Chief Judge on Track to Take All New Electronic Monitoring Participants

Criminal Justice Committee of the Board of Commissioners Meeting
March 11, 2025

• The Committee heard presentations from the Sheriff’s Office and the Chief Judge’s Office regarding the plans for the Chief Judge’s office to take responsibility for all new defendants ordered by Cook County Judges to be placed on electronic monitoring (“EM”) on and after April 1. 
• Currently, Judges order some defendants to be placed on EM overseen by the Sheriff and some on EM overseen by the Chief Judge.  new 
• The Sheriff will continue to oversee those placed under his program prior to April 1, but expects that by the end of September, that program will no longer have any remaining pre-April 1 participants.  The Sheriff hopes to retain all or most of the positions currently involved in EM to cover his other operations, particularly correctional officers for the Jail.
• The Sheriff’s EM program is generally a 24/7 confinement, with some limited movement.  His program has averaged 5 new EM participants a day, or 150 a month, vs. the Chief Judge’s program averaging 3 new participants a day, or 90 per month, both as averaged over the last 3 months. The Chief Judge’s program generally restricts movement only for 12 hours, mainly from 7 pm to 7 am.  Movement is generally unrestricted outside of that curfew.  The other major difference is that those under the Chief Judge’s program are assigned to a pre-trial services officer, who helps provide or connects the defendant to other services.
• Cook County Judges will continue to determine what restrictions on movement will be applicable to all those placed on EM.  The Chief Judge’s office is expecting to have many more people on 24/7 restrictions than currently, along with the expected additional 900 EM participants to be added over the coming 6 months that would have previously gone to the Sheriff’s program.  The Chief Judge’s office is planning to assign pre-trial officers to all of these new participants.
• As a result, the Chief Judge is anticipating needing up to 153 new employees:  66 to 83 new people in the Home Confinement Unit (which monitors EM) and 54 to 79 new people for the Pre-Trial Services Unit over the coming months.  In addition, the current space for the Home Confinement Unit is not sufficient for the necessary increase.  The process has started to look for a new, larger space.  Also, it is anticipated that more support, such as capital and technology, will be needed by the Chief Judge’s Office.

The Chief Judge’s Office has a 4-Phase Implementation Plan to accomplish this:

• Feb. thru May, 2025:  On-boarding of around 25 new employees, which are currently provided for in the Chief Judge’s budget, and identification of the new space for the Home Confinement Unit.
• June thru Augusti 2025:  Onboarding of 2 new classes (approximately 25 each) of employees; promotions to add additional supervisors; ready and move into new space for Home Confinement Unit; develop new reporting structure.
• September thru November, 2025:  Onboarding of another class and more promotions to supervisors; implement reporting structure.
• December 2025 thru May 2026:  Onboard 3 more classes to be fully staffed.

Also appearing at the meeting was Cara Smith, the Director of the Illinois Office of Pre-Trial Services.  

• She explained that the office had recently received the request from Cook County for the 153 new positions and is reviewing that now.  
• This will necessitate amending that Office’s proposed budget for the State’s new fiscal year that begins July 1, but the Office has already alerted State lawmakers.  Comm. Britton told her not to hesitate to contact the County Board if it needed to lobby the State for the needed money.  

A representative of the State’s Attorney also spoke and said that that Office was looking forward to more information about the transfer of EM responsibilities from the Sheriff to the Chief Judge.

The Commissioners had many questions:

• Commissioner Degnen received assurances that the Chief Judge’s Office would continue to report information about EM on the web site, such as numbers of those on EM and the types of charged crimes, as is done now. During public comments, a representative from Appleseed’s Center for Fair Courts had expressed strong support for the Chief Judge’s Office taking over responsibility for all EM, but had raised a concern about obtaining information since the Chief Judge is not subject to the Open Records Act.  
• Commissioner Britton was told that if the Chief Judge’s Office found a defendant had violated the EM conditions, the local police would be called.  That defendant would be brought before the judge handling the case to determine if the conditions had indeed been violated, and if appropriate, the judge could order confinement in Jail.  In that case the Sheriff’s Office would take the defendant into custody.  
• In response to Comm. Lowry, the Office of the Chief Judge estimated that an additional $10 M would be needed this fiscal year.  
• Comm. Anaya and Daley were assured that the unions under the Chief Judge are fine with the changes:  the duties of the employees will not be changing; only the number of employees – an increase in those union jobs.  The Sheriff similarly is talking to the unions representing his employees.  
• Responding to Comm. Anaya and Quezada, it was explained that the Chief Judge’s Office has already been added to the Sheriff’s contract for obtaining places to stay for those on EM as necessary, and that the equipment the Sheriff is using for EM can be transferred to the Chief Judge.

Observer:  Priscilla Mims