Showing posts with label Richard M. Daley. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Richard M. Daley. Show all posts

Sunday, December 22, 2013

WHY IS WEALTHY INSIDER BRUCE RAUNER TRYING TO TELL US HE IS A SIMPLE, MIDDLE CLASS OUTSIDER?

12/22/13

Speaking of the Republican primary for governor in Illinois  (See today’s other post, HOW DARE BILL BRADY TAKE RISKS, PUT PEOPLE TO WORK, AND ACTUALLY PUT SOMETHING ON THE PILE?), people have asked me what I think of Bruce Rauner.   Would like him to become our next governor? I don’t know, but probably not.  Why?

First, Mr. Rauner is a very rich man who, in ads that insult people’s intelligence, if such a thing is possible in modern America, pretends not to be rich.   Such chicanery is especially obnoxious to yours truly.   There is nothing wrong with being rich…if one has come about his riches in an honest and forthright manner and remains mindful of the needs of those who have not attained one’s level of riches.   Why should one be ashamed of one’s achievements…unless one is a fraud?

Second, Mr. Rauner is an insider who pretends to be an outsider.   He knows everyone in city government.  He is very close to Rahm Emanuel; Mr. Rauner made Mr. Emanuel rich and, if the press reports are to be believed, the Rauners and the Emanuels vacation together.  (The idea of vacationing with even my best friends is appalling to yours truly, but I digress.)   Before Mr. Emanuel somehow decided that being mayor of Chicago would be a good stepping stone to the job he really wants, Mr. Rauner was close to Mayor Richard M. Daley.  Mr. Rauner has a habit of getting very cozy with people in “public life” who can make him money.   One can see why, especially in this state, one who is an insider would pretend to be an outsider, but does Mr. Rauner expect us to believe such protestations?   Maybe he does, and perhaps with some justification.

Still, I suppose I could support Mr. Rauner if I could be convinced he is a legitimate venture capitalist or private equity maven, or whatever he purports to be.  However, one gets the nagging feeling that Mr. Rauner is just another guy who has made money from his political connections in this most corrupt of states.  For example, his investment business seems to have easy access to public pension money, pools of funds that unconnected people have virtually no shot at.  And one wonders in how many other ways his connections have benefited not only his getting money to invest but also his performance in investing the money.

Maybe everything Mr. Rauner does is due to his diligence, his intelligence, and his wise insights into the markets and the way the economy works.  And maybe I and my libertarian leaning friends will be contributing heavily to Elizabeth Warren’s campaign for president in 2016.  Certainly Mr. Rauner’s connections have a lot to do with his success, and that is to be expected…but how much?  One suspects a great deal; as I said a few paragraphs ago… Why should one be ashamed of one’s achievements…unless one is a fraud?

It matters little, however, what I think of Mr. Rauner.   While I don’t like to make political prediction, it’s hard to see how he won’t get the GOP nomination, if only because of the weak competition he faces.


See my two books, The Chairman, A Novel of Big City Politics and The Chairman’s Challenge, A Continuing Novel of Big City Politics, for further illumination on how things work in Chicago and Illinois politics. 



Saturday, September 28, 2013

CHICAGO PENSION PROBLEMS: I’LL GLADLY PAY YOU TOMORROW FOR A HAMBURGER TODAY…AND THIS TIME, I REALLY, REALLY MEAN IT!

9/28/13

In addition to continuing to seek a pension holiday for the Chicago Public Schools (See my 6/3/13 piece, THE PENSION DEBACLE IN ILLINOIS: MR. MADGIAN AS MACHIAVELLI, MR. EMANUEL LOSES A ROUND, OR MR. QUINN GOES TO SPRINGFIELD?), Mayor Rahm Emanuel is working with his apparently favorite legislator, Illinois Senate President John Cullerton, to delay payments by the city into pension plans for its workers, including those covering its fire fighters and police officers.  The plan would postpone the date on which Chicago falls off its own fiscal cliff by having to increase annual pension contributions to $1.1 billion in 2015 from $483mm in 2014.  The bill would delay any pension related tax increases until 2018, not coincidentally until after Mr. Emanuel is safely reelected, and any meaningfully increased pension contributions until 2022, after Mr. Emanuel is safely, one presumes, in the White House.  The bill would give the city further breathing room by postponing the date by which the pension plans must be 90% funded from 2040 to 2061, by which time yours truly, and most of you, will be safely into the next life.




The obvious objection to this plan, which faces rough legislative sledding, to say the least, is that further delaying addressing the problem is not a good solution to a problem that has arisen from delaying addressing the problem.   The pension liabilities will continue to grow, even if concessions are made by the unions, and if the city doesn’t put money behind its promises, the unfunded portions of those liabilities will continue to grow.   Right now, the police pensions are 31% funded, the fire fighter pensions are 25% funded, and the pensions for all city employees are 35% funded.  These numbers are pathetic on their faces, but they are also the lowest of what are, for the most part, pathetic numbers for cities across the country.   The problem will get worse if the Emanuel/Cullerton plan somehow gets passed.

There are further objections to the plan that perhaps aren’t so obvious.  The first is that delaying the 2015 $600mm day of reckoning not only obviates the massive property tax increase it would necessitate but also frees up other money.   For the politicians, this is terrific news…more money to blow on getting reelected and making good their IOUs to campaign contributors.   But for the taxpayers, this is not such good news.   Spending commitments tend to become permanent and must be funded by taxpayers.  Giving the politicians more money to spend ultimately, and more quickly than the adverb “ultimately” implies, results in more money from taxpayers.   Money that doesn’t go into paying pensions doesn’t get squirreled away to meet such obligations later; it gets blown.   And we have seen this Mayor’s propensity to spend money.  Even though we are broke, we seem to have plenty of money for basketball arenas, new schools that serve Rahm’s yuppie constituency, NATO summits, etc.  Give this guy a dollar and he’ll spend five, just like any politician, but, in Rahm’s case, with both more aplomb and more gusto.



The other less obvious objection to escaping the $600 mm day of reckoning, and the property tax increases it will necessitate, is that such evasion confirms the impression that the city will never abide by any of the promises it makes to dig itself out of its fiscal hole.  This $600mm 2015 day of reckoning itself is the result of a deal the Richard II made years ago, the last time pension funding threatened to blow up the city budget.   The second Daley administration managed to codify into state law a plan to gladly pay tomorrow for a hamburger today, if you will, by promising to contribute $1.1 billion to city pensions in 2015.  It is quite clear that the Daley administration had no intention to pay that $1.1 billion and was merely, to use a variation on a trite expression, kicking the can down the alley a bit.  While the plan outlined by Senator Cullerton and Mayor Emanuel is much more reasonable (but not nearly as efficacious) as the Daley plan, does anyone believe that whatever administration is in power at the times its measures are to be implemented will really go along with it?

I don’t believe the city when it says it will be good tomorrow if we only let it evade its responsibilities today.  You shouldn’t either.  Surely the bond rating agencies won’t believe the city.  But I am not concerned so much about the bond rating agencies; I am concerned about the investors who buy the city’s bonds.   Detroit didn’t get into trouble when it was downgraded by the rating agencies; Detroit got into trouble when no one would lend it money.



See my two books, The Chairman, A Novel of Big City Politics and The Chairman’s Challenge, A Continuing Novel of Big City Politics, for further illumination on how things work in Chicago and Illinois politics. 

Wednesday, June 19, 2013

MIKE AND LISA MADIGAN: WHAT’S A DAD TO DO?

6/19/13

A poll commissioned by Bill Daley’s gubernatorial campaign (See, inter alia, most recently my 6/17/13 post BILL DALEY’S GRASP OF FINANCE AND ECONOMICS:   WAS I MISINFORMED? and more saliently my 6/13/13 post BILL DALEY AND THE GOVERNOR’S OFFICE:   THE BROTHER ALSO RISES? and my 6/6/13 post “GOVERNOR BILL DALEY…SENATOR BILL DALEY.   THERE JUST WASN’T THE TIME…”) has shown that Lisa Madigan’s being Mike Madigan’s daughter will hurt her if (when?) she runs for governor.  

The poll showed that Lisa Madigan would defeat the only formally announced GOP candidate for governor, State Treasurer Dan Rutherford, by 11 percentage points.  However, when voters were reminded that Lisa Madigan’s dad is House Speaker Mike Madigan, the capo de cappi tuti of Illinois and Chicago politicians and were asked how they’d vote if Mr. Madigan stayed on as speaker, the race between Ms. Madigan and Mr. Rutherford becomes a dead heat.



Hmm…

Several things come to mind.

First, Bill Daley ought to look in the mirror; how does his being Rich Daley’s brother, and Dick Daley’s son, play downstate or in the ‘burbs?   The aforementioned poll did not explore this question.

Second, poll participants had to be reminded that Lisa Madigan’s dad is Mike Madigan?   And these people get to vote?   Remember this the next time someone pontificates on the wonders of democracy.

Third, let’s leave aside for a moment the near fact that if Lisa Madigan were not Mike Madigan’s daughter, she would not have served in the Illinois House and Senate, never been considered for Attorney General, and certainly not now be the governor in waiting.  Let’s instead buy blindly into the silly supposition that Ms. Madigan’s being Mr. Madigan’s daughter actually hurts her.



What could Mike Madigan do to help his daughter if his being Speaker of the House and chairman of the Illinois Democratic Party really is a disadvantage for young Lisa?

Some have suggested that Mr. Madigan could step down as Speaker but retain chairmanship of the Party, where they claim the real power lies.   But those who make this argument are stuck in the ‘60s or ‘70s.  As has long been the case, and as is illustrated, for the careful reader, in my two books, The Chairman, A Novel of Big City Politics and The Chairman’s Challenge, A Continuing Novel of Big City Politics, the days of the power lying in the party office rather than the public office are long gone.  Rich Daley knew this when he was elected mayor in 1989 and eschewed the post of Cook County Regular Democratic Chairman, which his father held even longer than Richard J. held the mayor’s office.  Young Mr. Daley even left his post as committeeman of the 11th Ward, giving the post to his brother John.   Rich Daley knew that, largely through the efforts of his father, power had shifted from the Party to the Fifth Floor of City Hall.   To the extent that holding a Party position, even THE Party position, might imperil holding onto the Mayor’s office, young Mr. Daley wanted no part of that party office.

If you don’t believe me, first read my books.   If that doesn’t work, ask how much power the following men, who held the office of Cook County Regular Democratic Party Chairman after Richard J. Daley, wielded.   You might even honestly ask yourself if you remember some of these names:

George Dunne
Ed Vrdolyak
Tom Lyons
Joe Berrios

Fast Eddie Vrdolyak had some power, but he would have had that power even if he weren’t Party Chairman.   A few people remember George Dunne, but largely as something of a Daley lackey or as a guy who got into a little trouble with some comely female county employees in his twilight years.   Does anyone remember Tom Lyons?  I could describe him; nondescript northwest side committeeman who wanted a job no one else wanted.  But even I had to look up his name.   Does anyone think Joe Berrios was or is nearly as powerful as Richard M. Daley or Rahm Emanuel?   Or even Ed Burke?

It’s no different at the state level; the Party is largely toothless in this media age.   Mike Madigan’s power derives not from his heading the Party but, rather, from his having been Speaker for all but a few of the last thirty years, his thus being constantly cultivated by people who know how to return favors, and his therefore having the ability to make or break virtually any Democratic member of the legislature.   Retaining the chairmanship of the Party means little or nothing; ask, if you can remember, the following gentlemen who preceded Mr. Madigan in the post:

Gary LaPaille, who was something of a Madigan lackey who stepped aside for his boss
Vince DeMuzio
Cal Sutker

Mike Madigan, being a good dad, might resign from the Speakership, or even the House, if Lisa becomes governor, and promise to do so during the campaign.   In the opinion of yours truly, however, he would be crazy to do so.   For Mike Madigan, the Speaker’s office is a permanent, lifetime job.   The governor’s office, on the other hand, holds no such employment security.   If Ms. Madigan does run and win, and both are still highly likely, she might serve for eight years; Even if she manages to match Jim Thompson’s 14 year tenure, that would leave her in power only half the time her father has been Speaker. 

Mike Madigan, even as a good father, is highly unlikely to give away the permanent job of Speaker so his daughter can be governor for a relatively few years.   I realize he’s 71 years old, but that isn’t old and I am quite sure that Mr. Madigan doesn’t consider himself old and/or anywhere near the twilight of his career.   I’m not making a prediction here; I don’t know Speaker Madigan and, even if I did, he wouldn’t tell me what he is thinking.  I am saying, however, that to give up the Speaker’s job would be silly and Mr. Madigan is not given to doing silly things; see today’s other post MIKE MADIGAN, JOHN CULLERTON, AND PENSIONS:   SOMETIMES A CIGAR IS JUST A CIGAR?

One supposes that Mr. Madigan could stay in the House but replace himself with some stooge (There is no lack of stooges in Illinois politics.) who would serve as a placeholder until Governor Lisa Madigan either loses office or moves to Washington (or possibly replaces another major Chicago political figure whose ultimate goal is moving to Washington, but I digress) in some capacity or another and Mike Madigan feels safe getting his old job back.  But stooges sometimes start to think that they aren’t so stoogish after all and get comfortable in their old jobs.   The consequences can be dire; see yesterday’s post THE LEGEND LIVES ON FROM THE TEAMSTERS ON DOWN OF THE BIG GUY THEY CALL JIMMY HOFFA.  Mr. Madigan is not likely to take such a chance.

Those who haven’t ignored the obvious in their pursuit of today’s story realize that Lisa Madigan is helped a heck of a lot more than she is hurt by her being Mike Madigan’s daughter.   Mike Madigan is highly unlikely to give up his post as Speaker so that his daughter can become governor for a few years.   Ms. Madigan’s lineage will not hurt her in a Democratic primary, especially a three-way Democratic primary.   And, given the state of the GOP in Illinois today and its, er, lack of credible candidates, her being the Speaker’s daughter might hurt Ms. Madigan, but not fatally so.  Mike Madigan’s having been Speaker more or less continuously for the last thirty years did nothing to stop him from winning a supermajority in the House in 2012, despite pathetic GOP efforts to the contrary.  Either the voters are not as appalled by Mr. Madigan as some people seem to think…or they simply don’t pay enough attention to express their disdain in the voting booth.


See my two books, The Chairman, A Novel of Big City Politics and The Chairman’s Challenge, A Continuing Novel of Big City Politics, for further illumination on how things work in Chicago and Illinois politics. 

Thursday, May 16, 2013

AN ARENA FOR DEPAUL AND ELEVATING CHICAGO: “FRAU BLUCHER, ELEVATE ME!”

5/16/13

Mayor Rahm Emanuel provided a better look at his grand $500 million or so plan for improving the city’s “tourism and trade show infrastructure.”  (Ever notice how politicians, over the last twenty years or so, but more so over the last few years and especially so since Rahm Emanuel moved here from Washington, love to attach the word “infrastructure” to any project that involves their spending millions, or billions, if your money?  “Infrastructure” is just one of those words that a gullible public just seems to lap up…and the pols are counting on it.  But I digress.  Already.)  

The plan, yawningly entitled “Elevate Chicago,” involves improvements at Navy Pier to make it less “cheesy,” as Housing and Economic Development Director Andy Mooney put it.  I say “Hear, hear!”  But I also say that the Pier would never have gotten so “cheesy” if it weren’t for the city’s having dumped hundreds of millions into it about twenty years ago to make it “cheesy.”  Those of us with a sense of history and an attention span longer than, say, twenty minutes, liked the Pier the way it was before it was "improved."  But those who knew better instead insisted on turning it into a Disneyesque abomination.  Now the Mayor proposes spending hundred of millions of dollars to remove the cheese our prior expenditures of hundreds of millions of dollars churned up a mere few decades ago.  (The Mayor’s crew of trendy dazzling urban sophisticates, of course, doesn’t share yours truly’s retro enthusiasms and wants to give the Pier a more upscale feel, which doesn’t come cheap.)  Ain’t government grand?   Yes, if you are on the receiving end of the hundreds of millions, but, again, I digress.


The major portion of “Elevate Chicago” involves not Navy Pier, but improvements around McCormick Place, including two hotels (a “boutique” (how cutesy-pie!) hotel and a “headquarters” (how corporate!) hotel) and, most controversial of all, a 10,000 seat arena primarily for the use of the DePaul Blue Demons men’s basketball team.

Where do I start in commenting on this boondoggle?  Let me (not) count the ways…

--Apparently, not having money does not keep politicians from spending money.   The city of Chicago is broke.  We can’t buy our way out of the malodorous parking meter deal former Mayor Richard M. Daley strapped around our neck. (See my 5/14/13 post, ALDERMAN REILLY WANTS TO BUY BACK CHICAGO’S PARKING METERS:  “MY CREDIT GOOD ENOUGH TO BUY YOU OUT?”)   We can’t hire enough cops.  (See my 2/24/13 post IT’S NOT GARRY McCARTHY’S FAULT.)   And we are closing schools en masse, which would probably not be a bad idea under the best of financial circumstances, given the city’s population’s shrinkage, but that is grist for another mill.   But the city’s poverty does not stop ambitious pols like Rahm Emanuel from announcing, taking credit for, and reaping the indirect financial benefits that flow from projects like “Elevate Chicago.”

Recall that one of the underpinnings of the Reagan tax cuts, a fallback position, if you will, for Reaganomics, was that if you starved the government of revenue, it would stop spending.   So a sure fire way to reduce the size of government was to cut taxes, reduce revenue, and effectively starve government.   That theory went out the window long before we hit trillion dollar deficits at the federal level under President Obama.  In fact, it went out the window while Reagan was still in office.   But this latest example of an all but legally bankrupt city blowing nearly $300 million on a plan to elevate itself is just another example of the utter intellectual bankruptcy of the  theory of bankrupting government into shrinking itself

--When word of this plan began leaking out earlier this week, the experts, and anyone with a functioning brain, realized that it was utterly nonsensical to spend $173 mm to construct, and then millions annually to maintain, an arena for the DePaul Blue Demons, which would play maybe 18 games a year at their new home.   Someone should tell our out-of-towner Mayor that the Demons (strange name for a team from a Catholic school, but I digress) have, for the last 25 years or so, aspired mightily for, yet consistently fallen short of, mediocrity.  Mark Aguirre is about the mayor’s age, George Mikan and Ray Meyer are dead, and the Demons don’t draw flies.   

Since spending all this dough on an arena for the faded Demons made no sense, everyone with a pulse realized that there was more in the mix than a home for DePaul.  Sure enough, today’s announcement listed such things as DePaul Lady Demon’s basketball, an “events center” for mid-sized conventions, and 24 dates for the city’s use for games or events involving the Chicago Public Schools, City Colleges of Chicago, etc.

No mention was made of, say, boxing or ultimate fighting…the kind of events that gamblers like to attend before and after blowing their money at the tables.   However, with the now useless Michael Reese site, which the city bought for $91mm to use for Olympic dorms, so close to the soon to be rejuvenated McCormick Place “campus,” one could be excused for thinking that the Mayor and his minions had such events in mind.   The mayor’s aids flaccid and half-hearted denials of plans for a casino at or near McCormick Place only add to the suspicion, near certainty, really, that a casino will be part of the McCormick mix.   (See my 5/2/13 post ILLINOIS GAMBLING EXPANSION:   “A LADY DOESN’T WANDER ALL OVER THE ROOM AND BLOW ON SOME OTHER GUY’S DICE.”)



 --At the formal announcement of “Elevate Chicago” today, mayoral aides countered charges that the city is using public funds to aid a private, Catholic university by making it sound as if the city were getting the better of DePaul.  After all, they argued, DePaul will be contributing $70 million of the $173 million projected to be needed to build the arena and will only be using it a relative handful of days.

What do we make of this “we got the better of DePaul” argument?

First, these guys seem to be chortling something to the effect of

We got the better of the Vincentians on this deal!  In fact, we really screwed those guys!  Aren’t we just the smartest guys to come down the pike?  

Notice how quickly, after pointing out that the city is getting $70 million out of DePaul, and realizing how that sounded, mayoral henchmen quickly backtracked, pointing out that DePaul would certainly benefit and yammering on about how this was “true example of a public private partnership,” in the words of Development Director Mooney.  It was as if the out-of-towner Mayor’s crew  realized, too late, that bragging that they got the better of their highly respected and revered counterparty is neither good PR nor a great negotiating tactic.  

Second, who knew that the DePaul had $70mm lying around to finance a new basketball arena when the Blue Demons have been offered use of the United Center rent free?   If I were a DePaul graduate and/or financial supporter, I would consider this heretofore unrealized flushness the next time I received a letter or a call from the Vincentians asking me for money.

--The Mayor and his minions assure us that $70 million of the $103 million the city is contributing toward the new arena will come from TIF funds, as if such funds are manna from heaven.

The original idea behind Tax Increment Financing (“TIF”) funds was a good, clever, and innovative one.  Developers would put money into disadvantaged areas, which would be designated TIF districts.   The value of the properties they developed would go up.  The money that would have gone into increased property taxes resulting from that increase in value would instead go into a fund, a TIF fund, and used to finance further improvements in the area.   The city and other local taxing bodies would not see any reduction in property taxes; they would still get the taxes they had been receiving on the property before it was improved.  But any increase in taxes would be reinvested in the area for a period of, usually, ten or twenty years.   The underlying argument was that there would have been no increase in property taxes without the development, and without the property tax abatement there would be no development.  So the city would be losing nothing in taxes but the area would get an economic boost and, once the TIF period was over, the city, the schools, and other taxing bodies would collect taxes on a much more valuable property.  Everyone would win, or was supposed to win.

Like many public finance ideas that started out making all kinds of sense before the politicians inserted their ever growing and all consuming probosces, the TIF idea has grown into a hideous monster bearing little resemblance to its original virtuous and comely design.  TIFs are no longer limited to disadvantaged areas; much of the Loop is now in some TIF district.  And the TIF funds, which have grown as property values have increased with development or with just the workings of the marketplace, have become gigantic slush funds that the politicians can spend with little or no accountability…like this “Elevate Chicago” boondoggle.

It’s too simplistic to say that TIF funds could be used for things like schools and police protection; one could argue that without the TIF tax abatements, property values, and hence tax revenues, would never have increased.   But certainly TIFS in the McCormick Place area have created a huge pool of funds (at least $70 million, apparently) for which better uses could be found than an arena for the DePaul Blue Demons.

--The Mayor and his minions assure us that the remaining $33 million of the $103 million the city is using to build an arena for DePaul (but not for boxing, ultimate fighting, and other gambling related events, no sir… at least not yet) is coming not from “taxpayers” but from the McPier Authority, which is currently flush due to a 2010 bond refinancing.

The argument that McPier does not generate its money from taxpayers could be considered legitimate if we sufficiently narrow the definition of taxpayers.   McPier was set up to fund the original cheesifying of Navy Pier (See the second paragraph of this post.) and the expansion of McCormick Place by issuing bonds and servicing those bonds from hotel and restaurant taxes in the McPier Zone.  The Zone covers just about all of the city’s midsection, from, and don’t quote me on this, from 22nd on the south to Fullerton, or maybe Belmont, on the north, from the lake on the east to Ashland on the west.   Further, the definition of “restaurant” is, to say the least, a broad one.  When I worked at what was then First Chicago, we paid McPier taxes on our cafeteria meals because, after all, One First National Plaza was in the McPier Zone and the cafeteria served food.  

If I remember correctly, McPier was to have a limited life.  Once the bonds used to cheesify Navy Pier and expand McCormick Place were retired, the Authority was supposed to fold and the taxes it collected were supposed to go away.  But the Authority, as do all political bodies here, and most every place else, became a repository for hacks, lackeys, and hangers-on.   Politicians always found some new project (the uglification of Soldier Field, for example) to finance with anodyne “McPier revenues.”   And so McPier, like most public entities, has attained the closest thing on this earth to eternal life.  Its latest purpose, apparently, is to collect extortionate taxes from people who stay in McPier Zone hotels (most of whom are not Chicagoans but are taxpayers) and eat in McPier Zone restaurants, and cafeterias (most of whom are Chicagoans and suburbanites and are indeed taxpayers) to build an arena for DePaul basketball and “other” activities.   And so McPier lives on.

But if the intent is to attract tourists and convention business, wouldn’t allowing McPier, and its onerous taxes, to die be a good lure?   Anyone who has stayed in a hotel anywhere, and especially in Chicago, knows how much taxes add to a hotel bill.   Wouldn’t less expensive accommodations be at least as big a positive as “interactive fountains” (another part of “Elevate Chicago”) when people are deciding where to hold conventions?  It would seem that the only downside would be that more affordable accommodations don’t provide popinjay politicians the opportunity to preen, posture, and mug for the cameras.  To Mr. Emanuel, his predecessor, and other in their line of work, though, this downside is just too enormous to fathom.


See my two books, The Chairman, A Novel of Big City Politics and The Chairman’s Challenge, A Continuing Novel of Big City Politics, for further illumination on how things work in Chicago and Illinois politics. 


Tuesday, April 30, 2013

RAHM EMANUEL AND THE PARKING METERS: “GOT TO MAKE THE BEST OF…A BAD SITUATION”

4/30/13

Despite Mayor Emanuel’s latest exercise of his most salient talent, self-congratulation, the settlement he reached with Chicago Parking Meters LLC (“CPM”) was no great shakes for those who park and/or live in Chicago.

Under the settlement, the city still has to shell out $64 mm that it doesn’t have as compensation to CPM for meters used without charge by those with disabled parking placards and for revenue denied CPM due to street closings for police activities and the like, broken down as follows:

Disabled parking placards                     $55 mm
Police activity, etc.                                $ 9 mm
Total                                                    $64 mm

The Mayor, however, in only the latest manifestation of chutzpah bordering on shamelessness, says the deal will save the city “over $1 billion.”   How does he turn an outlay of $64mm into a saving of $1 billion?

CPM was asking for $50mm to compensate for parking revenue lost to police activity and the like.   CPM settled for the above $9mm and presumably agreed to the city’s formula for calculating such compensatable shortfalls in the future.  That is a savings of, using round numbers, $40mm.   The period in dispute was two years, so that works out to $20mm in “savings” per year for the city.   Since the contract runs another 71 years (Thanks, Richard I), by the Mayor’s arithmetic, 71 times $20mm works out to “over $1 billions.”   That the Mayor didn’t give himself credit for something like “almost a billion and a half dollars,” which would be closer to product derived from his political math, shows that even he lacks confidence in his numbers.

The more often mentioned part of the deal is that parking will be free outside the downtown area on Sunday.   In exchange, CPM will be able to charge for parking for an additional hour or three hours on the other six days of the week.  The three hour extension is limited to Streeterville and River North, the areas most likely to be frequented after the current 9:00 limit on evening parking charges for most of the city’s meters.  Whether the Sunday for late night trade-off turns out to be to the city’s or CPM’s advantage no one knows at this juncture, but, in any case, the difference will be slight.  



We do know, however, that extending the charged parking hours primarily, and for the longest period of time, in the city’s prime night life areas is yet another manifestation of Mayor Emanuel’s ongoing drive to impose taxes on those who don’t vote in the city.   Many, maybe most, of the people who will be in the entertainment districts after 9:00, and thus paying for more hours of parking, come from the suburbs.   As with the increase in fees for water, much of which finds its ways into suburban homes and businesses, by allowing CPM to extend parking hours in the city’s night life hotspots, the Mayor is politically wisely making suburbanites pay for city services.   One could argue legitimately that this is only fair; if suburbanites use the city’s services, they should pay for them.   One can argue indisputably that this is politically smart for the Mayor.

To his further credit, Mr. Emanuel is not arguing that the overall deal is great for Chicagoans; he is only arguing that he is making the best of a bad situation, that he is, as he put it, “making some lemonade out of a big lemon.”   

The interesting political story here is that the Mayor is getting closer to outright and unrestrained criticism of his predecessor who, among other bone-headed, or worse, moves in the latter years of his administration, stuck the people of Chicago with this turkey of deal.  But Mr. Emanuel still hasn’t crossed the line and slammed Mr. Daley personally.   Why do you suppose that Mr. Emanuel took no questions from the press after announcing the deal?   Surely some of those questions would have forced him to criticize himself or rip Mr. Daley.   Which would he have chosen?  To ask the question is to answer it, so Mr. Emanuel just dummied up after the announcement.

So why won’t Mr. Emanuel stop dancing around this issue and come right out and say, using the name, that Richard M. Daley left him a city that was broke, crumbling, and nearly out of options?

Part of the reason may be loyalty; without Mr. Daley’s help and encouragement, Mr. Emanuel would not be on the Fifth Floor today.   But we know how far loyalty goes with Mr. Emanuel.   A better answer might be that Mr. Emanuel knows that he will need the help of Mr. Daley and his associates in the future, for reelection or for a return to Mr. Emanuel’s real home, Washington, D.C.   Mr. Emanuel may not show much loyalty; when the tossing people over the side would benefit Mr. Emanuel, he shows no hesitation to do so.  But he knows how not to burn a bridge.


See my two books, The Chairman, A Novel of Big City Politics and The Chairman’s Challenge, A Continuing Novel of Big City Politics, for further illumination on how things work in Chicago and Illinois politics. 


Tuesday, March 12, 2013

RAHM EMANUEL HAS NO TIME FOR SERGEANTS

3/12/13

The 1,178 rank and file members of the Chicago Police Sergeants’ Association have rejected, by a resounding 7-1 margin, the contract negotiated by their new president and Mayor Rahm Emanuel.  The Mayor looks bad; Association President Jim Ade looks worse.   Far less importantly, the resounding rejection of the contract presents a quandary for those of us who are reflexively anti-Emanuel and reflexively pro-police.

This was a draconian contract:  a 9% pay raise over four years and an increase in maximum pension to 80% of salary from 75% of salary in exchange for

  • An increase in the retirement age from 50 to 53.
  • An increase in the pension contributions from 9% of salary to 12% of salary
  • Initiating a contribution of 2% of retirement pay toward retiree health care costs
  • Dropping cost of living adjustments from 3.0% to 2.5% and making those adjustments every other year rather than every year

To most people, though, while the changes in the contract may look severe, the result doesn’t.  Retiring at 53 at perhaps 80% of one’s salary would be a sweet deal to most of the people who pay the taxes that support the contract.   And those of us who are self-employed pay about 15% of our salaries into a far less generous social security program; those of us who work for others pay about the same amount when our employers’ contributions are considered.   Few of us get any kind of retiree health care.  So, on balance, while the changes are big, the ultimate contract still looks quite generous.  I say this as one who could not be more sympathetic to the dangerous and vital nature of the jobs of those in law enforcement, especially at this juncture in the great city of Chicago’s history.   Few have been as unabashedly pro-police, and especially pro-Chicago police, as yours truly.  See, as only one small, and perhaps not perfectly on point, example, my 2/24/13 piece, IT’S NOT GARRY McCARTHY’S FAULT.

More important, the city of Chicago is broke.   The major reason that the city is broke, besides the incredible mismanagement of the city’s finances in the latter years of Mayor Richard M. Daley’s reign, is the enormous pension burden the city faces.  Mayor Emanuel was right when he said

“This agreement was a break from the dishonesty of the past and provided a road map for a fair and honest pension system.”

The old deal was generous, but it was a lie.  The police, firefighters, and virtually all city employees would never have gotten their former, or existing, in some cases, pension and retiree health care deals because the city doesn’t, and won’t, have the money to make these false promises come true.   One wonders if even the newly negotiated deal was realistic given the financial problems the city faces and the inherent counterproductiveness, if you will, of solutions such as massive tax increases.

So, on the one hand, yours truly is disappointed to see the contract voted down.   On the other, I am instinctively pro-police and nearly instinctively anti-Emanuel.  It is great to see real Chicagoans (And, yes, I know I am no longer a “real Chicagoan” by virtue of my now living in the ‘burbs.   However, judging from number of years spent in the city, and my number of years caring about the city, I am way ahead of, say, Mayor Emanuel in my “Chicagoness.”   But I digress; at least I do so parenthetically.) stick it in the eye of the poseur from the north shore who now inhabits the Fifth Floor.   That it was not the 1,178 member Sergeants’ Association, but, rather the 25,000 plus member Fraternal Order of Police, which represents the proverbial cops on the beat, that may have been behind the contract’s demise makes the slap in the Mayor’s face sweeter…but the danger to the city’s finances far more dangerous.

Personal piques and affinities often have to be set aside in the interest of good governance…or of simply living one’s life in a world inhabited with people one finds agreeable and disagreeable.   In these very challenging times for what was once the world’s greatest city, there is even less room for personal loyalties or their opposite numbers.   Mr. Emanuel is facing reality; the sergeants, and, by all indications, the rank and file, are not.



See my two books, The Chairman, A Novel of Big City Politics and The Chairman’s Challenge, A Continuing Novel of Big City Politics, for further illumination on how things work in Chicago and Illinois politics. 

Tuesday, February 5, 2013

HOW DID CYNTHIA BRIM GET ON THE BENCH…AND STAY THERE FOR NEARLY TWENTY YEARS?

2/5/13


Cook County Judge Cynthia Brim was found not guilty by reason of insanity of battery charges arising from an incident back in March, 2012 in which she shoved a sheriff’s deputy after tossing courtroom keys at the deputy and his cohorts working security at the Daley Center.  It was quite clear that the insanity defense would work.    On the day of the alleged battery, Judge Brim, meaning to go downtown to protest an online article criticizing a fellow judge, got off the bus at 47th Street and apparently walked the six miles downtown and showed up at the Daley Center in hospital scrubs, a fur coat and hat.   This obviously aroused the suspicion of the Daley Center security detail, who had no idea she was a judge since she worked out of a courtroom in south suburban Markham and judges, even in Cook County, don’t normally come to work in scrubs and a fur coat.   Deputies who testified at the trial described her as “irrational” and “catatonic” that day, but, given the state of the judiciary in Cook County, one suspects that such traits did nothing to add to their suspicions that Judge Brim was not, indeed, a judge, but I digress.   At any rate, the Judge’s bizarre behavior led to the alleged battery and also to her ultimate conditional legal absolution.


The bigger question for Cook County residents and taxpayers (Judge Brim has been relived of her duties since the incident but continues to collect her $182,000 per year salary.  Hey, such stellar legal talent doesn’t come cheap, but, again, I digress.) is why Judge Brim was ever on the bench.  She has been hospitalized five times for psychotic episodes, once before and four times since her election to the bench in 1993.  At the time of her election, she was 35 years old, ten years out of law school, and had a resume bereft of private practice but featuring a series of jobs with Mayors Harold Washington and Richard M. Daley and Attorney General Roland Burris.   She was reelected in November, 2012, eight months after the alleged battery and while on the paid leave that resulted from that incident, with the support of the Cook County Regular Democratic Organization.

Judge Cynthia Brim appeared unqualified at the time of her original slating for, and perfunctory election to, the bench in 1993.   She did nothing while on the bench to dissuade anybody of that notion.   She has been a very sick person for her entire tenure as a judge.  And yet she has been on the bench for nearly twenty years.   But she was, and remains, a judge because, in Cook County, judges are elected, Chicago style.   Voters don’t pay attention to the judicial ballot; even yours truly, who follows politics more closely than does the average bear, doesn’t pay attention to the judicial ballot unless I know one of the candidates personally or through friends.   But instead of simply not voting for judges, like I do, on the theory that an uninformed vote is far worse than no vote at all, people randomly fill out their judicial ballots or simply vote for the candidate endorsed (slated) by the Cook County Regular Democratic Organization.

Given that few people vote for judge and many of those that do are politically motivated to do so, slating for the bench by the Cook County Regular Democratic Organization is tantamount to election.  That slating is, and has been for years, dominated by 14th Ward Alderman and Committeeman Ed Burke.  Consequently, judicial candidates are not chosen based on their legal acumen or experience but, rather, based primarily on their political affiliations and loyalties, which, in most cases, must run toward the Organization, Mr. Burke, and the few other pols who have some hand in the process.



Is this any way to select a third branch of government?  

The obvious argument is for appointment, rather than election, of judges, as is done in most other jurisdictions in this country.   This course of action is also fraught with peril, given that, like everything else in and around Chicago, that selection process would be dripping with politics.  But the current system of electing, and slating, judges is tantamount to appointment with the mere façade of an election, so how much worse could actual appointment be?

Even though it is not known as one of the nation’s stellar systems, it’s a miracle that the Cook County court system works as well as it does.   But we can’t count on miracles forever.  It would seem that the system of slating, for certain election, political hacks, lackeys, toadies, and hangers-on, along with a few random and largely coincidental fine legal minds, has to come to an end.   Or would the alternative be just as scary?