Legislation and Intergovernmental Relations Committee Meeting
June 10, 2026

Most of the meeting was an update to the Board of Commissioners and the public on the measures that are being undertaken to improve the processes and oversight within the Property Tax System. Comm. Britton requested that each office reporting not rehash the problems that are well known but provide information on how they are addressing the problems that have been previously identified and plagued the system for a long time. He asked that they limit their remarks to 10 minutes so Commissioners would have time for questions. (Agenda Item 26-1230 - Received and Filed)

Summary of presentations and questions:

• Office of the President - Jim Thompson, Director of Property Tax Policy - Stated that the lack of clear authority and lack of collaboration among the several offices involved in the process underlie the structural problems of the system. He provided an outline/timeline of how the Assessor, the Board of Review (BOR), the Illinois Depart of Revenue (IDOR), the County Clerk, and the Treasurer are supposed to work together to determine what the tax should be, to provide for collection of the taxes, and then distribution of the money to the various bodies that are supported by the property taxes. He referred to the reform group that has been meeting with representatives from all the entities. They have been looking to determine changes that can be made. He also said that imposing a new computer system (Tyler) on top of the problems that already existed has been challenging as each entity has integrated the system on a different time line. Meetings with Tyler are now being held daily and work continues to fix the system.
• Assessor - Fritz Kaegi - He stated that each part of the system depends on others doing their work so that deadlines can be met. His office is now sharing methodology on tax rates with the BOR so that is going more smoothly. Once his office receives the information from the BOR (revised assessments and certificates of error - see the presentation from the BOR below) and enters the information into the Tyler system, the Assessor’s office sends information to IDOR. This year his office still had to do manual reconciliation of the data to be sent to IDOR, but next year all data should be in the Tyler system so manual reconciliation will not be required. When asked, he said the process is 1 1/2 to 2 months behind schedule this year. Data was sent to IDOR on June 10 so it can calculate the multiplier and then that information comes back to the Assessor before he can send everything on to the Clerk. The IDOR process usually takes from 7-10 days. Comm. Degnan asked how many problems (defects) remain in the Tyler system for the Assessor’s office. Mr. Kaegi stated that the office is 95% working within the Tyler system. Tom Lynch from the Cook County Department of Technology stated that the Assessor part of Tyler has been working okay - it is the tax administration functionality phase that is still being worked on. 
• Board of Review - William O’Shields, Chief Deputy Commissioner, Commissioners Steele and Cardenas – The BOR does not create an assessment - it reviews appeals of an assessment. The BOR also reviews certificates of error. The BOR is the first transfer of information after the Assessor. The appeal process allows for oral arguments and the decisions are to correct errors in the initial assessment.   The BOR sends the corrected assessments to the Assessor’s office for entry into the property tax system.   Comm. Cardenas stated that they are working to reduce the time frame for reviews and working more closely with the Assessor to align their approach. Comm. Steele stated that the BOR has 3 individual offices. each with their own staff of about 40 persons. Each office needs to hear every appeal. There were no questions from the Commissioners. 
• County Clerk – Chief Deputy Clerk Cedric Giles  - That office deals with tax rates and it is fully using the Tyler system. The office applies the tax rates to the information from the Assessor and that process takes about 16-20 days to complete. That office also manages the redemption payments after the tax sale and this process is still not fully functional on Tyler. 
• Treasurer - David Byrnes, Chief of Staff - Began by reading a letter from Treasurer Maria Pappas. Comm. Britton reminded him not to focus on the past but highlight what changes are being made to make the system work. Mr. Byrnes stated that 2500 tax bills from last year have still not been sent due to data issues in the Tyler system that still has an identified 214 defects (though not all of these are critical). Since those bills have not been sent, the tax income has not been determined and thus cannot be distributed. The 2500 that have not been sent are scattered throughout the County and there are 6-7 defects that are holding them up. Mark Hawkins from Tyler stated that last year the first set of bills was done still on the mainframe computer and the second was sent on Tyler. Part of the problem holding up the bills from last year was that there were inconsistencies between the data in the two systems.  This year everything is being done through Tyler so the data problem should not continue. 
• The latest date for the termination of the mainframe is now July 31, 2026. All offices are off the mainframe except for the Clerk’s office that still uses it for reference. The Assessor started using Tyler 3 years ago according to Tom Lynch (Chief Information Officer, Dept. of Technology). He also stated that all payments to Tyler are based on milestones being met. To maintain the mainframe costs about $7M/year and the hardware is so old it is no longer available and all employees who worked on it are now retired. Comm. Degnan pressed Tom Lynch to estimate the cost for all the problems that have occurred with the tax system and his estimate was about $20M. 

Prior to these presentations,

• Meeting began with Public Speakers that included Priscilla Mims speaking on behalf of the League of Women Voters of Cook County asking the Commissioners to encourage the local election authorities to provide a way for voters to submit their Vote-by-Mail Ballots at their local precincts on election day. In addition, there were 2 other speakers addressing Voting Rights; 8 speakers from entities that have not received their tax distributions for the year and asking that the tax system be fixed; and 4 other speakers making general comments. 
• An amendment to the ordinance about the process for filling vaccines of some of the separately elected County Offices was approved by the committee without comment. (26-1414) 
• A resolution calling for a hearing on Voting Rights was not discussed. (26-1409)

Observer:  Cynthia Schilsky

Cook County Board - Criminal Justice Committee 
June 10, 2026

The Committee heard from public speakers and criminal justice stakeholders pursuant to a request for hearing to consider measures to be implemented to ensure fair and equitable processing of mediations for domestic relations and child representation.  (Item 25-3661, sponsored by Commissioner Donna Miller) Problems concerning these had been identified in prior meetings. 

• Public speakers spoke about the lack of follow up, confusion, and continued movement of personnel within the courts, whether participants are involved with the domestic relations and/or domestic violence court.  Several speakers thanked Commissioner Miller for taking the lead and listening to the experiences of people who are involved in the domestic criminal justice system (which is a separate issue).  A few speakers spoke about the length of time their cases have been in the courts, such as 7, 8 or 9 years, and the impact this has on their lives, families and children.  
• Diane Brown spoke about her daughter Jennifer and her experience in the court which started in 2017. The case is still open after 9 years and 8 judges.
• Another speaker shared that when her daughter was 11 or 12 she asked for equal parental time with her mother. During an 8-year period, numerous personnel changes occurred in the case, including 3 different judges. This resulted in no contact between mother and daughter for 7 ½ years.   She stated that courts should not have so much power over families. 
• Several people mentioned the role of GALs (Guardian ad Litem) in their cases and the fees involved.  GALs are independent licensed attorneys appointed by judges, credentialed in Illinois, who go through extra training to represent the best interest of children in domestic relations cases. They are not employees of the court. 

Representatives from the Chief Judge, Sheriff, State Attorney’s, Clerk of the Court, and Public Guardian; shared updates and answered questions from the Commissioners.  These questions, particularly Commissioner Stamps', centered around appointed GALs and fees involved, accreditation, court reporters, orders of protection (POs), length of time to serve, what information is available to the judges and where they receive it from, and what drives process and practices. 

Questions and answers concerning GALs included:  

• How are they assigned – by judges from an approved list
• How do attorneys become a GAL- independent licensed lawyers go through two 8-hour training days to learn court procedures and the role GALs play
• What are they paid -  $110/hour (for last 20 years)  or if judge decides the family can afford to pay a higher rate, could be as much as  $300 or $400/hour 
• If a family cannot pay, the court can appoint a public guardian who has a sliding scale or may be pro bono
• Is there a sliding scale available for GAL - no, fee is statutorily set
• Due to what may be an arbitrary decision on what kind of representation a family may receive, some people owe thousands of dollars in fees

The Resolution states that GALs are interviewed and screened by current GALs and that the Office of Public Guardian accepts appointments as the child representative in the majority of cases (as opposed to the GAL). 

Additional questions and responses included:
Who handles issues regarding ethics or problems with representation from lawyers?

• All concerns are directed to the ARDC ( Attorney Registration and Disciplinary Commission).  
• ARDC investigates misconduct complaints. By design, the process is confidential. 

Why are there no court reporters in these courts?

• There is a statewide lack of court reporters which leads to lack of accountability.
• Lack of court reporters is an impediment to seek review or appeal.
• Court reporters are not required in all cases. Are required if only one side is appearing in court or there is an interview of a child in the judge’s chambers.
• When asked about use of zoom, the answer is the technology is not there yet for accuracy.  A recording is not a substitute for a transcript. 
• When asked about increasing the number of court reporters, Commissioner McCaskill shared that South Suburban College has a court reporter training program.

On a separate issue, Orders of Protection (OPs) not being served cause litigants to feel unsafe for themselves and their children, A recent analysis determined that 75% of civil OPs remain unserved in Cook County.  Data from Sheriff’s office:

• Orders are processed by Clerk of the Court’s office and sent to Sheriff 
• About 72% of OPs are served on the same day as issued.  A second attempt is made within 24 hours, and 3rd attempt in 72 hours. 
• From Nov 1, 2025 to Feb 28, 2026, data showed there were 6,212 orders with 56.7% served. 
• Main barriers to serving are cannot be located, wrong address, respondent relocated. 
• There were some questions regarding how orders are issued - paper or electronically. Answer paper with some follow-up electronically. 

Information available to the judges?

• Information generally comes from the Clerk of the Court’s office 
• Judges have access to domestic violence court records

Other points from Commissioners:

• Need for raining for judges and others and the need to be mandatory
• There is a need to monitor technology in order to support the system better
• Questions on judges and turnover on cases
• Commissioner Stamps wants racial and gender data tracked. (The Commissioner said that 70% of victims are black women.) Some of this will require IL statute change. 
• Lobbying will be needed to update fee statutes and where court reporters are required. 

​Observer:  Laura Davis 

Criminal Justice Committee
June 9, 2026
Commissioners Hold Hearing on Orders of Protection and other Matters

The meeting had one agenda item:  a resolution to hold a hearing to examine the challenges, delays, and systemic gaps related to the service and enforcement of orders of protection (OPs) electronic monitoring compliance, and revocation of Firearm Owner’s Identification (FOID) cards.  (tem 26-1526)

• Public comments included a request to look at the system of electronic monitoring as a whole, rather than individual cases, in setting policy.  

During the rest of the hearing:

• Domestic violence was acknowledged as the highest crime incidence on the west side of Chicago. Accused perpetrators are known to ‘hide’ from those trying to serve OPs.  Communication to survivors about perpetrators released from custody is essential. The resolution stated that data from the Sheriff showed that 45% of OPs go unserved.
• The Sheriff’s report on FOID revocation showed that 68% of owners with revoked FOID cards do not comply with the transfer of arms. 
• There was discussion of a proposed bill to provide 60-day electronic notice to turn in weapons or have your driver’s license revoked.  Comm. Stamps asked why 60 and not 30 days? She was told that 60 days is the legislative standard notice.  Comm. Daley asked about the status of this bill.  He was told that it remains under negotiation. Comm. Miller asked about the anticipated opposition to the bill.  One concern was that the loss of a driver’s license could lead to a loss of work / family income.
• Service of OPs currently involves 3 attempts to serve a person within a 72-hour period.  A proposed bill calls for electronic receipt of the order and opening of the notification.  Precedent for use of this system is Washington State.  Data will be sent to Commissioners, but reported improvements include more people showing up in court to present their own case and improved due process, i.e. people know that they have been served, and improved privacy, i.e. no sheriff showing up at your home or workplace.
• Reasons for delay of this bill include: it takes time for the General Assembly to understand the intentions of the bill; time needed to get partner organizations/offices involved and aligned, e.g. State’s Attorney and Public Defender must weigh in.

Sheriff’s Office input:  

• Has supported several other bills aimed to improve safety for victims and due process for both parties
• A taskforce is working on a Public Safety dashboard that can notify relevant government and law enforcement agencies of orders of protection and electronic monitoring orders
• Prefer in person attempts to serve the order and e-serve as secondary process

State’s Attorney’s Office input

• Support any mechanism to notify individuals to appear in court to clarify parameters of the order
• Need hard evidence that people are notified
• Comm. Anaya asked if there are legislative gaps. The response was there are laws in place for use of e-devices to locate victim and witnesses in or near the court building. State-wide case-level data is not currently accessible, so office’s dashboard and Clerk’s office data are searched. 
• Victims need a police report to get into criminal (vs civil) court.  Chicago Police Department now takes reports at the Domestic Violence Courthouse instead of the victim needing to go to a station.

Public Defender’s Office input

• Lack of notice hurts both victims and their clients
• State’s Attorney now has access to other orders of protection from the Clerk of the Court in preparation for court

Observer:  Sue Gregory

Finance Committee
June 10, 2026
Commissioners Receive Performance Management Report

Carrianne Carallis, the Director of the Department of Research, Operations and Innovation (“ROI”), gave a short presentation on the status of the County’s Performance Management program in conjunction with the 2025 Annual Performance Management Report.  (Item 26-1025.)  This Report covers all departments within Cook County.  

• The ROI Department in 2025 worked with all the departments under the President to establish goals and outcomes.  The goals are broad statements that describe what an agency or department aims to accomplish over time.  Outcomes are the intended change or public benefit that indicate progress toward a desired goal.  The ROI intends to work with the departments under the other officials to establish goals and outcomes during 2026.
• While there are metrics listed for each goal, most of these are from prior years.  In response to a question from Comm. Anaya as to what checks and balances exist to make sure the metrics are appropriate, Director Carallis said that the ROI Department intends to work with all departments to tailor the metrics so they better measure whether the outcomes are being achieved during 2026. 
• Comm. Degnen stated that this Report is better than the last 3 annual reports.  She recommended that future reports should also provide narratives as to how the departments can improve.  She said the goals should be the cornerstones of what each department does.
• Comm. McCaskill said she looks forward to seeing how the performance management program goes forward and would like the goals, outcomes and appropriate metrics also applied to the various organizations which receive grants from the County.

The Committee recommended Board approval of

• A change in the ordinance Sec. 76-677 so that the revenues from the tax on firearm ammunition shall go to fund gun violence prevention programs and operations as determined by the Justice Advisory Council.  Previously the revenues went to the Special Purpose Equity Fund for those same purposes. (item 26-1336)
• A resolution to award additional Justice Advisory Council grants to 9 organizations to support community violence intervention programming. (item 26-0721)

The Committee deferred action on a proposed ordinance amendment to require that all contracts exceeding $3 M include a statement that a vendor’s failure to perform or deliver may result in a minimum 10% penalty.  Comm Degnen, the sponsor along with Comm. Kevin Morrison, explained that the deferral was to provide time to determine exactly where this provision should be placed in the County Code of Ordinances.  (Item 26-1514)

The County Comptroller reported that up through April,

• The General Fund has a favorable net variance as compared to budget of $344.1 M composed of higher revenues of $264.3 M and lower expenses of $79.8 M as compared to budget.
• The Health Fund has an unfavorable net variance as compared to budget of $47 M composed of lower revenues of $15.8 M and higher expenses of $31.2 M as compared to budget on a cash basis.  

Observer:  Priscilla Mims

Asset Management Committee
June 10, 2026
Committee Approves More Contract Funds But Concerns Expressed

• Capital Planning & Policy was seeking approval of  $13.25 M in additional funds for an existing Job Order Contract (JOC) program that had $197,250 M previously allocated. 
• The JOC program has a pool of approved contractors that can be used for smaller construction projects that are less than a year in duration, such as preparatory site work and electrical work.  The projects have specific pricing.   There are various projects currently under construction in County buildings.
• The original contract term expired in January of 2026, but under a new County Porcurment Code, the Chief Procurement Officer was authorized to exercise the option within the contract to extend it to 2028.  However, there is no authorization for additional dollars to be added, which is why this item was before the Commissioners for approval. 
• Commissioners Degnen and Anaya both expressed concern that the contract was extended without providing the Board updates on the work involved and now the Commissioners were being asked to approve additional funds.   Issues and delays with the 5th floor remodeling were pointed out.  
• Earl Manning, the Director of Capital Planning and Policy,  committed to providing updates to the Commissioners.
• The Committee approved the additional funds.   Commissioners Degnen and Anaya voted present. (Item 26-0842)

Observer:  Kathi Graffam

Finance Subcommittee on Litigation
June 10, 2026

Inspector General  Paxton presented some of the statistics and items from his 1st quarter report from the Office of the Independent Inspector General. Concerning the cases involving employees seeking Payroll Protection loans for companies run outside of their County jobs, Commissioner Degnan asked whether, when the Office recommended termination and placement on “do not hire” list, the termination takes place. Mr. Paxton did not have specific statistics ,but stated that in general the termination took place.
Observer:  Hollis Burgess

Technology Committee
June 10, 2026

For the third month, the Committee deferred the one item on the agenda:  a contract for video analytics platform to detect security breaches throughout the Department of Corrections.  (Item 26-0816)
Observer:  Ed Spire