In this article, I explore the debate surrounding Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson's decision to end the city's contract with ShotSpotter. Through interviews with community leaders, public safety advocates and policy experts, I amplify the divided opinions on its effectiveness, the challenges of finding an alternative, and the broader implications for public safety in Englewood.

It has been 50 days since Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson terminated the city’s contract with the controversial gunshot detection service ShotSpotter.

There has not been an update on alternative technology since Johnson issued a request for information on Sep. 22, soliciting companies to potentially replace the first responder resource. One Englewood public safety advocate says the Mayor’s budget cutting -- and the obscurity surrounding a potential substitute -- is a deadly gamble. (LEDE)

“You put people’s lives at risk by making a decision like this,” 7th Police District Councilman Joseph Williams said. “You’re taking it away to try to save money due to another deficit, and it’s not fair to our people.”

Williams is one of three members elected to the district council as part of the city’s Community Commission for Public Safety and Accountability. The youth advocate and educator acts as a liaison between Englewood residents and law enforcement, bringing local voices to the table at discussions of police oversight and reform. He said Johnson’s “abrupt” decision cut the community out of the conversation.

In February of 2024, Johnson fulfilled a cornerstone campaign promise, announcing he would decommission the use of the technology, which alerts police to potential gunfire. When the contract expired on Sep. 22, a 60-day transition period began. ShotSpotter, now known as SoundThinking, Inc., was ordered to de-install sensors on public-owned infrastructure across 12 police districts. Since then, a group of South Side aldermen have been waging a financial and legislative war to salvage ShotSpotter, arguing its value outweighs its price tag. But, the interim is now ending, and the Mayor has been silent on where the RFI stands. (NUT GRAF).

The Mayor’s Office did not respond to a request for comment to clarify what steps have been taken within this timeframe.

A spokesperson for SoundThinking said, “We will continue to follow the terms of our contract with the City of Chicago and collaborate with the CPD and Corporation Counsel on a coordinated 60-day demobilization period.”

Ald. Stephanie Coleman (16th), who represents Englewood, alongside Ald. David Moore (17th) and several others, raised $2.5 million with the help of the business community to preserve ShotSpotter for 15 months or until a stand-in service is enlisted. Coleman did not respond to a request for comment but has been an outspoken proponent of the service. On Oct. 8, the City Council passed an ordinance allowing CPD Supt. Larry Snelling to bypass mayoral control to renew or sign a contract with another vendor. Mayor Brandon Johnson promised to veto the “illegal” legislation on Oct. 8 but has not followed through with the threat.

Not all Englewood advocates are on the same page with ShotSpotter supporters. Dion McGill, another District 7 Councilmember, says ceasing the contract makes room for funding proactive, holistic solutions to gun violence, instead of “reactive technology.” “There’s no ‘magic bullet.’ No technology alone will solve this deeply rooted problem,” McGill said. “We owe our communities more than just a promise to collect their bodies faster.”

Leaders on both sides of the debate have turned to clashing data to back up their petitions for and against ShotSpotter. Johnson’s rejection of the technology is reinforced by a 2021 report from the Chicago Inspector General, whose office found that the system’s alerts “rarely produce evidence of a gun-related crime, rarely give rise to investigatory stops and even less frequently lead to the recovery of gun crime-related evidence.”

On the other hand, data analysis from the University of Chicago Crime Lab points to quantifiable benefits. According to their study surveying city data, “police districts with ShotSpotter had a 3-in-4 chance that the technology saves about 85 lives per year.”

Jonathan Manes, an attorney at the Roderick & Solange MacArthur Justice Center who studies the connection between police surveillance and civil rights violations, agrees with the Mayor and said any advantage suggested by studies is inconsequential.

Manes said he hopes Alderpeople and advocates trying to revive ShotSpotter can shift their attention to alternate avenues. “We all want the same thing, which is reducing crime, but the data shows that this technology does not work,” Manes said. “I think a better way to address this is by finding the neighborhoods that are too far away from trauma centers… or reducing ambulance response times. Both are less expensive than private technology that is not certified by the Department of Justice.”

In the meantime, the Mayor’s Office of Community Safety is reshaping its crime-fighting strategy, ditching sensors for community intervention. Teamwork Englewood, a non-profit, is one of the grant recipients tasked with leading efforts to decrease violence and increase investments in Englewood, as outlined in the administration’s 2025 Budget, which was unveiled on Oct. 30.

Although the 7th Police District Council has different ideas when it comes to ShotSpotter, Williams and McGill agree the city must do more to involve communities in shaping public safety policy, versus leaving constituents in the dark.

“The people I’ve talked to just want to know what’s going on -- what’s next -- but nobody will give us answers,” Williams said.