City Council - Regular Meeting

Please remember to log into your devices.

Thank you.

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 hazards, as determined by the sergeant at arms, is prohibited in the gallery. Such items include, but are not limited to, 1. Any pointed objects, including knives of any kind. 2. Banners, flyers or other forms of signage. 3. Food and beverages, including in glass or metal canisters. 4. 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 5. 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 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 2023-2027 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

Good morning, members of the City Council. The meeting will begin shortly. Please remember to log into your devices. Thank you.

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 hazards, as determined by the sergeant at arms, is prohibited in the gallery. Such items include, but are not limited to, 1. Any pointed objects, including knives of any kind. 2. Banners, flyers or other forms of signage. 3. Food and beverages, including in glass or metal canisters. 4. 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 5. 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 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 2023-2027 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 hazards, as determined by the sergeant at arms, is prohibited in the gallery. Such items include, but are not limited to, 1. Any pointed objects, including knives of any kind. 2. Banners, flyers or other forms of signage. 3. Food and beverages, including in glass or metal canisters. 4. 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 5. 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 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 2023-2027 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 to 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 hazards, as determined by the sergeant at arms, is prohibited in the gallery. Such items include, but are not limited to, 1. Any pointed objects, including knives of any kind. 2. Banners, flyers or other forms of signage. 3. Food and beverages, including in glass or metal canisters. 4. 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 5. 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 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 2023-2027 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 1. When entering or exiting the gallery. 2. When providing public comment during the portion of a meeting, set aside for that purpose. Or 3. 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 hazards, as determined by the sergeant at arms, is prohibited in the gallery. Such items include, but are not limited to, 1. Any pointed objects, including knives of any kind. 2. Banners, flyers or other forms of signage. 3. Food and beverages, including in glass or metal canisters. 4. Backpacks, large bags and sealed packages. Clear bags, not tinted in color, that do not exceed 12 inches by 6 inches by 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 hazards, as determined by the sergeant at arms, is prohibited in the gallery. Such items include, but are not limited to, 1. Any pointed objects, including knives of any kind. 2. Banners, flyers or other forms of signage. 3. Food and beverages, including in glass or metal canisters. 4. 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 5. 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 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 2023-2027 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 hazards, as determined by the sergeant-at-arms, is prohibited in the gallery. Such items include, but are not limited to, 1. Any pointed objects, including knives of any kind. 2. Banners, flyers or other forms of signage. 3. 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 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 2023-2027 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 hazards, as determined by the sergeant at arms, is prohibited in the gallery. Such items include, but are not limited to, 1. Any pointed objects, including knives of any kind. 2. Banners, flyers or other forms of signage. 3. Food and beverages, including in glass or metal canisters. 4. 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 5. 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 other individuals to view or hear the proceedings. Individuals or groups failing to adhere to Silence.

Thank you. Good morning. Welcome to today's City Council meeting. The meeting will begin momentarily. At this time, please take your seats and silence your listening devices. Thank you.

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 3. 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 hazards, as determined by the sergeant at arms, is prohibited in the gallery. Such items include, but are not limited to, 1. Any pointed objects, including knives of any kind. 2. Banners, flyers or other forms of signage. 3. 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

Good morning. The council will come to order. Madam Clerk, please take a quorum roll call.

Good morning. The quorum roll call is open. The quorum roll call is open. Please use your e-device. The quorum roll call is now open. All right, I will now call those that have not used their e-device. If you are online, please do not respond at this time. We'll come back to you. Alderwoman Dahl. Dahl is present. Alderman Robinson. Robinson is present. Alderman Hall. Hall is present. Alderman Mitchell. Not present in chambers. Alderwoman Gutierrez. Gutierrez is present. Alderwoman Coleman, not President Chambers. Alderman David Moore, not President Chambers. Alderman Curtis, not President Chambers. Oh, sorry. Thank you. Alderman Curtis is present. Alderman O'Shea. O'Shea is present. Alderwoman Taylor. Not President Chambers. Alderperson Fuentes. Not President Chambers. Alderman Burnett. Not President Chambers. Alderman Irvin. Not President Chambers. Alderwoman Rodriguez-Sanchez. Not President Chambers. Alderwoman Mitz. Not President Chambers. Alderman Vasquez. Alderman Riley. Riley is present. Alderman Gardner. Gardner is present. Alderman Clay. Not present in chambers. Alderman Martin. Not present in chambers. Alderman Haddon. Not present in chambers. All right. The roll call is now closed. Mayor, we have a quorum.

Very well. There are 37 members present. A quorum has been established. The following Alders have requested to participate in today's meeting remotely for reasons stated in rule 59. Can we confirm the presence online of Alders Mitz, Coleman, Martin, Fuentes, Haddon, LaSpada, Moore, Burnett, Irvin, Rodriguez-Sanchez, Mitchell, and Clay?

Alderman LaSpada.

Present.

LaSpada is present. Alderman Mitchell.

Present.

Mitchell is present. Alderman Chico. Alderman Coleman. Present. Coleman is present. Alderman David Moore.

More present, Madam Clerk.

Moore is present. Alderperson Fuentes. Present. Fuentes is present. Alderman Burnett. Alderman Burnett.

He's present.

Burnett is present. Alderman Irvin.

Urban urban is present.

Urban is present all the women, Rodriguez, Santa. All the women, Rodriguez, Santa. All the women met. As a man is present all the woman clay. Clay is present all the Martin president Martin is present all the one had in present. Haddon is present.

Alderman Chico is present.

Alderman Chico is present. Got you.

So all Alders, with the exception of Alder Rodriguez-Sanchez, have confirmed their presence online. Can I get a motion to approval? of the remote participation has been moved. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed say nay. In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it. At this point, let's stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Please remain standing for our invocation, which will be delivered by the Alder of the Sixth Ward, Alderman Will Hall.

Before we pray, we want to remember the legacy of our very own Chairwoman's father, Stephanie Coleman, and her mother, former Alder, as they laid to rest the pillar of their family. And as we bow our heads today, God, we come into this room to do the people's business. North, South, East, and West are dependent on us to figure out what it is that you called this city to do. And so God, in these times where those who are struggling with those who are looking for direction, look to us in leadership for clarity. God, make it make sense. God, we ask for strength for those who are going to and from. God, we ask that you cover this city. God, we ask that you cover our leader. God, we pray that you give him strength and clarity. God, we ask that the days to come, may they be better than what's been. So God, we pray that even in difference today, that we don't say and do things that divide this city. God, we pray that the next generation learn what they must do to take this city even further than what we have done thus far. And so we ask for grace, patience, but most of all, pure heart. We ask these things in Jesus' name. Amen.

Amen. Thank you. You may be seated. Next up, public comments.

The council will now begin the public comment period, which is limited to a maximum of 30 minutes. Each speaker is limited to three minutes. Speakers cannot yield or transfer their time to another speaker. Any written comments that have been submitted will be posted and made available for automatic review. Our first speaker this morning is Nama Divine. Our next speaker is Maggie Bowman.

Good morning to Mr. Mayor and all members of the City Council. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Maggie Bowman, and I'm a resident of the Edgewater neighborhood on the north side. On Monday, I attended a tour of McKinley Park, led by Neighbors for Environmental Justice. The park is stunning, one of our city's great gems of public spaces. We started in front of the field house and walked east on Pershing Road, the southern boundary of the park. I was fully masked. It was as it was an air quality alert day. And while Monday's levels were not as hazardous as last week, my asthmatic lungs must be protected. as we walked the smell of hot asphalt worked its way into my mask and into my body at damon we turned and looked south and saw the looming towers of matt asphalt it was an air quality alert day and yet the plant was fully operational as our guides explain the history of matt asphalt it started in 2018 but has been operating without a permit since 2019 I started to feel physically sick. I got a headache and felt nauseous from just 15 minutes in this noxious air. I learned of all the schools operating adjacent to the plant and in the blocks around it, and I imagined what it would be like to go to school every day breathing in this poisonous air. I implore every member of this body to go visit the intersection of Damon and Pershing Road and experience this for themselves. How do we allow this? Matt Asphalt's biggest customer is the city of Chicago. Not only does our city allow this polluter to operate in the midst of a dense neighborhood, but it pours taxpayer dollars into its operations. What tools are available to regulate the dangerous operations of such heavy industry? The City Council has an opportunity with the Hazel M. Johnson Cumulative Impacts Ordinance currently sitting in the Zoning Committee to put some common sense guardrails around such polluters. You have the opportunity to pass a piece of legislation that was designed by the communities most impacted by heavy pollution. The ordinance would simply ask those seeking to set up heavy industry operations to conduct a review of the cumulative impact of their operations on neighborhoods such as McKinley Park, which have been overburdened by pollution for decades. This is climate week in Chicago. Last week, we all experienced the climate emergency with the record levels of bad air quality added to by wildfire smoke. When will we act? When will we stop giving a free pass to businesses such as Matt Asphalt to keep poisoning our children's lungs and brains? Please act now and pass the Hazel M. Johnson Cumulative Impacts Ordinance. Thank you.

Thank you very much for your comments. Our next speaker is Miguel Chacon.

Good morning, Mayor Johnson and members of the City Council. My name is Miguel Chacon. I'm the Vice Chair of the Chicago Association of Realtors Public Policy Committee. I'm also a resident of Pilsen in the 25th Ward. It's where I'm a housing provider and where I'm raising my family and where I love my community. I'm here to provide additional information and perspective as to why you should all be opposed to the Protecting Renters Ordinance, or PRO, which is the lengthiest piece of legislation our industry has ever seen. I'm not here to attack the goals of the ordinance. Public stability is a worthy cause. But with housing policy, the details matter. Today, I'll speak of the provisions about lease non-renewals, which would require housing providers to pay relocation fees even when the lease is just not renewed, or for legitimate reasons, such as moving your own mother into your own building out of necessity. For an owner rehabbing an average three flat, that cost could be staggering. A property owner in Humboldt Park could be required to spend $23,000. In West Englewood, $20,000. And in some communities, up to $40,000. We've seen this before, and it doesn't work. We've seen it in San Francisco, where these mandated relocation payments have unraveled into exorbitant tenant buyout agreements. Under this proposal, if a lease is not offered for a renewal because of a rental increase, the tenant may reject that renewal, requiring the landlord to pay 10 months of relocation expenses. Consider the financial impact these lumped payments on a retired couple could have just renting out their garden unit for additional income or for young families investing in our aging, naturally occurring affordable housing. Renters should be alarmed, too. Costs this large do not simply disappear. They are absorbed into the rental market through higher rents, deferred maintenance, fewer available units, or owners choosing to just step away altogether. Chicago's housing crisis will not be solved by making rental housing harder to provide, and yet that's exactly what this ordinance does. At a time when Chicago urgently needs more rental housing, the PRO ordinance would move us in the opposite direction. making it harder for responsible housing providers like myself in the community, in the communities where they live, to just provide housing in our neighborhoods. The fact is this ordinance will make housing less affordable. It does not solve the problem of housing affordability. It does not solve the issues that we do not have enough homes getting built across our city. A vote for this ordinance for pro is a vote for rental increases across Chicago, and we should all be against it. Thank you for your time.

Thank you very much for your comments. Our next speaker is Sinead.

Good morning, everyone. My name is Sinead O'Sullivan, and I'm a youth housing organizer from Palenque LSNA, a lifelong Chicago resident, and a neighbor from the 30th Ward. Today, I'm here to ask you, older people, to support PRO rather than the unfair ordinance, as PRO is the only one that actually protects families and keeps them in their homes and communities. The introduction of the fair ordinance is watering down the most important parts of the protecting renters ordinance, which in turn will empower corporate landlords and harm tenants' rights. The fair ordinance does not address the complaints of our mom and pop landlords. It simply does away with the protections that renters so badly need. PRO makes housing significantly more stable for my neighbors, my family, and my friends. Yesterday, while I was canvassing in Hermosa, the most striking conversation I had was with a landlord. I told her we're trying to prevent gentrification, and she looked at me with a blank stare and told me it was far, far too late. There was no hope in her eyes, only apathy. She grew up in Humboldt Park and found herself watching the same process begin in Hermosa. Another homeowner told us about her former landlord, who personally financed her ability to purchase her home when they decided to sell. That is what allowed her family to stay in their community, on their block, with their neighbors. That was a radical and incredibly important decision. To make the property market-ready, her landlord could have raised her rent to market rate, and when she couldn't meet the price, she would have needed to move. Her ability to stay in her home was fully dependent on the kindness of her landlord. We cannot depend on individual acts of kindness for things this important. Mom-and-pop landlords don't want their communities gentrified, and they don't want to hurt their tenants. I know this because I've spoken to them canvassing across the northwest side. The reality is working-class Chicagoans everywhere are almost powerless in their choice of housing. FAIR seeks to maintain this, removing the most important parts of PRO, the parts of PRO which make it a solution capable of solving the problems we have. PRO doesn't solve our problems on its own. We need more abundant, dense housing. We need to uplift mom-and-pop landlords. However, these truths can be held altogether. This isn't a zero-sum game. Landlords are housing providers. Pro holds them accountable to doing just that, providing housing. Fair maintains the status quo, a deeply unfair practice in which tenants are subjected to the needs and whims of their landlords. Just cause doesn't mean landlords can't sell their properties at a profit. It means tenants won't lose their home just because their landlord wants to sell a building. Just cause is the only policy which addresses this problem head on.

Thank you very much for your comments. Our next speaker this morning is Jake Hanawalt.

Hi, good morning. My name is Jake Hanawalt. I'm here with the Chicago Alliance Against Racism and Political Repression. I'm also a proud public educator, a member of CTU, and resident of Bronzeville. I'm here as a working person, and as a working person, I'm extremely frustrated and confused as to why members of this council do not think that the people of this city deserve a chance to vote on things that actually matter to them and that will improve their daily lives. I'm confused as to why we're putting things that could be passed as an ordinance, why we're putting something like a referendum about a monument why we're wasting the time and the money of working class people in the city to do something silly like that when gas prices are going up, when, as we've heard, rent is a problem for everybody in the city, when we need real change to help the people that live in the city, not corporations, not big landlords, not the people who seem to be getting the most support and the most attention from some members of this council. As we've heard, and as thousands of people have said to you, I promise you've heard it, what people need right now is material change in their lives. What Mayor Johnson and what many people across the city, me, my neighbors, people in my neighborhood have said is that we need something to change the material conditions that working class people are experiencing. We need something like a referendum to tax the rich. As you've heard... People are concerned about what is happening with policing in their communities. ICE is murdering people on our streets. They're snatching our neighbors out of their workplaces and out of their homes. And CPD has not been doing what they need to be doing to make sure that that gets taken care of, to make sure that stops. We need to have people's representation. We need to have people's voices in the things that are happening in our communities. We want a voice, the people of this city want a voice in what's happening and what some of the people on this council are trying to do is silence regular people in this city. Y'all are trying to bury the voices of the people, bury our goals, our aspirations, our voice with this little sneak referendum proposal for, I'm sorry, what is it? This is a monument for some kind of, y'all want better lawyers or something like that? We need something that matters to people, that will help working class people, that will help the elders and the retired people in the building that I live in and affect their daily lives for the better. Y'all need to stop wasting our time. You need to stop wasting the time and the money of the people of this city. You need to do something that's going to matter to them. We see you, okay? This is not just gonna happen in secret. We're aware of what you're trying to do. You need to listen to your constituents. You need to listen to the people that live in this city and stop giving preference, giving attention, giving whatever it is to the billionaires, to the corporations, to the rich, to the big landlords who maybe pay your bills.

Thank you very much for your comments. However, your time has expired. Our next speaker is Gabriel Miller.

Good morning.

My name is Gabriel Miller. I'm here, resident of the 26th Ward. I'm here with the Chicago Alliance Against Racist and Political Repression. And I'm here to oppose rushing three ballot referenda through to clog out our February municipal elections. in a move to oppose what Brandon Johnson is trying to do by reversing the trend of disinvestment in working class people and actually give us a chance to vote on whether or not we want to tax the rich. The way that these alders are moving by trying to rush these referenda through genuinely makes me think that y'all think we're stupid. That you don't think we see what's happening in our country and happening in our city. in the context of the greatest threats to our democracy that we've seen in decades. We're talking about a Trump administration that is defunding and eliminating all the people in federal election oversight, that is trying to subpoena states that won't turn over their voter rolls, that's trying to pass legislation to require voter IDs specifically to stop people from being able to vote. We're talking about a context in which we've had a Supreme Court decision that will result in the greatest rollback in black political power since the end of Reconstruction. That's the context in which y'all are using these ballot referenda like political tools. These referenda are supposed to be for us to democratically vote on what matters to us. The attempt to rush through referenda that aren't that important to the people of Chicago, or maybe they are, we just haven't had time to look at them. This stuff doesn't have to be resolved until November, you know, the ones for the February elections. And y'all are trying to pass these so fast, and we see exactly what's happening, right? We see exactly what's happening. I'll tell you what the people of Chicago need. And the reason I know this is because the Chicago Alliance has been working tirelessly since 2021, canvassing our communities, especially on the south and west sides that have faced the brunt of police brutality in this city. and getting signatures on these postcards to pass the community power over policing referendum now this is a ballot referendum that we know people want right this is something that the people of chicago deserve to have a chance to vote on And I'm looking forward to all these alders that are going to be receiving hundreds and thousands of postcards signed by your constituents, delivered to your wards, showing you the power that we have and the demand that there is to be able to vote on this question. And again, alder people do not even have to support the content of the CPOP referendum. You just have to support our right to democratically decide what is best for public safety in our wards. In the context of the erosion of our democracy in front of our eyes, it is an insult to the people of Chicago to use these ballot referenda as a political tool to block Brandon Johnson's attempt to allow us to vote on taxing the rich, which we need, and to block the CPOP referendum from having a spot on the ballot in February. We see what's happening. You must do what is right.

Thank you very much for your comments. However, your time has expired. Our next speaker this morning is Ida Zumray.

Hi, I'm Ida Zumzai, and I'm a 17-year-old lifelong resident proudly from Ward 26 or Humboldt Park. I come from a family of landlords, and as one, I'm here today to share my concerns with the proposed FAIR ordinance, a name I find ironic because it really doesn't seem fair to me. FAIR removes meaningful protections from the presently promised protecting... renter's ordinance. But it horrifically goes even farther to destroy decade-long tenant protections. It removes the Tenant Bill of Rights, key affordability requirements, protection for renters facing displacement, the Bureau of Housing and Rental Services. But the corporate caucus recognizes Chicago's need for relief for the affordability crisis. However, FAIR does the complete opposite. It does not lessen cost burdens renters face. Instead, it reappropriated key tenant renter protections. Chicago is in the midst of rapid gentrification and displacement of long-term residents. Arguably, the people that make Chicago the city we all love so much, Chicago, to push them out of their communities, their homes, their lives, is something so unfair, or the unfair act would certainly perpetuate, is cruel and inherently corrupt. However, we, you, Chicagoans and alders alike have the rare and monumental opportunity to make real change, a change that will protect Chicago and all the people in it. We must reject fair and instead allocate our support to pro and just cause. Thank you for your time.

Thank you very much. Our next speaker is Merno Salgado-Ramo.

Good morning, Mayor Johnson and city council members. My name is Mirna Salgado Romo, homegrown, born and raised here in Chicago and a resident of the 12th Ward. This past week has been very challenging, particularly for residents in Chicago of sensitive groups, which includes people with heart and lung disease, children, older adults, pregnant individuals. Do any of these describe someone close to you? We had toxic smoke from Canadian wildfires pushing our air quality into hazardous zones, which increases asthma, respiratory illnesses, heart disease, and can lead to even more extreme health impacts. These impacts are doubled for residents of Chicago who live near industrial corridors and or environmental justice communities. These residents who live in what we call sacrifice zones. Sacrifice because they need to sacrifice their health and quality of life for the economic development and benefits of all city of Chicago. Current city zoning permits allow dirty industrial developments to stock up in the same neighborhoods, worsening asthma, heart disease, respiratory failure. But I want to remind you today, air quality does not have borders. And while you may not be directly impacted by these challenges today, you will face these challenges soon. Climate change is here. Climate change is happening. What will your legacy be? How will you protect your families, your children, and their children? We don't have the solution, but we have a solution. Dr. Ige, former commissioner of the Chicago Department of Public Health, once said to an audience at a community meeting that we need to change the policies that currently exist to address the concerns for the people face. Today, I'm asking you to support and pass the Hazel M. Johnson Cumulative Impacts Ordinance. It's a step in the right direction. It's the bare minimum. It will require a cumulative health and environmental impact review before any new and expanding facility are approved. It will create an environmental justice advisory board to give local residents a direct voice in land use decisions in their communities. This transformative ordinance is a long overdue step toward justice for communities like mine communities that have carried the burden of pollution for generations without protection or accountability. This ordinance is rooted in years of organizing and collaboration led by frontline communities. This is not just a policy decision. It is a public health necessity. Chicago has a chance to set the standard for true environmental justice and ensure every Chicagoan has a good quality of life and sacrifice zones. Please work with us to pass this crucial ordinance and stand strong with our communities. Thank you for your time.

Thank you very much for your comments. Our next speaker is Albert Mendez.

Good morning, Mayor Johnson. Good morning, distinguished members of the city council. My name is Albert Mendez and I am a mom and pop housing neighborhood provider in the city of Chicago. Like everyone here, I absolutely believe that renters deserve safe housing, they deserve fair treatment, and they deserve strong protections. What I don't believe is that protecting renters' ordinance is the right way to achieve those goals. There are many new fees, many new fines that are in this proposal, but that's not what concerns me the most. The real impact comes from the added legal requirements, the expanded liability, the mandatory relocation payments, and regulatory burdens that neighborhood housing providers like me and my family have to absorb. Let's not assume that we can afford it. These costs don't simply disappear. They actually make it more expensive to operate housing. They make it harder, and they discourage investment in neighborhood buildings, and they make it very difficult for small housing providers like me to continue offering naturally affordable rental incomes and rental homes. Ultimately, those costs are going to find their way back to renters through higher rents, through fewer housing choices, and with owners deciding that they can no longer stay in this market. I am not a large corporation. I run this with my family and we try to help other families. I'm part of this community. I'm proud to be a Chicagoan. I grew up in this city. I'm a product of this city. and I want to continue providing quality housing for my tenants and the families that I serve. I respectfully ask this council, I respectfully ask our mayor to slow this process down, give full consideration to the unintended consequences, and work with neighborhood housing providers like myself to modernize the RLTO in a way that protects renters without making it harder to provide the affordable housing that our communities depend on and that people like me want to provide. I genuinely appreciate your consideration, your time, and all of your efforts on working on this for people like me, the city of Chicago, and the renters that need it. Thank you for your attention. Appreciate you.

Thank you very much for your comments. Our next speaker is Estella Rivalorio.

Buenos días a todos y todas. Mi nombre es Estela Revolorio, soy madre de familia y rento un apartamento cerca de la escuela de mis hijos en el vecindario de Logan Square. He vivido ahí por más de 15 años desde que llegué a Estados Unidos. Hoy estoy aquí para pedirles a ustedes, los concejales, que apoyen la propuesta pro en lugar de la ordenanza unfair. ya que PRO es la única que realmente protege a las familias de desalojos injustos. ¿Qué está sucediendo? El concejal Villegas, junto a otros concejales, quieren quitarnos nuestros derechos como inquilinos para facilitar los desalojos y empoderar a las corporaciones inmobiliarias. Además, quieren impedir que las familias podamos protegernos de arrendadores abusivos. La ordenanza unfair No aborda ni los problemas de los inquilinos ni lo de los arrendadores. Solo busca distraernos para que no nos demos cuenta de lo que la propuesta PRO hace, ya que hace que la vivienda sea mucho más estable para muchas familias. Porque es importante. Las familias están siendo desplazadas injustamente. Las empresas inmobiliarias alientan a los arrendadores a desalojar a sus inquilinos, diciéndoles que es más fácil vender sus propiedades si están vacías. Por lo tanto, varios arrendadores están aumentando constantemente las rentas de manera significativa, de hasta 400 o 500 dólares, antes de poner sus propiedades en el mercado para presionar a los inquilinos a irse. Eso me ha pasado a mí y a otras familias que terminan abandonando el vecindario y dejando sin niños nuestras escuelas. Es así como las escuelas están perdiendo familias, alumnos, financiamiento para los programas de after school que hacen que los niños puedan estar seguros y fuera del alcance del peligro. La política del Just Cause ayuda a resolver este problema porque alienta a los arrendadores a seguir las reglas y a mantener a sus inquilinos en sus hogares. Just Cause no impide que los arrendadores vendan sus propiedades y hagan dinero, pero sí evita que los inquilinos pierdan sus hogares solo porque el arrendador quiere vender el edificio. Vender un edificio nunca debería significar desplazar a las familias que viven ahí. Just Cause es la única política que realmente enfrenta esta crisis. ¿Qué deberían hacer? Invito a todos los concejales a que se enfoquen en los problemas reales que enfrenta la gente de esta ciudad.

Thank you very much for your comments. However, your time has expired. Our next speaker is Nama Devine.

Good morning.

Good morning.

I'm going to play a sound here.

Stop by a cop who thought I was like making fun of Mao Zedong, which I never would and never will. Mao Zedong is one of the great leaders of this world, okay? A man who changed the entire universe, the entire planet.

So that was... the voice of Hasan Piker, that was a young man who is a streamer who you have appeared with several times, done an interview on his TV show, podcast, whatever you want to call it, and you also invited him to walk around in the Austin neighborhood in Chicago with you. Right there, he's praising not just a left-winger, this isn't left versus right, but he's praising a totalitarian dictator who murdered more people than Hitler, who targeted, I see we have a lot of landlords here. We have a lot of landlords here. Mao's troops also targeted the wives and daughters of landlords with rape as part of class warfare. You, as the mayor of this city, need to denounce your appearance on Hasan Piker and all praise of Mao Zedong, or if you refuse, then you're admitting that you support murderous political violence against your opponents. So which is it? Do you support Mao or do you believe in the American system and you want to be a liberal leftist? Because the difference between a liberal leftist and a totalitarian leftist is life and death for some people. So are you going to denounce your appearance on this man's show or are you going to implicitly support Mao Zedong? If you have nothing to say about this, then you are admitting that you support political violence against your political opponents, no matter how close in policy they may be to you, because he also killed other communists and other leftists. You are, by not saying anything right now, saying that there should be blood spilled on the streets of Chicago for your beliefs. Do you believe that or not? Excuse me. You're breaking the rules. You're not allowed to interrupt or boo during speeches.

Please direct your comments towards city council, please.

Please direct your people to keep everyone in line when I was polite for people that I disagreed with. Are you going to disavow Hasan Piker and Mao Zedong or not?

Thank you very much for your comments. However, your time has expired. Your honor, there are no further speakers who have time to sign up for the public.

This completes the portion of our council meeting for public comments. Alder Rodriguez Sanchez has joined us online. Madam Clerk, could you confirm her presence?

Alderman Rodriguez Sanchez, are you there? Rodriguez Sanchez, are you there?

Alderman Gardner has wished to address this body to offer up an acknowledgement. We need to suspend the rules to allow for that. Alderman Harris, can I get a motion to suspend the rules?

I move that we suspend the rules.

All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Any opposed, say nay. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. The chair recognizes Alderman Gardner.

Thank you, Mr. President, for allowing me to speak very briefly. I know we have a lot of business, city business to attend to. I just wanted to take a minute to wish a happy birthday to my aunt, Mary Rudden Gardner. She turns 85 years old today. She's a proud resident of the 29th Ward. So myself and Alderman Taliaferro would like to wish Mary a very happy birthday, who grew up in the west side of Chicago, attended Our Lady of Sorrows in Providence High School, which is now Providence St. Mel. She married Thomas Gardner, stayed married to Thomas for 56 years when she moved to Mount Clair. She raised 13 children. She has 46 grandchildren, 12 great-grandchildren, and many dogs with that as well. But Aunt Mary used to have these family gatherings often. Believe it or not, even with 13 kids, she would allow anybody who wanted to spend the night there. And I would often spend the night and you'd wake up in the morning with pancakes, sausage, Irish pudding, black pudding. And it was amazing to see what this woman did for so many people. And she still does today. So from the bottom of my heart, Alderman Talaferro and all of us from city council, we want to wish you a very happy and healthy birthday. Thank you for taking the time. You're welcome.

Happy birthday, Mary.

Mr. President, Alderman Rosana Rodriguez is here.

Okay, just a second. Thank you again. It's Mary, right? Aunt Mary? Happy birthday, Aunt Mary, on behalf of the City Council and the City of Chicago. Alderwoman Harris, can I get a motion? Yes, thank you. We can clap for Aunt Mary. Would it have been nice to have some of that breakfast this morning? Alderwoman Harris, a motion to return back to the regular order of business.

So moved.

All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Any opposed, say nay. We have returned back to the regular order of business. Madam Clerk, let's try this one more time. Can we confirm Alderman Rodriguez-Sanchez presence on line?

Alderman Rodriguez-Sanchez, are you there? I am here. All right.

Regent stated in Rule 59, as the previous members have requested, Alderman Rodriguez-Sanchez would like to be added. The roll call for Regent stated in Rule 59. Can I get a motion? It's a motion. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed say nay. And depending on the chair, the ayes have it. Please add Madam Alder Rodriguez Sanchez to the quorum roll call. We do not have any resolutions today. Next up, communications.

I, City Clerk Anna Valencia, hereby inform the City Council that the following documents were filed in my office. Fireman's Annuity and Benefit Fund of Chicago Funding Resolution for Year 2027, and Office Inspector General City Support of New Arrivals Mission and Explainer. I, City Clerk Valencia, also transmit herewith various claims against the City of Chicago, which referred the Committee on Finance. Your Honor, that concludes reports and communications from the City Clerk and other City Officers.

Very well. Thank you, Madam Clerk. We do not have any committees that are reporting out today. And for the agreeing upon calendar, the Chair recognizes Alderman Harris.

Mr. President, I have received from City Clerk Andrea M. Valencia a total of six items proposed for the agreed calendar consisting of congratulatory commemorative tributary resolutions for the following alderpersons, Alderperson Vasquez, Alderperson Gardner, Alderperson Clay. I move these in the omnibus.

Very well. This has been moved for the passage of the agreed upon calendar in the omnibus. Hearing no objections, so ordered. Now for new business, the clerk will call the wards beginning with the 50th.

Zoning amendments which are referred to the Committee on Zoning, Landmarks, and Building Standards, Traffic Control, Traffic Regulations, Traffic Control Signals, and Traffic Signs, which are referred to the Committee on Pedestrian and Traffic Safety, an exemption from physical barrier requirements for commercial driveway alley access to the parking facilities, which are referred to the Committee on Transportation and Public Way. Alderperson Silverstein has a proposed order for the issuance of permits for signed signboards at 6199 North Lincoln Avenue, which is referred to the Committee on Zoning, Landmarks, and Building Standards. Alderperson Clay has a proposed ordinance for an honorary street designation as Elizabeth Lily Grace Shambrook Way, which is referred to the Committee on Transportation and Public Way. Alderperson Clay also has a proposed ordinance for approval of 4,000 Marine Drive subdivision, which is referred to the Committee on Transportation and Public Way. Alderperson Knutson has a proposed resolution to call on the Department of Transportation to rename Lincoln Central Park as Deidre Gardens in honor of Deidre Garzano, which is referred to the Committee on Transportation and Public Way. Alderperson Riley has various orders for issuance of permits for signed signboards, which are referred to the Committee on Zoning, Landmarks, and Building Standards. Alderperson Napolitano has a proposed order for the issuance of permits for signed signboards at 8600 West Bryn Mawr Avenue, which is referred to Committee on Zoning, Landmarks, and Building Standards. Alderperson Telefeo has proposed ordinances for designation of the 1st and 19th precincts of the 29th Ward as restricted residential zones prohibiting additional shared housing units, which are referred to Committee on License and Consumer Protection. Alderperson Ervin has a proposed ordinance for amendment of Title II, by adding a new chapter 2-166, establishing the Chicago Public Infrastructure Trust, which is referred to the Committee on Finance. Two committees called, the Committee on Finance and the Committee on the Budget and Government Operations. The matter is referred to the Committee on Rules.

Could you tell me who made that motion, Mr. Chairman?

Alderperson Beal. Thank you. Alderpersons Gutierrez, Rodriguez, Villegas, and others have proposed ordinance for amendment of municipal code chapter 2-92 by adding a new section 2-92-4X establishing bid incentives for Chicago jobs plan commitment, which is referred to community workforce development. Alderperson Harris has proposed ordinance for amendment of municipal code section 4-60-023 to allow additional package goods licenses on portions of South Stony Island Avenue, which is referred to the Committee on License and Consumer Protection. Alderperson Hopkins has proposed ordinance for an honorary street designation as honorary Chili Pepper Way, which is referred to the Committee on Transportation and Public Way. And Alderman Hopkins has proposed resolution to call on the Chicago Transit Authority to elevate, to evaluate feasibility in installing next-gen fare gates throughout CTA rail stations, which is referred to the Committee on Public Safety. And Alderperson, Wagaspak, and others have opposed the ordinance. That the director, that the, City Comptroller, the Chief Financial Officer, and the Budget Director are ordered and directed to contribute any and all advance pension payments on or before October 31st, 2026, which is referred to the Committee on Finance. Your Honor, that concludes the presentation of automatic introductions.

Thank you. We have no journal to be approved for today. We do have some unfinished business, as I understand. And we have... Alderman Harris. The chair recognizes Alderman Harris for unfinished business.

I'm aware of six pieces of unfinished business. The first was filed by Alderman Hall and the next five were filed by Alderman Nugent on the first piece. I defer to Alderman Hall.

Chair recognizes Alderman Hall.

Thank you, Mr. President. First of all, thank you for this acknowledgement. I filed rule 41 notice with the clerk to call for a roll call vote on resolution R20260026834. And essentially that is a resolution asking on the November the 3rd referendum question for the public that should the city pursue lawfully all means to recover any financial compensation as a result of Operation Midway Blitz. And after my comments, Mr. President, in any debate, I'm asked that we call for a roll call vote for this matter, which is essentially a matter of whether or not Chicago, having dealt with a president, Mr. President, who is called Chicago a hellhole. On January 20th, 2025, it was evident that Chicago was a target from the terrorists in D.C. Are you moving a motion?

Not yet. Okay. Before you make comments there, let's move for the motion again. So the roll call vote on the resolution R2026-0026834, you move passage for that item, and you wish to speak to this item. Yes, sir. Very well. Please continue.

As I was saying, Mr. President, on the 20th of January, 2025, it was clear that Chicago was a target from President Trump. calling our city a hell hole, followed by Operation Midway Blitz that led to, as we all saw on the 30th of September, Blackhawks helicopters, 300 agents, firebombs thrown. We saw that, Mr. President, and it cost our city not only dignity, it also evoked a trauma that can never be paid for. But in addition to that, the resources spent to protect Chicagoans has not only cost us financially, but it has cost a lot of people a lot of nights of no rest. We've seen even Chicago residents, black men on the west side, your side of the city, harassed by ICE agents. We've seen people like Debbie Brockman, a WGN producer, harassed by ICE agents. We've seen workers, teachers' aides, Marion Martinez harassed by ICE agents. The cost of life is priceless, but the cost of these tactics on our city budget is simply unexplainable, and the people should have the right to be asked the question whether if we should lawfully pursue reimbursement. I think that the people in Chicago not only don't want to be terrorized, but Chicago should not have to pay also for the immoral actions of this government. And so this question is not only pivotal, but I believe this is what the people of Chicago want. chicagoans do not want to be terrorized and chicagoans don't want to continue to pay for this terroristic act and so i'm asking my colleagues to vote in support of giving the people what they want which is an opportunity to voice their support for reimbursement for these terroristic acts sponsored by this administration in this government in dc so mr president i ask that my colleagues also consider this for the November 3rd ballot question. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

Very well. There's been a roll call vote on this item. Does anyone else wish to speak to this item that is before the body? Very well. Seeing no hands, motion on the floor for the passage of this resolution by roll call vote. Madam Clerk, could you please make the e-vote application available at this time? And I would ask the members to record their votes at this time.

Okay. voting is now open the voting is now open. Please hit refresh.

Alderman Mitchell should be listening.

Yeah.

Okay.

Mm hmm. Okay. Well now call on those who have not yet cast their votes. Alderman La Spada. Aye. Alderman La Spada is a yes. Alderman Yancey. Alderman Yancey is a yes. Alderman Mitchell. Alderman Mitchell. Alderman Chico. Alderman Chico. Alderman Coleman. Alderman Coleman. Alderman Moore.

Alderman Moore is an aye.

Alderman Moore is a yes. Alderman O'Shea. Alderman O'Shea is a yes. Alderperson Fuentes.

Alderperson Fuentes is a yes.

Alderperson Fuentes is a yes. Alderman Burnett.

Alderman Burnett's a yes.

Alderman Burnett is a yes. Alderman Irvin.

Alderman Irvin votes aye.

Alderman Irvin is a yes. Alderperson Rodriguez-Sanchez.

Yes.

Alderperson Rodriguez-Sanchez is a yes. Alderwoman Mitts.

Alderman Mitts is a yes.

Alderwoman Mitts is a yes. Alderwoman Clay.

Yes.

Alderwoman Clay is a yes. Alderwoman Haddon. Yes. Alderman Haddon is a yes. Alderman Mitchell. Yes. I'm sorry. Sorry. Who is that? Coleman. Coleman. Alderman Coleman is a yes. Thank you. Alderman Chico. Alderman Mitchell. Okay. Voting is now closed.

There are 46 yeas, one nay. This motion passes. Alderman Harris on the motion to reconsider.

Motion to reconsider.

All those in favor of the reconsideration of this vote signify by saying aye. Any opposed say no. This motion fails. Alderman Harris.

Now I'd like to call upon Alderman Nugent to move her five items.

Very well. The chair recognizes Alderman Nugent.

Thank you, Mr. President. With respect to item one, since the city is limited to three advisory referenda under state law, I move to lay R2026-0025443 on the table by a voice vote if there are no objections.

Hearing none, all those in favor of laying that item on the table, signify by saying aye. Any opposed, say nay. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. Chair recognizes Alderman Nugent.

Thank you, Mr. President. With respect to item number two, I move to adopt R2026-0025438 by roll call vote. This item addresses whether Chicago should create permanent monuments celebrating Chicago's global contributions to music and arts.

There's a motion on the floor for a roll call vote for item number two. Are there any hands? The chair recognizes Alderman Irvin.

Thank you, Mr. President. Given the fact that we're talking about an election that is almost a year out, the need to put a referendum today, not knowing what may happen between now and the time we legally need to do this, if any other issues, any other items, any other concerns, that the people really need to weigh in on come before that particular point in time. I think it's a little premature for us to move on this today in August. With that being said, I'm gonna ask that we motion to table Alderman Nugent's resolution and do so by roll call vote.

Very well, there's a motion on the floor to table item number two, R2026-0025438. A motion to lay that item on the table by a roll call vote. Alderman Sergio Lopez, I know that you had your hand up. However, this item has been requested to be tabled. Adam Clerk, if you can provide the e-vote application to be available, and once that's available, I would ask that city council members record their votes.

Mr. President?

The chair recognizes Alderman Irvin.

If Alderman Ciccio-Lopez or any other Alderman have to say something, I will withhold my motion until they're finished and then ask that the table be recognized again. Do you find that to be necessary?

The motion has been made already. Very good. Thank you, Alderman Chair. The motion has been made. St. Joe Lopez believes that you speak for at least for some sentiment. So as this application is made available, I would ask the City Council members to record your vote at this time. If you vote yes to table this item, it means you wish to not move forward with the initial motion that was provided by Alderman Nugent. If you Vote no, it means you wish to move forward with the initial motion, which was for the passage of item R2026-0025438. The voting is open.

Okay, I will now call on those who've not yet cast their vote. Alderman LaSpada.

No.

Alderman LaSpada is a no. Alderman Hall. Alderman Hall is a yes. Alderman Mitchell. Alderman Mitchell. Alderman Chico. Alderman Chico. Alderwoman Coleman. No. Alderwoman Coleman is a no. Alderman Moore.

Moore is a no.

Alderman Moore is a no. Alderman O'Shea. No. Alderman O'Shea is a no. Alderperson Fuentes. Alderperson Fuentes is a yes. Alderperson Fuentes is a yes. Alderman Burnett.

Yes.

Alderman Burnett is a yes. Alderman Irvin.

Alderman Irvin votes yes.

Alderman Irvin is a yes. Alderperson Rodriguez Sanchez.

Yes.

Alderperson Rodriguez Sanchez is a yes. Alderwoman Mitts.

Alderman Mitts is a no.

Alderwoman Mitts is a no. Alderwoman Clay.

Yes.

Alderwoman Clay is a yes. Alderwoman Haddon.

Yes.

Alderwoman Haddon is a yes. Alderman Mitchell. Alderman Chico. Voting is now closed.

There are 18 yeas, 29 nays. This motion fails. Alderwoman Nugent on your initial motion.

Thank you, Mr. President. I renew my motion to adopt our 2026-0025438 by roll call vote.

Very well, there's a motion on the floor to accept this resolution by roll call vote. Members of City Council, please record your vote as soon as the application is updated.

Can we speak to this, Mayor, now that it's up for a vote?

That is technically the proper order. Thank you. Does anyone wish to speak to this item now that it is up for a vote? Alderman Moore does. Chair recognizes Alderman Moore.

Thank you so much. I voted no, not to table this because I believe that people should always have a right for a vote. But just like Alderman or Chairman Ervin, I believe with dealing with going right into 2026, I think we should take one thing at a time. We've got a November election coming up. We have referendums on that. And we don't know what's going to come up between now and February. And I respectfully, I've never seen this before. Not that, you know, Things can't change, but I think we need to give this the appropriate time around the February election or January to make sure that there are no other critical items that's coming up in city council. And so I would respectfully ask my colleagues to hold off on it. It's not that it wouldn't be passed in the future, but you just never know what come up. So I would ask that my colleagues colleagues vote no on this item for future considerations.

Thank you, Alderman Moore. The chair recognizes Alderman Sigcho Lopez.

Thank you, Mr. President, and I also want to echo the sentiments of Alderman Moore and Alderman Irvin. I think we heard from public testimony today about the urgent needs of our city. I think that when we're trying to stack up the questions to ask Chicagoans about monuments, to ask about things that are not relevant in a moment where the whole country is in disarray, when families are being chased by death squads, when our Chicago public schools are facing a $700 million deficit, when families are starving, That is the question that Chicago City Council is putting as a priority. People are not fools. Chicagoans see where Chicago needs, and this city council has a responsibility to act in this moment. I hear oftentimes that we are always fiduciary entities looking for the best outcome. But when we are blocking effectively a millionaire tax that will effectively provide a millionaire tax referendum that will prioritize asking Chicagoans if we want to provide property tax relief, tax in the reach, when we're asking Chicagoans if we want to fully fund our schools, I've seen children in Chicago public schools taking the crumbs off the table to bring it home because the federal government is ending benefits for many families through other words. But we want to ask Chicagoans about monuments. What an insult to our city. I am grateful. I am grateful for those colleagues who are putting the priorities of Chicagoans ahead of political expediency. I am grateful for Chicagoans who come today demanding answers and solutions from the city council. But blocking the will of the people will be met at the ballot box in February. I got no doubt about that. I think that this is the moment where we got to ask ourselves, who are we representing? Are we representing those billionaires? Are we representing those corporations that created $130 million hole in the budget? $130 million hole. That is an equivalent of 2,000 jobs, city jobs. That is an embarrassment for anybody who thinks that that is a way to represent Chicago, Chicagoans will remember that. And I tell you that today, I do think, and I'm grateful for my colleague, Alderman Hall, to ask the federal government to respond for the atrocities and the damages and economic damages and social costs and human costs in our city. I also think it's important that we solve these issues at hand. The millionaire tax, I hear often time, everybody here has talked about high property taxes. Everybody hears, we voted unanimously, no more property taxes. But what's gonna happen when the federal government keeps cutting? And the governor, who is another billionaire, does not give help to the Chicago public schools. Ask yourselves, what is gonna be the consequence of this? Chicagoans will suffer. Children will suffer. So today, we have the ability to stop playing with people's lives, with the people in CPS who are being laid off, with the children who will not have their clinical resources, with the homeowners and tenants who will lose their homes because of irresponsible decisions in this chamber. So today, I rise in support again that we take our time. If you're not sure yet, then hold your vote, and let's do the responsible thing to take our time. But if you block the decision to tax the billionaires, to tax the corporations, to tax the rich, I am hopeful that every Chicagoan will watch your actions today by blocking this referendum, blocking the will of Chicagoans, and effectively represent the corporations and billionaires. So the masks are off today. What side are you on? What side are you on? Thank you very much.

Thank you. The chair recognizes Alder Vasquez.

Thank you very much, Mr. President.

I'm going to ask the participants in the chamber, please refrain from shouting out. Please, thank you. Chair recognizes Alder Vasquez.

Yeah, thank you very much, Mr. President. I know there's a lot of persuasive argument that occurred. I want to just clarify a thing before I get to my point. Technically, nobody... The council and members who didn't vote on a referendum did not actually block a millionaire's tax. They blocked the question asking people if they want to have millionaires get taxed. I'm sure the city would say, yes, let's tax the ridge. It's not actually doing it, so just for clarification. But my point was separate. Right now, we currently have a matter that could be placed on the February referendum that is in the Rules Committee and hasn't had a full conversation. That is in regards to ranked choice voting. I think that because we have currently items in the Rules Committee that we should be debating out to see if they can make it on the ballot. I also would agree that pausing on this to have at least the full conversations on those other items would make sense. Thank you, Mr. President.

Thank you. The chair recognizes Alder Quesada.

President, just as my colleagues were saying, there has been a lot of community and constituent and resident organizing that has been taking place across the city of Chicago. I'm a proud sponsor of the community power over policing referendum question that is before the Committee on Public Safety and Police and Fire. We are working to get a committee meeting scheduled to have that discussion. But as my colleague just said as well, around rank choice voting, There are a lot of issues that can help save taxpayer dollars, that can provide more transparency and accountability when it comes to policing in our communities. And there are a lot of other issues that are impacting the residents of our community, like poverty, like increased housing displacement. I'm sure a lot of people would love to figure out if we should be buying back the parking meters. There's so many real important material things that I think Chicagoans deserve the opportunity to have the decision-making power over. And so I think that these questions are not, I do not question the merit of these questions, but rather the timing and our ability to have meaningful dialogue to represent the needs and interests of working-class Chicagoans. Thank you so much.

You are welcome. Are there any other alders that wish to speak to this item? Are there any hands on line? Very well. Seeing no other hands at this point, there's a motion on the floor for the passage of this item by roll call vote. As this is made available, I would ask that the body use their e-vote application to record their vote.

The voting is now open. Please cast your votes. I will now call on those who have not yet cast their vote. Alderman LaSpada. I'm sorry. Can you say that again, sir?

Voting?

No. Alderman LaSpada is a no. Alderman Mitchell. Alderman Mitchell. Alderman Chico. Alderman Chico. Alderwoman Coleman. Alderwoman Coleman. Coleman is a yes. Alderwoman Coleman is a yes. Alderman Moore.

Alderman Moore is a no.

Alderman Moore is a no. Alderman O'Shea. Alderman O'Shea is a yes. Alderman Mosley. Alderman Mosley is a no. Alderperson Fuentes.

Alderperson Fuentes is a no.

Alderperson Fuentes is a no. Alderman Burnett.

No.

Alderman Burnett is a no. Alderman Irvin.

Alderman Irvin votes no.

Alderman Irvin is a no. Alderperson Rodriguez-Sanchez. No. Alderperson Rodriguez-Sanchez is a no. Alderwoman Mitts.

Alderman Mitz is a yes.

Alderman Mitz is a yes. Alderman Gardner. Alderman Gardner is a no. Alderwoman Clay.

No.

Alderwoman Clay is a no. Alderwoman Hadden.

No.

Alderwoman Hadden is a no. Alderman Mitchell. Alderman Chico. Voting is now closed. 24.

There are 24 yeas and 23 nays. This motion passes.

Voting was closed.

On the motion to reconsider, Alderman Harris.

Move to reconsider the vote.

All those in favor of the reconsideration of this vote signify by saying aye. Any opposed say nay. This motion fails. Alderman Nugent, you are recognized.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. Item number three, I move to adopt this item, our 2026-0025457 by roll call vote. This matter pertains to whether Chicago City Council should establish and fully fund its own independent legal counsel separate from city's law department.

There's a motion on the floor for the passage of item number three, R2026-0025457. It's a motion on the floor for a roll call vote. Are there any individuals that wish to speak to this item? Alderman Robinson.

Mr. President, just a point of information. Can you break down how would this be structured? In my thought, we would have to go to the General Assembly. And in my experience, I'm just curious if somebody can give me a point of clarification on that. Thank you very much.

Sure. Thank you. For independent legal counsel, this referendum question, you are right that this provision within city code is established by the state of Illinois. And so in order for independent legal counsel to exist, the state of Illinois would have to provide the authority in order for that to take place. Very well. No, we're good. Thank you. Point of information, Alderman Moore. Chair recognizes Alderman Ervin. Who was that then? Point of information, Alderman Moore. It was Alderman Moore?

Yes.

OK, so my apologies. I heard someone's voice. I thought it was Alderman Ervin. So the chair recognizes Alderman Moore.

Yeah, point of view, I just wanted to be clear. Is this another February referendum? This is, yes.

This is a resolution that would be on the February ballot in February of 2027.

All right, thank you.

Chair recognizes Alder Vasquez.

Thank you, Mr. President. Regardless of how folks may feel on one matter or the other, I'm having a problem with the framing of this can't be a question because the state would need to make changes.

It was never said that it could not be a question. The point of clarification was, does the state of Illinois have to grant the authority in order for that to happen? That is correct. Right. The body cannot establish its own. Just a second. The body cannot establish its own independent legal counsel without the authority being granted by the state of Illinois. That is the law. It's not about whether or not the question should be asked. That's what is Alderman Robinson. Was that your point of clarification? Is everybody clear that the state of Illinois has the authority to grant this body the ability to establish its own independent legal counsel?

Got it, so for clarity, that'd be the same criteria for a millionaire's tax. Thank you. Say it again? That would be the same criteria for a millionaire's tax or anything else we're talking about.

Yes. Got it, just checking. Okay, thank you for checking. Does anybody else wants to check on what is the authority of the state of Illinois? Because just for clarification, according to the millionaire's tax, Alderman Vasquez, the question was related Just saying, according to your clarification, the state of Illinois, which was... First of all, you all are not going to shout me down. Yes, you are. Since you're offering up clarification in a point... the question around the millionaire's tax in the question explicitly called for the state to do it. So again, no one is disputing whether or not the state has the authority. The question in the referenda question for the millionaire's tax actually explicitly lays that out. So we're all clear, but let's also be clear that this question does not indicate for the state of Illinois to grant this body the authority to do it. Are we also now clear? The chair recognizes Alderman Riley.

Thank you, Mr. President. The real answer is it depends on how this body were to craft the independent counsel. There are situations where we might need an enabling act by the state of Illinois. There are others that don't require that. And that again is of course the opinion of your legal counsel, who used to be our legal counsel. But we've been debating the idea of whether or not we should have one, an independent counsel for this body, for now two administrations. So I don't know why you're taking this personally, but this is something that we think the voters should weigh in on because it's something this body has been endeavoring to get for quite some time. And so certainly I think it's worthy of the voters' opinion. Thank you, Mr. President.

Very well. And there's nothing personal about it. I don't know why you're suggesting I'm taking it personal. One of the colleagues indicated a point of clarification. Listen, if you want to debate my tone, we can do that. But don't intend for my emotions to be brought into this conversation. The point of clarification was offered up by one of your colleagues. I offered up that clarification. And so now that we're all clear and no one's taking it personal, the chair recognizes Alderman Napolitano. Did you have your hand raised? Okay. All right. The chair recognizes Alderman Wagaspak.

Thank you, Mr. President. Actually, could you provide to all of our colleagues here, all of us, the opinion that was just given to you on that?

Sure. If that was it. Yep. From the Corporation Council.

A copy to everyone would be helpful, but if you want to read it, that's fine.

Thank you. Yep. Someone else has their hand raised. Right, the chair recognizes Alderman Ervin.

Thank you, Mr. President. It has been stated on a couple of occasions here. Number one, I still believe that these items are premature going into February. Second, to the point of independent counsel, Um, I believe that, um, it's been stated, of course, if we want to have someone different than corporation council, uh, the corporation council represents the corporation of which we are part of the corporation. Um, I believe that our council has some other responsibilities outside of us and has other fiduciary responsibilities to provide us the legal assistance. that we need. Now, if we want somebody else to quote unquote officially represent us, that, of course, would require a change in state statute. However, we have independent expenditures. We have funds. We have funds in the Finance Committee. We have funds in our respective budgets. We also have the Legislative Reference Bureau, who with Mike, I think gives excellent counsel and who has also helped us draft and do things, a point of counsel that we have as well to work with that. The question I think boils down to, can somebody else represent the city of Chicago, which we are part of the city of Chicago and the Corporation Council's role is to represent the city of Chicago. As it relates to us getting independent advice from anybody or anyone we designate as a council. We have that ability to do that today. However, what we don't have is the ability for someone to officially represent us outside of the bounds of council. So I think that we really need to understand what the role of corporation council is, what the role of the Legislative Reference Bureau is, what the role of our legislative council and the RADATU is, you know, before we go embark on these things. Furthermore, As I stated earlier, February is a ways off. And again, there are other questions and the potential for other questions that can and may need to be asked and not cloud that decision on today. So again, I would respectfully ask that this matter be tabled. so that we could have that opportunity should we need to make that point. And again, this could be very well one of the three matters that are presented, but I think we have others that may have some greater urgency and importance to the residents of the city of Chicago. And this could be one of those items, but I don't think we need to foreclose on all of that today. Thank you, Mr. President.

You're welcome. Thank you. The chair recognizes Alder Vasquez.

Thank you very much, Mr. President. Speaking on the matter in question itself.

Mr. President, I made a motion to table.

All right, there's a motion on the floor. I had my hand up prior. Did he make that statement before I moved on? I just couldn't hear him. He made that statement while he was talking. He was already recognized. So did he close his statement with the table? I didn't hear that, Alderman Irvin. All right, Alderman Vasquez, you are recognized.

Thank you. I appreciate that, Mr. President. Speaking on the matter itself, and I appreciate now having a better understanding of the clarification, I think the question could then communicate to the state the interest of the public in Chicago, which is why we would have it. But the reason why I think it's important to talk about the independent counsel, especially in light of my colleague, Alderman Irving's comments is I don't think there's anything that's of greater urgency as we currently are talking about the parking meter deal and specifically have had the corporate council tell us they can't speak to us about it. So when we're living in a world where the corporate council, who is the body that the council would use, is one that explicitly isn't able to talk to us because of the parking meter deal, it shows and illustrates clearly the urgent and current moment where we need an independent council to be able to go through any of this stuff related to a parking meter deal when the public is looking to see how the council is going to vote on it. It is highlighting in the current moment. There's nothing more urgent than current as to why an independent counsel would be needed. And so I would urge the members of this body to vote in support because you're going to be asked to vote on a parking meter deal at one point. One would want to maybe be on record to say we should have had our own lawyers if we're talking about it. Thank you, Mr. President.

You're welcome. Is his hand raised again? Okay. Okay. Alderman Irvin, you are recognized.

Thank you, Mr. President. We'll speak to the author of the 44th point. The fact that corporation council couldn't speak to us is precisely why we have walls in that department. Just as if we would not want corporation council to speak to the executive branch regarding the things that we're discussing and the things that we are doing as a body, as a city council, that same luxury is afforded to everyone who seeks council from the corporation council. We do have representation provided by corporation council through the form of special counsel with Jones Day. So I think that what you're conflating two different issues in that respect. And again, if we want to move in that particular direction, we have the resources available within our own budgets, within the committee on finance for us to do that, as well as the legislative reference bureau. And to be clear, This time I'm asking that the motion, the matter be tabled and that it be done by roll call.

Okay, I did hear at that time clearly there was a motion to table item number three, which is item number R2026-0025457. Members of the body, please use your e-vote application to cast your vote at this time. There's a motion to table this item.

Voting is now open. The voting is now open. Please use your devices to cast your vote. Hey, I will now call on those who have not yet cast their vote. Alderman LaSpada.

Aye.

Alderman LaSpada is a yes. Alderman Yancey. Alderman Yancey is a no. Alderman Mitchell.

No.

Alderman Mitchell is a no. Alderman Chico.

No.

Alderman Chico is a no. Alderwoman Coleman. No. Alderwoman Coleman is a no. Alderman Moore.

Alderman Moore is a no to table.

Alderman Moore is a no. Alderman Curtis. Alderman Curtis is a no. Alderman O'Shea. Alderman O'Shea is a no. Alderperson Fuentes.

Alderperson Fuentes is a yes.

Alderperson Fuentes is a yes. Alderman Burnett. Yes. Alderman Burnett is a yes. Alderman Irvin.

Alderman Irvin votes yes.

Alderman Irvin is a yes. Alderperson Rodriguez Sanchez. Yes. Alderperson Rodriguez Sanchez is a yes. Alderwoman Mitts.

Alderman Mitts votes no.

Alderwoman Mitts is a no. Alderwoman Clay.

Yes.

Alderwoman Clay is a yes. Alderwoman Haddon. Alderwoman Haddon. Okay, voting is now closed.

There were 15 yeas, 33 nays. The motion to table this item has failed. Alderwoman Nugent, to your original motion.

Thank you, Mr. President. I renew my motion to adopt R2026-0025457 by roll call vote.

Very well as a motion before for the passage of this item by roll call vote as soon as this item is available members of the body please use your evil application to record your vote.

Voting is now open the voting is now open. These use your devices to cast your vote.

Thanks.

I will now call on those who have not yet cast their votes. Alderman LaSpada. Alderman LaSpada. Alderman Hall. Alderman Hall is a no. Alderman Mitchell.

Yes.

Alderman Mitchell is a yes. Alderman Chico.

Yes.

Alderman Chico is a yes. Alderwoman Coleman. Yes. Alderwoman Coleman is a yes. Alderman Moore.

Alderman Moore votes no.

Alderman Moore is a no. Alderman O'Shea. Yes. Alderman O'Shea is a yes. Alderperson Fuentes.

Alderperson Fuentes is a no.

Alderperson Fuentes is a no. Alderman Burnett.

No.

Alderman Burnett is a no. Alderman Irvin.

Alderman Irvin votes no.

Alderman Irvin votes no. Alderwoman Alderperson Rodriguez-Sanchez. No. Alderperson Rodriguez-Sanchez is a no. Alderwoman Mitts.

Alderwoman Mitts is a yes.

Alderwoman Mitts is a yes. Alderwoman Clay.

No.

Alderwoman Clay is a no. Alderwoman Haddon. Alderman Haddon? Alderman LaSpada? Alderman Haddon?

LaSpada votes no.

Alderman LaSpada is a no. Alderman Haddon, one more time. Voting is now closed.

There are 32 yeas, 16 nays. This motion passes. Alderwoman Harris on the motion to reconsider. Move to reconsider the vote. All those in favor of the reconsideration of this vote signify by saying aye. Any opposed say nay. This motion fails. Alderwoman Harris.

Alderman Nugent still has... One more item.

Very well. The chair recognizes Alderman Nugent.

Thank you, Mr. President. Two more items. I move to adopt our 20260025460 by roll call vote. This matter pertains to whether Chicago should withhold funding from its sister agencies that do not enforce debt repayment plans for outstanding debt owed to the city.

Very well. There's a motion on the floor for the passage of this item. Is it by roll call? Did you say roll call?

Yes, Mr. President.

I did say roll call vote. Are there any members of the body that wish to speak to this item? Are there any hands? The chair recognizes Alderman Irvin.

It's Groundhog's Day. Again, this still is premature. I know we're in the democratic process. However, these matters are coming before the people Without that, timing is going to delay. Again, it's unnecessary of doing today, but it seems like everybody's in a different mood than the people of the city of Chicago. So it's very interesting. With that, I ask that we table this by roll call vote.

There's a motion to table this item. I did hear that this time. There's a motion to table item R2026-0025460. That motion has been made requesting a roll call vote. Members, once it is available, please use your e-vote application to record your vote.

Voting is now open. The voting is now open. Please use your devices to cast your vote. I will now call on those who have not yet cast their vote. Alderman Laspada. Yes. Alderman Laspada is a yes. Alderman Mitchell.

No.

Alderman Mitchell is a no. Alderman Chico.

No.

Alderman Chico is a no. Alderwoman Coleman. No. Alderwoman Coleman is a no. Alderman Moore.

Alderman Moore is a no to table.

Alderman Moore is a no. Alderman O'Shea. Alderman O'Shea is a no. Alderperson Fuentes.

Alderperson Fuentes is a yes.

Alderperson Fuentes is a yes. Alderman Burnett.

Yes.

Alderman Burnett is a yes. Alderman Ervin.

Alderman Ervin votes yes.

Alderman Ervin is a yes. Alderperson Rodriguez-Sanchez. Yes. Alderperson Rodriguez-Sanchez is a yes. Alderwoman Mitts.

Alderwoman Mitts votes no.

Alderwoman Mitts is a no. Alderwoman Clay.

Yes.

Alderwoman Clay is a yes. Alderwoman Hadden.

Yes.

Alderwoman Hadden is a yes. And the voting is now closed.

There are 18 yeas, 31 nays. The motion to table this item has failed. Alderman Nugent, on your initial original motion.

Thank you, Mr. President. I renew my motion to adopt R2026-0025460 by roll call vote.

Very well. There's a motion on the floor to accept this item by roll call vote. Alderman Burnett.

I just wish to speak to this item when time is right.

Oh, very well. That is in order. Alderman Burnett, you are recognized.

I understand the intent of this measure, but I do want to recognize that this is a slippery slope. i consider my tiff funds particularly in the kinsey corridor that expire at 2034 with no ability to extend further delaying the process to provide funds to our sister agencies, whether it be the park district or the Chicago transit authority could potentially derail the opportunity of right key infrastructure for our city. and in a time where everything feels so important to get things done quickly, this measure in itself goes against that desire to make the investments that the council has been so desperately asking that we do in a timely manner. So I do want to urge my colleagues to think cautiously about the impact of what this measure really means and understand what their intent might be. But sometimes we have actions that go against what our true purpose is. So I would encourage us to think thoughtfully and vote this down before we make decisions that end up harming the rest of the city.

Thank you, Alderman Burnett. Are there any other Alders that wish to speak to this item? Very well. Seeing no hands, as this item is being prepared, please use your e-vote application to record your vote.

Is that voting is now open. The voting is now open. Please use your devices to cast your votes. Okay, we'll now call on those who have not yet cast their vote. Alderman La Spada.

No.

Alderman La Spada is a no. Alderman Mitchell.

Yes.

Alderman Mitchell is a yes. Alderman Chico.

Yes.

Alderman Chico is a yes. Alderwoman Coleman. Yes. Alderwoman Coleman is a yes. Alderman Moore.

A favorite referendum, no.

Alderman Moore is a no. Alderman O'Shea. Alderman O'Shea is a yes. Alderperson Fuentes.

No.

Alderperson Fuentes is a no. Alderman Burnett.

No.

Alderman Burnett is a no. Alderman Irvin.

Alderman Irvin votes no.

Alderman Irvin is a no. Alderperson Rodriguez-Sanchez. No. Alderperson Rodriguez-Sanchez is a no. Alderwoman Mitts.

Alderman Mitz is a yes.

Alderwoman Mitz is a yes. Alderwoman Clay.

No.

Alderwoman Clay is a no. Alderwoman Haddon.

No.

Alderwoman Haddon is a no. The voting is now closed.

There are 29 yeas and 20 nays this motion passes. Alderwoman Harris on the motion to reconsider. Motion to reconsider. All those in favor of the reconsideration of this vote signify by saying aye. Any opposed say nay. This motion fails. Alderwoman Nugent, do you have any other items?

uh just one more mr president um for item number five as rs2026-0026834 has already been considered by city council this would conclude the unfinished business very well

The chair recognizes Alderman Harris. Is there any other unfinished business?

I'm not aware of any other finished business, Mr. President.

Thank you. Now for miscellaneous business, Alderman Harris.

I'm aware of one piece of miscellaneous business. It was filed by Alderman Seicho Lopez, and I refer to him.

Thank you. The chair recognizes Alderman Seicho Lopez. The chair recognizes Alderman Seicho Lopez. Chair recognizes Alderman Beal for a point of order.

Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, I am rising to say that this item is totally out of order. Alderman Cinco Lopez's Rule 41 was not filed in a timely manner. It was filed Thursday, and it should have been filed Wednesday. And so the five-day notice was not adhered by. And so, therefore, I move to lay this motion on the table.

Very well, this item was not filed in a timely madam, so this item is out of order. With that being said, then there's no need to lay this item on the table. Thank you very much. Sure, the chair recognizes Alderman Siccio-Lopez for a point of clarification.

Yeah, thank you, Mr. President. I always refer to the the rules of order. So I accept the ruling of the legal counsel. I think it shows the independence of the legal counsel, but also has shown the lack of integrity of some people who continue to block the millionaire tax. So for the record, for the record, for the record, thank you very much, Mr. President. Just for the record, just for the record. You're a bunch out of order, all of you. Bunch of clowns.

Thank you all very much. Uh, it's, it's good to know that we have all of these parliamentarians here today. Alderman Alderman Harris for the date and time of the next meeting.

Oh, um, I've handed up to the clerk, uh, ordinance setting up the date and time of the next meeting for, uh, uh, for the next meeting date.

Very well. These for the date and time of the next meeting. It has been this ordinance is being handed or has been handed to the clerk. And if I would ask the clerk to please read the ordinance

Be ordained by the City Council of the City of Chicago, Section 1. The next regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Chicago shall be held on Wednesday, September 23rd, 2026, beginning at 10 o'clock a.m. in the Council Chamber on the second floor in City Hall, 121 North LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois. Section 2, this order shall take effect and be enforced from and after its passage.

The chair recognizes Alderman Lopez.

Thank you, Mr. President. I would just like to ask if our budget chairman would like to lay this one on the table as well. Chair recognizes Alderwoman Harris.

I move passage in the omnibus.

Hearing no objections, so order for the omnibus. Alderwoman Harris.

I move the matters in the omnibus be passed by a voice vote.

Very well. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed say no. This motion passes. No other objections. Alderman Harris for the motion to adjourn.

I move to reconsider the vote, Mr. President. I'm sorry? I move to reconsider the vote.

Oh, thank you. All those in favor of the reconsideration of this vote signify by saying aye. Those who oppose say no. This motion fails for the adjournment.

There being no further business before this body, I move that we adjourn.

Hearing no objections, so order the meetings adjourned.