John J. Flood   Bio & Jim McGough (Biography)
6304 N Francisco Av
Chicago. Il 60659
773-878-1002(tel)
 

 

 

DOJ press release on Stillo arrest and Amended criminal Complaint

Picture

U. S. Department of Justice

United States Attorney
Northern District of Illinois

 

Patrick Fitzgerald 
United States Attorney  

Federal Building
219 South Dearborn Street, Fifth Floor
Chicago, Illinois 60604

 

(312) 353-5300
 

 
 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE   

 
PRESS CONTACT:

FRIDAY NOVEMBER 19, 2004   


AUSA/PIO Randall Samborn (312)353-5318



 

CITY TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT FOREMAN ARRESTED
AS PART OF HIRED TRUCK PROGRAM CORRUPTION INVESTIGATION
 

CHICAGO - A City of Chicago Department of Transportation (CDOT) asphalt foreman was arrested today on federal charges for allegedly taking illegal cash payments from a cooperating trucking company driver participating in the city's Hired Track Program (HTP) in exchange for providing hundreds of tons of asphalt stolen from the city. The defendant, Patrick Stillo, and a second unidentified CDOT asphalt foreman allegedly received thousands of dollars in exchange for diverting truckloads of asphalt from the city to private paving contractors for use in private construction projects, In addition to providing city asphalt for private use, Stillo allegedly approved payment to the truck driver's employer for a full day's work even though the driver spent part of his time delivering stolen asphalt. He was charged with bribery in a federal criminal complaint that was unsealed following his arrest.
 

  


 

Stillo, 50, of 5429 S. McVicker, Chicago, has been a city employee since 1972, and currently supervises CDOT crews that spread asphalt on city streets, He appeared this afternoon in U.S, District Court and is the I 0th defendant charged this year in the ongoing investigation.
 

  


 

The charges were announced by Patrick J. Fitzgerald, United States Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois; Richard K. Ruminski, Acting Special Agent-in-Charge of the Chicago Office of

1

  

the Federal Bureau of Investigation; J.D. Nichols, Special Agent-in-Charge of the U.S. Department of Labor, Office of Inspector General in Chicago; Kenneth T. Laag, Acting Inspector-in-Charge of the U.S, Postal Inspection Service in Chicago; and Jose A. Gonzalez, Acting Special Agent-in-Charge of the Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigation Division in Chicago.
 

  

 

According to an affidavit supporting the complaint, a cooperating truck driver, "CW-4," was assigned through the HTP intermittently between 1999 and 2003 to Stillo's asphalt crew. As crew foreman, Stillo was responsible for approving the tickets that were generated when the asphalt was picked up at a plant - typically 20- 23 tons per semi-truck load - and certifying daily activity reports to ensure that it was delivered to a specific city project, From time to time, Stillo allegedly authorized CW-4 to pick up city-purchased asphalt and deliver it to a private job while on city time as an HTP driver. The private contractor paid CW-4, who split the proceeds with Stillo, sometimes paying him in Stillo's CDOT van. The private contractor generally paid CW-4 $350 per truck load, with CW-4 paying $150 to Stillo and keeping the rest for himself.
 

  

The affidavit details conversations and events starting early this year and continuing into October, resulting in the following alleged thefts of city-purchased asphalt directed by Stillo and CDOT Foreman B, and bribe payments to them by CW-4;
 

  

  •    On July 13, a driver for another firm participating in the HTP delivered three truck loads of city-purchased asphalt to a private project at a suburban site in a north suburb. The next day, CW-4 delivered $750 to Foreman B, explaining that $450 was for the foreman and $300 was for the truck driver who delivered the loads. On July 19, the driver delivered two additional asphalt loads to the suburban site and two days later, on July 21, CW-4 delivered $500 to Foreman B for himself and the driver for those two loads;
     

  

  •    On Aug. 11, four trucks belonging to two different HTP participating companies delivered city-purchased asphalt to a private paving project adjacent to a west side church. (It appeared to CW-4 that day that Stillo
     

  

2
 

 

allegedly had made similar arrangements to provide truck loads of city asphalt to another individual, not CW-4, for the paving contractor's church parking lot project.) The next day, on Aug, 12, two more loads of asphalt were delivered to the church parking lot site. On Aug. 16, CW-4 paid $500 to Foreman B; and
 

  

 

  •    On Oct. 5, Foreman B told CW-4 that he and Stillo were obtaining asphalt for a private project from two different asphalt plants and they began sending eight truck loads -- containing at least 160 tons of asphalt in trucks operated by two different companies. That afternoon, CW-4 met Stillo and handed him two envelopes, each containing $1,000 in cash - one each for Stillo and Foreman B.
     

  

The government is being represented by Assistant U.S. Attorneys Manish Shah, Patrick Collins, Barry Miller, Julie Ruder and Patrick McGovern,
 

  

If convicted, bribery carries a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine, The Court, however, would determine the appropriate sentence to be imposed.

The public is reminded that a complaint contains only charges and is not evidence of guilt. The defendants are presumed innocent and are entitled to a fair trial at which the government has the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

*******

 

3


 

 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
 

 
 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, EASTERN DIVISION   

AMENDED CRIMINAL COMPLAINT
 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

 v.
 
PATRICK STILLO CASE NUMBER: 04 CR 1004  



 

I, John R. Hauser, the undersigned complainant being duly sworn, state the following is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. On or about between July 14, 2004, and October 5, 2004, in Cook County, in the Northern District of Illinois defendant,

 

 

along with CDOT Foreman B, being agents of the City of Chicago, Corruptly solicited and demanded for the benefit of any person, and accepted and agreed to accept things of value, namely cash payments, intending to be influenced or rewarded in connection with any business, transaction, and series of transactions of the city of Chicago involving any thing of value of $5,000 or more, with the City of Chicago being an agency that received in excess of $10,000 in federal funding in a twelve-month period from period from November 1, 2003 to October 31, 2004.
 


in violation of Title   18    United States Code, Sections 666(a)(1)(B)   and 2.
1 further state that I am an Special Agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and that this complaint is based on the following facts:
 

 

See attached affidavit
 

Continued on the attached sheet and made a part hereof:   ____x____ Yes ______ No.
 


Signature of complainant
Sworn to before me and subscribed in my presence,
 

  


November 19, 2004      at   Chicago, Illinois
 

  

Date

   City and State
 


IAN N. LEVIN{ U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Name & Title of Judicial officer    Signature of Judicial officer


 

     STATE OF ILLINOIS
 

 )
)
COUNTY OF COOK )  SS
   

 
 

AFFIDAVIT
 


I, John R. Hauser, being duly sworn, state as follows:

 

Introduction
 


 

  1.  I have been a Special Agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI") for approximately 6 years and am assigned to a public corruption squad, where I investigate criminal violations by federal, state, and local public officials.
     

  2.   I have participated in the investigation of the below-described offense. The facts set forth below are based upon my own personal observation of events described, upon my review of audio recordings and preliminary transcripts of recordings, upon my review of reports written by other law enforcement officers involved in the investigation, including but not limited to agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Postal Inspection Service, the Internal Revenue Service and the U.S. Department of Labor-Office of Inspector General, my conversations with other law enforcement agents, my review of documents, and upon information from cooperating witnesses ("CW's") and other witnesses.
     

  3. On the basis of this information, and the facts alleged below, I submit there is probable cause to believe that PATRICK STILLO and CDOT Foreman B, both being agents of the City of Chicago, corruptly solicited and demanded for the benefit of any person, and accepted and agreed to accept things of value, namely, cash payments, intending to be influenced and rewarded in connection with any business, transaction, and series of

 

 

1

transactions of $5,000 or more, involving the City of Chicago, with the City being an agency that received in excess of $10,000 in federal funding in a twelve-month period from November 1, 2003, to October 31, 2004, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 666(a)(1)(B) and 2.
 

  
  1. Since this Affidavit is being submitted for the limited purpose of establishing probable cause in support of a criminal complaint, I have not included each and every fact known to me concerning this investigation, Where statements of others are set forth in this Affidavit, they are set forth in substance and in part and are not verbatim. All times set forth below are approximate. Statements from recorded conversations do not include all statements or topics covered during the course of the recorded conversations, and are not taken from a final transcript. This Affidavit does not refer to every conversation that was recorded as part of this investigation.
     

 

  
 

Background of Hired Truck Program and Asphalt Projects
 

  1.     At times material to this complaint, under the Hired Truck Program ("HTP"), the City of Chicago ("City") rented trucks and drivers from privately owned truck companies. Once companies were approved to participate in the HTP, they could have trucks "called out" to work in several City departments, including the Department of Transportation ("CDOT").
     

  2. According to a City publication recently available on the City's Internet site, hired trucks removed or delivered about 300,000 tons of material for CDOT's street resurfacing program alone.
     

  

2

 
  1.  In interviews of City officials and truckers, agents were informed that the City compensated HTP participants at a fixed rate based on the size of the truck. There was no bid and no formal, written contract for any particular job.
     
  2. In general, during the period from at least 1999 to January 2004, companies had to be approved to work in the HTP by the program office, which was located in the City's Office of Budget and Management. In addition, the HTP Office had to approve particular trucks for the HTP.
     
  3.  According to documents produced by the City pursuant to grand jury subpoenas, the City spent close to $38 million in 2003 on hired trucks (for approximately 172 different vendors).
     
  4. According to information provided by a City official as well as public information electronically available, the City received far in excess of $10,000 in federal funding for each calendar year 2001, 2002, 2003 and 2004.
     
  5. Typically, as it related to City asphalt projects, including the City's street resurfacing program, each individual CDOT foreman managed a crew of laborers and HTP truck drivers who were assigned to perform particular asphalt-related projects. Asphalt crews typically consisted of five to seven City employees and five to nine different hired trucks.
     
  6. Typically, according to individuals interviewed in this investigation, when a trucking company was hired for a CDOT project, the truck driver and truck reported for work
 
   
   


 

3
 

as directed by the CDOT foreman for the project. The work performed by the driver and truck was memorialized on a document entitled "Department of Transportation Hired Equipment Daily Activity Report." The Daily Activity Report documented the date, time and location of arrival for the truck and driver, the time of departure, and a description of the work performed by the truck. The Daily Activity Report listed the number of hours (regular, overtime, lost-time and total) worked by the truck The Daily Activity Report identified the truck by a unique identification number, the HDX number. The Daily Activity Report was signed by the Operator (generally the driver) of the truck, certifying "that the above entries by me are correct." Finally, the Daily Activity Report was signed by the Immediate Supervisor (generally the CDOT foreman) certifying that "I have examined and verified this report correct."
 

  

13. For the typical project, HTP truck drivers assigned to a CDOT asphalt crew would be directed to pick up asphalt from an asphalt plant and deliver it to the designated location for spreading by the laborers. To track the asphalt taken from an asphalt plant through its ultimate destination on a City project, each load taken from the asphalt plant was assigned a "ticket." Each ticket documented the fact that the City of Chicago purchased the asphalt from the plant and identified the City project associated with the asphalt. The foreman would also complete and sign documentation verifying that the tickets were associated with a City project.


 

  

4

 
  1.  Based on the hours listed in the Daily Activity Reports, HTP companies would generate invoices on a monthly basis and deliver the invoices to the City for payment. After processing the invoices, the City issued warrants (checks) as payment for the hours worked in the HTP to the trucking company.
 

STILLO and CDOT Foreman B

 
   
  1. PATRICK STILLO is an employee of the City. According to a City personnel directory, STILLO has been a City employee since April 11, 1972. STILLO's job title, according to the directory, is Asphalt Foreman. According to individuals interviewed in this investigation, STILLO is a foreman of an asphalt crew that spreads asphalt on City streets and locations. In his capacity as a foreman, STILLO is an agent of the City.
     
  2. CDOT Foreman B is an employee of the City. According to individuals interviewed in this investigation, CDOT Foreman B is a foreman of an asphalt crew that spreads asphalt on City streets and locations. In his capacity as a foreman, CDOT Foreman B is an agent of the City.
 

Information Provided by CW-4

 
   
  1. At times material to this complaint, Cooperating Witness 4 was a truck driver working for companies that participated in the HTP. CW-4 has not been charged with a crime, and, to-date, no specific promises have been made to CW-4 regarding the possible charges against him/her. However, CW-4 is cooperating with the investigation in the hopes that, in return for his/her cooperation, CW-4 will receive a promise of immunity from
 

5

 
prosecution. The government has indicated to CW-4 that a promise of immunity is a distinct possibility in return for his/her complete and ongoing cooperation.  
   

  1.  CW-4 is an individual who, prior to any federal investigation into CDOT asphalt operations, contacted federal authorities to provide information regarding misconduct (summarized below) he/she engaged in with others relating to the HTP. Thereafter, CW-4 has provided information, from time to time, to federal investigators. To-date, CW-4 has been paid approximately $7500 by the FBI, including for information relating to the HTP and information relating to the instant case. CW-4 has proven reliable and credible in the past, and been corroborated by documentary and other information.

  2.  According to NCIC computer records, CW-4 has multiple arrests and one conviction. The charges for which CW-4 has been arrested include possession of a firearm, theft, possession of controlled substances, domestic battery and burglary. Pursuant to FBI guidelines regarding the use of cooperating witnesses who are under probation, federal investigators notified local authorities in person and in writing of CW-4' s cooperation with the federal investigation. No changes in the terms and conditions of CW-4's probation were made following the notice,
     

  3.  According to CW-4, beginning in the late 1990s and continuing thereafter, he/she worked as a truck driver for trucking companies that participated in the HTP. While in the employ of one particular trucking company (Company A) as an HTP truck driver, CW-4 indicated he/she engaged in a scheme with others that included the concealment of

     

6
 

income by CW-4 from the IRS, as well as the laundering and structuring of certain payments, so as to conceal the participants in the scheme. In addition, in an unrelated scheme, on multiple occasions, CW-4 paid a CDOT foreman to whom he/she was assigned, in return for not having to show up for his/her HTP assignment. CW-4 stated these payments were at most $100 per occasion.
 

  1.     After his/her cooperation with federal investigators, CW-4 provided information regarding allegations of misconduct involving asphalt-related projects. In particular, CW-4 indicated that, among other things, he/she had engaged in corrupt acts in the past with PATRICK STILLO.
     

  2.     CW-4 disclosed, in summary, that, for intermittent periods from in or about 1999 through in or about 2003, CW-4 was assigned as a truck driver to STILLO's asphalt crew. According to CW-4, as the foreman of CW-4's crew, STILLO managed the crew's work on assigned asphalt projects. In particular, STILLO was responsible for ensuring that when a truck driver on his crew (such as CW-4) picked up a load of asphalt from an asphalt plant, the load was directed to a City project to which the crew was assigned. As a foreman of CW-4's crew, STILLO was the individual who approved the tickets that were generated at the asphalt plant, which tickets documented each load of asphalt that drivers (such as CW-4) picked up and delivered at STILLO's direction. STILLO was also responsible for signing, along with the individual truck driver, the Daily Activity Reports, verifying the specific duration and location of the driver's work on a given day. CW-4 understood it was

     

7
 

never permissible to pick up a load of asphalt purchased by the City from the asphalt plant and deliver it to a private project.
 

  1.  While assigned to STILLO's asphalt crew, CW-4 approached STILLO from time to time and informed him that he/she knew someone who needed asphalt for a private project. CW-4 and STILLO discussed the project and the amount of money STILLO would receive for the asphalt. STILLO authorized CW-4 to pick up City asphalt from an asphalt plant and have it delivered to the private job. After picking up the asphalt, CW-4 delivered the asphalt to the private job, rather than the assigned city site.
     

  2.  At the end of the day or the completion of the private project, CW-4 typically tendered to STILLO the tickets and Daily Activity Report associated with CW-4's truck. STILLO then completed the documentation, falsely verifying that CW-4 was engaged in bona fide City asphalt work on STILLO's crew, for the full day.
     

  3.  After CW-4 had provided City-owned asphalt to the private job while on City time as an HTP driver, the private contractor paid CW-4. CW-4 split the proceeds with STILLO. On occasion, CW-4 made the payments to STILLO in STILLO's CDOT van. In exchange for City asphalt, the private contractor generally paid CW-4 $350 in cash per truck load. CW-4, in turn, paid STILLO $150 per load, and kept $200 per load.
     

  4.    CW-4 identified three specific sites where CW-4 delivered stolen City asphalt with STILLO's approval.


     

8

  1. According to information obtained from individuals in the trucking and paving industries, one semi-truck load can haul between 20 and 23 tons of asphalt.

July 2004 Theft of City Asphalt and Truck Services
 and Payment to CDOT Foreman B

 

  1. In or about early 2004, after CW-4 had begun cooperating with federal investigators, CW-4 was assigned to the asphalt crew of CDOT Foreman B. As with STILLO, CDOT Foreman B was in charge of a crew engaged in asphalt projects on behalf of the City. In prior years, CW-4 had never worked on CDOT Foreman B's crew. At one point after being assigned to CDOT Foreman B' s crew, CW-4 asked CDOT Foreman B to be transferred back to STILLO' s crew. In that unrecorded conversation, CDOT Foreman B asked CW-4 why he/she wished to be transferred back, asking, in substance, "Was it that other thing?" As he asked the question of CW-4, CDOT Foreman B held up his hand and rubbed his thumb and fingers together. CDOT Foreman B further indicated that they could earn money together. CW-4 then reported CDOT Foreman B's statements to federal investigators. Unless noted otherwise, the conduct of CW-4 set forth below at ¶¶ 29-74 was at the direction of law enforcement.
     

  2.  On May 18, 2004, CW-4 contacted a paving contractor, Paving Contractor A, to discuss a future effort to steal City asphalt for a private project. In a consensually recorded conversation, Paving Contractor A acknowledged paying, with the help of CW-4, City foremen for past projects in which City asphalt and HTP trucks were delivered to private projects managed by Paving Contractor A.

9

 

  1. On or about May 24, 2004, CW-4 contacted STILLO to discuss a future effort to steal City asphalt for a private project. In a consensually recorded conversation, STILLO told CW-4, "I only got two months left, and I don't want to fuck up right now, ... I don't want to get caught doing anything right now." STILLO agreed to contact CDOT Foreman B to obtain an HTP truck and driver for the private asphalt project.
     

  2.   On May 27, 2004, CW-4 contacted defendant STILLO to discuss the private asphalt project, In a consensually recorded conversation, STILLO told CW-4 that he had talked to CDOT Foreman B and "it's all set up." STILLO informed CW-4 that CDOT Foreman B had a truck CW-4 could use for the private project. CW-4 asked STILLO if he needed anything for "hooking this up?" STILLO responded he did not, but rather that CW-4 should deal with CDOT Foreman B.
     

  3. Between May 27, 2004 and May 28, 2004, CW-4 contacted STILLO to discuss the timing of the proposed private asphalt project and related delays. In consensually recorded conversations on May 28, 2004, STILLO said he would consult with CDOT Foreman B about the private project, and later provided CDOT Foreman B's cellular telephone number to CW-4.
     

  4. On June 2, 2004, after leaving messages, CW-4 contacted CDOT Foreman B. In a consensually recorded conversation, CW-4 indicated that his "guy" (referring to Paving Contractor A) needed 400 tons of asphalt (approximately 20 semi-truck loads) for a church parking lot, CDOT Foreman B indicated he had talked to STILLO and agreed to provide the

     

10

 

 
 

asphalt for the project. CDOT Foreman B indicated that he and STILLO were "partners." As to the financial arrangements, CW-4 indicated that CDOT Foreman B would receive $150 per load, the driver $100 per load and CW-4 $50 per load.
 

  1.  After June 2, 2004, CW-4 had a series of recorded conversations with Paving Contractor A regarding the proposed church parking lot project. Ultimately, Paving Contractor A was unable to move forward with the project in a timely manner. As set forth below in ¶ 45-59, this project was completed in August 2004.
     

  2.    On June 24, 2004, after investigators had obtained an alternative site (namely, a north suburban parking lot provided by a cooperating defendant (CD-1), hereinafter, the "Suburban Asphalt Project") for a private asphalt project, CW-4 attempted to contact CDOT Foreman B, but was unable to reach him. CW-4 then contacted STILLO. In a consensually recorded conversation, CW-4 indicated that he/she had a guy who needed 4-5 loads relating to the Suburban Asphalt Project, but was unable to reach CDOT Foreman B, STILLO indicated he would try to contact CDOT Foreman B regarding the Suburban Asphalt Project.
     

  3.  On July 12, 2004, at 6:55 am, after CW-4 left messages for CDOT Foreman B, CW-4 had an in-person meeting with CDOT Foreman B regarding the Suburban Asphalt Project. The meeting, which occurred at a City project site, was consensually recorded. At the meeting, CW-4 indicated he/she had a private project near an asphalt plant on the north side of Chicago that needed a lot paved, CW-4 asked if CDOT Foreman B had "somebody"


     

11
 

(meaning an HTP driver) to assist with the project. CDOT Foreman B indicated (non-verbally) that he did.
 

  1.  On July 12, 2004, at 12:26 pm, CW-4 contacted CDOT Foreman B. In a consensually recorded conversation, CW-4 indicated that he/she needed 5 loads of asphalt for the Suburban Asphalt Project. CDOT Foreman B indicated he could provide 2 or 3 loads, but not 5 to the project. CW-4 asked if CDOT Foreman B had "someone you can trust" to deliver the asphalt. CDOT Foreman B identified the driver he would supply (hereinafter, "Driver A"). After confirming the financial arrangements with CW-4, CDOT Foreman B stated he didn't want the private asphalt recipient "beefing to anybody" about the stolen asphalt.
     

  2.  On July 13, 2004, at 6:21 am, CW-4 contacted CDOT Foreman B. In a consensually recorded conversation, CW-4 indicated that they were "all set" and ready to receive the asphalt. CW-4 also provided the address and directions of the site, which was a suburban location outside the City limits. CDOT Foreman B indicated that CW-4 would hear from "us" in an hour or so. CW-4 indicated that he/she hoped this was the start of making some money this summer, to which CDOT Foreman B responded, "Hope so."
     

  3.    On July 13, 2004, in the morning, a truck from a participating HTP company, Company B, loaded with asphalt and driven by Driver A, delivered the asphalt at the Suburban Asphalt Project site. Driver A met briefly with CD-1, who received the asphalt.


     

12
 

CD-1, who was wearing a recording device, engaged in a brief recorded meeting with Driver A regarding the asphalt.

  1. At 9:50 a.m., on July 13, 2004, law enforcement agents observed Driver A leaving the premises in his truck. Later that day, Driver A returned to the Suburban Asphalt Project site and dumped a second load of asphalt. After dumping the second load of asphalt, Driver A left the premises in his truck. A short time later, Driver A returned to the Suburban Asphalt Project site and dumped a third load of asphalt. After dumping the third load of asphalt, Driver A left the premises. Law enforcement agents took video of Driver A's activities.  
     

  2. On July 13, 2004, at 3:29 pm, CW-4 contacted CDOT Foreman B. In a consensually recorded conversation, CW-4 indicated that he/she was going to get with his/her "guy" tonight and receive payment. CW-4 further indicated he/she would have $750 for the three loads, with Driver A getting $300 and CDOT Foreman B receiving $450. CDOT Foreman B agreed to accept Driver A's share and give it to him.
     

  3. On July 14, 2004, agents equipped CW-4 with a recording device and gave him/her $750 in United States Currency. Shortly after 9:00 a.m., following a brief consensually recorded phone conversation, CW-4 met with CDOT Foreman B at an agreed upon location, a McDonald's restaurant parking lot in Chicago. In the ensuing face-to-face meeting (which was consensually audio- and video-recorded), CW-4 handed CDOT Foreman


13



 

  


B $750 in cash, indicating "here's [$]750. [$]450 for you and three for [Driver A]." CDOT Foreman B accepted the currency and the meeting ended.
 

  1. On July 19, 2004, at 11 a.m., Driver A, driving the same truck as on July 13, returned to the Suburban Asphalt Project and dumped a fourth load of asphalt. Later that same day, Driver A returned and dumped the fifth and final load of asphalt. The dumping of both loads on July 19 were observed by law enforcement agents.
     

  2. On July 21, 2004, at 10:57 a.m. and following a brief consensually recorded phone conversation, CW-4 again met with CDOT Foreman B at the agreed upon location in Chicago. At that time, CW-4 provided CDOT Foreman B $500 for both his and Driver A's participation in the additional two loads of asphalt. This meeting was consensually audio-and video-recorded. The United States Currency had been provided to CW-4 by agents.
     

  

August 2004 Theft of Asphalt and Truck Services
and Payment to CDOT Forman B
 

  

  1. In June 2004, based on information provided by CW-4 and from consensually recorded telephone calls with Paving Contractor A, an FBI agent observed unpaved parking lots adjacent to a church, located on the west side of Chicago, associated with a project by Paving Contractor A. See ¶ 34 above.

    46    On August 10, 2004, in a consensually recorded telephone call, Paving Contractor A asked CW-4 how many loads of asphalt he/she could provide the next day. CW-4 told Paving Contractor A that he/she could possibly get a total of four loads, two from each City foreman [STILLO and CDOT Foreman B].
     

  

14

 

  1. On August 10, 2004, in a consensually recorded telephone call, CW-4 told STILLO, "We got this big job here for a guy we did work for last year when I was with you. He's ready now. He wants to start tomorrow." STILLO said, "Ok," CW-4 said, "I was talking to [(DOT Foreman B], ... How many trucks would you be able to send?" STILLO said, "It depends on what you need." CW-4 said, "He's estimating like 400 tons. It's a church, , .." STILLO said, "We could do it in two days. , .. I can send probably four [loads] for the day.. . Let [CDOT Foreman B] know. Let [CDOT Foreman B] handle it. [CDOT Foreman B] will handle everything.... Tell [CDOT Foreman B] to call me." CW-4 said, "It's all set then for tomorrow morning." 
     

  2. On August 10, 2004, in a consensually recorded telephone call, CW-4 told CDOT Foreman B, "This guy is ready to go tomorrow morning. I just got off the phone with PAT [STILLO]. He says he could send four trucks... I know last time we talked he was sayin' maybe you guys probably would send two a piece or something, at two loads per truck." CDOT Foreman B said, "I could send like, maybe two or three [loads] maybe, the most." CW-4 gave CDOT Foreman B the location of the church parking lot. CDOT Foreman B said, "The only thing I need, . . is for [the driver], when he's there, just to get him out, fast. . . I'm doing Meigs field."
     

  3. On August II, 2004, at 8:08 a.m., in a consensually recorded telephone call, CW-4 told STILLO, "The guy's ready, you send two to start off." STILLO said, "I can only send one at a time." CW-4 said, "I'll call [CDOT Foreman B]." STILLO asked about the

 

  

15

 


location of the project and when told the location by CW-4, STILLO said, "I sent them already! I'm dealing with another guy... I made a connection this morning, some guy called.... I've been dealing with this guy, .. I been getting-" CW-4 said, "Let me call the fuckin' guy [Paving Contractor A] back, see what the hell is going on."
 

  
  1. On August 11, 2004, at 8:24 a.m., in a consensually recorded telephone call, CW-4 told Paving Contractor A, "What's going on? I called my guy to tell him to start sending over trucks, and he told me he's sending trucks over there already. He's dealing with somebody else over there." Paving Contractor A said, "Oh shit." CW-4 said, "I don't need no problems here. . . . Now I find out you paying somebody else." Paving Contactor A said, "I'm sitting here waiting for asphalt. .. If there's a conflict somewhere else now, it's out of my hand, All I'm trying to do is get a job done." CW-4 said, "Alright, I'm gonna call my other guy and have him start sending [a truck] over there,"

     
  2.  Based on the two conversations above, I believe STILLO had made arrangements to provide truck loads of City asphalt to another individual, not CW-4, for Paving Contractor A's church parking lot project, unbeknownst to CW-4.  
     
  3. On August 11, 2004, at 9:32 a.m., in a consensually recorded telephone call, CDOT Foreman B told CW-4 that he would assign one driver to alternate his loads, one for the church parking lot, and one for City work.
     
  4.   On August 11, 2004, beginning at 8:22 a.m. and continuing through 3:00 p.m., surveillance agents observed four trucks enter and exit the church parking lot, periodically
     

16


 


raise their trailers and clump asphalt. Two trucks were identified as belonging to Company B and Company C. According to information obtained in this investigation, both companies were registered with the Hired Truck Program at the time the asphalt was delivered.
 

  1. The next day, on August 12, 2004, at 6:31 a.m., Paving Contractor A told. CW-4 in a consensually recorded telephone call that he needed. 2 or 3 more loads of asphalt, and that Paving Contractor A was only dealing with CW-4 that day.  
     

  2. On August 12, 2004, at 6:39 a.m., in a consensually recorded telephone call, CW-4 told CDOT Foreman B that Paving Contractor A needed two to three loads later that morning. CDOT Foreman B said, "Alright. Just give me a call then."
     

  3. On August 12, 2004, at approximately 7:41 a.m., in a consensually recorded telephone call, CW-4 asked STILLO, "Are you still going [to the church parking lot] today?" STILLO said, "Yeah." CW-4 said, "[Paving Contractor A] just told me I was the only one coming today.... I figured I'd give you a call, see if I could get a couple out of you [but if you've got it covered]..." STILLO said, "Ok. Alright, Let me know,"
     

  4. On August 12, 2004, beginning at 8:27 a.m. and continuing until 11:22 a.m., surveillance agents observed two trucks enter and exit the church parking lot, periodically raise their trailers and dump asphalt. Agents were unable to determine whether the trucks were participants in the Hired Truck Program, Later that afternoon, in a consensually recorded call, Paving Contractor A asked CW-4 for more loads, but CW-4 told Paving Contractor A that it was too late in the day to get asphalt from the City because the City


17

would not pay overtime, CW-4 made no further arrangements to send asphalt to the church parking lot.
 

  1. On August 16, 2004, in a consensually recorded telephone call, CW-4 told CDOT Foreman B that he/she had the money to pay CDOT Foreman B for the church parking lot job, and CDOT Foreman B agreed to meet CW-4 later that day.  
     

  2. On August 16, 2004, agents equipped CW-4 with a recording device and gave him/her $500 in United States Currency. During an in-person meeting with CDOT Foreman B, CW-4 gave CDOT Foreman B the money and said, "Here's the five [$5001. Cover the two loads.... You know, PAT [STILL()) was supposed to be bringing some. He ended up bringing some, but . . . somebody else called him for the same job." Later, CDOT Foreman B said, "Anything else?" CW-4 said, "Maybe in a week or two, ... We'll get more work."

     

  

October 2004 Theft of Asphalt and Truck Services
and Payment to STILLO and CDOT Foreman B
 


 
  1.  As part of this investigation, federal agents contacted the owner of a private vacant lot in Chicago. The lot's owner permitted the agents to use the lot as the staging site for an undercover operation in which CW-4 would introduce an Undercover Agent ((UCA) to Paving Contractor B, and arrange for stolen City asphalt to be used to pave the vacant lot.  
     
  2. On October 4, 2004, in a consensually recorded telephone call, CW-4 asked STILLO if he was up for a job. STILLO said, "[CDOT Foreman B] is." CW-4 said that he/she had a job for the next day and needed both STILLO and CDOT Foreman B. STILLO
     



 

18


said, "Let me talk to [CDOT Foreman B]." STILLO then asked CW-4 to call CDOT Foreman B because CDOT Foreman B "handles it."  
 

  1. A few minutes later, on October 4, 2004, in a consensually recorded telephone call, CW-4 told CDOT Foreman B that he/she needed 9 loads of asphalt and that the job needed to be done in one day. CW-4 told CDOT Foreman B that "PAT [STILLO] said to give you a call." CDOT Foreman B said that the job could be done if STILLO helped. CDOT Foreman B said, "Sounds good, .. I'll give [STILLO] a call." A few hours later, in another consensually recorded telephone call, CDOT Foreman B told CW-4 that he had not talked with STILLO yet, but "I'll get four or five [loads] for sure, and let [STILLO] get the rest"
     

  2. On October 5, 2004, in a consensually recorded telephone call at 8:07 a.m., CW-4 told CDOT Foreman B, "It should be ready to start receiving you guys by about ten [a.m.]. , . Everything squared away with PAT [STILLO]?" CDOT Foreman B said, "Yeah ..... we'll give him four loads each." CW-4 said, "Do you want me to pay PAT [STILLO] too?" CDOT Foreman B said, "I don't care... I'll talk to him." CW-4 said, "I'1l try to settle up with you guys as soon as possible." CDOT Foreman B explained in this conversation that he and STILLO were each obtaining the asphalt from two different asphalt plants in Chicago.
     

  3. At 9:35 a.m., on October 5, 2004, in a consensually recorded telephone call, CW-4 told CDOT Foreman B, You can start sending them. They're ready." CDOT Foreman B said, "I don't know if we're gonna be able to get eight of them today, it's so late

19

now. . . I'm going to send as many as I could ... four, .. I'm going to keep sending them." CW-4 said, "See how many [STILLO] can send at one time." CDOT Foreman B said, "Alright." CW-4 then gave directions to the undercover lot to CDOT Foreman B. CDOT Foreman B said, "I'11 call PAT [STILLO] now."

  1. At 10:03 a.m., on October 5, 2004, in a consensually recorded call, CDOT Foreman B told CW-4, "I'm sending two right now. PAT [STILLO]'s sending two right now. And then after that I'll send one truck at a time. , . I think [STILLO]'s gonna send two at a time." In this call, CDOT Foreman B identified the company whose trucks would be sent to the undercover lot, Company D. According to information obtained in this investigation, Company D was an approved HTP company at the time the asphalt was delivered.
     

  2. At 10;00 a.m., surveillance agents at the undercover lot observed a Company D truck enter the lot, and begin to dump asphalt. A second Company D truck arrived approximately one half hour later, At 10;54 a.m., a third truck, belonging to Company E arrived at the undercover lot and dumped its asphalt. According to information obtained in this investigation, Company E was an approved HTP company at the time the asphalt was delivered. A fourth truck arrived at approximately 12:00 p.m. The Company D trucks each made a total of two trips to the lot; the Company E track made a total of three trips; and the fourth truck made a total of one trip.
     

  3. Surveillance agents followed the Company E truck after its final trip to the undercover lot. The Company F truck departed the lot and went to an asphalt plant in
     

20


Chicago. This plant was the same plant identified by CDOT Foreman B in a consensually recorded telephone call as the plant from which STILLO was sending his loads.
 

  
  1. At 12:27 p.m., in a consensually recorded telephone call, CDOT Foreman B told CW-4, "PAT [STILLO]'s on his fourth one now ... I'm on my fourth one, I think." CDOT Foreman B later said, "The first time I sent two trucks and then after that I sent one at a time.... PAT [STILLO] sent four loads and I sent four loads."
     
  2. STILLO and CDOT Foreman B sent a total of eight truck loads, or an estimated 160 to 183 tons of asphalt to the undercover lot on October 5, 2004.
     
  3.  At 1:08 p.m. on October 5, 2004, in a consensually recorded telephone call, CW-4 told CDOT Foreman B, "I'm gonna swing by. . . and get the money.... Can you meet me[?]" CDOT Foreman B said, "How about if I have PAT [STILLO] meet you over there?
    .. You want to give him a call?" CDOT Foreman B said, "Put 'em in, uh, separate envelopes, if you could." CW-4 said, "You guys got four loads a piece?" CDOT Foreman B said, "Yeah."
     
  4. At 1:11 p.m. on October 5, 2004, in a consensually recorded telephone call, CW-4 told STILLO, "I just talked with [CDOT Foreman B], he says he's so far north, could you come meet me to pick up the envelope'?" STILLO said, "Yeah, where you gonna be at?" CW-4 and STILLO then arranged to meet within the next hour, and STILLO said, "Ok. I'll start heading that way now."

     

21

  1. Agents equipped CW-4 with a recording device and gave him/her two blank envelopes, each containing $1000 in United States Currency. At 2:18 p.m., on October 5, 2004, CW-4 met with STILLO in person and gave the envelopes of cash to STILLO. CW-4 said, "I got. , ." STILLO said, "[CDOT Foreman B's?]" CW-4 said, "Separate, thousand each.... Tell [CDOT Foreman B] I said thanks."
     

  2.  At 2:34 p.m. on October 5, 2004, in a consensually recorded telephone call, CDOT Foreman B asked CW-4, "How much are we getting for a load?" CW-4 said, "It's a [$] 1000 in each envelope. [$] 150 a load for you and PAT [STILLO] and 100 for the drivers." CDOT Foreman B said, "So only [$]250..." CW-4 said, "Right [$]250 a load, a grand in each envelope. Six [hundred] a piece for you, and four [hundred] for the drivers . . You talk to PAT [STILLO]?" CDOT Foreman B said, "Yeah... alright." 
     

  3. At 2;46 p.m. on October 5, 2004, in a consensually recorded telephone call, CW-4 asked CDOT Foreman B, "You met up with PAT [STILLO] yet?" CDOT Foreman B said, "No." CW-4 said, "A grand in your envelope. If it's anything different, then call me, let me know." CDOT Foreman, B said, "Alright... I just wanted to make sure." CW-4 said, "Should be a grand in yours." CDOT Foreman B said, "Alright.. , we could do that again."
     

  4. According to information provided by individuals in the trucking and paving industries, the market value for the asphalt projects set forth above substantially exceeded $5,000.

22
 

Conclusion
 

76. Based on all of the facts set forth above, I submit there is probable cause to believe that on or about between July 14, 2004, and October 5, 2004, PATRICK STILLO and CDOT Foreman B, being agents of the City of Chicago, corruptly solicited and demanded for the benefit of any person, and accepted and agreed to accept things of value, namely cash payments, intending to be influenced or rewarded in connection with any business, transaction, and series of transactions of the City of Chicago involving any thing of value of $5,000 or more, with the City of Chicago being an agency that received in excess of $10,000 in federal funding in a twelve-month period from period from November 1, 2003 to October 31, 2004, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 666(a)(1)(B) and 2.

FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NOT,
 

 


John R. Hauser
Special Agent
Federal Bureau of Investigation
 
 


 

 

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME This 19th day of November 2004
 

  


IAN H. LEVIN
United States Magistrate Judge

23

IPSN  © 1997-2006 All Rights reserved. Not for republication on the internet without permission. 
webmaster