Committee on Public Safety meeting, April 30, 2025

• When: Wed, Apr 30, 2025, 10:00 AM (Chicago time)
• Where: City Council Chamber, 2nd Floor, City Hall, 121 North LaSalle Street - Chicago, IL 60602
• Status: Recessed
• Committee: Committee on Public Safety
• Video: https://vimeo.com/1078068268
• Transcript: full text (49,105 words, official captions)

Meeting notes

AI-written from the transcript. Speakers are inferred from cues in the recording, so treat names as estimates and check the video at the linked time.

The Committee on Public Safety held a hearing on a substitute ordinance that would allow the Police Superintendent, jointly with the Deputy Mayor for Public Safety, to declare curfews for minors in response to large group gatherings such as teen takeovers. After public testimony mostly opposed to the proposal, the committee accepted the latest substitute and heard from the Chicago Police Department's Chief of Patrol, its general counsel, an outside constitutional law consultant, and OEMC. Members debated whether the ordinance gives police a tool they lack today, its constitutionality, notification, geographic scope, cost, and the role of the Deputy Mayor. A motion by Alderperson Silvana Tabares to strike the Deputy Mayor from the curfew decision failed on a roll call announced as 7 yes and 10 no. At the request of co-sponsors Ervin and Dowell, the chair held the ordinance for further discussion and recessed the meeting until the call of the chair rather than adjourning.

Topics: teen takeovers, snap curfew ordinance, constitutionality, police authority, Deputy Mayor for Public Safety role, youth programs and safe spaces, emergency notifications, police overtime and resources, parental accountability, public comment

Agenda items discussed

• 22:30 Rule 59 motion to permit remote participation: passed
• 58:56 Approval of Rule 45 report: passed
• 59:12 Motion to accept substitute ordinance on curfew regulation in response to large group gatherings: passed
• 2:05:21 Motion to amend the substitute to strike the Deputy Mayor for Public Safety from curfew declarations: failed
• 19:37 Substitute ordinance amending curfew regulations in response to large group gatherings (snap curfew): held

Alderpersons who spoke

• Brian Hopkins (chair): Opened the hearing on the substitute curfew ordinance and explained the randomized order for public speakers. (19:37); Explained a change to the substitute requiring OEMC to notify affected sister agencies and aldermanic offices when a curfew is declared. (59:12); Said the superintendent already consults the Deputy Mayor for Public Safety and that the curfew decision is ultimately the superintendent's. (2:07:52)
• Pat Dowell (alderperson): As a co-sponsor, said she supports the ordinance because firearms, fights and property damage in public spaces cannot be tolerated, while also supporting programs like the Peace Book. (1:11:19); Noted that Inspector General review had been sought for the green social housing ordinance because of ethics questions about a new nonprofit board. (3:07:26); Asked CPD to confirm that penalties apply to youth who fail to obey a dispersal order and that they would not receive a juvenile record. (4:06:00)
• Maria E. Hadden (alderperson): Compared the proposal to the movie Footloose and questioned the efficacy of the ordinance, citing constitutional concerns raised by outside organizations. (1:12:19); Asked why police need the ordinance when officers in her district already monitor and disperse large gatherings under existing rules. (1:14:19); Asked what the tool would allow police to do that they cannot already do, such as dispersing an unpermitted group. (1:20:24)
• Matthew J. Martin (alderperson): Said attorneys from several legal organizations have called the policy legally flawed and asked for a week or two more to address their concerns and reduce litigation risk. (1:26:34); Cited the Chicago v. Morales decision striking down an anti-loitering ordinance as unconstitutionally vague. (1:28:43); Argued the Wauwatosa curfew case is not comparable because it involved documented civil unrest and a limited one-time curfew. (1:29:49)
• Jessica L. Fuentes (alderperson): Said her office offered three subject matter experts for the hearing and all were rejected. (1:41:38); Expressed concern that the ordinance gives broad discretion to whoever holds the superintendent and deputy mayor positions in the future. (1:42:15); Questioned the chief on CPD's existing authority to disperse violence, unpermitted gatherings and vandalism. (1:43:22)
• Brendan Reilly (alderperson): Pointed out that terms such as minor, parent and public place are defined in section 8-6-2 of the code referenced by the ordinance. (1:56:52); Said he supports giving police the tools they ask for and that the policy would especially affect downtown communities he represents. (1:58:14); Disputed the Footloose comparison, describing incidents of tasing, shootings and fights in Streeterville. (1:59:22)
• Silvana Tabares (alderperson): Moved to amend the substitute so that only the police superintendent, not the deputy mayor, would declare a curfew. (2:05:21); Asked whether CPD would change general orders to avoid backlogs when enforcing a curfew. (2:24:58); Asked how the time-consuming process of detaining minors until a guardian arrives would affect manpower and overtime. (2:26:25)
• Walter R. Burnett (alderperson): Asked what the difference is between the superintendent and the deputy mayor since both answer to the mayor. (2:07:35)
• Andre Vasquez Jr. (alderperson): Said the ordinance is ambiguous and suggested adding an alderperson to the decision as a check under a future administration. (2:10:01); Asked whether the detention and processing procedures described already exist regardless of the ordinance. (2:28:37); Said he understands why affected alderpersons seek a solution but has concerns about how the curfew would be used. (2:44:55)
• William Conway (alderperson): Said the ordinance is a constitutional time, place and manner restriction and supported the amendment because the council has advice and consent over the superintendent but not the deputy mayor. (2:10:36); Raised concern that the mayor's office may act slowly or never concur and said the superintendent is best placed to decide. (2:12:07)
• Raymond A. Lopez (alderperson): Agreed that requiring joint action means nothing moves if the two officials do not agree and called the question on the amendment. (2:13:27); Raised a point of order that the motion to call the question is non-debatable. (2:19:33); Established through questions that the city already has a constitutional curfew ordinance that this proposal amends. (3:41:25)
• Jason C. Ervin (alderperson): Said dual civilian and law enforcement concurrence was a compromise and that he would not support the ordinance if the deputy mayor were removed. (2:14:45); Said Inspector General involvement at this stage is inappropriate and Law Department review is the relevant question. (3:06:35); Said the substitute ensures all areas of the city are treated the same and that perfect should not be the enemy of the good. (5:09:50)
• Timothy R. Knudsen (alderperson): Agreed with having two parties involved but said the joint probable cause language is unclear and said he would vote no on the amendment. (2:17:06); Said he is inclined to support the ordinance as an additional tool, citing guns confiscated at lakefront takeovers. (2:36:33); Asked why the curfew area is unlimited and suggested limiting it to specific blocks or a half-mile radius. (2:36:57)
• Derrick G. Curtis (alderperson): Said he would rather accept the compromise now than lose the entire substitute and amend it later. (2:18:37); Described a takeover on residential streets in Ashburn that grew from about 60 to over 200 teens late at night. (3:36:47); Said takeovers are happening across the city and the council should pass the ordinance and amend later if needed. (3:39:53)
• Byron Sigcho-López (alderperson): Asked whether the Inspector General had been consulted and urged an opinion before voting on the amendment. (2:19:54); Said he contacted the Inspector General's office and asked what conversations had occurred with it. (3:05:17); Asked for overtime data and said FOIA requests about overtime had not been answered. (3:08:08)
• Nicholas Sposato (alderperson): Called the deputy mayor requirement an unnecessary layer and said he supports the amendment. (2:21:45)
• Peter Chico (alderperson): Asked how police respond when takeovers are not detected in advance. (2:41:11); Said officers pulled from Far Southeast Side districts leave residents underserved and that he supports the ordinance as another tool. (2:42:51)
• David H. Moore (alderperson): Thanked the sponsors for reaching a compromise and said the council can amend the ordinance later if needed. (3:50:33); Said his support is based on saving lives. (3:52:05); Said youth need structure and consequences, and offered to work with youth groups on safe spaces in Ogden Park and Market Park. (3:53:24)
• Jeanette B. Taylor (alderperson): Said the hearing has mostly demonized young people and that existing tools were not fully used. (4:06:50); Asked whether the youth council, DFSS, the health department, Park District and CTA were involved in developing the ordinance. (4:07:22); Asked who starts the takeovers and how much CPD spends on social media monitoring. (4:08:35)
• Nicole T. Lee (alderperson): Said she had not decided on the ordinance and called for a holistic approach with accountability and sister agency involvement. (4:17:52); Described police dispersing a party of teens at a foreclosed house in Canaryville within 30 minutes. (4:19:24); Asked for an example of a known planned event where the ordinance would have helped and how many events were de-escalated in advance. (4:20:34)
• Leni Manaa-Hoppenworth (alderperson): Echoed concerns that young people and the Park District were not part of the discussion and called for a holistic approach. (4:40:37); Confirmed that CPD already has authority to disperse crowds, make arrests and use a coordinated mass arrest policy. (4:42:16); Asked about other cities where the mayor, not the police chief, declares emergency curfews. (4:43:08)
• Ruth Cruz (alderperson): Said she had not decided and that more perspectives were needed alongside CPD. (4:59:19); Raised concern that repeated case-by-case answers mean districts may enforce the ordinance inconsistently. (5:00:51); Raised concern that residents could use the 20-person threshold to confront youth gathering lawfully, such as on the 606. (5:01:53)

Exchanges between members

• 1:11:11 The chair yielded to co-sponsor Dowell for opening remarks.
• 1:40:17 Martin asked the chair to consider giving the ordinance more time.
• 1:57:16 Fuentes thanked Reilly for pointing to the code definitions.
• 2:07:52 The chair answered Burnett's question about the deputy mayor's role.
• 2:10:36 Conway spoke in support of Tabares's motion to strike the deputy mayor.
• 2:13:27 Lopez said he fully agreed with Conway's point about joint action.
• 2:16:32 Ervin cited Vasquez's point about future administrations in defending dual concurrence.
• 2:17:15 Knudsen agreed with Ervin on the importance of having two parties involved.
• 2:19:05 Curtis said he would rather compromise with what Ervin proposed than lose the substitute.
• 2:19:20 The chair told Curtis the committee can always amend the ordinance later.
• 2:34:58 The chair told Fuentes her follow-up was not a point of information and returned the floor to Tabares.
• 2:36:25 Tabares thanked Hopkins for his work on the ordinance.
• 2:46:04 Vasquez responded to Reilly's earlier remarks, saying some of the language could be received as coded.
• 2:46:56 Vasquez called Tabares's CTA question fair but said it could be heard differently by some constituents.
• 2:48:06 Vasquez asked whether the ordinance originated with CPD or the council.
• 2:48:46 The chair answered that the superintendent's office was consulted and asked for it.
• 2:49:09 Vasquez said he shared Fuentes's view that CPD already has the needed tools.
• 3:03:37 The chair told Vasquez the exemptions mirror the existing curfew ordinance.
• 3:05:53 The chair answered Sigcho-López that the Inspector General has no formal role.
• 3:06:35 Ervin said Inspector General involvement at this stage would be inappropriate.

Documents

• Agenda
• Notice