Which committees, if any, would you combine or eliminate?

Corruption

As Alderman, I would work with the Committee on Committees, Rules and Ethics to
determine if there are any standing committees that can either be combined or eliminated.
Although this measure has been suggested by Alderman in the past, I think it would
ultimately be up to the new Council to determine which committees would be affected.

The Office of the Mayor has already reformed the City Council committee structure and I do not have any recommendations for combining or eliminating committees at this time.

I would eliminate and / or consolidate. Transportation and Traffic Control can be combined.
Economic Capital and Work force development could also be combined to stream line committee
structure. I would base further consolidations based on their activity

Combine: Buildings with Zoning with Housing and Real Estate,
Energy Environmental Protection and Public Utility with Health,
License and Consumer Protection with Rules and Ethics,
Special Events and Cultural Affairs with Historical Landmark Preservation.

No response provided

I believe the current situation, where decisions are made by the Administration and dictated to
the Council, makes most of the committees “for show”, at best, and extraneous, at worst. The
way things should be in a Strong Council/Weak Mayor system is for issues and budgets to be
discussed in committee and voted out as recommendations to the Council as a whole. This
allows for maximum transparency and citizen participation, and, though a single alderman
doesn't have the power to make this happen on their own, it is what I want to work toward when I
am elected.

I believe the current Workforce Development and Audit committee has not been able to utilize its audit function. I believe that aspect of the committee should be improved.

Chevette A. Valentine IVI-IPO 2015 Chicago City Council

N/A

Generally, I think there are too many committees. I know that some committees historically have
met infrequently, and meetings have been poorly attended and have violated open meeting laws.
I am open to input about which committees should be consolidated or eliminated.

I believe the current number of committees is sufficient.

No response provided

I believe the current situation, where decisions are made by the Administration and dictated to
the Council, makes most of the committees “for show”, at best, and extraneous, at worst. The
way things should be in a Strong Council/Weak Mayor system is for issues and budgets to be
discussed in committee and voted out as recommendations to the Council as a whole. This
allows for maximum transparency and citizen participation, and, though a single alderman
doesn't have the power to make this happen on their own, it is what I want to work toward when I
am elected.

No response provided

No response provided

The City Council’s committees are tailored so that each is broad enough to cover all of several
closely related subject areas and narrow enough that it can be specialized enough to develop real
expertise. This careful fitting is an advantage for the City Council, whose members can dedicate
significant time and effort to the issues they care most about, while benefitting from the
complementary dedication of their colleagues. Moreover, the cost savings from committee
elimination are fairly small, and it’s important to bear in mind that the monetary savings are only
one side of the equation—there will be some loss in terms of governance and professionalism.
Still, I am always open to new ideas, and will review any serious consolidation proposal.

Joseph J. Moseley II IVI-IPO 2015 Chicago City Council

ESSAY

None at this time. However, upon being elected and before taking office, I would review all committees for combining/elimination. Also, I believe we need to change how committee chairmanship are assigned.

I am in favor of reducing the size and scope of city government to save taxpayer dollars and reduce inefficiencies, but it will be difficult to lead on this issue until I have served in office and are able to identify which committees can be combined or eliminated without negatively impacting services or representation. I will be a reliable vote for government reform but need to gather more information before I can give specifics on this issue.

The 2011 reduction of the number of committees was a positive step, but more reductions are necessary. There are a staggering number of committees, particularly if one includes all of the "Joint Committees". Moreover, many of such committees include most Aldermen (Committees, Rules and Ethics boasts 50 members; Budget and Government Operations has 35; Finance has 35). The Joint Committees are even worse in terms of size (Finance/Transportation and Public Way has 43 members; Aviation/Finance has 40; Rules and Ethics/Capital and Technology Development has 48). Such large, unwieldy committees defeat the rationale for having committees in the first place: to facilitate greater analysis, dialogue and creativity than could be achieved by the larger body – the City Council as a whole. Further, as addressed below, the current committee structure has been abused. Logical choices for consolidation include combining (1) Pedestrian and Traffic Safety with Public Safety, and (2) Health and Environmental Protection with License and Consumer Protection. Much more could be done, and if elected, I plan to elicit specific recommendations for consolidation from Dick Simpson and other respected City Council observers.

No response provided

I would not combine and or eliminate any committees because the City of Chicago is an immense
metropolitan area that needs several departments to safeguard the concerns and the issues of
the residents. There are over a million people in the city and I believe the number of committees
suffices and the current structure addresses the needs of the constituents adequately.

Perhaps, traffic & transportation

I would combine the pedestrian and traffic safety with public safety. Public safety is a wide
umbrella that covers safety in general.

No response provided

Michael E. LaFargue IVI-IPO 2015 Chicago City Council

a. Transportation and Pedestrian Safety could be potentially combined theoretically
they address similar issues
PRO’s: Save Money
CON’s: There could be a deemphasize on one of both of these important issues.
b. Education and Work Force Development could be combined as education and
training our future workforce are related.
PRO’s: Save Money
CON’s: There could be a deemphasize on one of both of these important issues.

I will not combine or eliminate any existing committees. However, I am amenable
to changing in the number of committees

No response provided

Carlos Ramirez-Rosa IVI-IPO 2015 Chicago City Council

I believe the number of City Council committees is the not the issue our city faces. What Chicago
faces is a lack of independent Aldermen. Chicago needs legislators, not rubberstamps, who work
to pass legislation for the benefit of regular Chicagoans, not powerful corporate interests.

Note: The text in the PDF link for Bita is not able to be copied. I Googled to look for an alternate PDF and found this link but it is also has text that can't be copied:
http://www.iviipo.org/2015QResps/wd02BBuenrostro.pdf
The Bita answers above this question were already prefilled

At this time I would not recommend combining or eliminating any existing committees.

I believe that the current number of joint committees seems excessive, but without a more
intimate knowledge of the special topics that each may have to independently address, I would
not suggest that any be eliminated.

I need to carefully review each committee in more detail, however, I believe we have too many
alderman and committees.

Susan Sadlowski Garza IVI-IPO 2015 Chicago City Council

candidate's responce

No response provided

"No Response Provided"

No Response Provided

Stephen Niketopoulos IVI-IPO 2015 Chicago City Council

None, although over time I don’t mind openly discussing the need to eliminate any that serve no purpose. I think committees need to be restructured more than eliminated.

No response provided

I am less concerned with the number of committees then how legislation is assigned to
them. We must reexamine how and why ordinances are assigned to committees.

I would no eliminate any of the current committees, our committees are overburdened already in addressing issues.

I am not in favor of combining any committees. But hypothetically speaking, Health and Safety
could be combined.

I do not have a comprehensive list, but 50 committees is far too many

The ones I proposed combining in
the past were addressed during the recent consolidation, which reduced committees from
19 to 16. However there are still more that could be eliminated, such as Human Relations.

Which committees, if any, would you combine or eliminate? The recent reorganizations
reduced the committees from 19 to 16. However, I would still combine Traffic Control &
Safety with Transportation & Infrastructure, as well as Health & Environmental Protection
with Human Resources. Economic Capital & Technology Development could be
eliminated, with its main functions incorporated into all committees.