Public Meetings Report. Illustration by Holley Appold/South Side Weekly
Public Meetings Report. Illustration by Holley Appold/South Side Weekly
  1. Public Meetings Report – March 18, 2021
  2. Public Meetings Report – April 1, 2021
  3. Public Meetings Report – April 15, 2021
  4. Public Meetings Report – April 29, 2021
  5. Public Meetings Report – May 13, 2021
  6. Public Meetings Report – May 27, 2021
  7. Public Meetings Report – June 10, 2021
  8. Public Meetings Report – June 24, 2021
  9. Public Meetings Report – July 08, 2021
  10. Public Meetings Report – July 22, 2021
  11. Public Meetings Report – August 05, 2021
  12. Public Meetings Report – August 19, 2021
  13. Public Meetings Report – September 30, 2021
  14. Public Meetings Report – October 14, 2021
  15. Public Meetings Report – October 28, 2021
  16. Public Meetings Report – November 11, 2021
  17. Public Meetings Report – November 25, 2021
  18. Public Meetings Report – December 9, 2021
  19. Public Meetings Report – January 13, 2022
  20. Public Meetings Report – January 27, 2022
  21. Public Meetings Report – February 10, 2022
  22. Public Meetings Report – February 24, 2022
  23. Public Meetings Report – March 10, 2022
  24. Public Meetings Report – March 24, 2022
  25. Public Meetings Report – April 7, 2022
  26. Public Meetings Report – April 21, 2022
  27. Public Meetings Report – May 5, 2022
  28. Public Meetings Report – May 19, 2022
  29. Public Meetings Report – June 2, 2022
  30. Public Meetings Report – June 22, 2022
  31. Public Meetings Report – June 30, 2022
  32. Public Meetings Report – July 14, 2022
  33. Public Meetings Report – July 28, 2022
  34. Public Meetings Report – August 11, 2022
  35. Public Meetings Report – August 25, 2022
  36. Public Meetings Report — October 20, 2022
  37. Public Meetings Report — November 17, 2022
  38. Public Meetings Report — December 1, 2022
  39. Public Meetings Report — January 12, 2023
  40. Public Meetings Report — January 26, 2023
  41. Public Meetings Report — February 9, 2023
  42. Public Meetings Report — February 23, 2023
  43. Public Meetings Report — March 9, 2023
  44. Public Meetings Report — March 23, 2023
  45. Public Meetings Report — April 20, 2023
  46. Public Meetings Report — May 4, 2023
  47. Public Meetings Report — May 18, 2023
  48. Public Meetings Report — June 1, 2023
  49. Public Meetings Report — June 15, 2023
  50. Public Meetings Report — June 29, 2023
  51. Public Meetings Report — July 13, 2023
  52. Public Meetings Report — July 27, 2023
  53. Public Meetings Report — August 10, 2023
  54. Public Meetings Report — August 24, 2023
  55. Public Meetings Report — September 7, 2023
  56. Public Meetings Report — September 21, 2023
  57. Public Meetings Report — December 7, 2023
  58. Public Meetings Report — February 1, 2024
  59. Public Meetings Report — February 15, 2024
  60. Public Meetings Report — April 11, 2024
  61. Public Meetings Report — May 9, 2024
  62. Public Meetings Report — May 23, 2024
  63. Public Meetings Report — July 18, 2024
  64. Public Meetings Report — August 1, 2024
  65. Public Meetings Report — August 15, 2024
  66. Public Meetings Report — August 29, 2024
  67. Public Meetings Report — October 10, 2024
  68. Public Meetings Report — October 24, 2024
  69. Public Meetings Report — November 7, 2024
  70. Public Meetings Report — November 21, 2024
  71. Public Meetings Report — January 16, 2025
  72. Public Meetings Report — January 30, 2025
  73. Public Meetings Report — February 13, 2025
  74. Public Meetings Report — February 27, 2025
  75. What Does The Public Meetings Report Mean to You?
  76. Public Meetings Report — March 13, 2025
  77. Public Meetings Report — March 27, 2025
  78. Public Meetings Report — April 24, 2025
  79. Public Meetings Report — May 22, 2025
  80. Public Meetings Report — June 19, 2025

May 21

At its meeting, the Chicago Police District 007 Council—Englewood (covering Gage Park, Auburn Gresham, Chicago Lawn, Englewood, Greater Grand Crossing, West Englewood) heard from Dion McGill, who serves on the nominating committee. He reviewed the Felony Review Bypass Program, which was initiated by the State’s Attorney’s office to reduce roadblocks in connection with low-level gun possession charges. This pilot initiative allows some CPD officers to file certain felony gun possession charges directly without review by a Cook County State’s Attorney. The usual process is for police officers to call prosecutors to alert the office to a potential charge, provide the necessary facts, and then wait for a prosecutor to call back with a yes or no as to whether charges are warranted. This process can take several hours, which can also take officers off the street. District Council Member McGill expressed concern that District 7 Council members were not even aware of this program until a community member circulated a press article about it. “I feel like this is a cut of due process,” he said. An invited speaker from the Chicago Police District Council 2, Alexander Perez, that council’s community engagement member, explained the District Strategic Plan (DSP) and its significance. “How do you know these plans are taking place?” an audience member asked. Perez said that more community input is needed and made two explanatory documents available at the meeting. One is a brochure, “Help Your District Council Improve the Police District Planning Process.” The other is “Community Input Handout on CPD’s Strategic Planning Process.” Twenty-two district councils were created by the Chicago City Council in 2021, according to the committee’s web page. 

May 29

Should CPD officers be allowed to make “consent” searches of vehicles they stop? If so, under what circumstances? Conflicting answers to those two questions were debated at a meeting of the Community Commission for Public Safety and Accountability (CCPSA). The answers turn, in part, on interpretation of the Constitution’s Fourth Amendment, which protects individuals from “unreasonable searches and seizures” by the government, noted CCPSA Executive Director Adam Gross. Disagreements existed not only among members of the Commission but also among members and CPD. In certain instances police can search a car without consent, including when they have a search warrant or specific information to suspect a car might contain evidence related to a crime, Gross said. Without a warrant or enough information to justify a search, officers can still conduct a search if they have a driver’s permission—in other words, their “consent.” CPD doesn’t have a policy spelling out when and under what circumstances a consent search may be conducted, Gross said: “If a police officer pulls over a car, they have a lot of discretion about whether to ask to do a consent search… For example, an officer could ask to do a consent search if they just suspect there’s evidence of criminal activity in the car. They don’t currently need anything more specific.” Some commissioners want a stricter requirement; others want written forms. “Consent searches are essentially a short cut,” said Commissioner Aaron Gottlieb. “They’re a way around having probable cause [and] they have been shown to be incredibly ineffective and inefficient… They’re also among the most racial disparate policing tools that exist. From my perspective, they should be used rarely.” A policy would require sign-off from the Illinois Attorney General and the designated independent monitor, who oversees CPD’s adherence to the department’s federal consent decree, which stipulates reforms to be implemented by CPD.

June 3

Chicagoans might not know if their groceries will be taxed in 2026 until after October 1, when the City Council must vote to continue the tax or let it expire. At its meeting, the City Council Committee on Finance: Subcommittee on Revenue reviewed the issues. With the city staring down a one billion-dollar budget deficit next year, the argument is strong to hang onto the eighty million dollars Mayor Brandon Johnson’s budget team expects the tax to bring in. The Council must decide because a statewide one percent grocery tax is to be scrapped as of January 1. But individual towns and cities can keep the tax, and many already have. One argument for cities to retain the tax is that consumers are used to paying it and will not notice any new adverse effects. On the other hand, the tax is regressive and hits lower income households harder than wealthier ones. During the meeting, the subcommittee members discussed the broader issue of taxation policy. Some Council members supported progressive taxation in which wealthier residents are taxed at higher rates. “A lot of the taxes we’re talking about here today are still a burden on working-class people, on poor people, on small businesses,” said newly appointed Council Member Anthony Quezada (35th Ward). “We all have our fair share to pay, but we continue to leverage this burden on working-class people… we should be really examining how we make the wealthiest people in our state pay their fair share.” Right now, the flat rate for all income levels is 4.95 percent. Quezada recalled the failure of an attempt at progressive taxation in 2020, the Fair Tax Amendment. The current one percent tax specifically applies to “food prepared for consumption off the premises where it is sold.” Groceries purchased with SNAP benefits are not taxed. 

Chicago’s Uber and Lyft drivers demanding safety standards, a living wage, and decent working conditions dominated the public comment portion of a Chicago City Council Committee on Finance meeting—even though the topic was not on the committee’s agenda. Specifically, public commenters were supporting the Chicago Rideshare Living Wage and Safety Ordinance, which covers many of the drivers’ concerns. The drivers are also seeking more transparency by Lyft and Uber in fares and deactivation processes. The issue falls more directly under the Council’s Workforce Development Committee, chaired by Alderperson Michael Rodriguez (22nd Ward), who sponsored the proposed ordinance in 2023. A vote on the measure by the Workforce Development Committee was anticipated in the near future. If passed by the full Council, the ordinance would also create a public assistance fund and an appeals process for drivers facing suspensions. One commenter, a ride-share driver who said he had ten years of experience including 27,000 rides, said there have been discrepancies with Uber not only with underpaying drivers, but also overcharging passengers.

✶ ✶ ✶ ✶

This information was collected and curated by the Weekly in large part using reporting from City Bureau’s Documenters at documenters.org.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *