.
The budget should be transparent about what it's funding, and this study gives the
department the tools to do so with even greater precision.
Second, geographic reallocation.
The study points out that recommended increases in sworn staffing can be achieved
by moving officers from districts that have more than optimal capacity to
districts that are struggling to meet needs.
Even if this isn't the wholesale solution, it shouldn't be removed from the
implementation conversation entirely, particularly if it can help save the city
money in other vital areas.
And third, bureau reallocation. The study shows that there were
thousands fewer officers working on patrol than the budget allows.
Meanwhile, activities that are less important to Chicagoans, like PAC teams,
were overstaffed by hundreds of sworn officers compared to what those departments
are budgeted for. While the methodology employed by the study doesn't analyze why
that's the case, we as a city should.
Chicagoans pay over $2.1 billion to fund largely
personnel costs of CPD. In this time where funding for other public
safety-generating services like affordable housing, food, and healthcare are under
attack, it's simply good government to use this study to identify areas for
cost-saving within the city's largest line item.
This study is a foundational step in the right direction.
As the department moves forward to implementation, it should also keep in mind the
need to address the record-keeping gaps that were surfaced by the study and to
assess the effectiveness of the officer activities described in the study to
better understand which are or are not contributing to our city's public safety.
Thank you. That concludes our public comment.
I would also like to note that the joint committee received two written public
comments that have been sent out to the committee members via email.
We will now begin the subject matter hearing regarding the Chicago Police
Department Workforce Allocation Study.
I would like to welcome and thank the following individuals who are here with us
today. From the Chicago Police Department, we have Allison Clark-Henson,
Director of the Office of Research and Projects, as well as Casey
McKenzie, Managing Deputy Director of the Office of Constitutional Policing and
Reform. And from Matrix Consulting Group, Richard Brady,
Chairman, and Ian Brady, Senior Vice President.
Director Clark-Henson, I believe you have a presentation, so please
proceed at your convenience.
And again, we want to express our thanks for you joining us here this
morning.
Okay. Good afternoon.
I want to thank you for the opportunity to provide an update on the workforce
allocation study. In attendance with me today virtually is
the Matrix team, who will also be available for questions at the
conclusion of my presentation.
Today's presentation is focused on how the department is transitioning from
assessment into operational implementation planning.
The study was never intended to function as a static report.
Rather, it was designed to create a long-term implementation planning framework
that allows the department to continually evaluate staffing, deployment,
supervision, operational efficiency, and community policing effectiveness over
time.
As we move into fiscal year 2027 planning discussions, the department
is focused on identifying realistic, sustainable, high-impact
operational improvements while balancing fiscal considerations,
excuse me, labor implications, operational demands, and consent
decree obligations.
I will briefly walk through why the study was conducted, the
operational themes identified, the department's immediate implementation
priorities, and how the work connects
broader efforts to modernize workforce planning and continually
optimize resource in support of public safety and service delivery.
The study was conducted as part of CPD's broader
organizational modernization and reform efforts, including
commitments under the consent decree.
I'm going to hold on.
Yep, next one.
Great. At a foundational level, the study was
intended to evaluate whether the department's staffing structures, deployment
models, and operational practices are aligned with current service demands
and community needs. The study examined where operational pressures
exist, where how workload varies across the department, whether
deployment structure supports proactive policing and community
engagement, and where opportunities may exist to improve efficiency and
operational effectiveness. Importantly, this work was not
solely about staffing counts. It is about understanding how
work is actually performed across the organization, how
operational structures impact service delivery, and how CPD can
build a more sustainable long-term workforce planning model.
The study also supports broader community policing objectives by
helping the department evaluate whether officers are being deployed
consistently and effectively across neighborhoods while identifying
barriers that may limit proactive engagement and problem-solving efforts.
Ultimately, the goal is to build a more adaptive, data-informed
department capable of continually reassessing operational needs
and making informed decisions over time.
The workforce allocation study evaluated every administrative and operational
area across the department. This includes patrol workload and
deployment practices, supervision structures and span of control,
operational staffing pressures, scheduling complexities,
civilianization opportunities, and geographic deployment
consistency. The study also examined community policing
operations and neighborhood engagement practices to better understand how
operational structures either support or hinder long-term community
policing goals.
Importantly, the analysis was both operational and
organizational. The study reviewed not only where staffing exists but
how workload is distributed, how operational demands
fluctuate, where administrative inefficiencies may occur, and how
deployment practices impact proactive policing time.
The department also used this process to identify areas where long-term
workforce planning tools and stronger performance evaluation methodologies
are needed moving forward.
Ultimately, the study provided a much broader operational framework that will
continue informing organizational planning, deployment strategies, and resource
allocations decisions progressively.
As the department moves into implementation planning, the focus is on using the
study as an organizational management tool
Okay.
Slide four.
One major priority is integrating study findings into operational
decision-making processes. That includes improving deployment
consistency, identifying opportunities to increase proactive policing
over time, strengthening operational efficiency, and improving how
resources are distributed across the organization.
Another critical goal is scalability.
Historically, workforce studies had become one-time snapshots
that quickly lost operational relevance.
The department's goal is very different here.
This model was developed for CPD to build repeatable
methodologies that allow the department to continually reassess staffing needs,
workload pressures, operational performance, and deployment strategies as
demands change. This includes building sustainable performance tracking
systems, developing more consistent workload evaluation
methodologies, and improving the department's ability to make future
workforce planning decisions that are based on evolving operational
realities. The long-term objective is continual organizational
evaluation and continual optimization of resources.
The study identified major operational themes that will shape implementation
planning moving forward.
One of the most significant findings involved uneven workload pressures
and deployment demands across districts and operational areas.
In higher demand areas, officers often have reduced
proactive policing time due to service call volume and operational staffing
strains.
The study also identified opportunities to civilianize certain administrative and
technical functions where sworn staffing may not be operationally necessary.
The analysis further identified operational complexity within scheduling and
deployment structures that may contribute to inefficiencies in some
areas. From a community policing perspective, the study also
identified inconsistencies in implementation and deployment practices across
districts, which may affect neighborhood engagement efforts and long-term community
policing objectives.
Finally, the study identified gaps in workload and performance data in
certain units, reinforcing the need for stronger long-term data
infrastructure and operational evaluation methodologies moving forward.
The department has already begun transitioning into implementation planning
efforts. Current work is focusing on reviewing recommendations through both
fiscal and labor lenses to ensure that implementation efforts are
realistic, they're sustainable, and operationally achievable.
CPD has already begun meeting and coordinating with DHR, OBM, the mayor's
office, and members of the steering committee as part of this collaborative review
and planning process. The department is prioritizing
recommendations that may produce the greatest operational impact during
the 2027 budget planning cycle.
This includes reviewing opportunities to improve administrative
efficiency, evaluating deployment and supervision structures, and
identifying operational improvements that can strengthen service delivery while
remaining grounded in fiscal realities.
The department is also continuing to analyze civilianization recommendations in
greater detail by categorizing opportunities based on
operational need, feasibility, workforce implication, and
implementation complexity.
Throughout this process, alignment with the consent decree obligations and broader
organizational reform efforts remain a central
consideration. As the department evaluates
2027 budget priorities, the focus is on
implementation of operational improvements that can produce the
most meaningful and sustainable impact.
One major area of focus involves civilianization
identified during the study.
Rather than treating civilianization as a single initiative, the department is
evaluating recommendations in operational categories or buckets
based on feasibility, operational impact, workforce
considerations, and implementation timelines.
The department is also prioritizing supervision and operational support needs,
particularly in areas where the study identified span of control challenges
or supervisory constraints.
Additionally, CPD is continuing efforts tied to unity of command and span
of control principles to strengthen operational demands.
The overall objective is to implement improvements that strengthen
operational efficiency, improve deployment practices, and support
long-term workforce sustainability.
One of the most important long-term findings from the study involved the need to
strengthen workload and performance data collection capabilities across certain
operational areas.
In some areas, units lack sufficiently digitized infrastructure to
support the level of workload analysis necessary in the workforce model.
In other cases, units were either operationally specialized, rapidly
evolving, or too newly established to have mature historical data sets
available during the study, period.
Rather than reviewing these as limitations or barriers, the department and Matrix
are using this as an opportunity to build sustainable methodologies for long-term
workforce evaluation.
The next phase of implementation includes improving workload
tracking processes, strengthening operational data collection
practices, and developing measurable key performance indicators and
performance benchmarks that can support continual evaluation
of the organization.
Importantly, the workload model itself was designed to function
as an interactive and repeatable planning tool.
As operational conditions evolve and additional data becomes available, the
department will be able to rerun the model, reassess deployment strategies,
and make adjustments over time.
At a minimum, the department will be reevaluating the model
annually while also maintaining the flexibility to conduct
reassessments whenever major operational or
infrastructure changes occur. The broader goal is continual
operational optimization and ongoing resource evaluation rather than a
one-time staffing exercise.The department
recognizes that the implementation of these recommendations will require a
phased and sustainable long-term approach.
In the near term, efforts are focused on budget review, labor analysis,
operational assessments, supervision evaluations, and
strengthening workforce data collection methodologies.
The department is also identifying priority implementation areas that can be
reasonably advanced during the 2027 planning
cycle. Long-term implementation will involve continued
workforce evaluation, phased operational improvements,
ongoing deployment assessments, and the development of public-facing
implementation planning and accountability structures.
Importantly, the department is approaching this as an iterative process rather than
a fixed implementation plan. The ability to continually reassess
workforce needs, repeat the model, evaluate operational outcomes, and
adjust implementation priorities over time is a crucial part of the
long-term strategy. The phased approach allows the
department to balance operational realities, fiscal restraints,
and evolving public safety needs while continuing to improve resource
optimization over time.
Transparency and continued stakeholder engagement remain central
components of this process. The department is developing a documented
multi-year implementation plan that will outline
implementation priorities, operational strategies,
timelines, and long-term planning efforts.
Finalized implementation materials, project planning information,
and additional study resources will continue to be made publicly
available through the department's workforce allocation study
webpage. That platform will also continue serving as a
mechanism for stakeholder engagement, public feedback, and ongoing
communication regarding implementation progress.
The department is committed to maintaining a collaborative implementation process
to ensure recommendations are operationally effective, sustainable, and capable
of producing measurable improvements.
This includes our continued coordination with city partners, operational
stakeholders, community groups, and members of the steering committee throughout
the implementation planning.
The overall objective is to establish a sustainable framework for continual
organizational improvement, accountability, and long-term workforce
modernization. In closing, the workforce
allocation study represents an important step in the department's broader workforce
modernization and operational improvement efforts.
The findings provide a data-driven framework for evaluating deployment
strategies, supervision structures, operational efficiency, and
long-term workforce planning.
More importantly, this work establishes an ongoing process for continual
resource optimization rather than a one-time assessment.
As the department continues improving data collection capabilities, strengthening
analytical infrastructure, and refining workforce evaluation
methodologies, the model can continue being repeated and re-examined over time.
That ongoing evaluation process will help the department continually optimize
deployment strategies, identify evolving operational needs,
improve service delivery, and strengthen public safety outcomes.
Throughout this work, the department remains committed to balancing operational
effectiveness, accountability, fiscal responsibility, community
policing priorities, and long-term sustainability.
Ultimately, this effort is about building a more adaptive, transparent, and
operationally effective organization capable of continually improving how
it serves Chicago's communities.
Again, I appreciate the opportunity to present to you today, and I'm happy, along
with the team from Matrix, to answer any questions.
Thank you, Director.
As a reminder, we have representatives from Matrix on the line who are able to
answer questions in addition to our two CPD representatives.
I'd also like to thank Chairman Tully Farrell and his team for working to put this
on the calendar. I know typically we try to avoid that week after council, but this
is the one that made sense to get everybody on the same
page, both from CPD as well as Matrix. So thank you, Chairman.
And now we will turn it over to questions from committee members, followed by
non-committee members.
Questions.
Alderman Palatano.
Thank you, Chairman.
What is the overall goal here? Is the goal
to find a way to do more with less,
with less officers, with less
equipment? I'm not following. What's the
overall goal?
Essentially, it's to maximize operational efficiencies.
So it's to ensure that we are utilizing
individuals with the skill sets, the appropriate skill sets, and training to
fulfill positions that optimizes our resources.
So this isn't intended to be a finite net gain or net
loss, but it's about becoming more effective overall as an organization with the
right individuals performing the right responsibilities.
We're talking about police officers, correct?
We're talking about both. So some of the recommendations did include potential
opportunities where in administrative or technical
functions, that there would be opportunity for members who
have that skill set because these particular responsibilities do not require sworn
authority and sworn training.
So in essence,
adding more civilian work?
The work already exists. It's adding the right personnel to complete the
work.
So when you say finding the best fit, and if we're clumping that into
just police officers before you go to the civilian side of it, we're all trained
the exact same. We're all trained through the academy the exact same way unless you
move on to a specialized unit. So they're all given the
same information. They're all trained the same exact way, and it's based off of the
laws that we're given. So how do you optimize-- Unless somebody's getting
special training like arson or, I'm sorry, not arson,
tactics or
SWAT or bomb and arson or
different types of force mitigation training,
how are we separating any of these officers?
Unless they're all given that
So in the study, there's a couple different components depending on what
section, and the recommendations are very specific to the bureau they're assigned
to. So I think that's done intentionally, and I'm sure Matrix can
weigh in on this, but when we start talking, for example, about the Bureau of
Detectives, they make very specific recommendations in the variety of very specific
functions and roles, and that's intentional to your very point.
When you're talking about patrol as a different example with unity and
span, then that training and that support, it looks a little bit
different because essentially in the patrol field operations,
there's conducting the same work.
But again, if Matrix wants to weigh in on that, but I would say that it was very
intentional that they did it by function, by bureau, because there are
differences to your point.
Okay. And if we're
looking at
this
study done based on deployment, what's your definition of deployment?
Because you've mentioned it a couple of times.
What do you mean as far as deployment?
So again, I probably should be clearer.
So there's patrol deployments, which is where officers are
assigned for a particular beat, sector, that sort of thing.
But in other areas and units, there's an assignment of their role, and this is
meant to encompass both of those.
Okay. Yeah, because when you use deployment-
Has a connotation-
Yeah
... fair sounding, I found.
Yeah. And
if you base it off of patrol, I hope there's that
kind of caveat to it where patrol doesn't exist within beats anymore
because we're so understaffed that you
might not even have a beat car in a sector, or you might not have any cars in
a sector, you might not have a beat car in their beat.
It's kind of just willy-nilly patrol now because we're so understaffed
that deployment is so general now that
deployment technically should be you're deployed to an area, whereas a patrol is
you patrol an entire area. So
I hope those
factors are kind of taken into-
Yeah, I'll definitely take that note so that the terminology, just because the
understanding, there is a connotation with that.
Okay.
All right. I'm done for right now, Chairman. I just want to see as questions go on.
Understood. Anything you want to direct to Matrix in terms of follow-up?
It was just general, so if they can weigh in on any of that as well, I'm
good with that. I think I have some more questions.
I just have to kind of figure out how I want to go about it, though.
Understood.
Thank you.
Mr. Brady, Richard or Ian Brady, anything you would like to add before we move to
Chairman Tally Ferro?
I would just add that we evaluated the needs of each unit
individually because our goal is to
evaluate based off of the workload inputs, based on their capacity to
handle that workload for every individual function where officers,
sergeants, et cetera, are assigned what the needs are for that
position and are there opportunities either to identify where there are staffing
needs or identify better ways of providing the service that are more
efficient, more effective, or alternative means of
providing that service as far as is civilianization an
opportunity there, or are there other ways of providing the service?
Go ahead. Thank you, Chairman. When you
say units, what do you mean by unit?
Any individual work group where someone is assigned, whether it's
specific duty or assignment, such as being a desk
officer in a specific district, or whether it's being in an investigative
unit in the detective bureau.
Okay. And I guess
I'll wait. I got another question.
I just have to see how I want to construct it exact so we can move on.
Thank you, Chairman.
We'll come back to you. Chairman Tally Ferro.
Thank you, Chairman. Has there been an identification
of any specific,
I should say, any specific titles that'll be served
by a civilian than a police officer?
Because we've identified positions every year I've been a part of the city council,
and we make a commitment to move
50, 60, 80 people from police headquarters
to the
bureau patrol. But we never get a follow-up on whether that has occurred.
So are there specific positions that this study would
recommend
that it would be filled by civilians
rather than a police officer? For example, if it's a graphic artist
or photographer.
These are positions that I've personally known to be filled by police
officers, sworn officers,
that could probably rather be filled by a civilian.
So have you identified
the type of position and where they're located?
So the study itself made several recommendations, as we
know. What we're doing right now, to your very point is, when I talked
about bucketing and categorizing, we're looking at positions that there are
existing civilian titles that we could probably
more quickly move towards. For example, timekeepers would be
one. Things about graphic arts. Those are the ones that we're looking at now
because there's an opportunity where we don't have to necessarily create a
title, a new title, one that maybe previously was only held by a sworn,
which probably would have some labor implications as well.
So those are the areas that we're currently looking at to focus on for fiscal year
2027.
And what is
the degree of concern when it comes to access
to police records or access to police
information that your
study utilizes in making these
determinations?
In terms of what Matrix considered?
They'd have to weigh in on that, but I mean-
Yeah, because
one of my concerns that I have is in access to
dataWhether that be police personal information or
more secure data that's kept within the Chicago Police
Department.
When you do have police officers serving in these positions,
if we put civilians in those positions, I'm sure they won't have
the same access that a police officer would have.
So what's your level of concern when it comes down to reallocating these
positions toward a civilianized position?
That would again go to the considerations that we're taking.
What we're looking at right now as kind of our near-term
civilianizations are titles like timekeeper or titles where they're a hybrid
right now, so that the type of information they're accessing, that sensitivity
is not there. As we move into positions where historically there had not
been a non-sworn there, we would have to take that into serious
consideration. Again, that goes to the feasibility, if we can really
operationalize that recommendation or not.
Are you actually going to implement some of these things from the study,
or
is this study being done generally to
satisfy-
We are absolutely going to implement what recommendations we deem as we go
through each one that
are feasible, are sustainable, and truly do optimize our resources.
That is part of the implementation exercise, and quite frankly, is
required by the consent decree. The existence of the study itself does not
satisfy the requirements under our consent decree.
And lastly, does the study actually
go into the area of looking at the effectiveness of community
policing? And if it does,
what is the effectiveness of community policing, and do you believe it to be
effective as we move into the
summertime of 2026?
So the study in conjunction with the community policing assessment did find
very much overlapping themes, and I think we've heard them multiple times about the
desire and the necessity for officers to know their neighborhoods,
to be able to have that geographic integrity, for them to be visible,
and to have that proactive time to interact with members of the community, in
essence, getting to know them, getting to know the problems.
So that was consistent in both studies.
Okay, but I'm saying, have you determined whether community policing is
effective, or as we engage in another
summer, have you determined whether community policing is effective,
or was the study designed to make that determination?
The study was not designed to make a determination of the overall
effectiveness of the current community policing strategies.
But that is something that was considered more in-depth with the community policing
assessment, and that came out with also nine recommendations that the department is
working through right now to implement.
Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Chair.
Thank you. I want to recognize Alderman Curtis and Sposato for purposes of
quorum. One follow-up piece, Director, if you could share a little bit
more about some of the key hurdles that Matrix has
identified for purposes of civilianization.
And I'm curious if there needs to be any sensitivity to
existing CBAs as you look at different types
of positions that could be civilianized.
Yes. Matrix itself in the study did not assess what the hurdles would
be. That's something that we're working through as we're identifying our
implementation strategies. But what we have identified
is things such as if a position there is not an
existing classification or job description, that's a step we'd have to take prior
to being able to even begin working through getting the
position added to the budget, moving through, as we know, what could be a little
bit of a lengthy hiring process. So we're taking all of that into
consideration, as well as what type of training may need to happen before that
individual can really fall at the highest functioning level in that position.
So those are what we're working through planning-wise, and it's why for near term,
we're really looking at positions that there are civilian titles and
hybrid components already in existence in the department because we
feel like that will have the greatest immediate impact.
Thank you. Alderman Lawson.
Thank you, Chair, and appreciate the information.
Just to stay on civilization for a minute, and then I'll move on.
I was going to ask about the buckets, but it sounds like we're looking at each job
title individually as opposed to a
class or a unit or...
Correct. We're looking at every recommendation as that
job specification and seeing if something exists, how feasible
it is, will there be labor implications, things like that.
Great. I'll move on from there then.
One of the things that I feel like changes a lot is, department might get a reorg
with a new superintendent or a new mayor. We might have beat realignment.
I have two districts merged.
How do we keep this data and tracking consistent across different
administrations in the department, in the city?
Because you might need to reorg some beats, right?
You might want to change things up, but we want to make sure our data is still
good. How are you taking that into consideration?
So that is one of the things that was identified by Matrix.
So certainly, there's extensive data, which was why they were able to utilize the
mature datasets they did have to come up with the recommendations they had.
It's a fundamental component of this iterative model that is handed off to us.
But they identified areas where there wasn't enough datasets for a variety of
reasons in certain areas. So currently, we are continuing to partner with
Matrix to develop those key performance indicators, the type of
data that we would need, so that regardless of what
administration is at play, that model is ours.
We rerun the data, and that data is what's going to drive the
information that we have in order to make decisions about what
we should or should not do with our resources.
Well, and to the point, I think, right, so we're going to try a new strategy.
Superintendent has whatever it is that works somewhere else, and we're going to
implement here, but our data will
be consistent. Because I think that's a criticism is that-
Correct
... we've done a new
initiative, and we've changed the way we're reporting it, so we really don't have
anything to compare it to.
Correct.
That's--
And honestly, in this instance, I don't know, Matrix, just to give a little bit
more insight as to how they built this model, it might be beneficial for you
all if, because I think to your point, it speaks to how there's that consistency
of the data that we're utilizing to make these decisions.
Right.
Richard or Ian, I don't know which may want to weigh in on that.
I'll get it started, and Ian can take over.
Just to echo your point that one of the key objectives
associated with this study was to develop factually based
and consistent and replicable approaches to
determining staffing needs in every function within the police department,
at any point in the future, based on workload changes, based on different
philosophies about enforcement, et cetera.
So Ian can talk a little bit more about the model development that we did.
Right. So
a key finding across many areas was that in a number of units,
there isn't sufficient data
tracked or identified to be able to complete the kinds of
workload-based analyses that
hold up as far as being the gold standard to evaluate the staffing needs of
individual positions. And the interactive model gives
CPD flexibility to, in the future, as they improve their ability to
track data for individual positions, to be able to complete those workload-based
analyses and have this be a living document, a living model that
will adapt to the needs of the future.
Thank you. I appreciate the living document.
Very often we publish something, and it goes on a shelf.
So that's not going to happen here. A couple other quick things.
I know one of the issues we have with police overtime in my area is the lack of
traffic control aids. So the Department of Human Resources is not hiring
fast enough for OAMC to deploy them.
And when we don't have them, then a police officer has to take that spot.
I mentioned it to our new OIG office, actually, because I think we often lose
something when we go across departments.
And police overtime, obviously a major FY27 eight
nine issue, always will be. Are you looking across departments at those areas
where the police have to show up? Whether
whatever department it may have fallen under to begin with,
is that part of this analysis as well as it impacts our workforce and our
deployment?
So,
when we're utilizing police to cover, you're saying maybe a role elsewhere?
Traffic control or
a mental health crisis or an eviction,
something, a special event,
all those things, but specifically city-related functions.
So for me, it's traffic control aids at Wrigley Field, I'll be honest.
In regards, and Matrix, please correct me if I'm wrong, that wasn't
specifically looked at, but I understand what you're asking.
And unfortunately, the team that is kind of focusing in on that overtime
initiative and tracking that isn't with me today.
But if there's any information that you would like me to get through the chair, I'm
absolutely happy to do that.
Sure. It's something that's come up in our budget now a few times, right?
Whether that's special event cost recovery or this issue with the traffic
control aids. I'm sure there are other things as well.
So I just want to make sure we're looking at how those other departments, if
they're not meeting the need or they're exceeding their job, how that impacts,
and that they're tied into that.
If you'll allow me just to interrupt briefly to push on that point some.
When we talk about this being a living document, I'm curious, understanding that
only so much can get done with this first bite at the apple.
Is this something that if a good number of people in this joint committee
or others on city council said we would like CPD alongside Matrix to
look into something, say, I think what you had mentioned in terms of a previous
hearing, a kind of call analysis to say, what are the calls that we absolutely want
and need officers to respond to, and what are ones that would be better addressed
by others because they're not a high priority?
I'm curious, by way of example, if that's something that could be filtered
into a second or third or fourth bite at the apple as we have this
existence of living documents.
I'll definitely let Matrix also weigh in, but as I understood it,
in order to conduct the study, we have to start with current state, right?
There's a state of what we may want police to respond to or
not in the future, but unfortunately, that is going to impact
the realities and the recommendations, and it's not going to be current state.
So in 2024, when that data was there, that is what they utilized to
make the recommendations. And of course, to optimize resources, they were not
taking into consideration overtime, right?
Because that's not an optimization of resources if you're having to continuously
conduct and perform functions with extensive overtime.
So those are just two pieces I want to make sure that are clear, and Matrix,
please weigh in on this. But again, there's a space of
maybe things we don't want to do in the future or think we need to do in the
future, but they had to, for the fidelity of the study, they
needed to maintain what was currently the responsibilities and roles being
done by the Chicago Police Department.
And Matrix, if I did not convey or explain that properly, please
weigh in.
Right. So we don't factor in overtime into the patrol analysis, for instance,
because ultimately the analysis is asking whether authorized staffing
is sufficient to be able to meet the demand for workload with
time left over for proactive. The overtime would exist because there isn't enough
time, and so if we're counting it overtime as capacity, it would be
hiding the problem that we're in essence trying to measure.
And so that's why we filtered overtime out, and ultimately it's
to have functions that are,
particularly in an area like patrol, that are driven largely by overtime, it's not
sustainable. So our goal is to provide a staffing plan that's able to meet the
needs based off of workload with filled positions, which was the focus of the
study. And so, in the future, if changes are made to say which
calls patrol answers or doesn't answer, or having
alternative means of responding to those workloads, that
the impact on workloads would be entered into the model, and it would provide
feedback on what that translates to as far as what the staffing needs are for
both patrol, but any other alternative needs of handling those calls.
Great. Parking was the other thing I couldn't think of when I was-- But that's one
of those things that we have a lot of people other than officers that do them.
Officers will do them, especially if there's some sort of more
immediate, non-threatening crosswalk hydrant intersection,
things like that. I'll close. I always talk about tech, and tech
in policing, where we're moving there, and how we're becoming more reliant on it.
It helps with our officers. It helps with resources.
Curious what
your relationship with tech in this study has produced so far, and
along with any sort of specific recommendations.
We've talked about gunshot detection technology in this chamber a lot.
We've talked about camera networks and how effective they are.
Is that part of the puzzle here that we're looking at and looking at its
effectiveness?
In terms of-
Workforce setting, right
... sorry, in terms of technological platforms, no, but where they did make
recommendations is technical positions.
Okay. That maybe a few more are needed?
Correct. And yeah.
Yes. Great. Thank you, Chair. Appreciate the work.
Alderman Beasley, followed by Alderman Conley.
Thank you, Chairs, and thank you to you all.
You have really helped us to give more language when we
say more policing.
Love the smarter deployment, the faster emergency
response, the stronger accountability, and the consistent neighborhood public
safety services across
all parts of the city. I want to start by asking you
about just that response time when we talk about geographic
integrity and having beat integrity.
What are some ways that we accomplish that?
And I'll highlight even one of the thought around substation.
Is that something that helps keeps officers in areas that
really need that presence?
So I think that the first component of that, at least based on the findings of the
study, is that we saw a great disparity in the ability
for response times, and there's direct recommendations based on staffing around
that. And again, this also takes into
consideration what is a best practice, and they can speak to you about the
proactive 40%. But in order for that
consistent service delivery for every neighborhood, the
staffing needs to support that ability to be able to have that
40% proactive time.
And is it always the need to have a sworn officer,
or what's the opportunity for
non-sworn personnel to respond to some of these things?
We're looking to be innovative here in the city with things like the
care unit and so forth. What more can we do to
have residents feel better about the response time,
even if it's not always a sworn officer that's
responding?
Certainly, as I think we spoke briefly about earlier about what we
decide moving forward that officers will be responding to or not.
But in the interim,
I can't speak to the care program. I'm sorry, but I'm not part of that work.
But again, we would rerun the model based on changes in
responsibility or community needs, and that's
what the importance is of this model is the fluidity of our ability to pivot
based on data-driven information to make decisions as to what
we need and who we need where.
And what about some of the things like online reporting or virtual reporting?
I know oftentimes it comes up where residents are involved.
It could be an incident, something like a
traffic or even something greater, and they get frustrated
because they're calling the police to come and respond, and they're being
told by, "You need to go to
your local station or near station in order to fill out this
report."
So again, if we're talking strictly about the workforce allocation findings, it
considered all types of priority calls, not just priority one.
And so the intent there was how we can best serve a
consistent service delivery to all neighborhoods for all priority calls.
If the question is more related to futuristic kind of records management
system where there's more streamlined abilities for digitizing some of
that work, that's yet to be seen. But again, I just want to
emphasize the study was about concurrent responsibilities
of the department and ensuring that we can meet those in every neighborhood and
community sufficiently and consistently.
How do we have
proportional responses? And I say that because
sometimes you see a traffic stop, and there may be
four to five, six cars, and people often wonder,
is this the best use, particularly when there are other priorities at a
point in time.
So, I think what you're speaking to is some of the findings consistent with the
community policing assessment that speaks a great deal about proportionality to
responding to circumstances, and that's the work that in the
recommendations from that study that we are also working collaboratively
with in addition to our workforce allocation study.
And have you seen
an increase of
maybe disproportionate responses because of the loss of
our gunshot detection system?
Unfortunately, the team that would be able to respond to that is not me, but
I'm happy to get additional information through the chair if there's a specific
question or additional information that you'd like.
I would love that, Chair.
Also, talk to me more about
is there an opportunity here when we say that we are looking
to civilianize certain positions.
If there's a sworn officer in that position, is it then an
opportunity for that sworn officer to be reassigned into a new
position? I love the goals here in terms of the
increases, but being realistic about our workforce and not a
flood coming in, wondering how we can achieve that.
So certainly the recommendations are intended that where there is a
need for sworn training and authority, that those officers then are reassigned
to those types of functions. But again, as we know, this is going to
be a multi-phased approach. These individuals are currently doing a
function that needs to continue on.
So as we move towards civilianization, it's not a light switch, right?
We need to have this rolled and phased implementation so that
where we determine it is feasible and beneficial to
bring on a civilian member in an appropriate title to
conduct that work, we would do so, but we would be doing that in a phased approach
where the work would continue until that individual was in place.
Two more, Chair, and I'll turn it back over.
Oftentimes, the report highlighted
the situations of where tech teams are helpful
and proactive in certain areas,
but we will lose those tech teams with things like downtown
events, protests,
citywide responses, and so forth, which then lessens
the integrity or that response in those neighborhoods that
sometimes need it arguably more.
Is there a strategy behind that to improve where you can still
appropriately respond to those downtown events and other things, but
not lose the safety of the neighborhoods, particularly like in my ward on the
far South Side?
Those types of operational strategic strategies, I'm not the right person to
answer, but I'm certainly, again, if there's any follow-up information, I'm happy
to get that provided to you.
Thanks. Last question from me, Chair, just deals around the community
policing, and we have a lot of layers to it, right?
In addition to caps, there's new things like district council, there's
CCPSA.
Did your report have any recommendations on how these things could work
collaboratively to better increase the capacity of the department
overall?
Certainly. So that was another area where both the community
policing assessment and the workforce allocation study had a very similar
finding. The approach of having siloed community policing
assignments or responsibilities has been seen to not be as
effective as we would've intended.
Both studies believe that every officer's
responsibility is in community policing, so avoiding those silos and
instead making sure that messaging and training is across the board where every
member knows that that's their responsibility.
So again, both of those studies were consistent, and as we move forward, that is
the intention of the department is to break down those silos, and
that it's not the specialized role per se.
Okay. I want to thank you for the language you've helped add to my
vocabulary today, and I'll turn it back over to you, Chair.
Thank you, Alderman.
Yeah, please, Alderman Mitchell.
Chairman.
Alderman Mosley touched on almost everything that was in my
mind. Your response was to one of his
points in particular was, if there's information, you'll get back to
us. What does that mean? Because I definitely would like to hear your
response
in response to
particularly the one where resources are
taken downtown and our community
feel that they are getting the short end of the stick.
So when you say, "If there's information to get back," what do you mean by that?
So I apologize. Any information that exists in regarding to that, it's just the
team who would have that information is not here, and so I'm just unable to
provide that answer.
Okay. Will you take the steps to get those people?
Of course. Whatever you--
We want to make sure I get everybody's questions so that we can do the proper
follow-up so you have the right people who have the answer.
Okay. Thank you.
Thank you. And Alderman Paul Tello had a follow-up before we head to Alderman
Conway.
Thank you, Chairman. I actually had a point of clarification.
I thought my colleague asked a great question,
and his question was as far as on traffic stops
with the use of the amount of officers that show up to that, and that's something
that you guys are looking into,
if manpower is properly being allocated the right way
towards calls for service.
What spectrum do you put that on?
I mean, isn't it all based off of a threat level assessment and
calls for backup? How can you tell where
we need more officers or we don't need more officers based on-
So the operational strategies behind that would be something that's taken into
consideration by another team that is not myself.
Okay.
But again, certainly make sure that whoever we need to have here
for you all to answer those questions, we can follow up.
And I have another question, but if someone else is going, I can wait for mine.
You got one more. Go ahead.
Okay. I got one. Yeah, just one more.
So
in
what you're constructing in ways that we're looking to make the department
operate better and with
less manpower or more manpower,
do you ever look in the scope of the district
layouts?
I mean, if you look at a district layout, you take the 16th district is roughly
30 miles,
footprint's about 30 miles, 30.95 is how it's listed.
And we have about 180 officers in that district.
You compare it to our next adjoining south district was the 25th district,
which is 10 miles square footprint, which has over
300 police officers assigned to that district.
And then you go to the next district from that is the 15th district, Austin,
which is three miles square, and they have over 400 police officers.
Are we ever looking at these districts and saying, "Okay, we are
not--
There has to come a point in time when we redistrict the districts." There has
to come a point in time when we look at the footprints of districts and
say some of them are just way too big for the amount of officers that we're giving
them, and some of them are way too small, and we're giving them even
more officers than everybody else.
Granted, crime is different across the city.
I totally understand that. ButIf
we're looking to do better in areas where we could
possibly make a difference, you could start with the 16th District, which
is 30 square miles and has 180 officers.
Probably less than that by now.
Is that a factor that we're looking at?
Has that come across your-
In the study? So, I will also let Matrix weigh in, but in the
study, there was no recommendations in terms of district boundaries.
But I think everyone saw there were some recommendations around the busiest
sectors, dividing those into two, a couple of the slowest ones,
combining those. And they also kind of left some opportunity there
for potentially defining maybe some of the sectors a
little bit differently, but not necessarily the districts.
So that was and is included in the study's recommendations.
And if Matrix has anything to add on that, I'd happy to have them weigh in as well.
I would just add on that our focus in the
geographic deployment level was that districts should
have this
targeting at least the same level of service to build or meet at least 40%
overall proactive time or uncommitted time.
And
that requires scaling the number of officers that are assigned based off of the
workload that is handled. So, if a district has twice the workload
of another district, then to be able to meet that 40%, it's going to require
twice the number of officers in that district.
And so, the actual workload that they handle was the focus as opposed
to the area that they cover.
And I get that. That's, I guess, common factor that you
can throw in there. But the issue is
sometimes the workload factor is less in a larger district,
but the time of response is a hell of a lot bigger.
And it's unfortunate, especially when you've got lower manpower.
So I could see that because if you go by crime statistics in
districts, it's apples and oranges.
But if you go to response times and being able to attend
to
crimes that might be a level three but turn into a level
one because the response time is
so much more drastic, that's something that's got to be factored in there.
People have been avoiding this district change since the dawn of
time here in Chicago. I think it's something that
definitely has to come up and has to be looked at.
We need to find a better way to-- I get it.
Up in the northern end, there tends to be a little bit different style of crime.
A lot of it, but different style of crime.
It just does not mean that they should not have the same amount of
service and quickness. If we have less officers,
shorten the district up, allow them to get there a little bit quicker.
So I think that'd be something very good to look at in this study going
forward. Thank you.
Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, Alderman. Alderman Conway.
Yeah.
Thank you. As a high
level question, which
follows on Alderman Napolitano's question from the first time, is
when we were talking about the purpose of
the study, it sounded like initially the
purpose was to
build on community policing. Then were some
discussion on
fulfilling what the consent decree told us to do, and then there was some
discussion about lowering crime.
So
just at a high level, how did you think about the purpose of conducting the study
in the first place?
The purpose of the study was to evaluate every position and every
bureau to make a determination as to the ability
to fulfill those functions and resources fully and
successfully, and where that could not happen, to identify those
gaps.
When you say those functions, like what
functions?
So if I'm a timekeeper, my function is to make sure I'm conducting the
ANAs on a timely basis by the conclusion of my
shift. If I am a data scientist, I am
responsible for analytical reporting and conducting
queries and queues for different reports.
Depending on my function, if I'm a training officer, I'm responsible for being able
to provide training to the officers or detention aides or
whomever during my shift. So it's based on what my role is in the department, what
my function is, and do I have the time to do that properly and successfully,
and where those gaps existed.
Well, it was my understanding though that there was some element
of the study that's not sort of so micro level, but that we're trying to make
sure we're allocating our officers or civilian personnel in a better way.
To what end were we doing that?
So are you speaking about the unity of command and span of control component?
Because there's many issues regarding supervision that were identified.
So again, it's about the role, and do we have the sufficient amount of
staff that can conduct that role fully?
I really just more meant the whole workforce allocation study, like what was
the purpose and priorities of completing it?
The purpose is to fully optimize our resources and to be able to do that
on an ongoing basis as demands and conditions change
for the department.
But to what end? To fight crime? To build our community
policing? To
fulfill the goals of the consent decree?
Like, what was the-
I don't see a distinction or a disconnect between fighting crime and
optimizing our community policing efforts.
We see that as
complementary efforts.
And as far as fulfilling the consent decree, the
optimization of resources is something that's in the supervision section of the
consent decree.
Mm-hmm.
Would I say that's the foremost purpose? No.
It's optimizing the department, all of our resources, and
being able to do that on an ongoing basis so that we provide the best consistent
service to the communities that we serve.
That's great. Yeah. I don't mean it as a gotcha question.
I don't think I was-
No, I just want to make sure that
it's not that fragmented. This is really intended to be a very
comprehensive, data-driven study that
allows us to make sure that we are being the best department we can be,
but based on real information.
No, that's great. And
as a follow-up from-Alderman
Mosley's questions.
I don't think I saw discussion in the report
about CVI programs, but maybe I'm mistaken.
Was there any discussion about
community violence intervention programs and how effective they've been, and how
CPD can better work with them or not work with them, or was that outside the scope?
It was outside the scope because they are not employees of the
department, so that wasn't taken into consideration since it was really
just evaluating members of the Chicago Police Department and our
roles.
Now,
by the way, are you a sworn police officer or no? That's okay if you're not.
I am not.
You're not with the department, so it's okay.
Is there a
person or a group that's in charge of implementing
the changes? Is this something that the superintendent's leading, or is this
something that's been allocated to you, or how is that
at the district level? Or yeah.
I report to the superintendent, so I certainly work with the superintendent's
office as we begin through the implementation.
My office will be working closely to ensure that decisions on
recommendations we will move forward with, that we take that and
include that work in our implementation plan for transparency as well as
make sure it goes into effect.
Okay, so you're kind of leading the effort with the superintendents.
Yes.
Which is great. And
I think that
most of us here in city council, maybe all of us,
we want our police officers to be fighting crime and not
fighting administrivia. I was in the military.
I fought some bad guys. I also fought some administrivia, so I
appreciate that.
But our role here in city council, we don't run the police department.
It is one of
budget and influence and ordinances
and oversight.
And this is
by the way, you can totally get back to me on this.
Is there anything in particular that you would think that city council can do
to aid in your efforts?
I think as we continue to really evaluate each and every one of the
recommendations and make determinations for our phased implementation plan, there
may be opportunities there. At this time, I don't have something that I could say
for sure that immediately we would need, but I think certainly
as we continue the implementation work.
Well, I'm
sure I speak for this committee, even though I'm not on it, but I assure you that
we stand in the ready to try and be as helpful as we can to try and
help you
implement these changes. And if you bump into some
weird ordinance or anything, which seems to happen all the time, please don't
hesitate to let the chairman or myself or whomever, any of us know,
so we can be partners in that effort.
Thank you.
I don't think I saw this, but was there
any recommendations for perhaps how the department
can better work with, say, the sheriff's office or the state's attorney's office
or anything like that?
That was outside of the scope of this particular study.
Okay. For what it's worth,
I
was
an ASA for a long time at the state's attorney's office.
So I remember we always had these little issues that would be,
for example, we would get all the police reports, but the complaint would go into
the court file. And then you're sort of moments before trial
seeing the complaint for the first time on a lot of misdemeanors.
And that's just one I can think of off the top of my head, but I
think there would be some benefit at some point down the road
of working with some of these other departments about how
everybody can be working together.
I know that it's not like you don't have enough on your plate, but it's something
that
speaks to me as somebody that worked with a partner agency previously in
that. Thank you
very much for completing the study and presenting to us, Mr. Chairman.
That's all I have. Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman. Alderman Cuzzato.
Thank you, Chairman.
Good afternoon.
I mean, I got here a little bit late, but I'm not exactly sure what
you do, but just some questions about what you do or how you prepare yourself for
it. So you're an assistant to the sup, correct?
I'm the Executive Director of the Office of Constitutional Policing and Reform.
Great. So you and your staff,
do you ever do ride-alongs? You ever visit districts?
You ever go to the academy, take any classes like Shoot/Don't Shoot or anything
like that? Just trying to get an understanding exactly of what you know.
Yes. So my staff has done ride-alongs.
I've been with the Chicago Police Department, it'll be 27 years in September.
I was a training officer at the academy.
I went through those courses in 1999 when I
began. From that point, I was the manager at the
academy. From there, I moved over to be the Assistant Director
of Research and Development Division, where I also served as the accreditation
manager for CALEA, and the department did successfully get the CALEA
accreditation for both law enforcement and its training academy as I served in that
role. I then became the Deputy Director of Professional Standards and
Compliance Division, which is a division that I created under the
direction
of the superintendent to begin taking on our
reform efforts to make progress in that area.
From there, I became the Managing Deputy Director of the Office of Constitutional
Policing and Reform, and then I have now served in this capacity for a little over
a year.
So you're a former police officer?
I am not.
Oh, okay. You're never an officer, okay. Yeah, I'm just curious.
You told me your credentials, which are pretty great, but how many staffers do you
have, and exactly how many people are under you that answer to you?
In my bureau,
about
650 to 700. The training division is under
myself, the professional counseling division, research and
development, the strategic initiative division.
Those are all civilians, or those are-
Combination of sworn and civilian.
I'm sorry, combination of both?
Yes.
Do you have an idea of the breakdown? Is it 50/50?
Is it-
I would have to get you that through the chair.
Okay. All right. So
do you really answer to--
the super answer to Chief Navales, basically?
Superintendent Snellling.
Okay. All right. I
just want to make sure you're educated about stuff. I know what's going on.
I know my colleague brought up the 15th and the 16th District.
That's something that really, really bothers us. It really bothers me.
I can't speak for him. I know it bothers him, but
the lack of officers in 16 and the
25% more officers in the 15th District, which is
a 10th of the size almost, about eighth or ninth.
So, I just want to get a little idea of your background. I appreciate it.
Thank you.
Understood. Thank you.
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you. Two questions on my end.
One following up on a piece of this being a living document.
Is this intended to be updated routinely,
annually? What gets shared publicly, and is it
currently the hope or intention that Matrix will continue working with
you and your colleagues in doing so?
So currently, we are working with Matrix again, just because of the areas that we
identified some gaps in data, and we want to make sure that we correct that so that
the model continues functioning as intended.
We are going to annually, at a minimum, repeat the model,
because things do change, and we want to make sure that we're nimble enough to
change with the findings. So but in addition, if there was a
need based on an infrastructure change, a condition change, a service
delivery change, we would rerun the model at that time to ensure that we're acting
accordingly with any modifications we would need to ensure the optimization of
our resources.
Currently, what are you envisioning in terms of sharing with city council or more
broadly, the results of that, at least annual
re-upping of the analysis?
So as we rerun the analysis, I would anticipate,
again, as we move forward, that things may change, but we certainly are going to
keep everything on that workforce allocation webpage.
And that also does allow for ongoing feedback.
So if there was questions or clarifications that anyone wanted, that is an
interactive webpage. But anything that we do in terms of the workforce allocation,
the rerunning of it, the findings of it, modifications to implementation plans as a
result of that rerunning, would then be held there.
And we certainly would be happy to present here or in other spaces just to make
sure. I think people are aware we did a webinar, but we would be happy to make sure
we continue to do that so everyone is informed and can provide feedback.
Understood. And then my last question is around key performance indicators.
You had mentioned that throughout the presentation, not
just explicitly but implicitly, I think that 40% threshold in
terms of not responding to calls for service that could be
involved. Certainly, the consent decree and what you had shared separately in
terms of unity of command, span of control, that can take a KPI sort of
approach, but also one could lose the forest for the trees
by just reporting out on this without saying, "Here are the ones that are most
important who are going to drive our near-term work."
Because as I think you had shared in response to one person's question,
this touches upon the entire department.
This is not only your job to be done in a silo.
Can you speak a little bit more to how you are thinking about
near-term KPIs? Which ones you think are most important?
Some of them might be identified in the consent decree, some of them might be part
of discussions with senior leadership at the department, and how that's going to
impact your work.
So I think there's a bit of complexity to that, because I think some of it is a
little bit more straightforward.
For example, as we talk about unity of command and span of control in the
districts, right? We can measure that.
We'll be able to determine if we're meeting the ratios.
We'll be able to determine if officers are now reporting to the same
supervisor consistently and working in the same geographic area.
Now, in terms of our expectations there, we would hope to see improved engagement
with the community, better service delivery,
better problem-solving with community members in conjunction with our district
strategic plans. In other areas,
it might be a little bit more nuanced.
We certainly with the additional supervision that is consistent, we would hope
we would see an increase in mentorship, which again, would improve
our
expectations of officer behavior.
In areas of training, we would hope that, again, we would have the opportunity for
reinforcement training as identified early on.
So there's a lot of areas we can go there, but I would
certainly say there are some metrics that are quite straightforward.
There are others that are going to take, I think, a little bit more time for us to
see and feel the impact, and I think we just have to make sure that we're adjusting
accordingly for those so that we are not missing what is critical here is to
determine the success or if we need to make a modification to the approach that
we're taking.
Okay. Thank you.
Oh, Alderman Politano. Thank you, Chair. This will be it.
I'm sorry that- Oh, please. I like this.
I'm glad we're having this discussion, and I appreciate the information you're
giving. All right.
Two really quick questions. Based off of the manpower of the
police department right now, give or take 11,500, wherever we're at,
up or down from there.
Do you guys
in your study take the crime statistics, say like for the last five
to seven years, if you take major crimes such as people shot,
murders, carjacking, burglaries, now teen wildings, the
smash and grabs, the vehicle thefts, and batteries, the harder core of the
crime. As those have
expanded exorbitantly, especially people shot and murders, are we
doing enough with what we haveAnd
the most important part of that 11,500 is factor in
IOD or even long-term
injuries, furlough,
actual officers on the street any given time of
year. Are we set
up to get better? Because I think
we're getting worse, even though some statistics are down in the city, which is
great.
Mm-hmm.
Other statistics are off the charts still.
Are we doing enough with what we got?
With our active duty in the field, is that what you're asking?
Yes.
Again, I think that the team that would probably be better suited to make
an assessment of that would be outside of my realm, but certainly, I'm
happy to make sure that the right team is here to answer those very specific
questions.
And my last question, I promise you, just on top of that, do you guys ever look
at--
We've got to be one of the only cities in the country where our sheriffs aren't
working side by side with the police department.
I know that it's on request, so if the Chicago Police Department requests the
sheriffs to come in, they can help.
But if you go to any other major municipality across the country, you go into LA,
you go into Georgia,
in most
major cities,
besides the
department of that city, you also have the sheriff's patrolling as well.
We're missing out on major resources or major help
that we could possibly find a way to institute.
And maybe it's given certain aspects
of patrol that isn't the same as Chicago,
or maybe we're given the ability for us to call and ask for them to help a
little bit more than we already are.
Because I know when I was in the job, the only time we ever got their help, and not
against them, is when we did search warrants and we needed it.
But if it's working in other municipalities, will it work
here? Maybe, I don't know. Maybe they've tried it and it doesn't work, but
this could be something we could be looking into.
Yep. I've notated that for follow-up.
Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman.
It appears that we have no other questions, so there being no further business
before the committee, Alderman Napolitano moves to adjourn.
All those in favor, signify by saying aye. All those opposed.
In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. The meeting is adjourned.
Thank you all.