Ineffective By Choice
Summary of the Neighbors for Environmental Justice Report: Ineffective By Choice
The City of Chicago does not enforce environmental laws in any way that could seriously disrupt the operation of businesses that violate them.This report examines how the city enforces environmental laws by analyzing two decades of previously unpublished data from the Department of Administrative Hearings (DAH).
City inspection reports, settlement agreements, and emails put the data in context, showing what the city does and how they do it.The data shows environmental enforcement is mostly limited to small infractions like construction site cleanliness, which are frequently cited and quickly resolved.Serious concerns about air pollution and waste from industrial facilities are the subject of many complaints but rarely lead to citations. When citations are issued to industrial facilities, they often take years to resolve as the city engages in lengthy negotiations.These negotiated settlements end in small fines and minimal consequences.Sometimes companies plead liable to some charges while the city drops the rest; for example, companies frequently plead liable to "Failed to take reasonable precautions to minimize air pollution while handling a substance or material that may become airborne or be scattered by the wind," while most citations issued for"Air pollution prohibited" are later dropped. Sometimes there is no admission of liability at all.
The decision to routinely drop air pollution charges protects companies from escalating fines for repeated air pollution offenses, introduced under Mayor Lightfoot. But even when companies are found liable for air pollution, the fines issued do not meet the minimums in the ordinance. For example, in late 2021, MAT Asphalt was found liable for air pollution and fined $2,000; but as a category A1 facility, the minimum fine should have been $5,000. Since the air pollution ordinance was passed, no facility has been fined more than $5,000.
Additionally, CDPH has confirmed they have a legal strategy of not citing companies for ongoing violations until negotiations are complete.
This practice means a company which has been repeatedly cited for environmental violations can protect itself from additional tickets (and any risk of escalating fines for repeat offenses), sometimes for years, by dragging out negotiations. In at least one instance, an inspector did issue additional citations, but CDPH declined to send them to DAH for prosecution.
A Review of Environmental Enforcement Data In Chicago This incentivizes companies to negotiate in bad faith. Inspection records describe companies that denied access to city inspectors (itself a violation), took months to clean up illegal dump sites, and denied responsibility for noxious odors being experienced on-site during inspections, all while negotiations were in progress. There were no consequences.
Most importantly, the city fails to use the full range of powers granted by the municipal code, instead relying solely on fines or settlements through the Dept of Administrative Hearings.
The Commissioner of the Dept of Public Health has the authority to directly issue emergency or non-emergency abatement orders, requiring a business to suspend part or all of any process whenever there is "a threat to human health or safety or to the environment that is expected to occur within a reasonably short time, or that is present now, although the impact of the threat may not be felt until later."
This is in addition to the power to seek injunctive relief in Circuit Court, which is also explicitly granted by the municipal code, and the power to attach additional conditions to the annually renewed operating permits. Current environmental enforcement practices are ineffective at addressing serious violations, but the city chooses not to use more effective tools.