Chicago City Council is expected to vote Wednesday, Oct. 14, on a proposed $261 million settlement for 16 people whose murder convictions were vacated in cases involving former Chicago police detective Reynaldo Guevara. If approved, it would be among the largest wrongful-conviction settlements in the country. The proposal has prompted aldermen to debate how the city should pay people who were wrongly imprisoned. Chicago’s Department of Law plans to distribute the settlement over two years, rather than in a single payment. Ald. Raymond Lopez, who represents the 15th Ward, said he and 12 other aldermen asked the city’s top attorney to reconsider settlement policy after Francisco Nanez received an $8 million payment from Chicago. Nanez’s conviction was overturned in 2022. He was arrested two years later on suspicion of soliciting a minor and is back in custody; he is eligible for parole Oct. 16. Lopez has proposed paying settlements over time, with future installments contingent on recipients avoiding further legal trouble. He said the city does not have to issue a single multimillion-dollar check. Lopez called the city’s plan to divide the proposed Guevara settlement into two annual payments “a step in the right direction.” Andrew M. Stroth, a Chicago attorney who has represented people wrongfully convicted in lawsuits against the city but is not involved in Nanez’s case, opposes conditioning compensation on later conduct. People who are exonerated and receive a certificate of innocence should not be treated as criminals, he said, calling Lopez’s proposal “offensive.” The debate also extends to eligibility. Two people expected to benefit from the proposed settlement do not appear to have certificates of innocence, according to records cited in the report. The certificates are separate from the court decisions that vacated their convictions. Chicago has paid more than $545 million to settle wrongful-conviction cases since 2021, not including the proposed Guevara settlement. The payouts address the consequences of convictions that were later overturned, while raising questions for the city about how to compensate people harmed by the justice system and how those payments should be structured.