Good morning.
Committee will come back to order.
We'll begin today with public comment.
We have two people who have signed up for public comment.
We'll begin with Zoe Lee, followed by Jessica Jackson.
Yes, Ms. Lee. Yes, you're up.
We only got two.
You or Jessica, y'all pick.
What up? It's budget season for
fiscal year 2027 budget
recommendations. Now,
Danielle went and filed her petitions yesterday, so I couldn't make the
first day.
And if anybody wants to challenge her, just
know it doesn't have to be the candidate. I know y'all have minions.
I will get everybody's signatures, and it'll be a
marathon on CFR. It'll be a marathon,
and I will go find me-- She had a lot of Mexican volunteers.
We will go through every one of these
signatures. So I really advise y'all to understand
integrity, and we're going to
all get on the ballot,
and may the best one win.
Now,
Brandon Johnson
is proposing a billion dollars more.
But we're $882 million in a deficit.
He said he gave $10 billion to Downtown in the last three years.
I don't know. But when I walk down State Street,
it's the saddest thing I've ever seen in my life.
He also said he gave $2.5 billion to the South Side.
Now, I know for sure he didn't do that, just like I know for sure he didn't give
Downtown $10 billion.
Then West Side,
off of Madison and Pulaski, I know for sure they didn't see that $2 billion.
So I'm trying to figure out where are these numbers coming from,
and why do y'all think this generation don't know how to count?
If
I don't know anything else,
I know how to count
Y'all keep talking about this socialism stuff.
Y'all affordability,
when y'all are rich in here.
Tax the politicians. Tax the politicians,
tax the churches,
tax the 501 [c] [3]
s, because y'all are the rich.
Ain't nobody going to continue to play with this. I'm trying to tell you.
Y'all think the Montgomery bus boycott was something.
Watch the CFR
boycott. This is ridiculous. Let's do better, let's do better.
Why are we proposing another billion dollars? Why?
Danielle Carter Walters for mayor.
Thank you for your comments. Ms. Jessica Jackson, you're our second and final
speaker.
So, at the end of the day,
you all just don't know how to do government. You just don't.
You have very, very limited skills in everything.
You
do not know how to generate revenue any way
except for raising taxes.
You just lack business skills. Most of you in
here are what, activists and organizers?
How did you generate income?
You didn't. You came and got 501 [c] [3] s from the city, from the
county.
So you don't know how to manage our money,
and now you in these positions and you're doing a horrible job,
and every year we're going further and further and further into debt, and
you all's services are getting worse and worse and worse.
Now, this is not to put you on Front Street or nothing like that, Pat Dowels,
nothing like that. Just to make an example.
My tax dollars is paying for services.
Paying for services, because I'm not an
affordable house and stuff. Not that I got nothing to do with people who need what
they need, but there's a population of people out here that actually work
and actually pay their money into the system,
and that's the system that generates the income for you all
to do all this bad managing that you all are doing.
And when I ask for some services from
corporation counsel to settle my issue, for me to be
told that, "Well, she really can't do it because she hasn't been appointed
yet." Okay, then give me the next person in line.
The next person in line is John Hendricks.
Your explanation is, "Well, can't meet with him because you don't
like him. He don't like me." That's crazy.
He has a job to do.
It has nothing to do with personality. He has a job to do.
Whether I like him or not, he's taking my money
for his salary.
See, it's crazy. It's just like when I told Tim Conway, what is it,
Bill Conway,
to look at what these public administrators are doing, and the fact that he could
cover his face and talk about, "Don't show me that, don't show me that," that's
insane. And again, my money is paying his salary.
Same thing with Matt Martin. Supposed to be a civil rights
attorney. I give him the information, he won't move on it.
Part of it is incompetence. Another part of it
is corruption.
You all are so corrupt that when you get a real
situation, you all don't know how to handle it, and that's why you have to keep on
doing things like putting Jason Ervin over the budget.
He's a knucklehead. He doesn't know how to do anything at all,
or we would not be-- You can nod your head over there, but you know it's true.
We would not be going into four budget seasons in debt.
You're a loser.
Thank you for your comment.
Now, Mr. Blakemore.
No, no, no. Hold up, hold up, man. You railed on us for not
starting on time and all that stuff, and here you come after we done started with
your slip. I'm going to give you a pass today, so go ahead.
But, sir-
Proceed with your comments, sir.
Sir, what makes me different from you?
You getting paid.
Sir,
sir,
you getting paid.
I'm not.
I'm not getting paid, and you should always remember, I
am a citizen here,
and
we're not on the same level now.
They don't pay me.
So you said I came late and turned my slip in
late. I'm not getting paid. I'm a public servant.
You should be elated to have a man of Mr.
Blakemore caliber to come to your meetings.
Look at these empty seats with
these hearing building. It's something
wrong with you that you're not informing your
constituents.
Thank you.
You turn your slip in to run for alderman
again,
so this should be packed with each one of you
alderman constituents here. So you have the
audacity to tell a person of my high
caliber, "You're late." And you all,
the difference between us, between you and me, I'm not getting
paid
to serve.
I am a citizen here, and you should
always be
welcome to see a citizen
So, Mr. Blakemore, you late.
Listen here, sir.
Do you know who I am?
I know who you are.
You get 100 and something thousand dollars a year for a
part-time job. And how many people from your
ward is here today?
Did you let them know about this meeting, the importance of the
building department? Did you do that?
All of you, did you do that? If you did, these seats wouldn't
be so damn empty.
Amen.
So,
don't play with me.
I'm not a toy to be tossed around at will.
I've been here. I am somebody. I didn't need Jesse
Jackson to tell me I was somebody. My mama and daddy told me that.
Now, I'm seeing you as a nobody when you going
to put yourself above me. I am a citizen,
and I pay
. So,
the audacity to talk to a man of my height.
You late. You way too late.
Because you've been around me and Ed Smith and all of these corrupt
politicians. You follow them. Follow me.
And we'll-
Thank you, Mr. Blakemore.
Follow you? All right, I got you. All right.
Today, we
have the Department of Buildings before us today.
Welcome, Commissioner Hopkins and the team.
Before we proceed with them,
we're going to have a brief overview from COFA.
I'm not going to do that to Dalia y'all alone. No, I'm going to do
that. Chairman Irvin, this is Alderman Myers.
Can I be recognized for the purpose of a quorum, please?
You've already been recognized. This is one continuous meeting, so you're good.
Thank you.
Everybody's good.
Thank you.
I'm only missing one member that hasn't chimed in yet.
Okay.
All right. Go ahead,
Director Odegray.
Thank you. Chairman Irvin, Vice Chairman Lee, alderpersons,
and guest, good morning. My name is Janice Odegray, Chief
Administrative Officer at COFA.
Today, COFA is presenting a brief analysis of the Department of Building
proposed FY 2027 budget.
Their proposed budget is approximately 40.5
million, an increase of 1.1 million, or
2.79% over the prior year.
Most of the department's funding, approximately 36.7
million, is allocated to personnel, with 3.8
million allocated to non-personnel.
The department is proposing no increase in its budgeted workforce,
which remains at 279 positions. At the
same time, the department has a vacancy rate of
15.64%.
Looking at appropriations by category and fund, personnel is the
largest category. Personnel appropriations increased by
approximately 910,000, or
2.56%, to
36.67 million.
Contractual services increased by approximately
$80,000, while equipment increased from zero to
$100,000.
Travel and commodities remained relatively flat.
From a funding perspective, approximately 32.5 million
is coming from the corporate fund.
The remaining funding streams lies within the water fund,
the vehicle tax fund, and sewer fund.
The historical view gives us important context.
The department's budget declined in 2021,
then increased in the following years.
The proposed FY 2027 budget of
40.47 million is the highest amount
shown in this series.
Notice how the funding composition changed.
The chart shows that community development block grant funding supported a
portion of the department's budget in the earlier years, while the
most recent budget relies more heavily on local funding,
particularly the corporate fund.
The staffing trend shows 295 budgeted FTEs
in 2018 and 2019. That number declined to
260 in 2021, increased to
290 in 2024, and now stands at
279 in the FY 27 proposal. The chart
also shows grant-funded positions falling to zero
beginning in 2024, while locally funded
positions account for the current workforce.
This concludes my brief analysis of the Department of Building.
Thank you, Director.
Mm-hmm.
We've been joined today by Commissioner Marlene Hopkins from the Department of
Buildings. If you can introduce your staff that are here in the well with you, as
well as those that are in the box, and after which,
we will proceed to
questions. We're going to waive the reading of the opening statement.
Everyone has a copy of that, it's been provided for them.
After which, we'll open with questions.
Good morning, Chairman,
Vice Chair Lee, and members of the committee.
To my right, I have John Scott, my first deputy
Next to him is Lolita Ware-King, Deputy Commissioner of Finance.
In the box, Grant Ulrich, Managing Deputy Commissioner.
Hal Hutchinson, Deputy Commissioner of Permitting.
Carl Byrd, Deputy Commissioner of Technical Inspections.
Martha Reynoso, Deputy Commissioner of Express Permits.
Irma Rodriguez, Chief Building Construction Inspector,
Conservation. Nesfa Hyatt Brown,
the department's PIO.
In the second row, I have Scott Frankowiak, Chief New
Construction.
Next to Scott is Oscar Compion, Supervisor of Electrical
Inspectors. Next to Oscar is Stephen
Gibson, Supervisor of Electrical Inspections.
Louis Rosado, Chief Building Construction Inspector
of the Building Safe Community Initiative Task Force
and
our SIP Bureau.
Don Mitchell,
Chief Building Construction Inspector of Demolition.
And Michelle Evans, my executive assistant.
All right. We're going to open with Bennett Lawson.
Chairman Villegas is not here, you're the vice chair of the committee.
So are you ready to proceed?
I will be.
Go ahead.
Sure. I'm so low on the pecking order, otherwise. I appreciate it.
Thank you very much. And thank you, Commissioner.
It's always great to work with you and your department and staff.
We always ask time to permit, and where the trends are going in that vein.
So let's start with that.
And then while we're at it, volume.
We're all concerned about the volume and want to make sure that we have projects in
every neighborhood. What trends have we seen over the
last year?
So the average time to permit total days for
2026 through this quarter is 88 days.
Roughly two-thirds of that time is with the design professional,
and a third of that time is with the department for the actual reviews.
And that's about the same where it's been, right?
It-
About a third with us, and-
It's fluctuated-
Right
... over the years, but that's roughly the average.
Okay.
And then the volume of permits. Are we seeing an increase,
decrease, and in certain types? Have you taken a look at...
So year to date, we've issued
24,186
permits in comparison to 2025, where
we issued 24,405.
What we are actually
looking at is our express
permits.
There's a difference of 1.2% less this
year. Through the third quarter, we've issued
5,328 in comparison to
2025, with 5,392.
Our plan-based permits are down currently.
Year to date, we've issued 3,818 of
those permits in comparison to 2025, where
we issued 4,234, and that's our
direct developer services, our standard plan review, and our
self-cert. So all of our plan-based permits.
Okay. So I was going to ask about that, because the larger projects get a lot of
focus, of course.
And that's the developer services piece.
That is correct.
Okay. Yes.
Okay. Great.
We mentioned inspectors, right? And
wanted to give you a chance to talk about what we have on, what the plan is to
close vacancies, and how those inspectors are being
used going forward.
Okay, so we have a total of 197 budgeted inspector
positions. 33 of those positions are currently
vacant. 164 are filled.
We have extended contingent offers to 10 of
the vacant positions. Nine of those are for building construction
inspectors that will go to our new Construction Bureau,
our Special Inspection Program Bureau, and our Conservation
Bureau. And the other one is a ventilation
and furnace inspector position. Year to date, we've
hired electrical inspectors,
three, and we've hired two elevator inspectors,
and we've hired one iron inspector.
Right. There's only a handful in the Iron Bureau, right?
So we have three total.
Right.
And as
you know,
City Council passed the phase three of the construction codes,
which introduced the interlocking stairs-
Right
... as well as the option of building rear
porches using steel. So once we start to
see the impacts of those code changes, we will then be prepared to go to
budget to ask for additional iron inspectors.
Right. And those take effect beginning of the year, or are they in place right now?
So
it became an option on October 1st.
Okay.
And it will be in effect in December 1st.
Okay, great.
You mentioned the special inspection. What is that exactly?
So that's our public places of assembly- Okay
... and public places of amusement.
Right.
And they're responsible for inspecting large facilities like
United Center, McCormick Place, Navy Pier.
Wrigley Field.
Yes, Wrigley Field.
Excellent. Well, we're going to keep them busy in the off-season.
We've got quite the project there.
It's more CDOT than buildings this time, but I'm sure we'll see your folks there.
It's 279 FTEs, and nearly 200 of those are inspectors.
That's the workforce of your department.
So I'm happy to hear that offers are out and-
If we can get you fully staffed, that's huge for you.
Are there any barriers that you're seeing, whether that's through HR or
other processes?
No. What I will say is that candidates look one way on
paper, and then when they actually come in to do the interview, you see a different
side of the individual.
Right.
So we interviewed a total of 21 candidates for building
construction inspectors, and we were able to
identify 11 successful bidders. So we had-
Right
... nine vacancies that we had approved A forms for, which we were able
to extend those nine contingent office.
But we also had some retirements this year, so that's caused a
fluctuation in the number of vacancies.
But we work very closely with human resources for our
candidate pools.
Sometimes we hear about time being the issue,
a good candidate, it's taken so long that they've taken another job.
Has that come up with your hires at all?
That has not come up in our hires.
Good.
One of the
things that works very well is that everything is now electronic, utilizing
DocuSign. And so as long as the candidate is
following their email notifications and is being responsive,
we're able to work through the onboarding
process seamlessly.
Right.
I think your budget is going up a little bit more for
non-personnel costs-
That's correct
... supplies and tech. Do you want to talk about where that's going?
So
in 0139, there is an additional
$184,000, and that is for our ePlan-
Right
... system. That funding was previously in the Department of
Technology and Innovation, but it was moved over into the Department of Buildings
budget this year.
Got you. It's a much smaller number than your personnel number, certainly.
On the tech side of things,
have we sort of achieved all of our goals in modernizing, or is there some more
work to do there?
There is still work to do.
Always. But what phase are we at and give us the updates you have.
So we're currently in
between phase four and phase five.
So we
migrated demolition, construction equipment, and generating
permitting earlier this summer,
along with demolition permitting and periodic inspections of
existing electrical generators.
We are currently working on the applications that were
initiated in Hansen, and those have to be completed by
December 31st. And the remainder of the
construction equipment permitting process is scheduled for implementation
in 2027. In phase five, we are
really focusing on our plan-based permits and
migrating those from Hansen Seven into IPS 11.
And that will be inclusive of self-certification,
standard plan review, developer services, along
with some of our trade licensing, the general contractors,
electrical contractors, plumbing contractors, and masons.
And we are looking for that implementation in the third quarter of
2027.
Great.
We talked a little bit, since I'll make this my last question, about
fines and how the department is fining.
We're not increasing, I don't believe, in the proposal, any fines that impact your
department. Correct me if I'm wrong, Wil.
There are no proposed fine increases-
Right, or fee increases- ... for the
Department of Buildings ... inspection fee increases. Okay.
No. That will be something that we will take a look at as we're going through the
modernization when we get to the inspection build-out in
phase, I think it's phase seven.
Mm-hmm.
We'll take a look at inspection fees at that time.
Okay, great. I will leave it there.
Thank you very much, Commissioner, and to your team.
I look forward to working with you for another year-
Thank you,
Alderman ... and more. Thank you. Thank you, Chair.
Thank you.
Can we just get some hands raised to see who has questions for Buildings? Okay.
Who else?
Alderman Riley, you can go next.
Okay, go ahead. I'm just getting your hands up.
Thank you, Chairman. Good morning, Commissioner.
Okay. Yesterday
we said that we would start with the people that were here when we gaveled
in. I was very clear about that. I got a list of people that when we
gaveled in that were here. Everybody else will go as they come
in. We've been doing it that way my whole tenure here.
It's always been the same. Yes.
When we gaveled in--
No, I wasn't late.
Okay. Were you here?
Okay. Very well. Okay.
Okay. All right.
Alderman Riley, you can proceed.
Thank you, Chairman. Good morning, Commissioner.
Good morning.
So I'm just going to jump right in and thank you for responding to
my budget memo.
The department is moving permitting inspections and licensing from the old Hansen
system to IPS 11.
What has the project cost so far? What is its total budget?
And what share of permits still run through Hansen?
So the funding for this migration
is being funded by the Department of Technology and Innovation, not by
the Department of Buildings, so I don't have those numbers available.
But I can definitely ask Commissioner Lucius for that and provide that to you
through the chair.
Okay.
Please do.
And-
Mm-hmm
You've been busy issuing a lot of permits over the last
year and a half or so,
which is good news for the city's economy, and many of those permits are being
issued in the Central Business District, which is also great.
One big component of the administration's budget
proposal this year
involves increasing the personal property lease tax.
The lease tax applies to rented construction equipment like cranes, lifts,
scaffolding, and generators,
and the jobs tax applies to contractors with more than 125
full-time employees.
Has the department or the administration estimated what the mayor's proposed
lease tax increase and jobs tax would add to the cost of a typical
housing or commercial project in Chicago?
We have not, Alderman, but that is definitely something we can go and
do a review of and provide you a response through the chair.
And if you could,
before we're asked to vote on any items by this committee,
that would be very helpful.
At a time when we're facing a housing shortage, a
significant housing shortage in the city of Chicago,
we've been
doing all sorts of acrobatics to try and
incentivize development of affordable units,
including significant subsidies.
And so
these new costs, the cost of the mayor's job-killing head
tax and the cost of the highest PPLT
tax in the nation,
those are two very important inputs when the finance
community is evaluating whether or not to invest in a city like ours.
And so I think it would be very valuable to the development community and the
building trades to understand
at a high level what these new costs are going to mean
for their projects and whether or not they can get financing from the
private sector.
So I would please ask you to prioritize that request for this
committee.
The city owns over 7,000 vacant lots,
and the department's forfeiture program is meant to return vacant and
abandoned buildings to productive use.
How many vacant buildings did the city return to private ownership
and the tax rolls in 2026 year to date?
So year to date, we've returned seven to the tax rolls.
Those seven properties are located in Englewood.
We have an additional eight that are going through the enforcement
process for forfeiture in housing court, and we
work very closely with the Department of Law and the Department of Housing on this
process.
So of the 7,000 vacant lots in the city, we have seven.
Well, the vacant lots are not part of the forfeiture.
The forfeiture are vacant buildings.
Okay.
How about vacant lots?
So my department does not have
any control over the vacant lot process or program.
Okay. And how many buildings are currently in the pool for
forfeiture?
So currently there are eight.
So we're
looking at all of the buildings that have active demolition orders
and/or active cases in circuit court.
So the research that is done is to determine has there
been a transfer of the asset to a different owner?
Is it part of the Cook County Land Bank?
Is there other activities taking place?
Is it tied up in liens or other
legal issues that would not make it a viable candidate?
And so there are eight that we're getting ready to go out to do
inspections on to certify that are good candidates for
forfeiture. We just started this program earlier this year,
so we are anticipating to see a greater number
in 2027.
Okay. So just so that I'm clear,
the total number of buildings in Chicago under a court order
or administrative order to be demolished is eight?
No. The total number of buildings with an active order of
demolition is 3,041.
Okay.
And seven have been returned to the tax rolls, and eight are pending.
Yes. Eight are pending, and eight are going to be referred.
So
how are we going to cut through the rest of that 3,000-plus
list at a more rapid clip? Is there a plan to do so?
You did allude to having to have conversations with the Land Bank and others, but
what-
Well,
we just started it this year. We're looking to see what
additional resources are needed in order for us to be able
to increase the number of buildings that we are able
to refer to the law department for forfeiture.
Okay.
In recent months, there's been some headlines and public
conversations about
the city's various permitting processes, not just unique to
your department.
But for the record, on average, how many days is it taking to issue a
standard plan review permit?
88 days.
88. And how about an express permit?
That is one. It's typically a day,
unfortunately, but fortunately, we have an e-acceptance
process which requires the contractor of record to verify and
validate that they're actually the contractor.
So if they don't do it real time on that day, it is delayed until
they complete that process.
Okay. And how about residential permits?
Well, residential permits could either fall under express, or they could fall
under self-cert or a standard plan review.
So the plan-based permits, it's the average time to permit is 88 days.
And
how does that track with previous years?
It's pretty consistent. We're not seeing that large of a
deviation. Two-thirds of the time it's with a design professional,
a third of the time it's with the city.
Okay. And just so I'm clear,
and maybe my colleagues,
when we're talking about the design professional, that person works for?
I'm speaking about the architect of record.
Correct.
So about 30 days of that process lands on the city, is what you're saying?
Yeah. Okay.
I think those are the bulk of my questions.
Yeah. That's what I've got. Thank you, Chairman.
Thank you, Alderman Riley.
Alderman Lopez, are you ready?
Born ready.
Good morning, Chairman and members of the committee.
Good morning, Commissioner, and to your team.
Couple things just wanted to touch on.
In your
remarks, you mentioned that there are 3,897
new units of housing in the city of Chicago.
Is that inclusive of both publicly funded and privately funded developments?
That is a combination of both.
Do you have a breakdown of what that looks like that are
publicly funded and those that are not?
Not with me today, but we'll be able to get that to you through the
chair. Provide that through the chair by ward, I would appreciate that.
Inspections.
We're making some progress with regards to inspections,
but I know that one of the biggest complaints that we have continues to be
multiple inspectors coming
to the same job sites. Can you expound on what we're doing to
ensure, because I know we've had conversations with this department before with
regards to having
one person follow through the entire cycle of whatever an inspection
might be for a particular project.
Why do we have-
So your question is
the same trade, but a different inspector following up on the follow-up
inspection, or?
Same property.
If there's an issue, a building issue of some variety, inspector A comes out.
So when we respond to 311 complaints, people call 311
complaints for conservation, they may call it for electrical, and they may call
it for plumbing. So that's three different bureaus, which would require three
different inspectors that are going to look at their respective area
of responsibility and trade.
Understood. But
let's stick with one. Let's say plumbing inspector.
You don't have the same plumbing inspector coming out from start to finish.
So if you're talking for a permit,
it is not the same inspector that returns to the job site, and that
is largely due to the fact that we want to ensure that no one
gets too comfortable
working with particular contractors.
A common complaint that I receive, and I'm sure many of my colleagues do as well,
is that when inspectors come that are new to a location,
what was okay with one inspector becomes un-okay with the next inspector.
And you're actually adding and compounding to the issues that individuals are being
told that this light bulb is fine until the next guy comes and says now
it's a violation, or this crack is okay.
That adds time. And even as you mentioned too, cutting the red tape,
that's a
layer of red tape that is growing.
And I understand the need for lack of comfortability when it comes to
inspections. I fully appreciate that.
But I think that there has to be some semblance of common sense to when
one person says this is fine, then it's not up to the next guy to try and find
or create another problem just to keep the ball moving in that direction.
I totally agree with you, and I stress that
unequivocally to my supervisors
often. That once an inspector has given an approval,
the inspector that is following that
inspection should not be requiring any changes.
So if you are aware-
I'm sorry, Commissioner. Do you track that?
I have not, but what I will do is, you
contact me when you have that example because that's what's missing.
I need the address, I need the permit, I need to know the details,
and I take it from there.
Do we have the ability through technology to assist
supervisors when they receive a report on a building that lists
10 things to fix,
and then the follow-up will say whether or not those things have been fixed.
If there's a change to that property's
fix list, is there any red flags that show up in your
inventory or within your supervisors to say, "Hey, why is this happening?"
It doesn't show up currently because, again, we have to get to that
stage in the process for
the modernization of the system. But what I will say, all of you have my
number. All of you know how to reach me.
When you have those, if a constituent comes to you with that, give me a chance.
I bet you.
I want to know about it because not only am I going to get that
supervisor, I'm going to be out to the site myself personally.
And I appreciate that, and I commend you because you have done that.
But I also know that's a slippery slope for all of us,
to try to be calling when an inspector comes with too many issues.
I just want to make sure that at least it's consistent.
It will be consistent because it would only require me to have to do it one time.
So if we could work with DTI to try to make
sure that that alleviates the need for phone calls
on permit inspections, that would be great.
Active demolition orders, my favorite topic in the 15th Ward.
And I appreciate you working with my office on some of these.
Of the 3,041 orders
What are we looking at in terms of the timeline that these orders have been issued
as well as the status of assigning contractors to do the work?
So what I will say is that not every building that we have a
demolition order on is actually demolition worthy.
The courts will enter those orders when there is no one that is
appearing before the court to express an interest to
actually reinvest in it, and that is why we are able
to use those buildings to go back through the forfeiture process.
Because we want to see the reinvestment in the neighborhoods with the existing
housing stock that can be rehabilitated.
We realize we can't demo our way out, but we also are
cognizant of those buildings where, due to the length of
time that they've sat vacant, that there are structural
deterioration that is occurring, that those are buildings that we have to
demolish
immediately. And so we are very appreciative to you and your
team for bringing to our attention those buildings that are
of a concern to you, and that enables us to
prioritize those for demolition.
Now, I know previously the Department of Law and your department were working
on new protocols for informing aldermen of when these
cases were coming before a judge across the street.
That kind of has fallen off, and I believe at one point, I asked our former corp
counsel what we were doing, and I was told we are getting to it.
Have we gotten to whatever the new standard is for
informing aldermen of when these cases are showing up?
So we receive that same list, and it's generated from the Department of Law
to all of our offices.
I can follow up and ask the status, and I'm sure you will ask
Acting Corporation Counsel Hatchett as well, the status of that.
And I think part of the frustration that many of us have, particularly those that
deal with these, is that oftentimes when we used to get the list,
the law department would do continuance after continuance after continuance,
much to aldermanic and community aggravation and
your frustration, I would imagine.
Because we all know the problem, but we're not taking
leadership in making a decision on whether or not we're going to demolish
or move forward.
I understand, and I'm glad my colleague brought up, and you brought up the
issue of forfeiture. Where are we with receivership as well?
Because I think at one point we were doing a receivership program
for community, and then we stopped doing receivership programs.
It seems like every few years we try it, and it never kind of takes
off the way we hope.
So the receivership program is, or receivers are
appointed through the court, so they are an arm of the court.
And so under Chief Judge Beach
tenure, we have three new judges that have been assigned to
housing court, and those judges are
actually
more receptive to receivers being appointed
upon the time the city makes that request.
Who are our housing court judges?
So we have Judge Rodriguez in room 1111.
We have Judge Marsalek in
room 1109.
We have Judge Sayre, these are the three newest, in
1105.
We have Judge Sconza
in room 1103.
And we have Judge Merino in room 1107.
Thank you.
Chairman, I may have a round two later.
I'll also be sending some things through the chair.
But I have one final question, if I may, and that is with regards to something that
is also referenced in your
remarks about helping struggling homeowners who are having to deal with
violations versus upgrades. And as you may or may not be
aware,
working with City Council, the Department of Planning and Housing have
introduced a new TIF/NIP program,
to help with grants of up to $37,000
for homeowners, which will be before this body at some point.
Are you or have you been in consultation with those departments,
one, with regards to that? And two, would you be
open to, as we heard from Comptroller Belsky
yesterday about amnesty programs for water bills and things of that nature,
to embarking on a Department of Buildings amnesty
inspection program for our homeowners,
particularly seniors who need help,
are afraid to ask because they don't know.
And then,
if possible, down the road, connecting that with our funding
programs, which generally do not allow city money to help go
towards violations. Would we be able to create something in that
fashion?
Absolutely. Absolutely, because I realize there are a number of seniors who
are aging in place in their homes. Their homes are falling
into a state of disrepair because they don't have the financial
means to make those repairs, nor do they really have
access to the proper resources. There are countless seniors
who we assist now who currently have hired a contractor to do work.
They've taken the money. The condition still exists.
Yep.
And so we work through our bad contractor enforcement pipeline to go after
that contractor. But definitely would look forward to working
with my colleagues in the departments you referenced, along with the
members of City Council on a program like that.
Awesome. Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you, Chairman.
Thank you. Alderman Martin, followed by Alderman
Conway.
Thank you, Commissioner, and well, thank you, Chairman, and good morning,
Commissioner.
Of course.
Just two quick sets of questions for me.
One, we had a solar panel installation
company recently reach out to us asking if there were questions
with DOB's process in two areas. One was the
time of day or the days of week during which solar related
inspections were happening, if it was something that was being pushed
towards after 4:00 PM on weekdays or to Saturdays.
And then second, if there was a change in how those inspections would be
requested, going from the portal previously to a
paper or phone request.
This was the first I was hearing of anything along those lines, so I was wondering
if you or someone on your team could shed light into
whether either of those changes in fact have
happened, and if so, what the reasoning is behind it.
Yes. Thank you, Alderman. The solar permit
inspections were intermingled with our building construction permit
inspections for the electrical bureau.
When the solar permits were intermingled with the building permits, it was
pushing our time to inspection out to five to six weeks,
which means we were holding up residential units, we were holding up
businesses, we were holding up construction.
And so unfortunately, I had to make a decision about how
to prioritize these inspections, and solars
are an option or an additional feature to the home.
And so I made the decision to move those inspections to Saturdays as
reimbursable overtime inspections to the installers, not to the property
owner, to the installers, in order for us to maintain our
responsiveness to those in the construction industry that are looking for those
inspections.
That's helpful. I appreciate that.
And then that second question around how one goes about
requesting that sort of inspection, was there a change in that
process?
So the reimbursable inspection process is currently a paper-based process.
It's not electronic. That is something that we will be looking to implement as we
continue to upgrade our current system.
Understood. And then my last set of questions is following up
on what Alderman Lawson asked, and apologies I had to leave for part of his
questions. But I understand 44
budgeted vacancies in the book. It seems like
about 31 of those, give or take, were inspector related.
Are there things that you think we aren't yet exploring but
could to speed up our ability to fill
those? And I understand that that's separately a question that we can pose to
DHR, but I'm curious if there's something that you would encourage
us to consider along with DHR to fill these positions more
quickly, given how critical they are and how even with some minor things
admittedly, like solar panel installation, we want to make sure that,
especially if the positions are budgeted, we're filling them as quickly as possible
so that maybe that minimizes the extent to which you have to adjust some of
those priorities in ways that I think, to be clear, were appropriate, but
still maybe not ideal.
So
currently,
the hiring process works through our hire plan,
and so we prioritize our hires through
the necessity of the department in order to meet
salvage. And once we have the approved A forms, we work through
DHR. We upload our hire plan hires for the month.
They are very responsive with working with-- The analysts that work
with my department are the best. Let me just go on record to say that.
We upload ours into the system. They are reviewing the job
spec. We're going back and forth to ensure the job spec really reflects
the actual job duties, and they are able to post the
position within a week's time. The postings generally stay up
14 days. Within two weeks of that, we're getting the referral
list, and then another two weeks to kind of work through scheduling for the
actual interviews, making sure that the interviewers in the departments, the
department has the availability.
And once the interviews are performed,
the paperwork is resubmitted to the Department of Human Resources, and it
takes another couple of weeks for us to actually, again, find time on
the interviewer's schedule to then go through the
consensus meeting. Once consensus is completed, it goes
back to DHR, and then it goes through the onboarding process.
So
I'm not aware of any change-- I wouldn't recommend any changes at this point.
I believe that we are going through the process. We're getting the candidates.
We're doing the interviews. We're identifying the most,
the strongest candidates for the positions.
And I mean, we've hired six inspector positions to
date, and we have 10 contingent officers offers that are out.
So we are working through the process.
And unfortunately, we, as you fill, you lose because people
retire.
Yeah.
My last question, just through the Chair, if you could share maybe going back
to 2019,
per year how many inspector positions have been
filled. I'd be interested to know, even with COVID
presenting challenges I'm sure, how the current year
has compared to prior years.
Okay.
That's
it. No problem. Thank you.
Thank you, Chairman.
Thank you. Alderman Conway, followed by Alderman Lospada.
First question following up.
Could you speak in the mic, sir?
No? Okay.
Following up on what Alderman Lawson was asking, you talked a little bit
about
some department reorganization you're doing.
We see some salaries jumping around, like
looks like structural engineer is getting significantly reduced in pay.
Your chief building inspector is getting a significant increase in pay.
Supervising inspector is Getting reduced.
Inspectors, which I know you have a shortage of, are getting increases.
It
looks like there's a broader reorg you're doing on some level, and you kind of
mentioned that when you were speaking to
Alderman Lawson. So noting that, I didn't know if you wanted to follow up.
Explain a little bit of that.
Sure. So the structural engineer position,
the
reviewer retired in August, and so upon retirement,
the salary goes back to the starting level.
We had promotions this year for chief building construction
inspector. We promoted three supervising building
construction inspectors to chief.
So those supervising positions are now vacant and they go back to
the starting rate as well.
Okay. So they're basic resets. I got you.
Another thing, it looks like
building permits revenue is projected to significantly
increase from
about 2.78 million in 2026 to about
3.2 million in '27.
And that's for the Neighborhood Opportunity Fund.
Didn't know if there was something driving
that, or
maybe it's not including the fact that sometimes the Neighborhood Opportunity Fund,
only 80% will make it
into there. It just seemed like a significant increase despite the fact there's
not building behind it.
So
my department doesn't have access to the NOF funds.
Okay.
Through September
30th of this year, our permit revenues were at
$29,697,861.74.
Okay. I might be conflating things.
It was listed under you in the budget data, but
I'll follow up on that.
And the last thing is you mentioned your,
you talked significantly about your shortage of inspectors.
How is that affecting your
turnaround time in terms of a building inspector, either the basic or
express or what have you?
Well, for new construction, our average
time to inspection is about 25 business days.
So the shortage in the building
construction inspector or the number of building construction
inspector vacancies are contributing to that.
And so we have made offers to three candidates
for the new construction bureau. For the
conservation inspectors who are responsible for doing our
311 inspections, we average roughly 45 days.
And so we are going to be adding three additional
inspectors to that bureau because they're just as
necessary.
Yeah.
And then we're going to add the balance to our public places
of assembly and public places of amusement because we need to ensure that those
are being inspected on an annual basis.
No, that's great. And certainly, obviously we want to be doing even more
building here in Chicago, and adaptive reuse, et cetera.
So obviously that's something we need
to keep up on. So, I want to thank my colleagues for essentially asking all my
questions. So Mr. Chairman, that's all I have. Thank you.
Thank you. Alderman Espada, followed by Vice Chair Lee.
Chair, similarly, I will do my best to be additive rather than duplicative.
My first question actually comes from
the budget hearings document. So I'm looking here,
and it
suggests that about 50% or more of Department of Building's
workforce is over the age of 55.
I'm curious, and there's
a lot of experience represented there.
It also suggests to me that you're going to have probably
a cascade of retirements
in the next five to seven years. I'm wondering how the department is preparing for
that.
So what we are currently doing is we're doing a lot of cross-training, a lot of
mentoring of our inspectors in each of the different trades.
We're enabling them to be,
not only
knowledgeable in perhaps just doing a permit-related
inspection, but also dealing with licenses, also dealing
with our complaints, so that they're able to also be an accord
inspector, an administrative hearings inspector, so that they're able to understand
the role that they play in their respective bureaus.
And that enables them to position themselves, that if they
want to move up and apply for a supervisor position, that they're
able to do so. Or if a supervisor wants to apply for a chief
position, they're able to do so. So that's a lot of the
succession planning and training that we're doing.
Also, when we are doing our interviews, we are able
to create a PQC list, which is a preferred
qualified candidate list, and that list stays valid for
18 months in DHR. And that enables us to
advance those individuals into hires when
positions become vacant. So we are cognizant that we
are at a 50%
staffing level that could retire at any given point in
time. And so we're just working with our existing
inspectors and staff, and those that express an interest and a desire to do
more, we allow them to do so.
I appreciate that. Do we have a sense of what
retirements may look like in 2027?
Particularly when we look at the back half of the year.
How do we
prepare for that?
Well, fortunately,
we have a workforce that is pretty
informative and will give us-
Okay
... advance notice of their plans to retire.
So I believe I have two building construction inspectors that are
hinting that they're planning to retire in June of next year.
So when we are aware, that just helps us to build upon our
PQC list when we're doing interviews.
Thank you. My next question comes from the same page.
And again, looking by gender,
it says that 70% of your workforce is male,
21% is female. Now, no one can expect a perfect
50/50 split, but I'm wondering to what you attribute such
a
stark gender disparity in the workforce, and how we address that.
Well, I think that the building trades are not necessarily
something that is of interest to women.
And so what we have actually been doing, you can't be what you can't see.
And so through our partnership with Chicago Builds last year,
we actually met with high school students that are going through the various
construction
training programs, and we introduced them into
what life in the building trades actually looks like.
And that was to expose the young ladies to the
opportunities that are available.
We have female building inspectors, we have female electrical
inspectors, we have female plumbing inspectors, female elevator
inspectors. But if a young girl doesn't know that those
opportunities exist, they can't envision themselves there.
I think it's everything that you just said, and I think my colleague,
Alderwoman Wilson Rodriguez Sanchez, might pick up on that line based
off of ordinance work that she's been working on.
My last point, and then I'll hand the mic...
Actually, two quick questions while I've got the time.
I think the building permit application status portal is
so helpful.
Whenever folks reach out to me for feedback on their permit, it
is the first place I go. When I had an outstanding
permit, it was the first place I would go.
I think the challenge is
when you see that denied status,
it's challenging through the portal itself to dig deeper on
there. I'm wondering if, and this doesn't have to be open to the public,
maybe it's something for the application holder,
is there a way that we can
revise or expand the portal so that if you need to dig
deeper into those causes for denial, maybe for whatever reason,
your architect isn't communicating that feedback to you, the applicant.
How do we expand the amount of information that's available through the portal?
And so what I would suggest is
downloading the PDF file, and
therefore you are able to see everything.
If you open the PDF file on your desktop, you're able,
or on your cell phone, you're able to scroll the entire document
to find what the actual corrections are.
I do it a lot when I'm out in the field if I get a phone call about a permit,
and I'll just go to the portal and put the application number in, and I'm able to
scroll through it. But you have to open the PDF up,
and then, like I said, if you save it or import it so that you're able to save it
into a file that you're able to view it on the desktop.
But that functionality is there.
Who in the box can I follow up with on that functionality?
Grant Alvarez.
There he is. Hi, Grant. Thank you.
My last question
would be, and this can even be through the chair.
I would imagine and assume the Department of
Buildings is a
revenue net positive department for the City of Chicago.
I would like to, at some point, understand
the degree to which that is.
I say this from the perspective of so many of the folks that I talk to in
development spaces have no qualms with the
quality of the inspection work being done, particularly on the
permitting response side. They only wish that there were more members
of your team.
I know that there are various peer cities for which
building permits are essentially an enterprise fund.
And I'm not saying that that's where we have to go in this budget or even the next
one, but I would like to better understand
the degree to which
DOB is a revenue net positive department.
How can we best understand that information?
And so, Alderman, you're correct, and
we have discussed internally considerations
to potentially become an enterprise fund.
We have not talked at great length with the Office of Budget
Management about that, but we are cognizant
that we are a revenue generator through the issuance of
our building permits as well as our trade licenses.
Those are our two largest streams of revenue.
Could those specific revenue streams be provided through the chair, both for
2026 and projected into 2027?
Yes.
Thank you very much. Thank you, Chair.
Thank you, Alderman Espada.
Vice Chair Lefler, Alderman Moore.
Thank you, Chair. Good morning, Commissioner. How are you?
Thank you to you and your team. Yours is one that
we speak with very frequently, for better or for worse.
I don't know if that's a good or a bad thing, but we get great service from
your department, from your staff, and
from you especially.
I just have a couple of questions, and I apologize if any of these are redundant,
because I did have to step out of the room for a second.
Looking at efficiencies, we already talked about permit times.
Did anybody ask you about inspector productivity?
Oh, how are you doing on inspectors vacancy-wise?
Are all your inspector positions filled?
And are they being as
productive as they can, I guess, in a day?
So the answer is no, we have not filled all of our vacancies.
We have 33 inspector vacancies. We've extended
10 contingent offers
to fill 10 of those positions.
As far as efficiencies,
on average inspectors do eight inspections per day.
Depending on the type of inspection, they may be able to do
a few more, especially if it's complaint-based, because it's not as involved
as a permit-based inspection where you're looking at the plans and
verifying that the work was done in compliance.
On average, an elevator inspector does two to three
inspections a day, but that's largely due to the complexity of the inspections that
they're performing for modernizations
and/or various types of repairs.
I think I heard you talking a little bit earlier, I didn't catch all of it, about
just some of the challenges in hiring.
You've got offers extended. When you extend offers, are you getting positive
responses on those offers, or is the length of time that it takes to hire
part of the challenge as other people are looking for work?
No, we have not had any challenges as it is related to
extending an offer or the responsiveness of the candidates.
As I stated earlier, the fact that everything is electronic and goes through
DocuSign has actually made the process a lot
easier-
Oh, that's-
... for the candidate.
Good. That's great to hear.
The task force, the mayor's financial futures task force,
it's alphabet soup, but you know what task force that I'm talking about.
There was a recommendation
about automatic permit approvals for qualifying projects.
Can you talk a little bit about any progress on that?
What sort of permit types might DOB consider moving to, or
where we are on self-certified approvals?
So self-cert is actually a big part of our-
Efficiency
... plan-based permitting programs.
Give me a second.
We issued 2,580 self-cert
permits through September 30th this year,
in comparison to 2,556 last year's.
And how many-
Same time period
... how many--
So those are how many are approved.
How many
applications are we seeing?
We can provide you that through the chair.
Yeah, provide that through the chair. Thank you.
When it comes to demolitions, I know we charge
the owner of the property back
typically for when the city has to demolish a building.
Do you know how we're doing on cost recovery on those?
So that is handled by the Department of Law.
They actually do the cost recovery for us because they file a
lien on the property,
those that have demolition orders.
And so
through September of this year, it looks as if
they've only collected $95,000.
Okay.
We'll ask more of the other departments.
Something that's really-- I don't know that it's
unique to the 11th Ward necessarily.
I know that your task force teams work really closely
with a lot of other departments. I just want to say thank you for the work
that you all do. We've had some unique challenges in the 11th Ward that
I don't want to talk about on the record here.
But we've brought you some weird and odd things, and
your department has always risen to the occasion.
And we get really expeditious responses.
I know that it's frustrating on the part of constituents when complaints
come in,
and we're not able to just jump right on it.
There are rules and laws and policies that we've got
to sort through and coordinate with other departments.
But I will say that we've seen good progress over the
course of the last year under your leadership. So I just want to thank you so much.
Knowing all of the things that you are juggling, and the hands-on person
that you are, I'm glad that you're at the helm and
that you've got a great team supporting you. So thank you.
Thank you, Vice Chair Lee.
Alderman Moore, followed by Alderman Beale.
Thank you so much, Chairman. Definitely want to
first commend you, Commissioner, for just doing a
Herculean job at the Department of Buildings.
Your team, John,
Michelle Evans, who I rely on a lot, and I know Sharron rely
on. Several people within the office that's very responsive.
I have to start this. How many years have you worked with the City of Chicago?
This is year 28.
28. And which department did you start working in first at the City of
Chicago?
Department of Aviation.
And how many years did you serve there?
Maybe 18 months.
18 months. And then from there you went where?
To CHA.
In what capacity?
I was the executive assistant to the chief of development.
And then from there?
Department of Sewers.
Okay. And what was your role there?
Executive assistant.
Okay. And then where did you go from there?
Department of Buildings.
That's right. In permits or something, right?
Was it at-
It was started in Buildings, and then we separated, and the Department of
Construction and Permits was created about a year later.
And so you've been working in this capacity for about how many years you think?
Well, I- The second tour is right at 20 years.
Right. And so if I add back those other two, 22.
And I just wanted
not only the
body to know that, if they didn't know, but also
the
city, when we hire and promote from within, this is the
quality that we get. And
you are just doing a yeoman's job. We've had people come
in and out of here. Another person I could think of that is not here that started
out at aviation as well,
our former aviation commissioner, who did a
magnificent job in a role when you're answering these questions,
you answer them with confidence because you know
what you're doing. And if anybody don't think you know what they're doing,
I'll put it out there, they need to come and see me.
And then if not, they can see probably some other alderman as well.
But you are doing a great job, and I just want to commend you
and your team for that.
I don't have a lot of questions, just probably one.
But I want to say thank you for being responsive.
There's nothing that my team doesn't call for that in a
timely fashion. Like Aldermanly said,
yes, constituents want things to happen right then and there, but you
do things in a timely fashion, and that's what I appreciate,
and that's what the residents of 17th Ward appreciate about you and
your team. So I thank you so much. That's why as you're listening here,
asking and answering questions from some of our most talented
aldermen, they don't have a lot of questions.
Some people want to talk because they got to say something.
But you're doing a great job. And when you're doing a great job,
that should be commended. My first question is, and I know we're dealing
with having to hire people, do you have everything that you
need outside of people that you still have to hire for your budget?
Do you have the resources and the tools that you need?
Is there anything additional that you need that
this
body can help get for you for your department?
So you know, Alderman, I'm very responsible, and so
we have to be able to fill all of our positions to really know
what our needs are.
Right.
I could speculate about what the needs are, but I'm not that type of person.
And so I need an opportunity to be able to get the positions filled to then
determine where are we still short.
As I stated with phase three of the code
modernization that was approved by City Council,
realizing that porch systems are going to be allowed to be
built up to four stories utilizing steel
construction, we will be needing to look at evaluating how many more
iron inspectors we'll need. But we can't make that determination right now.
We have to see the permitting trends.
We have to see what the actual demand is for those type of permits in
order for us to make that determination.
Same thing with the interlocking stairs, which are also part of
the
newly adopted code provisions. And so that potentially would
be ironwork as well. And so I can anticipate us
having to come back before the body for iron inspectors.
Okay. And then just
piggying back off, and I think you answered it, but I would like to
delve into things with a
example if you can. And if something we need to discuss off record,
please let me know.
As we were talking about this receivership portion,
and I remember
that we were trying to come up with something with, I think, even the Department of
Planning and Development, if I'm not mistaken, in terms of these
properties where
these landlords are not responding.
The building's just sitting there, but we
have someone who wants to purchase it and rehab it.
Where are we in that process?
So that's the forfeiture program that we're currently
doing in conjunction with the Department of Housing and the Department of Law.
Department of Housing, right.
And so what we do, we
evaluate buildings that we have orders of demolition on, as well
as active cases in court that are on the demolition call
that would be ideal candidates for forfeiture.
We do the necessary research, and then we
make the referral to the law department to file those cases.
We just really started this new forfeiture program this
year. We were successful in having seven properties
forfeited that are in the Englewood community.
We have an additional eight that are active cases that are going through the
enforcement process in court. And we have an additional eight
buildings that we're going to actually do an inspection of, just an
assessment to ensure that they are viable candidates for the forfeiture call,
and then we're going to refer those over to the law department.
So it's a collaboration between law, housing, and
buildings to return these buildings back to
reuse in the neighborhoods, because we realize we can't demo our way out.
Absolutely. And talk about that partnership, if you will, with the courts.
I remember
years ago, and I think
people still stick that in their mind, and I think there's been some changes along
the way,
where people felt like their property was being taken away from them.
And then the courts were not as
kind to us in the buildings department in hopes of
not getting people caught up and getting their properties taken
away.
But the courts were not always friendly.
So how are the courts responding now in these situations?
From a time where we saying, "Hey, we've reached out."
Was it up to us to reach out or the courts to reach out to people for the response?
Who reaches out?
So through the enforcement process, the property owners are required
to appear in court. They are served a notice or a summons that lets them
know the date and time of the court ... hearing.
Some owners are responsive, and they do make their appearances.
Others may not ever be served. And so when
there is a problem with the service, then that's where the courts have to
work with the law department on what the next steps are
in order to identify and require those individuals
to actually make an appearance in court.
But what I will say is that-
And that's the part where I'm saying, how long is that process
you think is taking, or
do we know that yet?
Call.
Thank you, Alderman.
First Deputy John Scott. So I think the length of time
varies.
If somebody is found quickly by a-
No, no, I'm talking about the not responsive
part
... service.
So
it typically requires multiple attempts to serve them.
That can go on, depending on the conditions at the property, it
can go on for a short period of time before the next court
date, which would be like 30 days or less.
But if there's nothing dangerous at the property, the court may give additional
time to try to locate those owners.
And so it's really hard to put a number on how long that part of
the process may take.
And I guess what I'm getting at, maybe we got to push the courts to get to some
type of
continuity in that time frame.
Well, what I will say is that if the conditions are dangerous and
hazardous and it's continuously declining, the law
department, at the request of the building department, will ask for a receiver to
be appointed, and the judges that we have in the courtrooms are
open to doing so. As I referenced earlier,
under Chief Beach, who recently
took the helm at the-
Chief justice role
... of the circuit court. He has appointed new
judges to three of our courtrooms, and those judges are very
receptive to working with the city on the appointment of
receivers. And so we have seen
in those instances where it has risen to the occasion where we needed a receiver to
be appointed, they've not hesitated to make that appointment.
Great. That's good to know. Thank you.
And again, thank you for your leadership. Thank your team.
Jess, again, always responsive, and
I look forward to continuing working with you as long as you want to be here.
God bless.
Thank you.
Thank you, Chairman.
Thank you. The
one thing that's come up, the demolition, could you provide the respective
alderman a list of active demolition cases in their
everyone's respective ward?
Yes.
Okay. Thank you. Alderman Beale followed by Alderman Vasquez.
Thank you.
Good morning.
I just have a couple of quick questions, make it quick and simple.
How many crane permits do you currently have, and how many
cranes are actually in the air?
So we have eight cranes that are in the air, and we have 13
future sites for cranes.
Okay.
Eight and 13.
Okay.
Actually, Alderman Moore
took my main question about the resources that you need in order to
be more effective, so I won't
belabor that question as well.
When you look at...
Trying to be careful how I phrase this question.
Matter of fact, I'll just pause.
Commissioner,
let me just say, I've worked with you for
28 years.
And I will tell you, this is one of the bright
spots in this administration.
When you look at a public servant,
and you look up public servant, you're going to see a picture of Marlene Hopkins.
And when I tell you the
real hot topics in the community, you're out there personally.
Your department is led by a true champion, and you have a bunch of
champions over in that box
working alongside it, because you could not be the person you are without all of
the people in that box who are under your vision.
So I'm just going to close by saying that there
are a few
stars in this administration, and you are one of them.
And I want to thank you for being who you are, the job that you're doing.
You're
one of the most responsive commissioners that we have in this
administration. So I just want to personally thank you for the job you're doing and
your staff, and congratulations.
Thank
you. That's all I have. Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman Beale.
Something we agree on today. All right.
Alderman Vasquez.
Thank you, Chairman.
I would also agree with
everyone's assertion here. You all do amazing work.
Thank you, Commissioner, for the department.
I think I'll start.
I'm curious where we are as far as modernization or moving from
Hansen to IPS 11
so that 311 can kind of be one system as opposed to how it's a little bit
separate when it comes to DOB. How's that looking and what do you need
from us? Where is it at in transition?
So it is a multi-year
project.
We have, year to date, completed a significant
portion of our short form and express permits
We are currently working on our plan-based permitting,
which will go live during the third quarter of
2027.
Following that phase, we have to work through
inspections and case management with a targeted
implementation date in late
2028.
We also have sewer permitting that's in our department that
lives in a very antiquated system
that we are looking to
integrate into IPS 11 in late
2027, early 2028.
And then there are a few specialty permits that are
lingering that will go into the system
by the end of 2029. So we are very
intentional with how we are working through this system
upgrade. We are building for the future, not
just for today.
Sure.
And Hanson was built for that time period, and it didn't look forward.
Got it. No, thank you, I appreciate that.
A separate question is more related to,
there have been conversations about different levels of
renter protections and different departments being in charge of
whatnot.
I'm curious
if you have, through the Chair possibly, a breakdown of the calls you have
coming in. Right? Typically, we call a DOB
because we get a complaint from a neighbor related to specific building issues,
but some of them may be
more relational between a landlord and a renter, which I imagine
doesn't then
kind of work with the systems you have in place.
And so I'm curious as to the breakdown of what is a DOB stuff and
what actually you all don't really have the wherewithal to handle.
So last year, we inspected over
52,000 311 complaints, and of that,
50% of those were no cause. So it was nothing tied to a
building code
of any nature. So some of those naturally would be the
neighbor that's calling, but then a significant number of them are
tenant-based, and a lot of those issues are not building related.
They are tenant-landlord. And so with the
proposal that is being discussed in Council,
the ability for the Department of Housing to have the authority
to enforce provisions of that ordinance would be
tremendous. It would be very helpful.
There is some overlap in the
RTLO
between the
Chicago Construction Code when it comes to the responsibility of owners,
as well as the responsibility of tenants.
So there is an intersection there for the two departments to work
hand in hand.
But the majority of the RTLO does center
around really landlord-tenant.
Yeah. And I appreciate that. I think
as we're trying to figure out what a solution looks like, I don't know that it's
necessarily binary about one or the other.
I think there is clearly a partnership to be had there.
I think what's
the reason why I ask is if it's around 50%, or I'm
guessing less than that of some of what you're getting in, the amount of time that
takes away from being able to address the other building stuff, which
if that were right fit, would then allow you to get so much more done, as well
as investigations and collections and things that we need to do.
So
would you have a sense of how much time or people you might
think that takes that could be used in a better capacity?
Well, what I would say is that, let's just use the 50% number.
Those are 25,000 plus inspections that could
focus on periodics, that could focus on
licensing, that could focus on permits, maybe would even
enable us to maybe cross-train or
reassign inspectors from one bureau to another to be able to
balance out the workload. So there are definitely
some
benefits that would come from that.
Yeah. No, I appreciate it. I do think they have to work hand in hand.
It's just kind of right-fitting it. So thank you for that. Next question.
What are the collections on fines of violations from DOB by category, and
are there any changes in that? And that could be kind of through the Chair if
there's a lot of categories, obviously.
So there's code enforcement fines that are collected, and year to date,
it's roughly $1.8 million.
Okay. And then
since we have
folks in Council really focused on debt collection, I was kind of curious as to
how are we doing as far as collecting on that. Is there debt? Is it outstanding?
Is that something we should dig into to kind of
get better at collecting?
So what I will say is, for our
periodic and annual inspections, we generate the bill
once we complete that inspection.
After day 31, if that debt has not been paid, it
goes into cost recovery, and the Department of Finance handles the
actual cost recovery of the debt. So all of our
collections are handled through the Department of Finance.
Got it. Okay.
And then I know we had questions about staffing up and hiring to the
openings that are there. How are we as far as turnover year over year?
How's that looking? Are we retaining people?
Is there attrition that you're catching up to?
So most of our attrition is attributed to retirements, not
because of someone leaving the department to pursue
an employment opportunity elsewhere.
For the most part, the men and women that work in this department love being a
public servant and love being out in the communities that
each of you represent and actually being that hero to those
people, whether it's through a permit inspection, whether it's through a 311
complaint inspection, or whether it's through a license inspection.
As I stated earlier, as we are doing our interviews and
identifying candidates, we are able to create
a PQC list, which is a preferred qualified
candidate list, and that enables us to hire people as
vacancies become available. So that is a tool that was
introduced by DHR. The list is valid for 18 months, and
so it's very helpful. As I
responded to Alderman Lospada, currently I know of two
inspectors that are planning to retire next year, and so
for the most part, the inspectors, well, the staff, does give us
enough notice when they're planning to retire so that we can kind of
anticipate it.
Yeah, I appreciate that. It says a lot about the leadership and the culture of the
department for folks to be able to give the heads-up.
I know
it's great to know that people are dedicated to that work until they retire, and I
think it's something that more folks, maybe it's not the first thing that comes to
mind as coming to DOB, but they should because I think it does serve a
very important service for the city.
Next question I've got
is related to the Ernst & Young. Are there any of the
findings that the Ernst & Young report or group have that
impact DOB? And if they are,
would you be able to
outline anything that does kind of jive with that and what that looks like?
So the only part of the Ernst & Young process
that the Department of Buildings is involved in is the collections
for overtime, so for special events.
And so through their process, we were able
to track our overtime for Lollapalooza, for overtime,
and our expenditures for Lollapalooza was
$26,940. So
that is very resourceful and helpful for us.
We don't really do a lot of special event participation where the
inspectors are out, but that is one of those events that we are actually out at.
And so just to kind of
take that to the next step, is that information then collected by the city in a way
that allows us to know what we're asking of the Lollapalooza event throwers, right?
If we're looking at, "Hey, there's a cost associated here, there's a cost
associated with this department, here's what we should be asking for."
I believe that that's what they're actually working through.
I just provide the information forward, and then
budget or finance, I'm not sure which department actually works with them
on that.
Sure. No, like I said, I appreciate it.
I think
you've just been stellar since
even before you've been in the role, but since we've been interacting and kind of
how you've helped out the ward. We've had incidents
where we've really needed y'all, and
I'll tell you that the response time, the ability for
you all to move and operate is top-notch, and I think
it's something for other departments to take note.
I know obviously everyone's got different capacity and staff, but you all do it
well, and I just want to commend you on that.
And like I said, anything we can do to empower that or give you more resource,
we're happy to do. So thank you for your work, and thank you, Chairman.
Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman Vasquez. Alderman O'Shea.
After Alderman O'Shea,
we'll go to non-members. Do you want to close,
Chairman Villegas? You want to close?
Yes, ma'am.
Okay, you got... Okay.
You do, you tell... Okay. All right. Moseley.
Who else? I'm sorry. Scott.
Burnett.
Any others?
Commander Hoppenworth and Walker Speck.
Are you good?
She's got her hand up? Oh.
Okay. I'll text her, see if she responds. You're good.
Go ahead,
Alderman O'Shea.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Hopkins,
in my almost 16 years in the City Council,
long before you were commissioner, but in previous roles you've had,
you've always been someone that the 19th Ward could count on.
Whether it be a
good operator, a bad operator,
your goal was always first and foremost to be helpful.
You are a true professional.
Really appreciate
your responsiveness,
your communication, your ability to solve problems, and to
be helpful.
If
every leader of a department was like you across the city,
we'd be in much better shape. Really appreciated
your work, your friendship.
Appreciate the people in the backs.
Appreciate the people out on the street, the men and women each and every day,
working to make my neighborhood a safer place.
Thanks for all you do. Nobody does it better.
God bless you.
Yep.
Thanks, Chair.
Once again, I'm faster than most.
And we appreciate that, sir.
We're going to have Alderman Moseley followed by Alderman Scott.
Thank you so much, Chair, and thank you, Commissioner, for all that you do.
Echo all the words of my colleague from the 19th Ward
and extend thanks to so many folks throughout your department.
Michelle Evans, Donald Mitchell, Carl Berg, John
Scott, Oscar,
Hal.
It's just so many to thank.
You truly are responsive.
In person,
good or bad,
you get the job done, and when we say that the city that works,
the Department of Building lives out that creed, so thank you so much for that.
I do want to ask you about the capacity we were
to revisit the windows ordinance You know, there was a coordination between
BACP and also the Department of Buildings going out in
terms of the excessive signage
that we were dealing with. Has there been any conversations
about
preparing to make sure that businesses are in compliance with that?
Yes. So when we are doing our inspections as
part of the Wednesday and Friday taskforce inspections that we do with
BACP, the electrical inspectors that are assigned to the
team have been informed and told that
they need to cite any signs or businesses that are
not in compliance with the ordinance requirement for only
25% of the window coverings. And so,
I've not had an opportunity to look at all of the violations that have been cited
to see what percentage that is, but that is definitely a focus of
my team when they're out doing those inspections.
And thank you for that. I also want to ask that
we focus on making sure that businesses don't keep
repeating bad behavior. Do you have recommendations around the
fines and fees for when businesses are not taking out
sign permits, or when contractors are not taking out
building permits?
What I've experienced, and please expound more if needed,
is that there's
a slight increase in the permitting fee if you did not take out
the permits ahead of time, and it's something that developers or
construction folks will kind of even just bake into their costs.
And,
I don't want us to give credence to allowing that to continue to
happen.
So what I will say is that one of the ordinances that was
passed by the body is that stop work order fees are now
200% of the permit fee
cost. And so they are getting hit in the pocket
when they fail to obtain permits because that building permit will not
issue without them paying that stop work order fee, and that's
non-negotiable.
Thank you. Thank you.
I know that some of my colleagues have asked about some of the things that
I had an interest in, and so just again, thank you for that.
I do want to focus in on
group living, transition homes in particular.
And thank you for really coming to the table, again, with concrete
solutions on how some of our other levels of government can work
better with us.
Can you tell me, is there a capacity for
individuals in a house based off of
bedrooms that are there?
There is provision in the code for room
capacities. I think I put it in my book because I knew someone would
ask.
That would be
me. Bear with me,
though.
So the minimum area requirement, a minimum
area of 70 square feet for occupants...
Or I'm sorry, it's two or less.
For 150 square feet is three
individuals,
and for four occupants it is 200
square feet. And then for each additional individual
is an additional 50 square feet.
50.
So if I'm looking at,
let's just say,
at best 1,300 square feet, how many individuals would that account
for?
I would say, that would be kind of tight.
It would be six- Yeah
... give or take. And that's really
tight.
So,
maybe
it's not 1,300. But I
really want us to make sure
that as we are looking at housing options for all,
that we are doing it adequately and, most importantly,
according to code, and not just maximizing things for a
profit. So I thank you and that work,
being a true partner for coming to the table with solutions and
helping us solve issues. And with that, Chair, I'll return it back to you.
Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman Mosley. Alderman Scott, followed by
Alderman
Burnett.
Thank you, Commissioner.
I mean, Chairman. Commissioner.
Hi.
Both. Jan Scott, thank you always.
I know you deal a lot with Coach in my office, so thank you for always being
there and responsible and always--
Both of you are like the video game Call of Duty, always there.
Like really, always there.
And as my colleagues mentioned, if there's anything, seriously,
that
the council can support you on-
Please let us
know
... please let us know.
I want to go back into what my colleague just talked about, the enforcement
of revenue.
I know that this is not... But I know that they probably give you a report.
How much revenue do we collect from
bad
landlords, or
the permitting process?
So those are two different things.
So, like the fines from buildings, how much do we collect over the year?
So in code enforcement, fines was $1.8 million
collected through September 30th.
For permit revenues, it was $29.6 million
through the end of September.
For-
Permit revenues
... permit.
Yes.
And
Is there any way that we can-- That
$29.6 million is a huge revenue for us.
And is there any way that we can
cut the red tape to get additional revenue?
Because
a lot of people don't want to do business with the city because it's so much red
tape. So are there any processes that you're even thinking
about, if it's technology or anything, that we can speed the process
up a little bit faster?
So a couple of things that we are actually looking into for
2027,
from an initiative standpoint, is for
streamlining permitting and supporting housing development.
So we recently had a
demonstration from Avol, which is
the
system
that we actually utilize for our electronic plan review.
So they did a demonstration for us of some of their AI tools,
AI Submit, and I believe AI Readiness.
And so
those two do preliminary reviews to
identify deficiencies that would
enable the design professional
to correct those deficiencies before actually submitting into
the process. There are a number of projects that are submitted that go
through two, three, four rounds of review for just
pre-screen. That's not even getting across the threshold to actually
start the plan review process.
A couple of other things we're looking at doing is expanding self-cert.
So currently, new residential buildings are
for eight dwelling units, and we're looking to go up to 16
dwelling units.
But it will require us to stay at a four-story
limit on the building height. And so,
we are looking at that implementation for the first of the year in
2027.
We're also launching Ready Set Build,
which is expanding our developer services
pathway for new residential and mixed-use
buildings that contain four to 50 dwelling units.
So these are three initiatives that we're looking at for
2027, and we are confident that these will
help us to cut the red tape.
So you've collected 29.6 million in
permits. Do you know how much outstanding?
Is that a figure we would be able to calculate, or is it
normally determined at time of permit issuance, the actual value or cost of the
permit?
Yeah. So
Grant Ulrich, Managing Deputy Commissioner. Thank you for the question.
So generally, the permit fee is calculated.
They have to pay for it before they can start building.
Correct.
So they have 120 days to make that payment.
Usually, they pay pretty quickly, but we do have some payments that are sitting
there unpaid in the system. Maybe they're finalizing closing or financing.
But it's not usually a very big number, but there is some float
of-
Okay.
Well, I want to say thank you to all of you in the box as well, because
your work helps support
their work. And so I want to say thank you from the 24th Ward.
I appreciate you all. Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman Scott.
Alderman Burnett, followed by Alderman Robinson.
Thank you, Chairman. I, too, want to echo
my gratitude and thanks to the Commissioner.
In my one year, we've already had some crazy stories that you've been able to
help me navigate
on the west side of Chicago. So I deeply appreciate
your urgency and
just how quickly you pick up the phone.
It's deeply, deeply appreciated, and that goes to the entire department.
I know we have a lot of
building permits, so my ward depends on you all to continue to flourish
and grow. So I thank you for all of the effort.
And so my question, and it stems off of the great line of questioning from my
colleague, Alderwoman Scott. The technology that you all are implementing
and these initiatives that you're trying to pass for the next year, I know
last, in 2025, we talked about it being 71 or so days
for permit processes to conclude, and 20 of it is from you all, and the
remainder of it being
in the hands of the applicant who applied.
As you mentioned, with this Ready Set Build and this initiative to do
self-certification, can you talk through some of these initiatives, both in the
sense of how are we helping the other side
go through their process quicker, and what can we do from our ward office
perspective in terms of education to help our
contractors reduce the amount of time that they're going through in order to
receive their permits?
Okay. So the initiatives are building upon the
existing systems that we have in place now for self-cert, so we're actually
just increasing the number of units that are eligible to go through the self-cert
process. So we do training every two years for
self-cert architects, which allows them to be
certified as self-cert architects.
And so we definitely will work closely with each
of you
for any potential projects that are coming to your ward to utilize and take
advantage of the self-cert process.
It eliminates the plan reviews performed by the Department of Buildings
because the architect of record is certifying that the design is in compliance with
the code. And so that reduces the time to permit
significantly.
The architect of record is required to go through the debt
check process prior to submitting the self-cert
application in order to carve out that review time,
which sometimes takes upwards of 20 working
days to have that debt resolved. It does still
require the internal review by zoning, but once that zoning review is
completed, the Department of Buildings is then able to issue that building
permit. As it is related to Ready Set Build, that's working
directly with the developer services review firms.
So we have three that are part of that review process, and
the developer is able to select the firm of
their choice, as long as it's not the same firm that actually did the design.
And they're able to establish the actual timeline that they want
to work according to for the building permit.
So, that will factor in their financing and some of the other variables
that are tied in with the development process.
So, that gives them greater control over the actual time to permit.
And the development firms that do these reviews, is there a list from the city
perspective that you all have agreed to work with?
Yes. We have three, and I can provide that to you-
That'll be awesome
... Chair.
I appreciate that. And I know in our budget, we're accounting on
both
some additional dollars to come through NOF and also
through ARO in-lieu fees.
As you've seen in the last couple of years, is permitting coming across
your desk in terms of frequency, it seems like there's a bit of a decline
in
the number of projects that are happening every year at this current state in this
market.
Can you talk about that,
how the market affects both the way that your ability to move
quickly or slowly if it's up or down,
but also the impact on the revenue that we're anticipating
for the next year?
So, what I will say is that
there have been a number of projects that were submitted for
plan review and permit issuance that due to the
market or due to financing or some problem within the deal,
that they had to push pause, and we have allowed for those
projects, though they go into a void status.
Once they have been able to resolve those issues, we have been able
to reinstate those permits or those plans so that the reviews can
continue, and the permit can be issued.
So,
it has not impacted a significant number, but it has impacted a
few. And so, we are here to work with those design
teams, those owners, those developers to get those
applications back online so that they can proceed with the
process. We work very closely with the applicants that
have received the NOF funding. And when they
encounter delays or challenges due to issues
with their contractors, we
get involved immediately once they bring it to our attention.
And then we have our team of inspectors that are out, really holding
those contractors accountable. And when they fail to do so, then they have to
come in for a larger meeting with my team and I to discuss it.
Because we want to ensure that those monies that are being provided to those
businesses, that they're actually able to recognize
their dreams come true.
Awesome. Yeah. And those are super important to our local community, so we
appreciate your commitment to making sure that they get done.
And so,
following back up on the
Ready, Set, Build initiative. So are you starting with three because those are
the three that you feel are the most qualified and ready?
Or is there a plan over time to have more outside
reviewers in that capacity or development reviewers?
Or how are you all thinking about the growth of that program and how it could
assist with moving things quickly?
So these contracts were awarded, I want to say, in 2024,
if I'm not mistaken. And so we have different categories.
We have those consultant review firms that do
single review. So they might have capacity to do structural or
electrical or architectural. So if we have,
let's say, God forbid, we have a mass retirement in our plan review
team, we would be able to pivot to those firms for them to be able to
continue the review seamlessly. And then we have
firms that are qualified to do our stormwater reviews.
And then we have those three firms currently that have a contract with the
city to do the direct developer services reviews.
And so, we would have to work with procurement
to
advertise again to get more firms involved
with its active contract to do those reviews.
And for those three in that contract, what's the timeframe on how
long that they have that contract with the city? Do you know?
So that contract will go through 2029.
Okay. And so, at that point in time, we could possibly review if we want more- Yes
... same partners, different partners.
Do we know how many of those reviewers, are any of them
MWBE?
So Globetrotters is MBE.
V3 is not a MBE,
and Primera, I believe, is MBE, but I'll verify that.
Okay. That'll be awesome. Well, thank you again. I appreciate all that you do.
As has been indicated by a lot of my colleagues, this is a very pleasant department
to work with. I know there's a lot of pressure on you all to continue to keep
things going. And I appreciate your communication and you all's
willingness to keep working with us. So, thank you again.
Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman Burnett. Alderman Robinson,
followed by Alderman Hall.
Chairman, thank you very much.
Commissioner, I would be remiss sitting here.
As you know,
my father was a 25-year veteran of your department,
and
it's always great to talk to your staff because
they are very knowledgeable and care
about the citizens of the city of Chicago.
And so, I just want to give them kudos, particularly Carl,
who
if for whatever reason you're tied up, I have to bug the heck
out of him. And so, I'm, again, thankful for him and the rest of your
team sitting in the box.
If you could share
We are working on
the
pro ordinance.
And I'm just curious if you could share what your
thoughts are as how that is going to help your department
better inform us,
and be more helpful to the residents of the City of Chicago.
We're trying to figure out how to get to a happy medium, and just curious
what your thoughts are regarding the ordinance. Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman. So the tenant landlord ordinance is
a ordinance that has lived on the books silently for
30 years. And so without there being a
arm in government to really enforce it, it has
resulted in tenants calling in 311 complaints that really
are not building code related. They really are related to the RTLO.
And so through what is being proposed to have the
Department of Housing to have the ability to enforce the provisions of
that ordinance, it is going to help significantly
reduce the number of calls that we receive through 311 because
tenants will be able to contact housing.
But also landlords will be able to contact housing when they have issues with
tenants that are not tied to the actual living conditions.
The two ordinances do intersect at the responsibility of
owners and the responsibility of tenants.
And so that is where housing and the Department of Buildings will really be able to
work collaboratively together to ensure that we're holding landlords
as well as tenants accountable for being in compliance with those
provisions of
both codes.
The rental registry, which is something that is also being discussed, will
definitely be a resourceful tool for both of our
departments.
As I stated in a recent interview that was
performed, having that ownership information available
would be beneficial when inspectors are at a property real time and
there's a problem with a furnace that's inoperable, and perhaps the
tenant didn't call the landlord first, they called the city first.
And so that will enable us to pick the phone up to call and
inform them that the heating system is not
operational. Can they get a company out to make the repairs?
And that would prevent us from having to file enforcement action in court.
And that's what I'm able to do with a number of the various property
management and owners of some of our larger portfolios in the
city. When my inspectors call and they'll say, "I'm at this building
or that building. Can you reach out to someone?" I'm able to call and say,
"Hey, I have an inspector there. These are the conditions.
Can you respond to it?" And a lot of times the first thing they'll say is, "My
tenant never called me about this." And so I do see the
benefits of having the housing department being able to
enforce the provisions of that code.
Commissioner, thank you very much.
Thank you, Alderman Robinson. Alderman Hall.
Yes.
Any others?
I know I got Alderman Taylor down. You have something for buildings?
Okay, no problem.
You back up? Okay.
You know what, Chairman, out of respect for our chair, she can go
in front of me and then I'll go after her.
As you wish.
Thank you, Chairman of the
Subcommittee on Revenue.
Whoa. Hold you.
Hello, Commissioner. How are you?
Well. How are you?
I just wanted to thank you
for always being available and accessible.
I appreciate you coming out to
the Third Ward in my community on sometimes
some very adverse situations. Thank you for being
accessible and available for that.
I want to also thank John Scott.
This is the first time I'm really connecting with you
by name and face and everything. So now you're in my head,
but now I see you.
Very connectable I see. Also want to thank
Michelle Evans for her work with
my
sometimes crazy staff.
Thank you.
And Carl Byrne and Hal, I just wanted to thank you, too, for the work that you
do. I only have one question, which is related to
if there's been any movement on policy related to
tiny homes. I still get
people, developers, showing an interest in that
product. There's a lot going on in the
nation with the development of these kind of homes, but it
seems not to have caught fire here.
What's
happening with that?
So no one has come in to meet with us about tiny homes, but my
team and I are available and willing to meet with anyone that's
interested in that. There are provisions in the code that would
allow for some sort of that construction.
But we would want to hear what they're proposing and connect
it to the building code requirements.
Okay, so there is an openness.
There was some
trepidation about that maybe a few years back, but you're
saying that there's an openness.
What I'm saying is that we are open to have
that discussion. You're ready to have the discussion.
Yes.
I appreciate that. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. That's it for me.
Thank you, Chair Dowell.
Mr. Subcommittee Chair
Oh.
Father, forgive them, for they don't know what they do.
But needless to say, first of all, I want to say thank
you to you, Commissioner,
because the first time I met you was on your off day, and we had an
issue in Englewood around an abandoned home.
And oftentimes, we forget the role that you play when
it comes to safety. And on behalf of all of the
residents in the 6th Ward, especially
in neighborhoods where we've had a lot of abandonments, and the
way in which you've expedited removing homes that were in the
pathway of children to and from schools.
When there was a concern around women
being abducted and killed, you gave assurance through,
again, the expediting of the demolitions.
And then lastly, you've given myself, which has given my staff,
clarity on 99 questions that we've gotten.
The question has been asked around what do you need, and I'm the
fourth one to add to the
words of my colleagues around whatever we can do, we
will do to make sure that you get what you need and what you want.
Because you've been effective ten times over, and to the staff
that answers the calls from other people on our staff, we're
definitely grateful, too. And so in concluding, Commissioner, thank you for
building and rebuilding parts of my ward and other parts of the city of
Chicago, and you are the best
given to us from the administration. Thank you so much, Commissioner.
Thank you.
Thank you,
Alderman Hall.
Alderman Curtis.
Thank you,
Chair.
Commissioner, thank you so much. I talk with you all the time,
and my brother over there who even answered calls on
vacation.
He's great. Awesome.
Hearing all the accolades, I mean, I don't have to
even go any further with that,
but you guys are just a wonderful team. Wonderful.
As you know, Commissioner, our community is growing older,
and they don't want to leave our great community.
But what I'm seeing and getting calls on a lot now is
their garage is falling down, and they are in
the house
by themselves. Family moved on.
How do we help them?
I know we got help before. We tore down a couple garages
before, but they're in pretty bad shape.
And how do we move forward, making
sure you got the funding that you need to help
them even?
So we do work very closely with the Department
of Streets and Sanitation on the removal of garages.
But what I will say is that as our seniors are aging in place,
one of the vulnerabilities that removing that garage creates is
that their rear yard is now open. And so the
Department of Buildings doesn't have a fencing provider that could
reconstruct or put a fence around the property.
And so what I will work with my team on is to see if we
can create a program that would enable us to
assist the seniors through the removal, but also through maybe
installing some sort of protective measure for them so that
the rear of their property is not open to people now fly dumping,
parking abandoned vehicles, and things of that nature that the
garage does prevent. So let us take that back and
talk internally and see what options we could
potentially come up with as potential programs to help them.
Thanks. That was all I had. I
couldn't thank you enough for making the tough decisions that we
made. Yourself on
Ford City, it needed to be closed. Thank you so much for
that.
Safety is our first concern.
Thank John for even looking after our Ford City
condos, which was built so long ago, and now they're in
receivership.
It's hard making those tough decisions
because we get to a place where we have to
decide on
now where do these people go, and
sooner or later, they're going to have to leave there.
But people don't understand that real leaders have to make those real
decisions. So thank both of you. I don't have any
more questions. I am in a good place.
So thank you both for being who you are and leading
our Department of Buildings. Thank you.
Alderman, and what I'll say is that we are able to make those tough decisions
because we walk those walks. We get out from behind the desk.
Absolutely.
I walked the Ford City Mall. I saw all of the vulnerabilities that were
in that mall. I saw all of the areas that were not secured, and
anyone could have wandered down into those areas, and it was very
apparent that the owner just did not care.
But this team that I work alongside with every day,
we all care. We all get it. We've all walked it.
We've all been out in the trenches, and I could not do
what I do day in and day out without the men and women that are sitting in that
box and the men and women that are out on the street today doing inspections while
we're sitting here before you.
Thank you, entire team. Thank you, Department of Buildings.
Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner. Thank you, Chair.
Thank you, Alderman.
Alderman Harris.
Thank you.
I don't have a lot of comments because I am one of those people where I call them,
if it's not the commissioner, I'm calling Michelle Bofa six
times in a week.
But I want to say a big shout-out to Michelle, who has left
me and gone over to
the building department. But she has been amazingly
wonderful to work with and a real
delight in the office. I tell her all the time, "She don't work for y'all."
And everybody in buildings is really, really amazing.
I want to say a big shout-out to the entire team for being really,
really amazing and taking my calls, Carl, at crazy times and
stuff, morning, noon, and night. I appreciate you, even on vacation.
And Commissioner,
it doesn't get any better than your leadership because you lead by example.
You work really hard, and I don't know how you are every place all the
time and everywhere. I think you got a twin hidden somewhere
around here. But thank you for your leadership in moving
the department forward. It's a joy to work with your department,
so I appreciate you and everything you do for the city of Chicago. Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman Harris. Alderman Taylor, do you have anything?
All right. We're going to close with you.
Thank you.
Commissioner,
black girl magic, that's what I call you.
Can you explain the for employments of students as
trainees?
It's in 407. It's
line
0039.
So that is the student intern program that
we do in conjunction with the mayor's Summer Employment
Initiative.
Okay. So this past summer, we actually had three student
interns from Chicago Builds through Dunbar High School
that actually worked in the department on the permitting side.
So they were exposed to what the building trades actually do
on the permit side of the house. So it was really exciting.
And then we had one college student who was also an intern with us
for a year.
How was that? And go mighty women. I went to
Dunbar. That was my school.
It was really rewarding. We actually did a
cohort at Dunbar with Chicago Builds,
where our supervisors and chiefs went and actually
spoke with the students and shared a day in the life of a
supervisor electrical inspector, or life as a
building inspector, or a cooling plant inspector.
And it really opened the students' eyes to seeing what they
could actually become, should they continue down this path.
And so it was very heartfelt, very rewarding, and we're actually looking
forward to doing more outreach in 2027,
and hoping that we have other students that are interested in doing their
internship in our department.
Where do most of
your workers come from? Are
they from CPS, or they come from all around?
Well, they actually come from the building trade.
So to be an inspector for the city, you have to be journeyman
status, and you have had to complete the
five-year journeyman
training with the building trade to become an inspector.
Okay. Do you all have a dashboard?
A dashboard of?
So where
if I went to the Department of Buildings, I went on a website, and there's a
dashboard that tells me this is how many complaints you got,
this is how many you're working on, and are you all having...
And so that's a question I'm going to ask all the departments.
Because we're
the City of Chicago. We're a 21st century city, and we not
using 21st century technology. And so I
want you all to think about us having a dashboard, and it's
another level of transparency to show people that you got all of these
calls and service. This is what y'all working on.
This is kind of what's in the queue. And it makes sense.
I've really appreciated you and your team making sure
every winter we got some either elevators out or
heat out in my 18 senior buildings.
And so I appreciate you all always making sure my seniors are
taken care of. I want you to really look into that
dashboard because people often will say,
"I called the buildings department,
and I go in 311, and they didn't call once."
And I know those systems don't talk, which is another thing that I feel like we
don't talk enough about, and I'm going to ask the questions, of course, to that
committee, but
are you all looking at ways that technology can make your department more
transparent and easy? And that's my last question.
So as we are undertaking our system
upgrade from Hansen seven to IPS 11, that is something that we
are definitely discussing and exploring.
The inspection tool is much later in the phase.
It's phase seven of the process. But that is
definitely the time where we'll be able to discuss and interface one
into Salesforce, which as you know is the 311 source system, and
then as well as our ability to create dashboards.
As we're doing this implementation, we're looking future forward.
We're not just looking at the present.
And because we know that this system is going to be in place probably for another
20 years, so it needs to be designed to carry the department forward
for an extended period of time so that they're not using Band-Aid
approaches like we are now with Hansen seven.
Last thing. I was at a graduation
at People's Gas yesterday, and there was this conversation that people are
concerned about AI taking over their jobs.
That's not a concern of the building department, is it?
That is not a concern of the building department.
We are looking to integrate AI to help with pre-screening for
permit applications, but we are not looking for AI to do building
inspections.
Thank you so much, Commissioner. Thanks, Chairman
Thank you,
Alderman Taylor. Alderman Cruz, followed by Alderman Anna Harpworth.
Thank you, Chairman. I also want to echo my gratitude
to our Commissioner Hopkins, and for your
partnership, but for your leadership as well, for always answering my calls,
always guiding me through tough situations.
You have been outstanding, and I just want to make sure people know
that you are one of the best commissioners the City of Chicago has.
But I know you don't do it alone. You do it with your team there.
So I also want to say thank you to them.
But also looking at some of the statistics from last year to
this year, I noticed some changes.
So I'm going to highlight three of them.
And I wonder, would you tell me
how were you able to accomplish this?
But for example, for vacant and abandoned building complaints,
previous year it was taking about 64 days
to close something. Now it's taking 28 days.
Also for no building permit and construction violation, previously it was
taking 84 days, now 66 days. And for the
building public facility violation was taking
167 days and now 26 days. So we see
a huge improvement in the turnaround,
which speaks to your leadership. It speaks to what you're doing.
But what are some of the things that you have implemented that
are making the difference when it comes to, again, how fast we're responding to
complaints?
So, in each of those three areas that you highlighted,
we posted chief building construction inspector positions
this year, and we actually
were able to promote three of our supervisors to chiefs.
And so this is a testament to the work that these three
individuals put in day in and day out, that has been
instrumental in helping us to reduce the time to
responding to those three areas of complaints.
And, we know we've got work to do, especially in the area of
no building permit and construction violation.
And as I shared earlier, we have extended offers to
three individuals to go into the new construction
bureau, and those individuals will be instrumental as well as helping to
drive down the time to inspect for permits, as well as
being able to focus on our 311 complaints.
You let us know what else the department also needs in order for us to
be helpful to all of you and see more changes.
But so far,
I'm pleased with the work that you have been doing. So thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman Cruz.
And now to close, Alderman Anna Harpworth.
Thank you, Chairman. Hi, Commissioner.
Hi, how are you?
I'm very well, thank you. Thank you for all the work that you have done
with
us in the 48th Ward and with my team, and for your
leadership. And I know that you don't do it
alone, but so often
I call you, and you personally help us, so I appreciate you very
much.
I wanted to
put faces to a couple names on your team to my
team who's here today, including my director of neighborhood
services and my
communications manager and my intern.
And I was hoping to identify Michelle Evans.
Michelle.
And Hal Hutchinson.
Thank you. John Scott.
Thank you.
Gary Bach.
Gary isn't here with us today.
Okay. Well,
those of you mentioned, thank you personally from the 48th Ward
and everybody in the box for working to keep our buildings
safe, for advancing our small businesses
so that they can operate and,
especially when tragedies happen like fires in our
buildings. We are one of the more compact wards, so we
have a lot of high-rises and you know that's a
lot of work, especially as we have to coordinate with the fire
department to make sure that people can stay in their homes.
So I appreciate you so very much.
You helped us quite a bit with two SROs,
and that was very difficult. And my
colleague, Alderman Moore, was talking about forfeitures.
And I was wondering if you can explain a little bit more about
the difference between forfeitures and the Troubled Buildings Initiative,
and how that's related, and also which
wards have forfeitures.
Does that include the 48th Ward?
I'm just not sure.
How are buildings deemed
uninhabitable and need to be
forfeited?
And because, as I mentioned earlier, we are a
ward that's very tall and we're mostly renters,
63% renters, and we have a lot of folks, as Alderman Curtis was
saying, who don't want to leave their neighborhoods.
They want to stay, but we need their buildings to be habitable and
safe, and for people to live in dignified ways.
So the forfeiture program is focused around
reinvestment in vacant housing. And so
oftentimes, these are buildings that are either active cases on a demolition
call or buildings that we have a live order of demolition on.
And we work through the Department of Housing and Department of Law to
actually put those buildings onto the forfeiture call
with the purpose of finding an owner or an entity
to reinvest in it, to restore it so that it can go
onto the market and become housing for a family.
The TBI initiative is a
combination or a collaboration between the Building Department, the
Housing Department, the Law Department, CHA, and
CIC, and that is focusing on
multi-unit properties that are owned by
entities and or individuals that fail to
maintain their buildings in compliance with the code.
And through that process, we do inspections, and we file those cases
in circuit court to hold the owner accountable
for the reinvestment or for the purpose of having a receiver
appointed to stabilize that building so that people are
not being displaced from their homes.
Because as you stated, and as Alderman Curtis stated, people want to stay
in the homes that they are renting or that they own until
they're ready to leave, not because of someone's failure
to maintain a property in compliance with the code.
Thank you for that. We want to get to the point where
we know where the troubled buildings are and to be able
to manage that without having to go to court,
because we know when it goes to court, it is really beyond
livable in some cases.
We have questions about how plumbing concerns
are prioritized,
especially, for instance, after a fire or just plumbing
generally.
With water, there's outgrowths of mold, and
so
how
are those problems prioritized? Can you speak on that?
So the supervisor in chief in the plumbing bureau do a
review of their 311 complaints that come in on a daily basis,
and they prioritize those inspections based on the
severity of the
items referenced in the complaint.
Mold is a byproduct of water infiltration, and
so oftentimes what we are looking to see is, are there
deficiencies in the exterior walls?
I know that a lot of times there are calls and complaints
regarding mold in bathrooms, and
oftentimes that's perhaps due to a lack of ventilation in
that there's not a fan, there's not a window.
And so there are those of us that like hot
showers or hot baths, and that steam, if you aren't
drying those areas, are going to result in mold
actually developing. And so some preventative measures that
can be taken to reduce that is drying those areas, wiping them
down, and
ensuring that it is
being ventilated. But if it is due to a lack of ventilation,
then we will work across the aisle with our ventilation team to
address that as well.
Thank you for that.
That's really it. I'm excited that we're
accelerating the process so that we can build new homes.
We need it, not just in Edgewater and Uptown, but across Chicago.
And again, thank you for everything that you do.
Thank you to your entire team. Thank you, Chair.
Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman Amanda Harper.
Again,
great work, great service that your department continues to provide
the citizens of our great city.
We appreciate everything that you and the team continue to do.
I know everyone has great accolades.
That's the level of service you all provide to us is--
You and I first met in an alley. I'll never forget that.
We met in an alley. Actually, we met in the alley.
The longer the short of it is, a guy called and said they
were picking on him. And she said, "Well, why don't you walk around
here?" And we walked around to the alley.
The man had no back porch, and so I had to walk away, and I
said, "Thank you," and we just kept going, and I left her alone, and she left me
alone, and we're all good.
But again, you've always been--
It's a long story. He got a fire escape back then.
But be that as it may, thank you for everything that you're doing.
The department is focusing and getting things done.
I know we talk about the permitting and try to get stuff moving as fast as we can.
But generally, when we call, we find it's on them and not on you guys,
that it's something that they haven't done that they're supposed to do to move the
process along. So appreciate all the work that you're doing.
Committee will stand at ease while we bring in the Department of Aviation.
I got it. I got a smoke. I
will say the right to do. That was such a bad one. So we find that bad, brother.
I need some too. I hear you. I'm sorry.
I hear you.
Okay. I feel
a little
bit uncomfortable. Uncomfortable? Yes, sir. No. I couldn't remember.
I could say it. That's possible. You
know what?
Yeah, we need it. That's good.
No, it's not good. It's not. Oh, step. No.
Good afternoon. We have before us the Department of
Aviation,
led by Commissioner McMurray. We're going to have a brief
overview from our
members of COFA, followed by introductions
from the commissioner,
and we'll move in that
order.
Go ahead.
Thank you. Good afternoon, Chairman Irvin, Vice Chair Lee, and members of
the City Council. My name is Katie O'Toole.
I'm the deputy director for COFA. I'm going to provide a brief
summary of the Department of Aviation's 2027 budget request.
For fiscal year 2027, the proposed budget for the Department of
Aviation is
$1,781.78
million,
approximately $116 million or 7% increase
compared to 2026. Personnel costs account
for $272 million, up 5%
from this year.
Non-personnel make up the majority of the department's budget with
$1,509 million.
The department requests 2,476 full-time
equivalents for 2027. This is 33 additional
FTE positions compared to 2026. As of
the budget release date last week, the Department of Aviation has a vacancy
rate of 12.89%. This represents
the share of budgeted positions that were vacant at the time the data were
collected, and they are a point-in-time staffing
snapshot, so they're separate from the budgeted FTE figures.
Aviation receives zero dollars from the
corporate fund.
This slide shows proposed appropriations by category and
fund compared to FY 2026's budget
ordinance. So looking at categories, contractual
services account for the largest dollar and percent change,
with an additional $245 million allocated in
2027. The purposes as specified category
sees a decline of approximately 24%, and this is due to
changes in the reserve balances from grant funds.
So we see the federal grant reserve balance down 50%,
but that's balanced out by the state, which increases over
200%.
Looking at funds, funding from O'Hare and Midway Airport funds
increase by approximately 10% together in
2027, mostly driven by O'Hare. And like I
said, federal grants decline in 2027, but
state grants increase by over
260% to $223 million.
Here you'll see a historical overview of the department's appropriations
by funding source beginning in 2018.
So as you can see, the department's appropriations have consistently increased year
over year and are split between non-corporate local
and grant funding.
Lastly, you can see the department's historically budgeted
full-time equivalents.
Staffing levels have gradually increased over the past several years,
and of the 2027 budgeted positions, all are
supported by the airport enterprise funds.
This concludes COFA's overview for the 2027 proposed
budget.
Thank you.
Commissioner, if you could introduce the members that are with us here and
those that are in the box in the audience you wish,
after which you
can provide your opening statement.
And from there, we will go directly into questions, starting with
Chairman O'Shea.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good morning, everybody.
I am Michael McMurry, Commissioner for the Chicago Department of
Aviation, which owns and operates Chicago's Midway and
O'Hare International Airports.
I have with me today on the dais here to my right is
Nafisa Ahmed, our Deputy Commissioner of Finance.
To his right is my first deputy, Tracey Payne.
In the box,
Bernadette Williams, Assistant Commissioner.
Colonel Duane Hayden, Managing Deputy Commissioner.
Elizabeth Granados Perez, Managing Deputy Commissioner.
William Moline, Acting Managing Deputy Commissioner.
Amber Ritter, Managing Deputy Commissioner.
Robert Diaz, Managing Deputy Commissioner.
Tammy Morgan, Managing Deputy Commissioner.
Zach Baughman, Managing Deputy Commissioner.
Angie Korcaka, Deputy Commissioner.
Castalia Serna, Deputy Commissioner, and
Thyatiria Towns, Deputy Commissioner.
Mr. Chair, I do have a statement I'd like to read this morning.
Chairman Irving, Vice Chairwoman Lee, and esteemed members of the
Committee on Budget and Government Operations, thank you for the
opportunity to present the Chicago Department of Aviation's 2027
budget. Indeed, it is a privilege to appear before you for
my second time and to continue advancing CDA's
mission to operate world-class airports, invest in Chicago's
future, and deliver for the millions of passengers, employees, and
businesses who depend on O'Hare and Midway each
year. In partnership with Mayor Brandon Johnson,
Aviation Chairman Matt O'Shea, and Aviation Vice Chairman
Derrick Curtis,
we are building on a legacy of excellence while making the investments
necessary to keep Chicago at the forefront of global
aviation.
However, before I turn to this year's highlights,
I want to recognize and thank Alderman O'Shea.
This will be his final CDA budget hearing as chairman of the City Council's
Committee on Aviation, a role he has held for more than
eight years.
Alderman, you have been a steadfast partner to this department.
Your leadership and support have helped CDA navigate the
pandemic,
complete the Midway Modernization Program and O'Hare's runway
expansion, and advance ORD Next.
On behalf of the entire department, thank you for your
friendship,
your years of service, and your commitment to Chicago's airports
and the people we serve.
Thank you. Thank you.
Yeah.
Whoo!
Thanks. It's always that.
Thank you.
2026 has been a year of records and a year of extraordinary
momentum for Chicago Aviation. In July,
O'Hare welcomed more than 8.5 million passengers,
making it the busiest month in the airport's 71-year
history. That's more than 275,000
passengers every single day.
Earlier this year, O'Hare also reclaimed the title of the busiest
airfield in the world. In 2025, more than
860,000 flights safely
departed or arrived at O'Hare. That translates
to one takeoff or landing every 37 seconds
around the clock, every day of the year.
Those numbers are a tremendous point of pride, but they also are a
clear reminder we need to keep building.
That is why, under Mayor Johnson's leadership, we worked with our airline
partners this summer to accelerate the $8.8 billion ORD
Next program and establish a clear path forward for the next
generation of O'Hare,
and we're delivering. Construction on the new Concourse D is moving
forward on schedule for completion in 2028,
and we've locked in a construction cost at least $21
million
below the approved budget. That's $21 million
below the approved budget.
Later this year, we will break ground on the first phase of the new
Concourse E, a $917 million investment
that will deliver 14 additional gates by 2030.
Those gates will create the capacity we need to build the O'Hare Global
Terminal, the centerpiece of ORD Next, in a single
coordinated phase, with construction beginning in 2029
and completion scheduled for 2033.
Of course, none of this happens in isolation.
Coordination is the cornerstone of everything we do at O'Hare.
We must remain aligned with Mayor Johnson and the City Council, our airline
partners, the FAA, our contractors, and the thousands of skilled
men and women of organized labor who are building these new
facilities.
Our challenge is unlike almost any other infrastructure
project in America. We are rebuilding O'Hare while
operating the busiest airfield in the world.
Every day, hundreds of thousands of passengers have somewhere to be.
And as I mentioned earlier, every 37 seconds, another
aircraft is taking off or landing, and through it all, the
tower cranes keep rising. That is the
scale of the challenge, and that's the
scale of the opportunity before us.
These projects will strengthen O'Hare's position as a leading global
aviation hub while ensuring that growth is
inclusive. Since 2018, our O'Hare capital
program has paid more than $915 million
to the City of Chicago's certified minority and women-owned firms,
representing 37% of all payments made to date and
surpassing our MB/WBE participation goal of
32%.
That momentum is not limited to O'Hare.
Midway continues to grow as well. Through July, passenger
traffic is up nearly 3%. And in partnership with Mayor
Johnson and this very city council, we also
secured at least $150 million to
modernize Midway's private aviation facilities,
one of the most significant private investment in the history of the Southwest
Side.
Through new agreements with Atlantic Aviation and Signature Flight
Support, that investment will deliver new hangars, ramp
and ground support facilities, improved infrastructure for
international arrivals, and $15 million toward runway
safety improvements.
At the conclusion of those agreements, the improved facilities will become city
property.
It's a major private investment that create lasting public value and
ensures Midway remains the region's premier destination
for private and general aviation for
decades to come.
As you know, our airports are self-sustaining, operating without
local tax dollars. This independence allows us to focus
on responsible long-term investments that balance
growth with fiscal stewardship.
Our proposed 2027 budgets,
826.3 million for O'Hare and
186.9 million for Midway, prioritize
operational excellence, workforce development, community
investment, while seeking to maintain affordability
for our airline partners and passengers.
This budget also supports our work to bring the opportunities created by
Chicago Aviation directly into communities across all
77 neighborhoods. That means connecting residents with
career resources, small business opportunities, and
educational programming, while making aviation feel more accessible to
Chicagoans of every age. CDA's annual
Airport Small Business Summit and Job Fair achieved record
participation in 2026, connecting more than
1,700 residents with nearly 100
exhibitors to explore business and employment
opportunities at our airports.
Just this month, we hosted our fourth CDA Family Night,
welcoming more than 50 residents for our behind-the-scenes experience
designed to help children of all ages and abilities become more
comfortable with flying before that first big trip.
More than 350 students have participated in airfield tours at
both airports, and we're launching our very first Next
Generation Day on November 19th to give
CPS students from all 50 wards the
chance to explore aviation careers firsthand.
We've also expanded our partnership with City Colleges through the Aviation Career
Pathway program, offered three times each year.
For the first time, members of our own CDA leadership team joined the
program as guest lecturers, giving more than
360 Chicagoans an inside look at
the industry and knowledge and tools to begin considering a
career in aviation. Finally, we are proud of
our department's internship program, which combines practical work
assignments with structured professional development for nearly 50
interns. All this work is centered on building a pipeline
of talent because the growth of our airports should create
opportunities not only for people who travel through them, but also
for the communities that surrounds them.
In conclusion, I'm grateful for your continued partnership
and your commitment to keeping Chicago a leader in aviation.
Together, we are ensuring that our airports remain engines of opportunity,
reflections of our values, and welcoming front doors to
Chicago. Thank you.
Thank you, Commissioner.
We'll open with Alderman O'Shea. I also have Alderman
Quinn down for questions. Any others for questions?
Two,
three. Okay. Thank you. Alderman Quinn. Chairman Quinn.
I'm sorry. I am sorry, Alderman O'Shea.
Okay.
No respect.
Matt O'Shea, Chairman of the Committee on Aviation.
Thank you, Chairman.
Good afternoon, Commissioner.
Good afternoon.
Commissioner, since your appointment nearly 18 months ago,
you've made major strides in improving both our international airports
while assembling a dedicated team.
That is much appreciated.
At O'Hare, the city's vision for the future of air travel is quickly becoming
reality as significant progress on the ORD Next Capital
Improvement Project continues to move forward.
The department broke ground on the first phase of that project a year ago
August,
and from the vantage points across the airfield, you can see the new Concourse D
taking shape more and more every day.
We have a 14-story crane tower
hovering over the site
The department also broke ground on the first phase of that project.
Under your leadership,
the department has saved hundreds of millions of dollars,
accelerated the original project timeline, and created employment and
contracting opportunities for thousands.
Next month, we'll celebrate another major phase of that transformation when
we break ground on new Concourse E.
ORD Next is more than a terminal and gates.
It reflects the department's commitment to sustainability,
enthusiasm for modernizing air travel,
and investment in our great city.
On the southwest side,
Alderman Quinn's ward,
you have also managed to make sure Midway International Airport,
an employer for hundreds of constituents from my community and many others,
remains both competitive
and continues to grow.
You've invested in the Midway airfield, upgrading its safety systems,
and earlier this year, approved at least $150 million
in private investment through new general aviation terminals
that included Atlantic Aviation and Signature Aviation.
Thank you for your intentionality and focus on elevating both
our international airports.
I want to thank the thousands of employees from the Chicago Department of Aviation
who keep products
and passengers moving,
from security and airfield operations
to dining and shopping,
airline carriers, cargo operators, and many,
many more.
These men and women are the pulse of our airports, and without them,
our airports wouldn't be the world-renowned transportation hubs they are known
as.
As we review the Chicago Department of Aviation's 2027
budget,
I encourage each of us to consider not only the impact of our
two international airports on the global stage,
but just as important, the vitality they bring to Chicagoans
across all 77 of our communities.
Chicago's international airports put people to work.
They create opportunities for generational wealth.
They elevate and support
hundreds and hundreds of our city's small businesses,
and they highlight the beauty of Chicago for our travelers from around the
world.
With that, Commissioner, I thank you for your hard work,
your leadership, your expertise in moving our airports forward.
Thank you.
Before I finish, though, I
work with many, many people from your department,
but there's three I want to single out who I speak to on a regular basis,
and sometimes we're putting fires out.
First, Deputy Tracey Payne,
thank you. Thank you for always being so accessible, and thank
you for your willingness to put
those fires out and to put yourself in the middle to solve problems.
Thank you.
And as we have legislation that comes before our committee,
we lean on Amber Ritter to put that together each and every time to
make sure she's got the questions answered and that the
information is brought forward in a concise and effective way.
And each time we do that,
she never lets us down, and thank you for that.
And another one of your managing deputy commissioners,
someone who saved us a considerable amount of money recently,
Mr. Zach Baughman.
Again,
you've got a very talented team, and you've brought a lot of new people in also.
As we move forward,
those are some of your strongest leaders that I work with on a regular basis, so
thank you. Thank
you. Chairman, that's it for me.
All right. Thank you, Chairman O'Shea.
Just to recognize Alderman Chico, a non-member who has joined us.
I have Alders Beale, Quinn, Conway,
Lawson. Any others? Paul.
Lee.
Gutierrez.
Curtis.
Okay, just want to make sure I've got everybody in.
Vice Chair Curtis?
Oh, you want me to go up now?
Yeah.
Okay. Thank you.
Thank you, Chairman. I just wanted to
say thank you for those same eight
years that
Chairman O'Shea have
chaired aviation. I have been his Robin,
right by his side, and it's been great.
It's been awesome
working with Department of Aviation.
You guys have allowed me to bring
tons
of students out to
Midway O'Hare,
and
they were able to
see what you guys really do, and
even
the AMAC events. They are so awesome.
I've never seen anything put together
like it. The last one was at the Obama Center.
I mean,
man, who gets better than that? So,
the entire aviation team, it's been a joy working with all of
you. I'm not leaving yet,
like my chairman
So I'm able to stay around a little bit more to
harass each and every one of you. Thank you so much, Chairman.
Thank you for the great job that you do.
Thank you. Thank you, Vice Chair Curtis.
Alderman Conway, followed by Vice Chair Lee.
Oh, great. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Actually, the first question I'd like to ask was something that was brought up by
COFA regarding
a 20% reduction in grants you're getting from the federal government.
The
related question, is that all the money you get from the federal government?
And how has that affected
operations?
And any idea what's driving that?
Yeah, so we do. There are a couple of different kinds of grants that we
receive-
Mm-hmm
... from the federal government. Airport
ALP grants or AIP grants, I think they're called.
And then there's one more. And typically these are based on certain projects.
Federal government grants to aviation have been fairly consistent over the
years.
Mm-hmm.
And they're sort of project based.
Part
of
our Elevate T3 project in terminal five,
part of that was funded by the federal government and federal grants.
I don't have the ratio right now, but most of our funding come from our airline
partners and revenues generated through
sessions,
rental cars and the such. So a portion comes from federal grants,
but not the major majority of it, Alderman.
So it
sounds like you're saying that there's a number of projects that have fallen away
that the federal grant funds. Okay.
Yes, like the Elevate T3 project and a few others, they're coming to a
conclusion. I will say,
all the federal grant monies that we've been promised, we received.
Okay.
We consistently applied for more, and there has been no issues with
respect to grant funding from the federal government.
Okay. Funding from the FAA.
Got it. Wanted to ask because I-
Yes. No, that's-
The old internet has said that the president is perhaps not a huge fan of the city
of Chicago, and I didn't know if that was driving it or something else, or what we
could continue in the future, but-
No, our partners at the federal level have been great.
We consult with them regularly. A lot of coordination with our federal
partners. They've responded well.
I've been to Washington, DC on a couple of occasions.
Met with officials at the FAA and the USDOT,
and
they've been fine from a grant perspective.
Right.
Thank you for that. You did mention concessions.
I did get a number of questions regarding the
O'Hare concessions RFP
issued for terminals one and three at O'Hare.
It appears it's been two years since that RFP was
issued,
at least a year since final proposals were due,
and wanted to see if you could provide us with a status
update on that RFP.
Yes. So Alderman, yes. You're referring to our Order Up RFP,
144,000 square feet, approximately 100,
110 commercial spaces,
at O'Hare for terminals one and three.
That proposal did go out
about a couple of years ago, I guess.
Mm-hmm.
Prior to my arrival at O'Hare. We received responses
last year. It was an overwhelming response to that
solicitation. We received over 167
proposals for that solicitation, and that was huge.
And this was one of the largest RFPs ever, if not the largest
ever, for a North American airport for concessions at
one time. Again, 144,000 square feet,
110 commercial spaces.
The proposals were submitted last year, 167 received.
Those proposals
have been under evaluation by our team of experts,
local experts who are well-versed in
concessions in airports
around the country, and food and beverage and retail.
And then we also have had professionals from around
the country from other airports, and who have
reviewed
solicitations and proposals for this kind of
solicitation from other airports around the country.
That being said-
Yeah
... those proposals have been in. They have been
reviewed.
Mm-hmm.
I received a briefing last Friday from our consultants.
I have been getting
regular briefing updates from them on a regular basis, and I'm
expecting to receive the recommendations of
award any day now.
So.
From when you
receive
the recommendation,
you
mentioned 167 proposals.
Mm-hmm.
A lot of folks have reached out that they spent a significant amount of money
preparing the RFP, so-
Yes
... after you get the recommendation,
when do you anticipate
the awards
being
announced? And any other steps besides the
recommendation that needs to happen before those awards
occur?
Yeah, so those recommendations would come to me as commissioner.
Mm-hmm.
And of course, I have discretion to review those,
and make any changes the department may deem
necessary or the commissioner deems necessary.
I expect to get those any day now, as I mentioned.
From
there, these will be recommendations of awards.
So our team would then need to sit down with the recommended award
winners-
Mm-hmm
... to review those proposals.
... um, to negotiate if any changes are necessary.
I'm not sure how long that would take.
If I were to give you a guess, I'm thinking maybe 30 to 45 days
before we can get something then to the aviation chair,
committee, and go from there.
So you anticipate your part of this process at
least being done before, say, the end of the year?
I hope so. Yes, sir.
Okay.
Yeah. Mr. Chairman, that's all I have. I appreciate the status update on that, and
appreciate your visibility into working with your federal partners.
Thank you.
Thank you, Commissioner.
Thank you.
Go to Vice Chair Lee, followed
by
Alderman Beale.
Thank you, Chair. Hi, Commissioner. How are you?
Hi. Good morning, Alder.
Good to see you in the building.
Yes.
And your team, your amazing team. You know.
Thank you.
I have a special place in my heart for aviation.
Thank you.
Any time you guys invite me to events at the airport and I can't go, I'm very sad,
because I miss being at airports.
Appreciate that support. And we really do like it when the alders can come
out. It gives us a chance.
We also try to get out to the 50 wards too, to educate and talk and
collaborate with the alders.
Yeah.
But we do appreciate it when you can make it out.
I know for a fact there's wonderful opportunities, especially for careers
in aviation through CDA, through the airports, through just working
for an airline or a concessionaire.
There's a whole world of opportunity there, so-
Yes
... I understand why there's so much interest in concessions.
I'm not going to ask you about that, even though I've been getting calls to.
You guys got to get through that process.
Yours is one of the easier
hearings to have you pay for yourselves
, which we appreciate. And I think a lot of people don't really
understand how much commerce comes through an airport.
Not just passengers, but cargo. Chicago handles a lot of cargo.
Sure do.
And a lot of the things that we use every day that people don't think about,
along with some rather obscure things.
My questions are really just mostly going to be around
contracting, how we're paying vendors.
What's it been like trying to--
How many contracts do we have?
I'll go one at a time. How many contracts do we have that are expiring,
and where are they in the process of either
renewal, or are these being rebid? Can you talk a little bit about that?
Yeah. Alderman, we do have some contracts that are
expiring, and some that have expired a while back.
And it takes a while to really get caught up with that.
I do not have that number in front of me. We can get
that to you through the chair if that's
fine. But if I could get that to provide exactly the number of
contracts and also the nature of those contracts and
any upcoming contracts.
Yeah. And then if you can also include, obviously, we're very interested in the
minority participation. So, if you can add in-
Yeah
... that level of detail into what you provide through the chair, that would be
wonderful.
Yes, I can do that.
And I
know that you and your predecessor have a great track record on that
front. Certainly, we want for
all of our communities in Chicago
to benefit from
doing work at the
airport.
Yes.
How are we doing in terms of paying contractors in DBE
and ACDBE firms?
Do you know what the average days to pay prime contractors are and how
quickly primes pay-
Sure.
So for those contractors that are paid through our
O&M budget, our operation and
maintenance budget, it's typically 15 days.
And on the capital side, it's 30 days.
And of course,
those numbers are decent. We're working every day to get better.
But I will say, particularly on the capital side with 30 for construction,
I've been in the construction business now, or the engineering and
construction, for over 25 years,
and both on the government side and in the private sector.
So, I know what it's like for private owners, particularly small
businesses, to be paid, and be paid timely.
I will say that, again, although we are working to get better,
30 days is not bad.
Right? From a construction standpoint, particularly for
aviation when you look at the volume of contracts, the number of contracts,
and all that goes into
approving those invoices and getting those invoices in.
So, I'm assuming you're talking about once the invoices are in, the
invoices are correct, and then we get it back out.
So 15 days for our O&M budget and-
30 for capital
... 30 days for capital. And again, every day we're working to even improve on
that. I think that's pretty decent.
But again, there's always room for improvement and efficiency if we can do that.
I'm working to do that.
Well, you hit the nail on the head. A big concern for me is the amount of time it
takes, especially
for subs to get paid.
Yep.
A few more of these prime companies can probably afford to float the city some
money.
Smaller contractors are not, and in some cases, this has nothing to do with the
airport, but in terms of just timeliness of payments, people,
they've mortgaged their homes in some cases-
Yeah
... to put up money because they've already paid their workers.
So, they're sitting there holding the bag.
So, it's something that I'm going to raise with many departments.
So, I'm not trying to single you all out here, but-
Sure
... since you're the first up that I can ask this question to-
... you get it the first time.
Do we do any tracking of how quickly the subcontractors are paid, the DBE
and ACDBE firms-
Um
... after the primes are paid?
Well, I will say that I know that our contracts have a pay when paid
provision. And then most of the contractors, I think, are
required to pay their subcontractors, I think it's within 10,
15 days or 10 days, within 10 days of the city paying them.
And, I don't know if we track it because we don't always
know when those payments are going out, unless those
subcontractors contact us and then we do assist them.
Mm-hmm.
We will reach out to those primes and say, "What are you doing?
How come you haven't paid that particular sub?
And we want you to. And if you don't, there could be consequences."
What is the role of procurement in this process?
For the payment of invoices?
Yeah. So just-
Sure
... talk to me like I'm a four-year-old and explain to me.
My general understanding is that you've got a contract.
You'll go through procurement to bid the contract out.
Mm-hmm.
You decide on somebody, and then they do the work, then they get paid for the work.
So I guess I'm trying to understand the role of procurement
beyond just getting a contract approved-
Sure
... and where things may or may not go awry
in the process-
Well, I- ...
for people getting paid.
Yeah. I don't want to speak for procurement- Sure
... but you're exactly right. But I know that procurement, and they do an excellent
job, they also have a compliance unit within the Department of Procurement
Services that monitors participation, right,
on certain levels. We also, within our department, we have a
contract department as well within aviation, and
we monitor compliance as well. Whether it's
MBE compliance, ACDBE, DBE-
Mm-hmm
... compliance,
and the such. And then from time to time, we'll monitor when those
payments go out. So, that's our role.
And procurement's role, they also have a compliance role.
Mm-hmm.
But again, I don't want to speak out of turn.
But they typically do a fantastic job in compliance and
working with our department
at CDA, and making sure that we monitor
that
compliance, whether it's MWBE, whether it's DBE,
ACDBE, and the such.
Got it. And
obviously we're going to have a lot of questions for procurement when they come in.
Through the chair, and I don't need you to have it right now if you don't have it
available,
I'd like a breakdown of
the contracts that expired in '25, are coming expired.
As contracts are renewed or new contractors are brought in, I'd like the same level
of detail, like who the companies are, where they fall on ACDBE,
DBE, what the value of the contracts are and
if they've got identified subcontractors in their bids.
Yeah. And we do have that. I know for a fact we have that information.
I didn't bring it today, and I should have.
That's okay.
But I know that we have that information.
That's great.
Really, really interested. And if
I get outreaches, I
do hear from constituents and from people within the
industry of issues getting paid.
Who do I best contact to
work through that if they involve aviation work?
If it's aviation work, I would prefer that they contact Tammy
Morgan from my team.
Okay. I'll reach out with specifics. Thanks, Tammy.
That's all I've got, Chair. Thank you, Commissioner.
Thank you. Thank you all.
Thank you, Vice Chair. Next we're going to have Alderman Beale followed by Alderman
Quinn.
Good morning, Commissioner.
Morning, Alderman.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I just got a couple of quick questions.
Don't have many
outstanding issues with you all. You do a wonderful job.
You stepped into the role.
You had very, very big shoes to fill.
But you made your own way, and you filled your own shoes, and so I
appreciate you for that.
Thank you.
So, I just have a couple of questions.
Number one,
what kind of conversations are you guys having,
if any, with putting VGT machines out at the
airports from Bally's?
So,
one of the things I'd like to say, I think we
covered this a little bit last year about slots, is what you're referring to-
Mm-hmm ...
at Midway.
And so,
I always like to just start off by saying we're
operating
aviation, not
casinos-
Mm-hmm
... from that standpoint.
But there have been conversations with Bally's regarding
slots at Midway only.
One of the things is,
I've had conversations with Bally's about is not
allowing slot machines in our gate hold areas. All right?
Like in Las Vegas, which I think they, at the time, agreed to.
So there have been ongoing conversations with Bally's about the
feasibility of a gaming location in a newly
created concession space at Midway.
Mm-hmm.
And those conversations are ongoing.
They have submitted to me a very preliminary
proposal, and that proposal is still on the table.
I look forward to meeting with them and continuing this conversation
about, again, slots at Midway
Airport. So, there have been conversations.
We talked about feasibility
from the standpoint of structural, financial, other things we need to look at.
Of course, from our standpoint at aviation,
again, the financial feasibility of that, logistical
feasibility of slots at our airport, and then of course,
talking about it with our airline partners.
No, I get it. The reason I ask, because I know we brought this up last year.
Mm-hmm.
And we're still having conversations instead of action.
Mm-hmm.
To me, that's a problem.
Mm-hmm.
As much as we need revenue Um, we need revenue extremely bad,
and they've had authority at the airports from
the day that we voted to allow them to start operating here in the city of
Chicago-
Mm-hmm
... with the temporary.
They could've had
slots at the airports faster than they got a
temporary casino up and going.
And so it's just troubling to me that we're still having conversations, and
we're not actually looking at build out and
creating that space for them in order to get the Bally
revenue, needed net revenue here in the city of Chicago.
So,
that's troubling, but I guess as long as conversations are still
going, I guess we're making headway.
Yeah. And
Alderman, again, we stand ready to meet and continue to, and then
review whatever proposals Bally's may have.
Mm-hmm.
It's been a while since I've heard back from Bally's.
Okay.
But I stand ready, and we stand ready at the CDA-
Okay
... to discuss that.
So, are you waiting on conversations from them, or where's
the hold-up?
I'm waiting for conversations with Bally's to continue.
Interesting.
And they have been ongoing.
Mm-hmm.
It's just been a while.
Okay.
All right.
Well,
I'm going to leave that right where it is.
The last piece I would like for you to touch on, and I know it's been
ongoing, I think we're kind of behind
with concession contracts.
What's the hold-up? Why is there a hold-up?
What's the process? Where are we at in the process?
And
give me the straight from beginning to end on why we don't have a concession
contract going.
Sure. So,
if you're referring to the order up-
Mm-hmm
... I think you, as I mentioned earlier, Alderman, that
for terminals one and three at O'Hare, 144,000 square feet.
As I mentioned, we received the proposals last year when I came
aboard.
Mm-hmm.
I think about maybe a month or two, maybe before I came aboard.
And 167 proposals we received. That was
a lot. It was voluminous.
Mm-hmm.
I think the thing to remember is, this was one of the largest, if not the
largest, concessions RFP in the
US in history. And so it was all done at one
time. So you can imagine 167 proposals for the big
largest RFP ever. It took time to review that.
And I wanted to make sure we did it right.
Mm-hmm.
Right? Because we're doing it all at one time, so it's important that we get this
right. This is going to be a game changer for O'Hare, 10% more concession
space, and what it means in terms of revenue.
Mm.
And how it's going to take O'Hare, and terminals one and three in particular,
to move it forward-
Mm-hmm
... right along with everything else that we're doing to expand O'Hare.
So it was important that we do it right. I didn't want to rush it.
I wanted to make sure that we did it right, and I think that we have.
Those proposals have been reviewed.
Our concessionaire, our concessions
consultant,
had been reporting to me on a regular basis on the status of that, so they've been
reviewed.
Mm-hmm.
They are ready to submit to me, and I expect to receive any day now, any day
now-
Mm-hmm
... a recommendation of award for that
concessions. As I mentioned a little bit earlier, once we get that, I will
review those recommendations. My hope is that
there'll be some negotiations with the recommendees.
And if we can move that along quickly, like I would like to
do, I think it would maybe be somewhere,
I think, between 30 and 45 days. I am not certain.
Mm-hmm.
But 30 to 45 days before we can get that to the Aviation Chair,
Committee, I'm sorry, and then to the City Council.
Mm-hmm.
Of course, I'm going to try to move that as quickly as possible.
Okay.
Right? So I know the sooner, the better.
That it's been hanging around for a while.
Mm-hmm.
But again, I think it was so important that we get this one right.
Okay. And
the firm that you're using to go through the contracts, how were they
vetted?
So they're one of our consultants, our long-term,
long-time
concessionaire. So we use
the law firm Neil and LaRoy.
They was one of the companies that vetted it on the first end
for compliance related kinds of issues.
Mm-hmm.
And then Unison Consulting
here in Chicago, both.
They have been a long-time concessionaire for us.
They put together,
under my authority,
a group of individuals locally and from around the country-
Mm-hmm
... who are experts in this very kind of thing, experts
from other airports like
SFO,
San Francisco, Dallas/Fort Worth, LaGuardia, who have done
major concessions programs, and they have been
very successful. So individuals from those airports and
consultants to review
our proposals. They've done that, and now they,
again, today, tomorrow, any day, I'm waiting just to receive that
written recommendation of award.
Okay. And they report to you, and you only?
They report to my deputy commissioner, Amber Ritter, but ultimately it
all comes to me.
Okay.
Exactly.
So nobody else is being reported to?
No.
It's all in-house. I don't even know. Nobody knows.
Nobody on my staff nor I, we didn't know the
people who proposed.
Okay. Great.
So only the consultants. So that was done only with the law firm and the
consultants initially.
Okay. So once the proposals come back,
after that, then they make the recommendation to you and the team.
To me, yes.
Then what?
And then
we submit it, we put together the packages, and we
bring it to the Aviation Committee for approval, and obviously the City Council.
Okay. So it comes to the City Council And nobody else?
Yeah, it comes to the city council.
Okay. All right. I'm just trying to make sure, because
I just want to make sure that there's no outside influence
going on with these concession contracts, because it's very important,
and it's going to be very lucrative.
And I know that people are calling and people are trying to
maneuver and jockey and do whatever else they got to do, and I just
want to make sure that you and your department, which I have the
utmost confidence in,
to make sure that it's done
decent and in order.
Yes, sir.
But I do know people want to get their hands in the cookie jar.
Yeah.
And so I just want to make sure that you stand firm, stand
tough, and make sure that this thing is done right.
I will. I will definitely will, Alderman.
Thank you.
That's all I have.
Yeah. We finished, okay. Alderman Quinn.
After Quinn, we'll break
for lunch after Quinn.
Chairman, may I ask to be motioned in via Rule 59?
Nick's saying no,
Dan.
So moved.
Is there any other member of the body who would consider the
motion? We got it. So moved.
Thank you.
All in favor signify by saying aye.
Any opposed and opinionated says one oppose and opinionated ayes have it.
All right. All right, Alderman Quinn.
After Alderman Quinn, we're going to break for lunch.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Good afternoon, Commissioner.
Good afternoon.
Wanted to sort of pick up where Alderman Beale left off
relative to Bally's, Slots, Midway Airport.
I think it's really important as those conversations progress that you
stay in front of this body.
It was beyond aggravating to learn that conversations were taking
place between the mayoral administration
and Bally's about Midway, and no one knew about it.
We learned about it in the newspaper.
I made those comments this time last year.
And so I think it's really important
that this body's informed.
And along those lines, from your perspective, the revenues that are
earned through the slots at the airport, Midway,
how do you foresee those getting doled out?
Are those going to stay in the airport in the enterprise fund, or are those coming
back to the City of Chicago?
So I think that's sort of determined, if I'm not mistaken, and I haven't
looked at the
law that established
the slots at the airport, and I think that's sort of determined a little bit by
that.
But by and large,
revenues
from a concession standpoint
that are produced at each airport stays at the airport.
Correct. Right.
Because it has to.
Right.
For the slots,
I'm not quite certain.
Again, I know there may be certain taxes that will flow
from whatever's produced
from the casinos or slots being at the
airport. But
again, I have not reviewed the law that
gives them the-
So-
... the right to have slots there and how that works
... would slots be viewed as
concessions?
I would have to look. I would say probably not-
Okay
... but I would have to look at that. Right?
But then if there's a food and beverage aspect to it,
that would be, certainly.
I think getting that clarity would be very helpful for this body.
Okay. I can certainly do that.
Shifting gears,
can you provide
a status on the replacement of the smelly windows?
Sure.
So the
odorous windows.
Yes, and I know you've been good about checking in with us on that.
So I know that the advisory council for the RSIP,
I know, I think there was like 2,294
homes for mitigation.
And they were approved enabling the launch of
an odor mitigation phase. So they've set
up four phases
to mitigate the windows. The first phase consists of
225 homes,
and the city awarded a construction contract in May
of this year. And so we anticipate beginning construction
early next year.
Okay.
On that first phase. That's the first
phase. On the 225?
Yeah. Then there's another phase.
The second phase consists of 242-
Yep
... homes. And we advertised for construction
just in September of this year, 2026.
And then we anticipate awarding the construction contract early next year,
and beginning construction in the fall of 2027.
So again, we phased them. For the third phase, that will consist of
242 homes, and we are planning to advertise
for construction bids this fall again, and
construction beginning in the fall of 2027.
Okay.
And then the final fourth phase will consist of 250 homes,
and we plan to advertise for construction bids early next year, with
construction starting in 2028.
Great. And is it still the idea that roughly 200 homes will be
constructed a year?
Yes.
Okay.
A little bit more, but yes.
Okay. And
we're looking at the first quarter of
2027 for construction?
For the first 25, yeah, the first
quarter of 2027 for the first 225
homes. Right. Commissioner, a suggestion I think it would be
in the best interest of the department and the City of Chicago to get that
information out.
Okay.
Because this has dragged on for so long. No fault of yours.
We faced with COVID and inspections, but people started to lose hope and
confidence, and I know that we weren't going to allow this
to not get done.
But I think it's really important to get that message out that the City of
Chicago has made good on its promise to replace these windows.
I agree. We definitely should do that.
Yeah. For sure. Thank you for that.
Last thing, I just wanted to offer my congratulations to Chairman
O'Shea. He's done a great job here in the 15 years that we've been
together. So Matt, congratulations.
Thank you.
Thank you, Otto.
Thank you.
I know you're not O'Shea. I'm getting it.
Otto Quinn.
All right. We're going to take a break for lunch.
We will return at 1...
Wait a minute, is this 1:00 now? At 2:00 PM. We'll return at 2:00 PM.
Committee will stand in recess till 2:00 PM.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mm-hmm.
Oh, the ones at 201A are like those.
Check the ground. There might be a ground screw that's loose on the bottom.
Okay, pull it out. Pull it out and check the terminals.
Once you push it in, does that pull out?
No. So there's two little wires that stick
in right here.
But you got to clink them out.
Good.
Is it that?
Hey,
we're going to talk on my CP here.
Mic check one two, mic check three four, mic check, check, check.
Thank
you.
Good
afternoon.
Good afternoon.
Okay. I just wanted to make sure we were
back on the live stream. Good afternoon, and welcome back.
We still have before us the Department of
Aviation.
Are there any members or non-members with questions at this time?
Alderman Lawson,
we'll come to you. Also, who do I have?
Nugent, you have questions, ma'am?
Okay.
We'll go to
Alderman Lawson, followed by Alderman Nugent.
Thank you, Chair. And hello again, Commissioner.
Right here.
Thanks for being here.
Sure.
Some of my colleagues had followed up on the concessions, and so I
don't want to go too deep into that.
But
we were talking earlier, it sounded like you had a great deal of discretion in
looking at
who those concessionaires would be.
And I know we spoke last year about a local focus in
hiring. Not just hiring, but in these concessions.
Businesses that we know in our neighborhoods or downtown with a presence at the
airport, which speaks to
our great city, and especially culinary.
Do we have sort of a local percentage or minimum for these
concessions, or do we have some sense of how that's going as far as it's local
versus national?
Yes, we do. So with respect to our
concessions,
I know that we set ACDBE goals
for those concessions. That's federal airport,
basically disadvantaged enterprise businesses
for our concessions.
And I do know, I have figures-
Right
... for where we are with respect to sales
only from April to August. You may know that that
program was suspended, if you will, back in October of last
year by the federal government.
And all of the ACDBE
participants had to reapply-
Okay
... for ACDBE certification and status,
because the federal government wanted them to do so.
And you couldn't take into account race or gender any longer and being
declared a disadvantaged business.
So
there was not this presumption of being discriminated against because of
your race and/or gender.
Got it.
And so in October of last year, they suspended it.
They gave the states an opportunity, or certifying agencies an
opportunity, to recertify
individuals,
ACDB companies, and they had to resubmit their applications.
And on a state-to-state basis. Basically, within
each state and each agency within that state.
And we finished ours, meaning for the city,
basically, in April of this year. And that was very good.
They did a tremendous job, led by our procurement department, of
recertifying our ACDBE partners.
Because that wasn't easy to do. And not everybody decided, not all
prior
ACDBE partners
submitted to recertify.
Took months in costs, and maybe it's not worth it, right?
Yeah, and for various reasons. And some states are
still recertifying. So they're still going through a
process of recertifying their ACDBE
partners. Again, fortunately here
in Chicago, our procurement department, led by our procurement department and
Charlotte Roberts, they did a fantastic job of-
Right
... moving that process along. It was not easy, mind you.
And it was a very difficult process.
Right.
Lengthy. But they did a great job of facilitating
that and getting as many ACDBE
firms that applied, getting them recertified based on whatever
criteria.
No, that's-
But I'll be able to talk to you more about that.
Yeah.
But I do have the breakdown from April of this year to
August
in terms of the ACDBE at O'Hare
was 23%,
which is about $77 million of sales, and Midway
was 52%, which is $38 million of sale.
Again, those numbers are only from April-
Right
... of this year, 2026, through August.
On the local side, though, are we tracking those businesses that are-
Local
... Chicago-based? Yes.
Yeah. So, the local concepts at O'Hare,
it's about 33%-
Right
... with local concepts,
and Midway 56% local concepts.
And I expect that to change, hopefully,
with this new order up RP that's out.
Because
we had a,
not necessarily ACDB, but a small business portion-
Right
... component to that order up, which I think is fantastic.
I agree. And I have a lot of residents who own businesses.
I have a lot of businesses that are there long term, some looking to get in, and
it's a great program, and it highlights our neighborhoods-
Yes, it is
... as soon as you land.
Yeah. Because
our airports are our front doors to Chicago.
Right.
And it gives people an opportunity to
sample Chicago as they're passing through Chicago.
Clearly, Midway is more of an O&D, so you have more of origination and destination
market at Midway. At O'Hare it's different because people are connecting, right?
Right.
One of the things is that we're very fortunate here in Chicago,
because we have three of the major four US airlines with hubs here,
and that's very unusual, right? You don't see that in most cities, which is great
because for us, it's good for competition, good for fares, and
for routes. So you can go just about anywhere, actually, in the world, mind you.
From Chicago almost directly. But we have United, our hometown
airline at O'Hare. We have American there.
Both making significant investments in our airport with our ORDNext
program- Right
... the $8.8 billion program I spoke about.
And of course, Southwest Airlines at Midway, and they've been
great partners here in the City of Chicago.
Sure. Absolutely. The only other thing on order
up, if when you're making those decisions, let's bump the local numbers as
best we can. And I mentioned this last year, it'd be great if they were all open
every day of the week, too.
Yeah. I think because of the way the
solicitation was structured when it was solicited.
Again, that predated my arrival.
Sure.
But I think because of that way that it was, we'll see significant
participation. Now, the thing is,
some of those ACDBEs, firms that may have been
ACDBEs before, whether or not they've already been
certified, because not all of our ACDBEs are local.
Right. Some are from other state.
Right.
And some of those other states are far behind where we are today.
Got you.
So I am, again, thankful for that.
Through the chair, you can give us the percentage-
I can do that
... that have re-upped.
Yes.
I just have a couple other quick things then.
I'd asked you last year about CTA,
and CTA being a vital
partner really for our airports in moving passengers,
employees-
Mm-hmm
... throughout.
Do we have a sense of what ridership is like to the airports?
Is that something you track? Is it up? Is it down?
And then do we know the percentage of employees,
either at aviation or at
the airports or airlines that are using CTA?
And if we don't have it, we can get it through the
chair. Yeah. That's not something that we keep at-
Right
... O'Hare. Of course, we have the Blue Line from-
Sure
... Metro Business District and other areas straight to O'Hare, and the Orange Line
to Midway.
But that's not something that we track.
I will say that
we try to partner with all of the local and regional transit
agencies, whether they're CTA, Metra, Pace-
Right
... and now the newly formed NITA
to look at ways to get people to use public transportation to
ease up congestion on our roadways, and it's cheap, and it's
affordable. I ride the Blue Line
whenever I'm traveling for personal reasons to the airport,
to O'Hare, and I'll use the Orange Line to Midway all the time.
Right.
The only other thing that I think hasn't been asked, you've got a big
bump in contractual services.
I'm sorry?
You have a big bump in the budget for contractual services, about
$250 million more-
Okay
... year over year. Just curious
what's that going for?
Beyond pay increases, but are additional contracts or-
Some of it-
Say re-up
... again, we've
embarked upon and we're in the process of with our ORDNext,
that $8.8 billion program- Right
... where we're expanding. We're building two new concourses, a global terminal,
underground tunnel for
... And for that.
And then it
looks like for the con--
There's a lot we have. So some of it is IT related.
Okay.
As we go through,
one of the things I'm looking to do is to
digitize and
our terminals,
they need to be more sustainable, more digital.
And so we're future-proofing our airports.
Terminals one, two, and three, or terminals one, three, and five, and two to some
degree, because that's important.
There's so much that happening technology-wise.
And so we're moving forward with a lot of that, and a lot of construction clearly
at our airports, and I think that's what's accounting for most of that.
But we want our terminals to be smart, digital, sustainable.
Sure.
Again, it's all my effort to make sure that we future-proof our airports for
future growth.
Great.
That's all I have. Thank you, Commissioner and team.
The airports are such an important part of tourism for us, for our neighborhoods,
for our downtown. And you guys are doing a pretty great job.
So thank you, and thank you, Chair.
Thank you. I appreciate the questions. Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman Lawson. Point of information, Chair Dowell.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. That was going to be one of my questions, so I just want to
be clear. So it's IT related
for terminals one, three, and five.
Mm-hmm.
And what else makes up that increase?
So-
And it's just at O'Hare, not at Midway.
Yeah. And I think a lot of that is what we're doing, again, from an IT
perspective.
Okay.
Again, we're upgrading our terminals there, and the construction that's going on in
our terminals. I think we pretty much have construction
going on in every terminal, probably except for Terminal 2.
Okay. Thank you.
Yes. Okay.
Alderman Nugent.
Thanks, Chair. Thanks, Commissioner, for being here today with your team.
You guys have been nothing but really great to work with.
Beck and Amber, Bernie, Tracy, really just stellar.
My colleagues hit on some of the
bigger topics that I don't have to ask on, but I wonder if you could speak a
little bit to
some of the more unique things we're doing in our airports.
And I guess
when I think of going out for a good dinner,
it can be spoiled if you don't get your check in time.
And I look at our airports a lot like, "Hey, this is the first introduction to the
city." I've had the really good pleasure of being able to tour some of the
art that you guys have brought in. But tell me some of the things we're doing that
are cool for what kind of experiences we're seeing at Midway and
O'Hare right now, and what makes us special.
Oh, wow.
So
you referred to, for instance ... Let me start by saying,
airports are fantastic in and of themselves.
So they're great economic drivers, but they're also drivers of innovation.
We talked a little bit about what we're doing a few minutes ago about technology.
They're also a great driver of culture and connectivity And so we have an
extensive art program at our airports,
both airports. I think we have about 70
pieces right now, a program that we operate
for local artists and others through
Department of
DK's Cultural Affairs and Special Events.
And so programs that we are pretty proud of.
If you go to our airports, you'll see
different exhibits. We have a house music exhibit, for instance, at
O'Hare. We have a Buddy Guy exhibit at O'Hare and
various exhibits as well at Midway.
And those are programs that we're really a part of.
Again, airports themselves, they're also a driver of culture and we realize that,
so that's why we want to do those things.
With respect
to the airports in general,
it's been a while since we've really, particularly at O'Hare,
I think 30 years since we've built a new facility.
And that's the purpose of our ORD Next program, the two new concourses
and also the new global terminal.
And I think we're behind in that respect, and that's the reason why we've embarked
on this $8.8 billion program.
Again, I think those terminals will be more interactive.
Again, more digital.
And I think that's important. And
architecturally, how they're designed for more natural light
and the architectural flow,
the intuitive way finding, things like that.
I don't know if you've had a chance to at least see some of the sketches that we
put out for at least the Concourse D,
designed by Skidmore, Owings & Merrill. They look fantastic.
Good.
And it shows
what the future O'Hare is going to be.
And then also we haven't released any sketches yet for our
crown, the centerpiece of the ORD Next, which is
the O'Hare Global Terminal. But I hope to have some
schematics or drawings of that available to show this body,
and as well as the public sometime very soon.
I'm for one, I'm excited to see it. So, thanks to you, thanks to your team.
Appreciate it. Thank you, Chair.
Thank you. Alder Lopez. Any others after
Lopez?
Followed by Alderman Vegas.
Thank you, Chairman, and good afternoon members of the committee.
Good afternoon, Commissioner, to you and your team.
Real brief, I wasn't going to say
much with regards to aviation.
As you know, I'm one of two
with an aviation background, having worked for a delightful airline
on the southwest side for well over a decade.
But I want to bring something to your attention which I've brought to the
comptroller's attention, which I've brought to BACP's attention,
which is the extensive use of
parking apps
who do not necessarily have
shuttle access to the airport legally
that are manipulating the app systems,
avoiding paying city parking taxes
and are causing
grief in the surrounding areas, whether it's residential on the southwest
side or
on the northwest side.
A number of our operators who
do not ascribe to this circumventing of law and
taxation are very frustrated.
So I'd like to know,
well I shouldn't say I'd like to know.
I'd like to just put this on your radar as something that I think the three
departments need to start seriously looking at.
Because as you know, parking taxes are significant.
But when you have apps that are claiming that we only charge 71 cents for our
parking tax just so they could put that on their receipt in the window,
we know that's not legitimate. When they are having you dropped off
at airports through Ubers
to avoid any kind of issue with shuttling, that's a problem.
So I would just like to flag that for you here
because we know that there's many things that are associated with many of the
parking places around both airports
that are in the city with regards to access to the airports.
And it's simply not fair to those who do right if we're
allowing all of these who do wrong to go unchecked, and this has been going on for
the better part of a year and a half we've seen it.
Apps similar to Spot Hero and others, but there's a whole host of them that
are operating
different names but all under the same guise and
oftentimes the same platform
that we need to shut down immediately.
Okay. No, thank you. Certainly we are willing to work with
anybody
when it comes to driving revenue at the airport and or the city.
If there's flaws out there, we want to know about it and we want to do something
about it.
Thank you. And then if I may, one last thing that just came to mind.
One of the other issues that has always been a recurring request
has been for many of our taxis and
drivers who need safe, convenient and
clean places to pray and eat. If you can touch on what we
are doing to address that at both airports
because I know that in some instances we've put up temporary
locations or
we've allowed for a food truck or something.
Can you expound as to what we are doing at both airports to
ensure that we are being culturally sensitive to those who are also servicing
our airports and our-
Our airline traffic
Yeah. Thank you. So,
in both airports, first of all,
I know what you mean culturally. Religiously, I know we have
these non-denominational
places for people to go in both airports.
And then I know in and around the airports, particularly
O'Hare, I know we have a couple of sites and locations that we
have
where we've worked with
some of the local
cab drivers, taxis, and some of the
rideshare drivers to provide places for them.
And I think these places have been there for a while, where we've donated
modulars,
if you will, on one part of the airport.
And then the other
side of the airport, there's a structure there, a temple that,
quote unquote, "that's been built."
I think the challenge a little bit is sometimes
these can't be permanent structures because this is federal property and aviation
property.
And then so just finding that right balance where we can be sensitive
to
people's cultural and/or religious,
to the degree that we can, sensitivities.
We try to accommodate that. But often on some of these federal
properties, again, we're FAA regulated, and so
we have to be careful about
what we build,
how
tall something and/or how permanent something can be.
But we're always willing to sit down with our
people
and taxi drivers and rideshare drivers.
They really are a very important part of our ecosystem.
They drive millions of people
every year back and forth
to and from our airports.
And so,
they're a very important part of our ecosystem.
So we do work with them, we do sit down with them, and then sometimes
there's just limits that the federal government imposes on us about how far
we can go and how far we can take it.
And does the sitting down with these various groups or
denominations also include addressing any
potential
dietary issues that they may have, since they are not always able to-
Yeah, well we-
Most of them can't go through security as it is anyway, but are we
able to bring, for example,
a food truck that is specific to needs to an area?
Are we doing that? And if not, can we do that?
I've seen food trucks out there. I'm not sure if we do that, and I think we do
sometimes.
I should say legally, can we do that?
Well, no. I think
we do sometimes. I think sometimes the drivers do it,
and they can when they want to. And sometimes
we do it. But
that's
not something we do on a regular basis, I'll say.
So if we can look at doing something more permanent, because I think that
my concern would be if people are
... What I don't want to see is people selling food out of their trunk,
because it's not healthy or sanitary, and we wouldn't allow that on our streets-
Yeah
... let alone in the standing area, the taxi standing
area.
Sure.
But I also want to be cognizant of the fact that, as you said, they are integral.
So we should be able-
They are
... to find a way to not only address that need, but that also might help us
add more revenue if we have a legitimate food truck vendor who's
there licensed and paying taxes.
Sure.
Thank you, Chairman.
Yep.
Thank you, Alderman, for those questions. Thank you.
Thank you. Alderman Villegas.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Commissioner,
team.
Thank you guys for being here.
I had missed earlier around some of the concessionaires, so I won't go back on
that, but I did get kind of a highlight as it relates to where we're at in that
process. And my understanding was,
according to your department, March was supposed to be the time when you
guys were identifying the folks, but it's been delayed.
And my understanding is that your evaluation committee, I'm sorry, the outside
entity's evaluating now. My question then
comes back to your shop for your
team's evaluation.
No, so first of all, let me say I wish you a happy belated birthday.
Oh, thank you. Appreciate it.
I thought today was your birthday.
So we have consultants, two consultants in particular, a law firm, Neal
& LeRoy, and also Unison. They've been conducting this process, not
my
shop, not CDA. Although we oversee it.
I'm the commissioner, and everything is under my authority.
But it was set up that way purposefully.
And so the evaluation committee
which consisted of, gosh,
I don't know the exact number, but at least 20,
25 members, local members and people from around the country
who are experts in airport concessions.
And they're the ones who evaluated these proposals.
We received 167 proposal, which was
outstanding.
That went beyond what we thought we would. Has it been slow?
Yes, it has. But as I mentioned earlier, it's very important that we get this
right. I didn't want to rush this. This is too big.
It means too much to the airports, to the city.
This is a game changer for O'Hare. So I wanted to make sure that
we got this right.
And so to the degree that we are behind, that's why.
I was just briefed last week that I should be receiving, and I'm
hoping to receive very soon,
a recommendation of award.
From the outside consultants that are-
Yeah. Who are reviewing, yes
... that are non-biased, that are professionals in this space.
Yes.
Non-biased. Okay.
Yes, sir. Exactly. They will make a recommendation.
They will send me the written recommendations And like most of our
contracts, I think most, I don't know, well, at least they-- Most of the contracts
give commissioners some discretion, right?
At least to review. Right? And then I'll be making my recommendation
to the aviation committee. That aviation committee then brings it to the
city council
for approval. So this is a-- It's not just aviation, but
it's also city council that plays a role in this as
well.
Yeah. No, so I appreciate that. So the outside professionals that
are non-biased, non-city employees that are subject matter experts in the
space evaluate it, they provide a recommendation to you.
Yep.
You in turn huddle with your team to kind of make sure what?
Yep.
To kind of make sure what?
Well, just look at it. All right. So one of the things is, again, because
it's a city initiative, so
it has to be under somebody's authority, and I'm the-
Mm-hmm
... the CDA commissioner.
Yep.
But for instance,
let's say if there's some concepts that were submitted
and approved because there were different evaluation committees on
all. So one committee didn't know what the other were doing.
It just was not one committee, right? And so we broke it up.
So there was about four or five committees.
So let's say if there's a couple of concepts, there are two McDonald's, let's say,
or two
chicken places and you don't want that, right?
And so you would want to say, "Okay, maybe that's not a good concept here.
Maybe you guys need to do something else rather than having
two food places."
And then I think also just to look at it because these were
submitted quite a while back and about two years ago, I think, prior
to my arrival. And-
So let me stop you there, Commissioner.
So then
your team evaluates it. Does the mayor's office play a role in this?
No. The Chicago Department of Aviation.
We do. I work for the mayor, obviously.
No, I know who you work for. I'm just curious as to whether or not
does the mayor's office have a say in selections or any type
of evaluation?
Oh, the CDA commissioner, that's me. I do.
Okay. I'm doing all that.
Yeah, that's what I wanted to get to.
Oh, okay.
Thank you.
So,
have all the bidders, have they all received some type of update that we're getting
now or are they just receiving-
Not yet
... so we're just receiving it right now after looking at the-
Well, yeah, the bidders, they haven't received anything.
So,
I'm waiting for the recommendations of awards, and then once
I do that, we'll be sending notice out to the recommended, and
I say recommended because there's still a negotiation period.
Things may have changed, I don't know.
So that's why I'm saying the recommended award
winners,
and then we'll move from there. And then I'll make my recommendation and send it to
the aviation committee, and then on to city council for the city council's
approval.
Got you. Now, I don't remember when the last time we did
these concessions. When was the last time these concessions were open
for bid?
Wow. It's been a while now. It's
been years. I mean, Chairman, were you around when that happened?
It's-
Talking to me?
Yeah.
I would defer to Chairman Ose. I think the last round
may have been Midway. I don't know when the last time you guys rounded up
O'Hare. Ambers went up. Yeah, at Midway, but I don't know. Yeah, you're right, Mr.
Chair. For O'Hare, Amber?
Yes. The last RFP that we put out for O'Hare, not for the particular
spaces that are involved with this current RFP order up, but the last one we did
was for Terminal 5, and that was in 2022.
So we've had a series of RFPs that are of smaller scale than the-
But for Terminals 1 and 3.
That-
That's been years ago
... was in the early 2000s, I believe. Yeah.
Oh, yeah. So at least well over 20 something years.
And so it's time for a refresh, without a doubt. Without a doubt.
Got you.
Are there any plans for RFP for concessions for the new Concourse D?
There will be. Yes.
What's the timeline?
So we're in the process. Yeah. Because Concourse D, that will be
opening in the fourth quarter of 2028,
right? And so that's just two years away.
Yeah.
Right? And we're on schedule for that.
And I'm glad you brought that up because I think the last time I was here in front
of the council,
there were questions about how come we haven't moved fast enough
and what's happening with
Concourse D. And now we're third into the-- We're the project
is going to be delivered at least $21 million under budget.
Good job.
Which is huge for a project of this size and complexity,
right? To be under budget. I don't know of any construction project that has come
in under budget, at least not to that tune. So we're proud of that.
But Concourse D will be online in 2028, and so that means I
really need to get started now on getting out a
solicitation for concessions in my Concourse D, because it's
going to take at least a couple of years.
Yes. And then, Commissioner, I'd like to get your opinion.
So all the construction work that's going out there has been done under
CMARs, your construction managers at risk.
For, yes, for the ORD next.
Yeah, for ORD.
Has that been working out okay for you guys?
It has. As I just mentioned, for instance, before, when you look at our Concourse
D, it's about a $1.4 billion, $1.5 billion
project. Again, it's on scope, it's on schedule,
but more importantly, it's under budget.
Yeah.
I think that shows that it's working. Right?
This is why you engage, or you use this form
of construction
to get it done this way, right?
Okay.
Because they ought to be able to do it faster, cheaper,
and keep it on schedule.
Yeah. But
with under budget, there's also value engineering and some of the other bells and
whistles that we don't get. So are we getting-
We're getting everything. Yes.
You're getting everything. Okay.
Yes. And as you know, there's value engineering
in every-
Yeah
... right? And the value engineering is not a bad thing. Sometimes it's good.
Oh, yeah.
Which is,
okay, how can we do this better?
What else can we add?
And in fact, I think with the Concourse D,
because of those savings, we'll be able to put some of those cost savings back into
the project itself.
Got you. And I know your team. I know you got a lot
of lawyers on your team. I was curious as to
how many airport professionals that you guys have hired in your team.
Professionals?
Yeah.
Oh, God.
Folks that actually went to Southern Illinois Aviation School or something like
that.
You're asking me about our total personnel?
No, just your senior staff.
Okay. Yeah, because all my personnel is professional.
Well, yeah, by default. But I'm talking about
folks that are-
I know
... yeah, folks that are actually-
I know
... studied aviation.
Yeah. So management, we have 142
management. And when I say management, that's the
project administrator, project director, and above.
So my project administrators, directors,
my assistant commissioners, deputy commissioners,
managing deputy commissioners, and of course, myself and my first
deputy.
Yeah.
So we have 142 management. At O'Hare
is 128, and Midway is 14.
Got you. And of all that,
I know they're
now because they're thrusted into these positions, airport professionals, but I was
just curious as to the background of some of the more senior staff that you have
there.
So some of our senior staff are licensed
engineers, civil engineers.
Okay.
Some are lawyers, including myself.
But you're both, though, an engineer and attorney.
Yes, exactly. Some are former police officers, particularly
in safety and security-
Got you
... safety of issues.
So we
run the gamut. We have architects.
I mentioned engineers. We have construction professionals-
Okay
... obviously, as well.
Well, Commissioner, again, a huge fan of
you and your team at Aviation. You guys are very important
to the region.
So keep up the good work, and looking forward to continuing supporting you.
Thank
you. Thank you, Alderman. I appreciate the support. Thank you.
Alderman Beal.
I would just like to request,
when you bring the concession contract to us, that the
consultant comes before the committee as well.
I plan to do that, both consultants. Yes, sir.
Alderman Lapata.
Hey, thank you so much, Chair. I will try to be
brief, and again, only additive to the conversation.
Maybe I'll just ask two quick questions again on this topic, and I
don't know if you expected it to be so much about
concessions, although I will simply say, as someone who flew, even just
over the weekend, Frontier from O'Hare to Denver,
the concourse that I flew out of was great.
I will tell the Chicagoans in the room,
our food options
strongly beat the ones that exist in Denver.
If you're ever flying out of their airport-
... don't expect as many full service restaurants as you find at O'Hare.
I did want to ask, though,
and again, it's two years late. You weren't a part of the conversation at the
time, but I'm curious why we put out
so much square footage to bid
all at once through one RFP rather than phasing
it in a way.
Do you know what the thinking was behind that?
I think one of the good things about doing it this way is simply because
it'd been such a while at O'Hare.
I think, as we mentioned it earlier, it'd been 20, 22
years since there's been a refresh,
and it was sorely needed in both terminals.
I'll be honest with you about that. It's sorely needed.
And
the loss of revenue because of the current concepts we have,
the better use of the space that we can initiate because of this order of
RFP, again, it's going to be a game changer.
But I could only surmise that it was simply because it had been just so long
since
they had gone through a refresh at O'Hare in terminals one and
three. And, rather than piecemealing it, the thought
was, "Let's do it all at once and get it over with and get it
done with."
Okay.
My understanding from the RFP
was that
applicants had to make
financial commitments to their
ability to succeed in that space. I also know that the
last two times have been
rocky from a
borrowing, financial stability perspective in the banking industry.
How are applicants
asked to prove out that those commitments still
stand? And how will we work with them if they've had
challenges in that lending space since?
That's a very good question, because you're right.
It's been a couple of years since the applicants have submitted.
And I do know that we do ask for
their financial statements and financial wherewithal.
And
what I can do is I have Amber Ritter, who is my deputy commission for
concessions. Amber, you can speak more specifically to
the requirements that were in the RFP
that the applicants had to
apply with.
Thank you, Commissioner. Yeah,
we certainly want to ensure that our concessionaires are set up to
succeed. And so, we don't want to be in a position where
someone doesn't have the capacity to do what they're bidding.
So there is a strong vetting procedure that we ask for through
the RFP for financial information.
That has been reviewed as part of the long evaluation
period that we've gone through. But to your point, it has
been some time. And so to Commissioner's point, as we start these
conversations with the folks that have been recommended to go forward, that will
be key among our questions is, has your financial situation
changed? We'll want proof of updated financials, et cetera,
because certainly, we all know conditions may have changed
in the past few years.
And Amber, if they have changed for that applicant, how do we work with the
applicant?
I'm sorry, I couldn't hear the first part of that question.
Sorry. If their financials have changed for various
reasons, some potentially outside of their control, how then do we
work with the applicant?
Well, I think that just depends, right? We can't really answer that question.
I think that may be specific
to whatever situation or the situation it may be for a particular
applicant. But I can assure you we will do our best to work with them in
ways that we can, particularly if they're still very much interested
in doing business at our airports.
I appreciate it. My last question will be, so we know
there's the cost of opening a restaurant on
any general commercial corridor in Chicago.
Not easy, but done most days of the week.
It is, one might say, orders of magnitude
more challenging and more expensive to open a
restaurant concession space at our airports.
I'm wondering if you could talk about
what those costs currently look like, I might say, and then
from there, what are financial or grant
programs that are available to our entrepreneurs?
I'm particularly thinking about the city's housing and economic development
grants. Is that an opportunity that extends to airport
concession spaces?
Amber.
Thank you, Commissioner.
Yeah, I will say in 2024, we hosted a symposium
at CDA on that very specific question of financing small
business concessions. We had folks in from a number of city
departments, and also the US Small Business
Administration to talk about lending options.
We had folks from different banks on a panel talking about lending options and
financing options for small businesses.
To your question, so we do want to make sure that we get resources to folks.
All of that information is currently and still housed on our concessions
resources website under our Fly Chicago webpage,
that we hope folks are taking advantage of
all that information. To your question about other grants and assistance,
I believe that
obviously CDA doesn't control the other city grants, but we encourage
people to do everything they can to get the resources they need from other
departments, and we try to facilitate those engagements as well.
Okay. I might then ask this as a through the chair, because it's kind of a
mutual sort of DPD and aviation question.
But Chairman Ervin, if you can find out for us if
concessionaires are eligible to apply for the city's
economic development grants, I would very much appreciate that.
All right. Thank you for your question. We will get that information to you. Okay.
Thank you, sir. No further questions.
Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Commissioner.
All right. Thank you.
Thank you very much. I
want to recognize
Alderman Coleman. She's a non-member that's joined for this meeting.
Any other questions for our commissioner?
Okay. Well,
as you've stated, you guys have a busy job out at the
airport. You account for about almost $2 billion and over
$2 billion of our budget. But again, you all are a
self-containing enterprise fund
that is also an economic engine, not only for the city of Chicago, but
for this region in its entirety. So
continue the work that you all are doing.
And as I see a lot of interest in the concession contracts, I'm sure
there'll be plenty of briefings and understanding as
to
how many square feet somebody got and who didn't get what, and I'm sure we'll have
those conversations. So we look forward to those conversations as you
bring that forward to the aviation committee,
sometime hopefully
before the year is out, we're thinking, or next year.
Yes. Before the year.
Okay.
That's my goal.
Very well. Okay.
Yes.
All right. Very well. Thank you very much.
And with that being said, you all are excused.
Committee will stand at ease while we bring in 2FM.
Thank you,
Mr.
Chair.
No,
I'm good.
Good afternoon, and welcome back.
We have before us
Fleet and Facilities Management.
Before they provide their budget presentation,
we're going to have a short presentation from COFA,
after which
Commissioner Prieto will introduce his team here
in the well and those in the box and provide a
brief statement.
You may proceed.
Thank you, Chairman. Good afternoon, Chairman Ervin, Vice Chair Lee,
and the members of City Council. I'm Chloe Dumaine, Manager of Data
Analytics with COFA. I'm here to provide a brief overview of
the Department of Fleet and Facility Management's proposed
FY 2027 budget. For FY 2027,
the department has a proposed budget of
$565.13 million,
an increase of $61.68 million,
or a 12.25% increase. Approximately
55% of the department's proposed budget is funded through the
corporate fund. Across all funds,
$125.97 million are allocated
for personnel and remaining $439 million
for non-personnel expenses. Compared to FY
2026, personnel appropriations increased by
4.78%, while non-personnel appropriations
increased by 14.6%.
The department has 1,040 full-time
equivalent positions budgeted for FY 2027, an
increase of nine FTEs compared to prior year.
As of October 21st, the department has a vacancy rate of
9.95%.
Moving on to the appropriations by category, both the dollar and percentage
changes shown in this table are calculated using the FY
2026 ordinance as a baseline.
The largest spending category is commodities and materials, with
the proposed appropriations of
$253.85 million,
or 11% increase compared to FY 2026.
In terms of the percent changes, equipment saw the largest
increase of over 400%, which is a
$3.62 million compared to prior year.
Overall, the department's proposed appropriations increased by
approximately $62 million.
Looking at the appropriations by fund, the corporate fund remains the department's
largest funding source, with $309.9 million
proposed for FY 2027. This represents an
increase of approximately 12.6%.
Other notable increases include Library Fund, Chicago Midway
Airport Fund, and Protecting Care Fund.
On the other hand, the special events and municipal hotel
operators occupation fund decreased by
$10.15 million.
Overall, local funding appropriations totals
$557.82 million.
This slide shows department's historical appropriations by funding sources
from FY 2018 through FY 2027.
For fiscal year 2027, department is funded by
approximately 55% of corporate fund,
44% of all other local funds, and 1.3% by
grants.
Finally, this slide shows the department's historical budgeted
FTEs from 2018 through 2027.
For FY 2027, the department has
1,040 budgeted FTEs, an increase of nine FTE
positions from prior year. This concludes COFA summary.
Thank you.
Thank you, Chloe. Commissioner?
Good afternoon, Chairman Ervin, Vice Chair Lee, and members of the Budget
Committee and City Council. My name is Juan Pablo Prieto, and I serve as the
commissioner of the Department of Fleet and Facility Management, or 2FM.
With me today are Managing Deputy Glenn Cross,
Deputy Commissioners Victoria Santiago,
Curtis Anderson,
Michael Pickens,
Anthony Maggio,
Marek Wisniewski,
Margaret Rizzo,
Assistant Commissioners Merit Solis,
Jacqueline Williams, Director of Finance Alvin Smith
III, and Project Managers Jaime Viramontes and
David Powell.
I also want to give a special thank you to our electricians that make sure that the
public can access our public meetings, Jonathan Bondi,
Antoine Burdette, Luis Guerrero, Michael Olson,
and Michael Smith. Thank you.
Today, I'll present 2FM's 2027 budget request, which
prioritizes delivering the critical work that city departments
depend on to provide essential services to our residents while ensuring
we are being good and responsible stewards of the taxpayers' dollars.
2FM supports city departments by providing efficient fleet management,
effective facilities maintenance and real estate operations,
responsible energy procurement, photography, videography
services, printing, document record keeping,
and manages Chicago's Riverwalk, Millennium Park, and our newly
acquired municipal bus station.
In total, 2FM manages 476
facilities, including 423 owned and 53
leased.
Over the past two years, we've partnered with a number of departments to bring
critical new investments across our city.
We've worked with the Mayor's Office of People with Disabilities and the Public
Building Commission on Title II ADA improvements at various
public-facing facilities.
We've also partnered with the Chicago Police Department for the implementation of
security hardening at all police stations and shower and locker
rebalancing at area stations.
We continue to collaborate with the Chicago Public Library to identify and
implement projects that provide necessary updates to make the
spaces more welcoming at various libraries, referred to as
CARE,
and remain steadfast partners in supporting CPL facilities across
the city.
Our city's fleet comprises of
16,485 units of equipment,
including for CPD, CFD, CDOT, and Streets and
Sands, to name a few.
Through strategic long-term planning, our department leveraged dollars to
purchase 225 new fire department vehicles, the
first time in decades, and 754 new Streets and Sand
vehicles, which are scheduled to be delivered between 2027 and
2031.
Over the past two years, we've delivered 550 new vehicles to
the police department and are awaiting the delivery of 81 more in the
first quarter of 2027.
We are also working actively to electrify our fleet where appropriate,
with over 1,475 hybrids,
75 plug-in hybrids, and 247 electric
vehicles, which has helped
increase
overall fuel efficiency by more than 4.5%.
This effort has saved the city over half a million dollars in fuel costs
in 2026.
The department remains committed to operational efficiencies and has
implemented several initiatives over the past year, including leveraging
bulk purchasing price discounts to save
approximately $8.2 million,
partnering with the Department of Procurement Services to improve fleet
decommissioning productivity, and continue our sustainability
efforts at the Riverwalk, which during the last 13 months
surpassed our goal and achieved 30% recycling from the waste
produced.
We remain committed to the success of small businesses.
Through July of this year, 2FM achieved 34% M and
WBE participation, which translates to over $69
million.
2FM will continue to prioritize cost-effective operations while
providing critical work so our residents can receive essential
services. I want to thank the dedicated 1,031 staff on
team 2FM and look forward to collaborating with you to
continue building a better Chicago. Thank you.
Happy to answer any questions.
Thank you.
Alderman Napolitano, any other
questions?
All right. Followed by Alderman
Lopez.
Thank you, Chairman.
Good afternoon. How are you?
Good. How are you, sir?
Good. Just a couple of brief questions.
Not a lot, nothing grilling, but just
very excited to hear about the amount that we're adding to our fleet,
especially where my heart's at on the fire department.
But my big question is right now, until
order and delivery,
the fleet we have now as far as the fire department is in pretty rough
shape.
A big question, a big ask is
what have we set up as far as have we changed our
or do we have a more adequate service capabilities
for these rigs that are in service right now before the new ones arrive?
And what I mean by that is 24 hours a day, seven days a
week service on these rigs.
Yeah.
Has that changed drastically, or is there a plan for that?
Thank you for that question. So obviously our first responder vehicles are given
top priority when they come into our fleet facilities.
The reason that
certain vehicles take longer than others is really the age of the vehicle.
We also need to establish a long-term
permanent preventative maintenance program so that vehicles, when they are being
brought in for a specific issue, we don't have to
then do
more maintenance on the vehicle that should've been done on a scheduled basis.
And so the team is working on creating that schedule, and as these new
vehicles come in, there'll be
less maintenance work that we have to do on them because they're lower in age,
so they'll be easier to maintain.
One of the big issues, though,
in real time is when rigs are brought in,
there is nobody to work on these rigs.
The manpower as far as who can, who has the
ability to work on these rigs, a lot of them are diesel rigs.
You have to have a different type of certifications or capabilities.
And in many cases in the department, we're being told that they don't have the
people to work on them. The time that this is going to take is going to be longer
from drop-off to pickup.
Is there
any movement towards bringing in more manpower to work on
these rigs in real time?
So our technicians, our mechanics are trained to work on these diesel vehicles.
We have used outside services before for highly
specialized jobs. But we have found that our internal
staff can sometimes do them faster than the outside
services.
Yeah.
So we are making sure that the staff that we have at our fleet
facilities are receiving training to make sure they're up to date
on all the different certificates they can have to work on these vehicles.
So we will continue to be aggressive with that training and ensure
that we have the best qualified personnel
ready to work on those vehicles as they come in.
Are you increasing the number, though?
The only increase in staff, as you saw that we're asking for,
those are coming from our airports and being funded through those funds to
repair the vehicles at the airports.
Now, Commissioner, our job is to find a way to make your job easier.
And your job is to do
everything you can to work within the means of what you're given.
So I'm not trying to put you in a bad position here or put you in a-- I want you
to succeed. I think you do a great job.
But at the same time,
if you're told to work with what you got, that's what you're going to do.
My question is, I don't think you adequately have enough
maintenance or staff to work on these rigs.
And I'm telling that from firsthand, where I know for a fact rigs are being dropped
off.
Those companies might not see those rigs for months, if not
longer. So
if
we're not putting our best foot forward towards bringing in
more technicians that can service these rigs,
as council here, we're not helping you
guys,
and you're trying to work with what you got.
So at some point, we're going to have to meet in the middle, and you're going to
have to turn to us and say, "Yeah, I need absolutely more people." I know you're
trying to work within a budget, but I think to service these vehicles and
get them out in a timely fashion, you're going to need more help.
You're going to. It's a given.
How about as far as staffing, how about as far as working on these rigs with
the staff that you have, like in overnight hours?
Because the fire department and police department and a lot of other departments,
they run 24 hours a day. And like I said, I'm not trying to put you in a
position here. I'm just saying when it comes to emergency services,
as far as somebody going out on the road to a firehouse to fix a rig,
or to bring it in and have a turnaround time that's fairly quick, is there an
adequate amount of staffers working
that overnight shift?
Yeah. So we currently do not have a third shift.
We are doing
everything we can to make sure that these vehicles are repaired as quickly as
possible with the two shifts that we do have.
We do have, again, those positions that we're asking for
are going to include machinist automotive positions.
Then again, we will make sure they receive the training that they need to maintain
these vehicles. If there are other certifications
or
trainings that we need to, we'll partner with
departments like city colleges. We'll look to other organizations to make sure that
we get them the training they need to get those vehicles out the door as
quickly as possible.
Commissioner, is it possible going forward that your staff can maybe
just put together maybe just a think tank on
if a
24-hour
window is feasible for some emergency vehicles?
I think it would be something that would help.
And you might even have technicians that are working in other
places that would like to come over and work for you,
that would like those hours.
But for emergency vehicles, I think it's very important
When you guys are working on vehicles, between
let's just say all departments, and you fix an issue or a
problem, are you giving that
vehicle a list or a receipt showing what was
wrong with it, what's fixed, what you did, and what preventative
measures have been done to it? Is that something you guys supply to-
Yeah. Thank you for that question.
Again, when a vehicle does come in for a specific issue, we're not just
addressing that specific issue. We'll do a bumper-to-bumper review of the vehicle
to make sure there's
other preventative maintenance tasks that need to be taken care of while the
vehicle's up in the air, anything else that's going up in the vehicle that we
need to take care of. And we do log all that maintenance into our
system to make sure that we have detailed records of what was done to the
vehicle.
Okay. And that's actually handed to whoever's taking that vehicle from you guys?
Yes.
Okay. All right.
Here's an important question, and I get this a lot from my brothers and
sisters in the fire department and police department, especially in the fire
department.
How many spare apparatus do you have on the front lines that
are capable and ready to go
for a swap-out? So if someone's got to change rigs,
how many
adequate,
accessible, and functional... And when I'm talking about functional, I'm
talking if it's a truck, if the ladder's operational, if it's
an engine that the pump can go in the pump.
How many of those do you have
ready to go and operational?
So we can get you an exact list of each vehicle, and how many
spares we have for each vehicle.
Yeah. Can I get that? That'd be great.
We can get you that through the chair, yes.
Thank you. Another big thing with some of the rigs,
I know it's
kind of
a spoiler, but it is a big deal, especially in the city of Chicago when they're
working throughout the summer, and we've had a lot of hot summer days,
as far as the air conditioning in some of these rigs, especially our ambulances.
Are you guys putting your best foot forward to make sure that these ambulances, not
only for the patient, but for our paramedics, are
operating properly as far as air conditioning, not only in the back of the
bus, but in the front of the bus as well?
Yes. We are making sure that, again, all systems on the vehicle are
running
as best they can. We are ordering new ambulances.
So as those start coming in, we'll retire the ones that need to be
decommissioned and make sure that the best ambulances are out
there
servicing the city.
All right. Is that possible I can get that through the chair as well?
Can you show us as far as what operational rigs you have as far
as the trucks and fire engines, and ambulance as well?
Yes.
And
as far as new ambulances, where are we at? What's our goal?
And
those things put on hours and miles like nobody's business.
Where are we at as far as new ambulances?
So we have ordered
41 new ambulances.
And that's from 2027 to-
2031 is the delivery time window, depending on when the order
was placed and where in line they are with production.
As far as '27 to '28 or '29, what do you expect
that delivery to look like?
I'm going to ask Deputy Commissioner Curtis Anderson.
Deputy Commissioner Curtis Anderson, Fleet.
We look for the majority of the vehicles to come between '27
and '28.
It will taper down toward the end. So in 2028, we will get a smaller amount,
but starting now,
next year, we'll get
a larger amount, like 20.
Okay. Oh, between beginning of 2027 and the end, you could see up
to about 20 rigs coming in in 2020? Okay.
Yes, sir.
And really quick too, Chairman, just on that same question.
As far as on the
engines and trucks, deliveries on those as
well?
Yeah. So
thank you for that question.
Fire trucks in '27. Ladders, fire
trucks, we expect 18 units in '27.
Oh, wow. Okay.
Hell yeah.
Well, I don't think I've ever heard that down here before. That's pretty awesome.
So
all right. Thank you, Chairman. I appreciate that. Thank you.
That's a first. All right.
Take it.
Where's Nick at when you need him? So, all right.
I think Alderman Lopez, followed by Alderman Hadden.
Thank you, Chairman, and good afternoon, members of the committee.
Good afternoon, Commissioner, to you and to your team.
If I may,
last year, your predecessor said that we were going to be receiving
262 vehicles for CPD in 2026. Did we receive
those?
Yes.
As well as 40 vehicles for CFD. Did we receive those?
Yes.
And 67 for Streets and Sanitation. Did we receive those?
Yes, that's correct.
Okay. The vehicles that we received, were
they replacing or were they to add
to?
Replacing.
And all of those
400 vehicles, what did we end up-- God bless you. What did we do with those?
With the vehicles that they replaced-
Mm-hmm
... you mean? So they were put into our decommissioning pipeline,
which is what we're working with Procurement Services to ensure we have
a more streamlined process for those decommissioned vehicles.
So first they need to be,
the decals, lights, sirens need to be taken off.
And then it goes to a public bidding site.
Do we continue? I know on occasion, the city council introduces ordinances,
as I have done, to donate vehicles and things of that nature.
Are we aggressively donating to any
municipalities or organizations?
Upon request.
So typically-
A request would need to come in.
Okay.
Last year, we highlighted 1,385
hybrid vehicles in our fleet.
Your opening statement said we have 1,475, which would
be a significant slowdown in what we've been ramping up to.
Are we migrating away from electric vehicles or hybrids?
No. Again,
the vehicles that are ordered are
ordered when we need to replace other vehicles and when funding is available.
So at first, as funding becomes available,
and then as vehicles are identified that we can decommission,
either
they're owned and so we need to sell them off, or the leases expire and
we can return them. We'll then, again, funding available makes a
purchase for a new vehicle and the
priority unlikely-
If I may. So when you say when funding's available,
under the previous administration, there was a one point
something billion dollar infrastructure that was used to modernize
some of our fleet. Are those dollars still accessible to you, or is that
line of funding no longer in existence?
The funding-- I'm sorry. Glenn Cross, managing deputy commissioner for
Fleet and Facility Management.
The issue we're having with-
Could you pull the-- I'm sorry. Could you pull the-
The issue we're having with that is
the infrastructure.
We're looking to improve our infrastructure so that we can
purchase vehicles and have infrastructure where we can
install the charging stations. And so we're
doing a study of other facilities that we can put
infrastructure in, the charging stations, so that we can purchase more
vehicles and have that
available for different city facilities.
I know in the past, we've tried to,
quote unquote, "modernize" the fleet
at various stages of whatever that
environmental-friendly iteration was.
At one point, I think we were doing compressed natural gas for some of our fleet,
and we only had
two locations to fuel them, and they didn't work well in the winter.
I think recent trucks and things that were purchased for street and sanitation
didn't even have the luxury of electric windows.
So
when we say we're modernizing, are we making sure that we are not paying the most
for the least amount of
features in these vehicles?
Yes. And again,
through those strategic conversations, making sure we're doing some long-term
planning.
We're doing our best to
see as far out as we can and make those purchases
in bulk so that we can take advantage of some savings when we do bulk
purchases so that we can get the best vehicle for the best
price for what we need it for.
What do we do for Chicago
libraries
through our 2FM?
I'm sorry. Is there partnerships with the library system?
Yes. We service libraries when work orders
come in around building maintenance, right?
The team goes out to address those.
At specific libraries, we will do landscaping, janitorial,
and then we have also partnered with them through that care
project that I talked about to make sure that we have new carpet in place,
painting.
Do you have a list of deferred maintenance for libraries?
We can get that for you,
yes. If you could provide that through the chair, a list of all the deferred maintenance
for all libraries across all wards, I'd appreciate that.
Sorry, Chairman. Didn't mean to scare you.
Also,
with regards to the deferred maintenance for
both police and fire stations.
Particularly when it comes also to-- God bless you as well over there.
Personal vehicles. The issue of parking lot safety and
things of that nature has come up.
Do we have a plan in place to address that as it relates to our
fire houses and our police-- more so our fire houses than police
stations?
Thank you for that question. I can talk to the OPSA
commissioner or executive director to talk about any safety
concerns that they've raised at either CPD or CFD
to make sure that we're addressing those.
Okay.
And then
lastly, I think we may have
a list of questions with regards to some of the fleet, although I
know Alderman Napolitano is ecstatic with your answers for CFD.
But I would have a question with regards to the vehicles that we
get for CPD.
Mm-hmm.
I feel as though we go through CPD vehicles at quite an alarming clip.
In some cases, in no fault of our own,
responding or being involved in accidents because of the reckless drivers
that are on the road. How do we, as a city, and perhaps this
is a shared question both for you as well as for the
budget team.
My question has always been, when any of our vehicles, but
mostly police because they are more expensive, when they are involved in an
accident, when they are totaled out,
do we do anything to recoup that cost from the individuals who are
responsible for that crash
when it is not us at fault?
Thank you for that question. I can get with the Department of Law and the
Department of Budget to find out if we do.
Okay. I believe the answer is no,
but I think that for me, that is a huge issue for us because
our taxpayers are paying for things that
between two residents, you'd resolve it as an insurance dispute.
But Chicago oftentimes just takes it on the chin and just buys and replaces,
as opposed to actually going for the cost recovery of being involved in an
accident.
Again, thank you for your efforts here.
We're looking forward to working with you and your team to help modernize this room
and some of the issues here for public safety and public accommodations.
And we'll be sharing that with you and your team shortly. Thank you. Thank
you, Alderman. Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman Lopez.
Alderman Hadden, followed by Alderman Villegas.
Fantastic. Thank you, Chair,
and thank you, Commissioner. I want to follow up on a
similar vein. So one, I want to plus one
my colleagues who previously spoken
about the quality and amenities in the vehicles that we're
purchasing. A little bit extra goes a long way,
particularly
around the cooling piece.
So obviously, heat protections for our workers is something I've championed.
And even though
not everybody supports it, I do.
So we should have cooling for all of our workers.
I wondered if you could speak a little bit more
about the positions that we're losing.
The positions we're losing. So
I know there are a couple gains, mainly tied to right enterprise
funds. But given some of the concerns around turnaround
times, right, for maintenance of our fleet, I see both in
the facility management
or, excuse me, the fleet operations and the asset management, we're seeing a
combined loss of 19 positions. So could you speak a little bit
to what that looks like for your workload?
Thank you for that question.
Those positions are actually being transferred over to the Department of
Environment.
Okay.
So they were under 2FM, but now they're with DOE.
Okay. So just switching. Okay. Helpful there.
And then, around electrification, I know
you were already speaking a little bit to our vehicles.
I kind of wanted to ask more broadly.
So
Alderman Lopez mentioned some of the
problems with the CNG
fleet, right?
The lack of fueling stations, some of the maybe
weather temp things. As we look at electric
vehicles, I'm wondering if you could speak a little bit to what
the city's charging stations and kind of plans for
charging stations for city fleet look like.
Thank you for that question. And so again, as
Managing Deputy Commissioner Cross noted,
we're looking to make investments at city facilities where we can to
install those charging stations.
Now,
that's going to take some time because we need to make sure that not only is there
space to install the charging station, but the building is bringing in enough
power for that charging station. The other challenge is a lot of
our vehicles get parked outside, and that's not an
ideal situation for a charging station.
And so creating
indoor or covered parking spaces would pose a
challenge. So we are electrifying as much as we can where we
can. Lightweight vehicles,
the technology is there, right, for us to do that,
and for us to make those purchases where we can.
But we are evaluating our facilities to see where we can make those
investments.
As you do so, a thing I would ask,
there's potentially a revenue opportunity there.
So I know that we might not have a ton of needs right
now for our city fleet, but I can say a lot of
constituents increasingly are purchasing electric vehicles or would
like to purchase electric vehicles, especially as
more affordable options are kind of on the market.
But one of the things that we hear a lot is that there's not
access to a lot of electrical charging stations.
So coming from the 49th Ward, we don't have a lot of single-family homes.
Where we have some charging spaces are--
I think we've got one in a CTA garage facility,
and then a private parking garage.
So a couple things to throw out there, and it'd be great if
maybe in this new year, this is something that your department could
evaluate,
whether it's through a public-private partnership, right?
I know
because of some of the changes in the
renegotiated kind of parking meter situation, I feel like we've got an
opening and an opportunity that we were previously kind of blocked out of,
where we've already had private companies who have a product or something they can
kind of bring to market. But also thinking about a city
revenue piece.
Where are people parking? Where could they park?
How could we also use the intentional placement of
charging stations to help with some traffic management, perhaps?
I'd love to get more cars off the street in Rogers Park and into some parking
garages that we have. And if there were amenities there,
like a vehicle charging station that could incentivize people to do it.
And then to the indoor storage facility piece,
don't we own all the parking, like under Millennium Park?
We own the parking garages.
Okay. I know we lease them with an operator, but we own the parking garages under
Millennium Park. And
I feel like there's probably good power run to that area because of the
trains.
Yes. So just, I would love to see an analysis from your department in the new year
about not what we could just do for our fleet, but what
possibilities, if we have to install the infrastructure anyway, we have for
potentially a revenue-generating solution while also providing access
to Chicagoans. So,
through the chair next year, not specific to this budget, but would love
to hear some updates on that.
Thank you for that.
Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman Hatton. I have Alderman Villegas,
followed by Alderman Conway. Do I have any others for 2FM?
Alderman Waguespack, can I get a hell yeah out of you, too? Or what?
Out of Nick?
Okay. All right. Very well. Followed by Alderman Waguespack.
Go ahead, Alderman Villegas.
Thank you, Commissioner. You've got it figured out already, huh?
It's a good team.
Okay, good.
It's a good team.
Yeah, you guys do have a good team. I just have a couple of questions,
and these are based off some of EY's
findings.
And
I think there's a lot of savings to be found there.
My first question is, do you still have staff working from home?
There are some staff that work remotely one day a week.
So one day a week your staff works remotely?
Okay.
And I'm just asking because obviously, office space.
So,
the city plans to leave 1900 South Western
in December, and 111 West Washington when the lease
expires in August of 2027,
and then move to
66-72 East Randolph,
until it can be sold.
And EY values that property at about $130 million.
In April, the
budget office promised
the council
a list of 30-plus sites that you guys have by September 30th.
Have you guys sent that list of properties to us yet?
I can follow up and see if that list was sent.
If you could, I'd be interested because, again, I think there's an opportunity to
realize some revenue from that.
How much will the city pay in 2027 in rent and operating costs for
space it does
not need,
in your opinion?
That it does not need?
Yeah.
I can get
that to you, sir.
Okay. All right.
Yeah.
And then,
when do you think 6672 will be sold and put back on the tax
roll?
So right now we're evaluating.
We don't think it's the best time to sell that space right now, given where the
market is.
Okay.
So we're watching the market to make sure that we put that on the
market when we can get the most money for it,
both of those properties.
So you guys have gotten appraisals already?
Yes, we have.
Okay.
We've gotten some estimates based on the market.
It's
not a steady time in the market right now for office space.
Okay.
All right.
Your department runs the Riverwalk.
In 2024,
Riverwalk businesses paid the city about $2.5 million in license fees,
and
EY found that matching peer cities could raise about $13 million
across the next 10
years.
So-
Go ahead.
Yes. So we have our Riverwalk operations.
I think part of what we are trying to do as well is to make sure that those
locations are
accessible to small businesses. And so
while there may be some opportunities to increase
revenues, we also have to balance that with the needs of small businesses
and recognize that they may not be able to afford that.
And
the economic impact that a space like the Riverwalk would
provide a local business,
sometimes you may not be able to put a dollar amount on that opportunity for that
small business.
Okay.
You're relatively new there, so I think that not a lot of questions here.
And the gentleman to your right's done a great job holding the shop down as
well.
Look, I
think we're all counting on you and your
team to come up with some new ideas around creating efficiencies.
And you have a body here that wants to partner with you to figure
out how we can help do that. So please feel free to reach out to us, so that
way, whether it's through ordinances or whatever,
keep us abreast of what you need in order to make yourself successful.
Thank you, Alderman.
Good luck. Looking forward to continue working with you and your team.
Thank you.
Thank you, Chairman.
Thank you, Alderman Villegas.
Alderman Conway, followed by Alderman Waguespack.
Yeah,
morning or afternoon, Commissioner.
Afternoon.
Two things to mention out of the gate.
First of all, as praise to you, in the short time you've been
commissioner, I have appreciated our conversations regarding the
Greyhound terminal.
The Greyhound terminal has been a source of great concern to-
The folks in the neighborhood for a long time,
frankly, most of them wish it wasn't there anymore.
I have promised them that it will run better under government
control. So I've put my life in your hands.
So I've appreciated that you have been very engaging on that, and please don't
hesitate to call on me to help me help you help me make that
situation better.
Thank you.
The next thing I'd say is that
I recall in the--
Following up on what Alderman Villegas said about office space not being
used, I recall
that the EY report that we commissioned last year,
they had done a sample size of a number of buildings, and they essentially said in
the sample size that a third of the desks weren't
being used. And they identified that as an area of potential
efficiency. I think this came up in your confirmation, so
hope that you're
looking into that.
And I had some follow-up questions to what Alderman
Napolitano asked about
fire department equipment. And if I misask the questions, I hope Alderman
Sposato will get a chance to
clean it up. But looking back at my notes, essentially from last year,
there was discussions about
aerial ladder inspections. Apparently, they're supposed to be done every
five years. And there was some
contention last year that that wasn't happening to what I have in
my notes from last year was 61 aerial ladder trucks.
Are those being done today? And
perhaps you can give a status on that.
Thank you for that question. Yes, the inspections are being completed.
That's great. Okay. And it sounded like getting some new equipment
will change the-
Will alleviate
... brevity of that.
Yes.
And
I would ask the same question based on
pump inspections for the 96 engines that we have, or at least that's what the
number was last year, if those are happening.
And I actually don't know if those are on the same schedule or not, but wanted to
see where we're at on that.
Thank you for that question as well.
They are on a different schedule, and yes, those inspections are taking place.
Now, those inspections, are those
done in-house or are they done by a third party?
In-house.
Okay. Those are done in-house. Okay.
I think there was a bit of confusion about
that last year.
Frank, this is not an area where I know enough to ask follow-up questions.
I'm happy to hear that they are happening, but if some of my colleagues know more
about the fire department and want to dig in on that, they can feel free.
But Commissioner, you've only been in the job for, like, five minutes, but I think
you're doing a great job. Thank you.
Thank you, sir.
Thank you, Alderman Conway. Alderman Wojcik.
Thanks, Chairman.
Commissioner, welcome.
Thank you.
Going back to Ernst & Young, the report that was commissioned last year,
and then, of course, we have the second one coming up this year.
EY identified about 16 million to 30 million in fleet
savings.
And if you already answered this, I apologize, but what specific fleet
initiatives are funded for 2027
based on last year's
$3.2 million study and the
$6.5 million study this year?
I'm sorry, sir. Could you repeat your question?
Sure. So
last year, we had a pretty significant EY
report that came out, said there would be about 16 to
31 million in fleet savings.
What are the initiatives undertaken by your department for
2027
related specifically to the EY report?
Thank you for that question. So
one thing I'd like to highlight is we are reducing
number of lease vehicles, light duty lease vehicles.
That will save 1.1 million.
We also have $500,000 in improved warranty
recovery.
3.3 million in improved sale of retired equipment.
Some of those numbers were also
efficiencies or value adds.
So $200,000 in reduced overtime.
And 4 million in implementing a preventative maintenance
improvement. So again, as we're improving those preventative maintenance
programs, we should see a reduction
in maintenance costs.
And then using the GPS system that are
installed in some of the vehicles, we'll be able to
also produce some savings from there.
So you'll be getting
about a third of the way there, sounds like. Or at least the top end of it.
Let's see.
Going back to the facilities,
got a $15 million increase. Library fund is at
11.5.
Special events looks like it drops to 10.2.
Is this the allocating cost to appropriate funding sources
savings?
And did it move into the corporate fund?
Which line? I'm sorry. Which line again?
Facilities management corporate fund share
goes up 15,
and then library fund is 11.5, but
there's a $10.2 million drop in the special events or hotel tax
fund.
I think it's page 95.
So there was just some movement of funds there.
So Millennium Park moved into
our fund, and then-
Harold Washington, the property
management of Harold Washington Library was also moved
into our fund.
Okay.
Hold on one second.
Shifting to a couple of other things that came up in there.
So one of the initiatives that several of us
undertook last year was an advertising
opportunity
that had taken place many years ago, or was looked at many years ago.
It
included $24 million in potential
advertising on fleet vehicles, light poles.
Was there
anything
done beyond the task force recommendation for a feasibility study on
that? And
you had an asset optimization oversight committee that included two council
members. Was there anything done to move that forward?
We'll have to get you more information through the chair.
I'm not aware of any advertising on fleet vehicles.
That was in budget last year,
and it wasn't undertaken by the administration.
I'll have to get you more information about what happened with that.
Okay.
Energy
contracts
we have at 206.2 million.
When do these electricity and natural gas supply contracts expire,
and how much do you have hedged for 2027?
And is there any potential exposure for price increases included in the forecast?
I'm going to have David Powell,
our energy expert here, weigh in.
Hi, David Powell, project manager.
Electricity for next year, we are hedged 100%
until January of 2028. In the springtime of next year, we're
going to be looking at
doing more price locks for electricity supply.
In terms of what that term would be, whether it's 12, 24 or 36 months,
we're going to evaluate that next spring.
Okay. And you said for electricity?
Correct.
And
for gas supply as well? Similar situation since they
both
expire about the same time.
Yeah, so for natural gas,
we are
hedged at about 75% of our volume for next year.
Excuse me, that's natural gas supply is hedged until
April of next year.
We are actually working on doing a competitive RFP
to be issued,
hopefully before January 1st of next year, so that we can
hedge that supply for next year.
And for the competitive RFP, how many
business entities could actually apply for that?
When I ask this question, we work with energy management consultants,
in terms of the
level of players that would be able to meet the business needs of the
city of Chicago. They said anywhere from two to three, potentially
more, but likely two to three players.
Okay.
All right.
Commissioner, that's all I had for now.
I think I've got quite a few other questions, but I'll put them through the chair
because I think they just might require you to kind of take a little time to look
at them.
Sure.
They're not gotchas, but they're just sort of walk through them and take your
time to get back to us on them.
Thank you.
All right. Thank you very much. Thank you, Chairman.
Thank you, Alderman Waguespack. Any others for 2FM
before we
close out? All right.
Alderman Lopez?
Thank
you, Chairman. And sorry, just one other thing popped into my head.
A few years ago, we talked about the solar farm that we have out in
some
county where Jesus lost his sandals.
What's the status of that?
Not Jesus' sandals.
No sandals.
We still have...
Let me get the exact name.
And can you expound on the details of what that
energy farm is for my colleague's edification?
Is it in Grundy County, if I'm not mistaken?
David, do you have the specifics on where the
farm is?
Thank you for the question, Alderman. David Powell, project manager.
That solar farm, Double Black Diamond, that is located, I believe, in Sangamon
County.
Sangamon.
Downstate Illinois.
Okay. I knew it was somewhere out there,
where they eat horseshoes
sandwiches. That's what they're called.
Yes.
Are we done with that location? Is it fully built, fully
operational?
What's the details on that?
Yes, that site is fully operational.
The city of Chicago, all of our municipal electricity,
70% of
our power is through this Double Black Diamond solar
installation.
That represents our list one accounts.
So all of our biggest, our largest
electricity accounts such as the airports, such
as
water management, Jardine and Sawyer, as well as City Hall and some other
local facilities
Our list two and our list three accounts, that's through our electricity
supply agreement, but that's not through the solar farm down there.
And does that provide electricity to us directly?
Does it have to go-
It is not directly.
I don't know the specifics behind,
but I was told that there's not a wire that's going from that
solar array to the City of Chicago, no.
Well,
I didn't think it was one giant cable.
I was just thinking, we're not supplying that electricity
to
a utility that is in turn selling it back to us or giving it back to us?
No.
Our electricity supply, we have an alternative
retail electric supplier through Constellation.
We still do have to pay
delivery charges to ComEd
for their infrastructure, but our electricity supply is not
paid through ComEd. It is paid through another entity.
And since that supplies 70% of our need, is that at
100% capacity and output that gets us to 70%?
Or is there- The
uh- ... electricity that's going unused or being sold off?
No, we are not selling. So from my understanding, the
Double Black Diamond solar farm, there are other customers to that,
that are not the City of Chicago. We are only procuring 70% of
our need for our municipal load
through those-
And we paid for this location, correct?
We do not pay for this location. But we
are a customer that procures a limited amount of energy from
that installation.
Okay. Thank you, Chairman.
Thank you. Alderman Coleman?
Thank you, Chairman Ervin. Commissioner, congratulations.
We had not had an opportunity, but I know you will be
amazing in this role. You mentioned earlier the
vehicle donations upon request.
How does one acquire the list of vehicles that are no
longer in service?
But I think more than acquiring a list is letting us know where the need
is, and we'll take a look at the inventory to see what's ready to be decommissioned
and still operable so that we can see if there's a match there.
Okay. Are you familiar with, I have not witnessed it
in this administration, not even the last administration, but there
was once upon a time a partnership with World Business Chicago, with our
sister cities.
I believe Kenya and other kind of third-world countries that are
in need of the ambulances, the vehicles specifically.
Has that come across or...?
Thank you for that question. I've heard there was, I think, one request.
Curtis, you might have the specifics on the request.
Curtis Anderson, Deputy Commissioner of Fleet. Yes.
We
have one ambulance that we just donated
within the last month,
and there were questions on others. We were waiting.
Okay.
So one in the last month.
One where?
Somewhere-
Bahamas
... Bahamas, yes.
To the Bahamas, yes.
Point of information, Chairman.
Alderman Lopez.
Was that the donation introduced by Alderman Lamonte Robinson?
Yes, that's correct. Yes.
Thank you.
And what is the...
I believe Chairman Viegas requested what is the cost of those
vacant facilities? There is a former ward yard
at 61st and Troop in the 16th
Ward, and I have noticed that the
maintenance of that lot is not what it should be, and it's
always a kind of cross between Streets and San, as well as your department.
But I am curious as to the cost of that annually, of
maintaining that particular space.
Thank you for that question. We can get you the exact
cost to maintain the space.
Okay.
And last question. It isn't...
Who's across the street?
Um.
Ray
Guarnoffke is the director.
PBC. PBC. So if we were to RFP that
out, would that be in a direct partnership with PBC?
Would they be the overseer?
RFP what? I'm sorry.
The vacant land or the building and the
land.
So to sell the land, we would go through DPD
to put that on Chi Block Builder and get that sold.
If we were building a municipal
building, depending on the size, we would partner with PBC to build the
building,
and that would go through a competitive RFP.
New construction only with the PBC for an
existing or for
to work with your department.
Yes. There are some
larger projects that are not considered new construction that we also partner with
the PBC with.
So it depends on the size and complexity of the project.
But a new building that
will end up being a municipal building, we would partner with the PBC.
Okay. Thank you, Commissioner.
Thank you.
Alderman Moore.
Thank you, Chairman. So thank you, Alderman Coleman.
So I wasn't aware because I was assuming the
ward facilities, the former ward facilities, were still handled
by um
Streets and Sand, but it's your responsibility.
You're saying it's,
2FM's responsibility
The maintenance of--
I'll have to check on the specific
lot. But we do maintain many city-owned
lots in terms of landscaping and janitorial.
We partner with Streets and Sands on various ones as well.
Mm-hmm.
So I can get you the specifics if you tell me-
Yeah, 74th and Hermitage. And who would be our contact
person? Who should we be reaching out to in your office when that
is not done?
We'll get that for you.
You'll let me know who- Yes
... I'm supposed to be reaching out-
Yes, sir
... to as well.
My final question is from the standpoint, and I'm
assuming it's down to your department, if I'm wrong, correct me.
So when we have police vehicles and other vehicles down,
the
repair places that they go to, who chooses them?
Is that chosen by your department or the individual user department?
We do repairs in-house.
Mm-hmm.
Again,
there were times where we would go outside service where there was a
very specialized case. But we take care of the maintenance of the
police vehicles-
Okay. So if
a police car gets into an accident and it has to be
repaired and
it goes to an auto body shop,
is it the CPD deciding on that, or is
2FM deciding on that?
We would
procure the
body shop that would do that-
Okay
... service.
So if you could provide through the chair the number of body shops that
you contract with, and of that number of body shops,
the
ethnicity makeup of those body shops that you use, please.
Yes, sir.
All right.
Thank you, Chair.
All right.
Alderman Villegas.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I just have one question I forgot to ask about
JOC contracts. Does your department have JOC contractors?
That's correct, yes.
Could you provide through the chair a list of those JOC
contractors
broken down by MW and VBE as well?
Yes, we can get that to you.
Okay. Thank you.
Okay.
Any questions? Okay. Alderman Gutierrez.
Thank you, Chairman.
Once again, Commissioner, congratulations.
Thank you.
Looking forward to continue working with you.
I just have a couple questions.
So we were discussing here with our peers how
we have to share spaces for Streets and Sands, right?
When I came in as an alderwoman for the 14th Ward three and a half years ago,
trying to know the spaces and all the buildings, and knowing more about the city
because I was coming from the county, I wanted to go visit one of the
facilities that we had for Streets and Sands.
I went at 5:00 in the morning to go say hi to our laborers, and
I became
aware
to this not nice building of ours
that our
workers were there in, being deployed to
our communities. It was really sad for me to see the conditions
that that
space was. I was able to bring it up to budget that first year,
and I know some changes happened.
But as of now, I don't know if we still
own that building. But I don't know if there's
any other remodeling happening, if there's thoughts or money putting
back to that space to be reused. And it goes to my
question because as we were talking to my colleagues in
the back row from me, that they share offices, right?
There's some wards that have their own Streets and Sands yards, but some others
have to share some others. And for us, we love to share with the
13th Ward because we've been there
in the meantime, but also there's not a good space for materials, for
garbage cans, and for my superintendent to work from. Right?
So I would love for us to also have a space like some other wards
have. And also, if my colleagues don't have a good space, how can
we make sure that all the 50 wards, that all our 50
superintendents have a good space to work in, and every ward has a
decent and nice space to store their materials?
So what do we have? What can we do? And I know you can
make it a great thing.
Thank you for that question. So the team is doing an assessment of
all of our facilities to
provide a plan on how we
can make sure that
any deferred maintenance is taken care of,
that we're also upgrading those facilities.
So we need to first do an assessment of all of our city-owned
properties to understand what
is needed, and then assign a priority level to that, so that we can put that into
the capital improvement plan, so that we can have it scheduled, work with you,
with the council to make sure that the funding is available for those
improvements.
Thank you. So then in that yard, is there still construction happening, or
it's just closed down? Because it was coming down.
There was mold. There was some ceilings and
walls coming down. It was in really deplorable conditions, as they know.
Thank you for that question, Alderman. And Managing Deputy Glenn Cross.
That particular facility, we did close down completely, and
we were able to relocate your staff in some nice trailers for
now.
We continue to seek out for another conducive facility
that can
maintain your staff and to be able to have a large enough facility to
also house all the trucks. So we're still working.
It's work in progress still.
Okay. Hopefully we can revive that space, because it's city land
that we can use, and it's also helpful because it's right close to I-55.
So also from there, they can be deployed to many other parts of the city.
So hopefully we can get it back on track, and we can utilize that space.
Thank you, Deputy, for that answer. And thank you, Commissioner.
I also know I talked to you about the facility that we have
on Catsey and 48th Street. We all know it's a big
space. Now,
not a lot of people go out there and make their payments for the finance department
and pay their tickets and so. So I guess hopefully we can get also another smaller
space, because I know rent there is not cheap.
And of course, we want to utilize the money of our people in the best way we can.
Thank you so much.
Thank you.
You had one question?
Yes, please.
All right. Let's come on with the-
Thank you, Chairman. I'll go quick.
First question,
how much of the debt load for the city can be attributed to FFM projects?
And if you can share that list and status of any cost changes through the chair.
Could you repeat that one more time? Sorry.
Yeah. How much of the debt load for the city can be attributed to the department?
So we're asking this of all the departments, as we're getting an understanding of
the debt load, so we don't necessarily get all the details, so we're going
specifically to different departments to ask that.
And like I said, that can be through the chair.
Next question. On the vehicle and vehicle tracking
appropriations, we went from almost frozen vehicle appropriation last year,
which was 550,000 to
3.6 million this year.
A separate appropriation for vehicle tracking up from 1.7 million
last year to 3.4 million this year.
So the increases that are happening, are those one-time expenses,
and if so, are they delivering efficiencies down the line?
Is it a
lump sum front-loaded investment?
Yeah. Part of the increase is to add cameras to
vehicles.
And
the more vehicles though that we add
to have GPS and cameras, the more we'll have to pay for that
subscription fee. Right? For the annual fee to use the
service.
The telematics, though,
and the data that comes out of those is going to help us reduce
costs and provide cost savings on the back end.
But we do have to make some investments in installing cameras and GPS.
That could sometimes be a one-time fee, but then we do have that annual
fee that we'll have to use the service.
Are the cameras that you're mentioning
kind of similar or the same ones that are being brought up as smart streets for
other vehicles, or could they be?
They're different than the smart streets one.
But we haven't decided on which camera yet. We're still evaluating that.
Okay. And the reason I ask that is, is we're talking about expanding smart streets.
Mm-hmm.
If you guys are putting cameras on your vehicles, and it could be the same and used
similarly, there might be overall cost savings rather than going to
DOF to try to expand there.
Yeah,
thank you for that. We can take a look into that.
I know the cameras primarily are being put up to
document what's happening to the vehicle, right?
And so-
Somewhere like driver or whatever else.
Right. But we can take a look and see what
the cameras they're using for
smart streets and see if there's any compatibility.
Yeah, because I think that would help us scale up possible.
I guess, can you outline any 2FM intersection with the ERP, like things that
are looking to be modernized, and you could through the chair that as well?
Okay. We can get you that through the chair.
Okay. And
another through the chair is-- A lot of these will be through the chair.
All 2FM budget line items that are
related to CPD.
So although we always say the CPD budget is 2.2 billion, you got to
add all the vehicles and everything else, which is technically in your
department, but still part of that same cost in a way that I think
when we talk to the public about the total cost is important.
And you want to know that for the '27 budget?
Yeah.
Okay.
Yeah.
And then similarly,
and this is something that came up like Ernst & Young and other conversations
related to facilities and buildings,
if there was a list of things that you're looking to offload, which one
those would be, right? I think the example made by Mr.
Ernst
in a conversation was
Ernst & Young might have looked and said, "Hey, this building needs to go," but
then they go check out the building.
There's actually a lot of resource files and other things,
which is why the building can't go just because there aren't a lot of people in it.
So an assessment from 2FM as to like actually these ones
could go is something I'd be interested in getting a sense of.
Yes. And we're going through that assessment now of
figuring out which buildings. First, we're taking a look at which leases we can
exit.
What we don't want to do is sell off a building, and then as leases end,
say we should've kept that building because now we need to put those
staff in this building, right?
Right.
And so we're doing that assessment now of timing
as the leases end, where will we need to put folks,
so that we can make sure to plan accordingly and not offload a building
that we then need to figure
out- Get another building just in case to try to consolidate, then becomes a bigger
issue. Yeah. No,
I completely appreciate that. So I think
a breakdown of that for us to understand would be super helpful as well.
I apologize in advance if this comes off as
anything.
All the different commissioners who have vehicles,
are all those vehicles 2FM vehicles?
Some of them are.
So to further answer your question, we are doing an assessment
of every vehicle,
and who or what department it's assigned to,
and the usage on that vehicle.
Yeah. There's a couple reasons why I'm curious.
One, I don't know what the standard is for the commissioners, whether
they all have vehicles or they all just, whatever's available.
Just want to make sure that there's one rule across the board.
Yes.
Right? And I think the other interest I have, which is something that came up last
term, is there are a number of us who just do a lot of
work in the ward, and we're using our own vehicles
to haul--
I know I literally do it, sawhorses on top of a Honda Pilot as if that's the
smartest thing to do because we don't got a pickup.
Meanwhile, Streets and San have those vehicles that if I just had one of those, I'd
be driving out here handling business in the ward.
So I just didn't know what the possibility of something like that would be,
and not sure if there's been any conversation.
So you're asking about assigning it to the ward office?
Yeah. Like the same way the ward supe's got a pickup, right?
If the ward office had a pickup,
be happy to kind of follow up and help, because I think sometimes
it might be the cheaper option than trying to get more staff to do the things that
we might be able to just go do.
Right? Like if there's debris that's in a parkway, I can move it and take it to the
ward yard myself if we got everybody else busy.
Would you be open to a pool vehicle for that program?
Yeah. I'd be open to whatever might be possible to get something like that done.
You can join me in the pool vehicle program.
We could ride together. We could do the video.
But like you said, I think
I'm spending 98% of the time in the ward trying to make sure we're handling stuff
24/7. When the storms are hitting, we're the ones bringing stuff out to the
neighbors too, and so I think
anything that could help in that regard would be appreciated. So, cool.
Thank you.
That's all I got. Thank you. Thank you, Chairwoman.
Thank you.
Alderman Lopez?
Sorry. Thank you. Are
employees that are
assigned a permanent vehicle still responsible for the taxes of that
usage?
The taxes-
Mm-hmm
... you said?
Yes.
No, the city covers the
full cost of the vehicle.
No. So a vehicle is viewed as
a benefit
to your salary.
Previously, administrations have required that to be incorporated in your
W-2s. Are we still requiring that?
Because if the city is paying, providing you a vehicle
and
fuel,
that's basically like a bonus because you're not paying for it.
I believe under Mayor Daley,
we previously did that.
Are we doing that or...?
I can follow up with human resources, with Commissioner Hinton,
and see.
But to your knowledge?
To my knowledge, no.
But I've only been here-
Okay
... for about a month, so
thank you.
Alderman Beale.
Thank you.
Just on that note.
I asked at your confirmation to provide us with a list of everybody who
has vehicles. Do you have that list?
Not yet. We're still doing that assessment.
As to-
You've had two weeks to get that list to us, and you don't have that list?
So the vehicles,
some vehicles are leased, some are owned, some are used as a pool
vehicle. So we're still doing the assessment to see who the
vehicle's assigned to, if it's a specific person or a department.
All right. I need that list as soon as possible.
Yes, sir.
Thank you.
And for a point of clarification, Commissioner,
so that could be a list where here are pool vehicles
assigned to a department, and then here are vehicles specifically
assigned to an employee?
Okay.
Thank you.
Okay.
All right.
No further questions. Commissioner, thank you.
Thank
you. You and your team.
We will take a two, three-minute recess,
just enough time for us to switch out departments.
Department of Environment is next.
All right. Thank
you.
Committee will resume.
We have our last department before us today.
We have
the Department of Environment. Before we get into the commissioner's
testimony, we will hear our analysis of the department from COFA.
Thank you. Good afternoon, Chairman Ervin, Vice Chair
Lee, and members of the City Council.
This is Adrienne Russell, they/them, data analyst with the Council
Office of Financial Analysis. I'm here to provide a brief summary
of the Department of Environment.
For the fiscal year of 2027, the Department of Environment has a proposed
budget of $53.06 million,
a $0.60 million increase,
or 1.15% increase from fiscal year 2026.
This department is 14.35% corporate funded,
with $9.42 million allocated for personnel
and $43.64 million for non-personnel expenses.
Compared to fiscal year 2026 appropriations, there has been a
35.06% increase for personnel and
4.06 decrease in non-personnel
expenses. The department has 79 full-time equivalent
positions budgeted for fiscal year 2027, which is the
same as fiscal year 2026.
As of October 21st, 2026, the date of the
mayor's fiscal year 2027 budget address, the
department had a vacancy rate of 13.7%.
This rate represents the share of budgeted positions that were vacant at the
time the data were collected.
This slide compares the fiscal year 2027 proposed
appropriations by category and fund against the 2026
ordinance. Both the dollar and percentage changes shown in the
tables are calculated using the 2026 ordinance as the baseline.
The largest appropriation category is purposes as specified
with a proposed $42.27 million.
The largest relative increase in percentage between 2026
and 2027 in appropriation category is in personnel
services.
The Department of Environment is mainly funded by federal grant funds, which
are 1.81 million or 4.04% lower
than fiscal year 2026.
This slide provides a historical overview of the department's appropriations
by funding source beginning in 2018.
From the graph, we see that the 2026 ordinance to the 2027
proposal, corporate funding has increased by approximately
$2.5 million,
while appropriations from other local funds and grants have decreased.
Community Block Development Grant funding remains unchanged.
Finally, this slide shows the department's historical budgeted full-time equivalent
positions, or FTEs, from 2018 through
2027. As stated previously, no FTE
changes are proposed between the 2026 ordinance and the proposed
2027 budget. The large jump in both appropriations
and FTEs seen in these graphs is explained by the reinstatement of the
Department of Environment, which was formally reestablished in the
2024 budget ordinance.
Of the 2027 budgeted positions, 62 are
supported by the corporate fund, while the rest are supported by other local
funds and grants. This concludes COFA's overview of the department's
2027 proposed budget.
Thank you very much, COFA
All right.
Commissioner Tovar, I'll turn it over to you.
Thank you, Chair Hadden.
Good afternoon, everyone. Angela Tovar, Commissioner
for Department 72, Department of Environment.
I am joined here
to my right with our First Deputy, Jared Policicchio,
and in the box we have Megan Willis Johnson, our Administrative
Manager, Assistant Commissioner Lindy Wordlaw,
Deputy Commissioner Kimberly Worthington, Program Administrator
Grace Adams, Director of Environmental Justice Gabby
Wagner-Sobredo,
Assistant Commissioner Ram Ramaswamy, and Environmental Engineer 3,
Abraham Bradshaw.
I'll go into my opening remarks, Chair.
Good afternoon, Chair Hadden and members of this council.
Thank you for the opportunity to present the proposed 2027
budget for the Department of Environment.
The budget represents a new era for both the Department of Environment and the City
of Chicago. This spring, with the return of environmental
enforcement and remediation programs, the Department of Environment
was fully restored. Now, the city's critical
environmental functions, environmental policy and planning,
regulation and remediation are consolidated under one umbrella.
This achievement is the culmination of years of tireless advocacy of the
community, the commitment of Mayor Johnson and this council, close
collaboration among city departments, and a shared vision for a strong,
unified department with the power to drive the city's climate policies,
safeguard our land and natural resources, and protect all
Chicagoans from environmental harms.
In the five months since the transition took place, we've already seen the benefit
of uniting the city's environmental leadership and expertise under
one department. Already, the collaboration of the new and existing
teams has strengthened our ability to protect environmental health and
safety of Chicagoans and advance the city's robust climate and
environmental justice goals.
During FY 2026, DOE advanced
citywide environmental initiatives while improving interdepartmental
coordination. Key accomplishments include the department
restoration. We successfully incorporated the environmental
remediation and enforcement teams under one department.
We took active steps to fill new vacancies, expanding our
administrative policy and technical capacity to
deliver environmental programs and coordination across the city.
We want to acknowledge the steadfast leadership of the Environmental Council and
members of this City Council for your strong support throughout this
transition.
Regulatory actions related to data centers.
We took critical steps to begin implementing more protective measures to update our
regulations and minimize the negative impacts associated
with the rapid growth of data centers.
In July, the Sustainable Data Centers working group that DOE convened released
its recommendations after over a year of research and engagement with
industry, energy and water experts, and community.
Working with leaders in this body, including Alders Hadden, Manal Hoppenworth,
Dahl, Robinson, and others, along with experts citywide, like the
Illinois Clean Jobs Coalition and Mayor Johnson, we're taking critical
steps to turn these recommendations into tangible actions that will safeguard our
communities.
The relaunch of the city's energy benchmarking program.
We rolled out the revitalized version of the city's Chicago Energy
Benchmarking Program earlier this year after taking over the existing
program in 2025. With new resources and support
for building owners, we continue to build this program with a focus on
education, energy efficiency, as well as an enforcement
component for those buildings that do not report the required energy data.
Also, with the partnership of Chair Hadden, we continue to explore
important ways that the benchmarking program can be used to enhance our
policies, including data center regulation, and to drive greater
energy efficiency citywide.
The release of the green infrastructure strategy and the expansion of green
infrastructure. We released the draft of the citywide plan for
green infrastructure, the first time since 2014, with
support and input from various partners, including fellow departments like
DWM and the Little Village Environmental Justice Organization, Friends
of the Chicago River, Greater Chatham Initiative, and Alderwoman
Ramirez. We developed the strategy to serve as a roadmap for
using natural systems to manage runoff and reduce flooding in
overburdened communities, enhancing climate resilience and environmental
equity.
Drawing upon public comments we receive, we will release the final version of the
strategy this fall. We also continue to take concrete steps to
expand green infrastructure this year.
We continue to work with the Department of Water Management, Chicago Public
Schools, the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District, Open Lands and
Healthy Schools campaign on the Space to Grow initiative,
transforming schoolyards into multifunctional green spaces
that manage stormwater and reduce urban heat.
Through the work of this collaborative group and support of Alders Fuentes, Harris,
and Chico, four new resilient schoolyards, including the
first high school transformation project which we unveiled today, will be
unveiled this fall.
Energy efficiency and cost savings.
We expanded our partnership with the Department of Housing to continue growing
Green Homes Chicago, a one to two-unit home retrofit and
repair program. We're grateful to our partners, Elevate and People for
Community Recovery, for their partnership as we work to reduce the energy burden
that low-income households bear.
We also expanded our partnership with the Department of Fleets and Facilities
Management to install lighting and HVAC retrofits and rooftop
solar panels at two additional Chicago public library branches,
bringing the total to four libraries, making these neighborhood hubs more
energy efficient and reducing overall operational cost.
We're proud to celebrate the unveiling of those newly resilient hubs, Tomin
Library, with Alderman Rodriguez and Mayor Johnson on Earth Day this year.
The FY 2027 budget builds upon this
momentum, setting our department up to be even more streamlined and effective
in our new role as the city's centralized and accessible hub for environmental
leadership. DOE's key FY 2027
priorities include
modernization and efficiencies improvement.
We will continue working to improve our processes and services.
One core area of focus will be continuing our efforts to link permitting
inspection, our database is called IPS-11, with Salesforce
for a more streamlined, efficient 311 complaint process.
Thank you to all the alders for your partnership with our permitting and inspection
team as we work together to keep all Chicagoans safe.
We will complete the identification of high-risk contaminated city-owned
parcels in the vacant lot reduction program and work with the Department of
Planning and Development to restore those lots to new productive uses.
Clean energy and affordability, we will prioritize policies and programs that
reduce household energy burden, promote clean energy adoption, and
support local workforce development.
One of these efforts is a community solar initiative to drive reduced
utility costs for Chicago residents.
We are eager to keep working with Alders Mosley, Chico, and Hall, and many others
to push this program forward in 2027.
I want to pause briefly to thank the 79 dedicated members of the Department of
Environment and to this council. DOE looks forward to continuing its
close collaboration with you, with OBM, our partner
departments, and sister agencies to advance a unified, efficient, and
accountable environmental department.
Thank you for your continued support and commitment to a more sustainable and
equitable Chicago.
Thank you very much, Commissioner Tovar.
I've got a couple questions to start us off, and then I know we've got a few people
on stack.
And I'll
start a little bit here
using the privilege of the chair, and I think Alderman Beale was first
on deck when he returns.
You mentioned a couple programs, the library retrofits.
Two more you said we got this year. For
2027,
are there any more planned? And outside of libraries, are there
any additional buildings that are
in the works?
So
there are two more libraries that we brought online for
2026. We were able to obtain more
money via a federal earmark, so that's discretionary
dollars that are obtained by our
congressman.
And we were able to secure some funding through that.
The evaluation in terms of which libraries are next are still underway in
coordination with 2FM.
How much money?
I believe it is $1.1 million.
Okay.
And then on the benchmarking compliance
program, really excited
for your leadership and how that's been brought back online.
Wondering
what's that been looking like as far as
compliance?
And has there been--
I guess, what are the numbers looking like as far as reports,
compliance, and any fines that have been levied?
Sure. So I will say our work with enforcement is a work in progress.
We're certainly proud of the work that we've done over the past year
to ensure that the benchmarking program now has an
enforcement component, which is very exciting.
And I know that that was something that was up for conversation last year at this
council, and there was wide support from this council in ensuring
that a benchmarking enforcement, that that capacity was built in.
One of the things to note about that,
benchmarking is on a reporting year.
Building owners are required to report as of June 1st.
And so we provide
notifications and communicate to the building owners that are
on our covered buildings list to require them to report to us.
From there,
in addition to that, as we have been managing the program, we have also been
working with our law department to set up the enforcement component.
That took a lot of coordination with both law and administrative hearings.
As covered buildings, there are over 1,000 buildings on the covered buildings
list. If we were to issue all of those tickets at once,
we have to make considerations in terms of the capacity of administrative hearings.
If those buildings were to go to court, what strain would that
put, or what capacity would be required to help sustain that
enforcement
at administrative hearings? And so we are working with administrative
hearings now
to
conduct a pilot so that we can have
the first set of buildings that are out of compliance, so that they can
receive their fines and fees, and then we can evaluate what
that does- Capacity
... in terms of capacity. And so that is an ongoing process,
and we are working through that. I will note that we can still fine those buildings
even outside of this reporting year.
So if the year concludes, if those buildings were not in compliance
for
2026, there's still an opportunity for us to issue them a ticket,
which is our intent. So we heard loud and clear last year that enforcement was a
priority for this council, for this body, and it's certainly something that we
want to pursue with your partnership.
My follow-up, and then I'm coming to you, Alderman Beale.
My follow-up on that is could we have-
Some information about maybe the scope or the timeline of that pilot.
If you want to get that through the chair-
Sure
... that pilot with administrative hearings, kind of
what the status is, when there will be some reporting and some findings on
it.
I know that in prior years,
administrative hearings
do a lot of work,
especially being one of our smaller departments and with the way they're staffed.
But I know that even with the Department of Public Health, we've run
into capacity issues as well. So as we beef up
our enforcement, right, and so much of the
environmental enforcement that is now within your department,
this seems like it is a major priority.
And so, yeah. So through the chair, if you could get us some information
about the pilot so that we can be prepared,
one, when administrative hearings comes before us, but also to really think
about how we are
giving enough capacity and meeting the needs of both
departments in order to
be able to be fully functional in enforcement. That would be great.
Yes. And if I may, Chair, one other thing to
add that you asked is that our compliance rate for benchmarking is
76%-
Right
... of our covered buildings to date have reported.
And so, we're very committed to bringing that number back up.
Fantastic. All right. I've got Alderman Beale, and then I've got Alderman
Villegas, Alderman Sigcho-Lopez, and then Alderman Conway,
and then Lopez, and then Moore.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Good afternoon, everybody.
Afternoon.
Can you just give me a quick two, three sentence
on what you all do every day?
Sure. So there's a number of different things that we do every day, Alderman.
The two teams that have just transitioned over, one team works
on environmental remediation, largely focused on the
city's vacant lots.
Mm-hmm.
In addition to that, we also conduct all of the environmental reviews that are
federally required. Any time that the city is using federal funding,
that is also a function of this team.
In addition to that, we uphold the city's code related to
environmental remediation, so any time that there is a complaint that goes
to the 311 system related to odor
or pollution concerns,
that
is a function of this team as well. We have a dedicated team of
inspectors and environmental engineers that work on
that.
Mm-hmm.
In addition to that, anything related to permitting.
There are
a number of facilities that require permitting for the City of Chicago.
Anything related to environmental permitting is issued by this team as well.
Mm-hmm.
And then in addition to that, we have a very large project management team.
So large relatively. I mean, we're a very small department, but we have a
strong project management team-
Mm-hmm
... that works cross-departmentally, and then also
with partners across the city to advance
environmental and sustainability initiatives.
So everything from the clean energy projects that I mentioned to the green
infrastructure strategy,
supporting 2FM with the retrofits of some buildings-
Mm-hmm
... when we have funding for things like that.
Advancing solar projects when we have funding.
I talked a little bit about the Resilient Schoolyards project.
A wide range of things
focused on
improving the overall environment for the City of Chicago.
Okay. Well, let's start with the
vacant lot.
Are you guys doing phase one and phase two on all the inventory
vacant lots the city has?
We are not doing phase one and phase two.
And I can actually turn that question over to our deputy commissioner,
Kimberly Worthington, who can-
Okay
... field questions about the vacant lot.
Okay.
Hi, this is Kimberly Worthington, deputy commissioner over environmental
remediation.
For the 10,000 vacant lots that the city owns,
we did a historical review back in
2022 for all 10,000 lots. It was not a
phase one. We did not go out and inspect each site,
and we have not sampled many sites at all.
So that's my answer.
So would that explain why-- Because, I mean, I talk to developers all the
time. I have a lot of development going on in my ward, and one of the big
complaints they have is that it takes your department
extremely
long time to
do environmental work in order to pass it on to be sold.
So why is it taking so long?
Yeah, so we have identified a number of strategies.
You are not alone in sharing
your concern about that, Alder, and
I would welcome a conversation to learn more about that.
Throughout this transition, we have worked with Deputy Commissioner Worthington
and her team to think about several strategies to improve that.
Mm-hmm.
I know one major thing that we just completed, in fact, with the Department of
Planning and Development was ensuring as
the few hundred lots that went up recently on Chi Block
Builder, for example.
We thought one strategy to help facilitate the sale faster
would be to proactively disclose information about the lots.
Mm-hmm.
And so we directed the team
to come together to do that evaluation, to disclose those records at the
time of posting at Chi Block Builder.
So now when you're on Chi Block Builder, instead of selecting
a lot that you think may be something that you want to pursue as a
developer, and then later down the line hearing that there may be
some issues, we've worked with DPD to proactively disclose that
information at the front end.
Mm-hmm.
And so that we can help to facilitate and improve the sale of vacant
lots.
Okay. And how long does it usually take to, say, do a phase one?
So it depends. I think the most important thing, and
maybe the information that we provide most frequently to
DPD, is the sales memos. So it depends on the condition of
the lot, what
phase we're doing.
We are disclosing information based on the risk of the lot.
If it's low risk,
we may be just providing the records that we have.
If it is medium risk, we are providing
information and recommendations to the developer on how they can do additional
environmental due diligence. And then if it's high risk, we are
giving them some requirement steps in terms of what they can do to
remediate the lot and pursue environmental due diligence.
Great. Now, if it's a city-owned lot, and they're interested in it,
why not just, if they're committed to buying the lot, just do the
phase one and then expose what's there or what's not
there to expedite the sale?
That seems like that would be a seamless transition to me.
If the phase one looks good, then pass the property
along, let them go. It's just they're complaining that it's taking too long
for your department to move and get those properties out the door.
So, what's the hold-up?
Yeah. So I'm very committed to improving that process.
That's something that I take with great seriousness.
As I mentioned, we have been meeting weekly with DPD to help to
facilitate improvements with the vacant lots
program to increase and help to facilitate the sale.
Again, I'd welcome a conversation with you directly, Alder.
I will follow up with you. I'd like to hear more about some of your concerns
related to that. We are very committed.
I'm giving you my concerns right now.
Yeah. So, it's just come up with a process-
Yes
... to streamline to get those properties out the door.
Because the developers want to move. We want to get projects going.
We want to move these things forward. Time is money.
And the longer it takes to get these properties moving,
the cost escalates. So the only thing I would recommend is, you don't need to meet
with me. Come up with a process and get it done.
Yes.
Okay?
Mm-hmm.
All right. The second piece that I have,
when we talk about odors...
Well, first,
you going from 14 employees to 79?
So that was a transition that was approved in last year's budget.
Mm. The transition happened in phases this year.
Mm. So we completed the transition in May of this year.
Okay. And you took most of the employees from where?
The employees came from two teams, from the Department of Public Health, as well
as the Department of Fleet and Facilities Management.
Okay. All right. So
let's talk about the,
you say you guys work with odors.
The odors that's coming out of the South Side,
why did it take so long for you guys to go out and do anything with the
company that was just shut down because of the attorney general had to go to court?
Sir, we worked in close coordination with both the Department of Law,
with IEPA, as well as the Illinois Attorney General's Office.
We engaged in several years of enforcement related
to that site.
It is a process. There is an agreement that
happens between the site and the facility.
There could be continued violations, which is what happened in this case.
Mm-hmm.
There was follow-up.
Any time that there is a
issue where there is gross negligence, like in this case, then
that's something that we refer to the IEPA.
Mm-hmm.
We work in coordination with the IEPA, and then ultimately, if we cannot
get the business into compliance, then we refer that to the
attorney general's office.
Two things you just said, Commissioner.
You said gross negligence, number one.
And you've been working on this for two years, or years.
If it's gross negligence, why is it taking two years for the residents who
are smelling this smell? They can't go outside.
They can't sit on their porch. They can't walk their kids to school.
The smell was ridiculous, and
it's shut down now, thank God.
Mm.
But I know the
owner is trying to do the right thing, and he's saying he's meeting...
I've talked to the owner. He's saying he's trying to
become compliant, but he's not getting cooperation
from
the department or IEPA.
So if you have a company who's trying to do the right thing, and he's saying he
can't because he can't get permits from your office to implement the
technology to prevent the smell, then what
is he to do?
The people are smelling this stench, and it's re- I tell you, I don't know how
those people are not suing everybody for this smell.
And the owner's trying to do the right thing.
Mm.
He's trying. He's got the equipment sitting in his facility and
can't get a permit to install it because he's having
problems with the department and IEPA.
That's when one of the
people you have over here should be a point person for him and walk him through
the process to get him in compliant to get relief.
But he's not.
Mm-hmm.
So what are we doing to help this guy out?
So I would
say- And also help the residents?
And again, Alderman,
this case predates me, right? We've had this team and
the Department of Environment for five months, and that's not an excuse.
I get that.
But I would just-
We're not going to predate it when people are complaining about the smell that
they're dealing with. We're not going to pass that along.
And if I may- Okay?
Mm-hmm ... I will just say that in 2026, the Department of Public Health did
take action to require the
upgrade to the facility.
They did provide
a legal requirement for the company to install something
called an RTO, a regenerative thermal oxidizer-
Mm-hmm
... within 120 days. After that,
the company still Was out of compliance even with the
installation of that equipment. And so there has been an effort,
historically, to work in coordination with the
facility to get into compliance, and unfortunately, there are still
violations that took place after that.
Okay. Well,
I do know this owner personally.
Yes.
And I know he's trying to do the right thing.
And the information that he gave me is that he has the equipment,
but he can't get the permit to install the equipment.
And he said he got paid a visit as early as last week.
Mm.
And he said they came down and saw he was shut down.
That's correct.
Okay. But somebody went and filed an injunction saying that he was still operating
with a judge. So if somebody went in and said he was shut down,
how do you go to court and says he's operating?
You follow me?
Yes.
So it's too much going on. You need to
delegate a point person on this one, because this one's hot.
Mm-hmm.
Okay? To get this problem-
Yes
... solved.
And we do have a point person that's delegated to this project,
sir. The other thing to mention is that there are also IEPA inspectors
that are- Mm-hmm
... monitoring this site as well. So I believe that that determination did come
from the IEPA.
Mm. It was an IEPA inspector that determined that there were still ongoing issues with
the site last week.
But he needs the permit from the city to install this new equipment, correct?
I'd have to look into
the latest in terms of the litigation, but I can.
Okay. All right. That's all I have. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Thank you.
Before I go to our next speaker, I'm curious on a follow-up.
So it sounds like a
direct conversational follow-up on this case.
But I'm wondering if through the chair, Commissioner, for all of our
education,
especially with this team underneath the Department of
Environment now, if you could give us maybe a little
fact sheet or just process flow about what
happens and what enforcement looks like for complaints
that way, right? So if there are smell complaints, if there are noise pollution
complaints,
I think it would be helpful and informative if, through the chair,
the team could get us that of what happens.
Because I hear Alderman Beale's concern.
I know if a restaurant
fails an inspection, they're shut down,
right? Like that. So enforcement in other
areas,
I know are more developed and we have different
frames of reference for that, and it would be really helpful to get an idea of
how things work now,
understanding too some of the additional kind of layers of government that
are there. So if-
Yes
... you could provide that, it'd be amazing. All right.
I've got Alder Villegas and then Sigcho-Lopez,
Conway, Lopez, Moore, and Vasquez.
And I'm going to add,
Vice Chair, we'll squeeze you in after Villegas.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Just a couple of questions.
Commissioner, the city's franchise agreement with ComEd expired in
December of 2020
and has run on automatic extensions since then.
January 2023, the prior administration had reached a
deal that would've brought at least 100 million from ComEd for climate and
equity programs, plus at least 520 million in community benefit
projects.
The City Council never took action on it.
In the nearly three and a half years since Mayor Johnson took office,
the administration has taken no public steps to negotiate a new agreement.
Please correct me if I'm wrong on that.
And ComEd's chief executive said this June that the company would engage,
quote, "if and when the city is ready." Is anyone negotiating a
franchise agreement today, and who's responsible for it?
And then how much money,
if they are negotiating, is set aside for climate programs, city energy cost,
and other city priorities
that have been left on the table by letting this drag through the mayor's entire
term, and money that could've reduced the budget's asks for
taxpayers?
Thank you, Alderman. I'd like to direct that question to our first
deputy, Jared Policicchio.
Thank you.
Yeah, thanks for the question, Alderman.
Jared Policicchio, first deputy commissioner.
Well, first and foremost, completely acknowledge your
concern, and we
also consider this a priority for the reasons you described.
Let me just give you some quick background on what we've been doing at the
department level since that previous
draft agreement was before you all.
So first, as you've heard already, we've been engaged
in an intensive process of building
back a department, basically from scratch.
So that's
certainly been
our top priority over the past couple of years, and I think we see the
results now in having a robust team.
That doesn't mean we haven't been
focused on utility accountability.
So one of the things that we're proud of, working with the
Department of Law, we continue to engage on
utility issues at the Illinois Commerce Commission.
The franchise is definitely an important part of the puzzle here.
Again, for
some of the reasons you described.
However, it doesn't allow the city to set rates.
So rates are set by the ICC. And so we are very-
I never mentioned rates. I'm talking about the franchise agreement.
Yeah, understood, sir. I'm just mentioning that's the reason that
we
have been very involved in ComEd's cases
at the ICC related to their capital investments and their rates.
One of the things that came out of
their last large case, it's called a grid plan case-
Was a agreement with the city that led
to something called an energy partnership agreement.
So it's basically a shorter term agreement, not a substitute for the
franchise, but an effort that we were able to accomplish by
advocating at the ICC,
to require ComEd to undertake certain projects, to do better
coordination with not just us, but other departments like DPD, Department of
Housing. So that's something that, again, is not a substitute for the
franchise, but has served as something that we could work on at the department
level.
And I'll close by saying that we continue to
consider a new franchise, something that at the department is
a priority for us.
I think the final part of your question is what would be the...
The department itself is not in active negotiation with the company around a
franchise. But what would be required?
At a minimum, we would need to see the
kind of investment that you described was in the last agreement.
So your department's in charge of the franchise agreement along with law.
Is that accurate?
Yes. The Department of Environment has franchise oversight in the code.
Okay.
Given we're so far into this term, do you think that you'll
be proposing something soon, or do you think this is going to continue to have
continuations of the current agreement?
I think I'll turn it back to the commissioners.
What I'll say is that at the project team level, we
work with ComEd and speak to them frequently on this other agreement that
I talked about, as well as various other projects related to our
energy goals.
We are certainly interested in working with the council
and other leaders on a new agreement, but I'll defer to the commissioner.
Well, let me-- Here, because I've only got five minutes.
But look, my thing is that there's money there.
We are in a pretty good position,
as relates to negotiations. And so I would encourage you guys
to try to get something done, because there's an opportunity to realize some
savings that could ultimately be passed along to those folks that are having a hard
time with their bills. Okay, so that's that.
Your department provides environmental engineering for city's
property transactions, but so does the Department of Fleet and Facility
Management. They run their own environmental health and safety program
and buys the city's energy as well.
EY found $30 million to $70 million in savings from
consolidating overlapping divisions.
Has the administration evaluated combining these functions, and if not,
why not?
The team that was formerly at the
Department of Fleet and Facilities Management has transitioned over to the
Department of Environment.
So Department of Fleet no longer has that
duplicative- The environmental remediation component is under the Department of Environment.
And that's part of your
headcount? That's there, so there's no staff on-
Yes. Okay, perfect. Okay.
All right. I found this astonishing.
Federal grants make up $43 million of your
$53.1 million budget, about 81%.
Obviously,
the current resident at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue,
obviously we're concerned about federal funding.
What's your plan if
Washington, D.C. or the federal government cuts
some of those grants? And that's a huge number.
I've never seen a department that reliant on
federal grants.
CDPH and DFSS almost.
Oh, God.
So the one thing to note, Alderman, about our number,
is that a large portion of that is
related to the Anadarko settlement.
That is a settlement that was brought on by the Department of Justice
in coordination with the USEPA. That money was then directed to the
Department of Environment specifically for sites that
were exposed to something called thorium.
It's a radioactive material. And this is an issue that is
unique to the Streeterville community.
So any time the city departments are working in the right of way in
a specific geographical area, and then in addition to that, any time
there's any private development going on, both of our teams
are either coordinating internally with city staff
and/or if it's a developer, they are monitoring the developer to
ensure that there is no exposure as a result of that
contamination. And so although it looks like we have
a large pot of federal funds,
the large majority of that is that settlement. It's a drawdown account.
So we only use it when we're doing something that is unique to that project.
Okay, cool. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you.
Vice Chair Lee.
Okay. Sorry, I got distracted by the-
Easily, and I think Chairman Irvin failed to
recognize non-member-
Right
... Puppy Son in the house.
That's right.
Our newest member.
Commissioner, great to see you.
You too.
And thanks for all the work that you and your team are doing.
I'm probably going to bounce around a little bit.
And I apologize if someone else already asked this question because I missed sort
of the front half of this.
If you have it with you here, great. If not, I can take it through the chair.
But, I'd love an update on where you and your new team are
in terms of collection of fines and fees
for the various violations and things that your new team is doing.
If we can get a schedule for the last
12 months, that would be great.
Let me get back to my questions.
And I'll say, Vice Chair, to that piece
I think broadly through the chair that would be helpful.
We talked a little bit about it in related to benchmarking.
Yes.
And there was a pilot that she talked about that they're working with
administrative hearing. So I did ask through the chair for details on that pilot,
but if we want to add more broadly for fees and fines-
Yeah
... across the department.
In particular, because
we put in some revenue in the last budget associated to work
that your team was doing.
Yes.
And I know first and foremost what we want is to get people into compliance.
We're not here to be a big stick, but
the fines and fees
exist for a reason, so we want to make sure that those things are being applied
sort of equally
in and around the city.
Would you like me to share those numbers from
May through September?
Sure. Yeah, that'd be great.
We tracked those
numbers.
Okay.
And again, we became a full department in May, so these are-
Yeah
... just the numbers through September of 2026.
So we have $1.4 million from fees.
We have total fines collected from violations issued May 1st
through October 8th.
We collected $69,800
through
the administrative hearings process.
I should also note that we have a number of open cases.
Okay.
So there will be more money that will be collected through-
What was the number right before the administrative number?
The number was 1.4 from fees.
From fees? Okay.
Yes.
One other thing to note that happened during this time, we
actually facilitated something called a direct pay credit.
That is a tax incentive that the city can receive from the federal
government, even though, as Alder Viegas named,
the current administration has
really tried to roll back incentives related to clean energy investments.
There are still some that have not sunsetted, and this team has taken
on pursuing those incentives in partnership with QFM,
so that as the city does make those clean energy investments related to
EVs as well as solar,
that we can get those tax incentives back for the city of
Chicago. So we've done that in the past, and that has been
over a million dollars in tax incentives that we've received, a rebate that
we've received back for the city last year.
For this year, that number was 579,000.
Great.
And I believe that that was for the purchase of those public charger or those
chargers for the city fleet as well as vehicles.
Great work, team.
Switching gears away from fees and fines,
can you talk a little bit about how your department interacts
with the Chicago Department of Public Health?
The reason I'm asking this is, the 11th Ward has quite a few...
There was a lot of industry previously.
Now that has shrunk over time, and residential has sort of been
built up in some of these areas. And I have
constituents who have concerns about
what was leftover contamination or what may have been,
let's call it a paint factory at one point.
Now it's just individual spaces for different types of businesses, but there are
homes right next door.
I'm wondering how best to
flag or have someone take a look at
where we may see cancer pockets or things like that.
So the question really is what's the interplay between your two departments?
I know that some of the folks that are in your team now used to sit within
CDPH, but surely there's still some
coordination, where
one sort of bleeds, sorry, bad use of words, into
the other space. Can you talk a little bit about how you guys work
together?
Absolutely. We've been tied to the Department of Public Health for
many years.
Both when this team was in office in the mayor's office, and then now as a
department.
I would say that,
to your point about continued coordination related to
environmental exposure, we have so many examples of ways in which we've
done that in partnership and continue to do that.
Even though the permitting inspection team has transitioned, there are still a
really wonderful and dedicated group of epidemiologists that we work with.
So really understanding health data and thinking about that from an equity
context, understanding how we can prioritize communities
that may have existing health or environmental vulnerabilities.
Those are all things that the Department of Public Health, particularly their
epidemiology team, have been tremendously helpful with over the years.
Some very concrete examples of that is
when we started to work on understanding areas to
prioritize things like flooding.
They've done like a health vulnerability index for us.
We've worked with them to think about heat vulnerability.
We've thought about their work within the context of where we would prioritize
green infrastructure measures. So
they provide a lot of important understanding of what the state of the city
is from a health perspective and have really helped to guide us think about things
from a health equity perspective.
So we utilize and work with them in partnership all the time, and
plan to continue to maintain that relationship.
Would love to hear more about
what you think could be a possible project for the two departments.
Yeah, no, that'd be great. And I happen to know at least one epidemiologist-
They're wonderful ...
from the Department of Public Health.
Mm-hmm.
Hello, Emil Jorgensen, if you're listening.
So I've got this little Amtrak problem-
Yes
... in the 11th Ward right now. And the Federal Railroad
Administration provided for a categorical exclusion originally,
and we have been all furiously trying to
get our hands on the application, get our hands on the CE worksheet to understand
how that was justifiable at the end of the day,
with the plan to challenge the use of the
categorical exclusion. The FRA has now
just stated yesterday, they put out a press release that- Oh, given the
expanded scope of the project, we're going to do an environmental assessment.
It's not a full environmental impact statement, and I think that that
distinction is really important,
because my opinion right now is that the FRA
and Amtrak are backtracking now because they know some
things were skipped.
And this idea that within the next 30 days they're going to be able to give us
something more meaningful
is
kind of funny.
But there will be
opportunity for public comment on that, and I hope that we
can count on the Department of Environment to weigh in on that
as well. I know that
your work is very tied to the concerns
that we have today. The 11th Ward, especially in this
area where they want to move this maintenance facility,
is very burdened already. I can tell you as someone who lives
within 340 feet of the north end of this yard, I look out my
bedroom window and I see I-55 right behind me.
I look up, I see
the Dan Ryan. I look to the right and I see the Metro and Amtrak
tracks and trains going by.
This would add an enormous burden onto an
already burdened community. And the idea that
this industrial maintenance complex is the same
as loading rail cars, which is what they were doing on that yard previously,
will have no greater impact than what was there before is
laughable.
Because we know that they're going to have to dispose of waste.
They're going to have to refuel their tanks.
So can you talk about just the importance
of a full environmental impact assessment and what
that sheds light on in terms of
what the residents can expect? And
I think we haven't necessarily had the conversation in our community about
cumulative impact.
Mm-hmm.
So what are your biggest concerns with what
Amtrak's trying to do?
Sure. So,
thank you for that question. I know that you and I have had some many conversations
about this, and I will just say
the other thing to point to is that this conversation
has been very challenging, largely because
our limited jurisdiction over the rail yards.
I remember last year in a hearing, Alderwoman Taylor also bringing
up some issues related to this near her ward as well, and
really trying to understand where we have these points of leverage
in terms of ensuring that a full analysis is done
so that we can understand the health impacts
of the proposed scope of project. And so from our
perspective, that is certainly something that needs to happen.
We
have been awaiting, and I know that you have too, we've talked about this, more
information-
Little more information.
And
we have been working with a team. I know that we've been in contact with
a team internally to really better understand what has
been proposed, to understand that scope, and to really understand how they
determine that that categorical exclusion should be applied in this
matter. The information that they have provided to date doesn't really shed light
on that, unfortunately.
However, we are still going to join you in that
advocacy to understand better
what information they utilized to apply the categorical
exclusion. And then as this project progresses,
including the commitment that they just made, as you mentioned recently,
that we can secure that information so that we can do an
evaluation. I know that there have been a number of
people, including the folks on Kimberly Worthington's team,
where we've worked together to
evaluate that data that we have, the documents that have come through already,
and we'll continue to
analyze that as more information is disclosed.
I appreciate that, and we'll have to make sure you
know when the public comment period's going to be happening, because I think it's
going to be really important for the Chicago Department of Environment
and yourself to opine on what you see
in that
assessment. I'm doing air quotes. Thank you.
Thank you, Chair.
Thank you, Vice Chair. Alder Sigcho-Lopez, followed by Alder Conway.
Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
First let me start by
really praising the department and having a full
budget for the department. I do believe that this is actually
a very critical department.
The City of Chicago, I believe in the years to come, will become a destination
city, and I think it is critical that we take measures
to
protect the environment, clean air and clean water for all constituents
across the city. So I'm proud to have supported the reestablishment
of the Department of the Environment, and I'm glad to see now the
budget being a fully
fleshed budget for the Department of the Environment.
Let me ask just a few questions. This is specific to my ward,
another policy
citywide. But
in terms of enforcement and oversight,
I know that in the southwest side, especially in the Pilsen community, we work
very hard to have air monitoring systems.
I want to refer to specific cases where even the attorney general
has
put forward fine fees and called for investigations
themselves, and talk about Sims in particular.
So-
I want to just for clarity on the record,
I've been very clear about the importance of protecting the
environment and being
really diligent for enforcement, but in these kind of cases,
I know that the Illinois EPA
and the Department of Environment should be collaborating closely, especially
when it comes to
the license renewals and so far. I know that right now it is in the
Illinois EPA, and I want to talk a little bit about the
difference between the community impact, new permits versus
existing permits. And now in this particular case,
I want to see how these are monitors, how we can oversee, do we have
enough staff to do the inspections, and how do you
see this play out? What is the role of the Department of Environment?
Again, and for the record, I did not support the renewal of, or
this licensing, even though it was an existing license, and legally
speaking,
there was no route for us. I do believe it is important that we look
forward. So my question, how does this work?
Now we have the Illinois EPA. How do Department and Illinois EPA, the Attorney
General, work for oversight for inspections and accountability?
Thank you so much, Alder. That's an important question.
And as you've mentioned,
there is not a permit renewal in front of the Department of Environment today
related to Sims.
The IEPA is reviewing a revised,
federally enforced state
operating permit,
from Sims to the IEPA.
So that is something that is under their jurisdiction.
I think one thing to mention that is an important thing just for
context here is that,
we are
working to
increase coordination across the
enforcement agencies at both the
federal and state and local level.
It is important for us that we maintain communication, and that if
we have data information about any site within
our jurisdiction, that we are sharing that information.
And so regular dialogue with the inspection teams,
particularly at the IEPA, is critical.
We are
in fact working to better understand what that historic
relationship is, both in understanding the memorandum
of agreement that we are operating under to
ensure that anything that is required from that,
that we are continuing to do our part to make sure that we're communicating that
data, that information, and that we're having regular conversations.
So I think that that is an important step.
We're also increasing our conversations director to director level.
In fact, I'm welcoming the director of IEPA here next week.
And so that regular cadence of coordination and communication as well
as data sharing, and then understanding, again, that memorandum of agreement,
the agreement by which we are able to collaborate and coordinate for shared
enforcement is important. Evaluating that and then better determining
where any of that needs to be updated,
is really what we're focused on. I think that you make
an important point here that, as we are coordinating on
facilities, it could be your permit, it could be their permit,
but that doesn't mean that it's not our shared responsibility.
And I think that that is what is most important here, is that we still
have shared responsibility to make sure that if there are business owners that
are out of compliance, that we're educating them, that we're working with them to
maintain compliance. And then similarly, if the community has
concerns about environmental impacts, that we're better understanding
those and working in close coordination to mitigate those concerns as
well. So there's a lot of opportunities to serve people better.
And I think that that, for me, from my perspective, is how we are
now approaching the relationship and partnership with the IEPA.
Thank you. And again, for the record, I do really urge Governor
Pritzker to take that action, look at the Illinois EPA and,
not renew the permit that is just
big facilities like that do not belong close to
residential areas. My other question is around the air monitors.
I know that we put,
I think, one of the, if not the largest air monitor system across the
country.
There is some criticism around the location of these air monitors, how these air
monitors are placed, and what is the role of the community in terms of
like, look, I know this is real data that we're getting, but I think there has been
criticism in terms of how this data is reading and again, in enforcement in terms
of the data. Anything around the air monitors and how that can be, I think, a
critical part on how we collaborate with Attorney General as using this
information with the Illinois EPA.
Sure. So the air monitors that we have in place are still under the
purview of CDPH. We're really proud of their efforts
related to the air monitors. It is an incredible feat that the city of
Chicago now has the second-largest air monitoring
system in the country. That is something that we should all be
proud of. An important investment that we made.
How we intend to use that at the department is to really understand that by
trends. If we're seeing spikes in air
quality in certain areas, then that can help us better understand
where we should prioritize and think about additional inspections.
Again, these monitors are regulatory grade
adjacent. They are not regulatory grade, so they don't fall within
the specific specs that are needed to pursue enforcement via
the EPA. That is a very complex regulatory process.
But they are still good enough to tell us, from an educational perspective,
where we should be better prioritizing
staff and better working in terms of education with business
owners in areas And so we're looking forward to working
with CDPH so that we can maintain that robust system, and that
we can continue to use that as an important piece of how we
operate across the city.
Thank you, Commissioner. I do want to commend you for,
I think we all should definitely be proud about having the largest air monitoring
system in the country, and your leadership and the department being
involved in that has certainly been welcome, and I think your leadership critical
also in terms of the community impact and the framework.
And I hope that more members of the council support the Hazel Johnson ordinance.
I do welcome your leadership also on that.
My other question had to do with data centers.
I know that in your remarks, you mentioned about the
efforts. I know that the mayor signed an executive order for a
moratorium. My position in terms of air monitors, especially
in terms of data centers, in terms of the amount of
energy
and utility costs for residents, I think is exorbitant.
So,
what is it in terms of the department for oversight, for
regulation, and ultimately to protect the well-being of constituents,
especially in big facilities like the Quantum facility?
Can you repeat the question? I'm so sorry, sir.
In terms of the data centers,
how is the department working around the executive order the mayor-
Yes
... signed? And then, in terms of there having other proposals,
ultimately the department role, the oversight, and the position of the
department in light of all of that, given the concerns, especially in big
facilities like Quantum.
Sure. Thank you for that question.
I will say, related to data centers, there's a number of things
that we need to do from a regulatory perspective.
Again, we released a sustainable data centers working group report
that said that the city's regulatory policy, its
framework related to data centers is outdated.
The policies that we have in place today
aren't quite adequate enough for the types of data centers that we're
seeing built in our communities.
And so we think that there are just important guardrails that should be
implemented so that we can ensure that
we are minimizing some of the environmental impacts.
You are right and correct in saying that they are big off-takers of energy, that
they are big off-takers of water.
We are also seeing in real time concerns related to air
and noise impacts. And those are important things that we
need to ensure that our environmental code within the municipal
code are up to speed on, so that they reflect what we need in
terms of how to better regulate them in the city.
And so that is our intent
to continue to work towards that. The EO has allowed us to move
forward with important regulatory enhancements related to
noise and air, and that is our current focus, as well as
being a part of the implementation working group where we're
identifying additional regulatory measures that we should
put in place, so that we can propose them to this council.
Thank you, Commissioner. I would love to follow up maybe on conversations around
efficiency, if there's solar sustainable energy, and ways
that we can be more effective around, especially around housing.
Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you.
Sure. Alderman Beale.
Madam Chair, I just wanted a point of clarification
for the knowledge of this body that the Quantum Project is not
a data center.
Okay. Thank you.
All right. I've got Alder Conway, and then Alder Lopez.
Yeah. Following up on some of Alderman Sigcho-Lopez's questions.
Appreciated what you were saying about the environmental monitors, but
you seemed to mention that we didn't use monitors that we can use for EPA
enforcement. Why didn't
we get monitors that could do that? It seems like it'd be a pretty important thing.
The monitors that are utilized for the purposes of US EPA
enforcement are regulated by the US EPA.
Currently, the Cook County Department of Environment is the
local regulator related to regulatory monitors.
There is a complex regulatory process that we would have to
go to to obtain permission from the US EPA
to build and to sustain a monitoring network.
Typically within the city, within municipalities, those are much
lower in number. So there are US EPA monitors within the City of
Chicago.
What we are talking about is a more expansive network
across the city, that would require years
of complex regulation as well as funding to build them at that
scale. And there is no
precedence in place for a city of our size to have that many regulatory
monitors.
So it's not like an equipment issue, it's a
certification issue or...?
It's the determination of the US EPA,
where they build monitors.
But wait, the equipment that we're using, is that equipment that could be used
as part of a
US EPA network that could be used for enforcement?
It is the highest caliber equipment that you
could use for monitoring
that is not a regulatory monitor. So the US
EPA equipment is--
and again, this gets into very technical weeds here.
Sure. Yeah.
But they use a filtering system to be able to absorb and
weigh the pollution that's
collected, and they do that in a very scientific way in a
laboratory. So these are real-time monitors that are an
educational tool for the city that allow us great insight
into where we are seeing spikes in air quality across the city.
And again, I would defer any of these additional questions about the complexities
of the monitors really to CDPH. They implement the
monitors.
Okay, fair enough.
You mentioned in your opening statement, and I think Alderman Sigcho-Lopez followed
up on this, the Sustainable Data Centers Working Group.
Is that working group the same as the task force
that the mayor's office wants to implement, or is this
a pre-task force?
The working group was pre-task force.
We have now transitioned to the implementation.
The Sustainable Data Centers Working Group was pre-task force.
We have now transitioned to the implementation working group, which
is
happening currently. We have convened.
So the working group has become a task force?
Yes.
Okay. I'm not sure of the difference, but fair enough.
Do-
A point of clarification, I'll say the working group did work that put
together the Sustainable Data Centers report-
Yeah
... that we had a hearing on in July.
Yeah.
And then there were recommendations, and I think the
EO from the mayor is what has created the task force.
Yeah, no. So
I think separate-
I get it. Yeah
... separate efforts with different outcomes.
Great. No, let's create some more blue ribbon committees. Love it.
You mentioned that on the working group, and I don't know if this applies to the
task force or not, there are members of industry on that.
I saw you name some of the other folks.
What members of industry were on the working group?
So I would say that we did not have membership,
in the working group. We engaged with members of industry.
In fact, I would say that it is an important conversation that we had,
with members of the Data Centers Coalition.
There are several members that are concerned.
We're concerned about the types of policies that we were going to
implement given their concern about
the advancement. They wanted to see growth of
the data center industry in the city of Chicago, and were concerned about
some of the regulations that we were proposing.
I will say where we saw a lot of alignment is that there is a
shared interest in sustainability standards and ensuring that
we have high efficiency
data centers that reduce
energy offtake and water consumption.
So even though some of those conversations were difficult in terms of the level of
regulation-
Yeah
... I think that there is still a lot of alignment across the city
from both industry and as well as
environmentalists that there is an opportunity to align
on sustainability.
So are there any industry members on the task force?
These are both interdepartmental.
Oh.
Where both of them,
the working group engaged broadly with community,
and with industry, and with other water and energy experts.
The
implementation task force commits to doing the same thing.
Okay, so when you say interdepartment, does that mean it's all government people on
the task force?
Currently, the task force is an interdepartmental working group, yes,
comprised of city employees.
Okay, so the people from the Illinois Clean Jobs Coalition are not on the task
force.
They are not.
Okay.
You mentioned the community solar initiative.
If you could
talk a little bit more about what that is.
Sure. So we are exploring, a community solar
initiative where we look at
underutilized lots that cannot be turned into vertical
development because of contamination or other factors.
So if
they are not appropriate for vertical development, we are exploring the
opportunity of advancing solar
on a few sites.
A community solar model is a model that allows for
local residents to subscribe to a shared
solar array.
Mm.
And then as that solar array generates
energy, and that energy is sold back to the grid, that
investment goes to decrease their utility bills.
So it's an interesting model that has been deployed in other cities that we
think could be beneficial as an opportunity to
invite more creative ways to reduce energy bills in the
city. So is the city planning on developing solar arrays?
Pardon?
Is the city planning on developing solar arrays?
The city of Chicago-
Yeah ...
is exploring the opportunity for community solar.
Is the city planning on developing solar arrays?
The city of Chicago is interested in pursuing community
solar.
Is the city interested in pursuing community solar by developing solar
arrays?
Would we be developing solar arrays ourself?
Yes.
So we would be issuing a RFP to better
understand what model would work for the city of Chicago.
Mm.
There are still some tax incentives that are available as well,
that don't sunset until next year.
So this is an opportunity for us to explore a model that works best
for the city. So we're very interested.
We
will be putting out an RFP
either by the end of this year or early next year so that
we can pursue and explore that opportunity for the city.
So the city has not yet put out this RFP.
Is that correct?
The city will put out.
Okay.
Yes. Have they put the RFP out
yet? Oh, they have not, no.
Okay, and who would the RFP go to? Would it go to
EPCs, developers, or who would be the
recipient of that RFP?
You mean like a target audience?
Yes.
Solar developers.
Okay, so it would be going out to solar developers?
Okay. And how many solar arrays is
the city planning on
funding?
So we are exploring some, again, unique models that also
involve federal tax credits. I think part of the RFP
process will allow us to explore
where there could be incentives like offering,
again, underutilized land for the purposes of development to the developer.
Mm-hmm.
I think that the RFP is
going to be written in a way that allows for various models to be
considered by the City of Chicago. I know that you're a former solar developer.
Yeah, I'm a former solar energy developer. I'd love to
talk to you more about that.
Feel free to reach out to me, considering I've developed more solar arrays than
anyone in the history of City Council probably combined.
Yes.
But I appreciate you're working with Alders Mosley, Chico, and Hall and haven't
chosen to work with me, and that's fine.
I could speculate as to why, but feel free to send this RFP to someone
who's actually been a solar developer.
Sure.
If you choose not to do that, that's up to you.
And I sincerely apologize.
Yeah.
This is certainly not a slight. I think the reason why we have
talked to those alders first is just because there are parcels within
their wards-
Mm-hmm
... that are
unusable for vertical development.
And starting first with ensuring that we can explore
this with a suite of land
in coordination with them is really what we were trying to do in
talking to them first.
Okay. So it certainly wasn't a slight and would love to-
No, it's all right. If those are the only three wards in the city that have
lots that can be used for solar, then that is fine.
Well, I will tell you, I'll be very interested to see how the city
can
put out this RFP for solar development.
I suspect the expertise does not exist within the city to do that, but we will go
ahead and find out.
Fantastic. Alder Lopez.
All right. Good evening, Chairman and members of the committee.
Good evening. I guess we have to add solar
developer to our Conway bingo card moving forward,
but I'm glad to see that addition.
But I do want to just add a couple things.
First off, I am going to have a list through the chairs, but with regards
to community solar, I'm going to read what I was going to send you anyway
now.
The Lightfoot administration previously rejected this idea, so what
has changed?
I am unaware of a rejection of this idea by the Lightfoot
administration.
So though I may not be a solar developer,
I am aware that this was previously presented to the Lightfoot
administration to activate some of the 12,000
plus vacant lots throughout the City of Chicago to do exactly what you just
described, to actually generate electricity, put it back into the grid,
and have it used to offset local energy costs for the local residents
impacted by having to live next to these solar arrays.
That was not something
the Lightfoot administration was interested in.
Now, I could speculate why, because I know who came up with that plan.
But now we are apparently moving forward with that.
So
I'm assuming it's going to be based off of what I similarly
envisioned before, which is the use of city vacant lots. Is that correct?
Yes, that is what we are exploring.
You intend to incorporate
local aldermen in that, considering this entire row here
from 15, 16,
and 17, as well as 20, have probably
45% of the vacant lots in the City of Chicago.
Will
use of our lots be approved first before they are commandeered for
this program?
So the conversations that we've had are exploratory
conversations where our vacant lots team, in coordination with
DPD, have evaluated that those lots should not be prioritized for
vertical development. The priority of this administration and-
I just want to make sure the use of
vacant lots is the priority of the local alderman.
Yes. Of course.
So
the question was, will you be discussing that with the local
alderman? Because DPD and departments have a wonderful
knack of not including local aldermen on their planned
land use until the very last minute.
So I would hate to see projections for any of our wards,
not just in Englewood but throughout the city,
without knowing what the local alderman's plans are for those lots.
Yes, sir. That is something that is of importance to us in this matter.
Then will you be able to provide through the chair what you all have
already identified as potential usable lots for this program that
are to be included in this RFP?
Yes.
Thank you.
And can I add, if I just-- And through the chair for the full list, but
could you also just repeat for the record which alders are you currently talking
with?
Actually, well,
the ones I was referring to-
Oh, no, sorry. That was a question for the commissioner.
I wanted to know which alder the department's currently talking with.
Sure. So currently in our analysis, there are two communities that
we've identified for prioritization of this project, just
given the conditions that we described.
Our primary priority is to ensure that we're building
vertical development. That is the priority of the administration.
I know that that is the priority of everyone here.
Well...
And so this is not for every vacant lot.
Well...
This is specifically for a
specific, unique type of vacant lot.
That evaluation has been done by our team and with the Department of Planning and
Development. There are two wards, Alderman Mosley and Alderman
Chico,
that have been identified as possibilities for this project.
But I'm assuming DPD has reviewed all lots
I'd be happy to turn it over to my colleagues who can talk-
I'll leave that for through the chair, because I think that we
are all just learning of this right now, and I don't want to spend my
entire time talking about that program.
But
what I said stands, and I'd love more information on it.
Your department personnel is $3 million increase?
Yes, that is correct.
And
net position unchanged?
That's right.
Who was responsible for assigning the salaries associated with these
positions in your department?
That would be OBM.
So OBM
is the one responsible for
salary and wage increases within your department?
So everyone is on a salary schedule.
Which salary schedule provides for $60,000 raises?
So
the one thing to note, Alderman, is that-
No, no. I
asked the question. So which salary schedule provides for a
$60,000 raise?
That is not a raise.
Okay.
That is a salary schedule. What you're seeing there is accounting.
Last year, when those positions were in our budget, they were all put in our
budget at the starting salary. So it was a placeholder for the
position. As these teams transitioned over to the
Department of Environment, that accounting was
reconciled so that it reflected what they are being paid
today.
So
you have a
deputy commissioner who last year was paid
$126,000
in fiscal year 2026.
2027's budget recommendation for a deputy commissioner in the same
department, which I'm assuming is the same person, is now
$186,000.
So that means that person, who was ported from wherever they came
from,
was making $186,000 last year, or two
years ago, somewhere else?
Alderman Jared Palachiko, first deputy.
I think-
It's a yes or no. Was that person-
The position was reclassified by OBM due to a change in
the department size, is our understanding.
But we can answer through the chair with-
So we've heard various departments say that either
they're responsible or OBM's responsible for
salary increases
or for position eliminations. We heard
one of our colleagues, Alderman Martin, asking who was the one
responsible for cutting positions and...
We'll pause because I'll make sure we give you another minute back, but I think
there's a point of clarification from Chairman Irvin.
Yeah. So keep in mind that
DHR put
deputies and others on salary schedules, which
have their own machinations, and it was based upon
certain... Even though one deputy commissioner or another deputy commissioner or
managing deputy commissioner, they all have been slotted into salary
schedules and points that have their own escalation.
So while I understand what you're bringing up, it's
something that we essentially approve through the salary schedules
that are now in place.
I understand that in theory,
but that is not the case that we're looking at.
Because it's not just about that group,
which the chairman is referring to.
I think it's also based on-
When I also continue looking on, and you look at, for example, you
had
11 senior environmental inspectors, correct?
Last year's budget, the
salary for those 11
individuals was $75,000. Yes?
Now, we have, I'm assuming it's 11 of the same
individuals reclassified this year
at either the lowest rate, got a $2,000
raise of 77,000, all the way to the highest paid,
same position,
same
title position, now making almost double that amount.
Don't shake your head at me because I'm looking right at the budget.
And sir, if I may-
I'm looking at page 435, if you want to follow,
and it says, "Senior environmental inspector."
So now you have
from the 11, it's been
divided into various 11 different salary ranges, several
salary, different ranges, from 77 to 122.
That's not a salary schedule issue.
That's people being given various new job
classifications so that they could start at various new levels of salary.
So why
would OBM, with your consent,
allow that to be how we are moving forward with the employee headcount,
where you've not changed positions, but we're giving
raises that are
obscene?
So-
In that same page, by the way, you also have the Director of
Environmental Health and Safety that went from 139 to 180,
which is short of a $40,000 raise. So
I don't remember ever seeing any salary schedule
or resolution that has a 40, 50,
$60,000 step increase.
So sir, if I may,
just a point of clarification. There were no reclassifications
here on page 435.
What you are seeing again is when these positions were added to our
budget last year They added them. This was an accounting thing.
So they added the positions, and they added them at the starting salary.
As they've transitioned over, they had to account for where they were
at within their
step schedule. So they are on different salary schedules.
Right? Some people started one year, another person started another year.
All of those things are factored into the salary schedule.
So, this is reflective of what these people are making
today, as opposed to just last year, where they were
just accounted for in our budget.
Can you imagine what taxpayers think when they see this?
Yes.
And as we hear and have heard time and time again
about the lack of urgency coming out of this department,
when they see
year-to-year difference in this regard,
everyone scratching their head wondering what exactly we're paying
for with this Department of Environment.
The optics,
to me, are horrific,
and
it almost appears as though the only thing going green is your
salaries.
Thank you, Chairman.
Thank you. The zingers. For the
record, I do want to be clear. I want to be clear,
and through the chair, if it's helpful for everyone's
understanding and something that you can take, Alderman, and put in your
newsletter in case your constituents are worried about it.
Through the chair, Commissioner, if you could
put in layman's terms what you're explaining, because I'd
imagine what we're going to see from those placeholders is if we wanted to track
those individuals who are now filling the roles as proposed in
2027. These were existing employees that were in
other departments that were at that pay level.
And so maybe they would have gotten their COLA or a scheduled
increase based on where they were at.
But maybe if there's something where you can show us where those positions were in
the CDPH budget-
Yes
... or in the 2FM budget, just for the clarification so that
everyone can understand that no one's getting a $40,000
raise-
It's a transition
... or reclassified. So I think I got that.
Did everyone else get that? Are we good? All right.
Alderman Moore.
Thank you, Chairman. How you doing, Commissioner?
How you doing?
Thank you and your team for your service.
I'm going to be pretty short here. First of all,
I want to thank you for all your work you did over the past couple years
and help getting this Keep Chicago Clean ordinance passed and
getting some money in last year's budget.
My question is,
did we put some money in that for this year?
And if so, was it increased? I think we did do something
good and it's got some attention, but it didn't...
I know it's a growth process,
and I even seen people come out
doing more, at least in my community.
But in others, I even saw,
I think I saw something on the news where some
organization was doing something.
They was doing something with the
other cities, and I want to get involved with that person.
I think I wrote their name down, where they do a competition, a cleanup
competition, with the city against other cities and stuff
like that. Again, I think this is something we have to continue to highlight
throughout the wards because from an economic standpoint,
it's still costing us some money
to do,
everybody expecting the City of Chicago to keep these places clean.
But we have a responsibilities as residents of the city
to keep our city clean. And so can you speak to that and let me
know
what amount was put in the budget for that this year?
Yes. And I just would like to say thank you for your leadership on this
issue and this program. It was so wonderful to join you
for the launch of the program through your leadership, and I'll just say a little
bit about it because I think it's so important.
Keep Chicago Clean is an effort to ensure that we are beautifying
communities. And so through your leadership and through the partnership with
Streets and San, we were able to, as you said,
mobilize residents across Chicago to encourage
neighborhood cleanups. And through the resources of Streets and San,
we're able to ensure that you could go to a
ward office and receive
resources so that you could help to advance a community cleanup in your
ward. We were able to do marketing together to
ensure that we disseminated that message citywide, which was really important.
You will see Keep Chicago Clean back in the budget.
Again, if you recall, that wasn't within our budget
specifically. That was set up under
a finance general fund
within the budget book.
Oh.
And I believe that it is the same amount of money as
last year. So looking forward to working with you again on this exciting
project. I know that you just gave some examples of what we can do.
I love the idea of a ward competition as well.
I think that there are ways to keep inspiring
young people, people of all ages, to get out and to take pride in their community.
So
an important effort that we should continue to work on together.
What is that amount?
I believe it's 100,000, sir, but I can verify that with you.
Okay. And I think
besides whatever this organization is, and I got it written down, I probably
got it in my screenshot somewhere,
who does it
with competition with other cities.
I think the ward competition would be a great thing and
how we do that, I think we need to put that part of
the marketing scheme, in addition to putting
advertisement on the bus and in the ales and stuff like that.
But I think we need to push that out there As well.
Would love to keep-
I appreciate that
... working with you on that, sir.
All right. Thank you.
And thank you so much for your leadership.
Thank you.
Thank you, Alderman.
Alder Vasquez
did not have any questions, and we'll see if Alder Scott
comes back. So Alderman Mau Maupenmourth.
Thank you, Chair. Hi, Commissioner.
Hello. How are you?
Good, thank you. How are you?
Good.
Thank you for your leadership.
Thank you.
Thank you
for all the work that you're doing across the City of Chicago.
I want to shout out
to your team, Jared
Policicchio, and thank you for coming to the
48th Ward to present to our
constituents about the green infrastructure strategy.
Because of that, we were inspired to introduce an
ordinance to have bioswales on the
menu, and we hope to have that passed.
By the way, the Argyle strip that
we did many years ago, are those bioswales
technically, or no?
We could look into that for you with CDOT and give you, yeah-
Okay
... and get back to you on whether it's officially considered a bioswale.
Okay.
Thank you.
I wanted, speaking of
Keep Chicago Green, I just learned that you can
use 311 to borrow tools from Streets and
San. And can you also speak on the
other ways that we can use 311?
You mentioned that you've integrated your work into 311 for
permitting and inspection.
So we're just wondering what other requests are in 311 that go to
you. Is that something you could provide now or through the chair?
Sure.
For us, it's largely related to our concerns related to the
environment. So the 311 request for Keep Chicago Clean
would go to Streets and San, just given that the ward soups are
under their purview, and they would be the ones that would work to ensure that
those tools are delivered.
The
311 request around trees, I know that that is a popular
item, people requesting free trees for their community.
That is again, Streets and San, but is an important,
exciting program that we work on in partnership with them.
For us, largely, it's going to be the concerns related
to the environment. So anything related to
concerns about smells, concerns about noise,
concerns about things that you're seeing that may look unpleasant.
That would be the official record that we would route those complaints to our
permitting and inspection team.
Okay, thank you.
The only other
curiosity I have is
what are your plans to
provide
transparency into your progress around
the green infrastructure strategy, for instance, or a climate action plan?
Or where can I point people to
show
how this department is progressing in your goals?
Yes. Thank you for that. One thing that I think is
exciting about building a department from the ground up is the opportunity
to demonstrate better transparency and accountability.
Something that we're talking about internally,
one, we've talked about this modernization program with 311, right?
We want to be able to work with DTI to think about where there are
resources so that we're ensuring that we are accessing the most
up-to-date technology so that we can ensure that our team,
particularly our team that are out in communities, that we're eliminating any
barriers to their success. So if it's resources, if it's the
slow pace of the technology that we're using, we want to know those things.
That's really important to us. And the second way is thinking about how we can
collect that data and to do things like climate dashboards.
We already report internally. We have a
organization called CDP that the city reports all of our climate progress
on. That is usually utilized by big municipalities
and by big corporations so that we can track our progress.
That is not something, even though that report is accessible online,
there are opportunities to take some of those measures and to think about creating
a platform on our website so that we can continue to hold
ourselves accountable. That's also a way for us to track and
to allow for people to access
our programmatic process as well, and then as well as
how we are delivering on our 311 requests.
So there's a lot of exciting prospects that are coming in the future
as we are transitioning people in and thinking about how to
modernize our systems.
Terrific. That's all I have. Thank you so much for your work. Thank you, Chair.
Thank you.
Commissioner and your team, thank you for all the work that you're doing.
It is very exciting to see a fully
reconstituted and rebuilt from the ground up,
for the time that we're in, Department of Environment.
In a time period
where federal protections are being rolled back
and where you're hearing from constituents
all through the city of Chicago about concerns on air quality, noise
pollution, water quality, soil quality.
We have communities living with, for generations, the burden of
cumulative impacts
causing illness, cancer, and even the fact that
while community solar is exciting, the fact that we have land that's so
toxic that we can't use it in any other
way.
These are the burdens and the legacy of pollution
through times where we did not have a Department of Environment
working at the core of the city to help protect us.
So really appreciate you and your team.
Thank you all for being here, and we will recess this committee
until 9:30 AM tomorrow.