Siskel committed to police reform, with or without consent decree

Newly appointed Corporation Counsel Ed Siskel vowed Tuesday to lead the Law Department with “integrity and fairness” and forge ahead with police reforms, whether or not President Donald Trump’s Justice Department pursues a consent decree.

After sailing through his City Council confirmation hearing, Siskel was asked repeatedly whether there will be a consent decree and whether one is needed to implement the top-to-bottom reforms included in the DOJ’s scathing indictment of the Chicago Police Department.

Each time, Siskel dodged the question.

He said talks between the city and the Justice Department are “ongoing” — both by phone and in person.

But he refused to say whether the two sides are negotiating a consent decree.

Emanuel said last week that attorneys from the DOJ’s civil rights division would be in Chicago this week to start those negotiations. But Siskel would say only that a conference call was scheduled for sometime Tuesday.

“The mayor has made very clear that the city is going to move forward with the process of police reform, is going to take the recommendations made by the Justice Department — and others as well — to find ways to improve policing. . . . That is going to take place, regardless of whether there is a consent decree and regardless of whether the Justice Department is pushing for one or not,” Siskel told reporters.

But there’s a difference between a consent decree — with mandates, deadlines and the appointment of a federal monitor to ride herd over it all — and a mere commitment to implement reforms without deadlines and mandates.

Without court oversight, Siskel was asked what confidence Chicagoans should have that this promise of police reform will be any more enduring than all of the promises that preceded the DOJ report triggered by the police shooting of Laquan McDonald.

The report portrayed a biased police department stuck in the Stone Age — from training that relies on 35-year-old videos to outdated pursuit tactics that endanger suspects, officers and innocent bystanders.

It laid bare years of civil rights violations by officers accused of verbally abusing minorities, shooting at people who pose no threat and Tasering others simply because they refused to follow verbal commands.

“The confidence that people should have is to hear what the mayor has said, the message that he has sent loud and clear — not just to the public, but to the Police Department and to my department — that we are going to move forward. We are going to make real steps toward police reform and not wait around for the Justice Department or a consent decree,” he said.

Siskel was also asked how he plans to re-establish trust with federal judges who have accused the Law Department of withholding evidence from plaintiffs in civil cases and failing to turn over evidence in a timely manner.

“One of the things I am focused on . . . is to make sure that we are doing everything that we can to serve as officers of the court and to comply with all obligations regarding discovery practices and transparency,” he said.

“The Law Department has instituted a number of policies to make sure that we are complying with all discovery obligations and continuing to build on the strong reputation of the Law Department within the legal community.”

Before replacing retiring Corporation Counsel Steve Patton, Siskel was a partner at WilmerHale, a Washington law firm paid nearly $1 million to help guide the city through the Justice Department’s investigation of the Chicago Police Department.

He is also a former deputy White House counsel who has served at the highest levels of the Justice Department.

During Tuesday’s confirmation hearing, aldermen asked Siskel to identify his “clients.” In no particular order, he named the mayor, the City Council and city departments.

The answer didn’t seem to satisfy Ald. Ricardo Munoz (22nd). Munoz noted there are sometimes conflicts among those three entities — particularly between the mayor and aldermen demanding information the administration won’t release. He complained that there is “no firewall” between them to prevent conflicts.

Ald. Howard Brookins (21st), former chairman of the City Council’s Black Caucus, also noted that, unlike the White House where the president has his own counsel, the mayor of Chicago doesn’t.

Siskel would only say that there may be times when hiring outside counsel to represent the mayor might be necessary.