Having arrived pursuant to notice the Committee on Public,
Safety will be called to order, or we'll start with the
roll. Call to establish Quorum vice-chairman Yancey.
Auburn.
Alderman, Chico.
Outer Banks.
Call Ben Gutierrez.
All.
Alderman Lopez.
Alderman. Curtis
Alderman, Tabares
honor.
Alderman, Sancho Lopez.
All.
Alderman Fuentes.
All.
Alderman Taliaferro.
All.
Alderman. Sposato.
Auto advance.
Alderman Vasquez.
Robin Knutson. Ottoman Gardner Alvin Martin?
AutoZone in Manhattan worth.
Auto Manhattan and almond Silverstein.
Orange.
Orange bars. I did get you on the roll call. Okay.
Are we do have a quorum of, please be advised that your
vote of yes, or presents on the core and roll call will be
deemed as a. Yes. Vote. When referencing this roll, call
for later items. We do have one public speaker. Who
registered Alderman Nugent's, I believe you are
If?
If not, I'm going to appoint you right now.
Ask.
Actually, you're not. Yeah, that's alright. Your your
present either way. So that chair will recognize. Yes
Alderman. Nugent as president.
An ottoman Cardona who is not on the committee, but his
present for participation will resolve that you're not
listed on the roll-call sheet. Are we do have one public
speaker who registered in a timely manner, the clerk will
call the individuals name, please?
You are, that's correct.
Okay, the witness has three minutes to witness here.
Neither.
M, please press star 6 to unmute
Yeah, we have a witness who registered to testify virtually
just at the deadline. I don't have the individuals name.
What?
What's?
We'll try one more time. Please press star 6 to unmute and
now your testimony will be recorded
Okay, we'll move on and if it turns out that the witness was
present virtually, but was unable to speak to to technical
difficulties will recognize that person later on in the
agenda. No still have the opportunity to take their three
minutes. We have two items on the agenda today. The first
item is item 1261 an appointment from a net, Guzman as
member and chair of the emergency telephone system board.
Members of the committee should have received a copy of
this transmission. You should have also had her credentials
from a previous mayor all appointment the applicant is here
and I will ask her to make a few remarks about following
which they'll be questions and then a vote of affirmation
Miss Guzman.
where,
Work.
Working out, good morning and thank you everyone. So
obviously and Atkins, and budget director, you know,
honored to again, serve in any capacity to help the city
with its finances. And in particular, this particular board
that does cover a number of, of our expenditures, as a
relates to Public Safety. As we look to continue.
you to use the
You to use these Investments wisely to support our Public
Safety operations. I will use only my position within the
budget office but my work in public, safety on the county
side as well as previously on the city Side to help inform
the decisions that we make in. So I'm open to any questions
that you might have of me as a relates to this appointment.
Any.
Any questions for the nominee?
I hear.
Hearing no questions a motion to pass by Alderman Lopez
without objection. The roll-call attendance will be used.
Thank you, Miss Guzman. Appreciate your appearance today,
but we'd also like to recognize or purpose of the Roll.
Call On The Gardener's here under one Taylor and Alderman
Burnett.
Connect.
Next item on the agenda is ordinance, 2023 to 171, an
ordinance to amend the municipal code to modify the
appropriate sections regarding elections, for Police
District Council, are here to present. That is Alderman
Vasquez, who has a brought you Witnesses with him other
than Vasquez. And then I will call your Witnesses after,
and then you'll have the opportunity to close perfect.
Thank you very much. So, yeah, fellow colleagues. Thank you
so much hearing this agenda item. So with this organism
introduced introduced from last time 6 to do is a pretty
straightforward. What is
When is clear?
When is clarifying language?
When is clarifying language as it relates to the EZ, PS
district council elections Stouffer background. For some of
the people who weren't around last term be a lot of the
council members got together to create DCPS write the
District Council of police accountability commission and
establish that is a body. It took a lot of negotiation over
the years to actually come to agreements and get that
something did to move forward. I'll save my own personal
opinion, is in a little bit of haste because we got that
part done. Some of the election. Law could have been
flushed out a little bit better and we found out when the
election was playing out how it could have gotten so much
better. So this address is too big issues. One, is it
clarifies? The amount of signatures needed to get on the
ballot. If you are running as a candidate, what was Prior
there? It would say, well, based on 5% of the number of
registered voters in the district.
I doubt.
That would be the signature count necessary, because it
doesn't say when in time you're counting that it's
ambiguous, right? People move in and out of a district that
any time. So somebody running for the seat would not
necessarily know the exact number of signatures they need
what this ordinance does and part is it makes that a little
more clear by saying it is 5% of the registered voters in
the past presidential election, that is a fixed date with a
fixed number. That allows you to attend fit
Route. What percentage?
About what percentage of that number is needed for
signatures. The other thing that it does, is it makes it
clear that it's the registered voters who voted in that
election. So if you did registered voters by self, you're
talking to pretty large number. That would need to be
collected in order to get on the ballot, by making it the
register voters who voted, it's a smaller than I made her
so therefore, you can get a smaller percentage, making it
more reason. So if you're is somebody who wanted to run as
a district counselor now, you know, more specifically, what
number you would need as far as signature count, because
this wasn't really sorted out last time, people were kind
of guessing and ultimately having to collect more
signatures than necessary, just to be sure that they were
hitting that number. The other thing, that it clarifies was
a larger conversation that occurred about whether District
Council candidates could run as Slate's. So that had not
been determined and you hadn't some police districts in.
Letting you all know this from the elections for candidates
ran as a slate of 32.
The three spots that were open. Ultimately, that was
undecided. We had actually introduces resolution or this
ordinance last term to clarify it. It did not move because
it's getting too close to the election. So ultimately
people decided on their own whether to run as slaves or is
individual candidates, that then was subjected to court
challenges. The court challenges ended up finding that.
Yes, people could run has a slate. So what this is doing is
terrifying that language to make it clear that. Yes.
When is?
When is can run as a slave and the reason for doing so is
although all that was sorted out in this last election for
years. From now, when the election comes up again, we could
very well as well have candidates. And I like them, folks,
with the same questions. So, all this is looking to do, is
clarify the municipal code language. So that, you know,
what was designed as a community election in a community
body with folks who are not lawyers to look at it up and
find out exactly how many signatures they would need and
know that they could run this place. So that is all this
cease to do, happy to open questions and we have Ed Mullen
who was an election lawyer during the last cycle, as well
as Mike O'Malley from the legislative reference Bureau to
answer any particular as it relates to language. The only
other thing of note is we sent this out to everyone and
there was a clerical error which we can amend on the floor
in which on Section see where it says persons wishing to
appear on the ballot either as a candle.
Or asleep.
Or a slate of candidates that should have been underlined.
And so, it was not in the document, all we will be looking
to do, is add, where should be underlined to clarify where
the changes made. So that's, that's all we've got. And
we're happy to take any questions.
Alderman Vasquez, just for clarification, is that the
entire sentence that should have been underlined I will
share it with you. I passed it to some of the members is
underlined or the other work either and underline under the
words or a slate of candidates,
Okay, I will note that correction on its face. Thank you
very much, mr. Mullen, please do join us at the microphone.
Leaving the body, chair recognizes Ed Malin collection
lawyer, counselor, Thank you Sara. Hopkins to add just two
things to what Alderman Vasquez said, even though he was
raised most of the issues. One other thing this clarifies
is that the election is non-partisan and that was assumed
but wasn't set forth. So the Electoral board actually
determined that it was a nonpartisan election. So this is
confirming that and I think that's good. The other thing
that it does is it adds section Berry at the end that says,
all the other election law that exists applies to this
Police District Council if it's not set forth in the police
district council statute. And so, there were issues that
came up when we were trying to decide what needed to be
filed brinson's about whether candidates needed a statement
of economic interest, because that was not included in the
the police just a
Police District Council legislation but was in the general
election law. So the catch-all at the end but it says that
everything up that applies to other candidates who are
trying to get on, the ballot will apply to these candidates
as well, like the form of the statement of candidacy and
whether the statement of economic interest is required. So
I think this statue does everything that the election bar a
task to be done in terms of the things that were uncertain
and confusing about the way that the statute was previously
written, and caused some litigation, and some challenges
before the Electoral board. So, I'm in support of the of
the ordinance, I think it does a lot of good things. And if
anyone has any questions about how the Electoral board
handled any of the challenges or some of the litigation
that was filed, I'm happy to answer that or any other
questions about the the provisions itself.
I think it's
I think you just remind questions for the witness.
I hear he.
I hearing done, we also have, I'm sorry for taking my call,
but I think what we really need to be looking at your, the
body is re-evaluating the police districts in Chicago,
there are twenty-two, they haven't been redrawn since I
know, don't know when, and I think what we need to do is
Reveille in the police district because all of these police
sets
Are not eat.
Are not evenly populated such just like the case with the
wards and the general assembly members in Springfield. So I
would really like this body when I encouraged this body
that we really need to be looking at redrawing. The police
boundary, making sure that each police district has the
police resources that they needed to combat crime. That's
what we really need to be focusing on. But also in terms of
like to see example for the wards, every ward has 50,000
people, General Assembly double that, but they also have a
maximum number of petitions to. So I just want to encourage
the body that we really need to be looking at 3 drawing,
the police boundaries cuz we don't know when that was the
last time that we was redrawn and taking a look at how the,
the makeup of each Police District, as well as the
statistics of crime and how do we better allocate police
resources to that and get you something to be added to the
growing list of things to do for the new police soup?
Turn on hue.
Done. And who will?
Done and who will be tasked with a comprehensive resource
study right out of the box. So that should be one of the
items that is part of that resource study. Thank you for
bringing it up all the way on Vasquez. Thank you, thank
you. I appreciate that very much. I wanted to borrow ask it
something that came up in the conversation is because of
District sizes are, there's a golf into the Delta between
them, someone collect a couple hundred signatures in one
district and get close to five to seven hundred and another
one that will.
having a
Having that large.
Having that larger conversation about other changes that
could be made. We have effectively for years until the next
election to review, how that can be improved as well. I'm
the other thing I wanted to make mention of his Arizona
Department of law. Came to talk to me today about the
underlining in the ordinance and in order to do that I have
to formally make a motion to amend. So I would like to move
to make that Amendment if that if that's okay to share.
Okay. Could you are Tri-State in motion form than what
language is to be? Underlined, yes, I would like to move to
a man on his face, the ordinance. So that in section c, the
word, I read the sentence. First persons wishing to appear
on the ballot, either as a candidate or a slate of
candidates for District Council. Should file a statement of
candidacy. I would move to amend that sends by underlining,
the words either and the and the phrase, or a slate of
candidates. So I be moving to make that exchange on its
face here. If the body is supported,
Without.
Without objection sordid under the attendance roll call and
just as in no we're considering this the scrivener's error.
This is not a substitute to change to the item in which
case is substitute Amendment would be required but this was
just an air 290 the underlying motion carries. Thank you,
mr. Malin leaving the body. We will call on from
legislative reference Bureau, Michael, Malachi some
comments on the matter.
and,
and also, please add
And also, please add to the attendance roll call vice-chair
Yancy and Alderman Knutson.
It's
Ezra Miller.
Hi, Michael Matlock from the bus that runs through. I'm
just here in case there, any additional questions about the
draft, any technical questions? I think that other Vasquez
in this room alone, handled all these substance very well
Okay, questions for mr. Miller
very nice.
39 Alderman, Vasquez to close.
I'm sorry, chair, recognizes Alderman, sposati. You're
usually much more vocal and I was against this PC BS
program or whatever. So one of one of my issues with it
certainly was and I thought it was pretty much perfectly
clear the amount of signatures you needed and every
district. And that's one of the things I really had a
problem with. So, oddly enough is Alderman. We all need the
same amount of signatures. But for this I mean I could read
them all off if you want but I first met you and this is
pretty well-documented needed 277 signature second district
329. Third District 244 Fort Worth District. 458 25066
District 318. 7th District 19088 district 662 Ninth
District 360 for 10th District to 3611, District 229.
District for 30.
District, 436, 14th 420-5193, 16, 650-774-0318 490,
319-758-2083. 14/22 390-620-4396 25th 5:19 a.m. is this
Council isn't isn't a weighted what I mean? So we're saying
you need waited signatures but it's not a weighted vote and
I know that's not what this is. This ordinance is about but
I'm just a little
reply.
Fourplex. Because I thought it was pretty clear. I'm at the
amount of signatures you need to reach District, so, I
don't know. So, I don't know what that question is directed
for. And to take the most extreme, you take the 15th
District needs 193. The 19th District named 709 and 58. So
give me that something that seems a little unfair. Even
though I once again, don't support this whatever we want to
forward to it as so, I mean, I don't know who really direct
my question and I mean this was no secret with the with the
signatures were. So why are we clarify any amount of
signatures that we need? Thank you for your question
because I don't want to respond. So there's a fee agreement
and kind of like the difference between
Accounts in Eustis.
Accounts in each district. And I think that's something
that can be Revisited. I'm either in traffic, something
that might establish, like a cap across all the district.
So it's one number. But the numbers that you mentioned for
each district, kind of stem from their fuzzy. First
example, you got four years in between districts, are in
between election. What day are we picking the number of
people in the district that you determine that by. Is it
today? Is it a week from now? Is it two years from now?
Because we don't know that specific date. We don't know
what specific number need 5% up. So all it is is glittery
clarifying that by saying, based on the last presidential
election, that specific date and time and whatever, the
number of people who disregard that specific date, that's
where you would determine 5% of that to be the number
signatures you need because that's not clear. It could be
any day. And so somebody speaking up challenge, a candidate
who doesn't have enough money for a lawyer. Could look to
just jammed them up and go while you tell me what they were
talking about cuz it doesn't really count. So that's for
clarification.
I think you're
I think your law.
I think your larger point about one District, having two
hundred signatures the other one, having seven hundred
signatures I'm in agreement with you that I think it's not
the most Fair way to set it up. So if it's something you
want to revisit and maybe drop something to say hey no
matter what district you're talkin about, here's the cap.
Number of signatures you would need. I'm open it to
figuring out how to work with you on that. I'm as it
pertains to the weighting of each district. I think it's
also something to discuss I would say and talking to other
women to bars. That was a similar
Turn.
Discern. If we then want to have a conversation about
redrawing, the maps in the district, so that they're more
equal, I would be in support of that conversation. I think
the first step would be calling for a hearing, not in this
committee. But in the police committee, chaired by Alderman
Taliaferro, to really have a conversation and how we
Matthews districts, what the history has been and like,
what the prices would be going forward. If the body decides
to come up with a more Equitable way, to look at the police
district sizes. So, so it changes every four years, then
we're saying, we're just going to change every 4 years,
this would change based on whatever it would look at my
last presidential election, and that would be the marker.
But so every four years at changes, but our signatures are
signatures don't change though, they aren't real. There,
percentage is based on Alec's light, but to your point, if
you wanted to change that, to make it to say, Hades
District, this is account. We could as a body. See, to go
that route, I think it would take a lot of more
conversation with the members of the
Can.
Camila.
committee.
Comedian Council, but if that's something that folks are
interested in doing, like I'm happy to have a conversation
as well to see if it's something we get done. Thank you,
thank you. Thank you. All the messages out of chair,
recognizes Alderman, Lopez.
They?
Thank.
Thank you, chairman and good morning, members of the
committee. I am. I am in support of this because I think it
does as our Witnesses of a tested to and is sponsoring,
colleague is mentioned. Just caught a flies with the courts
of already dictator, correct. But I would like to know
chairman if we could actually recess to a food 8 to create
a new substitute that caps, the number of signatures
required at 250, so 250 or 5% or .5%, whichever is less for
all candidates this way. We can address this now and be
done with it.
and I,
And then we can move forward and focus on other things
moving forward.
We'll put that to the sponsor. If he wishes to yield to
that request or a or a Jack's, I would definitely be open
to that. Another part of the conversation that we were
looking at is what isn't clear is if you're asleep is a
triple the number, because it's three people is at the same
number. So I think setting similar cab, but I'd be
interested in discussing it actually, if I made, since we
do have an election lawyer here, I'm sure he can validate
this too. Is that the requirement even if you're listed on
a slate and a petition, every signature counts as a
singular signature for that individual candidates. So it
wouldn't matter if they were three names to names or one
name.
because,
because it all counts as one to
Because it all counts as one toward each, one of you are.
So what's your point in? This is a conversation with Miss
Ron, that's the case. If the erased at the election is a
partisan one because this is non-partisan. We could clarify
that here and Ed can speak at Mulligan speak more to it
because he was in the involved in the cases. So at it, if
it's okay with the chair,
Show.
Short. So just a little bit of background when you run as a
Democrat, you're under article 7 of the election code. So
when you look at people like Water Reclamation District
candidates, or you look at the city of the clerk of the
circuit court, and the state's attorney ran together on a
slate. A couple years ago, the judges were slated by the
Cook County. You know, they have 9 people on One ballot.
Those are under article 7 of the election code and it's
clear that they're allowed to do that and that there's one
number that applies all in them. So you don't have nine
times the number if there are nine judges on a petition but
these are Under article 10 of the election code which
doesn't have any of that language in it which is why it was
important to clarify that in this and why there was
litigation that went all the way up to the Appellate Court
over whether slaves were allowed. And there were five
slaves that filed
only three of us, the
Only three of the slaves were subjected to two of the
slaves. I think one you might have been involved in, we're
not objected to it all and the Electoral board, let them
get on the ballot and they passed What's called the
apparent Conformity, which means they complied enough with
the election code to get on the ballot. But the Appellate
Court said that the slaves were allowed under article Tammy
even though there was no language relating to it. But it
was unclear how many signatures were required? They said
there was three times. The number of signatures that were
submitted. So, no matter how you slice that they were
allowed to be on the ballot, but they didn't decide whether
you only needed one or three times. The minimum number, if
you were going to be a slave, the way I read this language,
it says one which would be the same as like the water
rafting the and the Cook County judges. But, you know, it's
always up to a court to decide that. But it's also a policy
question of the, of the council with
You want a single number for all three candidates or
whether you want three times. The number that's a policy
decision to me. It makes more sense to have one, because if
I'm a sign a petition for three people asking that, all
three of those people get on the ballot. If you tell the
person that they need three times. A number, that's only
one third of my signature counting for each of those people
instead of one signature County free to those people. So,
that's what I think is the best.
sir, but
Sir. But that's probably a longer answer. Then you want to
check my follow-up to that is our Citywide candidate
allowed to being asleep. No, and that's it in the statute,
it's pretty clear that if you're running for Chicago mayor
Clerk or Treasurer you cannot be in a slave. The way the
language of the state code in the city and Villages Act is
written. That does not allow slaves for those for those
positions. And if you look, Chicago is set out separately
than all of the other municipalities in the, in the, in the
states. So you're running in Northbrook and you're running
for mayor and cleric and city council. You can all be on
the same petition, but if you're running in Chicago, you
can't. And if you're running for governor, you need 5,000
signatures. If you're running for mayor of Chicago you need
12502. Think a lot of that was to make it harder for people
to challenge. The mayor who was in power. When that statue.
so, they
So then chairman going back to my original question, can we
recess so that we can include those changes in a,
substitute be done today? Alderman Vasquez has the sponsor
or what is your pleasure? I'm all for that cuz that would
have got to redraft it. So we have, we have found mr.
Malik, we also my calling here from lrb. I just to get
clarity on these specific language were looking for, so we
can minimize the time that we need to stand in recess.
Lopez, can you please?
Lopez, can you please restate the language you suggested
for this substitute Amendment?
First paragraph of section c, at least 5.5% of the total
number of registered voters in the district.
Or.
Wait.
Wait until at least .5% of the total number of registered
voters in the district who voted in the next preceding
presidential election.
Or maximum 250 voters.
even the
Even the district ended, it was in the police district.
, Or a minimum of 25.
Or just rewrite, the whole thing and a minimum of 25
maximum 2250.
Play, we get whatever.
Play, we get whatever was applicable to the one I cuz we
are going to address this late issue as well in this. So I
don't know if it's possible. Would you like to recess? And
we can just hash out the details. I'm sure we can get this
done in 15 minutes body in like have the boat and make it
clean, if that's okay with the chair. Okay? Thank you. I
miss your mail at 10. If you could, please provide us.
San Jose.
Send us a committee will stand in recess for fifteen
minutes.
No, thank you.
all the
Other than Chico.
Ed Malin. I did your your uncle's judicial
The real.
Erase.
The recess meeting of the Committee on Public. Safety will
reconvene a, we are Distributing a substitute Amendment
before we take emotion on this matter to substitute. I will
try one more time to call the public speaker that we did
have registered to see if he is still available. Mr. Peter
says naika heaters us and I, are you still available to
testify virtually?
He is now.
He is no longer on Zoom chairman. Okay, thank you.
Are.
All right, the substitute has been distributed with the
agreed-upon language added.
All.
Alderman Lopez.
Make.
Make sure Ellerbe staff mr. Malik stand by police, in case
there's further questions, and please add alderwoman
Gutierrez to the roll call, Alma Lopez and Alderman, Curtis
as well and are in Alderman Central Lopez. Thank you to the
Roll Call.
I'm in a
I'm in, El Paso, chairman and move to accept the substitute
a motion to accept the substitutes without objection by the
roll. Call to determine Karam album, Gutierrez.
Anyway he ate a second motion, we will need to do past
motion. Any further questions on the substitute motion?
That is not before us.
call her and ask her if
Auburn, Mass closing remarks.
Yeah.
Yes, yes, thank you very much German. I love like to thank
you. Think this committee. I think, my colleague, Alderman,
Raymond Lopez, Raymond Lopez. This is the first time I've
been part of the actual legislative process on the floor
and end it, freestyling it so to speak. So I really want to
come and everybody here and come and use a chair for this.
First meeting to have us accomplish this, which I think is
a great public interest and really
Apps to make a better.
Apps to make a battery CPS board commission. Thank you so
much. Thank you. It's normally an unwieldy way to legislate
to take a recess. But in this case, it seemed that there
was consensus. It was a relatively minor change. We needed
to make the correction for the underlying anyway and I
thought we probably could do it in 15 minutes. Let the
record reflect it, took us 20 close enough. So, thank you
everyone for your cooperation in your patience with no
further questions. Alderman, Gutierrez moves to do pass
recommendation. Hearing no objection will be passed on the
attendance roll call there being no further business before
the committee. Can we get a motion to adjourn by the same
role call as was applied to determine Corum?
Autumn.
Altima.
Alderman, winner happen with moves to adjourned hearing, no
objections to order the Committee on Public. Safety is
adjourned.