The Chicago City Council on Wednesday rejected an arbitrator’s ruling that would allow officers to contest their most serious discipline cases in private arbitration and bypass the Police Board, whose hearings and decisions are public.

The 33-to-17 vote extends a stalemate with the union for most Chicago cops and could lead to a Cook County Circuit Court battle that city attorneys acknowledge would be an uphill climb.

Holding a press conference after the vote, Mayor Brandon Johnson said the council made “a clear decision” that the public should have a “full view” of the accusations and decisions in police discipline cases.

Johnson added he remains open to negotiating a solution that would preserve transparency in those cases and avoid litigation: “I’m always open to discussion.”

The council needed 30 of its 50 members to reject arbitrator Edwin H. Benn’s October ruling, which allowed Fraternal Order of Police Chicago Lodge 7 to bring firings and suspensions longer than a year to arbitration. Less severe discipline is already eligible for arbitration.

• RELATED STORY
• Criminal Justice
• Politics

City Council puts off a vote on who should decide Chicago’s most serious police discipline cases. Here’s what you need to know.

read more

Before the vote, FOP supporters on the council pointed out that rejecting the ruling would return the matter to Benn, who has warned he is unlikely to change his mind. That would bring the issue back to the council and, if the sides could not reach an agreement, they could end up in court.

Ald. Silvana Tabares, 23rd Ward, said a court fight could “open the floodgates to further litigation” because of all the discipline cases decided in the meantime.

“These cases will last years and could cost the city hundreds of millions of dollars,” Tabares said. “Those are dollars that will go into the pockets of police officers who were rightfully suspended or terminated. … I’m sure none of us want public dollars to be awarded in court to bad cops as opposed to being used to fund mental health clinics or homeless services.”

But Ald. Maria Hadden, 49th Ward, pointed to the hundreds of millions the city has spent in recent years on settlements and judgments stemming from police misconduct.

“We’re paying for it either way,” Hadden said. “I would prefer to pay for it with public accountability.”

Hadden urged more negotiations: “If we institute a police accountability process that is fair to community members and police officers, as well as open and transparent, it can only be done as a collaborative effort.”

Ald. David Moore, 17th Ward, said he voted to reject the arbitrator’s ruling after talking with constituents of his South Side ward and police officers: “This all boils down to a black-and-white issue. And part of that is … trust amongst the people that are policed and the people that do the policing.”

Benn’s ruling sought to resolve the final sticking point in talks to replace an expired city contract with the union — a deal the City Council ratified earlier in Wednesday’s meeting. The contract will double the annual pay raises scheduled for cops in 2024 and 2025 and extend the pact until 2027.

The ruling revolves around the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act, a 1984 law that requires police union contracts to include arbitration for appeals of discipline decisions — unless the parties to a contract agree otherwise. That law ties the right to arbitration to a state prohibition on cops going on strike.

Last week, the council’s Workforce Development Committee voted 10-5 against Benn’s ruling, setting the stage for Wednesday’s vote by the full council.

On Wednesday morning, an “open letter” to Johnson and the council from FOP President John Catanzara Jr. appeared as a full-page ad in the Chicago Sun-Times. The letter urged council members to sign off on the arbitrator’s decision.

The ad included logos of 11 other unions, representing police bosses, firefighters, transit employees, trade workers and others. Catanzara framed the vote as a labor issue and said rejecting the arbitrator’s ruling “would be a slap in the face to all city workers.”

In the public comment portion of Wednesday’s meeting, David Melton, co-chair of the Civil Liberties Committee of the Chicago Council of Lawyers, said his group doesn’t want FOP members challenging their most serious discipline cases in arbitration — like other public employee union members can — because “other public employees do not have the right to use deadly force in carrying out their decisions.”

“The privilege that the police have to use such force — and a duty that they have to minimize the use of such force — mandates that we have public involvement and greater public scrutiny when they abuse those actions,” Melton said.

Johnson’s administration urged the council to reject the arbitrator’s ruling.

Jim Franczek, a longtime labor negotiator for the city, conceded at last week’s committee hearing that convincing a Cook County judge to rule against an interest arbitrator would be a “steep hill to climb.”

But Johnson, in his news conference, said the prospect of losing is no reason for the city to shrink from battle.

“If you’re asking this body to just simply accept something because it’s law, that would be the antithesis to how this stage even exists,” Johnson said, flanked by alderpersons. “Could you imagine if women just accepted the law and did not continue to pursue justice? [How about] Black folks or brown folks or Asian folks or poor people, working people?”

Tessa Weinberg, a WBEZ politics reporter, contributed. Chip Mitchell reports on policing, public safety and public health. Follow them at @Tessa_Weinberg and @ChipMitchell1.