City Council vote could allow members to keep ShotSpotter in their wards
Mayor Brandon Johnson listens to discussion during a Wednesday’s City Council meeting.
Anthony Vazquez/Sun-Times
Mayor Brandon Johnson suffered an embarrassing political defeat Wednesday on an issue central to the Chicago Police Department’s efforts to reduce violent crime.
After a long and emotionally charged debate, a defiant City Council voted 34 to 14 to lay the groundwork to tie Johnson’s hands when it comes to canceling the contract for the gunshot detection technology known as ShotSpotter.
Alderpersons approved an order championed by South Side Ald. David Moore (17th) that ShotSpotter’s lobbyist helped to draft.
It would require the Council to be notified in advance of any decision to “remove any violence prevention funding including SoundThinking/ShotSpotter.” The technology could not be discontinued in any ward without a meeting of the Committee on Public Safety and approval by the full Council.
The order also mandates the police department to collect more specific data to justify signing a new long-term contract with ShotSpotter instead of terminating the agreement on Nov. 22, as called for under the nine-month extension Johnson hastily negotiated .
The information to be collected includes incidents when ShotSpotter sensors detect gunshots, but nobody calls 911 to report a shooting. CPD also must report the rates at which shell casings and weapons are recovered after ShotSpotter alerts, the rates at which ShotSpotter alerts lead to arrests, and the varying response times to ShotSpotter alerts and 911 calls without the gunshot detection technology.
Three months after canceling a crime-fighting technology contract targeted by the progressive movement as a major contributor to overpolicing in Black and Brown communities, Johnson finds himself boxed into a corner.
He can either veto the order he has condemned as illegal, risking a Council override and prepare for a court fight .
Or, he could disappoint supporters by dropping the issue and renewing the ShotSpotter contract. That path is also politically fraught, inviting an already emboldened City Council to push back even more.
Either way, Johnson could emerge politically weakened.
The 34 "yes" votes included members of Johnson's leadership team.
During a news conference after Wednesday's meeting, a combative Johnson argued again that the decision has been made and it's final.
"I canceled ShotSpotter. It's canceled," the mayor said.
Pressed on whether he planned to veto the ShotSpotter order, Johnson said no one was "clear on what actually was voted on."
"The executive branch has the authority to go into intergovernmental agreements through my authority. What was voted on today — it just doesn't make any sense, quite frankly."
And Johnson bristled at the notion that the vote was the Council's way of pushing back at him for acting unilaterally, listing some high-profile decisions by past mayors: “It’s not like [closing] Meigs Field. ... It’s not like ... selling off the Skyway, selling off the parking meters. No. That’s not how my administration is governing."
Well aware ShotSpotter’s proponents had the votes, Johnson asked Budget Committee chair Jason Ervin (28th) to save the day by moving to send the order back to the Police Committee that already passed it “in the spirit of compromise.”
Ald. Anthony Beale (9th) then moved to table Ervin’s motion, and that effort passed 24 -23, amid claims Johnson had again thumbed his nose at Roberts Rules of Order to suit his political needs.
Beale held his ground as the more than hour-long debate began in earnest. He argued 80% of shots fired are not accompanied by a 911 call.
“Our communities have become complacent with gunfire because we hear it all the time. … When you hear it all the time, you say to yourself, 'Why should I bother to call?’ ShotSpotter fills the void. … It's about saving lives,” Beale said.
Apparently referring to the promise Johnson made to progressive voters, Beale told the mayor: “Get past the politics. Campaigning and governing are different. Sometimes, you have campaign promises you need to break.”
An emotional Ald. Monique Scott (24th) said her crime-ridden West Side ward was the scene of "another mass shooting," the fourth in the two years since she took office.
"There were 90 shots. Six shooters. Not one person called the police. ... This is something my community needs," Scott said.
Ald. Anthony Napolitano (41st), who has served the city as a police officer and a firefighter, described ShotSpotter as a force multiplier for CPD, saying the department has at least 2,200 and as many as 3,000 fewer officers than just a few years ago.
The campaign to get rid of ShotSpotter gained political steam after the fatal police shooting of Adam Toledo in March 2021.
Chicago Police Officer Eric Stillman was responding to a ShotSpotter alert when he chased Toledo into an alley in Little Village. He shot the 13-year-old Toledo in the chest just a split-second after video from his body-mounted camera showed the teenager dropping a handgun and raising both hands in the air.
Ald. Byron Sigcho-Lopez (25th), one of Johnson's staunchest City Council supporters, cast one of the 14 "no" votes.
"I also want to mention the case of Adam Toledo, another case that we should remember when we use technology that can be also detrimental," Sigcho-Lopez said, pointing to numerous studies that have questioned the efficacy and crime-fighting value of ShotSpotter alerts.
Although Police Superintendent Larry Snelling has been a cheerleader for ShotSpotter, Sigcho-Lopez said the superintendent has also advocated spending the six months that remain on the ShotSpotter contract to "look at alternatives that actually work."
"But I'll tell you that what we have today does not work," Sigcho-Lopez said.
Mayoral ally Jesse Fuentes (26th) asked her colleagues a simple question.
"If there's organizations in our communities that seek to reduce violence, but were only 2% effective, do we keep funding them? No. We take the money away every single time. ... And yet, we don't have that same sort of accountability for ShotSpotter. ... We haven't seen gun violence go down as a result of this system. We only get reports of the sound detected," Fuentes said.
Moore closed the debate by arguing the time for consideration and discussion has long since passed.
"Everybody wants to talk when you have the votes," Moore said.
Over Johnson's objections, Moore argued all the Council was doing was voting to mandate the collection and dissemination of data that will make the case to renew the ShotSpotter contract.
"Stop making excuses. Grow something. Grow a heart. Anything," Moore admonished his colleagues.
"You're voting against having a voice for your constituents. ... You should have that voice for your community. ... Is it legal? Yeah, it's legal. As a body, we have the ability to contract and we have the ability to fund."