Chicago cops facing serious discipline can take cases to arbitrator, but judge says hearings should be public

A Cook County Judge ruled Thursday that rank-and-file Chicago cops facing the most serious disciplinary charges can bypass the Chicago Police Board and have their cases heard by an outside arbitrator — but the proceedings should be held in public.

In his 26-page ruling, Judge Michael Mullen said arbitrator Edwin Benn’s decision that such arbitration cases should be held behind closed doors “was neither arbitrary nor capricious,” but Mullen sided with the city in deciding that Benn’s finding ran contrary to “a dominant and well-defined public policy.”

“The restriction of public access to arbitrations for serious police discipline is in direct contravention to the well-defined and dominant public policy of accountability and transparency of the government services in general and the Chicago Police Department specifically,” Mullen wrote.

Mullen’s ruling marks the end to the latest chapter of a lengthy dispute that has spilled over from police union negotiations to the City Council floor and into his courtroom at the Daley Center. During a hearing Wednesday, Mullen acknowledged the case would likely drag on after his decision.

“Is this the end of it?” he said. “I don’t think so."

His ruling applies to all cases in which an officer is facing dismissal or suspensions over a year that haven’t proceeded to an evidentiary hearing before the police board. That includes the case of Officer Eric Stillman, who fatally shot 13-year-old Adam Toledo in March 2021.

Moving forward, the city can’t hold hearings before the police board unless an officer has consented to have their case heard under the existing system.

The handling of the most serious police misconduct cases emerged as the most enduring dispute in yearslong contract negotiations between the city and the Chicago Fraternal Order of Police. Tapped to break the gridlock, Benn concluded that state labor law affords union members the right to bypass public proceedings before the Chicago Police Board and seek “final and binding arbitration.”

His finding set off a political firestorm, with city officials and activists warning it undercut transparency and accountability and threatened to further erode public trust in the Chicago Police Department.

Mayor Brandon Johnson, a defendant in the lawsuit before Mullen, echoed those concerns and urged his colleagues to vote down the ruling.

The City Council ultimately rejected Benn’s decision on Feb. 15, reaffirming its initial vote in December. A day later, the FOP filed a motion seeking a summary judgment in a case it had brought between the two votes. The city later followed suit.

On Wednesday, FOP lawyer Matt Pierce warned that vacating Benn’s order “would send this entire process back to square one,” with both parties being “sent back to negotiate the terms” of the contract. Pierce said a new arbitrator would likely come to the same conclusions as Benn.

“It’s safe to assume that we would wind up back in court — whether it’s a year from now, three years from now or six years from now,” he added. “This type of endless delay and starting the whole process over is not in anyone’s interest.”

The sides spent much of their arguments hammering on their differing views of how to resolve key sticking points.

That included debating whether the cases should be heard in private, whether officers should retroactively be able to seek arbitration and whether cops should remain on the payroll while their disciplinary cases are pending.

Benn found that cases dating back to when he was appointed can be taken to an arbitrator. In court, Pierce argued the “status quo” from past agreements affords officers the right to seek closed-door arbitration and continue being paid.

But city lawyer Jim Franczek pushed back on those claims, noting that the arbitrator’s decision upends a disciplinary system that’s been in place for six decades.

“If the arbitrator had maintained the status quo — made no changes with respect to transparency, with respect to pay status, with respect to retroactivity — we wouldn’t be here today,” Franczek said. “The officers would have been able to avail themselves to arbitration for months, if not a year.”

Mullen also vacated the portion of Benn’s ruling that would keep such officers on the city payroll while their cases are pending, but otherwise confirmed Benn's award.

FOP President John Catanzara didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. Neither did Max Caproni, the executive director of the police board, or Kristen Cabanban, a spokesperson for the city's Law Department.

Kyle Cooper, the police board president, is expected to discuss Mullen's ruling during a meeting Thursday night. It's unclear whether the board will take any disciplinary action in light of the decision.