Case: 1:69-cv-02145 Document #: 5986 Filed: 08/31/18 Page 1 of 4 PageID #:52448

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION

MICHAEL L. SHAKMAN, et al., )

) No. 69 C 2145
Plaintiffs, )
)
v. )
) Hon. Sidney Schenkier
COUNTY OF COOK, et al., )
)
Defendants. )

JOINT MOTION FOR SETTING A HEARING DATE FOR

SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE AND DISMISSAL OF THE COUNTY OF COOK

Plaintiffs, MICHAEL L. SHAKMAN, PAUL M. LURIE, et al. (“Plaintiffs”), and Defendant,

COUNTY OF COOK (the “County”), (collectively, the “Parties”) by and through their respective

attorneys, respectfully request that the Court enter the accompanying Agreed Order Setting a Hearing

Date for the Joint Motion for a Finding of Substantial Compliance and dismissal of the County of Cook in

the form attached as Exhibit 1. In support, the Parties state as follows:

1. On November 30, 2006, the Parties entered into a settlement agreement in this case entitled the

Agreed Supplemental Relief Order (“SRO”) (DKT. 531).

2. The SRO lists the standards for a finding of substantial compliance by the County.

Included are the following factors:

(1) The County has implemented a new Employment Plan, including procedures to ensure
compliance with the new Employment Plan and identify instances of non-compliance;

(2) the County has acted in good faith to remedy instances of non-compliance that have been
identified, and prevent a recurrence;

(3) the County does not have a policy, custom or practice of making employment decisions
based on political factors except for Exempt Positions;

(4) the absence of material noncompliance;

(5) County has implemented procedures that will effect long-term prevention of the use of
impermissible political considerations in connection with employment with the County.
(DKT No. 531)
 Case: 1:69-cv-02145 Document #: 5986 Filed: 08/31/18 Page 2 of 4 PageID #:52449

3. Over the past several years, the County along with representatives of the County Board

President’s Office, the Office of the Public Defender, the Cook County Health and Hospitals System

(“CCHHS”), and the Office of the Independent Inspector General (“OIIG”) has developed and

implemented policies and procedures to help ensure that unlawful political reasons and factors are

not and will not be considered in the County’s employment actions. The Court has approved the

Cook County Employment Plan of the Offices under the Jurisdiction of the President and the Public

Defender, the Employment Plan for CCHHS, and the Employment Plan for the OIIG. The County

has further revised these Employment Plans and the proposed amended Employment Plans for the

County, CCHHS and OIIG are attached hereto respectively as Exhibits 2, 3 and 4 for the Court’s

review and approval.

4. To facilitate monitoring of the County’s compliance with the Employment Plans and

investigating alleged violations of those Employment Plans, the County, the various Compliance

Officers and the OIIG have agreed to a protocol for addressing claims; said protocol is included in

the Employment Plans.

5. The County submits the Employment Plans as evidence that it has implemented

procedures that will continue after the SRO is terminated to effect long-term prevention of unlawful

political discrimination.

6. The SRO provides that prior to a finding of Substantial Compliance and dissolving the

1994 Consent Decree and this SRO, the Chief of the Bureau of Human Resources and the President

will sign a Certification of Substantial Compliance stating that, after appropriate review and inquiry,

the Chief of the Bureau of Human Resources and the President believe the County is in Substantial

Compliance with the 1994 Consent Decree and the SRO. Copies of such certifications are attached

hereto as Exhibits 5 and 6.

7. Based upon reports by the CA, Compliance Officers and the OIIG, a review of the

Employment Plans, and the County’s conduct in the last several years, Plaintiffs agree that the

Employment Plans can reasonably be expected to satisfy the objectives of the 1994 Consent Decree
 Case: 1:69-cv-02145 Document #: 5986 Filed: 08/31/18 Page 3 of 4 PageID #:52450

and SRO, and that the County has met the requirements of the 1994 Consent Decree and SRO for a

finding of substantial compliance with the 1994 Consent Decree and the SRO.

8. The Parties and the Compliance Administrator agree that the County is in substantial

compliance with the 1994 Consent Decree and the SRO.

9. The Parties agree that the Court should terminate the 1994 Consent Decree and SRO for

the County as it applies to the Offices under the Jurisdiction of the President, the Public Defender,

CCHHS, and the OIIG, with the Court retaining jurisdiction regarding a final fee petition, which the

Plaintiffs shall submit within 60 days after the Court rules on this motion. Consistent with their past

practice, the Parties will confer and attempt to reach agreement regarding fees prior to the

submission of the petition.

10. The Parties have agreed to provide a Notice of Hearing in the form attached as Exhibit

1.A. The Notice will be provided to current County employees in the Offices under the Jurisdiction

of the President, the Public Defender, the OIIG and CCHHS by email and posting on the County’s

website on September 21, 2018. On or before September 21, 2018, the Notice shall be published as

a display advertisement in one daily edition in each of the Chicago Tribune and the Chicago Sun-

Times.

11. Class members who wish to object to a finding of Substantial Compliance or who wish

to be heard at the hearing must file any objection or request with the Clerk of the Court by 3:00 p.m.

on October 12, 2018, with copies sent to the Cook County State’s Attorney and Plaintiffs’ Class

Counsel, as more fully stated in the Notice of Hearing.

WHEREFORE, the Parties respectfully request that the Court (i) enter the attached Agreed

Order Setting a Hearing Date for the Joint Motion for a Finding of Substantial Compliance and

Dismissal of the County of Cook, providing for such hearing to occur on October 31, 2018 at 10:00

a.m., and (ii) following such hearing, grant the motion for substantial compliance with the SRO,

dissolve the SRO and 1994 Consent Decree and dismiss the County as a defendant.
 Case: 1:69-cv-02145 Document #: 5986 Filed: 08/31/18 Page 4 of 4 PageID #:52451

Respectfully submitted,

MICHAEL L. SHAKMAN, et al.: COUNTY OF COOK

By: /s/Brian I. Hays By: /s/Daniel H. Brennan, Jr.
Roger R. Fross Cathy McNeil Stein
Brian I. Hays Daniel Brennan
LOCKE LORD, LLP Assistant State’s Attorneys
111 S. Wacker Dr. Cook County State’s Attorney’s Office
Chicago, IL 60606 500 Richard J. Daley Center
312.443.1707 Chicago, IL 60602

Michael L. Shakman
Edward W. Feldman
MILLER, SHAKMAN & BEEM, LLP
180 N. LaSalle Street, Suite 3600
Chicago, Illinois 60601
Phone: 312.263.3700

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Daniel Brennan, Jr., hereby certify that I have caused a true and correct copy of
the foregoing to be served upon:

Roger R. Fross
Brian I. Hays
Katherine H. Harris
LOCKE LORD, LLP
111 S. Wacker Dr.
Chicago, IL 60606

via E-Filing and by causing the same to be deposited in the U.S. Mail, first-class, postage
prepaid on the 31st day of August, 2018

/s/ Daniel Brennan

One of the Attorneys for Defendants