The Finance Committee of the Cook County Board is what we can.

We have the office of the sheriff for the Honorable Time of Star.

Welcome.

Is it down around?

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you so much, Mr.

Chairman.

Thanks for uh having me here.

Uh the fiscal 26 budget that we are operating with is 774 million, uh, which was a sixty-four million dollar increase from 25, which is mostly due to salaries.

Our current spend for 26 is 362 million.

Um so we're on track to meet our budget.

Uh as we had said we would be.

The biggest driver of uh fluctuation there is our overtime.

Our overtime budget was set at 72 million.

We're at 60 million already, and we anticipate we're going to exceed that.

That has been driven primarily by our call-ins.

At the Department of Corrections, we average 467 officers calling in every day using sick time or FMLA.

And so that's 467 officers a day that makes it a little tricky at times, so we have to utilize overtime to cover that.

Um between that and some of the help we gave to the town of Broadview and the state um police um out there, that those were the two big drivers of the overtime that we had.

But because we slowed down hiring, we feel pretty confident we will meet our budget that we had said we'd meet.

I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Sheriff, it's always great to see you and uh just want to say thank you to you, uh Brad, uh Jason, your entire team for uh the good work you do for continuing to uh allow me and my chief of staff to visit.

Uh we get you you make sure we get in, you make sure we get out.

Uh but every time I go to uh the jail, I learn a lot.

And uh so I just want to say thank you.

I'm still waiting for the helicopter ride, and I'm gonna do that with Commissioner Scott.

We're committed to do that.

Oh, absolutely.

We're committed to do that.

Give you both parachutes the whole nine yards.

So in the last year, you know, it's been a dystopic time for all of us.

And um certainly uh the sheriff's office has been called to probably engage in activities that are different from other activities that you've ever had to engage in.

Um what have we learned over the course of of the last year?

What can we do better than what we've done?

Well, I mean, to your point, uh to your point, a lot of the uh uh issues are driven by factors outside of all of our controls.

Now that's always been the case in law enforcement because you can't predict crime and things along those lines.

But now with all of the different um levels of uh intervention from the federal side of things, it complicates things tremendously.

I mean, obviously, as you folks know it what it's done to your budget and how that's complicated, and good luck anticipating that.

With us, it's complicated our uh operations at time because for you know, for starters, you know, we had no plan in place to be you know trying to assist the state um at Broadview and help that town out.

So that was, you know, training people, deploying people, all that.

Um so I mean, in the areas that you would expect us to be working on and to be in front of, we've been you know doing just that.

We've been out in front of the issues, we've been anticipating the issues, um, you know, whether it's the jail population, operations of the jail, uh, the uh winding down of EM, the working together with uh Judge Beech, which has been fantastic.

Those things have all worked pretty seamlessly.

The parts that get um uh difficult, as they say, is when we get the all of a sudden out of nowhere, we get some uh pivot from the federal government, and then we're scrambling.

Um I and I don't know how to work around that.

Um is we've always said we we're really proud of what we do, but at the same time, we're far from perfect.

So if there's suggestions on things that we can do differently, we'll either do them or at least certainly explore to see if they make sense to do.

Okay.

I think that's fair.

That's a fair request, and I think you can trust this board will do that as is needed.

Um relative to the EM program, uh are you now the sheriff's uh department?

Are you completely out of the program?

How how is that working?

I wish uh we were down, I and I say that only.

I I I say that only because one of the things that I anticipated and I had mentioned uh year plus ago was that there would be some people on the EM that would just uh uh linger for lack of a better word.

So we stopped accepting people well over a year ago, but we're still we we're 168 or seven people on it right now, which really is not a good use of anyone's time.

We anticipated that.

So for months now we've been working both with the Chief Judge's office and with the um uh the the new entity that was created for the rest of the state of Illinois.

I I can't remember the name of it right now that administers uh home monitoring for all the rest of the st the the state.

We've talked with them and we've done everything anybody would ask us to do to move those 160 off of us to frankly uh I you know save money.

Um and it is just taking a lot of time.

And I don't it it's none of it has to do with us.

We could literally turn it over tomorrow.

Um it just wouldn't be hard.

So you know uh any ideas from people, please have at it, but we're it doesn't make a lot of sense.

Well, I could be wrong, Brad.

You'll keep me in integrity, but I think a year ago you still had about six hundred or so.

So I it it's happening.

It's happening, it's just that the ones we have, they're they're moving maybe maybe one a week.

Yeah, it's just taking forever.

And as you know, the they get day for day credit why they're on home monitoring.

So a lot of these are guys who have cases where they're anticipating, I think, some degree of you know prison time, and so by utilizing being on home monitoring, they're gaining time day for day.

Um the problem is is we're trying to end that our program, and we'd committed to hang on to everybody that was in our program.

There's no way to anticipate when these guys install men when they'll get out.

Um and so but that's why just transferring to another entity is the smart move, and we've been attempting to do that for quite a while now.

And last thing relative to EM and and then Chairman, thank you for the time.

I'll I'll be done.

Explain to me again uh and to us.

The difference relative to the EM program, which the sheriff's office ran for years, and what the um Chief Judge's office is now doing.

I'm I'm being told that there's some differences.

There's some differences.

There there are differences, Sheriff, relative to when the programs actually kick off, so to speak.

I don't know if it's court related or if that's even accurate.

Is there a difference between the actual process, the EM process being utilized by the chief judge as opposed to the process which for years was used by your office?

I think the primary difference would be the way they were administered.

So by and large, most of their program throughout the years was more or less a curfew program where people were uh everybody w regardless of your charge, you were allowed uh there was some nuance with domestic violence cases, but by and large, regardless of your charge, you were allowed to do whatever you wanted from I think seven in the morning to seven at night, and then you're supposed to be home at the ours was driven by specific people, unique circumstances with each one.

So some people had freedom of movement throughout the entire day, um, but then had to be home at night.

Other ones had to be home all day because of the seriousness of the offense and the judge's orders and things like that.

Um so ours was more restrictive program, um, and that's what we had billed it as that if you put someone on ours, you can be assured that they will be staying in their house, other than you know, doctor's appointments, going to school, job, things like that.

Um whereas the uh judge's one was this one where it was blanket uh movement, and so there was a um group of people who felt we were too restrictive, and so they went to Springfield, started changing our um ability to monitor people, and that really was what precipitated us getting out of it.

We were no lay longer able to monitor people in the way we committed to doing it, which is we were committing that we're gonna keep people safe, and we couldn't do that anymore.

And so with uh Charlie in there now, we have been uh having extensive um we meet uh once every other week, me and Charlie, and then our staffs are with us as well, and we go through uh a range of issues, but EM's always at the top because we know a lot about it, and so we've been transferring not just a lot of our sort of um intellectual side of things to it, but also just some of the practical things as well.

So I think they're going through a lot of um uh uh changes and adapting their program to have some of it mirror what we do.

Um and I think it it's not like they're gonna become what our program was.

I think they're gonna take parts of it and import it now.

But it they were very distinct programs.

And the other big thing too, which I always thought was you know fascinating, not in a good way, was our program was completely transparent.

You can go online and you could look at who's on it, what they're on for, and all the rest of the stuff.

The the chief judges program, you had no idea.

We couldn't find out who was on the program.

And so we as I said, ours was much different, ours was much more responsive.

If someone left the house, we'd call them first, but if they didn't respond, we'd eventually send a car over there, which was not the case in the uh the old program, the chief judge's one.

That's great information.

Thank you, Sheriff.

Sure.

Thank you, Chair.

Hello, good morning, Sherman.

Sheriff Deem.

Um just a few questions.

Um wanted to go over some of the goals, and then I have some questions regarding the county courthouses and um the sheriff's role in that.

Um so one of the goals that is listed in the 2026 is that 98% of the population uh will receive an indig individualized assessment and strategic assessment evaluation.

Um so just wanted to see if you can elaborate on what those really mean and what they entail, what those assessments are.

And then what is um there is a component on there and the goal as described as the discharge plan.

So if you can also kind of talk about that.

Sure.

Um so long ago I made the determination that I I could just run uh a traditional jail where you put people in their cells, you feed them three times a day, get them back and forth to court and doctor's appointments and call it a day.

I I didn't want to do that.

Um I thought that their period of time with us was this unique opportunity to try to ch change trajectories of people's lives.

Well, the only way to do that was to develop individualized plans for everybody in there.

And the only way to do that was to do this really deep download on intake, and that's what we call the individual assessment of everyone and then putting a strategic plan together for them.

The the the hook always has been, and we knew it from the get-go is I can't force people into any of these programs.

So a lot of it's just a really like um hard sell that we don't stop.

So even if they're like intake, after we've gotten this data from people, and we can see clearly this person would benefit from an educational program or benefit from a jobs program or benefit from mental health treatment.

Um if they say no, we still have them marked as someone we're gonna keep going back at over the course of the coming weeks to see if we can get them in these programs.

And so all of that then is with this notion that this everybody's different, everyone's issues are different, and that we wanna try to get at some of the underlying reasons why either people are here or underlying reasons why when they leave us, they're gonna face a lot of challenges, and some of them we can help with.

And so that's that part of it on the front end.

The back end is with the dis discharge plan is to have coherent plans, thoughtful plans for when people leave.

Um that is always complicated by the fact we don't know when people are leaving.

But now if we get you into our programming and we get you into some of the planning that we have put together, we already start working on your discharge plan, not knowing when you're gonna leave.

And that runs the gamut, but it used uh it really starts with housing and trying to work through the housing, then we give them uh a plan, but more than a plan uh on how to stay connected to the mental health treatment that they may be getting with us at that point.

And so what I mean by that is we will work with community providers on the outside to get them to transition to the community provider, and in the event they need things such as transportation, we'll we'll supply that, even though they they're not with us anymore.

And so it really is unique to everybody, but with this notion that the different things that you have worked on while you're with us, we don't want them to just frankly be thrown away when you left us because we acted as if you're somehow gonna you know follow through on everything uh once you leave us.

And so it's with this notion to have almost like a hospital.

Here's the plan when you leave us, here's what you need to do, here's the follow-ups, here's the people you can reach out to.

And then we have an entire unit that that's what they do is they stay in contact with these folks, and we have a lot of success there.

We have a lot of people we continue to case manage that are not obviously in our custody anymore.

Uh difficulties arise that are all understandable, you know.

We people lose cell phone coverage, um, people move, um, people, you know, the housing we tried to get for them didn't pan out, and now they're living somewhere else and we don't know where that is.

And so we try to anticipate those challenges as well as we can.

Um, but that's really just this comprehensive approach.

When you come in, analyze you, get you into programs unique to you, and then when you leave to stay connected to you, just keep working with us.

And some of it's worked out really well.

I mean, a lot of the people stay connected with us and then they come and work for us.

They become employees of ours because they're just really you know amazing people who have a lot to add.

So we stay connected to a lot of people.

Have you met the 98% of the other?

On the on the front end, yes, there's a little bit of a caveat where some people we try to do it right at the intake, and sometimes as you can imagine, some people aren't in that mindset at intake where they even want to talk to us.

I mean they'll give us basic information, but they won't give us the stuff that we need, and then they're not terribly interested in going into any program.

They just want to be left alone.

So at the like the intake part of it, it's more in the high 80s, but then we get it up into the 90s over the course of the weeks.

So it's sort of a rolling thing.

And then what what you're describing seems like it's an internal so this doesn't get shared out to even SERMAC or anything, or how does that work?

Uh we we share a lot with Slurmick.

There's a lot of times uh where different things we're doing, particularly in the mental health component there, where we are sharing all sorts of information.

Um we have we share it with their lawyers.

Um so because their lawyers will use some of the different things that they're doing with us as a way to mitigate whatever their criminal case is.

Um and we'll give certificates to people who we we give them to many people without asking other ones will give them to them because they use them for purposes of their sentencing.

So there's some of it that's connected, there's other parts that are not so much so.

If there's parts of it that would make m sense to connect to other entities, I'm happy to do it.

Um, you know, with obviously privacy issues, things like that.

But I'm happy to do it if there's some things that you guys see that we can, you know, share with people.

Um I'm on board.

Okay.

Uh appreciate that.

Yeah, I was just um trying to figure out what was the main um usage, and it looks like it's internal and in a way strategically.

Yeah, internal, but as I say, uh I long ago I came, you know, woke up knowing that if we just do this all internal that not this information part, but like the programming part, and then it just stopped at the door that I just wasted a lot of time and money.

So there's a lot outside, but um is to your point, sharing like the the program and stuff, it's is pretty much internal.

But if people want us to share it with folks, we'd be happy to do it.

Yeah, but it's it's done if it is shared, it's because they're requesting it or they're lawyers or because of medical reasons, etc.

Yeah, yeah, but that's why if you come across some part of it where it makes sense to share it with some other entity, I'd be happy to do it.

I'm usually a against a lot of sharing.

Yeah.

Um I think uh so for us it's about the privacy thing, which is what you mentioned.

So I think you mentioned that it's um, you know, uh that that's always taken into consideration.

Yeah, right.

Um so okay.

Um and then to to my next question, I guess I'm just you have been around where um when the ice detainer was passed here in Cook County.

Um, and that is essentially the federal government or ICE asking for someone to be detained beh beyond the time that they were supposed to be detained in Cook County jail, all with the purposes of um, you know, uh arresting or detaining someone um in immigration um proceedings.

So I'm just wondering, has the federal government reached out in any way?

Have they continued to request ICE detainer?

I know we don't um typically um follow them or we don't, we're not supposed to based up an ordinance, but just wondering have they been reaching out?

Has there been any additional information that they've requested from you and your team?

The um the House Judiciary Committee has subpoenaed a bunch of um of our data um uh in Washington.

Um so they've been looking for our data on this area and been subpoena and stuff.

Um as far as detainers, we have not been uh honoring those.

We tell them that you know if you have arrest warrants, you know, we honor those.

But um I I don't know if there's is there been a drop off?

Do they even ask for?

Um they still send they'll still still send them, but they don't, they we don't acknowledge them or do anything.

They'll send them but we don't.

Okay.

Okay.

Thank you.

Um so since uh January of 20 uh 25, we've seen an increase in immigration agents in Cook County, um, especially in the courthouses, which is something that you're very well aware of.

I know you've engaged with many of us and your team has in trying to figure out what is the best solution.

There's obviously an executive order, there's also an administrative order from the chief judge's office.

Um so uh again, thank you for for uh the discussion.

But just had a few questions regarding that.

Um we know your staff is prohibited from assisting federal agents and executing federal immigration, civil immigration actions.

I want to be clear about that.

Um can your office um continue to um we've engaged in conversations about what does it mean to go beyond that, right?

Um so is there any way in which your staff can actually ask federal agents to leave courthouses and the surrounding parking lots, um, given obviously the state law and the executive orders um if they are conducting civil um immigration.

You see, part of the difficulty is we don't know to your point, because we don't interact with them, we don't know when they're doing uh ranges of things.

And so particularly when they're doing their operations, we don't know they're even out there.

Um and a lot of their stuff I we're I we are led to believe, because once again we aren't told this um they usually operate you know blocks away and things like that.

Um so we um don't know when they're there and when they come into the courthouses, they're required to comply like other law enforcement officers with you know announcing who they are as far as checking their weapons, things like that.

Um and then when they come in, my understanding is more often than not when they come into the courthouses, they're going into usually like the clerk's office to get some data or something, I guess.

Uh but once again we don't interact with them, so we're not sure what they're doing, and they don't tell us.

And when so I believe um there's not a formal protocol within your office um in regards to this is step one, step two, step three.

Um, and this is based on conversations that we've had with the team.

Um we had a meeting and we um you know suggested whether there were asked whether there were like official protocols that were um internal.

Um and one of the things that was um that we received was well, according to the executive order, they were supposed to be, I believe asset management was supposed to create overall overarching uh protocols and that those have may have not been in place.

But just wondering, is there an interest in establishing official protocols?

Particularly I'm interested in understanding, you know, if there are um federal agents that we don't know to your point whether they're doing civil or um whether they are doing um uh judicial proceedings or or arrest, um, whether there's a way for us to find out number one, what they're doing, and number two, whether there's a way to officially verify whether there's a it's a criminal judicial warrant or not, and what does that process really look like?

So not sure if that's something that has been discussed.

Yeah, well, we'll uh we have all of our people have gone through training um on these issues.

So we have training as far what their rules of who they uh can interact with, how they can interact with people and things like that.

So we do that, we keep updating it, you know, because things do seem to change, um, and we're happy to do more of that.

Is it you know, we attempt to find out uh, you know, what people are doing more often than not, we don't get responses um and answers.

Um if there's ways that you can come up with more uh like ways to make it clearer for how we're supposed to operate, it's just to the point we were talking about earlier.

It's just we're constantly having to pivot because things are changing.

So if there are some ways that you um can bring more clarity, we're all for that because as I said, we've been training our people over and over on this and how they're supposed to act.

And the the more clarity we can get the the better.

So we're we're open to listening to ideas and suggestions that make it clearer.

Okay, yeah, I think I'm I I think this this part is particularly important and obviously concerning to not only me, but some of uh my colleagues um and community members.

I think something that I often go back to is um the fact that it is our duty collectively to ensure that people have access to justice.

And if there's fear going to a courthouse, not only does it prevent the state attorney from doing her job, but it makes things unsafe for everybody.

Um and I think any time that we can create an actual protocol where people know um and create uh a stronger way, again, collectively to have people feel comfortable going to our courthouses is extremely important.

And as elected officials, um, you know, I I take that to heart and I you know obviously want to want to figure out what is the better way to do that because we are seeing so many people be picked out.

Um Yeah, and I couldn't agree with you more.

I mean, it serves no purpose for anybody to make it so that people are afraid to come to courthouses.

I mean, starting with the fact that these are people who are victims of crimes, these are people who are witnesses to crimes.

Um we have like a range of reasons why we want people to not just come there but to feel comfortable coming there.

I mean, is we've heard a million times, and it's the truth, the biggest issues that law enforcement has these days is getting witnesses to any crime, to any crime.

So now if you make another reason for people not to want to get engaged, that is not helpful at all.

And so that's why the guy we were talking with people from ICER and the like yesterday about some ideas about how things can be done virtually and things along those lines so that people don't have to worry about the fear of coming there, because it serves no one's purpose, no one to make it so that it's a place that people fear coming to.

I mean, it just exacerbates problems that already exist.

And so I I couldn't agree with you more.

Okay.

You mentioned that y all of your team receives training.

Wondering particularly if they're trained in distinguishing between a criminal judicial warrant and an immigration warrant.

Um they're definitely trained on the difference between like um uh uh judicial warrants and the civil warrants for detainers and things like that.

They know the difference absolutely.

Okay.

Um my next question is in regards to the protocols um of your team when dealing with rapid responders and civilians, um, particularly with the right of them recording an incident or interactions with ICE or federal agents.

Well, they're trained and given specific training on First Amendment and the right of people to record and do that.

So there's specific training that in that area, and it's been further drilled into because of all the nuances of everything going on now.

Um and so we do that, and we if we find instances where people are not doing that property, we retrain them, but we have not had um incidences that in the recent past uh where that was a concern because we've been training people specifically to let them know people are allowed to do these things.

Okay.

Yeah, we we think that's important, especially because we understand there's an overall, I think, um will from a lot of people to hold um some of the criminal things that ICE agents have been doing either through midway blitz um or potentially them violating rights of individuals.

So if they're in our courthouse, if they're in our vicinity in our property for rapid response individuals or civilians to record and to be a part of that is extremely important.

Yeah, and there's just there's some weird nuances that make it tricky.

So there's some parts of like the criminal courts building where everybody, no one's allowed to do a video tape.

And but then there's other big things.

But that's internal, right?

Within the courthouses or boundaries, within the area.

Within other areas of the courthouses, people can do it.

I mean, my point is is that even building to building, there's some nuances at times.

But but we try to train our people, or not trying, we do train them on the nuances to let people know that they're free to do that.

And I think it would be really beneficial for us to figure out what are those nuances and where exactly um because oftentimes it could be looked at um whether you know uh uh the sheriff's office may not be allowing right recording, and whether that's a decision internally within the office or not, to your point.

I just are always because of court orders, not our orders.

Right.

Um but we can get you that almost like uh uh here's where the judiciary says you can go in this building where you can't go with videos.

We can we can look at the And then that's also um in collaboration with the chief judges' office, correct?

It is that that's what you're referring to.

They issue the orders and then we just follow them.

Okay.

Um the next question is in regards to the incident on June 17 um in uh Broadview.

Um, just wondering, obviously there's been concerns by commissioners, also some state um electeds.

Wondering um what is the um uh I guess what was the official response that you all can share of what happened.

Uh the particular concerns are whether they're the sheriff's office is working or somehow in communication with um, you know, uh ICE agents and whether that is something that violates the state law or violates other things.

So just wondering, you know, what exactly did you all um internally do uh regarding this incident and if there was any type of corruptive actions taken.

So the this was in bridge view.

And um sorry, I I said, Yeah, thank you.

Thank you for the correction.

No, only because we're out in Broadview too, and I'm like, well, maybe there's something going on there too.

No, it was in Bridgeview.

Um but so the we've looked through that incident, we've talked with the people that were involved with it.

Um we've looked at the video, and what we can tell you is we had no idea ICE was going to be there that day.

They didn't tell us we had no idea.

We subsequently found out, like I think the next day maybe it was that they had already been out in the parking area or somewhere out that way, and they had taken two individuals.

I think one was a child into custody.

Um we didn't even know that until like a day later.

Um so we didn't know that they were around there, what they were up to.

And so we were manning our normal uh security posts at the entrance to Bridgeview, and then the next thing we know, there's a guy that's racing in through the exit.

Um, and as he comes running in, our people then are obviously surprised.

Our people are obviously not supposed to let people come running in through the exit.

You know, obviously these buildings have domestic violence cases going on, they have criminal cases going on, they have custody cases going on.

We had no idea who this person running in through the exit was.

So the perception of collaboration is there, number one.

And that's what we're looking at.

Yeah, from the video uh uh point of view.

Um but the the other part is um as a as a public servant, um it is very um concerning when someone says, Well, you know, are they breaking the law when they're illegal as as a sheriff saying that?

And the perception of if you're a public servant and if you're there to make sure that the rules are being followed, whether that statement or that sentiment actually creates an issue.

Well, that's what that's being looked at as well because we're trying to make sure that the people are following what the procedures are and the policies are in the office and not assisting in any form or fashion.

Um and so if people have crossed those lines, we passed them on to be investigated.

And I, you know, we had probably 10 or 12 people out there.

Um the other eight or nine people were doing nothing.

There weren't any assisting, weren't cheering people on.

We had numerous people trying to get information from the window of a car to try to find out who these people are, who you've taken into custody.

Do you have an arrest warrant?

Those things were all being asked.

We weren't getting a lot of responses for them.

And so in a lot of our people, the vast majority of people did exactly what they've been trained to do.

And those two cases there were were looking into to see if it was violating the the policy, but it wasn't like that.

Was the that was the same thread through everybody.

Everybody was on board.

No, that wasn't it at all.

They treated the um the people at the video cameras very well, who mind you I don't know if you've heard the the people the video cameras weren't particularly nice at all.

Um every other word was an F bomb, literally directed on all the people, and no one reacted, no one said anything.

They said no, you just you just need me put back, you know, blah, blah, blah.

And they they treated them respectfully.

Uh they did not treat any of our people respectfully, and that's fine.

That's their their choice to do.

But our people showed, you know, their professionalism is they did that.

And for the two people, the only two people that I'm aware of where there's a question of it, we're investigating it.

Yeah.

Um, no, I I I understand.

I think um, you know, emotions are high right now.

Yeah.

Um the goal is always to ensure the safety of everybody, right?

I think we can all agree on that.

And the also goal is being able to access it and whether access justice.

Um, and I think I'm uh, you know, I think many of us are particularly, you know, worried about the perception of what that looks like and whether um to your point and that you're you're all looking into it, so I won't I won't make additional comments on that.

But I will say because it you know emotions are high because there's so much at stake and because we're seeing unprecedented attacks on communities, but also complete overreach from the federal government here locally.

Um I think it's extremely important to distinguish between uh emotions being high of someone that is trying to document and also um public servants.

Yeah, and to your point, the professionalism is appreciated from the other individuals.

But I think um and I appreciate you all looking into the other cases, whether there is any, you know, any particular things that need to be additionally looked at, or whether there's any internal changes and ensuring that the culture um uh is is looked at again as as a place where in uh folks can either feel safe going to a sheriff if there is an issue, um, and uh whether that creates an additional barrier, right, between the sheriff's office and the community member.

And those and that's exactly where I'm trying to get at too.

That's why people have to take this all in you know perspective and understand those like we have great people that work for me.

Um when people slip up or perceive slip up, we'll investigate it.

But like right now, we're actively working on the Franklin Park case.

We've done 30 some interviews, got no response from the federal government.

We've sent numerous uh letters to the federal government asking to preserve evidence.

We set up a portal for citizens to come forward if they have issues with the federal entities.

Um the uh judiciary committee um is making it clear that I am someone they don't feel is doing my job properly, and so that's all fine.

I signed up for this, I get it all.

But then when, as I said, people want to take an isolated thing with one person, maybe a second one, and some out say that's a culture of our place.

Wow, is that reinventing history?

And is that a fantasy?

And I'm not into fantasies.

Well, I think uh I think again, I I repeat, you know, perception is is is um is important and I think conveniently ignore everything else.

I but that often happens, right?

So I think like no, but it doesn't mean you need to go along with it.

Um I'm talking about me.

Yeah, yeah.

Um well I think it's I think you know that's why we're having this conversation.

I think it's extremely important for us to have these discussions, and like I said earlier, like we have um engaged in a lot of it with your with your team.

Um we talked earlier when I was talking with the folks from ICER yesterday.

If there's some other suggestions, please, because uh be honest with you, the more clarity we have, it's actually it makes it so much easier for us because right now, as you and I've talked about, there's like so much nuance to this thing.

Whereas I wish there was just more clarity, it would make life so much easier for us to say, listen, well, here's where people can go um to enforce what they're trying to enforce.

This is what it is, but the nature of it is so complex right now, starting with the fact none of us will talk to each other by design, by design.

Yeah, and that's why I'm more than willing to be a part of that, and whether it's through the protocols component, I know again, thank you so much for engaging in those conversations regarding protocols.

Um, and I think it's important that again collectively we figure out how to actually have the executive orders mean something and the administrative orders.

Um, because to me, what is most interest the the the thing that I'm more um particularly interested in is ensuring safety for my constituents, but um safety in regards to unfortunately in these times federal agents and what the things you know that they have done.

I've often talked about uh you know, um Operation Midway Blitz and the horrendous things that I got to see in my own district, just a few blocks from from me.

Um a lot of elected officials that were there got um you know maced.

Uh you know, we have a commissioner that sits on this board, Commissioner Vasquez that got shoved before, you know, in June of last year.

So there are a lot of concerning issues, and I just want to make sure that here that we're following our own ordinances, that we're following our own values and ensuring that the community members are um protected from some of those attacks.

And sometimes it's it really is, you know, working colla collaboratively to ensure that those safety mechanisms are internal within our offices.

So thank you for your willingness to being able to do that, and I look forward to working very closely to ensure that those gaps are closed.

That sounds great.

Thank you.

Thank you, Chairman I do have some other ones but I know everyone think and I Commissioner Breeda Commissioner has an a personal thing she has to attend to after so we'll go to Commission Breed and then back to you.

Thank you Chairman I wanted to take a quick liberty to recognize my baby sister who is here who came in to watch my kids so I could go to NACO.

She's also a city council member in Beacon New York.

Welcome friends in the family well first I want to uh thank you sheriff uh you've been a great partner on our language access work I want to thank Jason personally for always being able to help us kind of walk through what's possible we just put up some new language access signage um at the Skokie Courthouse in my district that we hope to expand countywide so we appreciate your partnership on that.

I know Commissioner and I already asked a number of uh questions about what happened in June I guess my question I know you said it's going to be it's um an OPR right now do we have any sense of how long the investigation might take a not very long okay not not very long.

So I just would request a a private meeting with you after that um to just understand what happened and like you said again just trying to think about what is possible.

Sure absolutely um in terms of protecting our folks um my other questions are um I think we're all including yourself I know concerned about the situation at the desks in the jail I know there's a number of different reasons um as to what has caused some of this I know some of it is the staffing um issues and and and challenges with you know cross watching and things like that.

How many current vacancies do you have in your office?

123 223 I'm sorry.

And are you know we look at every death we tear it apart to try to see if we can better cross watching is not been the thing that has led to these the majority of the deaths that we've had recently the vast majority of them are natural name naming that someone had cancer and they passed away as a result of it.

Someone had pre-existing health conditions uh they were sent to the Stroger hospital um they passed away you know good medical treatment all the rest of it but they're listed as in our custody but they're over at the hospital so when we have the deaths the majority of them have come under that or there were some where it was the drug soaked paper which we led the country um and you don't have to believe me you can look at the New York Times uh we led the country and um identifying it analyzing it and addressing it and it's still not perfect because like an average sheet of paper like like this size she the paper it goes for like 10,000 dollars.

And so you can imagine then that that gets to be um a horrible incentive for people to try to sneak it into the jail and things like that.

So we've had to prosecute a lot of people what's the number again?

136 this year.

We prosecuted yes total yeah between inmates and staff we've prosecuted 136 people for bringing that drug soaked paper in so I mean our biggest issue is as I said at the outset was people who either call in sick or you utilize FMLA on a given day and so when you think about it we have 467 people on average every day that call in it this really makes it tricky when we're then trying to fill those slots which we do.

But so the deaths in custody are something where we've been on top of forever you know compared to other jurisdictions we're way in front there's some things that we have been attempting to get through the board um like heart monitors and things like that that have been taking way too long to get um that we think could be helpful but um as I said there's uh a range of reasons the majority of them are health related that end up causing those deaths you referenced um you know I know and there's been a number that were also um had to do with overdoses and I from what I understand there's been some challenges with having Narcan available as quickly as as possible I think that there was at least one case where the Narcan was not available.

No that's not no that's not accurate.

We got it on every we have it on every tier we have at least one report I see in in this where there was it said that it was not available when the officer went to go get it.

Well that means the officer wasn't carrying it but it may maybe yeah as I say if an officer uniquely didn't carry it that day that that could happen and then we'd write them up and discipline someone but that's not our protocol and we've made a point of having Narcan everywhere.

I think we were the first jail in the country that have it all over the place because we've been so uh engaged with the overdose issue which is driven by this paper.

This paper is the big thing, and the um alternative that some people have done is they prohibit paper from coming in the jail.

I felt that that would have been very difficult given the fact that the cards and letters that individuals get from their children and from family members is literally the thing that keeps them going at times.

And so that would have been the easy thing where you say no more paper in the jail.

But I thought from a human standpoint that would be not the right thing to do.

And places like IDOC have banned paper, and they haven't seen the great change either.

It's just a very difficult thing when people have come up with these bizarre, usually cannabinoids that they soak these in, and there's no rhyme or reason to how they concoct these things.

We did a long-term investigation where we caught one of the people that was doing this in his uh basement, um, and he was sending things all around the country as well, making lots and lots of money.

Um, but it just was tricky to keep this from coming in.

So we've got this scan machine now that's uh the best of the best that helps us, but it's not perfect.

Um and so we've gone down dramatically on the overdose deaths.

Um it was in 2023 when it really hit hard, and we had eight overdose deaths that year.

Um we had none last year, and we have um two suspected ones from this year.

Um, but it's all coming from that paper, which is tricky.

So you're saying I know that the Narcan uh was supposed to be available on each floor.

You're saying that officers carry it now as well?

Yes.

Every officer.

Does everyone have we have a pouch?

They have a pocket and a pouch that they can carry.

Yes.

Um yes, yes, they have a pocket in a pouch that they carry it in now.

Every officer.

Yeah, we don't have any shortage of now.

And we have no shortage in our camp.

Um, my last question is specifically about I know we have a number of vocational programs that you know are really great for uh folks kind of getting skills and and staying active.

Um I guess my question is about if and how much they get paid for their labor um when they're in a vocational program.

Um I can't.

And I know that there are a lot of different programs.

So you know if you can speak um are there programs where people are not getting paid, or are they getting paid in all programs?

I I'd have to get it get that to you because as you just mentioned, you're right.

It's it differs from program to program, and there's a lot of nuances to that.

Um I can get that for you.

There are some programs where people are not paid.

Um like the dog program don't get paid on that.

Yeah, so like in our dog training program, we have like a waiting list like you wouldn't believe.

Everybody wants to get into the program uh to work there, but we don't pay them, but they get to work with dogs in a you know quantit hut environment on the old boot camp, which is very appealing to a lot of people.

So that would be one where there's no pay, but boy, um the people involved with it are uh thrilled to be there.

Um, and it's a huge waiting list.

Can we just get a breakdown then of all the different programs in which are paid and how much?

Yeah, we'll do.

Thank you, Sheriff.

Oh, it's thank you.

You're welcome.

Thank you, Chair Daly.

Um and thank you, Sheriff Dart, for being here today.

I know that these are long days and lots of commissioners have a lot of questions for you.

But let me start off by saying that your team is always very responsive.

Um, especially uh Roe and Jason and uh first I've ever heard them mention positively.

Um I know that's not true because we say it all the time, but it does merit saying that when you have a great team, um, they deserve their accolades, and you know, you wouldn't be who you are without them.

So um as a leader, I know that you you care about that.

So let's start out with the ice situation that happened at the courthouse because um you were just talking to Commissioner Nye about it and the video.

So it's a video I think we've all seen.

And um I know how you feel about that video, but let me give you some of my perspective about it.

So when those two people ran through, or that one person ran through, and then those two ICEN agents ran through security.

Um, what I would have liked to have seen was your sheriff's officers approaching them and kind of de-escalating that situation right at that time and just slowing everything down and saying, hey, where are you from?

Where's your paperwork, whatever it is, asking those questions?

I completely understand that the your part of that can only be doing whatever your protocol allows.

If those ICE agents are pushing your people out of the way are running out that door, you can't control what they do.

You can't control the fact that they do not tell you that they will be there.

You can't control whether they're good people or bad people.

All you can control is the people that are underneath your employment.

So what I would have liked to have seen is those people approaching the ICE officers and saying, you know, what are you doing?

Who are you with?

Where's your paperwork?

Do you have a warrant?

You know, why are you here?

You have to, whatever it is.

And I think talking to those people may have slowed that situation down.

It may not have.

And like armchair quarterbacking is not going to help this situation.

Um, you know, just the the observation that they're making, just like they would if they are on the street and they see something fast escalating, you know, the whole idea is to slow that situation down, get more information.

So just on the upfront, that's what I would have liked to have seen.

I mean, I think what we all agree on the back end the the fist bumping and all of that stuff, and you putting it through OPR is completely appropriate.

But at least on the front end, I would have liked to have seen a de-escalation.

Um, the woman who was kind of clearing the way to make sure that the camera people who were, as you said, um very upset and you know, meaning one way to put it.

You know, uh yeah those people aside, let's just like we said, we can't control other people.

All we can control is the people who are underneath our employment.

So that's what I would have liked to have seen on the front end.

I don't, you know, I know that you go through routine uh training with your folks, that you're constantly talking to them, that your team constantly is updating protocols and updating discussions and making sure that everybody's working from the same sheet of music.

But just on the upfront, I think it would be really helpful if they would approach those folks and just said, whatever it is that they're supposed to say, who are you, what kind of paperwork do you have, what's going on, why are you arresting this person?

They're not a part of your team.

Um so that's what I would like to say.

I I just don't know how realistic that is based on the facts of what occurred, because the reality is you start with the fact that it's a secure courthouse for good reason.

I don't think you or anybody else is suggesting that we stop with doing security screens and let people come running in.

Absolutely not.

Okay, well uh yeah, so when our people are trained to keep a place secure and you have someone running full speed through the exit into a secure courthouse, it doesn't allow itself sometimes to, you know, just say, Sir, can you stop one second and let's have a little conversation here?

Not with the gentleman who was running through with the ICE agents.

Well, the ICE agents were the ICE agents were seconds behind them, seconds behind them.

So a person comes running into the exit through the exit of a courthouse.

Our people have no idea what's going on.

They're just trying to secure it, make sure it's not someone trying to harm somebody, do something at the courthouse.

We have you know bomb calls all the time.

Um so our people are trying to make sure that's on it.

They didn't even get to that point because he immediately immediately fell down.

The ICE agents were on him within seconds, and they got him up and out the door within seconds.

And so these were our frontline deputies were just working the security point.

Our command staff, our I think lieutenant or sergeants immediately were called, they're all racing out there, and people who look at the videos can see we had a large group of people following out there doing what you just said, asking, who are you, why are you doing this?

Do you have warrants?

What's he you would you have them for?

And we're getting very little information.

At that point, though, that you're talking about, I just do not think it's realistic at all to sit there and say there was a point that can be de-escalated.

There was no one doing it.

They weren't looking at us, they weren't looking for advice from us.

They were just grabbing the person they had chased, and they're taking them out.

And we weren't assisting, we weren't like directing, we were just trying to keep people the courthouse safe at that point and trying to figure out what the heck just happened.

We had no idea what was going on.

And then once it, you know, we got that part of it under control, then as I said, supervisors and the rest are following people out, they're trying to find out okay, what are you doing here?

Why are you here?

Do you have proper paperwork?

All that stuff.

And which is again, we got minimal information from them before they drove off.

I think the supervisor on the back end did a great job.

And like I said, things transpired very rapidly, but just on the front end, I would have liked to have somebody just say, What are you doing?

Just like that person who ran through security, the two ICE agents are not sheriff's officers.

Every single person who runs through security, regardless of who they are, unless they are part of your team, needs to be stopped.

And that's what I would have liked to have seen is them stop ever all three people, not just the person who ran through, but the ICE agents as well.

Well, they were stopped.

No one was getting by the security point.

I mean, they weren't like, you know, standing aside and letting them run through.

That was all happening before the the uh metal detectors.

And as I said, they didn't linger.

They uh grabbed the gentleman, they put them in uh restraints and off they went.

But they were not looking for our advice, our opinion, they weren't looking for anything.

And our people once again did not know what was just happening from they were just trying to keep it safe.

And then we had two people with cameras came running in through the city.

I saw the whole video.

Well, guess what?

That was a chaotic mess.

Yes.

And so we have two other people.

We don't know who they are.

Once again, we don't know any of the people there.

So they come running in with cameras, and we're trying to get them to say telling them calmly that if you want to go come in, you can't can't come running through the exit because that has a tendency to cause security concerns.

You gotta go over here.

So there was a lot going on that I just don't think that, you know, uh even looking at it, you know, Monday morning quarterbacking why you just sit there and say, I don't know what else could have been done here.

There was no time for depause.

They move so quickly.

But then as I said, it'd be one thing if our people just stopped doing anything.

It's like, no, they followed them all out in there.

Or ask them, what are you doing?

Who are you?

Why are you here?

Things like that.

Um let us turn um to the safety and justice being critical for public safety.

You know, that is something that we have all talked about in this chamber a number of times.

Houston, Minneapolis, Philly, um, have all been very vocal about um making sure that they know that their local citizens are, you know, protected across the board from ice or anybody else that comes in.

Philly basically said uh the DA and the sheriff said, We will arrest you, we will put handcuffs on you, we will close those cuffs, we will put you in a cell, we will do everything at our power to convict you, and we will make sure that you serve your entire sentence because Donald Trump has no power whatsoever to pardon you here.

So that was the Philly DA and the sheriff who doubled down on warnings to arrest ICE agents.

I'm just saying that making sure that we all feel protected, regardless of who is coming in and breaking the laws really brings community together and that those calls to protect citizens from ICE are starting to snowball nationwide.

So I do pr I really appreciate when you had shared that your office is assisting in the Franklin Park investigation of Silverio Viegas Gonzalez, um, and that you've updated that you have interviewed 30 people and more broadly you have written letters to preserve evidence.

Um I know that you have seen the Illinois Accountability Commission and their report, and so I'm glad that the sheriff is working together with the state and in concert with everybody else, you know.

As ICE continues to terrorize Chicago, you know, I know that you have commitment to continue to do the job that you had sworn as an oath to protect people of the city of Chicago and Cook County.

So I appreciate that.

Um to to pivot a little bit to the dollars and cents and and the budget component of this.

Do you know how much additional money your office has spent on midway blitz and on actions that you didn't account for in the FY26 budget?

Yeah, what does it about?

175,000 it's uh it is just broadhand view.

Yeah, so uh basically just the broad view part of it, that's just under 200,000.

The state is uh going to reimburse us some part of it.

That's useful.

That's just what we messed for reimbursement from the state.

You know, how much will we spend total?

Probably about 2.2 million or about two million.

Okay.

So correction.

Um we've spent 2.2 million um at Broadview.

Okay.

Um we're attempting to get about 200,000 back from the state.

Okay.

Well, I would just ask that you kind of silo that money somewhere in case there is an opportunity later, or that we advocate for an opportunity to be paid back.

That's a good idea in the federal government at some point when it becomes a little bit more accessible for you to do so because I think you know, right now, you know, there's like what that 1.6 billion dollar fund.

There's funds being created, and I know that's a non-starter at this is at this moment, but there are funds created for a lot of silly things.

This is not a silly thing.

This is significant money that you had to expend in order to protect the people that you swore an oath to serve, and you have well the constitutional statutory obligation to serve.

So that money came from taxpayers in order to protect taxpayers from a federal government who should never have been perpetrated trading violence against those people.

So I would formally ask that you you segregate that money, you put it aside some with that that that request aside, and when there is an administration or a DOJ that seems to be more accessible that you make a request to be paid back for that money, giving them the response.

Okay, thank you.

Um my last question really is about safety in the jail.

And your office has proposed various tech measures to improve safety, including heart monitors.

It's my understanding the RFP that was originally advertised.

Or you know a request for an addendum was asked for at one point and you guys revised your statement of work.

So I was curious about if there are updates on that and how that's moving forward and how we can be helpful.

Where is right there?

Yeah Mark can you he can give you I the the exact part where it's at the Commissioner Mar Patel CIO for the sheriff's office.

The heart rate monitors um currently are with procurement and in review before issues uh to the street again.

Do you know how long it will take to issue the RFP for those?

I do not but I could get you a timeline right away after this meeting.

Okay.

Thank you.

Um just one more quick issue I know that there's been an increase in the population in the jail um what is the associated food service cost that is being increased because of that and do you have enough money for that in FY26?

Okay.

Sorry my question Yeah I did hear your question.

I just got to figure out how to work the mic I'm not the CIO.

So uh about uh 17 million has been the increase in the food contract and um some of that is obviously uh the CPI increase uh with the but um based on the increase in in the uh population and the CPI it's about 17 million.

Okay.

And you can flip that from some line to another line in order to make sure that people are fed.

Okay.

You can you have money in your budget to pay for the extra food costs.

Oh yes that was Roma questions.

Thank you for being here thank you Chairman and sheriff good to see you and everybody else here you know we uh going back to my what a colleague says we understand that the complexity when it comes to IS agent but the last thing we need is some of your deputies getting arrested by federal agents who hold federal warrants just like the situation that happened in in Wisconsin where the judge was found guilty of it.

You know and um we understand the the quick snap seconds of your officers have to react because if they don't someone can get hurt or even die.

It's a very difficult position to be with public image.

You know and I want to just mention Jason and Brad when this incident happened with the courthouse I called them right away and they explained it right away.

This is what happened down you know and it made a lot of sense that kept the uh courthouse safe.

But then I I believe that you didn't release a statement until a couple of days later I think it was a day or two later.

And something like that you got to have an immediate release.

I'm not sure if it if it came out late or not but maybe to the public but you know we're under a microscope especially now with the agents in in in um in our accounting one day and the last thing we need is you know you know uh we're the bad guy and you pre-release something I think um like in within 24 hours something okay yeah maybe I was delayed in looking at it yeah but in the I think it but part of it too Commissioner was we wanted to make sure we got it right so we went through all the video exactly all the information.

Yeah because you know how about the public is especially with the media they want something juicy and they start exaggerating it and saying you know look at the shows they're doing and look what they're doing them you know uh there's there's no there's no question about that your officers and I've and I've seen them in action and I'm very proud to say that your officers are impeccable.

They do their job they know the job and I've been in situations in Broadview where it was a very hot situation and they de-escalated the situation preventing somebody from getting hurt if not somebody dying um I have a proposal it was rejected earlier on how to work I I believe you have to work with law enforcement at all levels.

You know it's very difficult because you get judge right away and you have to be very we have to be very careful you that your department have to be very careful how you react and I and I can appreciate the complexity that's involved.

And my proposal says work with your office it's in many of your officers especially one particular officer help me design it with community based organizations how to deal with this immigration out on the control under local control your office peacefully quietly working with law enforcement to get the bad guys there's there's no dispute and we want to catch the bad guys.

It's in many of your officers, especially one particular officer helped me design it with community-based organizations, how to deal with this immigration pro uh situation and under control, under local control, your office, peacefully, quietly, working with law enforcement to get the bad guys.

There's there's no dispute, and we want to catch the bad guys.

There's no dispute in public.

But how we do it, you know, emotions are high.

And my plan is at the same time working with local all local law enforcement and your department and could also generate money for the county.

But I'm going to release it later on before I leave.

And again, it was well thought out.

My microphone went out.

Can you hear me?

Oh, yeah.

You know, um so you know, I appreciate everything that your officers are doing, because I say again, I've seen him, I seen them in action.

And I appreciate Brad and Jason that informed me before I jumped into conclusions, I call them, say what happened, and explain what happened.

Like that incident the courthouse.

This guy is just running, you don't know.

He could have shot somebody.

He could have killed somebody, but your officers acted immediately.

But then again, the impression that the public got was that you know, whatever high five situation.

That's it's unfortunate that you have a great department, great officers, they know their job, do it effectively to keep our community safe.

And for one incident, they taint the reputation.

And that's what we have to be be careful.

So uh that's you know, again, my you know, what my colleagues says.

I just think I I just need to give you get a shout out to your EM officers.

I know I worked with officers uh work with them.

Um they and this is the opinion of other counties, not just in Illinois, but other states.

You have one of them said this past weekend, the Cook County EM officers are the world cup holders in their profession.

They know what they're doing, they prevent a lot of issues or potential fatal crimes from happening.

We we should be very proud of them.

We we always have been.

Yes.

We are we we we appreciate that the reason we got out of the EM business had nothing to do with their performance.

They they were fantastic.

It's just when the legislature changed the rules on how they could operate and basically prevented them from ensuring Well, we we need to talk about it because I've talked to other prosecutors from other counties, and they kind of said something different.

But we we could that's a legal.

Well, we we I'd love to hear it, but this is a newsletter.

I told him to contact your office and explain what happened.

Well, that's besides the point.

Yeah, but I just want to just emphasize how you how your your officers, your department, you know, they they the the biggest you keep the priority to keep our community safe, and that's exactly what they're doing.

So thank you for being so much.

Commissioner Trevor B.

Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Sheriff Dart, for being here and all the uh really great answers to the questions.

I'm I'm gonna touch on something that pretty much everybody else has touched on here.

But um I you know, I I do want to acknowledge that um your department um and the officers that that work there are being called to do things that um just a few years ago were way beyond their their scope.

I recognize that, particularly with Broadview.

Um but also us as commissioners, I mean, we may hear the exceptions and we may be pressing you on the exceptions, but the reality is is that our job is to hear our constituents, whether they they were talking to us in our offices or coming up to us at events, very often the stories that we hear are those exact stories, and it's our job to sort of pursue answers to that.

Uh and and given that you I'm I'm comfortable with your explanations on a lot of what happened at the courthouse, uh, particularly with regards to people running in ice and otherwise into the exit.

Um but again, I you know, I think that that uh when I saw the video, my thought first went to training or whether or not the training that some of your officers are are getting is adequate, uh particularly in the public facing uh uh part of it.

Um the reaction at the end of the video with a couple of officers in their exchange with ICE officers.

Uh also I had a uh resident come up to me at an event a couple of months ago uh with respect to what happened uh uh one day at Broadview, and admittedly this person was trying to get arrested.

It was uh uh nonviolent civil disobedience, and he's his claim was that um you know he was kind of uh handled quite roughly given what he had done uh and had concerns about whether or not the the training that the Sheriff's Office gets with respect to how to handle nonviolent protests, uh civil disobedience is adequate.

And given that that's probably not part of the scope that that the sheriff's uh Cook County Sheriff has uh dealt with in the past.

I'm wondering what your training protocols are for these things.

How have they changed over the past uh year or so?

And also, you know, do you do you have the the uh uh uh the training, including more training for this kind of thing in your plans for this year and for the the next year, and is that part of your budget?

Yeah, we've been giving specific training to people on this ever ever evolving world that we're in.

And you're right, a lot of the stuff wasn't on our um you know, bingo card two, three years ago.

Um so we have been specifically doing it, particularly as applies to the First Amendment, how to work with uh uh you know, protesters and work with them in a different way.

We specifically go through extensive planning when we are when we're going out to like Broadview, for example, to say, here's how we're gonna operate, here's where we literally talk about here's where we're gonna put our vehicles.

We don't want certain vehicles up front because we don't want to send the wrong message.

We put lots of time into that, so it doesn't come off as that this is some police state, and then people are you know carted away in the most uh difficult fashion.

We we train people extensively on that, extensively on the de-escalations, extensively on their First Amendment rights that people have.

Um we've had, you know, uh especially when it started, we had confrontations with ICE because they wanted us to uh push people beyond what were established protest uh areas and things like that.

And we said we're not doing that.

Um they have the right to do that, and our people, we got our supervisors there to tell them we're not doing this, and we're we're you know, you know, and then ICE would jump in and start pushing people around.

We'd be pulling ice off of people.

So it's been very chaotic.

We train our people pretty extensively.

We keep looking at it because to your point, the last thing we want to do is be uh perceived by the public as you know, joining arms with people who are violating people's rights.

And so we are very concerned about that part of it as well.

So we've been training extensively on it.

Um we're always looking at it.

It's not just a static thing.

Um and so we'll continue to do that.

Do you have in you know, in your plans for next year, an increase in the amount of training that your officers get on these subjects?

Um we've been we've been upping it already, so I don't I'd have to look and see if there's gonna be an additional component added to it, because we already have added stuff stuff um to it uh specific to this.

Um I'd have to see if we've we're adding another one to it.

And also you mentioned that uh the broad view um operation uh the the tab for that was about 2.2 million.

Does that include money for training?

Um probably not.

No.

Changing the subject.

Um I think one of the other things that you may not have had on your bingo card is um uh writing transit.

Yeah.

And I've seen those reports.

I looked through your responses um on our budget template.

I didn't see any reference to it.

I'm just wondering uh whether that's had any impact on your staffing and your budget for this year or and if it if it has, will it have some impact next year as well?

We we're we're getting reimbursements from uh RTA slash Nita, the new entity.

So we're getting that we're not anticipating it costing us anything.

I mean, frankly, this was not something we had sought out.

And so um we have been uh submitting uh uh you know our uh budget request for lack of a better word to them, they are in agreement with what we're asking for.

So we're not expecting that to be the case, and nor are we expecting to have a regular full presence of our office there right now.

It's just very um uh strategic and very small areas, just frankly, to get an understanding of what's going on out there.

Um, but there's never been like this notion that we're gonna have this expansive presence out there.

So what we have been utilizing, we're we've been told we're gonna get reimbursed, and we're not expanding uh planning on doing some big expansion at all.

So the staffing that you're you're putting on that is not having a uh substantial impact on your operations elsewhere.

No, it's been used through uh sort of the um was the air back hire backs.

So it's people who are doing it because they choose to get some extra overtime.

Uh one last question, this was, I think, on your uh budget template.

I a little information about uh uh the uh use of the helicopter.

I think uh you said something uh on the sheet uh that you're it's been operating for about 724 uh hours.

Um and I know that you've been using it in some cases for traffic enforcement.

I'm wondering what proportion of those hours uh uh are for those kinds of operations.

About sixteen percent is for traffic operations.

Um it's been remarkable.

I mean, the helicopter has been everything that we had hoped, and then some as far as helping on a range of things, but the the I can't tell you every day I'm reading the reports from it, and every one of these cases are one less p police pursuit.

It's just one thing after another where no one's having to do that, the helicopters tracking it, and then there's people that are radioed to be at where it's gonna end up, and um uh people are taken in custody in that respect.

We found um just I think it was yesterday or the day before uh we got a call of some people that were in the water.

We were able to uh find them before they drowned.

I was in the southeast side somewhere.

Um so it's been utilized to help find people often um and additional range of things.

So it's just been really helpful, and the the traffic control part of it's been really um positive because uh the the way people have been driving, particularly on shoulders, is scandalous.

It's so dangerous.

I I I agree with you there.

Um do you have any um statistics on number of citations uh that have been written uh at least with some helicopter support?

Yeah.

Um, we have we have I've looked at it.

I just don't have it with me here right now, but I absolutely have it.

I can get it to you today.

Yeah, and what I'm what I'm also curious about is w whether or not that's gener generated any revenue through fines.

It's it's generated quite a bit of revenue.

Could we get those?

Yes, yeah, I have that as well.

Great.

Those are all my questions.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Good morning, Chair, good morning.

Good morning, uh, Sheriff Dart.

Um plenty of ICE questions, and I didn't catch them all, so forgive me if this uh is duplicative in any way.

But given the changing federal landscape around immigration enforcement, how is your office balancing compliance with Illinois law and Cook County policy while ensuring public safety?

And have recent policy changes created new operational or financial challenges for your office, and if so, what are they?

Yeah, it's a good question, Commissioner.

It's it's definitely been challenges because they keep changing what they're doing.

So we've had to keep uh adapting to it.

Part of it's in the training component.

We just have to keep training people on certain elements of the changes.

Um of the things are more straightforward, you know, like some of the things dealing with the trust act and stuff like that as far as notification has been pretty straightforward, but um it's been mostly now uh trying to do like they're trying to subpoena a bunch of our records and stuff like that.

So we've had engaged outside law firms to help us with trying to navigate what it is they're looking for, what we are obligated to give and things like that.

So that's been a new uh curve that they've thrown at us.

Okay, what has been um so far the budget impact?

Um excuse me, I'm sorry, John was talking to me.

What has been the budget impact?

Um I don't know.

Is there been a specific budget impact with the court tax impact?

Not a specific budget impact.

From the law firms, yeah, I can get you that figure.

Um you don't have the figure?

Um yeah, I do.

Hold on.

How much for the law firm?

I think it's under 25,000.

Yeah, I think it's under 25,000.

I think we can get you a specific.

Is that a a retainer?

What that seems rallied relatively low.

Yeah, because I think that's we've just started working with on because we I just started getting these subpoenas in the last couple months.

Even for the last couple of months, 25,000, I pay more than that in a terrible divorce.

Um it seemed like that seems relatively.

Um for that.

But at any way, in any case, I was just curious about the what would be the uh what the budget impact.

And so if you have numbers on that, I'd appreciate it.

Um excuse me.

Commissioner uh Trevor was just talking about the CTA deployment, and I understand I heard you say that it's gonna be fully reimbursed.

What is the dollar amount that's that's going to be reimbursed to you all?

What is it costing that we're being reimbursed from?

You said it's gonna be reimbursed from NETA?

Yeah, we're going to get reimbursed.

How much is 7.5 right now?

7.5.5 right now.

That's what we're going to reimburse.

That's what they've approved for us to be reinforced.

And that's how much we've spent.

So they've agreed to reimburse us $7.5 million.

And that's what we've spent to date on any of the operations we've done with the public transportation.

And this uh the the officers that are on the CTA, you said this is optional overtime?

Yeah.

Yeah.

They're giving unique training though, if they're going to do this, so how to work with the public in public transit situations and settings because it's different.

Okay.

All right.

So personnel costs make up the largest share of your budget.

What is your strategy to reduce reliance on overtime?

And vacancies.

I'm also curious about your current vacancy rate by recruiting and retaining full-time staff and what savings or operational improvements do you expect to achieve over the next fiscal year?

So our biggest challenge is so right now we are, is it 2253 open positions?

We have 233 open positions.

And those are mostly where where is there can you aggregate those numbers?

Where are those positions primarily?

The majority of them are correctional positions, correct?

I've got the whole list.

Yeah, we'll get you the we have the list right here.

Um the um the majority of my correctional hold on one second.

Hi, Commissioner.

Uh Brad Curry, Chief of Staff at the Cook County Sheriff's Office.

How are you?

Good.

How are you?

We have 13 correctional lieutenants, positions open, one correctional sergeant, 101 correctional officers, four police lieutenants, one police sergeant.

Let me know if I need to slow down, Commissioner.

33 police officers, one deputy lieutenant.

That's in court services.

That's why it's uh one 12 deputy sergeants, nine deputy sheriffs, four OPR investigators, eight telecommunicators, thirteen SEIU, um, those work in uh different parts of the office or SEIU union members.

Uh 33 non-union members, that's for a total of thirty two hundred and thirty-three.

What are the non-union positions usually?

We have uh 14 law clerks.

We have uh an executive assistant and the sheriff.

Uh you said non-union, right?

Yeah.

Uh we have 16 IT contract, I'm sorry, not six.

We have IT contract compliance specialist, a project manager, a men's program specialist, a DOC project manager, um, another project manager, and the sheriff's and executive team, a quality improvement auditor, a DOC program manager, executive assistant, an inventory distribution person that works in the warehouse, mental health clinician, field technicians, two field technicians, a project manager, a deputy director or employee of veterans' affairs, IT systems and network engineer, a senior IT systems and network engineer, a project manager for special operations, a black a back end SQL developer for IT, a deputy director of inmate services, a front-end web app developer, a hearing officer, an information security investigator, a senior IT investigator, um, assistant general counsel for disciplinary and administrative hearings, a deputy director, a deputy chief, a deputy general counsel, a director of renew and swap, a director, uh, another director in the sheriff's office, executive director, and police commander.

A lot of seemingly high-level vacancies there.

Um I would ask what do you surmise that's about, but that may take more time than we we need to necessarily do to Commissioner, if I can clarify, that's because we can't hire right now because we're trying to make sure we get within budget, and we've been working with the budget office on that.

So thank you for that clarification.

I appreciate it.

What is OPR?

Office of Professional Review.

That's what in some uh law enforcement agencies, what they call their internal affairs.

Okay.

And when you are able to hire, what has been um the time say from application to employment?

What is what is that uh average length of time?

Um uh, and maybe to to specify what is the average length of time for an officer versus someone that might be in in an office.

So the average is 50 days, but you your question is a good one because it'll be different between an officer and somebody that's non-sworn.

It's probably like nine times.

Yeah, so an officer is probably closer to 90 days, nine zero?

Because of the mayor because of the merit board, um they do their reviews.

Again, thank you for that clarification.

I appreciate it.

Okay.

Um Sheriff Dart, with the Governor Pritzker signing the Senate Bill 1700, which permits county correctional officers to be hired beginning at age 18, effective January 1, 2027.

Does Cook County Sheriff's Office plan to lower its current minimum hiring age from 21 to 18?

Yes, that that legislation was um legislation that we uh were the ones that were pushing for.

Don't make you nervous having an 18-year-old doing it makes me nervous as hell.

I don't know about you all, but um maybe because I'm a teacher.

And so I kind of know the workings of an 18-year-old, and I don't know if you all have recently talked to any of our 18-year-olds, but yeah, yeah, yeah.

Because I love young people, I'm gonna err on the side of prayer.

Okay.

If so, what will implement implementation look like regarding the academy training and required 15 month probationary period, supervision, mental health supports, and safeguards to ensure younger officers are prepared to work in the Cook County jail.

Additionally, what is the current salary range for an entry-level correctional officer and will compensation or benefits differ for officers hired between the ages of 18 and 20?

They won't get the cut rate like internship.

So they're gonna be uh no, they don't get a cut rate.

They start at the 74,000 entry level uh salary.

Uh they uh will be mentored with we have a plan to mentor those 18-year-olds with officers until they get past that probationary period as they're working in the environment.

Uh and they will have uh uh additional training curriculum once they graduate from the academy to go through with our uh uh additional trainers that will work with them on how to develop communication skills, how to work on de-escalation, and so we have a plan in place and we'd be happy to to obviously share the whole plan with you, Commissioner.

I want to see the whole plan because I would be particularly interested in the mental health supports and what uh mental health evaluations or screenings uh might be a part of that onboarding process or that recruiting process, as you may or may not know I have a deep and abiding commitment to mental health, particularly among young men.

Um absolutely, Commissioner.

We're gonna be able to do that.

Yes.

So I'll come with me back.

Thank you so much.

I appreciate it.

Thank you.

That's the um only drawback to being last, Jess.

I think they asked all of our questions, so I will try.

Um thank you, uh Sheriff Dart, and thank your team and the fifth district.

You all have been extremely instrumental, um, especially for my um cities that have very limited law enforcement uh current personnel currently.

Uh the sheriff's office has dealt with some very um traumatic instances in several of my di in several of my cities, so I do appreciate that.

I have um a couple of concerns.

First being AI, um we're starting to see these trends of these real-time crime centers.

We just spoke about that at um the conference I just attended.

And so we're I'm just wondering what is our progressive measure with regard to how we're going to be using AI specifically to address arrest or just making sure that it's not discriminatory and how we're entering the characteristics because that was most of the conversation.

It's all about the technician who enters the data, which is how the oper the um the product actually performs.

So if it's discriminatory, it's because those characteristics were put in that way.

So how do we make sure that does not occur?

Well, you it any of the information that you have, we'd love to see it that you got from this, because it sounds like you were talking to some real experts in this area, because we we obviously are coming from the same place you are on what we want to see.

We don't utilize AI very often on the uh arrest side of anything that we're doing, but I'd be curious on what some of these experts have had to say to see if there's some things that we would in unintentionally walk into that we didn't realize is uh problematic, but it's it's not utilized uh to uh on the law enforcement side of it at all really um I can think of, but I I'd be curious on where they're seeing it being implemented.

But I I'd be curious on where they're seeing it being implemented.

Okay, I appreciate that.

We will definitely um share the.

Yeah, please get that to me.

I'd love to see it.

Definitely, and I want to circle back to um Commissioner Trevor was speaking about the helicopter.

So I too would like, or maybe you can share with the entire board just what some of the measurable outcomes have been, so we can see that they're gonna be able to do that.

I think we we we we send you guys a regular report.

How often do we just did uh it's supposed to be quarterly?

We issued a report and we have maybe we issued one a month ago, but we can um we can send it out again and we can s if you need updates on it, we'd be happy because we've got really good data on it that we'd love to share with you because frankly it's really reinforced what we had hoped was gonna happen.

We have that.

Okay.

I thought maybe we were gonna get something a little more um to really show.

Oh, we weren't getting it.

We got it late.

We got it.

Oh, okay.

So we'll just make sure that we're gonna go.

Okay, yeah, but if there's parts of it you want to add to it, let me know.

Yeah, yeah.

That was that one.

And then lastly, um again, it just circles back to the high number of vacancies.

We heard testimony a couple weeks ago where a person came in and they read the testimonies of people that are currently incarcerated.

Um there was one major concern about a uh like it appears to be concerted efforts to have large vacancies on the same day, and then one day they said there were like two hundred and some odd vacancies.

I mean, not vacancies, I apologize, absences.

And so I'm just wondering when that happens, does that lead to an automatic lockdown where the what it does is uh two things.

It it forces us uh to utilize overtime.

In some cases, it forces us to use a process called mandation, which requires officers who are on the previous shift, we require them to stay, even though they would prefer not to.

We require them to stay.

Usually it's for like an hour.

Uh it the amount of mandations vary how long we ask someone to stay.

Um so that occurs.

We don't put it on lockdown.

What happens sometimes though is that we uh don't have the sp uh uh personnel to get people to programming.

So they're not locked in their cells, but the the programming that they could otherwise be going to, we don't have anyone to move them from point A to point B.

So it causes problems.

It does, but we d we don't utilize lockdowns as a result of it.

And the heart of it is I mentioned at the outset on an average day we have 467 people who call in that day saying they aren't coming to work based on whether it's FMLA or sick days.

And so we're trying to plan around close to 500 people not showing up for work.

Um so that's that makes it very, very difficult.

And are we utilizing any um external resources as far as like temp agencies on those, any type of staffing for any of the positions that you have?

No, it's all um the people, the sworn officers that we have there that are trained.

Okay.

Are you on a timetable with regard to bringing in new recruits?

Um well, we do we do have a pretty we we've been very steady on that in the course of the last year.

We are bringing more people on than we're we're losing.

So we're catching up from all of the problems that occurred in 2019, 2020.

Um so we're catching up with that, and it's pretty regular, the number of people that are coming in, but it's it's usually what happens is when we get the merit board sending us a certain number of people.

It it doesn't uh uh fiscally make sense for us to do a class, a training class when there's only 10 people in it.

So we'll sometimes wait until we hit a number.

It's usually about right about 50, and when we have 50, then we'll start the class.

And the merit board has been uh progressively getting better at moving things along and getting us more people so that we can get more classes moving.

Okay, and you know I have a very particular interest in um the recruiting and bringing on new staff because I know that our needs are being heightened in the Southland.

I know that you can't police every city um, but I know that um the officers are probably stretched.

You commissioner, you're so right.

And see that's the you understand it so well, it's that trickle effect.

We can't uh to be one of our police officers, you have to start off as a correctional officer or deputy.

So if we have not enough correctional staff, we certainly can't then move people into the police department.

At the same time, to your point, we are getting more requests than we have ever got in the history of the office for additional help in these towns and villages that are really hurting, they're really hurting.

Um and so it's being we're being pulled in a lot of directions, and that's why when we're being uh sent out to Broadview, which we've been able to dial back quite a bit, and uh at times the mayor isn't real happy with that out there, but um when we've been uh dragged out to Broadview, that is less people we have to go into some of these towns and villages that really need our help.

Okay, thank you.

And the other questions I had, uh Jason had already responded to my emails.

Thank you.

Thank you so much, Commissioner.

Thank you, Chair.

Hello, Sheriff.

Thank you.

How are you doing, Commissioner?

Good.

How are you doing?

Good.

Um so first I would like to start off by thanking some of your staff.

Um we're in regular communication with Jason.

Uh Jason even called me from Columbia one time.

Um and I didn't pick up because my family knows to call me with WhatsApp.

Um, but I want to thank uh your staff, Jason, as well as you, Brad.

I know we've talked some.

Um and also I think Maria Duque, I don't know her last name, she just introduced herself as Maria.

Uh, but those folks are in regular com communication with our office.

So I want to thank you for for your work.

I I've I'm very fortunate.

I have some great people working with me.

Um and so before I start off with um some of my own questions, I just wanted to go back to what some of the other commissioners have asked for a little bit more detail.

Um and so when Commissioner Marita was asking about Narcan, you mentioned that every police officer has access to Narcan, they carry it in their pouch.

When did that start?

It's it's been a bit.

Since COVID, yeah, probably I mean, I can get you the exact date, but it's been a while.

It's been at least three or four years.

Okay, because I think um what commissioner Marita was referencing was in 2023 there was a overdose death.

It was Melvin Turner.

Um, and this individual it appeared to be that he was dead in his bed.

And so my question to you is why aren't inmates able to access Narcan themselves?

We have vacancies, you mentioned 233 vacancies.

Um of the correctional officers from the Teamsters have said that they are observing large portions of the jail.

Narcan is a life-saving kit.

Why can't the inmates access it themselves?

Why can't they get trained to access it themselves if there isn't an officer readily available to give it to them?

And you know, before you answer, I just want to state that you know there's been a lot of research about this.

Um the National Commission on Correctional Health Care in particular is urging all jails and prisons to make kits and training available to the incarcerated.

So why can't we make it so that the inmates can access it themselves?

Well, we uh presently for a different reason, so I'm not gonna try to uh confuse things.

We do train detainees on uh use of Narcan and then we give it to them when they're leaving us.

So when they're leaving us, we identify people who have come in who've had um issues with opioids, but then we even go well beyond that.

So we do train detainees, we give it to them when they leave.

The hesitancy of having detainees access it is that we would not be aware of overdoses in the jail, we would not be aware that there's drugs in the jail.

Um that I think has been one of the problems.

Now, that being said, if if there's some correctional facilities that you're aware of that are doing it, I would love to see it, and maybe they've overcome those issues, but those are the ones on our side of it that lend us to not be uh handing it out as such.

But as I said, if some other jurisdiction has found some ways to deal with that, I'm I'm all ears.

This has been such an evolving thing.

I mean, to be honest with you, the notion that somehow there's gonna be sheets of paper soaked in cannabinoids that are snuck into jail and they're worth the papers worth 10,000, and then people are lighting that on fire and overdose it's it's who would have ever thought that.

But so we've had to readjust everything.

So I I'm open, I'm open to suggestions there.

Brad, were you gonna say something?

I saw you kind of like inching closer.

No, I was just gonna add that um and sometimes, Commissioner, the Narcan doesn't work on the these particular drugs.

And so specifically, like sometimes on the synthanic synthetic cannabinoids.

So when if they were administering it on their own, there would be no no medical care coming to aid them if it didn't work.

And so our concern has been like we tell them like let us you know notify the officers, they have the ability to use Narcan.

And so the the the mission is kind of to make sure that we are aware so medical staff can be become because as you know, time is of the essence on those uh overdoses, and that's why one of the other reasons that we want to make sure that we that we administer the Narcan.

You know, I think the piece on knowing if it's being used and knowing if the Narcan K is working, those are it's incredibly important to make sure we have that.

However, you know, for me, um, making sure that lives aren't lost goes above that.

Um and so I will reach out to you and provide you the report that the commission has put out because I do think that if we're serious about saving lives in our jail, then I think that means Narcan needs to be available beyond just the officers having it in their pouch.

You know, God forbid there is something going on on the other wing of the jail.

Nobody is there to provide that life saving kit.

Um in the spirit of trying to avoid a necessary death if there is such a thing as unnecessary death.

Um, having Narcan readily available, I think is extremely important.

For the inmates to access themselves.

I I I couldn't agree with you more.

That's why when I mentioned before about how we train detainees how to use them when they're leaving, then we give them uh I think it's two Narcan doses, or maybe it's four now, when they leave.

It was all with the notion that you know this is how you save lives.

And we were the first correctional facility in the country to do this, and it was because we were trying to get out in front of ways that we can save people's lives.

And so it fits what we're trying to do.

We're just trying to weave through these other parts of it too, because Brad brought up the good point.

These different cannabinoids that they're uh smoking are so unique and different that a lot of things don't work on them uh for a range of reasons.

They're not done by scientists, they're done by people in their basements and things like that.

Um originally we were dealing with people who were sending in papers soaked with rat poison, certain bleaches and things like that.

So it's just been as they say, i everything keeps evolving and changing, so we're open to looking at things.

Yeah, and I commend you for making Narcan available once they leave.

I think we need to work on having Narcan available when they are in the jail.

Yeah, and it's a how question of how best to do it with say it it is in the jail, it's widely um distributed within the jail.

Yeah, exactly.

So I'd be happy to talk to you about them.

Um my other question in relation to what was brought up previously with uh Commissioner Naya um is the bridge view incident.

Um so you had stated that you learned about the woman and the child detained the day after, but I was in communication with Jason the day of and sent a picture of the woman and the child that were detained.

Um is our communication reaching you?

Yeah, it does, but I I mean could I be off a few hours one or the other?

Yeah.

I mean, the point being, uh I I guess if I'm off uh a date on that, I I we had a lot going on, as you can imagine.

Yeah.

Um, and all that was, frankly, was more proof that we don't get any contact from these folks.

The fact that they had done something outside there.

I remember reading it in the paper.

Could Jason have mentioned it in passing?

He could have, but it wasn't relevant to what was going on in there, other than here's another example.

They're doing operations.

We don't know, we have no idea they're out there, we don't know what they're up to.

But I I I'll tell you definitely for the first, I don't know how many hours when this was going on.

I had no idea because we're focused on the issue there, and then someone may mention and pass it, it could have been Jason, it could have been someone else.

And yeah, they were out in the the parking lot earlier.

The problem has been historically, historically in these incidents that in the first six, eight, twelve hours, the facts move all over the place.

And then it turns out, well, actually, it wasn't in the parking lot, it was two blocks down, and actually it happened yesterday, it happened today.

So I appreciate you letting us know.

Um, but uh as I say, the facts move around a real lot, and it wasn't as relevant to what I was most concerned with.

It was how did my staff operate um during the course of this incident?

And we've made no uh, you know, we haven't confused anybody.

We don't patrol the parking lots, so they were out there doing something.

How would we know?

How would we know?

Well, I'm doing my best as well as some others to let you all know in real time what we're hearing from advocates.

Yes.

Jason, did you want to say something?

Good afternoon, Jason Hernandez, executive director, intergovernmental relations.

Um yes, and thank you, Commissioner.

In that particular instance, you had brought something to our attention.

We communicate very often, as you had mentioned, and we had observed footage of uh individuals approaching the entrance to the courthouse, but we had no knowledge of what had occurred out in the parking lot.

And as I'd mentioned to you, they had all once they reached the entrance, they returned back to the courthouse to the parking lot, forgive me.

So we didn't know if it was an arrest.

We had just seen two people walking alongside each other, three people walking alongside each other, but we had no knowledge of whether or not that was an actual constituted an arrest from these agents.

So we see it, but we find out sometimes in the hours after the fact that yes, through confirmation through rapid response teams or other entities that there was some sort of an arrest that took place, but we just didn't have confirmation of what that was.

I just want to make sure that we're providing information that is being useful, and I do think it's useful information to have because I think we're both partners in trying to keep our courthouses safe.

And I share information in the spirit of working together and making our courts much more accessible to the people who are now very vulnerable in approaching their due process rights.

So you know I know that there's a lot of confirmation and sort of like investigatory work that has to happen after the fact.

But I do want to ensure that what we're sending you all is being acted on the It certainly is.

I mean regular, almost hourly communication with our court services staff, letting them know what people are seeing out on the ground and then relaying that up to leadership.

So thank you.

And I just for the board here and for the public record, so folks know uh we have over 50 detentions around our courthouses since July.

36 of those, I believe, have happened this year alone.

Um and so this issue of court safety and court access, I think is it's huge.

And I'm I'm scared to say I think it could get worse.

Um and so knowing that the information that we forward over to you is acted on is important.

And I would like to see if there's ways that we can expedite sort of that confirmation.

I don't know if that's uh something that we can do um to make sure that the information is being received and acted on.

I can talk to you offline about what that could look like.

Yeah.

Yeah, no, we appreciate that.

Yeah.

Um there was also mentioned um, well, Sheriff, you mentioned that there was some work that you all are looking to do with our courts in terms of making it safer.

And you said virtual.

Are you referring to virtual appearances for the accused?

Yeah, we were trying to get some type of uh uh uh program in place so that people are wildly aware that in certain cases they have the option to not be physically present, that they can conduct their um work, their business virtually, and that's an option available, but it's unique and nuanced and complicated.

And so we're trying to figure uh out and we've reached out to the public defender's office and the chief judge's office if there's a way to do it so that it's easily understood by people because it's it's it's quite convoluted right now.

And the last thing I'm trying to do is uh make it worse and now all of a sudden encouraging people not to show up for court and it further complicates everyone's lives.

Um I I do think though that there are a range of hearings that people don't physically need to come to the courthouse for.

And so if that is the case, then I wish they would be aware of that.

So if they have unique circumstances that brings concern to them, then they don't feel that they have to be there.

Uh well, we worked with the clerk who is here on a one-pager on virtual appearances that has been helpful.

And you mentioned that you reached out to or you want to work with the public defender and the chief judge.

We did reach out to them, yes.

Have you also reached out to the state's attorney's office about virtual appearance?

I believe we have, yes.

Okay, because we were in a meeting with uh some members of your office as well as the state's attorney's team, and they seemed pretty reluctant, I think, to consider you know, virtual appearance policies.

They said each case has to be evaluated case.

Not our office, correct?

Well, your office was a part of that meeting, but the question around virtual appearances was geared towards the state's attorney who at that point um her staffer, Eva Loison stated that uh virtual appearances are not something they could have a blanket policy on, but they have to be considered on a case-by-case basis, uh, which is a big hurdle.

And so I just wonder have you had additional conversations since our meeting and how are you approaching virtual appearances for the accused?

And it is primarily the accused that are getting detained.

I had a resident for in that was detained from a courthouse in my district after their case was dismissed, and it was for property damage.

So um just curious if there have been more conversations because I don't know that there is that much of uh an ability to make virtual appearance more accessible for the accused.

We we have reached out to people even recently to say that if we we think it would be a positive option for people and whatever we can do to try to facilitate that, we're on board with doing that.

Um and some of that would be uh uh communication-wise, you know, even you know, signage at the courthouses and things like that, you know, obviously prior to hitting the building.

Um, but uh it we just think that it's probably a more thoughtful way to address people's concerns in in a real sense because once they're there, it's too late.

Um I think we're in agreement.

I guess my question is just have there been conversations to move that forward, and have you been successful in moving that forward so far?

Yeah, it's uh it's it's been a little bit slow, um, but we've had the conversations, but it's just it's taken a little longer.

I mean, if we could work with you to try to accelerate things, that'd be great.

You have a comment on the good morning, Commissioner.

Umike, deputy chief of staff.

Um, and yes, uh Commissioner Vasquez, we were in that meeting, we heard what the state's attorney said.

Um they said that that would be something they uh might have to think about in terms of blanket policies regarding virtual hearings, every case is assessed case by case basis.

They also said that it's the judge's determination to uh grant a leave to appear virtually as well.

Um and I think we understand that.

We uh I being a former prosecutor, I understand that too.

And lawyers here understand uh it is ultimately the judge's decision.

In terms of us having more conversations about that particular issue, um, I don't know how we can tell them how to do their jobs.

I don't know if that would be advisable, but we have reached out to work with them on making the information public on what kind of cases can be possibly done virtually.

So to answer your specific question, have we questioned them on their statement about not having a blanket policy?

I don't know that that would be our place to do.

Yeah, and I mean I there are various stakeholders that take part in this process.

And so, you know, certainly our judges play a major role, and I'm glad that those conversations are happening.

And the Office of the Chief Judge was also in this meeting, and they uh did make reference to highlighting, you know, if there were you know specific incidents where like a judge was opposed to virtual appearance when there could actually be virtual appearance.

So I think it's really important that we have all of our stakeholders on board, you know.

Um and I would love to uh be a partner in this work.

Um I brought up the the state's attorney's office because they can contest the request for virtual appearance, and I just want to make sure again that everybody is on the same page if that's something that we are collectively working towards.

Um and I and I do think that perhaps you would be able to have uh a better conversation than me.

So I am hoping that you will ask for that because I do think in the spirit of protecting our residents, it's not about telling people how to do their jobs, it's about asking them to work with us in the interest of protecting the public.

And to that uh point, Commissioner, we continue to have conversations, not just in this area, but in different um in D V space in different areas, we continue to have those conversations with the State's attorney's office, the public defender's office, I think almost on a weekly basis.

If not, if it's not me, it's Jason.

Uh we talk to them all the time, and we without telling each other how to do your job, we do ask questions.

How does this work?

What else can we do?

Can we help you?

We do do that.

Thank you.

Um there were multiple questions or rather um mentions of AI technology.

Um there is an item that was brought to the technology committee, which I sit on for brief cam.

Um for the folks who aren't on that committee, uh briefcam is an AI video surveillance software that you all have proposed to be used in the jail.

Um we have yet to review a contract.

Um are you going to provide us with that contract?

I believe we well cle clearly, if we're going to do this, we're going to have to give you a contract.

We have uh had discussions on that and trying to uh inform people on what it is that we're trying to do here because there's been a lot of concerns, you know, which I I get.

Um but our purpose behind it is to try to give us an additional tool, frankly, to save lives, so that if we this tool would allow us to be able to know if like an in a a body is not moving for a period of time or if we could take a area that we've had problems with in the past, like the shower area, and it could be utilized to make us alert us that there's been an individual in the shower area for an extended period of time, it would alert to us.

So it would those are the the reasons behind what we're trying to do here.

Um as far as getting you an actual physical contract, I don't I don't know why we wouldn't.

And then I know you had asked for a report on if the facial recognition was ever used, which which we would be happy if we ever see very, very many, you know, very many circumstances that we would ever use it, Commissioner.

But if in the event that we did, we would then you know be happy to report that to the board and let the board know that we used it for this certain circumstance.

But the majority of of what we're trying to do is to save lives, identify where people smoke, hang out, and do things like that so that we can address going back to our Narcan discussions and things like that.

Like if we had a tool like that that could tell us, yes, we see somebody running and grabbing Narcan and putting it in a cell and then it would flag us, that might change some of the opinion of the Narcan being administered.

So it's about trying to save lives and identify those, you know, we have in certain characteristics and reviewing those incidents, we have been able to identify things that are red flags that it could help us rather than have somebody watch every camera on every tier every day, which uh is you know a problem for you know, here there's humanity.

And so that that's why when it was brought to my attention, the concern was about uh facial recognition.

It was like, well, that's not why we're getting this.

And then said, well, the there's such limited times where that would have any utility for us that we'd be happy to tell you when we use it.

And then you guys can be the judge if it's being misused or anything, but we just that's not why we're doing it.

So I think it's important for us to have this contract and have this information before the item comes back to the committee so that we are in complete knowledge of what exactly you want.

Yeah, no, no, that's not that's not a problem.

Um and you know, as you mentioned earlier, several advocates have emailed and called and they've highlighted many issues that this technology has presented when utilized elsewhere.

Um in fact it was banned in courts in France.

Um and I believe the Teamsters also sent out a letter in which they indicated that previously BriefCam has misidentified objects.

Is this the French teamsters or is this some of the things?

No, this is your teamsters.

Oh, okay.

Yeah.

Um they have missed this technology has misidentified objects.

It took a bag of chips for a gun.

And so I am concerned about what this technology could do, especially since as you said, we want to save lives.

Then that's the only reason we're interested in it, to be honest with you.

There's no element of it where there's this other hook to it where it's like, oh, this is gonna help us solve all these crimes.

No, that's not what we're looking for.

Um anything that would help alert us to a body that hasn't moved.

Anything to alert us that people are in an area that for too long a period of time, it's just an additional help for our staff.

And that's what we're trying to get at.

So that's why, you know, absolutely get get you the contract, but really have the time to put the presentation on so you can ask those questions.

We will obviously talk about ahead of time, so we'll have some answers for you, but just to make it so that the concerns um can be addressed.

We're we're just, as you said, we're just looking for another tool to help us with making sure we save lives.

And I would encourage you to look at tools that don't raise so many red flags.

Well, if you got them, let me know.

I mean, I've got a heart monitor thing, it's been sitting here at the county board for I don't know, two or three years.

Um, and I, you know, if if you guys come up with another one, you know, let us know.

I mean, as I said, happy to talk to you about the Narcan thing as long as it doesn't then lead to the fact that it exacerbates a problem where we have um uh narcotics in the jail and we don't know about it then.

So it's like there's reasons that you we have that are logic driven, but so that if you have some element there, we're on board.

I well, I'll reach out to you.

I um have a lot of work that I'm doing, but I will do my research so that we don't um procure something that is so controversial.

Um last thing before I know I'm running close on time here.

Um release times.

So last year at mid-year budget, I asked you about jail release times, and you had mentioned that it is perhaps a more complicated process.

Um we know that uh folks have had issues being released in a timely manner.

Some folks are being released late in the evening.

Um Has your office taken any steps to address that so that individuals are released more quickly?

You want to hit that one point?

Uh Brad Curry, Chief of Staff at the Cook County Sheriff's Office.

Um yes.

And we are uh we have made a lot of progress in that area.

We still have a lot of work to do.

Um it's uh I personally went over there and went through the process with our jail team and and our records office to walk through why it takes so long.

Uh it it should not take as long as it has taken, and we are working to make that better by scanning documents sooner to get to the records office staff by having additional staff that uh in that area that can flag when somebody has been there a certain amount of time, working through starting the paperwork for discharge the minute that that court hearing is done.

Uh we're also talking to the clerk's office about trying to get you know the paperwork back from the judge sooner so that we can start that discharge process as soon as we know the judge is going to discharge that person.

So we have made progress in it.

Is it where the sheriff wants it to be?

No.

But we're still working on it and we're trying to um you know give me about another three or four weeks, and I think we'll have it ironed out.

Um so can I ask then, you know, and thank you for outlining um is the progress so far, the sort of um assessment of what the current issues are.

Yeah.

The um the progress so far has been a di has been identifying what the holdups have been and what has been delaying uh the the start of the discharge process.

And can you remind me in your opinion um what are the holdups?

The holdups are getting the paperwork back from the court, whether it's the judge or the clerk's office, our staff holding the paperwork for too long.

Okay.

Um so we're not innocent in this.

This the paperwork getting from our court deputies back to the jail staff, the jail staff then making sure it gets to records, the records office people then starting the process because they would wait till the body got back before they would start the process, which doesn't make any sense because they know the person is discharging.

We don't have to wait for the person to get back but to start that process.

So those are all things that we've been working to make start as soon as that hearing is over, and we know that that person is going home.

Uh thank you.

And you mentioned you're looking at scanning documents and additional staffing.

Yes.

That's part of that's part of when the paperwork comes back from the court to the court deputies, getting that paperwork scanned quicker.

Okay, thank you.

And uh I'll go for round two.

Okay.

Commissioner Lower.

Thank you, Chairman.

Just quickly, I want to uh button this up.

Maybe I missed it.

Sheriff, if you had noted that in the context of the bridge view incident, there's an ongoing investigation.

When do you think that would be concluded?

Um roughly.

I I mentioned it's pretty much almost over now.

It's gotta go through command channel review or probably two, three weeks.

Two to three weeks.

And will we be briefed uh at the appropriate time, either individually as commissioners, or we could even do it as part of a criminal justice committee meeting in a closed session?

Yeah.

Yeah, yeah.

I think that would be very helpful.

Thank you.

Mr.

Digman, did you have good notes, John?

Mr.

Stamps, I follow up.

Is it my hand again?

Yes.

Thank you so much.

Um second, I was not here, I was ill-prepared.

Give me one moment.

Okay, okay.

All right.

Um, Sheriff Dart, while the county is considering 17 million increase for food services.

Many detainees report that the regular meals provided are limited in nutritional value.

I kind of witnessed that myself, and that they must rely on commissary purchases to supplement their diets.

How do you respond to the concerns that individuals in your custody, many of whom have not been convicted of a crime, are required to spend their own money or rely on family support to access adequate food?

What steps are you taking to ensure that the meals provided meet standard where commissary is a choice and not a necessity?

So we've had numerous meetings with the uh food providers to make it clear to them that their menu had to be different, it had to be what we contracted for, that they can't just be repeating menus.

And so we have them sending the actual menus to our people to examine, but then making sure what they're actually serving is what was on the menu because that sometimes would change too.

So we've had some real direct conversations with them.

If there is additional changes that you folks would want in the contract for the food, the types and things like that, we're we're open to that.

For 17 million dollars additionally, I want it to be humane.

Um I had the benefit of touring the kitchen facility.

I was disappointed in the the quality of the food.

I was disappointed.

And um the fact that it was a peanut butter and a couple of crackers and something else that was being served for breakfast and or a bagel, and that that was repeated several times that week.

I was concerned that the general population does not have regular fruits and vegetables, that that is a part of a specialized diet.

And I would think for additional 17 million dollars, you can throw in an apple or some vegetables or something.

I am con I I and so that that is just my those were my observations, and um Jason and the staff there did walk me through uh the kitchen, and that will those were my observations.

But can you provide to this board or can you provide this board with data on commissary revenue, pricing, and contracts?

How much are detainees and their families spending annually on food-related commissary items?

And does the county receive any revenue from those sales?

Oh no.

Well, yeah, we can get that information to you.

How soon can you get that information to me?

We can get it to you tomorrow.

Thank you.

Um I'm gonna just uh okay there.

Um, yeah, because I was very concerned about the few food quality and equally concerned that taxpayers of Cook County are spending additional funds and detainees, that means people who have not yet been convicted have to supplement their diets.

I think that is space for some concern.

Um with them.

They vote on that.

One other question relative to um the new the the um the lowering of the age.

So will these um young people that will be being hired?

How do you anticipate um this drop in the age helping to reduce some of the over reliance on overtime and the cost of overtime?

I think just because we're gonna be adding a another age group as potential employees, so that is more potential uh correctional staff, and that has historically been the problem is just getting enough qualified people so the more that we can add to that pool will just help us.

That was the whole thing underlying it.

Right.

So, what metrics will you be using to determine whether this legislation has received or has achieved its desired outcome?

Frankly, this will be somewhat straightforward because we can do monthly, we can do an annual report how many people between 18 and 21 who have applied, how many have passed the the different tests, how many have come on, how long they've stayed with us, things like that.

That's easy.

Okay, and so you I heard when I first initially asked you the question, you said you were championing this this legislation that passed, and so you don't have any apprehension um about that the difference with whether it's an 18-year-old or 21-year-old.

No, because we we do so much screening on the front end that if that is a problem, we'll just have a bunch of 18-year-olds applying who don't get accepted.

Um so other jurisdictions do this, and we were the only ones that weren't doing it, and we haven't been made aware of any problems from those jurisdictions, so we're not anticipating, but we'll be looking at those metrics that you just referenced.

I see.

Um there are some tablets being used or be integrated.

Make sure before I forget, there is a an audit coming to the coming to the board and the commissary in I think next in September.

Very good news.

Annual, yes.

I'm sorry?

It's an annual from the county from our county auditor.

From county auditor.

Okay, thank you kindly for that.

Appreciate it.

Um it says uh will mental health services be available through the tablets that are being integrated at SERMAC.

Um you'd have to ask SERMAC on that one.

They're not available.

No, I'm available, I'm here.

Um, but I I don't know what SERMAC's plans are for utilizing.

They we have a great relationship.

SERMAC, they're fantastic people.

We work with them great.

Um but there's some parts of their operations they don't tell us about, and I get it, you know, because of privacy issues and things like that.

Um but uh you know we utilize tablets across the board for ranges of things, including some mental health related uh components in some of the classes that we have.

Is there anyone will be reporting now for that?

Uh the hospital was up, yes, sir.

Okay, then that concludes my question.

Thank you for looping back to me.

I appreciate it.

Thank you for your responses.

Thank you.

Oh, that's working.

Yeah, sure.

And I want to just clarify clarification.

How how is transferring the electronic monitoring to the unit office of the chief judge be safer?

And especially in the light of uh what happened the last 12 months.

How how is it going?

I'm sorry.

No, how how would it be safer to transfer the electronic monitoring unit to the judge's office?

Well, the the chief judge has been working on uh altering his program and um trying to make it as safe as possible.

You'd have to ask him further on that.

Um but as far as us, as I told you before, we've I've had these discussions with you dozens of times.

Um that when the legislature changed the rules on how I operate it, I could no longer do it safely.

And so I couldn't look you in the eye and say we're running a safe program.

Sheriff, I've talked to other prosecutors from other companies, and they told me that's not true.

Give me their names.

I would love to talk about the car.

I'd love to talk to them.

Give me their names.

Okay, and I don't want to put you on a spectrum.

No, because we've had these discussions, and guess what?

I never get the name.

Okay.

Um if we increase the number of defendants on the electronic monitoring program, wouldn't it uh decrease the number of of staff needed in jail in in the jail?

Before he answers, I I don't believe Frank, and I know I believe you know you believe it should be transferred.

The sheriff should change.

Yeah, I believe the chief.

There is no willingness from this board, I believe that's every other county, the chief judge.

Um I understand the chief judge acts as a warrant of the jail.

Oh, operates the um and they there's a process that they're going through, and the chief judge then uh knows that and he is going to sharp indicated to trying to monitor and change some things within within the under under the There is no willingness, no matter what from the sheriff.

Yeah, I'm but I'm looking at what happened in the last 12 months under the under the judge's watch.

The incidents that happened, and I know you're Frank, you'd have to ask them about their policies and procedures there, but as I said, our legislature made it clear they did not like the way that I ran it.

They thought it was too restrictive.

Um so they changed it.

Um and I mentioned to you months ago, if if you want to undo that law, please do it, and nothing happened.

So we you know we were at the time we were the only sheriff's office in the country running an EM program.

And an excellent job you do.

Yeah, because everything we do, we we everything we do, we want to be the best.

And we we best.

Yeah, we everything we do, we want to be the best.

But then when all of a sudden we had changes made that we were not in favor of that prohibited us from running the program the proper way, it didn't make sense, or it wasn't being honest with the public to say we're gonna keep running this program where we can't watch people the right way.

Well, I'm just looking basing on that without the last 12 months, those incidents that happened under the judge's watch.

Wouldn't if your office would have been in charge, I think they could have been prevented.

Thank you.

Um did you ever follow up?

Thank you, Chair.

Um, and so when I visited the Cook County jail um last year, I was um taken to a pretty cool program, which is called I think it's like the pizza kitchen or something.

Yeah.

Um Bill Lawry is a fan.

Yeah, he's there all the time.

Um and I actually have questions because you know I learned that that's part of the or perhaps it is part of the vocational rehabilitation impact uh center, which is as I understand it now a mandatory court order program that requires some labor on the part of the incarcerated people awaiting trial.

Um and so I just wanted to ask some questions about the VRIC and the different sort of uh labor.

Well, yeah, I think I I we'd have to talk about uh the re what you're referencing because I think that part was the old boot camp provision that we don't utilize anymore.

Um so but but we'd be happy to get more specific with because uh the the pizza program that has the music component to it, has an art component to it.

That's separate from the other um section, but we'd be happy to talk to you just to clarify anything.

Okay, that would be really helpful.

Um and so with that pizza program, the music and the art, are they are the incarcerated folks compensated for that?

Is there any kind of payment for that?

I'd have to I we we I mentioned earlier to uh that I'd get you folks a list of the ones that are compensated and what that amount is because it differs.

Some of them know because these are programs that are being taught by volunteers, and there's a long waiting list for people to get into it where they're like the art program that they're learning to paint, uh the music program, they're mixing music, they're playing instruments and learning those things.

So uh we aren't paying people to do that.

Um so I I can get you the list.

Okay, and then specific to the music and art, because I myself have a deep interest in art.

Are there performances or galleries associated with the existing program?

Yeah, a lot of it's already just are murals that they have throughout the you most of it's in division eleven.

Um they're they're amazing.

Uh a lot of them are Picasso's and uh things you'd just be blown away.

These were done by folks who had no training whatsoever and they've done it.

Um they have a uh a studio where they have a lot of their artwork.

Um there's uh a gentleman who helps run the food program, he uh does his own fundraising for that um program.

And at his fundraisers, he'll sometimes uh display some of the art from the um uh detainees uh who've done these different works.

Um I'm just trying to remember.

I think there's other parts of the jail that some of these will be displayed, definitely in the women's division.

Um but to your knowledge, maybe not yet outside partners.

No, no, not them aware of um okay.

I didn't know if one of your staff was going to add to that.

Uh is there a similar program for for women?

Yeah, yeah, there's both a cooking program that's unique for them uh taught by a a woman.

Um that's done out um in division 16.

The men's program is in division eleven.

Um there's an art program.

Uh there's different art programs.

One one of my daughters comes in occasionally and teaches art to the uh the females.

Um and then there's some other volunteers that will come in at times and teach them as well.

Um so there is the the women across the board have lots of programs, and every woman is involved with a program of some nature, um, but we have an abundance of programs for women.

Yeah, I would love to know what those are because uh, you know, as I've said, I've I visited and I've seen what the men are offered, but I have no idea what the women are being offered, and I would love to know what that is.

I I have a little a list I can get you.

Okay.

And then just going back to whether or not folks are compensated, I would love to know, you know, in which programs individuals are and um, you know, why not have people who are awaiting um trial um as part of some of these more popular programs like recipe for change.

Um and I think some of the other um programs that I thought were uh paid programs include things like um the uh there's a there's a program where inmates um awaiting trial are potentially helping people strip down abandoned homes.

Is that a still a program to your knowledge?

Yeah, I'm still doing that, but I've had uh difficulty getting um people sent to the program.

So that was when I got rid of the boot camp program many years ago.

I reconfigured it into this program that taught detainees how to uh deconstruct buildings and uh go into communities and particularly a lot of it was in the south suburbs and uh the communities had didn't have the money to do it, so we went and did it.

Um when COVID hit uh a lot of things changed, and since then it that has not bounced back like we had hoped.

We're still doing it, but we're not having anywhere near the involvement by people in the incarcerated people.

We just we aren't getting it because we needed judges basically to sentence them to the program, and we are aren't getting that in the numbers we used to get.

We still do it, but in much lesser uh amount than we had in the past.

It was it's it's a great program.

I mean, these communities, I can't tell you how ecstatic they are when we go do this.

Um would love to know what numbers we do have for the folks who are being involved in that program um because it does sound like if that is compensated work, there's an opportunity there.

But to your point, if they're not told to be a part of this program.

Yeah.

Our biggest problem is getting people in the program.

Okay.

Um and then some of the questions I have around uh behavioral health.

Uh so I think Commissioner Anaya spoke about discharge earlier, and you had mentioned that the Sheriff's Office leads uh some of the discharge work when it comes to health.

Why not partner with Cook County Health on that since these folks are now leaving our Cook County Chief.

We tried.

We've tried.

And what has been the issue?

And we as I say I love working with them, they're great people, but it's not something that we're like, no, no, we gotta do it our way.

No, we'll work with anybody on it.

It um complicates things sometimes, but we'd prefer to work together.

Can you speak to some of those complications?

Well, when they're releasing the people that have been like in their the hospital, say for the whole time, we're less in tune with it, and I get HIPAA, I get it, I get it.

Um but then we're not as aware of some of the uh issues that that individual might have when they're getting released.

They do some of their own discharge planning then for individuals.

We do it for other people.

Um doing it in a more concerted way.

We've tried to do that.

So I'm on board.

Okay, and then I guess um, you know, related again to behavioral health, you know, there's a pretty high standard um for administering behavioral health from the state, um, you know, trainings, all sorts of, you know, requirements, assurances, confidentiality, other things of that nature.

Um for the staff that you all have that provide behavioral health services, what are the quality um what are the quality of service evaluations that you're all doing, or how do you continue to ensure that we are meeting the requirements that are stepped set forth by the state?

Well, we exceed all of the state requirements.

And the services we provide are not because they're required, they're because we want to help people.

And so these are things that are um things we think are the right thing to do.

And so with that, we hire people who have all of the training needed, all the requirements needed.

We do the best we can to encourage people to go in the programs who we know need the programs, because we can't force them into it.

Um we work with them extensively on your their unique needs, because they're all different.

There it's a range of different programs depending on what the needs are.

And then our big thing is to do the discharge plan as you were referencing when they leave so that all the work we've done isn't wasted because we're sending them off to um a community that doesn't have the services that they need, um, so that we then work with them to connect them to the services they need.

So um it's very well thought out, extensive, and all, as I said, not mandated by anybody.

We just are doing what we believe is the right thing.

And so how often are you um evaluating to make sure that trainings, credentials are up to date?

We always I mean that that that's an ongoing thing.

That doesn't we don't have like you're hired and then we don't look at it again.

So when you say ongoing, is that how how ongoing is it?

Is it every you know six-month mark you're checking to make sure folks have the appropriate trainings?

You know, I'd have to get back to you in that.

That's I'm not sure, but I mean we don't allow people who are not qualified to be there.

So whatever we have L C PCs, LPCs, uh different levels of clinic.

So I mean we uh you know ensure that they're qualified to do what they're doing, which would inherently would mean that they'd have to be up on their training, their licensing, all the rest of the stuff.

But I'd have to get more specific, you know, information to how we do that.

Thank you.

I will come back.

But I know initially when you started.

What is the percent of your budget is uh personnel 98 percent.

It's my personnel is 98 percent unionized.

And then no, 96 percent of our budget is is personnel.

96 percent is personnel.

86 percent is union.

Yeah, and then 80s 86 percent is union.

And hopefully I know this and we mentioned and I think Commissioner Anaya started off with the report that was done submitted by last week.

So hopefully all the the various agencies.

It's in the report.

And I know when you come back in um October it should be interesting because by then I think uh whether or not you're gonna have to cut your budget or you're gonna have to cut it would be a significant.

I know there's been some discussion pre and between now and October.

Yeah, there's been we have been talking with the President's office and the budget office extensively already, and we'll continue to do it because we understand there's um you know fiscal concerns.

Make sure to uh do you have one?

Chair one, I'm sorry.

Yeah, just one.

Um so um your service center that's on division near Western is is kind of between our districts, and occasionally I will stop by just to see what's going on because it's in the district and early on, uh like my first year, Jason took me by.

But invariably the doors are locked, and it does it doesn't look like there's anybody there.

So can you tell me what is how are uh recently released um constituents, my neighbors utilizing this facility?

Um what are the hours, what is the usage, how are you all tracking its usage, how it's been helpful?

Um it was also my understanding that just because you may have spent some time at Cook County does not preclude you from utilizing the services.

So how are you all um tracking how the community is taking advantage of of the services that are being offered there?

Thank you, Commissioner Jason Hernandez, executive director.

Um the use of that facility has evolved over time as we had discussed previously.

Um traffic was relatively low, um, and it's just one of several places where our clinicians and case managers schedule appointments with individuals out in the community that they might meet at community events or people who are being discharged from the jail.

Um so it's still in use.

Um but it's just one, including libraries and other public buildings where our case managers meet people to provide a linkage to services.

That was also a unique scenario there.

There was a public health crisis within that building that caused them to shut their doors for a little bit out of an abundance of caution for the safety of the staff.

Um that was on the tail end of COVID.

Um so it's still being used, um, but in order to ensure that our resources are deployed efficiently.

We're meeting there more frequently with people who have appointments, or we've met out through either our mobile response team or our community support center.

So it's still in use.

Uh just doesn't always make the best sense to keep it up running throughout the day.

Okay.

So if you could just you know, I'm gonna submit questions to you all as well.

And so I would like for you to provide to me or for me, and and maybe other commissioners might be interested, particularly uh Commissioner Vasquez um how it's being used, and then you just reference this mobile unit.

Can you just tell me a little bit more about the mobile unit that you referenced?

So the sheriff launched um a mobile crisis response team.

This is known as our treatment response team.

Um they do some amazing work throughout Cook County um helping uh individuals with mental health crises navigate um the justice system, provide a linkage to a wide range of services.

Um they can meet them out in the community through our transit initiatives or through public events, or even in their work um canvassing on foot in areas where we see an increase in unhouse populations.

Um they work in concert with our community support center, which is the unit that is historically had appointments at the location in West Town, do discharge at the jail, um, provide services to the unhoused and canvas the unhoused encampments, so they work in close collaboration.

But the mobile crisis response team is our treatment response team where law enforcement personnel in the moment of a crisis can provide a member of the public or a victim access instantaneous access to a licensed clinician um via tablet in order to expedite um the delivery of those services.

Yeah, these folks, it's a combination of civilians and some law enforcement with uh unique training.

Um but they do all the above, but they do a lot of street interventions working with people that are in crisis um wherever they may be in in the county to try to help them either immediately because of a crisis or try to get them into long-term type of setting, so they'll work with getting them into housing, they'll work with getting them into a treatment program, and we've had some degree of luck with it too, and uh we can get you those numbers.

It's been uh impressive um the the interventions we've been able to do on the street with people.

Thank you.

Um last question, and I noticed you didn't turn in, you didn't have a separate report.

You had your mid uh budget review.

I'm just curious.

Um your new budget request be from last year.

Yeah, how uh I'm sorry.

About how much more, including the 17 million in food.

Um I have it here.

It's um in it's based on the based almost exclusively on um the budget increases from last the pay increases that you guys had voted on.

Um it's going from 774 million to an 861 million, with the vast majority of that coming from um uh benefits, salaries, um benefits, um, work mass comp, thing like that.

That's the majority of the increase we are looking for.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you.

Yeah.