City Council Rules of Conduct for Public Meetings, 2023-2027
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.
Propane, 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,
1. Any pointed objects, including knives of any kind.
2. Banners, flyers, or other forms of signage.
3. Food and beverages, including in glass or metal canisters.
4. Backpacks, large bags, and sealed packages.
Clear bags, not tinted in color, that do not exceed 12 inches by 6 inches by 12.
5. Are permitted and subject to search.
And 5. 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 while seated.
used in a manner that does not interfere with the ability 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 2023-2027 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. Good morning, everyone. The Committee
on Finance meeting is called to order. Today we will be holding a TEFRA public hearing for the 5853 North
Broadway project for which the City will issue multifamily housing debt. We will now have a roll call to
establish quorum.
Vice Chair Conway, Alderman Laspata, Alderman Hall, Alderman Beal, Alderman Lee, Alderman Ramirez,
Alderman Quinn, Alderman Lopez, Alderman Curtis, Alderman O'Shea, Alderman Taylor, Alderman Scott,
Alderman Ciccio Lopez, Alderman Burnett, Alderman Irvin, Alderman Taliaferro, Alderman Cardona,
Alderman Wagesbach, Alderman Rodriguez-Sanchez, Alderman Villegas, Alderman Mitts, Alderman Sposato,
Alderman Vasquez, Alderman Martin, Alderman Silverstein. Chair Dowell is here. We have a quorum.
Alderman Moore is here. We have a quorum. We have 16 present in the chamber. Alderman Riley,
Knudsen, Cazada, Harris, Rodriguez, Mitchell, Hopkins, and Mosley have requested remote participation
for reasons stated under the provision of Rule 59. Can I have a motion to allow these aldermen
to enter? So moved by Alderman Irvin. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed?
In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the motion carries. I'd like to confirm
Alderman Riley, Alderman Knudsen. President, Chair. Thank you. Alderman Cazada. President,
Alderman Harris. Alderman Mitchell. President. Alderman Rodriguez. I'm here, Chair. Alderman Hopkins.
Present, Madam Chair. Alderman Mosley. Let the record reflect that this is a public meeting,
public hearing that is being held pursuant to the requirements of Section 147F of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986 as amended. Notice of this public hearing was posted on September 24, 2026 on the
website of the Office of the City Clerk. Let the reporter mark the screenshot of such a notice as
Committee Exhibit No. 1 for identification. This is a hearing regarding a plan of finance to issue
multi-family housing revenue bonds series 2026 in the amount not to exceed $19,500,000. And we will
refer to these as the bonds. The proceeds of the bonds will be used by 5853 North Broadway 4 LP and
Illinois Limited Partnership. We will refer to them as the borrower to finance an affordable housing
housing development project by acquiring, constructing, and equipping a low-income multifamily housing
development, and we will refer to this as the project. The project consists of the acquisition,
construction, and equipping of a condominium unit containing approximately 57 affordable residential
dwelling units, which along with another condominium unit containing approximately 33 affordable
residential dwelling units therein, together with an on-site management office and certain tenant
amenity spaces and common facilities, together with any functionally related and subordinate facilities
located generally at 5853 North Broadway Chicago, Illinois 60660. Of the 57 residential units in the project,
five of the units will be restricted for tenants at 30% or less of area median income, and 52 of the
units will be restricted for tenants at 60% or less of AMI. The city will issue the bonds pursuant to its
powers as a home rule unit of government under the 1970 constitution of the state of Illinois and an
ordinance adopted by the city council of the city. The bonds will be, the bonds will not be a general
obligation of the city, the state of Illinois, or any political subdivision thereof, but will be limited
special obligations of the city. The principle of premium, if any, and interest on the bonds will be payable
solely out of the revenue of the project and other funds pledged and assigned for its payment by the
borrower in accordance with the trust indenture under which the bonds were issued. The bonds will not
constitute an indebtedness of or an obligation of the city, the state of Illinois, or any political
subdivision of the state of Illinois within the purview of any constitutional limitation or legal
provision. No holder of the bonds will have the right to compel any exercise of the taxing
power of the city, the state of Illinois, the United States of America, or any political subdivision of
any of them to pay the principle of premium, if any, or interest on the bonds. Written comments related to
this plan to issue the bonds must have been submitted by email to the Committee on Finance no later than
10 a.m. Friday, October, 2026. Let the record reflect that no written comments were submitted on the
project. Ladies and gentlemen, if any resident, taxpayer, or other interested person attending the
hearing desires an opportunity to express their views for or against the proposed issuance of the
bonds, please do one of the following. For those attending the hearing in person, please come up to
the microphone in the aisle when your name is called. Or for those who have called in on the toll-free
phone number, please enter star 9 on your phone to notify the host of the call-in number. And once you
are called upon to provide your comments, please press star 6 to unmute your phone. Each speaker will be
limited to three minutes. We have a number of the public who wish to make a statement with respect to this
matter. And we will begin with Zoe Lee. And while she's walking to the microphone, we acknowledge Alderman
Silverstein, and you'll be counted towards quorum. Ms. Lee?
So, this project is really $66.3 million in combined maximum public financing. We have a public safety
crisis. We have a homeless crisis. We have a housing crisis. I mean, we have a string of robberies going
on in, you know, Bronzeville. I mean, I just don't understand how you guys continue to have this
type of money. $66.3 million is crazy. Like, I don't understand how black people continue to vote
Democrat. Y'all have literally financially bankrupt black America. Chicago alone is a SBK. That's a small
business killer. Y'all continue to mess up our businesses. The string of robberies that keep
happening, but
between 75th and Bronzeville. It is not random, but we allow it because we are politically
ignorant. We vote blue no matter who. There is no reason why any of you black aldermans
still should be in office. Like, we literally have nothing in our communities.
And unless we pay for it, unless we pay to play, we're not going to have anything.
Some of y'all are getting behind Alexi Janoulius. What has Alexi Janoulius did for the black
community? What has Alexi Janoulius done for the black community that you black aldermen
are going to get behind him? You got Danielle running. You have Willie Wilson running. But
you decide to do Alexi Janoulius. He literally bankrupts. He should be in jail. He gives
CDL license to illegal aliens. They keep showing, like, in the libraries, LGBTQ books that he
will not ban. He's sick. But y'all sick, too. Because as long as he got a couple of dollars
to give to y'all, y'all going to keep selling us out.
Our next speaker is Peter Lara.
Ladies and gentlemen, and for the news cruises over there as well, you could report this as
well. The city of Chicago is $882 million in debt. What comprises that, you may ask? Over
$100 million that was spent on illegals and many other different subsidiaries that we do
not need to spend it on. Why is it that the Democrats tend to target the extremely poverished
neighborhoods? They claim, oh, we're going to give them all sorts of benefits. But do you
know who ends up suffering in the end? They get taxed more. They don't get those benefits
at all. They wind up suffering more and stay even poorer. Here's the step-by-step plan that
this city wants to implement. They want to continue raising taxes, raising our property taxes, because
that's what this city and state loves to do. They want to continue doing that so that none
of us can afford, none of the public can afford anything. And then at that point, where do
people have to turn to? They have to turn to government housing, where the government controls
every aspect. That's socialism at its finest. That's communism. And that's where we are heading
if we don't change what we need to change. And Alexei Janoulius, he bankrupted a bank.
How does that happen? You would think a bank is one of the easiest things that you can run.
And that should reflect, God forbid, if he does get elected, it's going to be even worse.
If he can't even manage his own personal finances or his business's finances, do you think he can
really run the third major city in America? You better reconsider. We also have to take into
account that this state wants to continue building data centers. I don't care what this mayor has to
say. We're not going to do it. We're going to prevent it. No, because he's going to cater
to Pritzker because Pritzker is all for it. Then that's going to raise our utility bills.
We're not going to have clean water. And nobody seems to want to bring up this issue here or in
general. Why are we not speaking up on these issues? Have we gotten to the point in society that
we're afraid to speak on the truth? The truth is supposed to hurt because the only way we're going
to progress as a society is get through the hardest part, which is the truth. And then we
have to get with the solutions. But people would rather complain about problems. They want to fix
the system. And you know what? There are more citizens that are standing up. We're going to fight it.
Thank you. Thank you. I'd like to acknowledge Alderman Burnett, Scott, and Beal, who will be
counted towards quorum. Our next speaker is Jessica Jackson. So Alderman Beal, you come in late and you
going to talk to them instead of letting them listen to the public speakers? Okay. So anyway,
you all are here to deal with this bond for some type of housing. What's amazing to me is how this
body can really put on a front like it's concerned about housing. You're not concerned about housing
because if you were concerned about housing, you would be concerned about the people who currently
have housing that they paid for, real estate that they worked for and paid for, that you all have
raised some property taxes or have raised property taxes so severely that it was a clear attack on
property owners. You all do not want people to own private property. So you come in here and you
get this false illusion like you all care about people's housing with these unaffordable housing
projects that's really about making people be government dependent. You all would rather smear
our reputation with your paid goons to put on the internet about how our cases are not real.
We're talking about what we don't know about everything except for the fact that you all are knowingly
stealing black people's property. You are knowingly targeting black people areas and you know that
you are. So to sit here and act like you all are trying to do affordable housing, acting like it's a
housing shortage. No, it's not. Fix the abandoned buildings that are in our communities. Fix those.
That's plenty of inventory. But you all don't want to do that. You all want to steal from us.
And then get in office again because J.B. Pristler is protecting you all seats. You all are ready to put
another crook. This whoever the Democrat is, it's going to be a crook. You all are too scared to give up your
seats because if anybody gets in any of you all seats that's halfway decent, they'll find your
theft right away and you'll go to jail. So you all are just going to keep stealing seats. You're going
to keep rigging elections. You're going to keep on playing with your phones, acting like you're doing
business when you're not. Because if you were, the city wouldn't be this much in debt and you wouldn't
have to keep on with bogus bonds. So keep playing with your phones. Because you all are very unimportant.
You all are a bunch of thieves. If you all were really about business, you would show up for work.
Our next speaker is George Blakemore.
The people deserve the government they get. They deserve these Democrats. Look at these empty seats.
Where are the people? You deserve these Democrats. And nothing is going to flip red.
The same thing is going to come back again. The same people, the same party doing the same thing.
I've advocated for Trump to come in. I have a strategic plan. If Trump come and clean up this swamp,
this racist swamp here, the Democratic machine, then big head Trump is racist too.
So I get those two to cancel each other out. I can go black. I can go black. That's my strategic plan.
That Trump come here and clean up this swamp. And then when he cleans up this swamp, then I will know that
he's have a little swamp too now. I get rid of two birds with one stone. I used to ask, figure out what's wrong
my mama? Have she got any sense talking about killing two birds with one stone? Figure that out.
How can you kill two birds with one stone? Uh-huh. I got a plan to do this.
Trump come and clean up this swamp and then I'll get on track.
And then I'll go black on kids A.
I'll open up my own business, have my own bank, and I'll truly have a black Wall Street.
I'm a selfish black man.
Self-preservation is the first law of nature.
This one lady here, right over here, Mr. whatever, she says she's a Jew.
I'm a Jew, too.
All these religions come from the black men, but she starts around, and all of them come to her
because the golden rule is he who has the gold.
They rule, but they're rich.
And I ask somebody, is Judaism a religion, or is it a race?
And my answer from this Jew is saying, it's both.
How are you going to be a boy and a girl?
It's both.
Figure that out.
Is Judaism a religion, or is it a race?
And when she prays a call, anti-Semitic.
Anti-Semitic.
And everybody go along with her because the golden rule.
He who has the gold rule economic development.
He who has the gold rule.
And black people, you don't have no gold.
Now, you got to figure that out.
You don't have no gold.
Thank you.
Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes the public hearing on the proposed plan for the city of Chicago
to issue not to exceed $19,500,000 principal amount in multifamily housing revenue bonds series 2026 for 5853 North Broadway.
Let the record reflect that the public hearing on this matter concluded at 1027 a.m., October 5, 2026.
This concludes the TEFRA hearing.
We have another TEFRA hearing, guys.
Good morning.
The Committee on Finance meeting is called to order, and today we'll be holding a TEFRA public hearing for the Humboldt Village Redevelopment Project
for which the city will issue multifamily housing bonds.
We will now have a roll call to establish quorum.
Vice Chair Conway, Alderman Laspata, Alderman Hall, Alderman Beal, Alderman Lee, Alderman Ramirez, Alderman Quinn, Alderman Lopez, Alderman Moore, Alderman Curtis, Alderman Lee, I see you.
Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Alderman Ald
Alderman Silverstein. Chair Dowell is here. We have a quorum. We have 22 in the room. Alderman Hopkins, Mitchell, Harris, Mosley, Rodriguez, Cazada, Riley, and Knudsen have requested participation for reasons under the provision of Rule 59.
Can I have a motion to allow these aldermen to participate this morning?
Alderman Taylor moves. Yes. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and I want to confirm Alderman Riley, Knudsen, Cazada, Harris, Rodriguez, Hopkins, Mitchell, and Mosley.
Present. Present. Present.
Alderman Hopkins, present.
This is a hearing regarding a plan of finance to issue the multifamily housing revenue bond series 2026 for the Humboldt Village Redevelopment Project in a principal amount not to exceed $22 million.
We will refer to these as the bonds. The proceeds of the bonds will be loaned to TCB Humboldt 4 LLC, an Illinois limited liability company.
And we will refer to the company, and we will refer to the company as the borrower, to finance Unit 2 of an affordable housing development project by acquiring, rehabilitating, developing, and equipping a residential development consisting of a residential building and related facilities generally located at 2620 West Hurst Street and 1417 North
Tallman Avenue in Tallman Avenue in Tallman Avenue in Tallman Avenue in Chicago, Illinois.
The borrower, the borrower, will acquire the vacant Von Humboldt Elementary School, which is located on real property commonly known as 2620 West Hurst Street, 1417 North Tallman Avenue, the property known as the property.
Borrower will, thereafter, rehabilitate a portion of the property to provide a total of 75 rental units, all of which are to be designated for occupancy by affordable households earning no more than 80% of the area median income,
with 12 units at 30% AMI, 25 units at 50% AMI, 27 units at 60% AMI, and 11 units at 80% AMI, all including certain rental assistance demonstration project-based voucher units to provide public housing replacement units,
and 2, together with the 9% AMI, and 2, together with the 9% borrower, submit the property to the requirements of the Illinois Condominium Property Act,
765 ILCS Section 6051, thereby creating the Humboldt Elementary Condominiums pursuant to a declaration of condominium ownership,
an easement of restrictions, covenants, and bylaws for the Humboldt Elementary Condominiums, or comparable documents, called the Condominium Declaration.
The Humboldt Elementary Condominiums create three units within the renovated Von Humboldt Elementary School,
which are being rehabilitated, shall become a four-story, mixed-use, mid-rise elevator building located on the property, as follows.
Number one, one unit will consist of approximately 28 residential units for affordable rental to low-income persons and families with incomes up to 80% of the area median income.
Two, a second unit consisting of approximately 75 residential units for affordable rental to low-income persons and families with incomes up to 80% of the AMI.
And three, which is an approximately 3,244-square-foot space that will be operated as either a white-box office and programming for a community organization or commercial retail,
and will be located on the building's first floor.
Pursuant to the condominium declaration, the borrower will exclusively own Unit 2
and its undivided interest in the common elements of the project,
and Unit 3, which is not part of the project,
and the 9% borrower will exclusively own Unit 1
and its undivided interest in the common elements.
The city will issue the bonds pursuant to its powers as a home rule unit of government
under the 1970 Constitution of the State of Illinois
and an ordinance adopted by the City Council of the City.
The bonds will not be a general obligation of the city, the state, or any political subdivision thereof,
but will be a limited special obligation of the city.
The principle of, premium, if any, and interest on the bonds will be payable solely out of the revenue of the project
and other funds pledged and assigned for its payment by the borrower
in accordance with the funding loan agreement under which the bonds are issued.
The bonds will not constitute an indebtedness or an obligation of the city, the state of Illinois,
or any political subdivision of the state of Illinois
within the purview of any constitutional limit or legal provision.
No holder of the bonds will have the right to compel any exercise of the taxing power of the city,
the state of Illinois, the United States of America, or any political subdivision of any of them
to pay the principle of premium, if any, and interest on the bonds.
Written comments related to the plan to issue the bonds must have been submitted to the Committee on Finance
no later than 10 a.m. Friday, October 2nd.
Let the record reflect that there were no written comments.
comments submitted on this project. Ladies and gentlemen, if any resident, taxpayer,
or other interested person attending this hearing desires an opportunity to express their views for
or against the proposed issuance of the bonds, please do one of the following. For those attending
in person, come to the microphone in the aisle when your name is called. And for those who have
called in on the toll-free phone line, please enter star 9 on your phone to notify the hosts
of the call-in number. And once you are called upon to provide your comments,
enter star 6 to unmute your phone. Each speaker will be limited to three minutes.
We have a number of people in the public who have requested to speak. The first speaker is Peter
Lara. I'd like to acknowledge while he's coming to the mic, Alderman Ciccio Lopez and Alderman
Curtis have joined us and will be counted towards quorum.
You know, while reviewing this, I had a couple issues. The first issue
is the owner of the project. This is a company that's based out of Massachusetts.
Why is it not a Chicago-based organization that's owning this? Are we getting sold out
across either across this nation or across overseas? What is this? And yet, once again,
you know, and unlike everyone here who's either mingling or on their phone or whatever,
not paying attention to actually what's happening, you know, you look at what the mayor is also
doing as well. What does he do? He does nothing but photo ops, acting like he's actually doing
something with his job. That costs the taxpayer tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands.
And why does the mayor need so much security? He has over a hundred sworn police officers on his
security detail. That's ridiculous. Why do we need so many officers protecting him when they should be
outdoing their duty and protecting the public? That's misusage of our tax dollars right there.
And the ultimate question that everyone wants to know is, where's this money all coming from?
It's like it comes out of thin air. Oh, we're going to spend $20 million here. We're going to spend
$35 million on something that is unnecessary. Where did we get all this money from?
You know, you think that with all the taxes that we pay, it would go to the appropriate places.
Why do we need to keep adding more taxes and more taxes and more taxes?
What the next thing they're going to tax us is for walking is for breathing. They're going to tax
us on pretty much everything. And they're considering now where the city of Chicago wants an entry and exit
toll. Do you know how detrimental that will be for our tourism, for our general citizens?
That's ridiculous. You have to pay if you live in the city or even if you are a tourist visit visiting,
you have to pay an entry and exit fee. That's ridiculous.
It's ridiculous. And nobody wants to reject it because everyone is afraid. Oh, I'm afraid to go
against what they want to do. No, you people were you people represent the people. And you know what?
You guys aren't. You don't represent anything that we want accomplished.
It's the complete opposite. And you know what? We're voting you guys out. Thank you.
Our next speaker is Zoe Lee. You know what I like about Peter? Peter's 19 years old.
I love that 19. 19 million dollars is 22,438 CPS students that are unhoused. Veterans,
they can't even get their 100% disability out here on these streets. Seniors on these streets, homeless,
unhoused, which I don't care. I never cared. The Democratic Party is a scam full of scammers.
All y'all do is act like y'all are fighting for the working class, fighting for the kids,
fighting for the poor, and don't fight for nothing but these seats. Y'all don't fight for them too. Y'all just cheat.
Y'all progressively do not do anything. Anybody that is black and a Democrat, shame on you.
Y'all have literally let them take everything out of our communities for some campaign money.
That's fiend behavior. That's crackhead behavior. Y'all will sell us out for y'all habits.
Daley taught you though.
Because see what Daley was good at, Daley was good with gathering up the blacks, give them a job.
Now he can't go. Now y'all not going to go against him because he gave y'all a job.
So y'all just sell us out. Y'all let Vidoliak and Ed Burke tag team and take our properties and our community.
Then when I come down here and talk about it, because you know I'm not lying, y'all still don't do nothing.
Y'all mad at me. Y'all mad at me because I'm not going to allow y'all to continue to knock down properties without court orders
to give to y'all developer friends that are out of state, out the country. Walter Burnett's favorite one was in Canada.
He was working with Canada. Y'all trash. Trash.
Our next speaker is Jessica Jackson.
What's really tripping me out is that Thursday, I think it was Thursday when we were here,
for the fire and police safety meeting.
And you all didn't even have a quorum to be able to have that meeting.
A city that's sinking in crime.
While you all sit and lie about crime being down.
And while crime, Chicago's crime is being publicized all over the country.
For a public safety meeting for police and fire, you all didn't even show up.
You all didn't even come to work.
But then yet, let Brandon Johnson, with his no good low life, no good self, have a press conference.
And look how y'all rallied behind him.
Look how you're going to be seen on camera standing behind that piece of low life garbage.
But you won't even come to work.
You won't even come to work to deal with public safety.
It wasn't even enough for you all to come in virtual.
Ryan Hopkins needs to be tarred and feathered and burned at the stakes.
Anytime you are the ultimate over public safety and you are completely ineffective and you intentionally ignore the crimes of Chicago
and the issue of public safety and are allowed to still sit and be the head chair of something.
It's like you have the citizens just frantically looking for the bottom so that you all can stop falling.
My God, what is you all's bottom?
The city is in all kind of debt.
You all are stealing property.
You all are helping Cook County officials cheat in court to steal property.
You have invaded our communities and you've invaded our city with a bunch of illegal immigrants.
And have spent all our money on it.
The schools are failing.
The kids can't even read past fourth grade.
And you all never have that conversation in here.
Where's the bottom?
Where?
Where?
Help us find the bottom so y'all can stop falling.
You've never seen so many low life people in your life.
And then you all go get the bottom of the barrel people to act as goons.
And then you all go get the bottom of the barrel people to act as goons.
You said that you are going to have some office buildings or organization buildings in this complex that you're talking about.
Who are you going to give them offices to?
Your goons, your lowlife ex-thugs, ex-convicts, so that they can terrorize people who are trying to help the city?
Is that who's going to get them bit?
Our next speaker is George Blakemore.
It's a merry-go-round.
Burt is gone.
Osborne Burt was indicted.
Now here come another one, Pat.
Well, the same thing goes on.
Read it's fundamental.
Now she said that the city is not responsible for those bonds.
That's a lie.
You're telling the people a lie because it's coming to the city, and the city is giving their stamp on this.
Pat, you're doing voodoo economics.
You're lying.
If the city wasn't responsible for this money, kicking this vote down the road or whatever, why would it be in your committee?
If you're not responsible for it, if the city is not responsible for it, why is it in your committee?
This is voodoo economics.
Why is it the city is responsible?
You're just like Mr. Conway says, it's just a delay.
This money has to be paid back.
Now, you know, you're doing the same thing that Burt was doing.
Corrupt.
All of you have an element of corruption.
Criminal.
Maybe Mr. Blakemore, how do you know so much about it?
Maybe you're a criminal yourself.
Maybe it takes one to know one.
One prostitute knows another one.
I know you.
I've seen people like you.
I've seen people like all of you.
And I always say, you can look good.
You can speak good.
You can act good.
You can smell good and be a piece of SHI.
Man, you put whatever you want at the end of it.
I wouldn't, a friend of mine, a rich friend of mine say, he wouldn't come and associate with people like you.
My rich, a rich Jewish friend of mine that was the president of John Deere.
He said he wouldn't be in the company.
Birds of a feather flock together.
All of you all are Democrats.
You see how I'm tying everything in?
And you see how I'm speaking?
All of you.
Birds of a feather flock together.
One bird is not any better than the other bird.
Fifty birds with rotten feathers flock together.
All Democrats.
I want Trump to come here and clean up this one.
And another thing, I realized, nothing going to turn red here.
Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes the public hearing on the proposed plan for the city of Chicago to issue the not to exceed $22 million principal amount in multifamily housing revenue bond series 2026 for the Humboldt Village Redevelopment Project.
Let the record reflect that the public hearing on this matter was concluded at 1050 a.m. October 5th, 2026.
This concludes the TEFRA hearing.
The Committee on Finance is called to order.
We will now have a roll call to establish quorum for our regular meeting.
Vice Chair Conway.
Alderman Laspata.
Alderman Beal.
Alderman Lee.
Alderman Quinn.
Alderman Lopez.
Alderman Curtis.
Alderman O'Shea.
Alderman Taylor.
Alderman Scott.
Alderman Ciccio Lopez.
Alderman Burnett.
Alderman Irvin.
Alderman Taliaferro.
Alderman Cardona.
Alderman Wagesback.
Alderman Rodriguez-Sanchez.
Alderman Villegas.
Alderman Mitts.
Alderman Sposato.
Alderman Vasquez.
Alderman Martin.
Alderman Silverstein.
Chair Dowell is here.
Alderman Moore is present.
Alderman Beal is here.
Vice Chair Conway is here.
We have a quorum.
We have 20 present in the room.
Alderman Knudsen, Riley,
Cazada Harris-Rodriguez-Rodriguez-Hopkins, Mitchell, and Mosley have requested participation today remotely under the provisions of Rule 59.
Can I have a motion to allow these aldermen to participate?
So moved by Alderman Villegas.
Alderman Villegas.
All those in favor signify by saying aye.
Aye.
Opposed.
In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it.
And the motion carries.
And I will confirm Alderman Knudsen, Riley, Cazada, Harris, Rodriguez, Hopkins, Mitchell, and Mosley are present in today's meeting.
At this time, we will begin public comment.
The public comment period is limited to 30 minutes.
Out of respect for everyone's time, each speaker is limited to three minutes.
Our first speaker today is Peter Lara.
You know, while reviewing this, so more funds are going to CPS.
Now, what is that?
CTU gets a ton of money.
Do you know how much the average Chicago teacher makes?
$86,000.
And yet they still cry, oh, we don't got enough money.
We're going broke.
Look, it's a part-time job that you're working nine months out of the year, if not less, depending, okay?
And what are you mainly doing?
You're controlling the kids in the class because, I mean, most of the curriculum is AI'd anyhow.
There are so many professors in colleges across this nation that are genuinely concerned because there are so many people that are going into colleges
that don't know how to read, that don't know how to write, they don't know how to articulate correctly.
These are all major concerns that should have been taught a long time ago.
And now these professors have to teach it because of the failures of CTU.
Why do you think CTU sponsored Brandon Johnson, you may ask?
Well, that's because he was a teacher himself.
And all he does is cater to CTU all of the time.
He does nothing but cater.
That's scary.
We need to protect our youth.
We need to think about them.
We need to empower them.
And CPS does not empower.
Why are there so many schools operating that have very few people in this?
And they have very large capacities.
Someone better check where that money is going.
You don't know what grants they're getting.
It's genuinely concerning.
And now, and even before, under the Biden administration,
why are we funding for the transgenderism of our pets, of our youth?
Why is that happening?
They now have no parental notification in this state.
That's beyond absurd.
I would think that you could lose your medical license for that.
God forbid something happens.
It's a shame.
Where is our city heading?
This is the question that I want to even ask all the news outlets here.
Where is our city heading?
These are citizens.
Citizens have to think of where we're heading.
We have still the potential to change things around.
But people need to start thinking, thinking for themselves, fight for what is right.
That's how we're going to advance.
And you know what?
We're slowly doing it.
Thank you.
Our next speaker is Zoe Lee.
19-year-old.
So, you know, giving out $260 million in lawsuits, but can't figure out how to take care of my family.
But I know why, because that's Daly issue.
Daly is the one who gave it to Quackenbush and did that deal.
Daly is the one who gave it to Quackenbush and is the one who gave it to Quackenbush and is the one who gave it to Quackenbush and is the one who gave it to Quackenbush and is the one who gave it to Quackenbush and is the one who gave it to Quackenbush and is the one who gave it to Quackenbush and is the one who gave it to Quackenbush.
Oh, and nobody can't mess with that because that's daily problem.
So I know y'all still talk to daily.
So before he checks out.
Tell him that, you know, it'd be nice if he would sit down with my godfather and my mother and take care of that,
because he has helped me destroy the Democratic Party in Chicago.
With the help of Miss Jessica, too.
Thank you. In Chicago, mayor's race, candidates turn to influencers, hoping to go viral with voters.
I think that y'all think this is a game.
People are losing their lives, losing their properties, losing their minds.
Losing their children.
And all y'all are worrying about is creating content to get back in these seats.
Ain't nobody's content going to be better than ours.
Disgrace 50. I went through y'all whole time.
I know how y'all voted.
I know who showed up and who didn't.
I know how much money and TIF money y'all stealing in each ward.
I know about the eight hundred and thirty million dollars.
I know who been foreclosed and who hasn't.
I know who paying for who and who paying for not with that campaign money going more than this than that media over there.
That fake news over there.
I made my own media.
Y'all not getting back in.
Y'all did nothing for four years.
The Democratic Party.
Y'all always talk about the Republican Party.
We didn't give 60 years to the Republican Party.
We gave it to y'all for y'all lifestyle stories, like lifestyles.
Y'all did nothing, nothing for us.
Y'all took care of the minority.
The minority is the elite.
Y'all did not care about us at all.
Y'all not getting back in.
Our next speaker is Jessica Jackson.
So I'm looking at this agenda paper and you have the Department of Law and the 16 cases that they're looking to settle.
Now, Pat Diles, Chairman Alderwoman Pat Diles, I gave you an assignment for you to look up how much money was spent on my case.
Between you and big boy Jason Irvin, you all should be able to come up with that amount.
But you're going to have difficulty coming up with that amount because so many layers of cheating are involved.
It's so much that you're not going to find because when you trace my case, it leads you to these corrupt judges.
It leads you to corrupt public administrators.
In fact, it leads you right to J.B. Prisker.
And you all don't want to bother Big Daddy Money because Big Daddy Money, J.B. Prisker, have bought all y'all seats.
Now, you all don't believe that you all are getting out of office, just like those corrupt judges don't believe that they're going to jail.
Yes, you all are.
Now, here's the thing.
You all thought when we said Chicago flips red, you all thought that we thought that everybody in here was going to switch to Republican, switch to Republican.
No, the Bible says, be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind.
See, right now, Chicago flips red has the minds of people.
That's why they keep talking about us online.
That's why Brandon Johnson is finding his goons to try to destroy us, to try to make it look like we're not doing no movement, trying to go against Danny.
But it's what is it, just all these corrupt Democrats and flood the room with a bunch of the lineup, mayor lineup with a bunch of no good, sorry, pieces of thieves.
But the people are talking.
We're in their minds.
We're in their minds.
And we're going to get y'all out.
So y'all thinking that it's just going to come by way of that.
No, no, no, no, no.
Because the feds going to come in here.
Oh, they're going to get you because Trump's dislike for J.B. Prisker and Brandon Johnson is real.
He's going to make sure that that fat piece of slob J.B. Prisker, who's putting signs all over the South Side, which is really mocking his territory for the areas that he's looking to steal from next, especially over there in South Shore by the Obama Center.
Oh, he ain't going to let that thief see that presidency.
See, he's going to get y'all.
He's going to get you.
So don't think that you're safe just because you're running your little bogus election stuff right now.
Play on your phones.
Play on your phones like it doesn't matter.
Play on them phones because we're coming for them seats.
Understand that.
Our next speaker is Rodney Williams.
Alderman Vasquez, we see you and count you towards harm.
Alderman Lopez, we will count you towards quorum.
Mr. Williams.
All right.
Good morning.
My name is Rodney Williams, and I'm the site director at By the Hand Club for Kids in Altgale Gardens.
I've devoted the last 11 years to this organization and have spent 52 years of my life right here in Chicago.
I can see that there is no community with a greater need than Altgale Gardens.
My kids tell me every day how they'd like to have more opportunities.
I even hear our students express how they want more opportunities for their peers and to have resources and support provided by By the Hand Club.
For one of our eighth grade students, Cordae Barty, he's excited to see this project not only for him, but to see some meaningful, beautiful things in his neighborhood.
Cordae's mom shares that being in By the Hand Club helps keep him out of trouble, and it's a place that he enjoys being.
She says she's all about the kids and that there's no need, there needs to be more for the kids in our community.
A striking statistic that resonates with me is the Child Opportunity Index, which evaluates the conditions surrounding children for their growth and development on a scale of 1 to 10.
In Lincoln Park, that score is 94, while in Altgale Gardens, it's a mere 2.
I am committed to improving that number, which is why I'm here today.
By the Hand Club has been serving children in Altgale for over 20 years, yet our current facility limits us to about 150 kids.
This project offers a remarkable opportunity to more than double the number of young people we can support daily
and create a year-round environment where children and families for the entire neighborhood can learn, grow, connect, and thrive.
With the community using the building in addition to By the Hand Club programming, we estimate to serve more than 3,000 kids and residents each year.
I've seen firsthand that investing in a child creates an impact that far extends far beyond that individual.
It strengthens the entire family.
97% of our students report that having their child at By the Hand allows them to work or be productive during the day.
This is particularly vital right now.
With historic investments being made through the Red Line Extension, families in Altgale will gain increased access to jobs, education, and opportunities throughout Chicago.
However, access means nothing if families are not prepared to seize those opportunities.
Parents need to know that their children have a safe, nurturing place to go after school while they pursue these opportunities.
This project is not just about building a structure.
It aims to ensure that the children growing up in Altgale have the chance to dream, grow, and thrive in what I believe is the best city in America.
Thank you for considering this investment in Altgale Gardens, and most importantly, for investing in the future of the children and families who call this community home.
All right.
Thank you.
Our next speaker is Bernadette Williams.
Hello, everyone.
Good morning.
My name is Bernadette Williams, president of the Altgale Murray Homes Local Advisory Council, representing the residents of the Chicago Housing Authority.
I have known By the Hands for over 20 years, learning about their program at the Cabrini-Grain Community.
Altgale Local Advisory Council watched By the Hands how they invested and built trust with the Altgale Murray families.
Altgale Local Advisory Council asked By the Hands to expand their efforts.
the school program into into the up top vacant building so that our children can expand their
education and socialism the red line extension will connect outgill murray families to jobs
education and new opportunities especially families being subject to work requirements
parents would need a safe place like the after school program for their children to continue to
pursue their careers the lac local advisory council and the outgill murray residents support this project
that families can move forward through mobility and self-sufficiency to move beyond public housing
thank you our last speaker is george blakemore what is the solution term limitation
two four-year terms and your a is out now you heard that your a is out also a manager
that will come in and manage the city the city and get rid of 50 ultimate new york only have 25
so and another thing not a part-time job a full-time job for that hundred and something thousand dollars
you receive a full-time job you can get away with it because burt had his own law firm
come on with it mr blakemore and he was thinking about his money from his law firm not that little
hundred and seventy or fifty thousand or whatever they get here a full-time job
not part-time and so those are three and another thing they need here is an independent press not fake press
you're a fake you've gone to school to be an investigative journalist and i'm always looking for my name
you know they say i'm an attention in or what and and i don't uh i don't see it somebody say they
editor you out mr blakemore this is fake news fake news show the empty thing show that nobody was here
today i i can go to the news i won't see that this afternoon i will not see that because you are a part
of the problem also we have many problems here and uh and black folks have a problem on the plantation
the white man made an end we have mental problems and we got to recognize our mental problems to heal
ourselves before we kill ourselves we must love our nasty hair our big nose our thick lips and our black booty
hole we must be selfish people the first man on earth planet earth was a black man these white folks are
our sisters and brothers by our sisters and brothers by another mother we are the original man they don't want
you to know your history how great you are how great we are but you got to believe it you got to know it
history have distorted this uh it's something mentally wrong with black people
uh patty hurt fell in love with our enemy she fell in love with our enemy again love your nasty hair your big
nose i thank you i'd like to thank all our speakers this morning want to acknowledge alderman cardona
you'll be counted towards quorum and alderman chico um as a non-member we see you um we received one
written public comment from sustainable inglewood initiatives and that public comment was sent
electronically to everyone uh this concludes the public comment period we have a number of items
before the committee this morning we have nine items and we'll begin with the monthly rule 45 report
for september this report was sent electronically to everyone and if there are no questions can i get a
motion to so move by to recommend approval of the september 2026 monthly rule 45 report that motion was made
by alderman irvin all those in favor signify by saying aye opposed in the opinion of the chair the eyes have
it and the motion carries item number one from the department of law is a proposed order authorizing the
corporation council to enter into and execute a settlement order in the following 16 cases
they're all gavara cases uh the uh and it's buto flores juan and rosinda hernandez lugo devia abrigo
martinez kelly getch quill rivera robinson ortiz williams kruger and mcdowell we are joined by deputy
corporation council jessica felter felker who will uh present this case to us good morning miss felker
good morning chair uh thank you all uh i'm here to present the mass rivera settlement that
chair doll just went through the law department recommends to settle these 16 guivera cases
that involve 17 plaintiffs for a total of 260 million dollars 814 000 the law department finds
this in the best financial interest of the city in these cases the city's potential liability is more
half a billion dollars this body approved another six guivera settlements earlier in this year
and there are two more that are in the queue to be presented if city council approves this mass
settlement and the two others awaiting approval the total guivera case count will be down to 23
nearly a 50 percent reduction from the 41 pending today under the terms of the agreement the total
settlement will be paid over two years in four equal installments of just over 65 million each payment
will be made six months apart if this settlement passes this month the payments will occur in april
2027 october 2027 october 2027 april 2028 and october 2028 each of the plaintiffs in this proposed
settlement has brought a lawsuit against ronaldo guivera and other retired or deceased members of the
chicago police department as well as the city of chicago they claim that they have been wrongfully
convicted of murder all the plaintiffs convictions for murder have been vacated and the charges dropped
all but two of the plaintiffs have received certificates of innocence three of those of
those 15 who received certificates of innocence were opposed but the court granted the certificate
over the opposition of the state's attorney one of the plaintiffs has a pending felony charge in the last
two years collectively the plaintiffs in this mass settlement proposal have spent 383.55 years
in custody the payment here amounts to an average of 680 000 per year of custody the plaintiffs ages at
the time of arrest range from 14 to 28 with most between 19 and 22 when they were arrested
they spent on average 22.6 years in custody each of the 17 plaintiffs in this settlement are represented
by lobe and lobe that firm has 21 pending guivera settlements including the two which are in the queue
for this body's approval for this body's approval later on before this mass settlement
and there are 21 cases we were able to come to terms with a 16 case settlement mass settlement three of
their cases we were unable to include in the mass settlement and we will continue discussions to see if
those can be resolved like the watts global settlement the city here agreed to the total payment but the
allocation was determined by the plaintiffs themselves and is not equal plaintiffs council
worked with their clients to determine what that what each sum what each will receive and each
payment has plaintiff has agreed to that sum the city does not value every guivera lawsuit the same
in this settlement or outside it at 680 000 per year of custody this is unique to the merits of these 16
cases these 16 cases were evaluated based on the individual facts and these cases alone were examined to
determine the total value this mass settlement of 16 cases is in the best interest of the taxpayer
The settlement amount in this case was carefully and thoughtfully considered and weighed against the possible costs if settlement was not reached.
The parties began discussions to resolve these cases over 10 months ago.
One federal district court judge, Judge Mary Rowland, agreed to lead the mediation efforts, and she was instrumental in reaching the ultimate figure.
Although this mass settlement is a tremendous amount of money, the city's potential liability is at least double if these cases went to trial.
In that circumstance, the estimated exposure is well over half a billion dollars.
That includes $20 to $25 million in fees for outside counsel, and if plaintiffs were to prevail at trial, $60 to $70 million in plaintiff's counsel fees.
This mass settlement continues the Law Department's strategy of resolving cases by weighing the merits of each case and recommending the most prudent fiscal resolution.
This mass settlement provides certainty in exposure and allows for payments to be made over time.
Guevara is asserting the Fifth Amendment and declining to testify in his defense,
and as these cases linger, more and more of the defendant officers who will testify in their defense are passing away due to their advanced age.
Juries are unpredictable, and in recent years, plaintiffs in three cases were awarded a total of $170 million for 42 years in custody,
or over $4 million per year of custody.
Reaching this resolution here protects the city from those runaway verdicts.
For all these reasons, the Law Department recommends the resolution in these 16 cases, as in the clear financial interests of the city.
Thank you, Ms. Felker.
We have a number of questions from members of the committee, and we'll start with Vice Chair Conway.
You said $680,000 per year of incarceration.
How many years total are we settling here across the 17 plaintiffs?
383.55.
And you said they were all being prosecuted for murder?
Yes, they were all prosecuted for murder.
Now, and all but two of them have certificates of innocence?
That's correct.
And what were the years in question based on the harms caused by Detective Guevara that are at issue here?
You mean the...
When was the activity that has caused the city this liability?
When did that stuff take place?
Understood.
Between 1987 and 1999 are all the arrests in this case.
That's wonderful.
Well, fortunately for all of us, police oversight such as COPA has come a long way since then.
And I say that as somebody who has prosecuted a few police officers since then.
But nonetheless, obviously, the liability we have still remains.
We've all signed off on significant jury verdicts of a million dollars a year, if not more.
And those numbers are, excuse me, signed up on settlements.
And the jury verdicts we're seeing north of a million dollars continue to increase.
We also know we spend significant amounts of money on outside counsel and plaintiff's counsel.
And so based on those similar cases and outside counsel spending, this seems to make sense for the taxpayers.
And I tell you, nobody hates signing off on $260 million based on the fiscal mess that we have more than me.
But the fact of the matter is, we have a significant unknown liability here, and this takes a lot of it off the books.
And that significant unknown liability certainly is greater than $260 million.
So I would ask my colleagues to support this gigantic but responsible settlement.
And I want to thank you, Ms. Felker, and thank the law department for your work in this.
Thank you.
Thank you, Vice Chair Conway.
Alderman Beal.
Yes.
Alderman Irvin.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Again, I do echo the comments that the Vice Chair has made in relation to this.
I just have a couple questions.
How many more of these Guevara cases are out there that we're aware of?
Yeah, there are 41 pending.
This would resolve 16 of them.
And as I mentioned, we have another two that we've reached individual settlements that are waiting to be presented to this body.
So assuming all the 16 and those two in the Q pass, we would be down to 23.
So 23 cases, all basically similar fact patterns for what we're looking at?
Yeah, they're all very different fact patterns, I would say.
And they all have varying values.
So I don't, I mean, we've paid as little as $750,000 and as much as $17.5 million.
So they vary a lot, but they're all Guevara cases.
Okay.
And then is there any, what do you expect the resolution or bringing those cases to committee for approval?
Well, I can't comment on pending litigation, but we are continuing to make diligent efforts to evaluate these the best as possible and bring to you the best, most fiscally responsible resolution.
Okay.
That's a nice way to make sound, make that sound.
Are there, do you, are there any other ones that haven't been filed that potential out there for as well, or has a statute passed on those or what else could exist?
So I'm aware of nine petitions for post-conviction relief, which means they're challenging their convictions.
Nine people are challenging their convictions.
I can tell you that five have already been denied any relief by the trial court, and they're now appealing.
On top of the 23?
Yes.
They haven't sued, but there are potential lawsuits against Guevara if their convictions are ultimately vacated.
Okay.
And then what is the, or is there a statute of limitations on this particular type of a case?
Yes.
Of course, there's a statute of limitations, but in reverse conviction cases, that statute doesn't start to run until the case against them has been overturned.
So it's two, one to two years, depending on the type of claim from when their case is overturned and the charges are dropped.
Okay.
Thank you.
But again, we appreciate the work that you're doing.
I know this is not easy, given our financial situation, but I do agree with this, the best decision that can be made at the time, given everything that we do know.
And then, unfortunately, we'll have more of these to deal with, potentially, as time goes on.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Alderman.
Alderman Lopez, followed by Alderman Taylor.
Thank you, Chairman, and good morning, members of the committee.
Which of the three of these cases have the certificates of innocence been opposed?
So the three are David Lugo, Edwin Ortiz, and Tyrese Williams.
And those were opposed by the state's attorney at the time?
Yes.
Which was who?
The David Lugo was, the state's attorney was Kim Foxx, and Williams and Ortiz are the current state's attorney.
And who is the one that has no certificate of innocence?
There is two.
One is David Kruger, who has not filed for a certificate of innocence.
And the second is Antonio McDowell, who has one pending, not yet ruled upon.
And was the judge the same judge in all of these cases?
No.
How many judges were involved in issuing these certificates of innocence?
I would have to get that to you through the chair.
I have to say that I find this good and bad, revolting yet necessary.
And as someone who has voted against these settlements as recently as our last meeting, when we know that there's questions of people's certificates of innocence or even those without them,
swallowing this, swallowing this is like bad medicine today.
And I want to just take a moment, if I may, to actually thank both the chair and the department
for answering my questions with regards to this, as well as addressing my previous concerns with how we move forward with settlements.
But this is no less disheartening for all of Chicago to see the largest settlement in U.S. history coming.
Thank you.
Thank you.
before us right now. How are we paying for this? The law department has provided in its forecast
for 2027 and 2028, the payments made in this settlement. So roughly a month ago, we were told
chairman that the law department settlement fund was now going to be $401 million of which we are
going to not borrow, but pay up front. And how much is our annual, are these four payments?
We would pay total $130 million each year. So roughly $65 million per payment?
Correct. And that is still, and that's being factored into the $400 million budget increase
that we're looking at, or that's been proposed? I can't answer that question. A budget would have
to, but I can say that it was part of the department's forecast that it provided to budget.
I bring that up, chairman, and I know this is a conversation that we've had time and time again
with regards to the settlements, but now with the largest settlement ever, I think that this body
needs to have a broader, more in-depth conversation when it comes to settlements, how we're spending,
where they're coming out of, because I think we set a standard, a budget in one committee,
the budget of government operations, which will likely be passed in October, November,
or some point. But we don't track where we're spending. We don't know if we're blowing past
amounts. We just keep saying yes in one room and hoping that we're matching it in the other.
And I think that as we move forward, collectively, this body needs to see whether or not we're actually
living within the budgetary constraints that we put forward. Because I know, as the law department
just alluded to, there are other cases still in the hopper, which we don't know if we're going to
have the settlements for at any point in time. We don't know what the future holds with regards to
many of the outstanding settlements. And if we're in a situation where we are past our budget,
this body is going to be saying yes to what you're proposing as a department, not you, but as a
department, without knowing if we actually have the money to pay for it. And I don't want to be in
that predicament. I don't want us to see at the end of the year, a budgetary address that says we're
short because we said yes in one committee without being able to say, hold on a minute. You've only
planned for X and now you're beyond that. Today, I think as we're looking for the next two years of
settlements that we're paying out, we've heard time and time again in this chamber, we don't like
setting up the next councils and dictating what they have to do when we don't even know who's going
to be in this room. But I think, yes, I am going to support this. I'm going to bite my tongue
and do it. Don't change my mind now.
He hasn't bitten it yet.
We ain't done yet.
But I'm going to do this because I know that our former corp counsel did hear some of our concerns,
did address them, which I'm thankful for. But at the same time,
this is taking us down a new path that I don't think any of us ever really envisioned when it
comes to these global settlements and paying out with corporate dollars that we haven't even
realized or budgeted for not one year out, but now two years out. So thank you, Chairman,
for letting me have my rant. But I just think that we really need to watch where we're going
moving forward with this and these types of settlements. Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman Lopez. Acknowledging what you bring before us this morning is true. And as a
council, we have an opportunity through this budgeting period to start looking at the fact
that the law department blows past their allocation every year. I think we started looking at that last
year. We need to do more. Alderman Taylor. Can you tell me how many cases this officer has
in its history? Over 50. This officer getting a pension? Yes. Was this officer fired? No. He resigned.
He retired? He's retired. What measures are we taking to make sure stuff like that?
This doesn't happen again. Because I feel like we're paying for stuff that was done in the past
with no real change in an officer's behavior. And so is this the, is this, this seems like this is
just as many cases as the John Burge cases. And so I'm concerned. And how much of this money is
actually going to the victims? This is a large amount of money. And for what people lost or gave
up, you said they were from 14 to 29? 28. Yeah. 28. And so what they've lost in amount of years,
this money is not going to replace. It won't fix. And for people who are actually innocent. And so I want
to know what we're doing different when it comes to policing. And what, do you all have any bearings
or conversations with the, with the, with the pension board? I'll start with your first question.
And I appreciate all of them. They're all very important questions. Your first question is,
have things changed basically? Um, yes, a lot. These cases are from 1987 to 1999, as I mentioned.
One thing that's been a huge change in the law is that for any murder interrogations, the entire thing
has to be videotaped. So that is a huge change from beginning to end when they're in the interview room
that's on tape. Um, the changes in police policing and the CPD over the past 25 years, COPA is, has made a
lot of changes. I mean, this used to be IPRA and OPS. COPA is now in place. And I think the changes that
have come with COPA and the complaint system that they evaluate and the tracking that they see, um,
is a tremendous change in how, from how things used to be. And of course, the consent decree
is making changes as well. So there are a lot of reasons to be optimistic that if behavior happens,
it's caught early. Um, the other question you had was, uh, how much are the, uh, plaintiffs going to get?
So the $260 million will all go to the plaintiffs, but of course their, uh, attorneys will take
probably 40% of that. Yes, that is the typical agreement. I don't know for sure their terms in
these cases, but that's a typical plaintiff payment for, so 40% will go to the firm Lovi and Lovi.
Um, and I apologize. Am I missing another question? The pension board, obviously the law department
has, um, or the division that I oversee has no ability to change the law, um, for the pension
board or how that operates. The state law currently says the reason, the only reason you can, um, take
away somebody's pension is if they commit a felony and convicted of a felony, um, in the scope of their
employment. That's what the law, uh, says about pensions. Is there any conversation to have with
the state or the state's attorney about changing that? Because I'm pretty sure it based upon how many
years was he's a police officer? Um, let me check. So he was appointed on March 8th, 1976, and he
retired, uh, in June, 2005. So approximately 30 years. So 30 years and we paying a pension? Yes.
That math, don't, don't math. The amount of cases. Okay. Excuse me, Alderman Taylor, point of
information, Alderman Martin. Why has he not been, why have charges not been proofed?
Um, well, the charges would be through the state's attorney, um, when that is the statute of
limitations would have been up on anything, um, by the time these cases came to light.
Do you recall what that statute of limitations is? How many years?
Um, for the, I don't know.
Right.
Right.
Exactly. For the different, I mean, I guess the different types of cases that are different type of charges have different statute of limitations.
But there's certainly just a few years and these came to light much later.
Is that something you could get through the chair to the Alderman?
I don't need that. I was just curious. Thank you.
Alderman Taylor, sorry.
You said 40 percent is going to lawyers.
Correct.
These are the types of decisions that make me want to say no.
Because 40 percent of that is going to counsel.
That's not going to the people that were harmed.
And so we we got to have a real conversation about.
Punishment, we got to have a real conversation because we pay in two times for this person over 50 lawsuits.
Then he gets a pension.
And we paying for it.
I don't know what anybody else think, but I think it's the craziest thing in the world.
And so sooner than later, we got to have a conversation with the state and the state's attorney, because there has to be something that says maybe he pays these lawsuits because this is on taxpayers.
Taxpayers didn't harm these folks.
This this this this cop did.
And it's a real concern.
And it's a real concern.
And I appreciate it.
But I would say that this is policy and laws that come from the state and collective bargaining bargaining agreements.
Excuse me.
Thank you, chair.
So it's something that obviously I don't have control of, but it's certainly something for your body to consider changes in that respect.
And I just want to be clear to the state or the plaintiffs are the ones who sign engagement forms with their plaintiffs council.
So it's not that the city is deciding.
Well, absolutely.
I clearly understand.
I just want to matter for 40 percent.
Yeah.
Who signs up for that?
Yeah.
I understand.
Thank you.
Thank you, chair.
Thank you, Alderman Taylor.
Alderman Martin, followed by Alderman Rodriguez Sanchez.
Thank you, chair.
Good morning.
You had mentioned approximately one hundred seven million dollars in three lawsuits that the city has taken to trial in recent years.
Is that correct?
There are three lawsuits that to point out the possible exposure with a runaway jury.
There is three cases that went to trial and their total in award from the jury was one hundred and seventy million.
One seventy or one oh seven?
One seventy.
Okay.
Approximately when did those trials take place?
They took place, I believe, 2024 and then 2025.
Were those a fairly representative sampling of the remaining cases that we're here to discuss today?
I would say those are, again, on the extreme end.
But we I want to notify you as to the potentials that can happen if we don't settle.
Okay.
No other questions.
Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman Martin.
Alderman Rodriguez Sanchez, followed by Alderman Sitio Lopez.
So we have spent already about two hundred million that we have previously paid for Guevara cases.
Yeah.
So if you add the settlements, judgments and the outside council costs, we've paid approximately two hundred million so far.
And you were saying that litigating these cases could get us into half a billion.
And you're when you said that you were speaking specifically about these ones that were settling, not any others that are remaining.
Correct.
I would say the estimated possible liability is well over half a billion dollars.
So twice as much as the settlement we're recommending here.
I hear the concerns of many of my colleagues around this amount of money being used for a settlement.
And I also need us to be very aware of the human cost that this has had in communities, 383 years of prison for people who didn't commit a crime.
That's a lot of time, a lot of damage.
And it's not just what happens to the individual, but what happens to the community in which they're in, the ripple effect that it has in society as a whole.
So I support this settlement.
I'm very grateful for the work that has been done in order for us to be able to get here.
And I am looking forward to continue working with the law department to figure out how we can make these processes better.
This is incredibly unfortunate, but there is no way that taking these cases to court is going to be beneficial for the city or for the taxpayers.
So thank you so much for your work.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Alderman.
Alderman Ciccio Lopez, followed by Alderman Spisano.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Most of the questions have been answered, and this is a tough, tough time where we experience serious deficits, and yet we have to make sure that the victims always are compensated for these horrific actions by former detective, disgraced Detective Guevara.
My question, my only question pending, I know we talked a little bit about the report.
It was back in 2013, I believe, a report that was commissioned, but the understanding from the law department, it seems that there was not such a report that included Guevara cases.
There's other cases there, but I just want to get for the record, you know, I know that we discussed that these are memos.
There's other information, but I do want to ask about this report because apparently it cost the city $1.9 million to commission a report,
but does such a report does not seem to actually exist, or maybe just there were memos and other materials that maybe you can provide to us.
Just for clarity, you know, what is going on with this report, or what kind of report costs $1.9 million and then does not have anything to offer,
and then, you know, what is the information that you can actually provide understanding attorney-client privilege?
Thank you, Alder.
Yeah, I appreciate the opportunity to clarify.
There is, it's been reported in the news that there's a, quote, Guevara report, and as we discussed,
that's not what exists from in 2014 to 2013 to 2015.
As you accurately stated, the city of Chicago hired, the law department hired outside counsel to evaluate individual Guevara cases.
So there are dozens of memos about pending and previous and possible future litigation.
So these are not, it's not an evaluated report as much as it is legal counsel that have, at the time,
conducted work product and investigation, obviously pertaining to litigation that is ongoing.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Yeah, so I will appreciate whatever information can be provided through the members, and I appreciate that, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Alderman.
Alderman Spisato.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Jessica.
I'm tired to be jumping for joy over a $260 million settlement, but I agree with my esteemed colleague from the 34th Ward with his eloquent comments about what's going on here.
I don't think anybody in this room is jumping for joy about this, but we all appreciate the great work you and Corp Council did.
Hopefully, by 2030, we're done with the wear of Burge and Watts cases.
I don't know.
Is that a possibility, I think?
By 2030?
Yeah.
I think that's a possibility, yes.
That's great to hear.
So you hate to dump on the next counselor or the group after that.
But just, you know, at least we broke it down 130 this year and 130 next year.
Appreciate the good job.
But I do want to remind everybody in here, I know we have a couple of attorneys in city council.
We have four, but we have two in here today.
I just want to let everybody know.
And this leads to one of my questions is, a certificate of innocence, and you don't have to answer it, Jessica, because I'm not going to put you on the spot.
A certificate of innocence does not mean these people are innocent.
Okay?
So my question to you is, I know the state's attorney doesn't want to retry these cases is the usual deal, correct?
I couldn't speak to the current state's attorneys.
No, yeah, I mean, the state's attorney, period.
I'm sorry, in general.
I didn't mean the current.
So, but most of these cases were under the previous state's attorney that didn't want to retry them, correct?
Correct.
Okay.
All right.
That's it.
I just wanted to say, you know, great job.
We appreciate you.
Hard pill to swallow for us and the taxpayers.
But hopefully, like I say, by 2030, we're all done with this.
But thank you very much.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Alderman Sposato.
Alderman Vasquez.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I appreciate the work being done.
I think, although it's a large amount, it saves us $500 million.
I appreciate that rather than...
borrowing to try to cover it. We're paying for it in a way that doesn't increase the amount that
we'd be paying for it. My question is, based on kind of the activity that Cabara, Watts, and others
had done, have we gotten better at catching that kind of stuff as it occurs now? Like,
do you know what systems might have been put in place to kind of prevent that? Because,
you know, we're taking on a lot. It's our responsibility to do so. It's wanting to make
sure that future councils and generations don't have to. She generally answered that question when
Alderman Taylor raised the same question. So I will ask her to summarize. Sure, I appreciate that.
And then during budget, when the police department is before us, take that opportunity to explore the
answers because I don't think that the attorney can respond. In that case, she doesn't even need
to summarize. I appreciate that it was answered. I will, whether people bring up certificates of
innocence or anything else, I think we should remind each other as to why we're here in the
first place. Because an individual who shouldn't have been an officer, a corrupt criminal, then got
on the police force with the use of that badge and that responsibility, basically broke the law and led
to this. This isn't about a certificate of innocence. It's not about a state's attorney.
It's about individuals who shouldn't have been cops to begin with that are making this problem
for us. So I just don't appreciate how people want to point the finger at everybody else as it's not
the root cause to why this happened. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Thank you very much. I just wanted to say, Jessica, I appreciate your work on this.
Thank you very much.
So moved by Alderman Irvin, recommending do pass. All those in favor, signify by saying aye.
Opposed, in the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it. And the do pass recommendation will
report it out at the next City Council meeting. Jessica, thank you so much.
Thank you.
We'll now move on to item number two, which is from the Department of Planning, an ordinance authorizing
the execution of an intergovernmental agreement with the Chicago Board of Education
to provide TIF funds for improvements at Harriet Beecher Stowe Elementary School, located at
3444 West Wambansia Avenue in the 26th Ward. We're joined by Jamel Chambers, the executive director
of IGA for the Chicago Public Schools, Mr. Chambers. Got your pink suit on today, huh?
Do I do. Good morning, Chairman Dowell, members of the Finance Committee. For the record, my
name is Jamel Chambers, service executive director of government affairs for Chicago Public Schools.
Also joined by Vinny Dyer, our executive director of capital planning and construction for CPS,
as well as Jeff Cohen, the managing deputy commissioner of DPD. I'm here today to request your approval of
an intergovernmental agreement that will provide up to $1,150,000 in TIF assistance to replace existing
pavement with an artificial turf field at Stowe Elementary School. Here's an aerial showing the
school. Stowe is a neighborhood's elementary school serving 553 students from grades pre-K through
8th grade. These pictures show the existing pavement, which will be replaced with the proposed
artificial turf field. If approved, the intergovernmental agreement will authorize up to
$1,150,000 in TIF assistance, with the remaining $250,000 coming from CPS. This project is expected to
be completed by the winter of 2027. If approved, TIF funding would be used to finance the project costs,
and the majority of which are hard costs associated with material and labor. TIF funding would allow CPS to
replace the current pavement with an artificial turf field that incorporates drainage infrastructure,
stormwater detention. The new artificial turf field would provide a safer and more functional
place surface that reduces injuries and creates more engaging outdoor space for students. I thank you
for your consideration. I'm happy to address any questions that the committee may have.
Thank you, Mr. Chambers. We do have a question from a member of the committee, Alderman Beal.
Thank you, Madam Chairman. Good morning. Still morning. Still morning. Quick question. How much
money is CPS putting in on this project?
$250,000.
$250,000?
Yes, sir.
And how much in TIF?
$1,150,000.
Okay. How come you guys are not doing half? Usually, you know, we try to do a 50-50 split.
Usually, we do try to do a 50-50 split, but I think that this particular project was requested,
and the additional funding that was needed to make the project full is what CPS is putting in in this case.
Okay. Okay. Well, seeing it...
Excuse me, Alderman Beal. Would you please identify yourself for the record? I don't think our part reporter heard you.
For the record, my name is Vinuet Dye. I'm the Executive Director for Capital Planning and Construction.
Okay. Thank you. So, can you repeat your first name, please?
Vinuet.
Okay. Thank you. That wasn't me. That was...
Okay. Let me ask you. So, you know, I have several requests that have been put in,
and, you know, it seems like all these CPS projects are going to the same wards,
and it seems like, you know, either you are, you know, a progressive or you don't get.
So, can you tell me where my project is? Because I put in a TIF request as well.
Yeah.
Sorry, Jeff Cohen, Managing Deputy.
You said that you put in a request for TRR for a specific project?
Yes, I did.
I can check on the status and then respond through the chair of the status.
So, you don't know where the project is right now?
At the moment, it's in the process.
And you don't know where it is in the process?
No, not exactly off the top of my head.
Will it be done before the election?
I do not know the answer to that.
I would have to confirm with all of our colleagues as part of that.
Okay.
Well, let me just encourage you to get my project done because I'm really tired of voting on the same wards getting projects at the request of people who, you know, have other projects in the pipeline as well.
There needs to be the same consideration for other people's projects and not going towards the same wards over and over and over and over again.
So, I'm requesting that my project gets done before the end of the year.
I want that project to come before this body for approval.
Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman Beal.
Alderman Villegas.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Jeff had mentioned TRR.
Could you explain what TRR was?
Mr. Cohen?
Yes, sir.
Jeff Cohen, Managing Deputy.
The TIF request review process, also known as TRR, TIRR in some cases, is the formal process that we've initiated as the replacement for what was the legacy TIF Investment Committee.
And why was the TIF Investment Committee replaced?
So, the TIF Investment Committee was replaced in about, I think it was either May or June of 2024 after there was a court case that the city had tried to win where the TIC or TIF Investment Committee program was deemed to be in violation of the Open Meetings Act.
So, does the TRR meet open?
Yes, it does.
It's been designed specifically to comply.
When do those meetings occur and where is that advertised?
And how does one get invited to that, especially when they have pending requests, as my colleague from the Ninth Ward stated?
Well, the TRR process is initiated in certain cases by departments or aldermanic requests, and it consists of three different steps, the first being an eligibility review, a third, a second being…
Eligibility in accordance with the TIF statute?
In terms of the TIF Act, yes.
So, I think his question was, where do you advertise it, and is this an open meeting?
It is not an open meeting, and it occurs every month.
But didn't the TIC get disbanded because it was violating the Open Meetings Act?
Yes.
And so, why would the TRR not follow the same suit?
Well, the TRR process is built differently.
So, the TIC process was a singular meeting where it had several different decision makers at the city that deal with TIF investments, and that was determined to be the major issue with the TIC process.
So, we've designed it so that there are separate reviews that each get critically evaluated as part of the three different steps.
So, this is a major issue as well because the reality is that you have a TRR, an unelected body…
That is making decisions based on what your standing is with this administration, despite the despite the need that's being requested by the local council members.
And the fact that there's a balance that's in there that meets the state statute.
At the end of the day, it's bureaucrats that are determining what's best for the community versus the elected official.
And it's being done in secret because it's not an open meetings act.
And all you did was change some verbiage legally in order to hide the transparent process that would not violate the Open Meetings Act.
Come on, stop playing games here with this. This is crazy.
When aldermen are asking for TIF dollars to be expended in their wards and we're asking other departments to help fill the gap, it's because there's a need there.
It shouldn't matter what the hell your voting record is here with this administration.
Come on.
I think that there's also a analysis that's done based on other resources.
So TIF might not be the best instrument to help facilitate certain investments.
However, that part is getting determined through the TRR process so that we have the ability to leverage all financial resources that the city has at its disposal.
Well, look, again, I agree with my colleague from the Ninth Ward.
I mean, I want to support my colleagues' projects.
I really do.
But at the same time, all of us are putting requests in and we're hustling to try to figure out how to match, get matching funds and try to build stacks, capital stacks in order to fund these things.
And then it falls into the TRR, which is an unelected body that ultimately makes a decision as to whether or not my ward should deserve or is deserving of any TIF dollars, despite the fact that we're following the state, the TIF state statute.
So once it goes through the TRR process, we do come to this body for everybody's vote on it.
Yeah, but the TRR process has already determined – you guys have already determined whether or not – we deserve it.
You determine whether we deserve –
I don't think it's not about being deserved or – it's about resource allocation and strategy about how we allocate those resources and not whether or not –
Madam Chair, I'd like to have the TRR come and present to this body to find out what the hell is going on here.
This is crazy.
Send me a resolution.
Thank you.
I will.
Alderman Lopez.
Good morning, Chairman and members of the committee.
I can't help but smile because I swear we've had this conversation numerous times in this committee about this very thing.
First off, I'm going to ask something about CPS.
Are you guys paying your parking tickets yet?
Yes, we actually had a meeting last week with sister agencies as well as the mayor's office, and we laid out the process that we have in place to hold our employees accountable.
And I think our process is actually working.
What we saw is that between the last cycle and the current cycle, our employee debt is down.
So there's a new MOU between CPS and the City of Chicago with regards to collecting on debt?
There isn't an MOU.
I'm sorry?
No, sir.
There is an MOU.
We have a process at CPS where we require our current employees to either enroll in a payment plan or sell their debt in full.
Can you share that through the chair and what the participation rate has been since you've enacted that?
Yes, sir.
As well as how do you deal with potential employees that are non-compliant?
So employees who do not comply, because we have a board rule as well that employees have to settle any debt that's owed to the city.
I haven't seen – well, I'm not aware of what that disciplinary action is.
I think it's up to our talent team, which is, in other words, our HR team.
But I can follow up with them to get a better understanding of what that discipline action could be.
Okay.
Thank you.
Chairman, I want to just touch back with regards to the TRR, if I may, because I believe that I had previously requested from DPD through this committee for them to share exactly what that makeup was,
what the metrics for their resource allocation and strategy were, and what outstanding projects and priorities they had through all of our awards.
Was that ever given to your committee?
I don't recall your request on that, but I do hear your request now.
We have cataloged it, and we'll share it with DPD and get that back to you through the chair.
I will renew that request because I believe it was several months ago that it was made.
And I think, like many things, we may have just gotten lost with everything that comes at all of us.
So I will renew that request now.
On the city's website, there's no reference to this TRR.
Can the department say where it is?
Jeff Cohen, Managing Deputy DPD.
It's an internal SharePoint site that DPD administers in conjunction with other departments, such as OBM, as well as the mayor's office.
So this is an internal process.
So there's no dashboard for showing where any of the decisions or projects are made?
All decisions are posted as part of the open data portal.
And where is that?
If you go to, I don't know the exact URL, but Chicago open data portal.
And if you enter into the search, TIF request review, you can see all approvals since the TRR process has been established.
So on the city's main page, hold on.
On the city's main page under Planning and Development, Tax Increment Financing, where it says about citywide TIF maps and project locations, proposals for TIF investment, TIC, district reports, 10-year projections, funding sources, TIF district extensions, blah, blah, blah, all that other mumbo-jumbo.
So the one thing that's not part of that conversation online in a very easily accessible way is where you make decisions?
Okay.
You don't have to answer that.
So I have one last question, if I may.
Three guards.
Let's go.
When it comes to TIF allocations, does the statute state that we have to use TIC, TRR, or any other kind of bureaucratic tool first?
Or can city council, by ordinance, introduce an ordinance stating that TIF from Fund X can be used for Project Y directly through this body?
I don't know the answer to that.
We will ask that question to the law department.
Because I believe, Chairman, that we have that authority as aldermen, that the state gives city council, not bureaucrats, the authority to make these decisions.
And as such, then I think it's incumbent on all of us to start taking our TIF by the reins and directing them to our neighborhoods if we don't have a willing participant and friend in the fifth floor.
Thank you, Chairman.
Thank you, Alderman Lopez.
Alderman, why is back?
Chairman, thank you.
I was just going back to what Alderman Lopez was asking for.
Were you asking for a ward-by-ward breakdown of the decisions?
Yes, it was.
On the TR?
Okay.
I didn't recall it, but I think that's what he had asked for before.
That's all I had, Chairwoman.
Thank you.
Alderman Quinn.
Madam Chair.
Jamal, how many TIF projects are sort of in the queue that will be before the committee?
And how much total?
We can get back to you on that.
I don't have that number.
You don't have that?
But we submit projects on a rolling basis.
So we review a list of critical needs at schools across the district and determine whether or not they follow up in the TIF.
About how many projects are on the list?
That are scheduled to come before the board, this committee soon?
I would say at least 10.
10?
And roughly?
The answer was 10.
So 10 CPS projects will be before the committee?
Approximately, yes.
Next five, six months?
Yes.
Do you know roughly about how much?
No, I can't give you a number.
She said that she did not know.
We can get that information through the chair.
So you're looking for the amount, the exact projects, and what wards they're in.
Yeah, that would be helpful.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Yes, Alderman Villegas.
Could you also talk – could you also send through the chair what your capital budget is going to be for this year?
Yes.
Yes, I think.
Thank you.
All right.
Yep.
Outside of any other, just strictly what CPS's capital budget is.
We're putting our funds towards.
That's correct.
Gotcha.
Is there a motion to recommend approval of item number two?
So moved by Alderman Burnett.
Was that you?
Recommending do pass.
All those in favor signify by saying aye.
Aye, opposed.
In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it.
And the do pass recommendation will be reported out at the next city council meeting.
Item number three is also from the Department of Planning and Development.
It's an ordinance authorizing the execution of an intergovernmental agreement.
, you know, these are you?
We're looking at the term builder.
with
the Chicago Board of Education to provide TIF funds for improvements at Souter Montessori Magnet
Elementary School located at 2022 West Washington Boulevard in the 27th Ward. We're joined by
Jamel Chambers from CPS who will give this presentation. Mr. Chambers. Thank you. Good
morning again. Chairman Dowell, members of the Finance Committee. For the record, my name is
Jamel Chambers, Executive Director of Government Affairs for Chicago Public Schools, joined by
Vinnie Dye, our Executive Director of Capital Planning and Construction for CPS, as well as
Jeff Cohen, Managing Deputy Commissioner in DVD. I'm here today to request your approval of an
intergovernmental agreement that will provide up to $1 million in TIF assistance to provide
improvements at Souter Elementary School. Here is a map showing the general location of the project
within the city. The project is located at 2022 West Washington Boulevard in the Westside community
area and 27th Ward. It's located in the Central West TIF District. The school is bounded by Washington
Boulevard to the south, Damon Avenue to the east, Maple Avenue to the north, and Hone Avenue to the west.
Here's an aerial showing the school with the playground outline. Souter Elementary serves 476 students from
grade pre-K through 8th grade. These pictures show the existing conditions of the playground, which as you can see is
outdated and damaged. The project will provide a playground replacement and associated exterior upgrades. The total
project will cost $1 million with the completion of the project scheduled for fall 2027. If approved, the
intergovernmental agreement will authorize up to $1 million in TIF assistance, which will finance the entirety of the
project. TIF funding will allow CPS to replace the existing playground, outdated and damaged equipment. The new
surface will reduce injuries and monitoring play equipment will create a more engaging outdoor space for
students. I thank you for your consideration and happy to address any questions that this committee may have.
Thank you, Mr. Chambers. We do have a letter of support from Alderman Burnett, Conway, and Irvin.
Alderman Beal.
Thank you, Madam Chairman. All right. Good afternoon.
Good afternoon. So this is 100% TIF.
Yes, sir.
Okay. Is there a reason why you guys are not putting any money in this one?
This project – I'm sorry.
Again, my name is Vinuet Di or Vinny, Executive Director for Capital Planning at Chicago Public Schools.
This project was not a part of our current capital plan because it was not on our radar for replacement yet.
And this project was brought forward by the school and the Alderman to have it replaced.
And as we have actually started looking into the design of this project, as we told the chair when we briefed her,
that this project is going to be more than $1 million, and CPS will be putting in the balance of those funds.
So you say this was not on you all's radar. So how did it get on your radar? And when did it get on your radar?
It was brought to us.
Yeah, I would say we had some conversations over the summer with the school community principal in the Alderman.
Over the summer, huh?
Yes, sir.
That's pretty quick, huh?
I would say.
Huh. Well, I'm just wondering, how come mine is not moving this quick?
Alderman Burnett.
Yeah, so we started this conversation right when I got in. The parents of Souter have been calling not only me, but other aldermen, including...
Can you speak up? I'm sorry.
Can you hear me now?
Yes.
The parents of Souter, even before I got in, in September of last year, have been calling other aldermen in their wards where they lived to get this repaired.
There have been a few incidents that have been going on, and we took a while to get to CPS to actually have that conversation.
But the parents took it upon themselves to do a lot of the work and requested it upon us, and we made the request upon CPS.
Okay. Again, that doesn't have anything to do with the fact that they just said that this was not on their radar, and all of a sudden it's on the radar.
And so I guess that goes back to what my colleagues have been saying about certain projects moving at rapid speed, and other ones are at a turtle's pace.
We have to make sure that we continue to move forward with projects first in, first out.
And so there is definitely an imbalance of projects being funneled through this committee, and it's the same wards, same numbers, same people, and other people who are fighting to get resources are not getting them.
We have to correct it, and that's not directed at you guys.
I just want to make this crystal clear.
This is not directed at you guys.
But I will tell you, the sheets have been pulled back, and we see exactly what's going on.
Thank you, Madam Chairman.
Thank you, Alderman Beal.
Alderman Burnett, I know you want to close, but we do have a question from Alderman Rodriguez.
Alderman Rodriguez?
Thank you, Madam Chair, and forgive me for chiming in here at the last minute.
Sorry, Alderman, but I just want to congratulate you.
I am the former parent of suitor children, and I want to echo what Alderman Burnett said around the need there for this playground.
I believe it was in Alderman Burnett's first or second week on the job where I called and communicated the concern of suitor parents to Alderman Burnett.
And I wanted to say you got on the job right away and started working on this.
So I want to say I'm proud of your work on this.
Much, much needed.
My children have not been there for a couple of years now, but they were there for a good eight years.
It's an amazing school, amazing school community, and this is long overdue, and I appreciate you for delivering on it and count on my full support on this earmark.
Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman Rodriguez.
Alderman Burnett?
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Yeah, the park is really in bad shape.
We had a few calls at the beginning of the school year last year where folks are getting injured, and so this is on our radar right away.
And so thank you to the parents who have been advocating for this but also looking to do the work and designing something that makes sense for the students and the rest of the community.
And so I appreciate CPS moving quickly on trying to get this allocated, and I know this will be more expensive than this initial $1 million, so I appreciate the verbal commitment here to covering the rest of those calls.
So thank you, and I ask my colleagues to support it, please.
Thank you, Alderman Burnett.
Before I take a motion, Mr. Chambers wants to respond to Alderman Villegas' question.
Yes, so our capital budget for FR-27 is roughly $590 million.
Alderman Sposato moves to pass.
Oh, you have another.
Alderman Villegas.
Thank you, Madam Chairman.
I just have a question for Jeff.
Jeff, can you explain what the TRR process is and what the – in terms of what each party's role is as it relates to the TRR?
First in 2022.
Sure.
Jeff Cohen, Managing Deputy, DPD.
So the TRR process consists of three parts.
The first is DPD's eligibility review to see if the request complies with the TIF Act.
The second is a financial resources review per TIF district balances by OBM.
And the final is a strategic analysis of resources by the mayor's office.
Okay.
So the final in this process is the mayor's office?
Yes, sir.
So, again, that goes back to what my colleague Alderman Villegas stated, that if it doesn't get past the mayor's office, it doesn't come to this body.
Is that what I'm hearing?
Yes, it would, given that they are the final decision.
Do you actually think that's fair?
Do you actually think that that's fair, that the mayor's office has the final determination on what projects move forward as it relates to TIF projects with CPS?
Yes, I mean, to me, I think it's a diligent process that bases on the facts of the project itself.
I didn't ask if it was diligent.
I didn't ask if it was diligent.
I said, do you actually think it's fair that the mayor's office is determining which projects move forward?
To city council?
For your approval, yes.
You think that's fair?
I think it's a good system to make sure that we're allocating the right resources for projects.
Wrong answer, buddy.
Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman Bill.
Mr. Blakemore, please.
Alderman Villegas.
Madam Chair, thank you.
Could Jeff explain?
Is this a point of information?
Yeah, because the TRR is an entity that's made of departments.
My understanding is there's a ranking of projects based on the state statute.
And so my question is to Mr. Cohen is once the final review has been conducted and making sure that the state statute is in compliance,
what other points or criteria does the mayor's office put in?
there that supersedes the state statute. I'm just curious as to why does the mayor's office,
despite the fact that the state statute is in compliance, what does that office add to the
final decision that supersedes the members of the TRR based on their subject matter?
Mr. Cohen? If I understand the question, I don't think that there's anything that is superseding
anything. It's just a different type of angle to take a look at these projects that the other two
pieces do not look at in detail. So basically, despite the subject matter experts, all the
departments that make up the TRR to make sure that compliance and state statutes there and ensuring
that the capital stack is being done, then the mayor's office weighs in with no expertise just
to determine whether or not the project's worthy of moving forward. I mean, that's basically what
you're saying is to see if we've been a good alderman or bad alderman. Thank you.
Alderman Lee?
Thank you, Madam Chair.
CPS, I'm sorry, you're getting caught up in this. I would like to make a request through the chair
for a comprehensive list of anything that is sitting in the TRR queue currently.
I have at least one or two items that have been sitting in the queue approved by two of the three
parties but not the one to release so that we can move forward. I would love a list of by ward
of projects that are sitting in the queue awaiting approvals. So where they are in the queue.
My understanding is that, you know, the review, as you said, Jeff, is done in three parts,
DPD, OPM, and then the mayor's office. I think it would be great for the council to be able to see
this. We'll pursue it further during budget, so I'll move off the subject, but I did want to get
that on the record here. Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman Lee. Alderman, why is back?
Thank you, Madam Chairman. Could you just add to that a breakdown of all decisions by the mayor's office
and that final step, all that were approved or denied by the mayor's office? Thank you.
Alderman Beal, did you?
I would like to add to that request that we go back to 2023 and all projects that have been
approved and move forward through TRR and, you know, just everything is in and out,
right, broke down by ward.
Alderman Wagesback, is that okay with you?
Alderman Villegas, you want a book, a treaty.
I'm not happy with this. I'm not happy with this process, but because TIC was disbanded for
violating the Open Meetings Act in 2024, I think it would be inclusive. I think we should include
in 2023 and 2024, the TIC projects as well, since TRR was implemented in 2024, after the city lost a
lawsuit for not being transparent in the TIC process.
Mr. Chambers, are you walking away with everything that's been asked? Oh, I'm sorry.
You're fine. You're fine.
Mr. Chambers is good. Okay. Mr. Stern, Mr. Cohen, excuse me, are you, you got all that?
Yes, I think I got all that.
All right. Renee will also get that to you. Can I please get a motion to approve this item for
Alderman Burnett recommending item number, due pass of item number three. So moved by Alderman
Vasquez recommending due pass. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed? In the opinion of
the chair, the ayes have it, and the due pass recommendation of this ordinance will be reported
out at the next city council meeting. Alderman Burnett, congratulations. I know how a ugly
playground, how that impacts the psyche of young children, and when they go to school every
day. So congratulations. Item number four from the Department of Planning and Development
is the substitute ordinance approving the execution of the 66th Amendment with summer core 504
Inc. to increase the amount of grant funds available in various redevelopment projects
areas, to amend the small business improvement fund, the SPF program, and to authorize summer
core 504 Inc. to continue providing administrative services for the program. This substitute ordinance
affects wards 1-2-3-4-6-7-8-9-10-11-12-13-15-16-17-18-19-20-22-23-24-26-27-28-29-30-31-32-33-34-35-36-37-39-40-40-40-40-40-40-40.
We have letters of support from all of the wards. Alderman Mitchell and Alderman Quinn
did not provide support letters but are not opposed. So we're joined by Mary O'Connor and
Gabriel Miranda from the Department of Planning and Development. Good afternoon Chairwoman Dowell
and members of the Finance Committee. My name is Mary O'Connor, Deputy Commissioner of the Small
Business Development Bureau at the Department of Planning and Development. We are here today
seeking your approval of the 66th amending ordinance to the Administrative Service Agreement
with SummerCore 504 Inc. to authorize additional funding for the Small Business Improvement Fund
or SPF. This ordinance serves two purposes to request $43.35 million in new funding across 35
TIF districts and 39 wards for the SPF program and to update certain SPF program rules. As you are aware,
SPF utilizes TIF revenue to provide reimbursement grants to eligible commercial and industrial businesses,
and property owners within participating TIF districts to facilitate permanent improvements
to their properties. The program is not competitive. As long as an applicant and project meet the
program requirements, they are eligible for funding. I also want to clarify that if you do not see a
particular TIF district included in this funding request, it does not mean the district was overlooked.
In some cases, there are sufficient SPF funding remaining to meet current needs, or there was not
available funding at the time the request was made. For the TIF districts included in this request,
the additional funding will address existing waitlists and help us reduce the likelihood of waitlists in
the future. The rule changes will also allow DPD to be more responsive to businesses' needs and manage the
program more efficiently. Ninety-two percent of SPF recipients are existing businesses that are
renovating, expanding, or adding a new location. SPF projects often focus on building systems such as
roof replacements, HVAC systems, restroom renovation, and electrical upgrades. We are especially proud to
help long-time business owners make long-term investments in their properties and communities.
We respectfully request your approval. I will now turn it over to Gabidel Miranda, who will go over
the ordinance in more detail. Thank you, Mary. Good morning, Chairwoman Dowell and members of the
committee. My name is Gabidel Miranda, Coordinator of Economic Development in the Small Business Development
Bureau of the Department of Planning and Development. As Deputy Commissioner O'Connor said, the first purpose of
this ordinance is to provide new funds to address waiting lists and provide enough available funds to
address applications immediately and avoid waiting lists in the future as well. The second purpose is to
update certain SPF program rules as it pertains to funding. The ordinance removes the required grant
reduction for SPF recipients that receive other city assistance within three years of SPF. This rule change
allows for SPF to be used with complementary grants. Another program rule update, this ordinance will
also reduce time limits in Stage 2, 3, and 4 to expedite project timelines, which keeps projects moving
swiftly and ultimately results in helping more businesses. This ordinance also creates a streamlined process for DPD to
transfer eligible applications from other small grant programs directly into SPF. Other updates to the
program rules pertain to general process improvements, making our rules clearer in respect to eligible applicants,
technical assistance, as well as our program administrator contract with SummerCorps and also updates our compliance
requirements. These rule changes will help improve our processes to better serve our applicants.
As you are aware, the SPF program utilizes TIF revenues to offer reimbursement grants to businesses,
as well as property owners and specific TIFs to facilitate permanent improvements to their properties with grants of
up to $150,000 for commercial businesses and up to $150,000 for commercial businesses.
$150,000 for industrial businesses. This program is non-competitive. As long as applicants and
projects are eligible and they meet program requirements, they can receive SPF funding.
We open applications for five SPFs every month and roll out 55 TIFs on an annual basis.
From May 2023 to September 2026, on average, we have received 50 applications worth at $3.2 million
in grant requests per month. In this timeframe, our average grant has been of $109,000. We're happy
to say that we help businesses stay in business with 92% of our grants having gone to existing
businesses and 84% of our grants since 2023 having gone to commercial businesses, while
the other 16% has been industrial businesses. The average completion time from application
to reimbursement is two years. When an application is put on a waiting list, it adds an additional
two years, making for a four-year total project timeline, which is why we're eager to fully
refund all of our SPF districts to avoid waiting lists such as those as much as possible. Since
May 2023, we have completed 436 SPF projects and dispersed $47.6 million in grant funding. Currently,
453 applications are active totaling in $58 million in grant funding. The ordinance before
you would authorize $2.75 million to establish the SPF program in three TIFs for the first time,
those being Cortland and Chicago, Lake Calumet, and North Pullman. All of these are industrial
TIFs, and as a refresher, industrial businesses are eligible for grants of up to $250,000.
The ordinance would also authorize an additional $40.6 million to replenish the SPF program in 32
TIFs across the city. The total authorization covers 39 awards. DPD has reached out to all 39
older people affected by this funding request. The remaining funding request would address wait
lists, provide enough funding to avoid future waiting lists, and ensure equitable distribution
of funding in TIFs across the city. If City Council passes this ordinance, DPD will budget the funding
funding in late 2026 and begin to address the waiting list immediately, and we will roll out
the new funds throughout quarter one and quarter two of 2027. We look forward to continuing the work
with to work with you to support Chicago businesses and all of our neighborhoods. We respectfully request
your approval to this ordinance. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Thank you very much, Ms. Miranda. I neglected to say that there's a substitute ordinance, which was
prepared and sent electronically to everyone, and Alderman Villegas makes a motion to accept the
substitute ordinance. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed. In the opinion of the chair,
the ayes have it, and the substitute ordinance is what we're considering and was explained by Ms. Miranda.
We do have a question from Alderman Lopez. Thank you, Chairman, and again, good afternoon,
members of the committee. Good afternoon, ladies. Can you please tell me what the administrative
costs of Summer Corps 504 Incorporated is for the administering of this program?
They have a compensation of 10 percent of the funding that is allocated, but they receive one percent at the
beginning of the rollouts for the amount of administrative work that they put into it,
the technical assistance, and the remaining of the funding or their compensation is based on
milestones with the program.
So, yes.
Excuse me. Sorry. I just want to restate that. This is Nora Curry. I'm program manager for the SPF.
Um, it's actually one percent for the rollout and nine, nine percent, eight percent. I'm sorry for
commission. I think you said 10 percent total is nine percent total. My apologies. So one percent
up front before we roll out and at the time of project completion. So as each individual project
is completed, they get, uh, once that project closes, they get eight percent at the end. So roughly
speaking, four hundred thousand dollars to start and then up to just under the remaining four million
as part of that 10 percent. Um, yeah, we could do that nine percent, but this is over the course of
two, two to three years. Well, for the execution of this program. Yes. If you could provide that
scale through the chair, I'd appreciate it. And I want to touch on something, if I may, chairman,
which is when this was originally introduced in city council a few months ago, this was sent to
rules, um, in part because of the fact that many of us, particularly in the greater Anglewood
community, felt that while it's great to support this program of SPF, which is Small Business
Improvement Fund, the NIP program, which we used to do, the Neighborhood Improvement Program,
is something that this administration has completely forgotten about.
TIF NIP is a grant for all of you who are unfamiliar, which is basically the exact same
version of this, but for homeowners, for seniors, for all of our residents who are struggling,
who also happen to live in a TIF district. I think under the Emanuel administration was the
last time that we saw. Right. We lost it. We lost it under Lightfoot. We lost a lot under Lightfoot.
We won't bring that up. But we used to do half a million dollars almost every year for every TIF
where that was possible. Um, I'm not going to oppose this today because I believe that Commissioner
Castaneda and Commissioner Boatwright and ourselves are meeting after this meeting to discuss the
resurrection of this. And I would welcome anyone who wants to be a part of that conversation to join
us. But I think even as we look at the amounts that we're talking about, I think it was $43,350,000
for businesses. If we match that with $25,000 grants to our homeowners, we could help almost 1,700
people around the city of Chicago. So while we're doing this today, let's not forget about our
residents who could also benefit from these programs because it's great to do good things with TIF as we
just had a very robust discussion on. But our homeowners need help too. And we should get back
to doing that part of our business as well. Thank you, Chairman.
Thank you, Alderman. I understand that you have a meeting scheduled and you should reach out to,
I would love to be a part of that. I'm sure others, um, because we have had that program. It has
worked. It is a good program. Um, but it hasn't been in existence for probably over a decade now.
And I will, I'm sorry, if I may, I will say that we are meeting today at 1 30 on the third floor for
whomever would care to join us. Thank you. Um, Alderman Curtis followed by Alderman Moore.
Thank you, Chairman. Uh, similar to, uh, Alderman Ray Lopez's question. We first created the, um,
the bond and, and the, and the, and the TIFs was swept away from a lot of communities so we could use
that money on projects that didn't have a TIF, uh, in their areas, uh, which was, you know, kind of
a good idea. Uh, but can we do something like this for the SPF program also? Uh, I guess that
question is for Mary, where, where, uh, where businesses that's not in the TIF district could
also utilize, uh, SPF grants, uh, and, and they may not have, have ever been in a TIF.
Well, we have available for, uh, so SPF is in 72 TIF areas. And after, if this, uh, our funding
request is approved on Wednesday, it'll be in 76 areas around the city. And for businesses that are
located outside of a TIF, they are eligible for bond funding. And when we review our projects that,
um, submit applications in bond, we look to make sure that if there's an opportunity that we, um,
recommend them moving over to TIF because there's TIF funding, that's what we do to allow sufficient
funding for businesses outside TIF districts. All right. All right. Thank you, uh, Chairman.
Uh, Deputy Commissioner, you're saying that if a business is outside of the TIF,
they can participate in the SPF program? They, they, we, they would, uh, they would apply for our,
uh, community development grant. Okay. All right. Um, Alderman Moore.
Thank you, um, Chairman. Just wanted to go on record, uh, as we...
We've been having these conversations. I think this came up in last budget season.
So hopefully this meeting today will get to that because in terms of the TIF, NIF, and we'll get there because, as you know,
even with the roof and porch program, which has been put on the back burner because of, I don't know if it's finding off or whatever reason,
one of the challenges that we're dealing with is keeping, especially our seniors, in their home.
And so I think with this, the Neighborhood Investment Fund, with NIF, that would be, you know, helpful.
And, of course, all of us are going to support our business because this program has been working great for our businesses,
but we have to find those other sources of dollars to take care of our homeowners.
And we're going to continue to push for that, and I hope this meeting today goes to that.
And I think our commissioner, she's probably open to that as well.
But I want to appreciate and just say thank you for the work and your team do.
I know we've got budget hearings coming up, and we give all these accolades,
but you and your team really, from a communication standpoint, and I think it's what we do, just phenomenal.
And I appreciate that, and we can show the work, and I always like to use the word, point to the things that we're doing,
and you all helping us get there is a big thing for our businesses, which are a part of the community.
So thank you so much.
Thank you, Alderman.
Thank you, Alderman Moore.
Motion made by Alderman Moore recommending do pass of item number four.
All those in favor signify by saying aye.
Aye.
Opposed?
In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and the do pass recommendation will be reported out at the next city council meeting.
Thank you, Commissioner O'Connor and Ms. Miranda.
Thank you.
Item number five from the Department of Planning and Development is an ordinance authorizing the execution of a redevelopment agreement
with BTH Development, a not-for-profit to provide housing and economic development bond funds
for redevelopment of Autgale Gardens Youth Center Project at 131-22 South Ellis Avenue in the 10th Ward.
We have to present this today, Emily Kish from the Department of Planning and Development,
Jeff Cohen, the Department of Planning and Development, and Joe Bueller.
Ah, I got that one wrong.
Your name's not here.
From the department.
Can you just say your name again?
Kyle Brandon from the Department of Planning and Development.
Okay, great.
Ms. Kish?
Good afternoon, Chair Dowell, or, yes, Chair Dowell and members of the Finance Committee.
For the record, my name is Emily Kish,
Financial Planning Analyst with the Department of Planning and Development's Bureau of Economic Development.
I am joined today by Jeff Cohen, Managing Deputy Commissioner of the Bureau of Economic Development,
and Kyle Brandon, and members of the development team.
I am here today to request your approval of a redevelopment agreement between the city of Chicago
and By the Hand Club for Kids,
authorizing the use of $7.3 million in housing and economic development bond grant funding for the rehabilitation
of the historic up-top building for an approximately 35,000-square-foot Altgeld Gardens Youth Center.
The subject property is located at 13122 South Ellis Avenue within the Riverdale Community Area in the 10th Ward.
I'd like to recognize Alderman Chico, who is supportive of the project.
The site, highlighted in red on this map, is located in the Altgeld Gardens'
Philip Murray Homes Historic District and comprises the historic up-top building.
It is bounded by East 131st Street to the north, by South Ellis Avenue to the east,
and East 132nd Street to the south and west.
The property is adjacent to the Altgeld Family Resource Center,
the Altgeld branch of the Chicago Public Library, and Carver Park.
Shown here is an historic photo of the up-top building in 1945.
The building was designed by George and William Keck as an energy-efficient commercial building.
The building recently received landmark designation at the September 2026 meeting of City Council.
These are exterior and interior images of the existing building,
which has significantly deteriorated over time and is in severe disrepair, including a partially collapsed roof.
Environmental reports have identified asbestos, lead, arsenic, and arsenic in the building,
which are typical of a building this age and will be addressed during the rehabilitation work.
The building will be enrolled in the Illinois EPA Site Remediation Program.
BTH Development NFP will serve as the new market's tax credit entity or sponsor
and signatory to the Redevelopment Agreement, along with BTH Development Support Corporation,
which will serve as the property owner.
By the Hand Club for Kids will serve as the sole tenant.
By the Hand Club for Kids began in 2001 with 16 children from Cabrini-Green and now provides holistic wraparound services
for more than 2,000 kids from Cabrini-Green, Altgeld-Murray, Austin, North Austin, and Inglewood.
These services include transportation, year-round after-school care, daily meals, tutoring, mentorship,
eye and dental care, and mental health counseling at no cost to schools or families.
Additional members of the development team include the Altgeld Gardens Local Advisory Council
and the Chicago Housing Authority, which are serving in a leadership capacity on the project,
CNI, an approved community development entity, which will provide the new market's tax credit allocation,
present future architects, which is providing design services,
and Ujama Construction, which will serve as the general contractor.
Since 2005, By the Hand Club has operated out of a vacant school building in Altgeld Gardens
at 13015 South Ellis Avenue, which currently serves 200 students annually.
This building will be retained for middle and high school programming,
including a hydroponic container farming initiative, youth entrepreneurship, STEM,
media and technology programming, nutrition education, and gardening.
The up-top redevelopment will become the primary after-school facility,
increasing the student population by approximately 200 students annually,
for a total of approximately 400 students served.
It will increase the number of students served in grades 1 through 8 from 20 to 30 students per grade,
add a dedicated kindergarten class of 30 students,
create dedicated high school programming space for 60 additional students,
and add 30 students to its college and career group.
The redevelopment of this property will also include the addition of a new gymnasium.
The project will provide no less than 40 jobs,
equivalent to 20 full-time positions at 35 hours per week.
If approved, the developer will receive a grant of $7.3 million
in housing and economic development bond funds,
comprising 28% of the total project cost of $25.8 million.
Upon execution of the RDA, By the Hand Club intends to begin work immediately
and anticipates completing the project by September 2027.
The total project cost is just short of $26 million.
Beyond the City's $7.3 million grant,
By the Hand Club has committed $11.4 million in donations
and secured approximately $7 million in new markets tax credits.
Hard costs will comprise most of the funding uses,
with the bulk of costs going toward the building shell,
site work and remediation, interiors, and services,
including plumbing, electrical, and HVAC.
If approved, the redevelopment agreement will allow the City to reimburse
By the Hand Club for up to $7.3 million in eligible construction costs
via three progress payments during construction
and a final payment upon issuance of the Certificate of Completion.
The project will be subject to typical City construction compliance requirements,
including prevailing wage, local hiring, 26% MBE, 6% WBE,
and best faith efforts of achieving 3% VBE.
The City's investment will be protected by provisions in the RDA
that require the project to occupy no less than 75% of the property
and operate the facility as a community asset for a compliance term of 10 years.
If these conditions are not met,
the City has the right to recapture previously dispersed HED bond funds.
Here are renderings of the proposed exterior,
which show the rehabilitated historic structure and the new gymnasium.
Here are renderings of the structure's proposed interior.
A critical component of the interior build-out and restoration
is preservation of the building's existing memorial wall,
which is shown in the inset in the lower right corner.
Lastly, DBD supports the use of City funds to remediate, revitalize,
and reoccupy a recently landmarked building in the historic Altgeld Gardens community
and preserve the memorial wall,
expand current elementary, middle, and high school programs,
create a new kindergarten program,
and add a new gymnasium to increase the number of students served annually from 200 to 400,
and to retain 15 existing positions and create 25 new positions,
providing a total of 40 jobs equivalent to 20 full-time positions at 35 hours per week.
In closing, DPD requests the committee's favorable consideration
of entering into a redevelopment agreement with By the Hand Club for Kids
to find out.
Thank you.
Altgeld Gardens Youth Center. I am joined today by representatives from By the Hand Club for Kids,
Present Future Architects, and CNI to answer any questions you have regarding the project.
Thank you, Ms. Kish. We'll open up with questions starting with Alderman Beal,
followed by Alderman Lopez. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Good afternoon, everybody.
I just want to congratulate my colleague to my left, Alderman Chico, for getting this project
over the finish line. It was really good to see Ms. Bernadette. That's what we call her. We call
her Ms. Bernadette, who's the LSE chair over in Argyle, and also my good friends over at By the
Hands Club who are phenomenal at giving back and raising money for projects like this. I just
think this is a great partnership to get a building back in operation that is really the last piece
of Argyle that needs to be redeveloped, this core piece right here. I'm just ecstatic of the team
that's been put together, and I'm ecstatic for my colleague for getting this done. Thank you so
much. I guess I'll turn it over to Alderman Chico when he finishes it out. All right. Alderman Lopez.
Thank you, Chairman, and good afternoon, members of the committee. Just a few quick things. First off,
I want to congratulate Alderman Chico and everyone that made this happen. Reading the proposal earlier
looks phenomenal. But why are we saying best faith efforts to achieving VBE?
Jeff Cullen, managing deputy. So the recent ordinance that was passed related to redevelopment
agreements is an aspirational goal. So we will, it's an equivalent kind of statement. So we are
putting into our redevelopment agreements the aspirational goal of 3% veteran business enterprise.
So to be clear, MWBE is a requirement. Correct. And veterans hiring is an aspirational goal? Yes.
So is that something that needs to be clarified in the ordinance moving forward so that it's not just a
aspiration, but a requirement? If it were to be made a legally binding requirement, then yes.
And that's not what the previous, recently passed ordinance accomplished? It does not.
Okay. And then with regards to housing and economic development bond grants, we just had a quite
lengthy discussion about TIF, TIC, TRR, and all that other delightful acronyms. Do HED bonds,
go through the same kind of evaluation and decision-making process?
I can take that again. Jeff Cohen, managing deputy. There's a completely separate process for,
through the community development grant process. So there's three programs, the small, medium,
and large. And based on the need or gap financing that a eligible grantee submits through that,
that is evaluated through the Department of Planning and Development.
But it's a housing bond.
It's housing and economic development. So it's split.
So is this the one that's 50-50-ish?
Yes, sir.
And was that bond fully activated so that all of those funds are available for this grant process?
Yes, I believe so. So it's about getting the authorization letters and then future bond
issuances.
If you could provide through the chair, the list of requests, as well as the resource allocation and
strategy for that governing body, because we have subsequently learned that when it came
to flooding recently, that there were grants being provided through the housing bond that
did not make their way to all the city of Chicago. So I'd like to see how we are making decisions based
on the use of this dual function line of credit that's been activated, which totaled $1.1 billion,
$1.5 billion, if I'm not mistaken?
$1.5.
$1.5.
$1.5.
Yep. Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman Lopez, for bringing that up. I previously, before this meeting, made a
request to the departments that I wanted a report of the HED spending, not just the allocation,
but the actual spending, since the project was announced by ward, by department. And I made this request
last week, and I haven't received it. So Alderman Chico, while I support this project, and I hope this
will be approved through this committee, I do plan to hold this item and the other two in the committee
until I can get the report that I asked for. Alderman Chico.
Thank you, Chair. And I thank the comments from my colleagues. This is an exciting project
for the All-Gelt Gardens community and the greater Riverdale community. As you go through the main
entrance at All-Gelt, one of the first areas and buildings you see is the up-top building. So as you
drive in, when this is all done, you'll see one of the newer libraries in the city, and you'll see
this beautiful community center in All-Gelt. And I think that speaks to where we are trending in the
All-Gelt Gardens community. We are trending upwards. With the Red Line extension ending on the 130th,
and now this community center, this is where we want to be. So I want to thank everybody
and look to my colleagues for a favorable consideration as we continue to rebuild All-Gelt
and appreciate LAC President Ms. Bernadette Williams for coming and sharing her testimony about
the opportunity that will be had by the All-Gelt Gardens community when this is about. Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman Chico. Is there a motion to recommend approval of item number five? So moved by
Alderman Cardona, recommending do pass. All those in favor signify by saying aye. All those opposed,
in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. And the do pass recommendation of this ordinance will
be reported out at the next city council meeting. And I'm looking forward to getting my report. Thank you.
Item number six from the Department of Planning and Development is an ordinance authorizing the
execution of a redevelopment agreement with North Lawndale Catalyst Initiative, NFP, to provide housing
and economic development funds and tax increment financing assistance for the Fillmore Lennon Services
project at 920 through 922 South Campbell Avenue in the 28th Ward in an amount not to exceed $5 million
in bond funds and $5 million in TIF. We're joined by Alexander Benson, financial planning analyst from DPD,
and Jeff Cohen, Deputy Commissioner, DPD. Mr. Benson? Thank you. Good morning, Chair, or sorry,
good afternoon, Chair Dowell and members of the Finance Committee. For the record, my name is Alexander
Benson, financial planning analyst with the Department of Planning and Development's Bureau of Economic
Development. I'm joined by Jeff Cohen, Managing Deputy, and representatives from the development team.
I am here today to request your approval for a redevelopment agreement between the City and North
Lawndale Catalyst Initiative, Inc., authorizing the use of up to $5 million of TIF funds from the Western
Ogden TIF District, which will be paired with a $5 million housing and economic bond grant for a total
financial assistance award not to exceed $10 million for the rehabilitation of a 49,000 square foot vacant
property to house the expansion of Fillmore Linen Services. The property is located in 920-922 South
Campbell Ave within the near Westside Community Area, West Planning Region, and in the 28th Ward represented
by Alder Jason Irvin, who is in support of the project. This property is also within the Western Ogden
TIF District, established in 1998 and set to expire in 2034. The site, highlighted in red, is located on the
northwest corner at the intersection of Taylor Street and Campbell Ave, with the primary entrance on South
Campbell Ave and the building spanning Taylor Street west to the train tracks. The immediate area consists of a
combination of industrial, institutional, and residential uses. Shown here is the current exterior conditions
of the building. The property consists of a single-story, 49,000 square foot property that was built in 1969
and was previously occupied by Angelic Linen, who vacated the property in 2023. The property has remained vacant
since and was purchased by North Lawndale Catalyst Initiative in 2025 for the purposes of expanding the
operations of Fillmore Linen Services. Shown here are photos of the current interior conditions of the
property, demonstrating the current deterioration, deteriorated conditions, and vacancy. The development
of Fillmore Linen Services Phase 2 is being led by North Lawndale Catalyst Initiative, Inc., which is a
subsidiary of the Staines Family Foundation. The architect for this project is Phasma Group, and the general
contractor is a joint venture between WB and WB.
Olson, who has 55% of the joint venture, and Breaking Ground Builders, who has 45% of the
joint venture. CNI Group is acting as the owner's rep and is assisting with the execution of new
market tax credits. Fillmore Linen Services, which will occupy 100% of the facility, is an industrial
laundry cleaning nonprofit organization with a focus in the healthcare linen sector.
The organization was established in 2023 and is supported by the Staines Family Foundation,
who also spearheaded the rehabilitation of 4100 West Fillmore Streets. The rehabilitation of 4100
West Fillmore received a $10 million TIF grant and not only serves as Fillmore Linen's current base of
operation, but also several other businesses that operate from the location. At this location,
Fillmore Linen Services has grown its employee headcount to nearly 200 people and has been
awarded additional service contracts from healthcare providers in Chicago, most recently Endeavor Health.
To facilitate the fulfillment of these new contracts, Fillmore Linen Services is expanding
to the subject property, located two and a half miles away from phase one, and will result in the
creation of an additional 250 total new jobs. The developer for this project, North Lawndale
Catalyst Initiative, is a place-based economic development entity of the Staines Family Foundation.
They will renovate the property to accommodate the expansion of Fillmore Linen Services.
The project will build upon the success of the current operations and upgrade utilities such as
electrical, plumbing, and HVAC to accommodate the new industrial cleaning machinery in order to
reoccupy the vacant property. The total project cost is $47.8 million and will be supported by $10 million
in city assistance, consisting of $5 million in TIF funds from the Western Ogden TIF. The subject of this
action and $5 million allocation of the Housing and Economic Development Bond. This additional site
is expected to hire 180 full-time positions on-site and an additional 70 new jobs at healthcare facilities
across the city. Construction will begin this October and be completed by the end of February 2027.
The total project cost is $47.8 million, in addition to the city's contribution of $10 million,
$5 million of TIF, and $5 million of HED bond funds, the Staines Family Foundation has committed
$23.6 million in equity, an additional $13.1 million of new market tax credits has been secured,
as well as $1 million of grant funds from DCEO. Hard costs for this project account for 66% of this development.
Many of these costs will go towards physical building improvements and utility system upgrades
to accommodate industrial cleaning machinery. Here is a rendering of the proposed exterior once the
project has been completed. Approval of this request will allow North Lawndale Catalyst Initiative,
Inc. to be reimbursed for up to $10 million in eligible construction costs,
consisting of $5 million in TIF and $5 million in HED bonds. Reimbursement will come via one lump sum
payment upon the issuance of a certificate of completion. The project will be subject to standard
city construction compliance, including prevailing wage, local hiring, MBE, and WBE, as well as meet the
newly established 3% VBE aspirational goal. Additional protections of the city's investments
within the RDA include requirements the project will occupy and operate the site throughout the
10-year compliance period, with an exception for the recapture of the new market tax credit.
Beyond renovating the vacant property, Fillmore Linen Services will hire 170 to 180 full-time
on-site positions with an additional 70 to 80 off-site positions for a grand total of 250 positions
related to new operations. The majority of these roles will be hired by individuals from the
surrounding near Westside community area. 95% of these roles will be eligible for individuals without
a high school degree or GED equivalent. In addition, Staines Family Foundation intends to partner with other
local nonprofit organizations such as Chicago CRED, St. Leonard's, and North Lawndale Employment
Network to provide wraparound social services for their employees. These social services will include
assistance with obtaining affordable housing, GED support, food, transportation, health care,
mental health services, and financial literacy courses. As a part of Fillmore Linen Services' hiring plans,
they intend to prioritize hiring individuals who have experience with the criminal justice system,
providing a second chance for many. In additional, the employees at Fillmore Linen Services will receive
100% employer-paid health insurance and a profit-sharing plan once profitable. In closing, DPD requests the
committee's favorable consideration to enter into a redevelopment agreement with North Lawndale Catalyst
Initiative, Inc. to fund the development of Fillmore Linen Services Phase II, located at 920 to 922 South
Campbell Ave. I'm joined today by Leo Smith and Reginald Jones from the Staines Family Foundation, as well as
David Doi and Jennifer Brantford from CNI to answer any questions you may have regarding the project.
Thank you, Mr. Benson. Are there any questions for members of the committee? Alderman Moore?
Correct me if I'm wrong, and this sounds familiar. At a time, was the Will Group a part of this team? And if so, what happened?
Hi, Jeff Mellon, managing deputy, DPD. I don't believe the Will Group was part of this new extension.
I didn't say the new. I know you could use the word new. And Monique, correct me if I'm wrong. I thought it was supposed to go over there at one point near your warehouse. Did you know anything about that? Oh, you have one as well? That's what it is? Okay. That's the second one. Oh, okay. All right.
Good memory. Any other questions? Seeing none, Alderman Irvin.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Again, just want to thank the Staines Family Foundation for their visionary leadership on this.
What they have done at Fillmore One, located in the 24th Ward, has brought some significant change to some people's lives, and the fact that they were able to get this second contract with Endeavor that necessitates this additional facility and the expansion of their work outside of just North Lawndale, but into the Garfield Park community, is definitely going to be helpful to the West Side in its entirety as it relates to the jobs and the wraparound services that will be presented.
So glad that they've had great success over on Fillmore and Pulaski. Hopefully that same success attributes to the Garfield Park residents as well for a favorable recommendation from the committee. Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman Irvin. Motion made by Alderman Scott recommending do pass. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed. In the opinion of the chairs, the ayes have it.
And the due pass recommendation of this ordinance will be reported out at the next City Council meeting.
Thank you.
Item number seven from the Department of Planning and Development is an ordinance authorizing the execution of a redevelopment agreement with Hudson, Michigan Avenue owner, LLC,
to provide housing and housing and economic development funds for the Hudson House project at 2222 South Michigan Avenue in the third ward and an amount not to exceed $5 million in HED funding from a city loan and an amount not to exceed $10 million HED from a city grant.
This is being presented to us by Bill Grahams from the Department of Planning and Development.
Mr. Grahams.
Thank you.
Good afternoon, Chair Dowell and members of the Committee on Finance.
For the record, my name is William Grahams, Financial Planning Analyst with the Department of Planning and Development's Bureau of Economic Development.
I'm joined today by Jeffrey Cohen, Managing Deputy Commissioner and representatives from the development team.
I'm here today seeking your approval of a redevelopment agreement between the city and Hudson, Michigan Avenue owner, LLC,
for the purpose of authorizing the use of up to $15 million in housing and economic development bond funds
to redevelop the historic Hudson Motor Company building into a mixed-use property with complementary retail uses.
The subject property is 2222 South Michigan Avenue, located within the near Southside Community Area.
The central...
The central...
The central...
area, and in the third ward represented by Chair Dowell, who is in support of the project.
The project site, outlined in red, is located on the west side of Michigan Avenue, just
south of Cermak Road.
The property is within walking distance of McCormick Place, Wintrust Arena, and the CTA's
Cermak Green Line Station.
Here you can see the current condition of the site.
The exterior reflects decades of vacancy and deferred maintenance, warranting a full rehabilitation
to preserve the historic facade.
Designed by Alfred Alshuler, a prominent Chicago school architect, and completed in 1923, the
Spanish Revival-style building was originally constructed as a showroom for the Hudson Motor
Company.
Its terracotta facade is an integral part of the Motor Row Landmark District along Michigan
Avenue from 14th to 25th Streets, which was designated as a Chicago Landmark District in
the year 2000.
Here you can see the interior of the former first-floor showroom.
While many historic features, including tiled floors and decorative columns, remain intact,
the majority of the building has suffered extensive deterioration.
Significant investment is required to bring the structure back into a safe and functional
condition.
The project will renovate the 130,000-square-foot former Hudson Motor Company building into a
154-key boutique hotel with approximately 43,000 square feet of commercial retail space.
The hotel will carry the Curio by Hilton flag and will feature a restaurant, event space, fitness
center, and rooftop pool and bar.
The scope of the work for the $72.8 million project is significant and includes a total
replacement of the existing building systems, a full interior restoration and repositioning,
roof and masonry replacement, as well as site work and foundation repairs.
The developer is targeting a completion and opening in the second quarter of 2028.
Hudson Michigan Avenue Owner LLC is the single-purpose entity set up to facilitate the redevelopment
of the property.
This entity will be managed by Israel Adonaje, founder of the Impact Fund and legendary Chicago
Bears defensive end, and Tibor Kellerman, CEO of Kellerman Company, an established virtually
integrated real estate investment and development firm.
The Curio by Hilton Hotel will be managed by First Hospitality, with amenities including a
fitness center and work club to be operated by Fabric.
The ground floor restaurant, event space, and rooftop bar and pool will be operated by
Pangea Restaurant Group and Fabio Vivani Hospitality.
Importantly, the developer, having secured a hotel flag, has also executed a labor agreement
with Unite Here regarding the hotel jobs.
In addition to the city's support, the project will be funded with a combination of $4.6 million
of developer equity, $2 million in hotel key money provided by Hilton, a $41 million senior
loan, and $10.2 million in historic tax credits.
The city's $15 million contribution is comprised of a $10 million grant and a $5 million repayable
loan. On the USA side, approximately 82.5% of the expenditures are dedicated to hard costs,
reflecting the scope and intensity of the physical work required, with the remaining 17.5% covering
soft costs. The city funds will be dispersed in tranches at 20%, 40%, 60%, and 90% completion
milestones. Upon receipt of the certificate of completion, the final payment will be issued
and interest on the city loan will begin accruing. The project must remain operational and at least
75% occupied throughout the 10-year compliance period, and the development team is required
to meet prevailing wage, MWBE, and city residency standards, and has agreed to make best-faith
efforts toward the city's new 3% VBE target. This exterior rendering shows the preservation
of the historic terracotta facade, along with a thoughtfully designed rooftop deck featuring
a pool and restaurant. To maintain the building's historic character, rooftop elements will not
be visible from the public way. Here is a sample rendering of a hotel room illustrating the project's
interior design direction and its balance of modern amenities with historic architecture character.
DPD is highly supportive of the Hudson House project as it advances several important community
priorities. Crucially, it restores a long, vacant historic building, activates a key site within
the Motor Road District, and supports nearby economic drivers such as McCormick Place and Wind Trust Arena.
The project is expected to generate approximately 50 permanent full-time jobs and 195 temporary construction
jobs, adding new retail, dining, and entertainment options that strengthen the corridor while expanding
revenue and the tax base. For these reasons and to advance this long-awaited redevelopment, DPD requests
your approval of this project. I'd like to thank the committee for your favorable consideration of
this request. I'm also joined today by Tibor Kellerman, Katie Junkie-Dale, and Ann Maroney from the
development team. We are happy to answer any questions you might have. Thank you.
Thank you. Mr. Grahams, are there any questions from members of the committee?
Seeing one, seeing none. I'd like to just thank Israel Adonijah and Tibor Kellerman for their investment
in the third ward. This will address a large vacancy that we have on Michigan Avenue. I also want to
acknowledge that the hotel, which is coming, has signed an agreement with Unite Here, and we look forward
to bringing, I would say, Soho South to Michigan Avenue. And with that, can I get a motion to move
due pass by Alderman Martin? All those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed? In the opinion of the
chair, the ayes have it, and the due pass recommendation will be reported out at the next city council meeting.
Item number eight. Thank you, Mr. Grahams. Thank you, Mr. Stern. Item number eight, miscellaneous is one
proposed order authorizing the payment of various small claims against the city of Chicago. A direct
introduction, and that list of payments was approved and sent electronically to everyone. If there are no
objections, these will be placed on the omnibus. Item number nine is a miscellaneous proposed order
denying the payment of various small claims against the city of Chicago. Again, a direct introduction,
and that list of payments denied was sent electronically to everyone. If there are no
objections, these will be placed on file. Will be placed on the omnibus. There being no further business
before the committee, can I get a motion to adjourn? So moved by Alderman Lopez to adjourn. All those in
favor signify by saying aye. Opposed? In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. The committee on
finance meeting is adjourned. Thank you.