Chicago City Council

Midway Privatization: Yea Or Nay?

Adam Doster — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 09:09:11 -0700

Earlier this week, Mayor Daley announced that Midway Airport could become the first privately-run hub airport in the nation, not to mention a major test case for a 1996 Federal Aviation Administration privatization pilot program. Today, Chicago's two major newspapers came out in favor of the deal.

The Sun-Times editorial board writes that government has other services that need more attention, especially in tough economic times:

We don't necessarily endorse rampant privatization, but turning to the private sector makes sense for these sorts of assets. Roads, airports and garages are outside the core responsibilities of government and likely will be managed better by private companies.

In other words, we won't miss having them, and we can make good money off them. That's especially important these days, when tax revenue is down and funds to keep Chicago thriving are hard to come by.

The Tribune offers a more tepid endorsement, but hits on similar points:

The guiding principle in all such agreements should be to secure more efficient operations and make government more financially sound. At first glance, the Midway lease appears to pass that test.

When the alderman convene next Wednesday to debate the measure, they should think about the economic effects on both the city and travelers.

As part of the deal, the long-term investors would enter into a 25-year use agreement with the airlines that currently fly into Midway, capping their rates and charges at the outset and freezing them for six years. This puts a ton of pressure on the airport's owners to draw profits from travelers in the way of fees and price increases. Of course, the lessee can increase revenue through other means -- such as cost cutting or adding more retail and dining options -- but there are no guarantees a private enterprise would do so. There also should be a focus placed on oversight. Unless the city makes sure to include in any deal safeguards to ensure the operator maintains or improves the airport's current level of cleanliness, safety and service, Midway could fall into disrepair.

On the other hand, cashing out of the aviation business is an attractive option. Decarbonizing air travel is very tricky and the nation's travel habits will shift significantly in the next few decades. If the city can pay off Midway debts, shore up underfunded city pension funds, and intelligently use an additional $550 million ($450 million of which must be spent on infrastructure projects like new libraries, roads and transit improvements), it might be an ideal time for a cash infusion.

Midway Privatization Concerns

Adam Doster — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 10:20:42 -0700

Outsourcing government functions is a favorite pastime of the conservative movement. So when Mayor Richard Daley announced last year that he was entertaining the idea of privatizing Chicago's Midway Airport, right-wing think tanks rejoiced. Reason's Robert Poole and the Mackinac Center's David Bardallis are among the scholars who argue it's long past time American governments view airports as "potential profit-making enterprises rather than drains on the public purse." And with a $450 million deficit and a potential Olympic bid in his sights, Daley must be excited to get his hands on the $3 billion fee the airport deal may net.

But citizens should be wary of any privatization efforts, as the Tribune's Susan Chandler warned in yesterday's paper:

Because the phenomenon is so new, less has been said about what happens to consumers when they go from being taxpayers using public facilities to customers of a for-profit business.

It turns out they pay a lot more.

In her piece, Chandler includes some of those price jumps. Since the Millennium Park Garage was leased to Morgan Stanley in 2006, the price to park your car for an hour has risen 31 percent. The cost to drive across the Chicago Skyway is now 50 percent higher than it was in 2004, when Australian and Spanish investors secured a 99-year lease. By 2017, experts estimate the price will rise to a 100 percent increase from 2004. "The Skyway may look painless now but in 25 years or less, there will be people camped out in City Hall over these tolls," warned John Foote, senior researcher with Harvard's Kennedy School of Government. "In 25 years, the tolls won't be acceptable."

Midway's huge up-front payoff is enticing, but it won't solve the city's underlying financial instability. It might be more worthwhile for city legislators to pressure for sustainable changes -- like spending discipline and a more progressive tax code -- rather than gamble on a short-term revenue jolt.

Solis To Lead Hearing On Immigrant Rights

Adam Doster — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 10:58:52 -0700

On the heels of a nationwide campaign "to end immigration raids without due process, correct inhumane conditions in detention centers, and get action on the backlog of citizenship applications," the Chicago City Council -- led by Alderman Danny Solis -- is investigating at least 30 complaints of racial profiling by Chicago police officers and violations of federal immigration law at Cook County Jail:

The allegations include that undocumented immigrants who have a detainer placed on them by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement are being held longer than a required 48 hours. The time for federal agents to pick them up starts once they've been cleared for release from local law enforcement.

Last month officials at Cook County Jail - where three ICE agents are stationed each day - admitted that at least one immigrant inmate was held for ICE longer than 48 hours. Since then, the jail has established several reforms, including a hot line with updated information on the detention status of immigrants held on criminal charges, Cook County sheriff's police spokesman Steve Patterson said.

Solis, Cook County Commissioner Roberto Maldonado (D-Chicago), and immigration advocates also allege that some Chicago officers have pulled over individuals who appear Latino and questioned them about their immigration status -- a move prohibited by a 2006 city ordinance. These officers have then reported the immigration status of individuals to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Chicago police deny the allegations.

Close watchers of Chicago's approach to immigrant rights are thrilled with the oversight.

"It's always been seen as a place that's been more open and friendly to immigrants," said Raul Hinojosa-Ojeda, a professor at the University of California at Los Angeles and former Chicago immigration activist. "This particular announcement is a further step in making immigrants feel that their rights are going to be protected."

The City Council will hold a hearing on these issues next week.

Joravsky: What The Museum Fight Was Really About

Josh Kalven — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 12:03:38 -0700

Here's The Reader's Ben Joravsky on the underlying reasons for Mayor Daley's insistence that the Chicago Children's Museum move to Grant Park:

Compared to the waste and destruction promised by the Olympics, the Children’s Museum is chump change. After all, the museum only affects one little part of one park. And if it gets built after the inevitable court battle, it’s going to cost the public just $4 million or so a year in the form of a Park District subsidy. The Olympics, on the other hand, threatens to devour prime lakefront parkland from Irving Park Road on the north side to 63rd Street on the south and will undoubtedly cost the public hundreds of millions of dollars. Furthermore, the Children’s Museum will at least be open to Chicagoans. The only way average residents will get into any Olympic events is if they’re selling popcorn. The games’ real legacy will be the bill.

Let’s put aside for a moment the pros and cons of moving the museum to Grant Park. The fight waged in the City Council last Wednesday was really about Mayor Daley flexing his political muscle to assure the IOC [International Olympic Committee] that his word is law in Chicago. If there was ever any hope for a check to keep the mayor from exercising unlimited power it was the council, which by law has the final say on just about every major project he proposes. But that hope died during the June 11 debate, as alderman after alderman rose to affirm his subservience.

Read the whole thing here.

City Council Approves Chicago Children's Museum Proposal

Josh Kalven — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 13:08:57 -0700

This afternoon, the Chicago City Council approved a controversial proposal to move the Chicago Children's Museum to Grant Park. While the vote was the culmination of a long confrontation between Mayor Daley (who adamantly supported the plan) and freshman Ald. Brendan Reilly (whose ward includes the proposed site of the new museum), the outcome was no surprise. That being said, this is the latest instance in which the core members of the council's Independent Caucus have defied the mayor.

This Tribune piece provides good background on the controversy. The Trib also has the breakdown of today's vote. Here are the 16 aldermen who did the right thing and opposed the ordinance:

Manny Flores (1st Ward)
Pat Dowell (3rd Ward)
Toni Preckwinkle (4th Ward)
Leslie Hairston (5th Ward)
Sandi Jackson (7th Ward)
Sharon Denise Dixon (24th Ward)
Ed Smith (28th Ward)
Scott Waguespack (32nd Ward)
Rey Colon (35th Ward)
Tom Allen (38th Ward)
Brian Doherty (41st Ward)
Brendan Reilly (42nd Ward)
Vi Daley (43rd Ward)
Tom Tunney (44th Ward)
Eugene Schulter (47th Ward)
Joe Moore (49th (Ward)

SEIU's "Chicago Model"

Adam Doster — Thu, 29 May 2008 08:48:46 -0700

Flaunting Chicago's purported "post-partisanship" on the national stage would likely subject Barack Obama to some ridicule, but that doesn't mean other Chicago-based political programs aren't worth emulating on the national stage. Check out this Chicago Reader interview with Tom Balanoff, president of the SEIU Illinois State Council (which sponsors this site). Balanoff discusses the union's political success in the city's 2007 aldermanic elections (including the establishment of the Independent Caucus) and their plans to ensure Democratic accountability in 2008 and beyond. It's an approach with considerable merit:

MICK DUMKE: So you essentially want to take the 2007 Chicago model and apply it to Congress?

BALANOFF: We absolutely do. The alderman’s races were really an effort on SEIU and labor’s part to say "How do we establish an independent political base?" I think a lot of good things have already started happening in terms of creating an independent bloc there in the City Council, and I think a lot of good things came out of that for labor.

But it is really a question of specific issues—we want to establish some political power to get real results for working families on things like health care, the war, and the labor movement. [...]

I think there’s an understanding starting to evolve with labor that we need to build political power for ourselves and not for candidates, and the way we do that is to make sure we’re working on particular issues. The only permanent friends we have are those politicians who stick with our issues.

Chicago Politics As A "Model For Change"?

Adam Doster — Fri, 23 May 2008 14:51:09 -0700

Former Daley speechwriter Dan Conley has some odd advice for Sen. Barack Obama at Salon today: draw a distinction between the "personal destruction and political grandstanding" in Washington and the "post-partisanship" of Chicago politics, and situate yourself in the latter camp:

Various articles during this campaign -- including some in Salon -- have attempted to tie Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama to that outdated vision of the Windy City. But over the past 25 years, Chicago politics has evolved. The city is still divided along racial lines, and other layers of government here -- from the Illinois Statehouse to the Cook County government -- feature as much grandstanding and as many ad hominem attacks as anywhere. But anyone who doubts that a toxic political environment can be overcome should look to Chicago. Consensus has become more conspicuous than conflict. Deal-making is more important than showboating. In short, the city's politics has become post-partisan. It's a concept that should be familiar to anyone who has followed Obama's presidential bid.

Beyond the obvious rejoinder that city politics don't translate onto the national stage in any way, to paint a picture of Mayor Daley's Chicago as an ideal political environment ignores some crucial facts about life at City Hall. This 2004 paper (pdf) by University of Illinois-Chicago political science professor Dick Simpson explores the "new machine" in great depth:

The new machine under Richard M. Daley continues some aspects of the older machine, but patronage precinct captains are supplemented by candidate-based, synthetic campaigns using large sums of money from the global economy to purchase professional political consultants, public opinion polls, paid television ads, and direct mail. On the governing side, the new machine is characterized by a rubber stamp city council and public policies that benefit the new global economy more than the older developer economy ... The rewards for minorities, specifically African Americans and Latinos, under the new Daley machine reveal the racial basis of the regime.

Conley obscures huge chunks of crucial history to fit his argument that Chicago represents a "model for change." For instance, he asserts that "a general sense of civility prevails" in City Council meetings. Someone obviously missed Ald. Joe Moore's treatment at the hands of the mayor just last week.

The political environment could be much worse in Chicago. The news from Springfield reminds us of that everyday. But a model for national governance? I'm not so sure that flies.

Moore: City Council Enjoys "Less Democracy" Than Iraqi Parliament

Josh Kalven — Fri, 16 May 2008 14:08:21 -0700

On WIND's John & Cisco In The Morning yesterday, Ald. Joe Moore (49th Ward) called in to discuss Wednesday's City Council hearing, during which Mayor Daley steamrolled Moore's attempts to ensure that a hearing was held on an ordinance repealing the city's ban on foie gras. As we noted, Moore subsequently put out a statement likening the mayor's behavior to the strongarm tactics of his father.

Let's just say Moore cranked it up a notch during his radio appearance:

JOHN HOWELL (co-host): The mayor's probably a bit frustrated about the Children's Museum and he wanted to send a signal out.

MOORE: I think that's entirely the case. And the signal was, you know, to the City Council: "It's my way or the highway." And I don't think that's healthy.

You know, we send our young men and women to fight for Democracy in Iraq. I think yesterday you saw less democracy in the Chicago City Council than you now see in the Iraqi parliament.

Moore also criticized Daley's questionable time management during City Council hearings, which disproprotionately favors honorary measures over actual debate:

MOORE: I'll tell you this: for the first two-and-a-half hours of the City Council meeting yesterday we spent our time on honorary resolutions.

HOWELL: Yeah, there you go.

MOORE: And far, far more time than was ever spent on any other measure in the City Council, including the foie gras issue -- this time and the time it was passed two years ago. So I find it a bit ironic that the mayor decries the waste of time that the City Council spent on an issue he disagrees with. And yet time and time again, we spend hours -- every City Council meeting -- honoring this person or that person. Now, I think some folks are deserving of the honor, but there are other ways of doing it that don't take up the people's business.

You can listen to the segment here.

Moore: Foie Gras Vote Reminiscent Of Daley Sr.

Adam Doster — Fri, 16 May 2008 09:32:46 -0700

The Sun-Times' Fran Spielman called Mayor Daley's handling of the Chicago City Council's foie gras vote a "legislative end-run that set a new standard for violating protocol and rolling over the opposition." Via Division Street comes Ald. Joe Moore's (49th Ward) response, in which he blasts the Daley administration, not on its opposition to the foie gras ban (which Moore sponsored) but on its strong-arm maneuvering during Wednesday's council meeting:

How should the legislative process work? Laws to be passed (or repealed) move through committee hearings first before progressing to the Council floor for a vote. The committee hearings are where the voices of average citizens can be heard. Anyone can testify on any piece of legislation.

The committee hearings also provide aldermen with a opportunity to learn more about proposed legislation, to debate among themselves, and to amend the legislation as result of the public input and debate. Then at the Council meeting itself, there is another chance for debate before the matter is brought to a vote.

The initial foie gras ban was passed only after a great deal of public input and discussion among the aldermen. But not so in this case. Instead, 44th Ward Alderman Tom Tunney last year introduced an ordinance repealing the foie gras ban. He did so at the behest of the Illinois Restaurant Association, an organization he once chaired. The measure was sent to the City Council Rules Committee, where it sat for over a year.

Alderman Tunney never asked for a hearing on his repeal ordinance, even though the committee chair indicated he was willing to hold such a hearing, and none was ever held. Then yesterday in a surprise maneuver, Alderman Tunney invoked a seldom used state law that permits an Alderman to move to “discharge” a matter from committee without a public hearing.

(Click "Read More" to continue ...)

I attempted first to argue that we should hold the matter in committee for a public hearing, but the Mayor, who chairs the City Council meeting, ruled me out of order, without citing any legal authority for that ruling. I then demanded to be recognized so that I could debate the issue of the repeal, and the Mayor, in complete violation of City Council rules, simply chose to ignore me and demanded that the clerk proceed immediately to a roll call vote.

The entire incident was reminiscent of City Council meetings 40 years ago, when the Mayor’s father, Richard J. Daley, would turn off the microphones of dissenting aldermen. I was also disappointed in my fellow aldermen, who with a few notable exceptions, sat passively as the Mayor short-circuited the democratic process.

If this is the City Council of the future, we’re all in trouble. From the Children’s Museum to new property taxes to TIF’s, is this how future legislative decisions are going to be determined with no public input and no debate? Let us commit ourseves to a more decent, democratic vision.

Daley defended the process, claiming that “we’ve [already] had so much debate on this—it’s gone on forever.” The Reader's Mick Dumke provides some context on Daley's sudden emphasis on time management that's worth a read.

Ald. Sandi Jackson: First Year "Fast-Paced"

Adam Doster — Thu, 15 May 2008 10:08:01 -0700

It's been a whirlwind year for Chicago Ald. Sandi Jackson (7th Ward), who defeated Darcell Beavers in a closely-watched election last April. Speaking to WBEZ correspondent Gabriel Spitzer on Eight Forty-Eight this morning, Jackson called her first-year in office "fast-paced, incredibly exhilarating but humbling at the same time, and a bit overwhelming."

Elected in part because of her professed independence from the current administration, Jackson has become a regular participant in Independent Caucus meetings. The group's collective success has been limited -- Dick Simpson recently reported that all but 13 roll calls this session have been unanimous -- but Jackson says that's to be expected when you're dealing with new legislators. "I think that there is an educational process that has to take place. You've got a new group of aldermen who are very new to politics .... so there's certainly a learning curve that people have to go through."

While her name is being tossed around as a possible congressional replacement should Rep. Bobby Rush step down because of medical reasons, Jackson is intent on city business, including the development of 650 acres of lake front property located at 79th and South Shore Drive. "I want to create an environment," she says, "where our young people will have jobs right here in the community."

You can listen to the interview in its entirety here.