CHICAGO (CN) — The Chicago City Council on Thursday rejected an overhaul of the disciplinary proceedings for Chicago police officers, throwing the issue back to the city's courts.
The proposed ordinance would have sent all instances of police misconduct to private arbitration rather than to the city’s civilian police board. In an 18-32 vote, the council scrapped these efforts by Chicago’s police union to move police misconduct proceedings behind closed doors.
The legislation was born out of an October ruling from independent Illinois labor arbitrator Edwin Benn. He argued that unionized police officers have a right to arbitration under the 1984 Illinois Public Labor Relation Act.
Members of the City Council previously debated, and voted against, police arbitration when they voted to approve 20% raises for police officers on December 13.
The union filed a lawsuit against the city on January 4. The city’s lawyers responded to the lawsuit on Wednesday, calling the union’s demands “inconsistent with [its] contract and Illinois law.”
After the lawsuit was filed, Judge Michael Mullen issued an order that paused all of Chicago’s current police misconduct proceedings until the council voted on arbitration. The parties are set to appear in response to the police union’s lawsuit on February 26.
The issue was brought back before the council and deferred several times after Benn issued another ruling on January 4. That ruling found city council had acted illegally when it voted down the ordinance.
Benn wrote in his ruling that the council acted in violation of the Illinois Constitution when they voted against private arbitration for police officers.
“Adherence to the Rule of Law is not a request or a cafeteria selection process for the City to choose which State of Illinois laws should apply and which should not," Benn wrote. "Compliance with the Rule of Law is an obligation."
Critics of Benn’s decision cited transparency and accountability concerns with the Chicago Police Department — particularly because his proposal calls for police misconduct proceedings to happen in private.
Some city officials echoed those concerns on Thursday, during discussion of the proposed ordinance.
Alderperson Jessie Fuentes highlighted the importance of police transparency when she spoke about watching the verdict come in for Jason Van Dyke, former Chicago police officer who fatally shot 17-year-old Laquan McDonald in 2015. A jury found Van Dyke guilty of murder in 2018.
“That verdict was only reached because of the [civilian] police board,” Fuentes, alderperson for the 26th ward, said. “This process is for the most egregious and harmful behaviors of the Chicago Police Department.”
Other lawmakers argued that voting against police arbitration would open the city up to more violence.
The alternative to arbitration, they argued, could be a strike by police officers.
Raymond Lopez, alderperson for the 15th ward, has been a vocal supporter of police arbitration. He held up “The Gang Book," a 2018 report from the Chicago Crime Commission, during discussions on Thursday.
“Everyone in this book is ecstatic about the side you’ve chosen," he told his fellow lawmakers.
John Catanzara, president of Chicago’s Fraternal Order of Police, shared his frustration with equating the civilian police board to matters that would be adjudicated by a criminal court.
“It’s ludicrous we keep talking about criminal behavior and the emotions of Laquan McDonald," Catanzara told reporters. "That has nothing to do with this.”
“They talk about the most egregious behavior. My first police board case was for disobeying a direct order because I changed a doctor’s appointment because I was sick," he added. "They tried to fire me over that. You talk about egregious behavior, [but] it’s a fallacy and it’s a joke.”
In his original ruling, Benn also argued that rejecting the switch from a civilian board to private arbitration would open the city up to a torrent of new lawsuits. He likened people’s public disapproval of arbitration to Trump-era misinformation.
“The strategy that has been used to disparage arbitration through repeated misinformation, untruths and half-truths is the same type of strategy used by those now seeking to divide the country through repetition of ‘The Big Lie’ that former President Trump actually won the 2020 election, and that election was ‘rigged,’” Benn wrote.
Many lawmakers in support of the change echoed Benn’s lawsuit concerns. Representing the 23rd ward, Alderperson Silvana Tabarres likened the failed ordinance vote to “cutting off your nose to save your face.”
Representing the 40th ward, Alderperson Andre Vasquez said he wished the FOP would speak out against police misconduct with the same passion they’ve spoken out for arbitration.
Catanzara said the outcome of Thursday’s vote was what he expected. It added it tees the union up for a court battle with the city.
He framed the legal fight as a warning for Mayor Brandon Johnson and signaled an uphill battle for Johnson’s reelection bid.
“They’ve all but thrown the gauntlet down,” he said to reporters. “He wants a fight, and I can tell you right now: He has just made himself public enemy number one in 2027.”
Follow @RosenCaitlyn
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
