By Steve Rhodes
If it wasn’t for all the corruption, Richard M. Daley would be the perfect mayor, right? And let’s face it, a little grease is needed to make the wheels of government turn. Hail Daley!
At least that’s the way the media sycophants and stenographers tell the tale. And the current “campaign” is no different. Without an opponent the media deems strong enough, the tough Chicago press corps has taken a pass once again at examining the mayor’s record, much less his plans going forward into another term. Why bore everyone with the issues when we’re trying to land the Olympics?
Policy-makers and advocates in the trenches tell a different story, though. The Developing Government Accountability to the People project consulted hundreds of such civic-minded people and organizations to study the issues over the past year to grade the mayor’s job performance. It isn’t pretty.
And yet, even the DGAP’s report card doesn’t wholly reflect the reality of this mayor’s tenure. The Reader‘s Ben Joravsky reports that “some of its members privately confessed to me that they felt pressured to inflate Daley’s grades (awarding him, for instance, a C on transportation) because they figured their funding agencies and the media wouldn’t take them seriously if they’d given him all the Fs he deserved.”
Over the next two days, we’ll run excerpts from the DGAP report card. Today we look at Environment, Economic Development, Housing, and Transportation. Tomorrow we’ll look at Education, Criminal Justice, and Corruption. Then decide if you really want to cast a vote for this guy – and if he’s as great as the media tells you he is.
ENVIRONMENT: B+
“The Mayor’s obvious zeal for environmental progress makes his seeming indifference to certain, very large environmental problems perplexing. While we have seen recent indications of a shift in some positions- a retreat from the blue bag recycling program, for example, major corporate polluters are ignored, further damaging air quality and endangering the health of local residents.”
Dirtiest City
“[Chicago was] named in the July 2005 Reader’s Digest as the dirtiest of the 50 largest U.S. metropolitan areas, based on air quality, water quality, industrial pollution (toxics), Superfund sites and sanitation.”
The Coal Mayor
“With two coal-fired power plants within city limits, Chicago ranks as the city second-most-affected by power plant pollution. The Fisk and Crawford plants, in the Pilsen and Little Village neighborhoods, emit soot and smog forming sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides that are deleterious to human health, which are major reasons Chicago can’t meet federal health-based air quality standards. A study by the Harvard School of Public Health linked these plants’ pollution to 300 deaths, 13,900 asthma attacks, 2,600 emergency room visits and 500,000 incidents of upper respiratory disease annually – heavily affecting the densely populated neighborhoods around the power plants. The plants also emit mercury, a potent neurotoxin that accumulates in people and animals, as well as the pollution that many believe contributes to global warming.
“Chicago has declined to address Fisk’s and Crawford’s pollution through ordinance, instead passing the buck to the federal government.
“The Chicago Clean Power Ordinance, proposed by Ald. Ed Burke in 2002, would have imposed modern pollution emission limits on the Fisk and Crawford coal-fired power plants, reducing their pollution by about two-thirds. However, without the support of Mayor Daley, the ordinance died in the Energy Committee. It was reintroduced in 2003, but again lacked leadership or popular support necessary, and never made it onto the City Council floor for a vote. Power plant pollution is not as visible as flowers and trees, but that is no reason it shouldn’t warrant the city’s attention.
“Mayor Daley failed to make this environmental issue a public health and social justice issue when he had the opportunity.”
The Double-Secret Blue Bag Program
“Little of the fundamental data from Chicago’s Blue Bag program is publicly available. Instead, concerned organizations and the press have had to submit Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to the city for recovery, participation and cost data.”
Make No Renewable Plans
“Chicago doesn’t shy away from ambitious plans – in 2001 a decision was made that by the end of 2006, 20 percent of the city’s energy would come from renewable resources. Unfortunately, big dreams don’t always come true. Although the city fully planned to purchase 120,000 mega-watt-hours of electricity annually from wind turbines, the deal to buy the power fell through when developers refused to build a manufacturing plant here. The city also stopped buying green energy from landfills, which provided 10 percent of the electricity for city government only three years ago, because ComEd’s prices for that power became more expensive than other, less-clean types of power. The city still wants to achieve its 20 percent goal, but its projections have been pushed at least to the end of the decade.”
TRANSPORTATION: C
“Chicago has the third-worst metropolitan travel delay in the United States. Its citizens waste 253 million hours and burn 151 million gallons of fuel sitting in traffic. In a ranking of large cities with populations of 250,000 or more, Chicago was second (at 33.2 minutes) only to New York (at 38.3 minutes) for the highest average commute time in the nation.”
The Pink Stink
“The Douglas Blue Line serves primarily the low- and working-class communities on Chicago’s Southwest Side, including Pilsen, Little Village and North Lawndale. Renovation of the 105 year-old Blue Line began in 2001, with the goal of helping riders gain better access to the UIC medical district, downtown and O’Hare airport. But Blue Line riders realized that their access to these areas was short-lived when it was announced the CTA had received permission to reallocate $33.9 million from the Blue Line renovation to rehabilitate the Paulina Connector that previously was used to shuttle out-of-service trains between the Blue Line and the rest of the system. This renovation became the centerpiece for the newly constituted Pink Line, devised to use a significant portion of Blue Line track as it connects the Southwest Side terminal at 54th/Cermak with the Loop. The tradeoff for this more-frequent service to downtown is a decrease in direct access to city stops northwest of the Loop and to O’Hare Airport for many Douglas Blue Line riders.”
Stranding the CTA
“[The CTA] receives only $3 million a year from the City of Chicago – 1 percent of CTA’s budget. In comparison, San Francisco provides $95.4 million (21 percent of the operating budget) and Boston provides $65.2 million (6 percent of the operating budget) to fund their local transit systems in 2004.”
Stranding the South Side
“The South Side has 10 stops, averaging 9.2 blocks apart. The North Side, in comparison, has 21 stops that average 3.1 blocks apart. But it is Chicago’s West Siders who experience the longest gaps between stations on the Green Line – 1.5 miles from Clinton to Ashland and another 1.5 miles from Ashland to California.”
Stranding the West Side
“At the same time the CTA was cutting back the Douglas line, it eliminated the Washington Boulevard and Lake Street bus routes, creating hardship for even more West Side residents, senior citizens, and workers. CTA argued that ridership was too low to justify their cost – although Lake and Washington buses together served nearly 4,000 riders each workday. Today, the CTA operates more than 40 bus routes with the same or lower ridership figures the Washington and Lake routes had when they were taken out of service.”
Downtown First
“That CTA leadership prioritizes and funds projects such as the Circle Line and the Block 37 Super Station, designed to serve out-of-towners and residents of already well-serviced areas, while subordinating a desperate need for transit services in Chicago’s underserved neighborhoods indicates a failure to serve the entire Chicago community. Chicago riders are not unlike t heir counterparts in other cities that have seen poorer public-transportation services in minority and lower-income communities. Such was the situation in 1996 when the Bus Riders Union won a class action lawsuit against the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transit Authority for cuts in bus services in underserved communities. To avoid such community actions – but primarily to discharge their authority equitably and appropriately – CTA leaders must address issues of inequality throughout the city, and especially on the South and West sides.”
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND JOBS: C+
“More than one in five of Chicago’s 2.7 million residents live in poverty, an increase of about 20,000 people over the past year. Further, the median household income in the Chicago area has decreased nearly $1,700 over that same period. Despite having the third-highest per-capita personal income in the state – $23,449 – Chicago’s poverty rate for families with children under 18 years old is 25.7 percent, well above the state average of 13.9 percent. Further, a worker must make $17.33 per hour to afford a two-bedroom apartment at the Fair Market Rent of $901 for the Chicago area.”
Raising Your Taxes
“129 TIF districts generating nearly $400 million a year. Most of Chicago’s TIF districts are new – with nearly 100 added since 1995. Collectively they assessed as much in tax revenues for 2005 as the combined taxes collected by Cook County and the Forest Preserve District, the Chicago Park District and Chicago Library Fund, and the City Colleges of Chicago and Metropolitan Water Reclamation District.
“TIFs impact tax rates. According to Cook County Commissioner Mike Quigley, the typical Chicago property-tax bill is nearly 10 percent higher than it would be without Chicago’s TIF districts. Right now more than 13 percent of the city’s tax base is tied up in TIFs, meaning that new growth in those areas does not help to fund basic services. As a result, basic tax rates have to increase even more to keep pace.
“Despite the appearance of a public process, TIF districts often reflect back-room deals. The single required public hearing is usually scheduled after decisions have been made. As a result, residents and community groups must rely on the discretion of individual aldermen to intervene on their behalf, and have little recourse if they are dissatisfied with creation of a TIF district or related funding decisions.
Working Over the Working Poor
“While he disapproved of the Living Wage and Benefits Ordinance, Mayor Daley championed state legislation to raise Illinois’ minimum wage to $7.50, a move set to take effect July 1, 2007. For a 40-hour work week, a minimum-wage worker in Illinois who makes $7.50 an hour can expect to earn $15,600 per year before taxes, compared with $13,520 at the current hourly minimum $6.50. This is a positive step, but much less than the $20,800 proposed under the Living Wage and Benefits Ordinance – and a far cry from the $36,000 a year minimum required to pay for a fair market value two-bedroom apartment.”
Workforce Misdevelopment
“Specific groups are not well-served by the current system, particularly veterans, seniors, immigrants, the homeless and ex-offenders. Chicago’s Workforce Centers are of little benefit to people with poor English skills or those who haven’t completed high school – including many immigrants, who make up the largest group entering the workforce here. Those with multiple barriers to employment – substance-abuse problems or long-term unemployment (which often includes homeless people and ex-offenders) – often need a long-term, specialized effort to become employable. They may need several job placements, more intensive training and skill building. A handful of agencies work with of the hard-to-place, but there are not enough of them.
“While on the surface Chicago has an admirable structure in place to create and connect people to jobs, little data is available on how many residents are being helped. Community-based organizations find tracking clients expensive and time-consuming, so it not being done in any comprehensive manner. It therefore is hard to evaluate the programs of the Mayor’s Office of Workforce Development.”
Air Wars
“An enlarged O’Hare is expected to handle as many as 700,000 flights per year. However, critics, including the Aviation Integrity Project, claim that Chicago airspace already is so crowded that increased gridlock in the sky will result within a few years of project completion.
“Since the inception of the O’Hare Modernization Program, transportation experts have voiced concern that the project had more to do with generating large contracts political allies than with bringing true economic benefit to the region. The Aviation Integrity Project claims the contracts are driving the push for airport expansion, not the oft-touted economic development the plan would bring to the O’Hare vicinity. In fact, the group points out, the area is already crowded with businesses, many of which will be bulldozed for the new runways.”
Not Your Business
“Notable lack of opportunity for public debate over economic development and transportation priorities for the region also has been cited as troublesome. Alternatives to air travel were not publicly discussed, despite studies showing that high-speed rail lines between Midwestern cities could deflect thousands of travelers from airports each year, as they do in Europe. Area residents largely have been cut out of the decision-making process and told to trust the politicians. Slick public-relations efforts costing millions of dollars have sought to marginalize opponents. By not using federal funding, the city has avoided hearings and competitive bidding. When local dissent became too noisy, project approval was achieved through federal legislation.
“Since construction began in late 2005, new questions are being raised about the O’Hare Modernization Project. The sheer magnitude of the contracts being awarded is staggering and begs for an oversight process where none exists. In only one year, the project already has run $400 million over budget – OMP executive director Rosemarie Andolino called the increases a ‘hiccup,’ attributing them to the expense of fighting lawsuits filed by expansion opponents and to increasing land-acquisition costs.”
HOUSING: D+
“In Chicago, there are about 133,000 households (about 13 percent of households in the city) who can afford no more than $250 month for housing but only about 37,000 apartments that rent for that price. This means we are short nearly 100,000 units affordable to poor households – many with individuals working full-time, living on social security, or disability assistance. This also means that most of these household pay too much for the housing they have, which means they have little left for groceries, medical care and transportation.
“In contrast, a household bringing in $100,000 or more has about 500,000 rental units to choose from. As a result Chicago families earning $100,000 or more tend to be affordably housed, and most put less than 30 percent of their incomes toward housing. Providing them yet more options, signs for condos and new homes in many Chicago neighborhoods show prices geared to this high-income household.
Confusing matters, a recent UIC study found that only 20 percent of current and potential Chicago homeowners could afford the city’s median home price of about $250,000.”
Set Aside
“The proposed set-aside ordinance has never been called for a vote on the floor of City Council.”
The Housing Mayor
“Mayor Daley has made many public commitments about affordable housing during his tenure in office and often has referred to himself as the housing mayor. Yet he hasn’t put the city’s money where his mouth is – even as development and increasing home prices have generated more tax revenue.
“When it comes to affordable housing, Chicago is far from being the second city, ranking 22nd out of the 51 largest U.S. cities for funds invested in affordable housing and community developments. It spends substantially less than its counterparts on a per-capita basis – less than 40 percent of what’s spent by New York City.”
Richard’s Realty
“Chicago could address its affordable housing crisis by allocating its vast number of vacant lots to affordable housing development. For example, the city owns well over 1,000 units in West Garfield Park, Englewood and West Englewood alone. And every month the city reaps large profits by selling more of these lots to developers. Rather than addressing the needs of the poor, the city has chosen to become a major player in the development of market-rate real estate.”
The CHA Mayor
“The Chicago Housing Authority’s Plan for Transformation is the result of a federal mandate that required all housing authorities to determine whet her it was more cost-effective to rehab their deteriorated units or tear them down, provide families with vouchers and send them out to rent apartments in the private market.
“The plan guaranteed the CHA $1.6 billion in federal funds to demolish 51 high-rise buildings over a 10-year period and to replace them with lower-density, mixed-income housing. When completed, the plan will have a total of 25,000 units – 13,000 less than Chicago had when the plan was approved in 2000. Based on the number of occupied units at the time and not the number of families in need, the CHA plan falls well short of the estimated need for 153,000 affordable housing units for people earning less than $20,000 a year, a figure determined by a city-supported study completed before the plan was approved.
“While there was a commitment to provide housing to the 25,000 CHA families when the plan was approved, the CHA has changed its policy.
“Meanwhile, the CHA has ended its contracts with nearly all the Resident Management Corporations that had allowed tenants to manage and maintain their homes. Instead, many of these contracts were handed over to private companies, often within days after they made campaign contributions to the 17th Ward Democratic Organization. As noted in the section on corruption, Terry Peterson, former CEO of the CHA [and the mayor’s campaign manager] is also former 17th Ward alderman. While residents have protested and even sent complaints to the city’s Inspector General and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, no formal charges were filed and the CHA stays the course with its demolition plan.”
Posted on February 26, 2007