The Chicago Inspector General's Office (IGO) issued a report on 1/13/11 that described wrongdoing by city employees. In its report the IGO identified the city departments involved and the acts committed—but didn't name most of the wrongdoing employees. Can you identify them? Read the case descriptions below. If you can provide any info to help identify any of the wrongdoing city employees, let us know by clicking on "Contact us" under the "About chigov" menu at the top of this page.
Chicago Dept. of Aviation (CDA): The IGO found fraud in connection with a vendor's bid for the supply of "Taxi and Runway Guidance Signs, Parts, and Accessories." The IGO reported that a vendor had told a CDA employee that the vendor had defrauded the city by submitting a forged letter in connection with a bid. The IGO said that the "CDA employee, who had a duty to report misconduct, never informed CDA" about the fraud.
The IGO recommended a five-day suspension for the employee. Instead, CDA suspended the employee for two days. Can you help identify this employee?
Dept. of Buildings (DOB): The IGO found that building inspector "violated DOB department rules, the Ethics Ordinance, and Personnel Rules by concealing his ownership interests in buildings that he rented throughout the City of Chicago . . . Further, the employee repeatedly lied to IGO investigators by saying that his ailing father (who has the same name) owned the properties and that he merely attended to the day-to-day responsibilities that his father was unable to perform. He had previously told the same lie to DOB personnel during an earlier department inquiry."
The IGO recommended that the city fire the employee. Instead, DOB suspended the employee for 90 days. Can you help identify the employee?
Dept. of Fleet Management (DFM): The IGO found that a Senior Automotive Equipment Analyst "drove a Chicago Fire Department (CFD) vehicle without authorization." And a vendor bought over $1,000 in gifts for the employee in violation of the city's ethics ordinance.
Further, the employee "lied to the IGO in an attempt to cover up the severity of his/her misconduct."
The IGO also found that a CFD Assistant Deputy Fire Commissioner (ADFC) "misused his City vehicle by chauffeuring his friend, the [DFM employee], to court and attended two court hearings in support of his friend. The ADFC attended both hearings in uniform and on one occasion, on City time, even though he was not subpoenaed to court or in attendance in an official capacity."
The IGO recommended that the city fire the DFM employee and suspend the Assistant Deputy Fire Commissioner for two days. Instead, the city suspended the DFM employee for 29 days and gave the ADFC an oral reprimand. Can you help identify either of these employees?
In another case, the IGO found that a supervisor falsified his attendance records. "Surveillances of the employee showed that, early in the mornings, the employee would drive to a DFM facility near his residence and swipe in for work only to return home, usually for periods of several hours. Later in the day, he would report to the DFM facility where his office was actually located, stay there for a portion of the day, and then swipe out as though he had worked a full shift."
After the IGO investigated, the employee resigned. Can you help identify this employee?
Dept. of Revenue (DOR): The IGO found that a DOR supervisor "abused his position by requiring two of his [employees] to drive him to work in the mornings." The employees would, on city time, "drive a City vehicle from a Department facility on the north side, pick up the supervisor at or near his home on the south side, and return to the north side facility."
When interviewed, the supervisor and employees "repeatedly lied, giving false and evasive responses to direct questions."
The IGO recommended that the city suspend the supervisor for 30 days and the employees for four days. Instead, the city suspended the supervisor for 15 days and the employees for one day. Can you help identify any of these employees?
Chicago Dept. of Transportation (CDOT): The IGO found that that a laborer with the with the Division of Electrical Operations "regularly worked at his/her family-owned restaurant, picked up food for the restaurant, made personal shopping trips and visited his/her residence while he/she was on duty with the City."
After the IGO interviewed the laborer, the laborer resigned. But the IGO also determined that the laborer’s supervisor, an Assistant Superintendent of Laborers, "failed to supervise the laborer in any meaningful way." The IGO found the Assistant Superintendent's lack of supervision "a contributing cause to the laborer’s fraudulent behavior."
The IGO recommended that the city suspend the Assistant Superintendent for seven days. Can you help identify this employee?
