Chicago is experiencing an uptick in gun violence, reversing recent declines even as other major cities continue to see improvements. During the Juneteenth weekend this year, a series of shootings culminated in a mass drive-by attack at a large gathering in the Roseland neighborhood on the city’s South Side, where at least 14 people were injured. The weekend also saw eight people fatally shot and nearly 40 others wounded across the city. According to Chicago Police Department data, homicides have risen by 9% and shootings by 5% compared to the same period last year.

Mayor Brandon Johnson publicly expressed grief over the latest violence and pledged to hold the perpetrators accountable. Former President Donald Trump also weighed in, calling on Illinois Governor JB Pritzker to enlist his assistance, a recurring request following Chicago shootings.

Amid the ongoing crisis, local faith leaders such as Rev. Michael Pfleger and Rev. Ciera Bates-Chamberlain have intensified calls for action, advocating for the creation of a dedicated city Department of Gun Violence Reduction. This proposed department would consolidate various gun violence prevention initiatives under one umbrella and prioritize strategies beyond traditional law enforcement, notably community violence intervention (CVI) programs.

Supporters argue that the department could bring greater focus and stability to efforts combating gun violence, which have previously been fragmented and affected by frequent administrative changes in city leadership. One distinctive feature of the proposal is to provide the department’s head with substantial independence from mayoral control. The department leader would be selected by a 16-member advisory commission—including faith leaders—and could only be removed by the mayor for cause. This arrangement aims to insulate the department from political interference, referencing Mayor Johnson’s controversial earlier decision to dismiss Garien Gatewood, deputy mayor for public safety, who had been praised for his collaborative approach.

However, the initiative faces significant criticism. Some officials and commentators caution that ceding authority from the mayor’s office undermines democratic accountability and city governance norms. Concerns are also raised about the financial burden of creating a new city department amid persistent budget deficits; Chicago faces a budget shortfall exceeding $1 billion in the coming year.

Financially, the proposed department would take control of roughly $100 million in existing programs currently managed by various city agencies. The proposal would also bring CVI workers onto the city payroll for the first time. Currently, CVI employees are hired by nonprofit organizations like Chicago CRED, which operates with substantial funding commitments from the city’s business sector, philanthropic groups, the state, and Cook County. Critics warn that direct city employment of violence interrupters, many of whom have criminal histories, could expose taxpayers to liability risks if individuals revert to previous behaviors—a known challenge in CVI work.

While CVI is widely recognized as an important violence prevention tool, many advocates suggest it is best managed outside of government bureaucracy, by organizations with specialized experience. The city’s business community, which has invested heavily in these programs, has not yet publicly endorsed the shift to a formal city department.

The department’s establishment would also entail the addition of at least 19 new city jobs, including a high-level commissioner, raising doubts about claims that it would be fiscally neutral. Backers of the plan are reportedly working with Mayor Johnson on an executive order to create the department, but their ultimate goal is an ordinance that would embed it in city law, reducing the ability of future mayors to alter or dismantle it.

A proposal to formalize the Department of Gun Violence Reduction is expected to be introduced in the Chicago City Council this summer, potentially sparking debate amid ongoing budget negotiations and an election-year political climate.

While all parties agree that gun violence remains a critical concern for Chicago, questions persist about whether increased bureaucracy and the proposed redistribution of power within city government will prove effective solutions. Some observers suggest a more immediate priority is electing leadership capable of efficiently leveraging existing resources to address the violence.