Even before the pandemic began in March of 2020, the city of Chicago had been collecting data that residents are moving out of downtown to other parts of Illinois, or even out of state. Despite a couple of particularly pandemic-contingent experiences, the pre-pandemic reasons are mostly similar to the current conditions that are encouraging people to move away from the heart of the city.

Identifying a couple of pandemic-contingent situations that very obviously influence the want and need to leave downtown are lack of activity and lack of amenities. It is certainly a benefit to live downtown amongst numerous restaurants, museums, various stores, and pretty much every other possible resource a resident could possibly want. If one works downtown, there is also the allure of a short commute. The accessibility of all these experiences was also one of the main reasons why cost of living is/was so high downtown. With the pandemic, most people started working from home and most facilities closed. Suddenly there were no restaurants open, no stores, completely empty streets, and with this, lack of ability to use most or all the amenities of living downtown.

With downtown Chicago effectively being a ghost town, residents who paid what was considered high cost of living felt they were paying an exorbitant amount for a downtown residence with none of the benefits that they had previously experienced. Thus, with no incentive to stay downtown, many individuals took this rare and peculiar opportunity to move to the suburbs of Chicago, or further north. In general, real estate brokers have noted the surge of prospective homebuyers that are funneling out from downtown, which also leads to the current housing boom we are experiencing.

Since the global pandemic began in March of 2020, it has transformed and altered many professional industries. Although it is one of the most disturbing and tragic components of the pandemic, the rate of death associated with COVID-19 has severely impacted the working conditions and environment of, of course, physicians and nurses who work in a medical setting, but less often discussed are how licensed professionals in the funeral home industry have experienced and managed the COVID-19 Pandemic.

There are a variety of factors within the conditions of the pandemic that uniquely and directly affect funeral home directors and embalmers. When epidemics or pandemics occur, there is commonly a large increase in deaths, sometimes known as “excess deaths.” Funeral homes, which are equipped to handle sometimes just several deceased individuals in one day (depending on the size of the facility), become overburdened and overwhelmed with the deceased. This manifests in multiple ways. First, there is the physical and logistical issue of having too many bodies for the facility. This creates the conditions by which funeral homes must rent refrigerated trucks to store bodies in the interim while they work on others, or temporary storage solutions like pallets or wooden boxes. This can also result in mass storage sites for bodies that have already been prepared or unclaimed bodies. Alongside the logistical issue of having excess deaths is the emotional and mental toll upon the licensed professional. While funeral home directors and embalmers are very acquainted with death, the emotional turmoil of experiencing their facilities struggle to adapt to the surplus of deceased individuals, in addition to the trauma of the effects of the pandemic, can greatly affect their ability to perform their duties.

With the chaos of the pandemic as described above, it can lead to various situations and oversights that could invite investigation of one’s license or even generate complaints that the IDFPR will investigate. If facilities are unable to keep up with the demand, and these licensed professionals are subject to traumatic conditions, then it is inevitable that protocols might be adjusted, things might slip through the cracks, records might falter, corners might be cut, or a variety of other situations. It is important to try and maintain diligence and normalcy within these situations, yet the inevitability of error is always present in such situations.

In January 2020, the Adult Use Act 410 ILCS 705 came into effect. Adults over the age of 21 years old are now able to legally purchase cannabis for recreational use from licensed dispensaries across the state.

The Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation (IDPFR) has the sole authority to regulate cannabis dispensaries and its employees. However, the rules governing dispensary agents are murky. We outline preventative measures all dispensary agents can take to reduce the risk of compliance violations.

Agents and Agents-in-Charge

Dispensary employees are designated as “agents” for purposes of regulation, while dispensary managers are designated as “agents-in-charge.” Both must hold valid agent identification cards and must comply with the following:

The Supreme Court of Illinois just issued its highly anticipated opinion in Evans v. Cook County State’s Attorney, 2021 IL 125513. Evans considered whether Section 10 of the FOID Card Act – which establishes a process for relief from firearms disabilities – automatically and permanently makes this relief unavailable to convicted of felons. The Supreme Court of Illinois determined that Section 10 of the FOID Card Act was intended to be a mechanism for firearm civil rights restoration for some convicted felons.

Evans was convicted of two felonies in 1994. Both were related to controlled substances. Evans applied for a FOID card in 2018 but was denied. The Illinois State Police’s (ISP) justification was based on federal law. ISP argued that Section 922(g)(1) of the Federal Gun Control Act of 1968 prohibits an individual from possessing a firearm when that person “has been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year.”

The circuit court agreed with the ISP and rejected Evans’s petition to have his firearm rights restored. The court reasoned that federal law barred Evans from obtaining a FOID and Evans had also failed to prove that his owning a firearm would not be contrary to the public interest. Evans had submitted various materials to the court in support of his rehabilitated character including letters of recommendation. However, the circuit court did not find those materials to be persuasive.

Williams & Nickl (W&N) authored two legislative bills that were both signed by the Governor in August 2021. These legislative changes to the Private Detective, Private Alarm, Private Security, Fingerprint Vendor and Locksmith Act (Act) were the product of the combined efforts of W&N, the Associated Detective and Security Agencies of Illinois (ADSAI) and the Illinois Security Professionals Association (ISPA).

Public Act 102-0152 made significant changes to the training requirements for private detectives and their employees and private security contractors and their employees. Another change is that all licensees and employees who were issued Firearm Control Cards (FCC) (or who wish to apply) will have changes in the number of hours required to obtain a firearm training certificate and the addition of annual refresher firearm training requirements. We include a short summary of the Act changes made by PA 102-0152. All licensees are urged to read through the Act changes:

20-Hour Basic Training