Facing threats of a legal battle from the city’s rank-and-file police union, aldermen again deferred a decision Wednesday over the future of serious discipline for officers accused of wrongdoing.
A parliamentary maneuver to “defer and publish” a vote on the matter was made by allies of Mayor Brandon Johnson, marking the latest chapter in a contentious dispute over arbitrator Edwin Benn’s decision last year. Benn’s ruling granted members of the Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 7 the ability to have the most serious disciplinary cases heard privately by a third party, rather than in public through the Police Board process.
It was unclear heading into Wednesday’s vote whether Johnson and his aldermanic allies would hold onto their slim margin in favor of denying the clause in the FOP contract supporting Benn’s decision. An earlier City Council vote required 30 votes to pass. It garnered 33. But threats from the FOP over the cost of battling out the decision in court has led to some aldermen wavering in their support.
Benn — and leadership of the FOP — argue officers are entitled to the same disciplinary process via arbitration as other unions around the state.
Immediately after the deferral motion Wednesday, FOP President John Catanzara and the FOP delegation he sat with in council chambers rose to leave. He paused and turned toward Johnson as he walked out. “See you in court at 2:30,” Catanzara said. “I dare you to show up, mayor.”
But Johnson and supporters of more open police accountability had fought to maintain the Police Board’s power, arguing it gave the public a view into how high-profile decisions involving officer misconduct are decided. Board hearings are open to the public, and their decisions and rationale are also posted online.
In a January statement, Police Board President Kyle Cooper said that if Benn’s decision were implemented, it would “disrupt a system that has effectively promoted transparency and accountability in handling serious cases of police misconduct in the City of Chicago for over sixty years.”
Letting Benn’s decision stand could also allow officers to “either evade punishment altogether, or their recommended sentences are routinely reduced by as much as 50%,” Cooper said.
City Council rejected Benn’s decision in December. That decision was sent back to Benn, who reaffirmed his earlier ruling and warned the city “cannot prevail” if the dispute makes it to circuit court.
“The City’s high hurdle is clearly established by the courts because the courts give great deference to interpretations made by arbitrators,” because challenges only succeed if the arbitrator exceeded their authority, their order is arbitrary or “procured by fraud, collusion or other similar and unlawful means.”
None of those circumstances apply to the ongoing contract dispute, Benn said. “Now please don’t throw away potentially large sums of taxpayer money that could be used better elsewhere than on a legal fight you cannot win which you are undertaking to make a point that you have already made,” Benn wrote.
Another vote by the full City Council was expected to come to a head last week, but aldermen sent the issue back to committee instead, citing the need for more public debate.
Despite warnings from Benn and Catanzara, the council Committee on Workforce Development rejected Benn’s arbitration award a second time Tuesday, in a 10-5 vote. Attorneys for Johnson’s administration argued there was still a chance they could significantly change the disciplinary process enshrined in the FOP’s new contract. Catanzara pledged then to “sue the hell out of this body.”
Workforce chair Mike Rodriguez, 22nd, conceded Tuesday that the courts “will probably ultimately decide … But we’re going to go to each one of these processes and fight for Chicagoans.”
