2026-10-05 - Committee on Finance

City Council Rules of Conduct for Public Meetings, 2023 to 2027. Pursuant to Rule 58 of the Chicago City Council Rules of Order and Procedure, the Sergeant at Arms sets forth the following rules of

conduct for members of the public. These rules shall be in effect at all times that a viewing gallery or room is open for a meeting of the City Council or any of its committees. All individuals and

their belongings are subject to search at entry or upon request. Individuals must remain seated at all times except, one, when entering or exiting the gallery. Two, when providing public comment

during the portion of a meeting set aside for that purpose. Or three, when asked to rise and be acknowledged by a member of the City Council. Profane, threatening, harassing, abusive, or defamatory

behavior or speech, which in the judgment of the meeting's chair or the Sergeant at Arms may lead to a breach of the peace or disrupt the orderly conduct of the meeting is not permitted. Disruptive or

distracting actions, such as the stomping of feet, waving of arms, throwing any item, whistling, booing, shouting, or other loud utterances are not permitted when in the judgment of the meeting's

chair or the Sergeant at Arms, such actions are disrupting or impeding the orderly conduct of the meeting. Any item that poses a potential safety hazard, as determined by the Sergeant at Arms, is

prohibited in the gallery. Such items include, but are not limited to: one, any pointed objects, including knives of any kind. Two, banners, flyers, or other forms of signage. Three, food and

beverages, including in glass or metal canisters. Four, backpacks, large bags, and sealed packages. Clear bags, not tinted in color, that do not exceed 12 inches by 6 inches by 12 are permitted and

subject to search. And five, firearms, ammunition, fireworks, laser pointers, stun guns, tasers, mace pepper spray, and toy weapons. Cell phones and other small handheld recording devices must be

placed in silent mode, can only be used while seated, and can only be used in a manner that does not interfere with the ability of other individuals to view or hear the proceedings. Individuals or

groups failing to adhere to these rules will be subject to removal from the remainder of the meeting by the Sergeant at Arms. City of Chicago City Council Rules of Conduct for Public Meetings, 2023 to

2027. Pursuant to Rule 58 of the Chicago City Council Rules of Order and Procedure, the Sergeant at Arms sets forth the following rules of conduct for members of the public. These rules shall be in

effect at all times that a viewing gallery or room is open for a meeting of the City Council or any of its committees. All individuals and their belongings are subject to search at entry or upon

request. Individuals must remain seated at all times except, one, when entering or exiting the gallery. Two, when providing public comment during the portion of a meeting set aside for that purpose.

Or three, when asked to rise and be acknowledged by a member of the City Council. Profane, threatening, harassing- Good morning, everyone. The Committee on Finance meeting is called to order. Today,

we will be holding a TEFRA public hearing for the 5853 North Broadway project, for which the city will issue multifamily housing debt. We will now have a roll call to establish quorum. Vice Chair

Conway. Alderman Lospada. Alderman Hall. Alderman Beale. Alderman Lee. Alderman Ramirez. Alderman Quinn. Alderman Lopez. Alderman Curtis. Alderman O'Shea. Alderman Taylor. Alderman Scott. Alderman

Sancho Lopez. Alderman Burnett. Alderman Ervin. Alderman Taliaferro. Alderman Cardona. Alderman Waguespack. Alderman Rodriguez Sanchez. Alderman Viegas. Alderman Mitts. Alderman Sposato. Alderman

Vasquez. Alderman Martin. Alderman Silverstein. Chair Dowell is here. We have a quorum. Alderman Moore is here. We have a quorum. We have 16 present in the chamber. Alderman Riley, Knutson, Quezada,

Harris, Rodriguez, Mitchell, Hopkins, and Mosley have requested remote participation for reasons stated under the provision of Rule 59. Can I have a motion to allow these aldermen to enter? So moved

by Alderman Ervin. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it and the motion carries. I'd like to confirm Alderman Riley. Alderman Knutson.

Present, Chair. Thank you. Alderman Quezada. Present, Chair. Thank you. Alderman Harris. Alderman Mitchell. Present. Alderman Rodriguez. I'm here, Chair. Alderman Hopkins. Present, Madam Chair.

Alderman Mosley. Let the record reflect that this is a public meeting, public hearing that is being held pursuant to the requirements of Section 147F of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.

Notice of this public hearing was posted on September 24th, 2026, on the website of the Office of the City Clerk. Let the reporter mark the screenshot of such a notice as Committee Exhibit number one

for identification. This is a hearing regarding a plan of finance to issue multifamily housing revenue bonds, Series 2026, in the amount not to exceed $19,500,000, and we will refer to these as the

bonds. The proceeds of the bonds will be used by 5853 North Broadway 4 LP, an Illinois limited partnership, we will refer to them as the borrower, to finance an affordable housing development project

by acquiring, constructing, and equipping a low-income, multifamily housing development, and we'll refer to this as the project. The project consists of the acquisition, construction, and equipping of

a condominium unit containing approximately 57 affordable residential dwelling units, which along with another condominium unit containing approximately 33 affordable residential dwelling units, is

part of a larger development housed in an 11-story building containing approximately 90 affordable residential dwelling units therein, together with an on-site management office and certain tenant

amenity spaces and common facilities, together with any functionally related and subordinate facilities located generally at 5853 North Broadway, Chicago, Illinois 60660. Of the 57 residential units

in the project, five of the units will be restricted for tenants at 30% or less of area median income, and 52 of the units will be restricted for tenants at 60% or less of AMI. The city will issue the

bonds pursuant to its powers as a home rule unit of government under the 1970 Constitution of the State of Illinois and an ordinance adopted by the City Council of the city. The bonds will not be a

general obligation of the city, the State of Illinois, or any political subdivision thereof, but will be limited special obligations of the city. The principle of premium, if any, and interest on the

bonds will be payable solely out of the revenue of the project and other funds pledged and assigned for its payment by the borrower in accordance with the trust indenture under which the bonds were

issued. The bonds will not constitute an indebtedness of or an obligation of the city, the State of Illinois, or any political subdivision of the State of Illinois within the purview of any

constitutional limitation or legal provision. No holder of the bonds will have the right to compel any exercise of the taxing power of the city, the State of Illinois, the United States of America, or

any political subdivision of any of them to pay the principle of premium, if any, or interest on the bonds. Written comments related to this plan to issue the bonds must have been submitted by email

to the Committee on Finance no later than 10:00 A.M., Friday, October 2026. Let the record reflect that no written comments were submitted on the project. Ladies and gentlemen, if any resident,

taxpayer, or other interested person attending the hearing desires an opportunity to express their views for or against the proposed issuance of the bonds, please do one of the following. For those

attending the hearing in person, please come up to the microphone in the aisle when your name is called, or for those who have called in on the toll-free phone number, please enter star nine on your

phone to notify the host of the call-in number. And once you are called upon to provide your comments, please press star six to unmute your phone. Each speaker will be limited to three minutes. We

have a number of the public who wish to make a statement with respect to this matter, and we will begin with Zoe Lee. And while she's walking to the microphone, we acknowledge Alderman Silverstein,

and you'll be counted towards quorum. Ms. Lee? So this project is really $66.3 million in combined maximum public financing. We have a public safety crisis. We have a homeless crisis. We have a

housing crisis. We have a string of robberies going on in Bronzeville. I just don't understand how you guys continue to have this type of money. Sixty-six point three million is crazy. I don't

understand how Black people continue to vote Democrat. Y'all have literally financially bankrupt Black America. Chicago alone is an SBK. That's a small business killer. Y'all continue to mess up our

businesses. The string of robberies that keep happening between 75th and Bronzeville, it is not random. But we allow it because we are politically ignorant, we vote blue no matter who. There is no

reason why any of you Black aldermen still should be in office. We literally have nothing in our communities and unless we pay for it, unless we pay to play, we're not going to have anything. Some of

y'all are getting behind Alexi Giannoulias. What has Alexi Giannoulias done for the Black community? What has Alexi Giannoulias done for the Black community that you Black aldermen are going to get

behind him? You got Danielle running. You have Willie Wilson running. But you decide to do Alexi Giannoulias. He literally bankrupts... He should be in jail. He gives CDL license to illegal aliens.

They keep showing, like in the libraries, LGBTQ books that he will not ban. He's sick, but y'all sick, too, because as long as he got a couple of dollars to give to y'all, y'all going to keep selling

us out. Our next speaker is Peter Lara. Ladies and gentlemen, and for the news crews over there as well, you can report this as well. The city of Chicago is $882 million in debt. What comprises that,

you may ask? Over $100 million that was spent on illegals and many other different subsidiaries that we do not need to spend it on. Why is it that the Democrats tend to target the extremely

impoverished neighborhoods? They claim, "Oh, we're going to give them all sorts of benefits." But do you know who ends up suffering in the end? They get taxed more. They don't get those benefits at

all. They wind up suffering more and stay even poorer. Here's a step-by-step plan that this city wants to implement. They want to continue raising taxes, raising our property taxes, because that's

what this city and state loves to do. They want to continue doing that so that none of the public can afford anything. And then at that point, where do people have to turn to? They have to turn to

government housing, where the government controls every aspect. That's socialism at its finest. That's communism, and that's where we are heading if we don't change what we need to change. And Alexi

Giannoulias, he bankrupted a bank. How does that happen? You would think a bank is one of the easiest things that you can run, and that should reflect. God forbid, if he does get elected, it's going

to be even worse. If he can't even manage his own personal finances or his business's finances, do you think he can really run the third major city in America? You better reconsider. We also have to

take into account that this state wants to continue building data centers. I don't care what this mayor has to say. "We're not going to do it. We're going to prevent it." No, because he's going to

cater to Pritzker because Pritzker is all for it. Then that's going to raise our utility bills. We're not going to have clean water, and nobody seems to want to bring up this issue here or in general.

Why are we not speaking up on these issues? Have we gotten to the point in society that we're afraid to speak on the truth? The truth is supposed to hurt because the only way we're going to progress

as a society is get through the hardest part, which is the truth, and then we have to get with the solutions. But people would rather complain about problems than want to fix the system. And you know

what? There are more citizens that are standing up. We're going to fight it. Thank you. Thank you. I'd like to acknowledge Alderman Burnett, Scott, and Beale, who will be counted towards quorum. Our

next speaker is Jessica Jackson. So Alderman Beale, you come in late and you going to talk to them instead of letting them talk, listen to the public speakers? Okay. So anyway, you all are here to

deal with this bond for some type of housing. What's amazing to me is how this body can really put on a front like it's concerned about housing. You're not concerned about housing because if you were

concerned about housing, you would be concerned about the people who currently have housing that they paid for, real estate that they worked for and paid for, that you all are raising property taxes

or have raised property taxes so severely that it was a clear attack on property owners. You all do not want people to own private property. So you come in here and you get this false illusion like

you all care about people's housing with these unaffordable housing projects that's really about making people be government dependent. You all would rather smear our reputation with your paid goons

to put on the internet about how our cases are not real. We're talking about what we don't know about everything except for the fact that you all are knowingly stealing Black people's property. You

are knowingly targeting Black people areas, and you know that you are. So to sit here and act like you all are trying to do affordable housing, acting like it's a housing shortage. No, it's not. Fix

the abandoned buildings that are in our communities. Fix those. That's plenty of inventory. But you all don't want to do that. You all want to steal from us and then get in office again because JB

Pritzker is protecting you all seats. You all are ready to put another crook in ... just whoever the Democrat is, is going to be a crook. You all are too scared to give up your seats, because if

anybody gets in any of your all seats that's halfway decent, they'll find your theft right away, and you'll go to jail. So you all are just going to keep stealing seats. You're going to keep rigging

elections. You're going to keep on playing with your phones, acting like you're doing business when you're not, because if you were, the city wouldn't be this much in debt, and you wouldn't have to

keep on with bogus bonds. So keep playing with your phones, because you all are very unimportant. You all are a bunch of thieves. If you all were really about business, you would show up for work. Our

next speaker is George Blakemore. The people deserve the government they get. They deserve these Democrats. Look at these empty seats. Look, where are the people? You deserve these Democrats, and

nothing is going to flip it. The same thing is going to come back again. The same people, the same party, doing the same thing. Look, I've advocated for Trump to come in. I have a strategic plan. If

Trump comes and cleans up his swamp, this racist swamp here, the Democratic machine, then they say Trump is racist, too. So I get those two to cancel each other out. I can go Black. I can go Black.

That's my strategic plan, that Trump come here and clean up this swamp. And then when he cleans up this swamp, then I will know that he has a little swamp, too, now. I get rid of two birds with one

stone. I used to ask, "Figure out what's wrong with my mama," if she got any sense, talking about killing two birds with one stone. Figure that out. How can you kill two birds with one stone? Uh-huh,

I got a plan to do this, that Trump come and clean up this swamp, and then I'll get on Trump, and then I'll go Black on his A. I'll open up my own business, have my own bank, and I'll truly have a

Black Wall Street. I'm a selfish Black man. Self-preservation is the first law of nature. This one lady here, right over here, Mr. Whatever, she says she's a Jew. I'm a Jew, too. All these religions

come from the Black man. But she struts around and all of them come to her, because the golden rule is he who has the gold, they rule, they're rich. And I asked somebody, "Is Judaism a religion or is

it a race?" And my answer from this Jewish lady, "It's both." How are you going to be a boy and a girl? It's both. Figure that out. Is Judaism a religion or is it a race? And when she cried the call,

"Anti-Semitic, anti-Semitic," and everybody go along with her because the golden rule, he who has the gold, rules economic development. He who has the gold, rules. And Black people, you don't have no

gold. Now, you've got to figure that out. You don't have no gold. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes the public hearing on the proposed plan for the City of Chicago to issue not to exceed

$19,500,000 principal amount in multifamily housing revenue bonds, series 2026 for 5853 North Broadway. Let the record reflect that the public hearing on this matter concluded at 10:27 AM, October

5th, 2026. This concludes the TEFRA hearing. We have another TEFRA hearing, guys. Good morning. The Committee on Finance meeting is called to order, and today we'll be holding a TEFRA public hearing

for the Humboldt Village redevelopment project, for which the city will issue multifamily housing bonds. We will now have a roll call to establish quorum. Vice Chair Conway. Alderman Lospada. Alderman

Hall. Alderman Beale. Alderman Lee. Alderman Ramirez. Alderman Quinn. Here. Alderman Lopez. Alderman Moore. Alderman Curtis. Alderman Lee, I see you. Alderman O'Shea. Alderman Taylor. Alderman Scott.

Alderman Sicho Lopez. Alderman Burnett. Alderman Irvin. Alderman Tally Farrell. Alderman Cardona. Alderman Waguespack. Alderman Rodriguez Sanchez. Alderman Viegas. Alderman Mitts. Alderman Sposato.

Sposato. Alderman Vasquez. Alderman Martin. Alderman Silberstein. Chair Dowell is here. We have a quorum. We have 22 in the room. Alderman Hopkins, Mitchell, Harris, Mosley, Rodriguez, Casada, Riley,

and Knutson have requested participation for reasons under the provision of Rule 59. Can I have a motion to allow these aldermen to participate this morning? Alderman Taylor moves do pa-- yes. All

those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and I want to confirm Alderman Riley, Knutson, Casada, Harris, Rodriguez, Hopkins, Mitchell- Yes ...

and Mosley. I'm present. Present. Present. Alderman Hopkins, present. Yeah. This is a hearing regarding a plan of finance to issue the multifamily housing revenue bonds series 2026 for the Humboldt

Village redevelopment project in a principal amount not to exceed $22 million. We refer to these as the bonds. The proceeds of the bonds will be loaned to TCB Humboldt 4 LLC, an Illinois limited

liability company, and we will refer to the company as the borrower, to finance Unit 2 of an affordable housing development project by acquiring, rehabilitating, developing, and equipping a

residential development consisting of a residential building and related facilities generally located at 2620 West Hurst Street and 1417 North Tallman Avenue in Chicago, Illinois. The borrower and a

separate entity, TCB Humboldt 9 LLC, an Illinois limited liability company, the 9% borrower, will acquire the vacant Von Humboldt Elementary School, which is located on real property commonly known as

2620 West Hurst Street, 1417 North Tallman Avenue, the property, known as the property. Borrower will thereafter, one, rehabilitate a portion of the property to provide a total of 75 rental units, all

of which are to be designated for occupancy by affordable households earning no more than 80% of the area median income, with 12 units at 30% AMI, 25 units at 50% AMI, 27 units at 60% AMI, and 11

units at 80% AMI, all including certain rental assistance demonstration project-based voucher units to provide public housing replacement units. And two, together with the 9% borrower, submit the

property to the requirements of the Illinois Condominium Property Act. 765 ILCS Section 605 (1) , thereby creating the Humboldt Elementary Condominiums pursuant to a declaration of condominium

ownership, an easement of restrictions, covenants, and bylaws for the Humboldt Elementary Condominiums or comparable document called the Condominium Declaration. The Humboldt Elementary Condominiums

create three units within the renovated Von Humboldt Elementary School, which are being rehabilitated, shall become a four-story mixed-use mid-rise elevator building located on the property as

follows. Number one, one unit will consist of approximately 28 residential units for affordable rental to low-income persons and families with incomes up to 80% of the area median income. Two, a

second unit consisting of approximately 75 residential units for affordable rental to low-income persons and families with incomes up to 80% of the AMI. And three, which is an approximately 3,244

square foot space that will be operated as either white box office and programming for a community organization or commercial retail and will be located on the building's first floor. Pursuant to the

condominium declaration, the borrower will exclusively own unit two and its undivided interest in the common elements of the project, and unit three, which is not part of the project, and the 9%

borrower will exclusively own unit one and its undivided interest in the common elements. The city will issue the bonds pursuant to its powers as a home rule unit of government under the 1970

Constitution of the State of Illinois and an ordinance adopted by the City Council of the city. The bonds will not be a general obligation of the city, the state, or any political subdivision thereof,

but will be a limited special obligation of the city. The principle of premium, if any, and interest on the bonds will be payable solely out of the revenue of the project and other funds pledged and

assigned for its payment by the borrower in accordance with the funding loan agreement under which the bonds are issued. The bonds will not constitute an indebtedness or an obligation of the city, the

State of Illinois, or any political subdivision of the State of Illinois within the purview of any constitutional limit or legal provision. No holder of the bonds will have the right to compel any

exercise of the taxing power of the city, the State of Illinois, the United States of America, or any political subdivision of any of them, to pay the principle of premium, if any, and interest on the

bonds. Written comments related to the plan to issue the bonds must have been submitted to the Committee on Finance no later than 10:00 AM, Friday, October 2nd. Let the record reflect that there were

no written comments submitted on this project. Ladies and gentlemen, if any resident, taxpayer, or other interested person attending this hearing desires an opportunity to express their views for or

against the proposed issuance of the bonds, please do one of the following. For those attending in person, come to the microphone in the aisle when your name is called, and for those who have called

in on the toll-free phone line, please enter star nine on your phone to notify the host of the call-in number. And once you are called upon to provide your comments, enter star six to unmute your

phone. Each speaker will be limited to three minutes. We have a number of people in the public who have requested to speak. The first speaker is Peter Lara. Like to acknowledge while he's coming to

the mic, Alderman Sigcho-Lopez and Alderman Curtis have joined us and will be counted towards quorum. While reviewing this, I had a couple issues. The first issue is the owner of the project. This is

a company that's based out of Massachusetts. Why is it not a Chicago-based organization that's owning this? Are we getting sold out either across this nation or across overseas? What is this? And yet,

once again, and unlike everyone here who's either mingling or on their phone or whatever, not paying attention to actually what's happening, you look at what the mayor is also doing as well. What does

he do? He does nothing but photo ops, acting like he's actually doing something with his job. That costs the taxpayer tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands. And why does the mayor need so much

security? He has over 100 sworn police officers on his security detail. That's ridiculous. Why do we need so many officers protecting him when they should be out doing their duty and protecting the

public? That's misuse of our tax dollars right there. And the ultimate question that everyone wants to know is, where is this money all coming from? It's like it comes out of thin air. "Oh, we're

going to spend $20 million here. We're going to spend $35 million on something that is unnecessary." Where did we get all this money from? You think that with all the taxes that we pay, it would go to

the appropriate places. Why do we need to keep adding more taxes and more taxes and more taxes? What, the next thing they're going to tax us is for walking, is for breathing? They're going to tax us

on pretty much everything. And they're considering now where the city of Chicago wants an entry and exit toll. Do you know how detrimental that will be for our tourism, for our general citizens?

That's ridiculous. You have to pay. If you live in the city, or even if you are a tourist visiting, you have to pay an entry and exit fee. That's ridiculous. And nobody wants to reject it because

everyone is afraid. "Oh, I'm afraid to go against what they want to do." No, you people represent the people. And you know what? You guys aren't. You don't represent anything that we want

accomplished. It's the complete opposite. And you know what? We're voting you guys out. Thank you. Our next speaker is Zoe Lee. You know what I like about Peter? Peter's 19 years old. I love that, 19.

$19 million is 22,438 CPS students that are unhoused. Veterans that can't even get their 100% disability out here on these streets. Seniors on these streets, homeless, unhoused, which I don't care. I

never cared. The Democratic Party's a scam, full of scammers. All y'all do is act like y'all are fighting for the working class, fighting for the kids, fighting for the poor, and don't fight for

nothing but these seats. Y'all don't even fight for them, too. Y'all just cheat. Y'all progressively do not do anything. Anybody that is Black and a Democrat, shame on you. Y'all have literally let

them take everything out of our communities. For some campaign money? That's fiend behavior. That's crackhead behavior. Y'all will sell us out for y'all habits. Daley taught you, though. Now, see,

what Daley was good at, Daley was good with gathering up the Blacks, give them a job. Now he can't go. Now y'all not going to go against him because the guy gave y'all a job. So y'all just sell us

out. Y'all let Podoljak and Ed Burke tag team and take our properties in our community. Then when I come down here and talk about it, you know I'm not lying, y'all still don't do nothing. Y'all mad at

me. Y'all mad at me because I'm not going to allow y'all to continue to knock down properties without court orders to give to y'all developer friends that are out of state, out the country. Walter

Burnett's favorite one was in Canada. He was working with Canada. Y'all trash. Trash. Our next speaker is Jessica Jackson. What's really tripping me out is that Thursday, I think it was Thursday when

we were here for the fire and police safety meeting, and you all didn't even have a quorum to be able to have that meeting. A city that's sinking in crime, while you all sit and lie about crime being

down, and while crime, Chicago's crime is being publicized all over the country, for a public safety meeting for police and fire, you all didn't even show up. You all didn't even come to work. But

then yet let Brandon Johnson, with his no good, low-life, no good self, have a press conference, and look how y'all rally behind him. Look how you're going to be seen on camera, standing behind that

piece of low-life garbage, but you won't even come to work. You won't even come to work to deal with public safety. It wasn't even enough of you all to come in virtual. Ryan Hopkins needs to be tarred

and feathered and burned at the stakes. Any time you are the alderman over public safety, and you are completely ineffective, and you intentionally ignore the crimes of Chicago and the issue of public

safety, and are allowed to still sit and be the head chair of something. It's like you have the citizens just frantically looking for the bottom so that you all can stop falling. My God, what is you

all's bottom? The city is in all kind of debt. You all are stealing property. You all are helping Cook County officials cheat in court to steal property. You have invaded our communities, and you've

invaded our city with a bunch of illegal immigrants, and have spent all our money on it. The schools are failing. The kids can't even read past fourth grade. And you all never have that conversation

in here. Where's the bottom? Where? Where? Help us find the bottom so y'all can stop falling. You've never seen so many low-life people in your life, and then you all go get the bottom of the barrel

people to act as goons. You said that you all going to have some office buildings or organization buildings in this complex that you're talking about. Who you going to give them offices to? Your

goons, your low-life ex-thugs, ex-convicts so that they can terrorize people who trying to help the city? Is that who going to get them buildings? Our next speaker is George Blakemore. It's a merry-

go-round. Burke is gone. Alderman Burke was indicted. Now here come another one, Pat, with the same thing goes on. Reading is fundamental. Now she said that the city is not responsible for those

bonds. That's a lie. You're telling the people a lie because it's coming to the city, and the city is giving their stamp on this. Pat, you're doing voodoo economics. You're lying. If the city wasn't

responsible for this money kicking this down the road or whatever, why would it be in your community? If you're not responsible for-- the city's not responsible, why is it in your community? This is

voodoo economics. Why is it the city is responsible? You're just like, okay, like Mr. Conway says, "It's just a delay." This money has to be paid back. Now you know you're doing the same thing that

Burke was doing. Corrupt. All of you have an element of corruption. Criminal. Maybe Mr. Blakemore, how do you know so much about it? Maybe you're a criminal yourself. Maybe it takes one to know one.

One prostitute know another one. I know you. I've seen people like you. I've seen people like all of you. And I always say, "You can look good, you can speak good, you can act good, you can smell

good, and be a piece of S-H-I." Now you put whatever you want at the end of it. A friend of mine, a rich friend of mine said he wouldn't come and associate with people like you. My rich Jewish friend

of mine that was a president of John Deere, he said he wouldn't be in the company. Birds of a feather flock together. All of you all are Democrats. You see how I'm tying everything in? And you see I'm

speaking all of you. Birds of a feather flock together. One bird is not any better than the other bird. Fifty birds with rotten feathers flock together, all Democrats. I want Trump to come here and

clean up this swamp. And another thing, I realize nothing going to turn red here. Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes the public hearing on the proposed plan for the City of Chicago to issue the not

to exceed $22 million principal amount in multifamily housing revenue bonds series 2026 for the Humboldt Village redevelopment project. Let the record reflect that the public hearing on this matter

was concluded at 10:50 a.m., October 5th, 2026. This concludes the TEFRA hearing. The Committee on Finance is called to order. We will now have a roll call to establish quorum for our regular meeting.

Vice Chair Conway. Alderman Lospada. Alderman Beale. Alderman Lee. Alderman Quinn. Alderman Lopez. Alderman Curtis. Alderman O'Shea. Alderman Taylor. Alderman Scott. Alderman Siccho Lopez. Alderman

Burnett. Alderman Irvin. Alderman Taliaferro. Alderman Cardona. Alderman Waguespack Alderman Rodriguez Sanchez. Alderman Villegas. Alderman Mitz. Alderman Sposato. Alderman Vasquez. Alderman Martin.

Alderman Silverstein. Chair Dowell is here. Alderman Moore is present. Alderman Beale is here. Vice Chair Conway is here. We have a quorum. We have 20 present in the room. Alderman Knutson, Riley,

Casada, Harris, Rodriguez, Hopkins, Mitchell, and Mosley have requested participation today remotely under the provisions of Rule 59. Can I have a motion to allow these aldermen to participate? So

moved by Alderman Villegas. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and the motion carries. And I will confirm Alderman Knutson, Riley,

Casada, Harris, Rodriguez, Hopkins, Mitchell, and Mosley are present in today's meeting. At this time, we will begin public comment. The public comment period is limited to 30 minutes. Out of respect

for everyone's time, each speaker is limited to three minutes. Um, our first speaker today is Peter Lara. While reviewing this, so more funds are going to CPS. Now, what is that? CTU gets a ton of

money. Do you know how much the average Chicago teacher makes? $86,000. And yet they still cry, "Oh, we don't got enough money. We're going broke." It's a part-time job that you're working nine months

out of the year, if not less, depending. Okay? And what are you mainly doing? You're controlling the kids in the class because, I mean, most of the curriculum is AI anyhow. There are so many

professors in colleges across this nation that are genuinely concerned because there are so many people that are going into colleges that don't know how to read, that don't know how to write, they

don't know how to articulate correctly. These are all major concerns that should've been taught a long time ago. And now these professors have to teach it because of the failures of CTU. Why do you

think CTU sponsored Brandon Johnson, you may ask? Well, that's because he was a teacher himself, and all he does is cater to CTU all of the time. He does nothing but cater. That's scary. We need to

protect our youth. We need to think about them. We need to empower them, and CPS does not empower. Why are there so many schools operating that have very few people in this, and they have very large

capacities? Someone better check where that money is going. You don't know what grants they're getting. It's genuinely concerning. And now, and even before, under the Biden administration, why are we

funding for the transgenderism of our pets, of our youth? Why is that happening? They now have no parental notification in this state. That's beyond absurd. I would think that you could lose your

medical license for that. God forbid something happens. It's a shame. Where is our city heading? This is a question that I want to even ask all the news outlets here. Where is our city heading?

Citizens have to think of where we're heading. We have still the potential to change things around, but people need to start thinking, thinking for themselves. Fight for what is right. That's how

we're going to advance. And you know what? We're slowly doing it. Thank you. Our next speaker is Zoe Lee. 19-year-old. Oof. Good one. So, y'all giving out $260 million in lawsuits, but can't figure

out how to take care of my family. But I know why, because that's Daley issue. Daley is the one who gave it to Quackenbush and did that deal, and nobody can't mess with that because that's Daley

problem. So I know y'all still talk to Daley. So before he checks out, tell him that it'd be nice if he would sit down with my godfather and my mother and take care of that because he has helped me

destroy the Democratic Party in Chicago, with the help of Ms. Jessica, too. What y'all say? In Chicago, mayor's race, candidates turn to influencers hoping to go viral with voters. I think that y'all

think this is a game. People are losing their lives, losing their properties, losing their minds, losing their children, and all y'all are worrying about is creating content to get back in these

seats. Ain't nobody's content going to be better than ours. Disgrace 50. I went through y'all whole term. I know how y'all voted. I know who showed up and who didn't. I know how much money, in TIF

money, y'all stealing in each ward. I know about the $830 million. I know who's been foreclosed and who hasn't. I know who paying for who and who paying for not, where that campaign money going. More

than that media over there, that fake news over there, I made my own media. Y'all not getting back in. Y'all did nothing for four years. The Democratic Party. Y'all always talk about the Republican

Party. We didn't give 60 years to the Republican Party. We gave it to y'all for y'all lifestyles. Y'all did nothing, nothing for us. Y'all took care of the minority. The minority is the elites. Y'all

did not care about us at all. Y'all not getting back in. Our next speaker is Jessica Jackson. So I'm looking at this agenda paper, and you have the Department of Law, and the 16 cases that they're

looking to settle. Now, Pat Dowells, Chairman, Alderwoman Pat Dowells, I gave you an assignment for you to look up how much money was spent on my case. Between you and big boy Jason Irvin, you all

should be able to come up with that amount, but you're going to have difficulty coming up with that amount because so many layers of cheating are involved. There's so much that you're not going to

find, because when you trace my case, it leads you to these corrupt judges. It leads you to corrupt public administrators. In fact, it leads you right to JB Prisker, and you all don't want to bother

Big Daddy Money, because Big Daddy Money, JB Prisker, have bought all y'all seats. Now, you all don't believe that you all are getting out of office, just like those corrupt judges don't believe that

they're going to jail Yes, you all are. Now, here's the thing. You all thought when we said Chicago Flips Red, you all thought that we thought that everybody in here was going to switch to Republican.

Switch to the Republican. No, the Bible says, "Be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind." See, right now, Chicago Flips Red has the minds of people. That's why they keep talking about us online.

That's why Brandon Johnson is finding his goons to try to destroy us, to try to make it look like we're not doing no movement, trying to go against Danny. But what is it? Just all these corrupt

Democrats flood the room with the lineup, mayor lineup, with a bunch of no-good, sorry pieces of thieves. But the people are talking. We're in their minds. We're in their minds, and we're going to get

you all out. See, you all thinking that it's just going to come by way of that-- no, because the feds are going to come in here. Oh, they're going to get you, because Trump's dislike for J.B. Pritzker

and Brandon Johnson is real. He's going to make sure that that fat piece of slob, J.B. Pritzker, who's putting signs all over the South Side, which is really marking his territory for the areas that

he's looking to steal from next, especially over there in South Shore by the Obama Center. Oh, he ain't going to let that thief see that president seat. He's going to get you all. He's going to get

you. So don't think that you're safe just because you're running your little bogus election stuff right now. Play on your phones, play on your phones like it doesn't matter. Play on your phones

because we coming for them seats. Understand that. Our next speaker is Rodney Williams. Alderman Vessey, as we see you, we count you towards quorum. Alderman Lopez, we will count you towards quorum.

Mr. Williams? All right. Good morning. My name is Rodney Williams, and I'm the site director at By the Hand Club for Kids in Altgeld Gardens. I've devoted the last 11 years to this organization and

have spent 52 years of my life right here in Chicago. I can see that there is no community with a greater need than Altgeld Gardens. My kids tell me every day how they'd like to have more

opportunities. I even hear our students express how they want more opportunities for their peers and to have resources and support provided by By the Hand Club. For one of our eighth-grade students,

Corday Bardy, he's excited to see this project not only for him but to see some meaningful, beautiful things in his neighborhood. Corday's mom shares that being in By the Hand Club helps keep him out

of trouble and it's a place that he enjoys being. She says she's all about the kids and that there needs to be more for the kids in our community. A striking statistic that resonates with me is the

Child Opportunity Index, which evaluates the conditions surrounding children for their growth and development on a scale of one to 10. In Lincoln Park, that score is 94, while in Altgeld Gardens, it's

a mere two. I am committed to improving that number, which is why I'm here today. By the Hand Club has been serving children in Altgeld for over 20 years, yet our current facility limits us to about

150 kids. This project offers a remarkable opportunity to more than double the number of young people we can support daily and create a year-round environment where children and families for the

entire neighborhood can learn, grow, connect, and thrive. With the community using the building in addition to By the Hand Club programming, we estimate to serve more than 3,000 kids and residents

each year. I've seen firsthand that investing in a child creates an impact that far extends far beyond that individual. It strengthens the entire family. 97% of our students report that having their

child at By the Hand allows them to work or be productive during the day. This is particularly vital right now. With historic investments being made through the Red Line Extension, families in Altgeld

will gain increased access to jobs, education, and opportunities throughout Chicago. However, access means nothing if family are not prepared to seize those opportunities. Parents need to know that

their children have a safe, nurturing place to go after school while they pursue these opportunities. This project is not just about building a structure. It aims to ensure that the children growing

up in Altgeld have the chance to dream, grow, and thrive in what I believe is the best city in America. Thank you for considering this investment in Altgeld Gardens, and most importantly, for

investing in the future of the children and families who call this community home. All right. Thank you. Our next speaker is Bernadette Williams. Hello, everyone. Morning. My name is Bernadette

Williams, President of the Altgeld Murray Homes Local Advisory Council, representing the residents of the Chicago Housing Authority. I have known By the Hands for over 20 years, learned about their

program at the Cabrini-Green community. Altgeld Local Advisory Council watched By the Hands, how they invested and built trust with the Altgeld Murray families. Altgeld Local Advisory Council asked By

the Hands to expand their after-school program into the up top vacant building so that our children can expand their education and socialism. The Red Line extension will connect Altgeld Murray

families to jobs, education, and new opportunities, especially families being subject to work requirements. Parents would need a safe place like the after-school program for their children to continue

to pursue their careers. The LAC, Local Advisory Council, and the Altgeld Murray residents support this project that families can move forward through mobility and self-sufficiency to move beyond

public housing. Thank you. Our last speaker is George Blakemore. What is the solution? Term limitation. Two four-year terms, and your A is out. Now, you heard that. Your A is out. Also, a manager that

will come in and manage the city, and get rid of 50 aldermen. New York only have 25, so. And another thing, not a part-time job. A full-time job for that 100 and something thousand dollars you

receive. A full-time job. You can get away with it because Bert had his own law firm. Come on with it, Mr. Blakemore, and he was thinking about his money from his law firm, not that little $170,000 or

$150,000 or whatever they get here. A full-time job, not part-time. And so those are three. And another thing they need here is an independent press, not fake press. You're a fake. You're going to

school to be an investigative journalist, and I'm always looking for my name. They say I'm on the Chinchilla Network, and I don't see it. Somebody say they edited you out, Mr. Blakemore. This is fake

news. Fake news. Show the empty seats. Show that nobody was here today. I can go to the news. I won't see that this afternoon. I will not see that because you are a part of the problem also We have

many problems here, and Black folks have a problem. On the plantation, the white man made an end. We have mental problems, and we got to recognize our mental problem to heal ourselves before we kill

ourselves. We must love our nappy hair, our big nose, our thick lips, and our black booty hole. We must be selfish people. The first man on planet Earth was a black man. These white folks are our

sisters and brothers by another mother. We are the original man. They don't want you to know your history, how great you are, how great we are. But you got to believe it. You got to know it. History

has distorted this. There's something mentally wrong with Black people. Patty Hearst fell in love with our enemy. She fell in love with our enemy. Again, love your nappy hair, your big nose and- Thank

you. I'd like to thank all our speakers this morning. Want to acknowledge Alderman Cardona, you'll be counted towards quorum, and Alderman Chico, as a non-member, we see you. We received one written

public comment from Sustainable Englewood Initiatives, and that public comment was sent electronically to everyone. This concludes the public comment period. We have a number of items before the

committee this morning. We have nine items, and we'll begin with the monthly Rule 45 report for September. This report was sent electronically to everyone, and if there are no questions, can I get a

motion? So moved to recommend approval of the September 2026 monthly Rule 45 report. That motion was made by Alderman Irvin. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed? In the opinion of the

chair, the ayes have it and the motion carries. Item number one from the Department of Law is a proposed order authorizing the corporation council to enter into and execute a settlement order in the

following 16 cases. They're all Guevara cases. And it's Bhutto, Flores, Juan and Rosenda Hernandez, Lugo, Davila, Abrego, Martinez, Kelly, Goettsche, Quill, Rivera, Robinson, Ortiz, Williams, Kruger,

and McDowell. We are joined by Deputy Corporation Counsel, Jessica Felker, who will present this case to us. Good morning, Ms. Felker. Good morning, Chair. Thank you all. I'm here to present the mass

Guevara settlement that Chair Dowell just went through. The law department recommends to settle these 16 Guevara cases that involve 17 plaintiffs for a total of $260,814,000. The law department finds

this in the best financial interest of the city. In these cases, the city's potential liability is more than a half a billion dollars. This body approved another six Guevara settlements earlier in

this year, and there are two more that are in the queue to be presented. If City Council approves this mass settlement and the two others awaiting approval, the total Guevara case count will be down

to 23, nearly a 50% reduction from the 41 pending today. Under the terms of the agreement, the total settlement will be paid over two years in four equal installments of just over $65 million. Each

payment will be made six months apart. If this settlement passes this month, the payments will occur in April 2027, October 2027, April 2028, and October 2028. Each of the plaintiffs in this proposed

settlement has brought a lawsuit against Reynaldo Guevara and other retired or deceased members of the Chicago Police Department, as well as the City of Chicago. They claim that they have been

wrongfully convicted of murder. All the plaintiffs' convictions for murder have been vacated and the charges dropped. All but two of the plaintiffs have received certificates of innocence. Three of

those 15 who received certificates of innocence were opposed, but the court granted a certificate over the opposition of the state's attorney. One of the plaintiffs has a pending felony charge in the

last two years. Collectively, the plaintiffs in this mass settlement proposal have spent 383.55 years in custody. The payment here amounts to an average of $680,000 per year of custody. The

plaintiffs' ages at the time of arrest range from 14 to 28, with most between 19 and 22 when they were arrested. They spent on average 22.6 years in custody. Each of the 17 plaintiffs in this

settlement are represented by Loevy & Loevy. That firm has 21 pending Guevara settlements, including the two which are in the queue for this body's approval later on. Before this mass settlement,

and there are 21 cases, we were able to come to terms with a 16-case mass settlement. Three of their cases we were unable to include in the mass settlement, and we will continue discussions to see if

those can be resolved. Like the Watts global settlement, the city here agreed to the total payment, but the allocation was determined by the plaintiffs themselves and is not equal. Plaintiff's counsel

worked with their clients to determine what each will receive, and each plaintiff has agreed to that sum. The city does not value every Guevara lawsuit the same. In this settlement or outside it, at

$680,000 per year of custody, this is unique to the merits of these 16 cases. These 16 cases were evaluated based on the individual facts, and these cases alone were examined to determine the total

value. This mass settlement of 16 cases is in the best interest of the taxpayers. The settlement amount in this case was carefully and thoughtfully considered and weighed against the possible costs if

settlement was not reached. The parties began discussions to resolve these cases over 10 months ago. One federal district court judge, Judge Mary Roland, agreed to lead the mediation efforts, and she

was instrumental in reaching the ultimate figure. Although this mass settlement is a tremendous amount of money, the city's potential liability is at least double if these cases went to trial. In that

circumstance, the estimated exposure is well over half a billion dollars. That includes $20 to $25 million in fees for outside counsel, and if plaintiffs were to prevail at trial, $60 to $70 million

in plaintiff's counsel fees. This mass settlement continues the law department's strategy of resolving cases by weighing the merits of each case and recommending the most prudent fiscal resolution.

This mass settlement provides certainty and exposure and allows for payments to be made over time. Guevara is asserting the Fifth Amendment and declining to testify in his defense, and as these cases

linger, more and more of the defendant officers who will testify in their defense are passing away due to their advanced age. Juries are unpredictable, and in recent years, plaintiffs in three cases

were awarded a total of $170 million for 42 years in custody or over $4 million per year of custody. Reaching this resolution here protects the city from those runaway verdicts. For all these reasons,

the law department recommends the resolution in these 16 cases as in the clear financial interest of the city. Thank you, Ms. Felker. We have a number of questions from members of the committee, and

we'll start with Vice Chair Conway. You said $680,000 per year of incarceration. How many years total are we settling here across the 17 plaintiffs? 383.55. And you said they were all being prosecuted

for murder? Yes, they were all prosecuted for murder. Now, and all but two of them have certificates of innocence? That's correct. And what were the years in question, based on the harms caused by

Detective Guevara that are at issue here? You mean the- When was the activity that has caused the city this liability, when did that stuff take place? Understood. Between 1987 and 1999 are all the

arrests in this case. Wonderful. Well, fortunately for all of us, police oversight such as COPA has come a long way since then. And I say that as somebody who has prosecuted a few police officers

since then, but nonetheless, obviously the liability we have still remains. We've all signed off on significant jury verdicts of a million dollars a year, if not more, and those numbers are, excuse

me, signed off on settlements and the jury verdicts we're seeing north of $1 million and continue to increase. We also know we spend significant amounts of money on outside counsel and plaintiff's

counsel. And so based on those similar cases and outside counsel spending, this seems to make sense for the taxpayers. And I tell you, nobody hates signing off on $260 million based on the fiscal mess

that we have more than me. But the fact of the matter is, we have a significant unknown liability here, and this takes a lot of it off the books. And that significant unknown liability certainly is

greater than $260 million. So I would ask my colleagues to support this gigantic but responsible settlement. And I want to thank you, Ms. Felker, and thank the law department for your work in this.

Thank you. Thank you, Vice Chair Conway. Alderman Beal. Yes. Alderman Ervin. Thank you, Madam Chair. Again, I do echo the comments that the vice chair has made in relation to this. I just have a

couple questions. How many more of these Guevara cases are out there that we're aware of? Yeah, there are 41 pending. This would resolve 16 of them. And as I mentioned, we have another two that we've

reached individual settlements that are waiting to be presented to this body. So assuming all the 16 and those two in the queue pass, we would be down to 23. So 23 cases, all basically similar fact

patterns for what we're looking at? Yeah, they're all very different fact patterns, I would say, and they all have varying values. So I mean, we've paid as little as $750,000 and as much as $17.5

million, so they vary a lot. But they're all Guevara cases. Okay. And then, what do you expect the resolution or bringing those cases to committee for approval? Well, I can't comment on pending

litigation, but we are continuing to make diligent efforts to evaluate these the best as possible and bring to you the best, most fiscally responsible resolution. Okay. That's a nice way to make that

sound. Are there any other ones that haven't been filed that potential out there for as well, or has the statute passed on those, or what else could exist? So I'm aware of nine petitions for post-

conviction relief, which means they're challenging their convictions. Nine people are challenging their convictions. I can tell you that five have already been denied any relief by the trial court,

and they're now appealing. On top of the 23? Yes. They haven't sued, but they're potential lawsuits against Guevara if their convictions are ultimately vacated. Okay. And then or is there a statute of

limitations on this particular type of a case? Yes. So of course there's a statute of limitations, but in reverse conviction cases, that statute doesn't start to run until the case against them has

been overturned. So it's one to two years, depending on the type of claim, from when their case is overturned, and the charges are dropped. Okay. Thank you. But again, we appreciate the work that

you're doing. I know this is not easy, and given our financial situation, but I do agree with it's the best decision that can be made at the time, given everything that we do know. And then

unfortunately, we'll have more of these to deal with potentially as time goes on. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Alderman. Alderman Lopez, followed by Alderman Taylor. Thank you, Chairman, and

good morning, members of the committee. Which of these cases have the certificates of innocence been opposed? So the three are David Lugo, Edwin Ortiz, and Tyrese Williams. And those were opposed by

the state's attorney at the time? Yes. Which was who? The David Lugo, the state's attorney was Kim Fox, and Williams and Ortiz are the current state's attorney. And who was the one that has no

certificate of innocence? There's two. One is David Krueger, who has not filed for a certificate of innocence, and the second is Antonio McDowell, who has one pending, not yet ruled upon. And was the

judge the same judge in all of these cases? No. How many judges were involved in issuing these certificates of innocence? I would have to get that to you through the chair. Okay. I have to say that I

find this good and bad, revolting, yet necessary. And as someone who has voted against these settlements as recently as our last meeting, when we know that there's questions of people's certificates

of innocence or even those without them, swallowing this is like bad medicine today. Because I know that there are still outstanding questions, and I want to just take a moment, if I may, to actually

thank both the chair and the department for answering my questions with regards to this, as well as addressing my previous concerns with how we move forward with settlements. But this is no less

disheartening for all of Chicago to see the largest settlement in US history coming before us right now. How are we paying for this? The law department has provided in its forecast for 2027 and 2028

the payments made in this settlement. So roughly a month ago, we were told, Chairman, that the law department settlement fund was now going to be $401 million, of which we are going to not borrow, but

pay up front. And how much is our annual, are these four payments? We would pay total $130 million each year. So roughly $65 million per payment? Correct. And that's being factored into the $400

million budget increase that we're looking at, or that's been proposed? I can't answer that question. Budget would have to, but I can say that it was part of the department's forecast that it provided

to Budget. I bring that up, Chairman, and I know this is a conversation that we've had time and time again with regards to the settlements, but now with the largest settlement ever. I think that this

body needs to have a broader, more in-depth conversation when it comes to settlements, how we're spending, where they're coming out of. Because I think we set a standard, a budget in one committee,

the Budget and Government Operations, which will likely be passed in October, November, or at some point. But we don't track where we're spending. We don't know if we're blowing past amounts. We just

keep saying yes in one room and hoping that we're matching it in the other. And I think that as we move forward, collectively, this body needs to see whether or not we're actually living within the

budgetary constraints that we put forward. Because I know, as the law department just alluded to, there are other cases still in the hopper, which we don't know if we're going to have settlements for

at any point in time. We don't know what the future holds with regards to many of the outstanding settlements. And if we're in a situation where we are past our budget, this body's going to be saying

yes to what you're proposing as a department, not you, but as a department, without knowing if we actually have the money to pay for it. And I don't want to be in that predicament. I don't want us to

see, at the end of the year, a budgetary address that says we're short because we said yes in one committee without being able to say, "Hold on a minute, you've only planned for X, and now you're

beyond that." Today, I think, as we're looking for the next two years of settlements that we're paying out, we've heard time and time again in this chamber, we don't like setting up the next councils

and dictating what they have to do when we don't even know who's going to be in this room. But I think, yes, I am going to support this. I'm going to bite my tongue and do it. Don't change my mind

now. He hasn't bitten it yet. We ain't done yet. But I'm going to do this because I know that our former corp counsel did hear some of our concerns, did address them, which I'm thankful for. But at

the same time, this is taking us down a new path that I don't think any of us ever really envisioned when it comes to these global settlements and paying out with corporate dollars that we haven't

even realized or budgeted for, not one year out, but now two years out. So thank you, Chairman, for letting me have my rant, but I just think that we really need to watch where we're going moving

forward with this and these types of settlements. Thank you. Thank you, Alderman Lopez. Acknowledging what you bring before us this morning is true. And as a council, we have an opportunity through

this budgeting period to start looking at the fact that the law department blows past their allocation every year. I think we started looking at that last year. We need to do more. Alderman Taylor.

Can you tell me how many cases this officer has in his history? Over 50. This officer getting a pension? Yes. Was this officer fired? No. He resigned. He retired? He's retired. What measures are we

taking to make sure stuff like this doesn't happen again? Because I feel like we're paying for stuff that was done in the past with no real change in officer's behavior. And so this seems like this is

just as many cases as the John Burge cases, and so I'm concerned. And how much of this money is actually going to the victims? This is a large amount of money. And for what people lost or gave up, you

said they were from 14 to 29? 28, yeah. 28. And so what they've lost in amount of years, this money is not going to replace. It won't fix. And for people who are actually innocent. And so I want to

know what we're doing different when it comes to policing. Do you all have any bearings or conversations with the pension board? I'll start with your first question, and I appreciate all of them.

They're all very important questions. Your first question is have things changed, basically. Yes, a lot. These cases are from 1987 to 1999, as I mentioned. One thing that's been a huge change in the

law is that for any murder interrogations, the entire thing has to be videotaped. So that is a huge change from beginning to end. When they're in the interview room, that's on tape. The changes in

policing and the CPD over the past 25 years, COPA has made a lot of changes. I mean, this used to be IPRA and OPS. COPA is now in place, and I think the changes that have come with COPA and the

complaint system that they evaluate and the tracking that they see is a tremendous change from how things used to be. And of course, the consent decree is making changes as well. So there are a lot of

reasons to be optimistic that if behavior happens, it's caught early. The other question you had was how much are the plaintiffs going to get. So the $260 million will all go to the plaintiffs, but of

course, their attorneys will take probably 40% of that. Yes, that is the typical agreement. I don't know for sure their terms in these cases, but that's a typical plaintiff payment. So 40% will go to

the firm Loevy & Loevy. And I apologize, am I missing another question? The pension board. The pension board, obviously the law department or the division that I oversee has no ability to change

the law for the pension board or how that operates. The state law currently says the only reason you can take away somebody's pension is if they commit a felony and convicted of a felony in the scope

of their employment. That's what the law says about pensions. Has there been any conversations to have with the state or the state's attorney about changing that? Because I'm pretty sure based upon

how many years was he a police officer? Let me check. So he was appointed on March 8th, 1976, and he retired in June 2005. So approximately 30 years. So 30 years, and we paying a pension? Yes. That

math don't math. The amount of cases- Excuse me, Alderman Taylor, point of information. Alderman Martin. Why have charges not been approved? Well, the charges would be through the state's attorney.

When the statute of limitations would have been up on anything by the time these cases came to light. Do you recall what that statute of limitations is, how many years? I don't know exactly for the

different types of cases that, or different type of charges have different statute of limitations, but they're certainly just a few years, and these came to light much later. Is that something you

could get through the chair to the alderman? I don't need that. I was just curious. You don't need that? Okay. But thank you. Yeah. Alderman Taylor, sorry. You said 40% is going to lawyers? Correct.

These are the types of decisions that make me want to say no, because 40% of that is going to counsel. That's not going to the people that were harmed. And so we got to have a real conversation about

punishment. We got to have a real conversation because we paying two times for this person, over 50 lawsuits, then he gets a pension, and we paying for it. I don't know what anybody else think, but I

think it's the craziest thing in the world. And so sooner than later, we got to have a conversation with the state and the state's attorney because there has to be something that says maybe he pays

these lawsuits because this is on taxpayers. Taxpayers didn't harm these folks. This cop did. Understood, and it's a real concern, and I appreciate it. I would say that this is policy and laws that

come from the state- Collective bargaining ... and collective bargaining agreements. Excuse me. Thank you, Chair. So it's something that obviously I don't have control of, but it's certainly something

for your body to consider, changes in that respect. And I just want to be clear, the plaintiffs are the ones who sign engagement forms with their plaintiff's counsel, so it's not that the city is

deciding. No, absolutely. I clearly understand- Okay. I just want to be clear ... who's paying for 40%. Yeah. Who signs up for that? Yeah. Understood. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Alderman

Taylor. Alderman Martin, followed by Alderman Rodriguez Sanchez. Thank you, Chair. Good morning. You had mentioned approximately $107 million in three lawsuits that the city has taken to trial in

recent years. Is that correct? There are three lawsuits that, to point out the possible exposure with a runaway jury, there was three cases that went to trial, and their total in award from the jury

was $170 million. 170 or 107? 170. Okay. Approximately when did those trials take place? They took place, I believe 2024 and then 2025. Were those a fairly representative sampling of the remaining

cases that we're here to discuss today? I would say those are, again, on the extreme end, but I want to notify you as to the potentials that can happen if we don't settle. Okay. No other questions.

Thank you. Thank you, Alderman Martin. Alderman Rodriguez Sanchez, followed by Alderman Sigcho-Lopez. So we have spent already about $200 million that we have previously paid for Guevara cases? Yeah.

So if you add the settlements, judgments, and the outside counsel costs, we've paid approximately $200 million so far. And you were saying that litigating these cases could get us into half a billion?

And when you said that, you were speaking specifically about these ones that we're settling, not any others that are remaining. Correct. I would say the estimated possible liability is well over half

a billion dollars, so twice as much as the settlement we're recommending here. I hear the concerns of many of my colleagues around this amount of money being used for a settlement. I also need us to

be very aware of the human cost that this has had in communities. 383 years of prison for people who didn't commit a crime. That's a lot of time, a lot of damage, and it's not just what happens to the

individual, but what happens to the community in which they're in, the ripple effect that it has in society as a whole. So I support this settlement. I'm very grateful for the work that has been done

in order for us to be able to get here. And I am looking forward to continue working with the law department to figure out how we can make these processes better. This is incredibly unfortunate, but

there is no way that taking these cases to court is going to be beneficial for the city or for the taxpayers. So thank you so much for your work. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Alderman. Alderman

Sigcho-Lopez, followed by Alderman Sposato. Thank you, Madam Chair. Most of the questions have been answered, and this is a tough time where we experiencing serious deficits, and yet we have to make

sure that the victims always are compensated for these horrific actions by a former detective, in this case, Detective Guevara. My only question pending, I know that we talked a little bit about the

report. It was back in 2013, I believe, there was a report that was commissioned, but the understanding from the law department, it seems that there was not such a report that included Guevara cases.

There's other cases there. But I just want to get for the record, I know that we discussed that these are memos, these is other information. But I do want to ask about this report because apparently

it cost the city $1.9 million to commission a report, but that such a report does not seem to actually exist, or maybe just there were memos and other materials that maybe you can provide to us. Just

for clarity, what is going on with this report? Or what kind of report costs $1.9 million and then does not have anything to offer? And then, what is the information that you can actually provide,

understanding attorney-client privilege? Thank you, Alder. Yeah, I appreciate the opportunity to clarify. It's been reported in the news that there's a quote, "Guevara report," and, as we discussed,

that's not what exists from in 2013 to 2015, as you accurately stated. The City of Chicago hired, the law department hired outside counsel to evaluate individual Guevara cases. So there are dozens of

memos about pending and previous and possible future litigation. So it's not an evaluative report as much as it is legal counsel that have, at the time, conducted work product and investigation,

obviously pertaining to litigation that is ongoing. Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, I appreciate whatever information can be provided to the members, and I appreciate that, Madam Chair. Thank you,

Alderman. Alderman Sposato. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Jessica. I'm sorry to be jumping for joy over a $260 million settlement, but I agree with my esteemed colleague from the 34th Ward, who

was eloquent comments about what's going on here. I don't think anybody in this room is jumping for joy about this, but we all appreciate the great work you and corp counsel did. Hopefully by 2030,

we're done with the Guevara, Burge, and Watts cases. I don't know. Is that a possibility, you think? By 2030? Yeah. I think that's a possibility, yes. Yes, that's great to hear. So you hate to dump on

the next counselor or the group after that. But just at least we broke it down $130 million this year and $130 million next year. Appreciate the good job. And I do want to remind everybody, and I know

we have a couple attorneys in city council. We have four. We have two in here today. I just want to let everybody know, and this leads to one of my questions is, a certificate of innocence, and you

don't have to answer it, Jessica, because I'm not going to put you on the spot. A certificate of innocence does not mean these people are innocent, okay? So my question to you is, I know the state's

attorney doesn't want to retry these cases is the usual deal, correct? I couldn't speak to the current state's attorney's- No. Yeah. I mean the state's attorney, period. I'm sorry, in general. I

didn't mean the current. But most of these cases were under the previous state's attorney that didn't want to retry them, correct? Correct. Okay. All right. That's it. I just wanted to say great job.

We appreciate you. Hard pill to swallow for us and the taxpayers, but hopefully, like I say, by 2030, we're all done with this. But thank you very much. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Alderman

Sposato. Alderman Vasquez. Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate the work being done. I think although it's a large amount, it saves us $500 million. I appreciate that rather than borrowing to try to

cover it, we're paying for it in a way that doesn't increase the amount that we'd be paying for it. My question is, based on kind of the activity that Guevara, Watts, and others had done, have we

gotten better at catching that kind of stuff as it occurs now? Do you know what systems might have been put in place to kind of prevent that? Because we're taking on a lot. It's our responsibility to

do so. Just wanted to make sure that future councils and generations don't have to. She generally answered that question when Alderman Taylor raised the same question. Mm. So I will ask her to

summarize that- Sure, I appreciate that ... and then during budget when the police department is before us, take that opportunity to explore the answers, because I don't think that the attorney can

respond. In that case, she doesn't even need to summarize. I appreciate that it was answered. Whether people bring up certificates of innocence or anything else, I think we should remind each other as

to why we're here in the first place. Because an individual who shouldn't have been an officer, a corrupt criminal, then got on the police force with the use of that badge and that responsibility,

basically broke the law and led to this. This isn't about a certificate of innocence. It's not about a state's attorney. It's about individuals who shouldn't have been cops to begin with, that are

making this problem for us. So I just don't appreciate how people want to point the finger at everybody else as if that's the root cause to why this happened. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thank

you very much. I just wanted to say, Jessica, I appreciate your work on this. These legacy cases that we have, we're trying to get out of the pipeline, to make amends for people who have been harmed.

It is a great deal of money for the city of Chicago, and for taxpayers to bear, but when you're wrong, you're wrong. And, that's just the bottom line. And so with that, is there a motion to approve

items number 1A through P? So moved by Alderman Irvin, recommending do pass. All those in favor signify by saying "aye." Aye. Opposed? In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and the do pass

recommendation will report it out at the next city council meeting. Jessica, thank you so much. Thank you. We'll now move on to item number two, which is from the Department of Planning, an ordinance

authorizing the execution of an intergovernmental agreement with the Chicago Board of Education to provide TIF funds for improvements at Harriet Beecher Stowe Elementary School, located at 3444 West

Waubonsie Avenue in the 26th Ward. We're joined by Jamel Chambers, the Executive Director of IGA for the Chicago Public Schools. Mr. Chambers. Got your pink suit on today, huh? Yeah, I do. Good

morning, Chairwoman Dowell, members of the Finance Committee. For the record, my name is Jamel Chambers, Service Executive Director of Government Affairs for Chicago Public Schools. Also joined by

Vinuet Dye, our Executive Director of Capital Planning and Construction for CPS, as well as Jeff Cohen, the Managing Deputy Commissioner of DBD. I'm here today to request your approval of the

intergovernmental agreement that will provide up to $1,150,000 in TIF assistance to replace existing pavement and with an artificial turf field at Stowe Elementary School. Here's an aerial showing the

school. Stowe is a neighborhood elementary school serving 553 students from grades pre-K through eighth grade. These pictures show the existing pavement, which will be replaced with the proposed

artificial turf field. Slide. If approved, the intergovernmental agreement would authorize up to $1,150,000 in TIF assistance, with the remaining $250,000 coming from CPS. This project is expected to

be completed by the winter 2027. If approved, TIF funding would be used to finance the project costs, and the majority of which are hard costs associated with material and labor. TIF funding would

allow CPS to replace the current pavement with an artificial turf field that incorporates drainage infrastructure and stormwater detention. The new artificial turf field would provide a safer and more

functional play surface that reduces injuries and creates more engaging outdoor space for students. I thank you for your consideration. Happy to address any questions the committee may have. Thank

you, Mr. Chambers. We do have a question from a member of the committee, Alderman Beale. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Good morning. Still morning. Quick question. How much money is CPS putting in on

this project? 250,000. 250,000? Yes, sir. And how much in TIF? 1,150,000. Okay, how come you guys are not doing half? Usually, we try to do a 50/50 split. Usually we do try to do a 50/50 split, but I

think that this particular project was requested, and the additional funding that was needed to make the project full is what CPS is putting in in this case. Okay. Well, seeing it- Excuse me, Alderman

Beale, would you please identify yourself for the record? I don't think our court reporter heard you. For the record, my name is Vinuet Dye. I'm the Executive Director for Capital Planning and

Construction. Okay. Thank you. So, can you repeat your first name, please? Vinuet. Okay. Thank you. That wasn't me, that was... Okay, let me ask you. So, I have several requests that have been put in

and it seems like all these CPS projects are going to the same wards, and it seems like either you're a progressive or you don't get. So can you tell me where my project is? Because I put in a TIF

request as well. So- Yeah. Sorry, Jeff Cohen, Managing Deputy. You said that you put in a request for TRR for a specific project? Yes, I did. I can check on the status of that and respond to the chair

of the status. So you don't know where the project is right now? At the moment, it's in the process. But you don't know where it is in the process? No, not exactly off the top of my head. Will it be

done before the election? I do not know the answer to that. I would have to confirm with all of our colleagues as part of that. Okay. Well, let me just encourage you to get my project done, because

I'm really tired of voting on the same wards getting projects, at the request of people who have other projects in the pipeline as well. There needs to be the same consideration for other people's

projects, and not going towards the same wards over, and over, and over, and over again. So I'm requesting that my project gets done before the end of the year. I want that project to come before this

body for approval. Thank you. Thank you, Alderman Beale. Alderman Viegas. Thank you, Madam Chair. Jeff had mentioned TRR. Could you explain what TRR was? Mr. Cohen? Yes, sir. Jeff Cohen, Managing

Deputy. The TIF Request Review Process, also known as TRR, "terrr" in some cases, is the formal process that we've initiated as a replacement for what was the legacy TIF Investment Committee. And why

was the TIF Investment Committee replaced? So the TIF Investment Committee was replaced in about, I think it was either May or June of 2024, after there was a court case that the city had tried to win

where the TIC, or TIF Investment Committee program, was deemed to be in violation of the Open Meetings Act. So does the TRR meet open? Yes, it does. It's been designed specifically to comply. When do

those meetings occur, and where's that advertised? And how does one get invited to that? Especially when they have pending requests, as my colleague from the ninth Ward stated. Well, the TRR process

is initiated in certain cases by departments or Aldermanic requests, and it consists of three different steps. The first being an eligibility review, a second being- Eligibility in accordance with the

TIF statute? In terms of the TIF Act, yes. So- I think his question was: where do you advertise it, and is this an open meeting? It is not an open meeting, and it occurs every month. But didn't the

TIC get disbanded because it was violating the Open Meetings Act? Yes. And so why would the TRR not follow the same suit? Because the- Well, the TRR process is built differently. So the TIC process

was a singular meeting where it had several different decision-makers at the city that deal with TIF investments, and that was determined to be the major issue with the TIC process. So we've designed

it so that there are separate reviews that each get critically evaluated as part of the three different steps. So this is a major issue as well, because the reality is that you have a TRR, an

unelected body, that is making decisions based on what your standing is with this administration. Despite the need that's being requested by the local council members, and the fact that there's a

balance that's in there that meets the state statute, at the end of the day, it's bureaucrats that are determining what's best for the community versus the elected official. And it's being done in

secret because it's not an Open Meetings Act, and all you did was change some verbiage legally in order to hide the transparent process that would not violate the Open Meetings Act. Come on, stop

playing games here with this. This is crazy. When Aldermen are asking for TIF dollars to be expended in their wards, and we're asking other departments to help fill the gap, it's because there's a

need there. It shouldn't matter what the hell your voting record is here with this administration. Come on. I think that there's also an analysis that's done based on other resources. So TIF might not

be the best instrument to help facilitate certain investments. However, that part is getting determined through the TRR process so that we have the ability to leverage all financial resources that the

city has at its disposal. Well, look, again, I agree with my colleague from the Ninth Ward. I want to support my colleague's projects. I really do. But at the same time, all of us are putting requests

in and we're hustling to try to figure out how to match, get matching funds and try to build stacks, capital stacks, in order to fund these things. And then it falls into the TRR, which is an

unelected body that ultimately makes the decision as to whether or not my ward should deserve, was deserving of any TIF dollars, despite the fact that we're following the state statute. So once it

goes through the TRR process, we do come to this body for everybody to vote on it publicly. Yeah, but the TRR process has already determined, you guys have already determined whether or not we deserve

it. You determined that we deserve the investment. It's not about deserving or, it's about resource allocation and strategy, about how we allocate those resources and not whether or not- Madam Chair,

I'd like to have the TRR come and present to this body to find out what the hell's going on here. This is crazy. Send me a resolution. Thank you. I will. Alderman Lopez. Good morning, Chairman and

members of the committee. I can't help but smile because I swear we've had this conversation numerous times in this committee about this very thing. First off, I'm going to ask something about CPS.

Are you guys paying your parking tickets yet? Yes. We actually had a meeting last week with sister agencies as well as the mayor's office, and we laid out the process that we have in place to hold our

employees accountable. And I think our process is actually working. What we saw is that between the last cycle and the current cycle, our employee debt is down. So there's a new MOU between CPS and

City of Chicago with regards to collecting on debt? There is an MOU. I'm sorry? No, so there is an MOU. We have a process at CPS where we require our current employees to either enroll in a payment

plan or settle their debt in full. Can you share that through the chair and what the participation rate has been? Yes, sir. Since you've enacted that? Yes, sir. As well as how do you deal with

potential employees that are non-compliant? So employees who do not comply, we have a board rule as well, that employees have to settle any debt that's owed to the city. I haven't seen, well, I'm not

aware of what that disciplinary action is. I think it's up to our talent team, which is otherwise our HR team. But I can follow up with them to get a better understanding of what that discipline

action could be. Okay. Thank you. Chairman, I want to just touch back with regards to the TRR, if I may, because I believe that I had previously requested from DPD through this committee for them to

share exactly what that makeup was, what the metrics for their resource allocation and strategy were, and what outstanding projects and priorities they had throughout all of our wards. Was that ever

given to your committee? I don't recall your request on that, but I do hear your request now. We have cataloged it, and will share it with DPD and get that back to you through the chair. I will renew

that request because I believe it was several months ago that it was made, and I think like many things, we may have just gotten lost with everything that comes in, all of us. So I will renew that

request now. On the city's website, there's no reference to this TRR. Can the department say where it is? Jeff Cohen, managing deputy DPD. It's an internal SharePoint site that DPD administers in

conjunction with other departments, such as OBM as well as the mayor's office. So this is an internal process. So there's no dashboard for showing where any of the decisions or projects are made? All

decisions are posted as part of the open data portal. And where is that? If you go to, I don't know the exact URL, but Chicago Open Data Portal, and if you enter into the search TIF request review,

you can see all approvals since the TRR process has been established. So on the city's main page. Hold on. On the city's main page under Planning and Development, Tax Increment Financing, where it

says about citywide TIF maps and project locations, proposals for TIF investment, TIC district reports, 10 year projections, funding sources, TIF district extensions, blah, blah, blah, all that other

mumbo jumbo. The one thing that's not part of that conversation online in a very easily accessible way is where you make decisions? Okay. There isn't actually an answer on the TIF- So I have one last

question, if I may, with regards. Let's go. When it comes to TIF allocations, does the statute state that we have to use TIC, TRR, or any other kind of bureaucratic tool first? Or can city council, by

ordinance, introduce an ordinance stating that TIF from fund X can be used for project Y directly through this body? I don't know the answer to that. We will ask that question to the law department.

Because I believe, Chairman, that we have that authority as aldermen, that the state gives city council, not bureaucrats, the authority to make these decisions. And as such, then I think it's

incumbent on all of us to start taking our TIF by the reins and directing them to our neighborhoods if we don't have a willing participant and friend in the fifth floor. Thank you, Chairman. Thank

you, Alderman Lopez. Alderman Waguespack. Oh, Chairman, thank you. I was just going back to what Alderman Lopez was asking for. Were you asking for a ward by ward breakdown of the decisions? Yes, I

was. On the TRR? Okay. I didn't recall it, but I think that's what he had asked for before. That's all I had, Chairwoman. Thank you. Alderman Quinn. Madam Chair. Jamal, how many TIF projects are sort

of in the queue that will be before the committee? And to how much total? Yeah, we can get back to you on that. You don't have that? But we submit projects on a rolling basis, so we review a list of

critical needs at schools across the district and determine whether or not they fall under TIF. Okay. About how many projects are on the list? That are scheduled to come before the board- Sure. Yeah

... this committee soon? Mm-hmm. I would say at least 10. 10? In roughly- The answer was 10. So, 10 CPS projects will be before the committee? Approximately, yes. Next five, six months? Yes. Do you

know roughly about how much? No, I can't give you a number. She said that she did not know. We can get that information through the chair. Okay. So, you're looking for the amount, the exact projects,

and what wards they're in? Yeah, that would be helpful. Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, Alderman Viegas. Could you also send to the chair what your capital budget's going to be for this year? Yes. Yes, I

can. All right. Yeah. Outside of any other, just strictly what CPS's capital budget- Where we're putting our funds towards. That's correct. Got you. Is there a motion to recommend approval of item

number two? So moved by Alderman Burnett. Was that you? Recommending do pass, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? Any opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and the do pass

recommendation will be reported out at the next city council meeting. Item number three is also from the Department of Planning and Development. It's an ordinance authorizing the execution of an

intergovernmental agreement with the Chicago Board of Education to provide TIF funds for improvements at Sutter Montessori Magnet Elementary School, located at 2022 West Washington Boulevard in the

27th Ward. We're joined by Jamel Chambers from CPS, who will give this presentation. Mr. Chambers? Thank you. Good morning again, Chair Meadow and members of the Finance Committee. For the record, my

name is Jamel Chambers, Executive Director of Government Affairs for Chicago Public Schools. Joined by Vinnie Dye, our Executive Director of Capital Planning and Construction for CPS, as well as Jeff

Cohen, Managing Deputy Commissioner in DBD. I'm here today to request your approval of intergovernmental agreement that will provide up to $1 million in TIF assistance to provide improvements at

Sutter Elementary School. Here is a map showing the general location of the project within the city. The project is located at 2022 West Washington Boulevard, in the West Side community area, in 27th

Ward. It is located in the central west TIF district. The school is bounded by Washington Boulevard to the south, Damen Avenue to the east, Maple Avenue to the north, and Home Avenue to the west.

Here's an aerial showing the school with the playground outlined. Sutter Elementary serves 476 students from grades pre-K through eighth grade. These pictures show the existing conditions of the

playground, which, as you can see, is outdated and damaged. The project will provide a playground replacement and associated exterior upgrades. The total project will cost $1 million, with the

completion of the project scheduled for fall 2027. If approved, the intergovernmental agreement will authorize up to $1 million in TIF assistance, which will finance the entirety of the project. TIF

funding will allow CPS to replace the existing playground, outdated and damaged equipment. The new surface will reduce injuries, and modern play equipment will create a more engaging outdoor space for

students. I thank you for your consideration and happy to address any questions that this committee may have. Thank you, Mr. Chambers. We do have a letter of support from Alderman Burnett, Conway, and

Irvin. Alderman Beale. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Hi, good afternoon. So this is 100% TIF? Yes, sir. Okay. Is there a reason why you guys are not putting any money in this one? This project... I'm

sorry. Do I need to say my name? Yeah. Again, my name is Vinyette Dye, or Vinnie, Executive Director for Capital Planning at Chicago Public Schools. This project was not a part of our current capital

plan because it was not on our radar for replacement yet. And this project was brought forward by the school and the alderman to have it replaced. And as we have actually started looking into the

design of this project, as we told the chair when we briefed her, that this project is going to be more than $1 million, and CPS will be putting in the balance of those funds. Okay. So you say this

was not on you all's radar. So how did it get on your radar, and when did it get on your radar? It was brought to us. Yeah. I would say we had some conversations over the summer with the school

community, principal, and the alderman. Over the summer, huh? Yes, sir. That's pretty quick, huh? I would say. Huh. Well, I'm just wondering, how come mine is not moving this quick? Alderman Burnett.

Yeah. So we started this conversation right when I got in. The parents of Sutter have been calling not only me, but other aldermen, including- Can you speak up? I'm sorry. Can you hear me now? Yes.

The parents of Sutter, even before I got in, in September of last year, have been calling other aldermen in their wards where they lived to get this repaired. There have been a few incidents that have

been going on. We took a while to get to CPS to actually have that conversation. But the parents took it upon themselves to do a lot of the work and request it upon us, and we made the request upon

CPS. Okay. Again, that doesn't have anything to do with the fact that they just said that this was not on their radar, and all of a sudden, it's on the radar. And so, I guess that goes back to what my

colleagues have been saying about certain projects moving at rapid speed and other ones are at a turtle's pace. We have to make sure we continue to move forward with projects first in, first out. And

so there is definitely a imbalance of projects being funneled through this committee, and it's the same wards, same numbers, same people. And other people who are fighting to get resources are not

getting them. We have to correct it. And that's not directed at you guys. I just want to make this crystal clear. This is not directed at you guys. But I will tell you, the sheets have been pulled

back, and we see exactly what's going on. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Thank you, Alderman Beale. Alderman Burnett, I know you want to close, but we do have a question from Alderman Rodriguez. Alderman

Rodriguez? Thank you, Madam Chair, and forgive me for chiming in here at the last minute. Sorry, Alderman. But I just want to congratulate you. I am the former parent of Sutter children, and I want to

echo what Alderman Burnett said around the need there for this playground. I believe it was in Alderman Burnett's first or second week on the job where I called and communicated the concern of Sutter

parents to Alderman Burnett. And I want to say, you got on the job right away and started working on this. So I want to say I'm proud of your work on this. Much, much needed. My children have not been

there for a couple of years now. But they were there for a good eight years. It's an amazing school, amazing school community, and this is long overdue, and I appreciate you for delivering on it, and

count on my full support on this earmark. Thank you. Thank you, Alderman Rodriguez. Alderman Burnett? Thank you, Madam Chair. Yeah, the park is really in bad shape. We had a few calls at the beginning

of the school year last year where folks were getting injured, so this was on our radar right away. And so thank you to the parents who have been advocating for this, but also looking to do the work

in designing something that makes sense for the students and the rest of the community. And so I appreciate CPS moving quickly on trying to get this allocated. I know this will be more expensive than

this initial $1 million, so I appreciate the verbal commitment here to covering the rest of those costs. So thank you, and I ask my colleagues to support it, please. Thank you, Alderman Burnett.

Before I take a motion, Mr. Chambers wants to respond to Alderman Viegas's question. Yes. You have a question. So our capital budget for FY27 is roughly $590 million. Alderman Sposato moves due pass.

Oh, you have another? Alderman Beal. Thank you, Madam Chair. I just have a question for Jeff. Jeff, can you explain what the TRR process is, and in terms of what each party's role is as it relates to

the TRR? Sure. Jeff Cullen, managing deputy, DPD. So the TRR process consists of three parts. The first is DPD's eligibility review to see if the request complies with the TIF Act. The second is a

financial resources review and TIF district balances by OBM, and the final is a strategic analysis of resources by the mayor's office. Okay. So the final in this process is the mayor's office? Yes,

sir. So again, that goes back to what my colleague, Alderman Villegas, stated that if it doesn't get past the mayor's office, it doesn't come to this body. Is that what I'm hearing? Yes, it would,

given that they are the final determination. And in your estimation, do you actually think that's fair? Do you actually think that that's fair, that the mayor's office has the final determination on

what project can move forward as it relates to TIF projects with CPS? To me, I think it's a diligent process that bases on the facts of the project itself, and those decisions are made- I didn't ask

if it was diligent. I said, do you actually think it's fair that the mayor's office is determining which projects move forward? To City Council? For your approval, yes. You think that's fair? I think

it's a good system to make sure that we're allocating the right resources for projects. Hmm. Wrong answer, buddy. Thank you. Thank you, Alderman Beal. Mr. Blakemore, please. Alderman Villegas. Madam

Chair, thank you. Could Jeff explain- Is this a- Quick information, yeah, because the TRR is an entity that's made of departments. From my understanding is there's a ranking of projects based on the

state statute. And so my question is to Mr. Cullen is once the final review has been conducted, and making sure that the state statute is in compliance, what other points or criteria does the mayor's

office put in there that supersedes the state statute? I'm just curious as to why does the mayor's office, despite the fact that the state statute is in compliance, what does that office add to the

final decision that supersedes the members of the CTRR based on their subject matter? Mr. Cullen. If I understand the question, I don't think that there's anything that is superseding anything. It's

just a different type of angle to take a look at these projects that the other two pieces do not look at in detail. So basically, despite the subject matter experts, all the departments that make up

the TRR to make sure that compliance and state statute's there, and ensuring that the capital stack is being done, then the mayor's office weighs in with no expertise just to determine whether or not

the project's worthy of moving forward? That's basically what you're saying is to see if we've been a good alderman or bad alderman. Thank you. Alderman Lee. Thank you, Madam Chair. CPS, I'm sorry

you're getting caught up in this. I would like to make a request through the chair for a comprehensive list of anything that is sitting in the TRR queue currently. I have at least one or two items

that have been sitting in the queue, approved by two of the three parties, but not the one, to release so that we can move forward. I would love a list by ward of projects that are sitting in the

queue awaiting approvals, so where they are in the queue. My understanding is that the review, as you said, Jeff, is done in three parts, DPD, OPM, and then the mayor's office. I think it would be

great for the council to be able to see this. We'll pursue it further during budget, so I'll move off the subject, but I did want to get that on the record here. Thank you. Thank you, Alderman Lee.

Alderman Wagstaffe. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Could you just add to that a breakdown of all decisions by the mayor's office and that final step, all that were approved or denied by the mayor's

office? Thank you. Alderman Beal, did you- I would like to add to that request that we go back to 2023 and all projects that have been approved and moved forward through TRR, and just everything

that's in and out, broke down by ward. Alderman Wagstaffe, is that okay with you? Alderman Villegas, you want a book, a treaty, huh? I'm not happy with this process, but because TIC was disbanded for

violating the Open Meetings Act in 2024, I think it would be inclusive. I think we should include 2023 and 2024, the TIC projects as well, since TRR was implemented in '24, after the city lost a

lawsuit for not being transparent in the TIC process. Mr. Chambers, are you walking away with everything that's been asked? Oh, I'm sorry. You're fine. Mr. Chambers is good, okay. Mr. Stern, Mr.

Cullen, excuse me, you got all that? Yes, I think I got all that. All right. Renee will also get that to you. Can I please get a motion to approve this item for Alderman Burnett recommending item

number, due pass of item number three. So moved by Alderman Vasquez, recommending due pass. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed? In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and the

due pass recommendation of this ordinance will be reported out at the next city council meeting. Alderman Burnett, congratulations. I know how a ugly playground, how that impacts the psyche of young

children and when they go to school every day. So congratulations. Item number four from the Department of Planning and Development is a substitute ordinance approving the execution of the 66th

Amendment with Summerkor 504 Inc. to increase the amount of grant funds available in various redevelopment projects areas to amend the Small Business Improvement Fund, the SBIF program, and to

authorize Summerkor 504 Inc. to continue providing administrative services for the program. This substitute ordinance affects wards one, two, three, four, six, seven, eight, nine, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15,

16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 39, 40, 46, 47, 48, and 49 wards. We have letters of support from all of the wards. Alderman Mitchell and Alderman Quinn

did not provide support letters but are not opposed. So we're joined by Mary O'Connor and Gabriel Miranda from the Department of Planning and Development Good afternoon, Chairwoman Dowell and members

of the Finance Committee. My name is Mary O'Connor, Deputy Commissioner of the Small Business Development Bureau at the Department of Planning and Development. We are here today seeking your approval

of the 66th amending ordinance to the administrative service agreement with Summerkorps 504 Inc. to authorize additional funding for the Small Business Improvement Fund, or SPIF. This ordinance serves

two purposes, to request $43.35 million in new funding across 35 TIF districts and 39 wards for the SPIF program, and to update certain SPIF program rules. As you are aware, SPIF utilizes TIF revenue

to provide reimbursement grants to eligible commercial and industrial businesses and property owners within participating TIF districts to facilitate permanent improvements to their properties. The

program is not competitive. As long as an applicant and project meet the program requirements, they are eligible for funding. I also want to clarify that if you do not see a particular TIF district

included in this funding request, it does not mean the district was overlooked. In some cases, there are sufficient SPIF fund funding remaining to meet current needs, or there was not available

funding at the time the request was made. For the TIF districts included in this request, the additional funding will address existing wait lists and help us reduce the likelihood of wait lists in the

future. The rule changes will also allow DPD to be more responsive to businesses' needs and manage the program more efficiently. 92% of SPIF recipients are existing businesses that are renovating,

expanding, or adding a new location. SPIF projects often focus on building systems such as roof replacements, HVAC systems, restroom renovation, and electrical upgrades. We are especially proud to

help longtime business owners make long-term investments in their properties and communities. We respectfully request your approval. I will now turn it over to Gabadel Miranda, who will go over the

ordinance in more detail. Thank you, Mary. Good morning, Chairwoman Dowell and members of the committee. My name is Gabadel Miranda, Coordinator of Economic Development in the Small Business

Development Bureau of the Department of Planning and Development. As Deputy Commissioner O'Connor said, the first purpose of this ordinance is to provide new funds to address waiting lists and provide

enough available funds to address applications immediately and avoid waiting lists in the future as well. The second purpose is to update certain SPIF program rules as it pertains to funding. The

ordinance removes the required grant reduction for SPIF recipients that receive other city assistance within three years of SPIF. This rule change allows for SPIF to be used with complementary grants.

Another program rule update, this ordinance will also reduce time limits in stage two, three, and four to expedite project timelines, which keeps projects moving swiftly and ultimately results in

helping more businesses. This ordinance also creates a streamlined process for DPD to transfer eligible applications from other small grant programs directly into SPIF. Other updates to the program

rules pertain to general process improvements, making our rules clearer in respect to eligible applicants, technical assistance, as well as our program administrator contract with Summerkorps, and

also updates our compliance requirements. These rule changes will help improve our processes to better serve our applicants. As you are aware, the SPIF program utilizes TIF revenues to offer

reimbursement grants to businesses as well as property owners in specific TIFs to facilitate permanent improvements to their properties with grants of up to $150,000 for commercial businesses and up

to $250,000 for industrial businesses. This program is non-competitive. As long as applicants and projects are eligible and they meet program requirements, they can receive SPIF funding. We open

applications for five SPIFs every month and roll out 55 TIFs on an annual basis. From May 2023 to September 2026, on average, we have received 50 applications worth at $3.2 million in grant requests

per month. In this timeframe, our average grant has been $109,000. We're happy to say that we help businesses stay in business, with 92% of our grants having gone to existing businesses and 84% of our

grants since 2023 having gone to commercial businesses, while the other 16% has been industrial businesses. The average completion time from application to reimbursement is two years. When an

application is put on a waiting list, it adds an additional two years, making for a four-year total project timeline, which is why we're eager to fully fund all of our SPIF districts to avoid waiting

lists such as those as much as possible. Since May 2023, we have completed 436 SPIF projects and disbursed $47.6 million in grant funding. Currently, 453 applications are active, totaling in $58

million in grant funding. The ordinance before you would authorize $2.75 million to establish the SPIF program in three TIFs for the first time, those being Cortland and Chicago, Lake Calumet, and

North Pullman. All of these are industrial TIFs. And as a refresher, industrial businesses are eligible for grants of up to $250,000. The ordinance would also authorize an additional $40.6 million to

replenish the SPIF program in 32 TIFs across the city. The total authorization covers 39 awards. DPD has reached out to all 39 alderpeople affected by this funding request. The remaining funding

request would address wait lists, provide enough funding to avoid future waiting lists, and ensure equitable distribution of funding in TIFs across the city. If City Council passes this ordinance, DPD

will budget the funding in late 2026 and begin to address the waiting list immediately, and we will roll out the new funds throughout quarter one and quarter two of 2027. We look forward to continuing

to work with you to support Chicago businesses and all of our neighborhoods. We respectfully request your approval to this ordinance. Thank you for your time and consideration. Thank you very much,

Ms. Miranda. I neglected to say that there's a substitute ordinance which was prepared and sent electronically to everyone. And Alderman Viegas makes a motion to accept the substitute ordinance. All

those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and the substitute ordinance is what we're considering and was explained by Ms. Miranda. We do have a

question from Alderman Lopez. Thank you, Chairman. Again, good afternoon, members of the committee. Good afternoon, ladies. Can you please tell me what the administrative cost of Summerkorps 504

Incorporated is for the administering of this program? They have a compensation of 10% of the funding that is allocated, but they receive 1% at the beginning of the rollouts for the amount of

administrative work that they put into the technical assistance, and the remaining of the funding or their compensation is based on milestones with the program. So- Yes. Excuse me. Sorry. I just want

to restate that. This is Nora Curry. I'm program manager for the SPIF. It's actually 1% for the rollout and 9%, 8%, I'm sorry, for commission. Apologies. I think you said 10% total. It's 9% total. My

apologies. So, 1% upfront before we roll out and at the time of project completion. So as each individual project is completed, once that project closes, they get 8% of that. So roughly speaking,

$400,000 to start, and then up to just under the remaining $4 million as part of that 10%? Yeah, we could do that 9%, but this is over the course of two to three years. Well, for the execution of this

program. Yes. Yes. If you could provide that scale through the chair, I'd appreciate it. And I want to touch on something, if I may, Chairman, which is when this was originally introduced in city

council a few months ago, this was sent to Rules, in part because of the fact that many of us, particularly in the greater Englewood community, felt that while it's great to support this program of

SPIF, which is Small Business Improvement Fund, the NIP program, which we used to do, the Neighborhood Improvement Program, is something that this administration has completely forgotten about. TIF-

NIP is a grant, for all of you who are unfamiliar, which is basically the exact same version of this, but for homeowners, for seniors, for all of our residents who are struggling, who also happen to

live in a TIF district. I think under the Emanuel administration was the last time that we saw- Right. We lost it under Lightfoot. We went away. We lost a lot under Lightfoot. We won't bring that up.

But we used to do half a million dollars almost every year for every TIF where that was possible. I'm not going to oppose this today because I believe that Commissioner Castaneda and Commissioner

Boatwright and ourselves are meeting after this meeting to discuss the resurrection of this, and I would welcome anyone who wants to be a part of that conversation to join us. But I think even as we

look at the amounts that we're talking about, I think it was $43,350,000 for businesses. If we match that with $25,000 grants to our homeowners, we could help almost 1,700 people around the city of

Chicago. So while we're doing this today, let's not forget about our residents who could also benefit from these programs, because it's great to do good things with TIF, as we just had a very robust

discussion on, but our homeowners need help too, and we should get back to doing that part of our business as well. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, Alderman. I understand that you have a meeting

scheduled, and you should reach out to-- I would love to be a part of that. I'm sure others-- because we have had that program. It has worked. It is a good program. But it hasn't been in existence for

probably over a decade now. And I will-- I'm sorry. If I may, I will say that we are meeting today at 1:30 on the third floor for whomever would care to join us. Thank you. Alderman Curtis, followed

by Alderman Moore. Thank you, Chairman. Similar to Alderman Ray Lopez's question, we first created the bond, and the TIFs were swept away from a lot of the communities so we could use that money on

projects that didn't have a TIF in their areas, which was kind of good idea. But can we do something like this for the SPIF program also? I guess that question is for Mary. Where businesses that's not

in the TIF district could also utilize SPIF grants, and they may not have ever been in a TIF. What we have available for-- So SPIF is in 72 TIF areas, and if our funding request is approved on

Wednesday, it'll be in 76 areas around the city. And for businesses that are located outside of a TIF, they are eligible for bond funding. And when we review our projects that submit applications in

bond, we look to make sure that if there's an opportunity that we recommend them moving over to TIF because there's TIF funding. That's what we do to allow sufficient funding for businesses outside

TIF districts. Right. Thank you. Chairman. Deputy Commissioner, you're saying that if a business is outside of the TIF, they can participate in the SPIF program? They would apply for our community

development grant. Okay. All right. Alderman Moore. Thank you. Chairman, just wanted to go on record, as we've been having these conversations. I think this came up in last budget season, so hopefully

this meeting today will get to that because, in terms of the TIF, NIF, and we'll get there because as you know, even with the Roof and Porch program, which has been put on the back burner because of,

I don't know if it's funding or for whatever reason. One of the challenges that we're dealing with is keeping especially our seniors in their home. And so I think with this, the Neighborhood

Investment Fund, with the NIF, that'll be helpful. And of course, all of us are going to support our business because this program has been working great for our businesses. But we have to find those

other sources of dollars to take care of our homeowners, and we're going to continue to push for that, and I hope this meeting today goes to that. And I think our commissioner, she's probably open to

that as well. But I want to appreciate and just say thank you for the work. And your team too. I know we got budget hearings coming up and we give all these accolades, but you and your team really,

from a communication standpoint and the things what we do, just phenomenal, and I appreciate that. And we can show the work, and I always like to use the word point to things that we're doing, and you

all helping us get there is a big thing for our businesses, which are a part of the community. So thank you so much. Thank you, Alderman. Thank you, Alderman Moore. Motion made by Alderman Moore,

recommending due pass of item number four. All those in favor signify by saying "aye." Aye. Opposed? In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and the due pass recommendation will be reported out

at the next city council meeting. Thank you, Commissioner O'Connor and Ms. Miranda. Thank you. Item number five from the Department of Planning and Development is an ordinance authorizing the

execution of a redevelopment agreement with BTH Development, a not-for-profit, to provide housing and economic development bond funds for redevelopment of Altgeld Gardens Youth Center project at 13122

South Ellis Avenue in the 10th Ward. We have to present this today, Emily Kish from the Department of Planning and Development. Jeff Cohen, the Department of Planning and Development, and Joe Bula?

Kyle Brandon. I got that one wrong. Your name's not here. From the department. Can you just say your name again? Kyle Brandon from the Department of Planning and Development. Okay, great. Ms. Kish.

Good afternoon, Chair Dowell. Yes, Chair Dowell and members of the Finance Committee. For the record, my name is Emily Kish, financial planning analyst with the Department of Planning and

Development's Bureau of Economic Development. I am joined today by Jeff Cohen, Managing Deputy Commissioner of the Bureau of Economic Development, and Kyle Brandon, and members of the development

team. I'm here today to request your approval of a redevelopment agreement between the City of Chicago and BytheHand Club for Kids, authorizing the use of $7.3 million in housing and economic

development bond grant funding for the rehabilitation of the historic UpTop building for an approximately 35,000 square foot Altgeld Gardens Youth Center. The subject property is located at 13122

South Ellis Avenue within the Riverdale community area in the 10th Ward. I'd like to recognize Alderman Chico, who is supportive of the project. The site highlighted in red on this map is located in

the Altgeld Gardens Philip Murray Homes Historic District and comprises the historic UpTop building. It is bounded by East 131st Street to the north, by South Ellis Avenue to the east, and East 132nd

Street to the south and west. The property is adjacent to the Altgeld Family Resource Center, the Altgeld branch of the Chicago Public Library, and Carver Park. Shown here is an historic photo of the

Up Top building in 1945. The building was designed by George and William Keck as an energy-efficient commercial building. The building recently received landmark designation at the September 2026

meeting of city council. These are exterior and interior images of the existing building, which has significantly deteriorated over time and is in severe disrepair, including a partially collapsed

roof. Environmental reports have identified asbestos, lead, and arsenic in the building, which are typical of a building this age, and will be addressed during the rehabilitation work. The building

will be enrolled in the Illinois EPA Site Remediation program. BTH Development NFP will serve as the new market's tax credit entity or sponsor and signatory to the redevelopment agreement, along with

the BTH Development Support Corporation, which will serve as the property owner. By the Hand Club for Kids will serve as the sole tenant. By the Hand Club for Kids began in 2001 with 16 children from

Cabrini-Green and now provides holistic wraparound services for more than 2,000 kids from Cabrini-Green, Altgeld-Murray, Austin, North Austin, and Englewood. These services include transportation,

year-round after-school care, daily meals, tutoring, mentorship, eye and dental care, and mental health counseling at no cost to schools or families. Additional members of the development team include

the Altgeld Gardens Local Advisory Council and the Chicago Housing Authority, which are serving in a leadership capacity on the project. CNI, an approved community development entity, which will

provide the new markets tax credit allocation, Present Future Architects, which is providing design services, and Ujamaa Construction, which will serve as the general contractor. Since 2005, By the

Hand Club has operated out of a vacant school building in Altgeld Gardens at 13015 South Ellis Avenue, which currently serves 200 students annually. This building will be retained for middle and high

school programming, including a hydroponic container farming initiative, youth entrepreneurship, STEM, media and technology programming, nutrition education, and gardening. The Up Top redevelopment

will become the primary after-school facility, increasing the student population by approximately 200 students annually for a total of approximately 400 students served. It will increase the number of

students served in grades one through eight from 20 to 30 students per grade, add a dedicated kindergarten class of 30 students, create dedicated high school programming space for 60 additional

students, and add 30 students to its college and career group. The redevelopment of this property will also include the addition of a new gymnasium. The project will provide no less than 40 jobs,

equivalent to 20 full-time positions at 35 hours per week. If approved, the developer will receive a grant of $7.3 million in housing and economic development bond funds, comprising 28% of the total

project cost of $25.8 million. Upon execution of the RDA, By the Hand Club intends to begin work immediately and anticipates completing the project by September 2027. The total project cost is just

short of $26 million. Beyond the city's $7.3 million grant, By the Hand Club has committed $11.4 million in donations and secured approximately $7 million in new markets tax credits. Hard costs will

comprise most of the funding uses, with the bulk of costs going toward the building shell, site work and remediation, interiors, and services, including plumbing, electrical, and HVAC. Sorry. If

approved, the redevelopment agreement will allow the city to reimburse By the Hand Club for up to $7.3 million in eligible construction costs via three progress payments during construction and a

final payment upon issuance of the certificate of completion. The project will be subject to typical city construction compliance requirements, including prevailing wage, local hiring, 26% MBE, 6%

WBE, and best faith efforts of achieving 3% VBE. The city's investment will be protected by provisions in the RDA that require the project to occupy no less than 75% of the property and operate the

facility as a community asset for a compliance term of 10 years. If these conditions are not met, the city has the right to recapture previously disbursed HED bond funds. Here are renderings of the

proposed exterior, which show the rehabilitated historic structure and the new gymnasium. Here are renderings of the structure's proposed interior. A critical component of the interior build-out and

restoration is preservation of the building's existing memorial wall, which is shown in the inset in the lower right corner. Lastly, DPD supports the use of city funds to remediate, revitalize, and

reoccupy a recently landmarked building in the historic Altgeld Gardens community and preserve the memorial wall. Expand current elementary, middle, and high school programs, create a new kindergarten

program, and add a new gymnasium to increase the number of students served annually from 200 to 400, and to retain 15 existing positions and create 25 new positions, providing a total of 40 jobs

equivalent to 20 full-time positions at 35 hours per week. In closing, DPD requests the committee's favorable consideration of entering into a redevelopment agreement with By the Hand Club for Kids to

fund Altgeld Gardens Youth Center. I'm joined today by representatives from By the Hand Club for Kids, Present Future Architects, and CNI to answer any questions you have regarding the project. Thank

you, Ms. Kish. We'll open up with questions starting with Alderman Beale, followed by Alderman Lopez. Thank you, Madam Chairman, and good afternoon, everybody. I just want to congratulate my colleague

to my left, Alderman Chico, for getting this project over the finish line. It was really good to see Ms. Bernadette. That's what we call her. We call her Ms. Bernadette, who's the LSE chair over in

Altgeld. And also, my good friends over at By the Hand Club, who are phenomenal at giving back and raising money for projects like this, and I just think this is a great partnership to get a building

back in operation that's really the last piece of Altgeld that needs to be redeveloped. This core piece right here. And so I'm just ecstatic of the team that's been put together, and I'm ecstatic for

my colleague for getting this done. So thank you so much, and I guess I'll turn it over to Alderman Chico when he finishes up. All right. Alderman Lopez. Thank you, Chairman. Good afternoon, members

of the committee. Just two quick things. First off, I want to congratulate Alderman Chico and everyone that made this happen. Reading the proposal earlier, it looks phenomenal. But why are we saying

best faith efforts to achieving VBE? Jeff Cohen, managing deputy. So the recent ordinance that was passed related to redevelopment agreements is an aspirational goal. It's an equivalent kind of

statement. So we are putting into our redevelopment agreements the aspirational goal of 3% veteran business enterprise. So to be clear, MWBE is a requirement? Correct. And veterans hiring is an

aspirational goal? Yes. So is that something that needs to be clarified in the ordinance moving forward so that it's not just a aspiration but a requirement? If it were to be made a legally binding

requirement, then yes. And that's not what the previous, recently passed ordinance accomplished? It does not. Okay. And then, with regards to housing and economic development bond grants, we just had

a quite lengthy discussion about TIF, TIC, TRR, and all the other delightful acronyms. Do HED bonds go through the same kind of evaluation and decision-making process? I can take that again. Jeff

Cohen, managing deputy. There's a completely separate process through the community development grant process. So there's three programs, the small, medium, and large, and based on the need or gap

financing that a eligible grantee submits through that, that is evaluated through the Department of Planning and Development. But it's a housing bond? It's housing and economic development. So it's

split between- So is this the one that's 50/50-ish? Yes, sir. And Was that bond fully activated so that all of those funds are available for this grant process? Yes, I believe so. So it's about

getting the authorization letters and then future bond issuances. If you could provide through the chair the list of requests as well as the resource allocation and strategy for that governing body,

because we have subsequently learned that when it came to flooding recently, that there were grants being provided through the housing bond that did not make their way to all the city of Chicago. So

I'd like to see how we are making decisions based on the use of this dual function line of credit that's been activated, which totaled $1.1 billion, if I'm not mistaken. 1.5. 1.5. Yep. Thank you.

Thank you, Alderman Lopez, for bringing that up. I previously, before this meeting, made a request to the departments that I wanted a report of the HED spending, not just the allocation, but the

actual spending, since the project was announced by ward, by department. And I made this request last week, and I haven't received it. So Alderman Chico, while I support this project and I hope this

will be approved through this committee, I do plan to hold this item and the other two in the committee until I can get the report that I asked for. Alderman Chico. Thank you, Chair. And I thank the

comments from my colleagues. This is an exciting project for the Altgeld Gardens community and the greater Riverdale community. As you go through the main entrance at Altgeld, one of the first areas

and buildings you see is the UPTOP building. So as you drive in, when this is all done, you'll see one of the newer libraries in the city, and you'll see this beautiful community center in Altgeld.

And I think that speaks to where we are trending in the Altgeld Gardens community. We are trending upwards. With the Red Line extension ending on 130th and now this community center, this is where we

want to be. So I want to thank everybody, and look to my colleague for a favorable consideration as we continue to rebuild Altgeld. And appreciate LAC President, Ms. Bernadette Williams, for coming

and sharing her testimony about the opportunity that will be had by the Altgeld Gardens community when this is up. Thank you. Thank you, Alderman Chico. Is there a motion to recommend approval of item

number five? So moved by Alderman Cardona, recommending do pass. All those in favor signify by saying aye. All those opposed. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and the do pass

recommendation of this ordinance will be reported out at the next city council meeting, and I'm looking forward to getting my report. Thank you. Item number six, from the Department of Planning and

Development, is an ordinance authorizing the execution of a redevelopment agreement with North Lawndale Catalyst Initiative, NFP, to provide housing and economic development funds and tax increment

financing assistance for the Fillmore Linen Services project at 920 through 922 South Campbell Avenue in the 28th Ward in an amount not to exceed $5 million in bond funds and $5 million in TIF. We're

joined by Alexander Benson, Financial Planning Analyst from DPD, and Jeff Cohen, Deputy Commissioner, DPD. Mr. Benson? Thank you. Good morning, Chair-- or sorry, good afternoon, Chair Dowell and

members of the Finance Committee. For the record, my name is Alexander Benson, Financial Planning Analyst with the Department of Planning and Development's Bureau of Economic Development. I'm joined

by Jeff Cohen, Managing Deputy, and representatives from the development team. I am here today to request your approval for a redevelopment agreement between the city and North Lawndale Catalyst

Initiative, Inc., authorizing the use of up to $5 million of TIF funds from the Western Ogden TIF District, which will be paired with a $5 million housing and economic bond grant for a total financial

assistance award not to exceed $10 million for the rehabilitation of a 49,000 square foot vacant property to house the expansion of Fillmore Linen Services. The property is located at 920, 922 South

Campbell Ave, within the Near West Side community area, West Planning region, and in the 28th Ward, represented by Alder Jason Ervin, who is in support of the project. This property is also within the

Western Ogden TIF District, established in 1998 and set to expire in 2034. The site, highlighted in red, is located on the northwest corner at the intersection of Taylor Street and Campbell Ave, with

the primary entrance on South Campbell Ave and the building spanning Taylor Street west to the train tracks. The immediate area consists of a combination of industrial, institutional, and residential

uses. Shown here is the current exterior conditions of the building. The property consists of a single story, 49,000 square foot property that was built in 1969 and was previously occupied by Angelic

Linen, who vacated the property in 2023. The property has remained vacant since and was purchased by North Lawndale Catalyst Initiative in 2025 for the purposes of expanding the operations of Fillmore

Linen Services. Shown here are photos of the current interior conditions of the property, demonstrating the current deterioration, deteriorated conditions, and vacancy. The development of Fillmore

Linen Services Phase II is being led by North Lawndale Catalyst Initiative, Inc., which is a subsidiary of the Staines Family Foundation. The architect for this project is Fasma Group, and the general

contractor is a joint venture between W.B. Olson, who has 55% of the joint venture, and Breaking Ground Builders, who has 45% of the joint venture. C&I Group is acting as the owner's rep and is

assisting with the execution of new market tax credits. Fillmore Linen Services, which will occupy 100% of the facility, is an industrial laundry cleaning nonprofit organization with a focus in the

healthcare linen sector. The organization was established in 2023 and is supported by the Staines Family Foundation, who also spearheaded the rehabilitation of 4100 West Fillmore Street. The

rehabilitation of 4100 West Fillmore received a $10 million TIF grant and not only serves as Fillmore Linen's current base of operation, but also several other businesses that operate from the

location. At this location, Fillmore Linen Services has grown its employee headcount to nearly 200 people and has been awarded additional service contracts from healthcare providers in Chicago, most

recently Endeavor Health. To facilitate the fulfillment of these new contracts, Fillmore Linen Services is expanding to the subject property, located two and a half miles away from phase one, and will

result in the creation of an additional 250 total new jobs. The developer for this project, North Lawndale Catalyst Initiative, is a place-based economic development entity of the Staines Family

Foundation. They will renovate the property to accommodate the expansion of Fillmore Linen Services. The project will build upon the success of the current operations in upgraded utilities such as

electrical, plumbing, and HVAC to accommodate the new industrial cleaning machinery in order to reoccupy the vacant property. The total project cost is $47.8 million and will be supported by $10

million in city assistance, consisting of $5 million in TIF funds from the Western Ogden TIF, the subject of this action, and $5 million allocation of the Housing and Economic Development Bond. This

additional site is expected to hire 180 full-time positions on site and an additional 70 new jobs at healthcare facilities across the city. Construction will begin this October and be completed by the

end of February 2027. The total project cost is $47.8 million. In addition to the city's contribution of $10 million, $5 million of TIF, and $5 million of HED bond funds, the Staines Family Foundation

has committed $23.6 million in equity. An additional $13.1 million of new market tax credits has been secured, as well as $1 million of grant funds from DCEO. Hard costs for this project account for

66% of this development. Many of these costs will go towards physical building improvements and utility system upgrades to accommodate industrial cleaning machinery. Here is a rendering of the

proposed exterior once the project has been completed. Approval of this request will allow North Lawndale Catalyst Initiative, Inc. to be reimbursed for up to $10 million in eligible construction

costs, consisting of $5 million in TIF and $5 million in HED bonds. Reimbursement will come via one lump sum payment upon the issuance of a certificate of completion. The project will be subject to

standard city construction compliance, including prevailing wage, local hiring, MBE and WBE, as well as meet the newly established 3% VBE aspirational goal. Additional protections of the city's

investments within the RDA include requirements that the project will occupy and operate the site throughout the 10-year compliance period, with an exception for the recapture of the new market tax

credit. Beyond renovating the vacant property, Fillmore Linen Services will hire 170 to 180 full-time on-site positions with an additional 70 to 80 off-site positions for a grand total of 250

positions related to new operations. The majority of these roles will be hired by individuals from the surrounding Near West Side community area. 95% of these roles will be eligible for individuals

without a high school degree or GED equivalent. In addition, Staines Family Foundation intends to partner with other local nonprofit organizations such as Chicago CRED, St. Leonard's, and North

Lawndale Employment Network, to provide wraparound social services for their employees. These social services will include assistance with obtaining affordable housing, GED support, food,

transportation, healthcare, mental health services, and financial literacy courses. As a part of Fillmore Linen Services' hiring plans, they intend to prioritize hiring individuals who have experience

with the criminal justice system, providing a second chance for many. In additional, the employees at Fillmore Linen Services will receive 100% employer-paid health insurance and a profit-sharing plan

once profitable. In closing, DPD requests the committee's favorable consideration to enter into a redevelopment agreement with North Lawndale Catalyst Initiative, Inc. to fund the development of

Fillmore Linen Services Phase 2, located at 920 to 922 South Campbell Ave. I'm joined today by Leo Smith and Reginald Jones from the Staines Family Foundation, as well as David Doi and Jennifer

Branford from C&I to answer any questions you may have regarding the project. Thank you, Mr. Benson. Are there any questions from members of the committee? Alderman Moore. Correct me if I'm wrong,

and this sounds familiar. At the time, was the Wheel Group a part of this team? And if so, what happened? Jeff Cohen, managing deputy, DPD. I don't believe the Wheel Group was part of this new

extension. I say the new, I know you keep using the word new. And Monique, correct me if I'm wrong, I thought it was supposed to go over there at one point near your warehouse. Did you know anything

about that? Oh, you have one as well? That's what it is? Okay. That's the second one. Oh, okay. All right. Good memory. Any other questions? Seeing none, Alderman Irvin. Thank you, Madam Chair. Again,

just want to thank the Staines Family Foundation, for their visionary leadership on this. What they have done at the Fillmore 1, located in the 24th Ward, has brought some significant change to some

people's lives. And the fact that they were able to get this second contract with Endeavor that necessitates this additional facility, and the expansion of their work outside of just North Lawndale

but into the Garfield Park community, is definitely going to be helpful to the West Side in its entirety, as it relates to the jobs and the wraparound services that will be presented. So, glad that

they've had great success over on Fillmore and Pulaski. Hopefully that same success attributes to the Garfield Park residents as well and look for a favorable recommendation for the committee. Thank

you. Thank you, Alderman Irvin. Motion made by Alderman Scott recommending due pass. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Opposed? In the opinion of the chairs, the ayes have it, and the due

pass recommendation of this ordinance will be reported out at the next city council meeting. Thank you. Item number seven from the Department of Planning and Development is an ordinance authorizing

the execution of a redevelopment agreement with Hudson Michigan Avenue Owner, LLC, to provide housing and economic development funds for the Hudson House project at 2222 South Michigan Avenue in the

Third Ward, in an amount not to exceed $5 million in HED funding from a city loan, and an amount not to exceed $10 million HED from a city grant. This is being presented to us by Bill Grahams from the

Department of Planning and Development. Mr. Grahams. Okay. Thank you. Good afternoon, Chair Dowell and members of the Committee on Finance. For the record, my name is William Grahams, Financial

Planning Analyst with the Department of Planning and Development's Bureau of Economic Development. I'm joined today by Jeffrey Cohen, Managing Deputy Commissioner, and representatives from the

development team. I'm here today seeking your approval of a redevelopment agreement between the city and Hudson Michigan Avenue Owner, LLC, for the purpose of authorizing the use of up to $15 million

in housing and economic development bond funds to redevelop the historic Hudson Motor Company building into a mixed-use property with complementary retail uses. The subject property is 2222 South

Michigan Avenue, located within the Near South Side community area, the central planning area, and in the Third Ward represented by Chair Dowell, who is in support of the project. The project site

outlined in red is located on the west side of Michigan Avenue, just south of Cermak Road. The property is within walking distance of McCormick Place, Wintrust Arena, and the CTA's Cermak Green Line

station. Here you can see the current condition of the site. The exterior reflects decades of vacancy and deferred maintenance, warranting a full rehabilitation to preserve the historic facade.

Designed by Alfred Alschuler, a prominent Chicago School architect, and completed in 1923, the Spanish Revival style building was originally constructed as a showroom for the Hudson Motor Company. Its

terracotta facade is an integral part of the Motor Row Landmark District along Michigan Avenue from 14th to 25th Streets, which was designated as a Chicago Landmark District in the year 2000. Here you

can see the interior of the former first floor showroom While many historic features, including tiled floors and decorative columns, remain intact, the majority of the building has suffered extensive

deterioration. Significant investment is required to bring the structure back into a safe and functional condition. The project will renovate the 130,000 square foot former Hudson Motor Company

building into a 154-key boutique hotel with approximately 43,000 square feet of commercial retail space. The hotel will carry the Curio by Hilton flag and will feature a restaurant, event space,

fitness center, and rooftop pool and bar. The scope of the work for the $72.8 million project is significant and includes a total replacement of the existing building systems, a full interior

restoration and repositioning, roof and masonry replacement, as well as site work and foundation repairs. The developer is targeting a completion and opening in the second quarter of 2028. Hudson

Michigan Avenue Owner LLC is the single-purpose entity set up to facilitate the redevelopment of the property. This entity will be managed by Israel Idonije, founder of the Impact Fund, and legendary

Chicago Bears defensive end, and Tibor Kelemen, CEO of Kelemen Company, an established vertically integrated real estate investment and development firm. The Curio by Hilton Hotel will be managed by

First Hospitality, with amenities including a fitness center and work club to be operated by Fabric. The ground floor restaurant, event space, and rooftop bar and pool will be operated by Pangea

Restaurant Group and Fabio Vivani Hospitality. Importantly, the developer, having secured a hotel flag, has also executed a labor agreement with UNITE HERE regarding the hotel jobs. In addition to the

city's support, the project will be funded with a combination of $4.6 million of developer equity, $2 million in hotel key money provided by Hilton, a $41 million senior loan, and $10.2 million in

historic tax credits. The city's $15 million contribution is comprised of a $10 million grant and a $5 million repayable loan. On the usage side, approximately 82.5% of the expenditures are dedicated

to hard costs, reflecting the scope and intensity of the physical work required, with the remaining 17.5% covering soft costs. The city funds will be dispersed in tranches at 20%, 40%, 60%, and 90%

completion milestones. Upon receipt of the certificate of completion, the final payment will be issued, and interest on the city loan will begin accruing. The project must remain operational and at

least 75% occupied throughout the 10-year compliance period, and the development team is required to meet prevailing wage, MWBE, and city residency standards and has agreed to make best faith efforts

toward the city's new 3% VBE target. This exterior rendering shows the preservation of the historic terracotta facade, along with a thoughtfully designed rooftop deck featuring a pool and restaurant.

To maintain the building's historic character, rooftop elements will not be visible from the public way. Here is a sample rendering of a hotel room illustrating the project's interior design direction

and its balance of modern amenities with historic architecture character. DPD is highly supportive of the Hudson House project as it advances several important community priorities. Crucially, it

restores a long-vacant historic building, activates a key site within the Motor Road District, and supports nearby economic drivers such as McCormick Place and Wintrust Arena. The project is expected

to generate approximately 50 permanent full-time jobs and 195 temporary construction jobs, adding new retail, dining, and entertainment options that strengthen the corridor while expanding revenue and

the tax base. For these reasons, and to advance this long-awaited redevelopment, DPD requests your approval of this project. I'd like to thank the committee for your favorable consideration of this

request. I'm also joined today by Tibor Kelemen, Katie Junkie Dale, and Anne Moroni from the development team. We are happy to answer any questions you might have. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Grams, are

there any questions from members of the committee? Seeing one. Seeing none. I'd like to just thank Israel Idonije and Tibor Kelemen for their investment in the Third Ward. This will address a large

vacancy that we have on Michigan Avenue. I also want to acknowledge that the hotel, which is coming, has signed an agreement with UNITE HERE, and we look forward to bringing, I would say, Soho South

to Michigan Avenue. And with that, can I get a motion moved to pass by Alderman Martin? All those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it, and the do

pass recommendation will be reported out at the next city council meeting. Item number eight. Thank you, Mr. Grams. Thank you, Mr. Stern. Item number eight, miscellaneous, is one proposed order

authorizing the payment of various small claims against the City of Chicago, a direct introduction, and that list of payments was approved and sent electronically to everyone. If there are no

objections, these will be placed on the omnibus. Item number nine is a miscellaneous proposed order denying the payment of various small claims against the City of Chicago. Again, a direct

introduction, and that list of payments denied was sent electronically to everyone. If there are no objections, these will be placed on the omnibus. There being no further business before the

committee, can I get a motion to adjourn? So moved by Alderman Lopez to adjourn. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Opposed. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. The Committee on

Finance meeting is adjourned. Thank you