Congratulations?

Editor:

Congratulations to Amy Dodson for her new job opportunities in Chicago. Perhaps she will find “her people” there.

Maybe as executive director of the library district, she can express her political views and affiliations on taxpayer-funded public websites without the constraints of a board that may hinder such freedom. Perhaps when publicly supporting various organizations, she will research the full extent of their reputations and intentions before she insults the work of another organization. And maybe Chicago politics is such that the taxpayers there won’t have to waste $30K trying to prove she didn’t do anything wrong.

Before Dodson leaves our wee hamlet, I have one question for her. Why did you have the need to tell this community that the library welcomes everyone to enter its doors and take advantage of the resources therein? I can’t imagine a public library NOT welcoming all and every individual without reservation. Why did she have to tell us something that we already know to be true? Ms. Dodson, please, before the door hits you on your way out of town, answer that question. And once again, congratulations.

Sue Cauhape

Minden

Don’t give up volunteers

Editor:

For five years (minus COVID “vacation days”), I’ve enjoyed volunteering with Reading Paws at Douglas County Library. On Thursdays, children come read to therapy dogs, earning free books by their attendance. Of all the approaches designed to help kids love books that I used when teaching, Reading Paws stands among the best. When I received word that the program would restart in June, I could barely contain my excitement.

I learned there was a new application process for volunteers. Five years ago, this meant completing a form, proof of identity, and fingerprinting. When I started the new application process, I was shocked to encounter a convoluted process requiring the completion of eight forms. During multiple trips to the library for assistance, the Information Tech who kindly helped me expressed surprise at the difficult process.

By June, three months after starting the application and with the start date of Reading Paws rapidly approaching, I still wasn’t finished. I told someone at the library that even if I hadn’t been approved yet, I would be there when Reading Paws started to answer any questions. My teacher background came with the expectation that if I was unable to do perform my job, I was expected to leave clear and detailed lesson plans for the substitute. My intention was good, but my presence made some library personnel uneasy. I now realize it was a mistake for me to have come. For that I am sorry. (I did love seeing our dogs and visiting with students I’d come to know so well before COVID.)

During my time working with Reading Paws, I’d been overwhelmed by the amazing army of library volunteers who gave their time and talents to help the staff. While there that day, I learned that no volunteer application had been approved.

The next week, I received a call from a friend who works at the library. She’d been asked to inform me that Human Resources didn’t want me to return. My heart is broken, but I know God has given me skills that another place will be happy to use.

I am left with questions. Why wasn’t I contacted by Human Resources and told why my application was abruptly terminated? Why aren’t behavioral expectations given to volunteers? Isn’t it reasonable to be told which form(s) I completed were unacceptable? For the protection of our children, of course, thorough background checks are imperative! But with NO volunteers completing the application process in three months, doesn’t that suggest that something isn’t right with the process? How will the county budget be impacted when departments must hire more staff to do tasks volunteers once did?

Volunteers, know you aren’t alone in your frustration with the new application. Don’t give up. Just be cautious verbalizing your feelings. I “spoke up,” and feel I was “shut up.” Douglas County needs volunteers. The question is, does the county truly want free help?

Patricia Ann “Pann” Baltz

Gardnerville

Unsung heroes of enforcement

I commute weekly on the East Shore of Highway 28 segment .

I’d like to thank the hard-working Park Ranger enforcement squad in the Sand Harbor area in Lake Tahoe.

Daily they are subjected to over-tourism that will never be mitigated. They deal with many issues: illegal parking, illegal U-turns on a narrow two-lane highway, traffic gridlock at the entrance to Sand Harbor State Parking/boat launch, inebriated and disrespectful tourists, assisting first-responders with pedestrian/car and bike conflicts and the annual one or two vehicles that end up cantilevered over the edge of the ridge due to poor-parking skills as well as many accidents, most recently more semi/large transport truck traffic due to Mt. Rose restrictions creating a new kind of road havoc.

Thank you for your dedicated service in protecting the public at-large and the locals alongside Nevada State law enforcement and first responders.

Ellie Waller

Jacks Valley

Protect residents from mask mandates

Editor:

On July 16, the Southern Nevada Health District began recommending both unvaccinated and vaccinated people wear masks in crowded indoor public places where they may have contact with others who are not fully vaccinated. The SNHD claims that using masks has proven to be effective in helping to prevent people from getting and spreading COVID-19. Mask mandates are a tool that those in power use to promote a sense of fear in the community in order to continue their tyrannical power grab.

Democrat Party-controlled governments, including the state of Nevada and Gov. Sisolak, continue to use the COVID-19 pandemic to increase their power and to limit the constitutional rights of the people. It is only a matter of time before Sisolak reinstitutes tyrannical, unconstitutional mask mandates and COVID-19 restrictions on Nevadans again. I am calling on the Douglas County Board of Commissioners to pass local guidance declaring Douglas County a COVID-19 sanctuary county and declare an economic state of emergency restricting COVID-19 gubernatorial-mandated regulations and orders in Douglas County. The resolution should at a minimum:

• Forbid businesses and in Douglas County from requiring masks due to COVID-19;

• Forbid businesses and county government offices from requiring proof of vaccination (vaccine passports) due to COVID-19;

• Forbid businesses from implementing occupancy limits due to COVID-19;

• Forbid Douglas County law enforcement from enforcing any COVID-19 mandates issued by the state of Nevada.

Enough is Enough. Fifteen days to slow the spread has become you will wear a mask forever, be forced to take a shot regardless of the facts surrounding its efficacy and potential risks, and to give up your constitutionally-protected rights. What is happening in this country with mask mandates, forced business closures, and mandatory vaccinations is entirely un-American, and it is time for the people to begin to stand up against it. Further, it is up to the Douglas County commissioners to protect the citizens of Douglas Country from the abuses and tyranny being imposed by Sisolak under the guise of public safety.

Daniel J. Casentini
Minden

>>>#ad: Don't Miss Today's BEST Amazon Deals!
Originally Appeared Here

Historically, the Chicago alderman/woman is one of the most unique city government political positions in the country. We’ll get to more of the reasons why it’s such a unique position further down but, with three active aldermen/women currently under federal indictment, another having recently plead guilty to insurance fraud and obstruction and, in the last 2 years, another 4 who have all been under the microscope in their own very Chicago ways, the Chicago alderman/woman never fails to live up to its reputation as one of the most corrupt political bodies in the United States. Ignoring the high school cafeteria levels of cliqueishness and infighting, the utterly absurd political boondoggles and goose chases that more closely resemble a Dad who got lost on the family road trip than it does a functioning city government, and the altogether and all-encompassing incompetence that they seem to only serve to highlight daily, the Chicago City Council has, for far too long, operated with impunity and disregard for anyone but themselves.

As we approach the 100 year anniversary of the council’s current setup, it’s time for this city to rethink and reconsider its legislative body and how the council should move forward. More specifically, it’s long passed time for Chicago to shrink its City Council.

First, let’s take a look at a brief history.

Brief History

The village that would become the city it is today formed its first council in 1837. Residents divided the land into 6 wards and began electing two members per ward. One member went up for election each year and the two members served alternating terms. They called this the Common Council, as did many other cities of the era.

The first small change came in 1876, when residents changed the name from Common Council to the current City Council. As the city continued to grow and add wards, citizens continued to elect two members from each until they eventually reached the peak of 70 city council members, representing 35 wards, from 1901 to 1923.

The second change occurred in 1923 when the city was redivided into the 50 wards we know today. Each of the 50 wards were given only one council member to represent them.

Finally, in 1935, the third change took place and it was decided the alderman position would be elected to four-year terms rather than the alternating two-year terms mentioned above.

That’s it. You’re caught up to where we are today. In the long history of Chicago, the city council has had a total of three changes. One of which I can barely be considered a change.

Though I’ve never been a fan of change for change’s sake, it sure seems like relatively little for a city the size of ours. But let’s keep things simple and take a look at some of the raw data for city councils in other cities to see how Chicago compares.

Compared to Others

No American city has ever seen the type of staggering growth that New York City did overall but, way back in 1923, when Chicago formed the council into what it remains today, our city population numbers were as if on a tech billionaire’s privately funded rocketship. In fact, for the period from 1871 through the early 1920s, Chicago was the fastest growing city in world history.

In less than 50 years after the Great Fire, the city of Chicago had gone from a relatively small frontier town of less than 300,000 residents to a booming metropolis of 2,700,000 at the start of that 1920s decade. And the growth wasn’t showing any signs of slowing down. By 1930, the city added another 500,000 people.

In that sense, even though a place like New York City was concurrently electing less than 25 council members with over double the population of Chicago, while I don’t agree with it I can still understand the argument, theoretically, as to why Chicago wanted to pair down from its 70 aldermen size but continue to keep a larger council of 50 wards and 50 aldermen in 1923. They expected continued meteoric growth.

For a variety of reasons, the growth would slow and the city of Chicago’s population would eventually reach its peak of an estimated 3,621,000 people in 1950.

But we’re not talking about 1923, we’re talking about now. And below is a table of the top 10 cities in the United States by population and their city council as of 2019.

Data as of July 1, 2019 (Per U.S. Census Bureau)

City	Population	Council Seats	Pop./Seat
New York City	8,336,817	51	163,500
Los Angeles	3,979,576	15	265,300
Chicago	2,693,976	50	53,900
Houston	2,320,268	14	165,750
Phoenix	1,680,992	8	210,125
Philadelphia	1,584,064	17	93,180
San Antonio	1,547,253	10	154,725
San Diego	1,423,851	8	177,981
Dallas	1,343,573	14	95,975
San Jose	1,021,795	10	102,200

Do any particular numbers jump out at you? Is there an outlier?

First, you may notice that New York City, far and away the biggest city in the United States, with a population now greater than 3x that of Chicago’s population, elects an almost identical amount of city council members. You may notice next that, outside of New York City and Chicago, none of the largest cities in the entire country has greater than 17 city council members and our population per seat numbers are nowhere even close to near the average. Finally, you may also notice that Chicago’s current population is almost identical to its population in 1923. The only other city on that Top 10 list that has not grown since 1923 is Philadelphia. But that last comment is a long conversation for another day.

The raw data does beg the question, why do we continue to keep this many council members?

If the largest city in the country can not only have 3x the general population numbers but can also manage its affairs with population per city council seat numbers greater than 3x that of our metrics, and if the second largest city in the country can manage its affairs with 15 council members or less than one-third of our council, and if cities like Houston, Phoenix, San Antonio, and Dallas (some of the current fastest growing cities in the United States) can manage their city limits with even less, why does Chicago continue to find it necessary to maintain New York City sized government? Especially considering that the New York City government’s population per seat numbers are closely aligned with the averages of the other nine cities?

What is it about our city that forces us to and makes us uniquely required to have such a large and commanding council?

My sense is that ‘business as usual’ in Chicago is ripe for investigation.

The Corruption

Oh.

In addition to its publicly outlined legislative duties, Chicago’s aldermen/women are generally given exceptional deference, called “aldermanic privilege” or “aldermanic prerogative.” This is an unwritten and informal practice that emerged in the early 20th century and gave aldermen/women control over zoning, licenses, permits, property-tax reductions, city contracts, and patronage jobs in their wards. It was often based on “understandings” among members or on “arrangements” with city administrators who found it expedient to routinely comply with aldermanic requests.

And it is unique to this city.

To anyone with any hint of common sense whatsoever, this would naturally lead to an inordinate amount of corruption through the institution. And, true to both human nature and the aforementioned common sense, the Chicago City Council and its elected Aldermen/women are among this nation’s most notoriously corrupt. In fact, the City Council has often been described as the epicenter of political corruption in the American Midwest and some (I won’t name names) would go so far as to say the epicenter of political corruption in the United States.

For example, between 1973 and 2012, there were 100 different sitting members of the City Council. Of that group of 100, an eventual 31 members were convicted of some form of official corruption, proving a conviction rate of nearly one-third over the course of four decades.

To reiterate, that’s just those officially convicted. An investigation after the 2013 election found that over half of Chicago aldermen/women took illegal campaign contributions.

Even today, as we publish this, there are three current aldermen/women under federal indictment, another former alderman who recently plead guilty to insurance fraud and obstruction among many other rumors, and in the last 2 years alone another 4 who have all been under the microscope in their own very Chicago ways.

And yet, here in Chicago, the city council continues to wield extraordinary powers. Powers that have, over the years, earned them the nickname “The Little Mayors” due to how much power and influence they hold over their wards. I, too, use the term and have also called them “The Vassals” due to their allegiance to the Democratic Political Party and the machine politics necessary to get elected in this town for the last century.

And if you don’t believe that last sentence, simply look up the political leanings of the current council below.

Political Affilition of Chicago City Council Members

Yes, class, we know it seems unbelieveable but it’s real. Unbelievably real.

The Fix Is In…

I suppose, though there’s no such thing as a “good” amount of corruption, reality and nature tells us that corruption will always occur everywhere in some form. Still, the Chicago City Council harbors obscene amounts. Year after year, the names may change but the rackets stay the same and yet no one, other than a few wannabe reformers and politicians who merely pay lip service to reform when it conveniently serves them, attempts to even talk about it.

Why does Chicago allow this type of corruption to continue? Why do business owners and residents alike, cede so much of where they work and live, their home, to the whims of such a shamelessly ambitious and corrupt legislative body?

How do we fix it? Can it ever be fixed?

It’s likely that the only way for the citizens of Chicago to reduce the bootprint of its City Council is by citywide referendum. It would take only 80,000 signatures to put it on the ballot and get the ball rolling. Bill Daley proposed as much in his run for Mayor last year.

To make it easy, I propose placing the population per seat cap at 150,000 residents per ward. This would reduce the city council to approximately 18 members, more than enough to run a city the size of Chicago as evidenced by our list above, I would continue to give the elected Mayor of Chicago the tie-breaker vote on any major issues.

Would reducing the size of the City Council entirely eliminate corruption?

Of course not, don’t be silly. This is Chicago and this is the Chicago Way, after all, but until someone stops laughing off the Chicago Way it will never end.

Shrinking the size of city council would allow for far greater accountability and shine a larger and brighter spotlight on those elected officials who try to use every trick in the Chicago Way handbook to enrich themselves and hook the taxpayer. No doubt, there would still be hands reaching for the cookie jar but there would be far less hands and far more cookies left after they were caught.

It would force more flexibility to compromise, and put more pressure on elected officials to not be so myopic. It would eliminate much of the high-school cafeteria cliqueishness that seeps into the chambers far too often and is an ugly look for a supposedly world-class city.

If anything, it would make our city government more efficient and allow for the city council to address the city’s most pressing issues on a faster timeline.

I know what you’re thinking.

I’m not being naive. Convincing a Chicago politician to vote themselves out of a job, and vote their families and their friends out of the Park Walking Picnic Cake Inspector positions they’ve been given, is a non-starter. Asking anyone to vote themselves out of any type of paycheck is a fool’s errand (cough cough), and no one with the aspirations required for council will ever even wish this to a vote let alone call it.

So why waste the time talking about it?

For nearly 100 years, there have been too many crooks in the kitchen. Crooks that have run this town directly into the quagmire it’s in and has been in for decades. And now, particularly now, the nonsense coming out of the council on a near daily basis does nothing more than exacerbate all the other difficult issues this city already deals with on a daily basis.

Now is the time to send your local elected officials a message that you’re done with the political games. Fire them. There is nothing you can do that will send a greater political message, there is no better way to enunciate that you’re done with the theatrics and showmanship that makes 121 N LaSalle look more like a circus tent than it does a city hall.

Fire them.

Or not.

At least we won’t have to send in the clowns. They’re already there.

Notes & References

Enjoying these posts? Subscribe for more!

Subscribe Now

>>>#ad: Don't Miss Today's BEST Amazon Deals!
Originally Appeared Here

Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker has formally announced his re-election campaign this week, and while he spent more than $170 million during the 2018 race, it is unclear just how far he’s going to be willing to dig into his wallet for this campaign.

Pritzker, who will be looking for a second term as governor in next year’s election, demurred when asked by NBC 5’s Mary Ann Ahern about how much he’d be willing to spend in the 2022 race, and said that he’s focused solely on running a “robust” campaign and on trying to help down-ticket Democrats win their races.

“I’m focused on running a robust campaign, and to make sure that we elect Democrats up and down the ticket, not just myself,” he said. “We’ve got Constitutional officers who are running for re-election, and people who are running for county board seats, and state rep and state senate (so I’ll spend) like I did in 2018 when we created Blue Wave Illinois to help everybody up and down the ticket.”

According to campaign finance records, Pritzker spent $171.5 million of his own money during his 2018 bid to unseat former Gov. Bruce Rauner, who also spent significant sums in his unsuccessful re-election campaign.

Pritzker has already drawn a Democratic challenger in the 2022 primary, as Beverly Miles, a Chicago nurse and US Army veteran, has announced a campaign for the nomination. At least three Republicans have already jumped into the field, including State Sen. Darren Bailey, who filed several legal challenges against Pritzker’s executive orders during the coronavirus pandemic, as well as businessman Gary Rabine and former State Sen. Paul Schimpf.

All three Republican candidates have been vocal in their opposition to Pritzker, with Bailey accusing the governor of “attempting to buy” the election.

“Today, our failed liberal Gov. J.B. Pritzker announced he’s going to attempt to buy another election,” Bailey said in a press release. “Billionaires like Pritzker cannot relate to the struggles of working Illinois and families.”

Pritzker dismissed such criticism, saying that his election spending will solely be a matter of getting his, along with the Democratic Party’s, message out in Illinois.

“I’m just focused on making sure we get the message out there,” he said.

Pritzker also said that he will still plan to help Democrats across the country during the upcoming midterm elections, but emphasized that he did not discuss strategy or finances with President Joe Biden when the two met at the White House last week.

“I’ve always been a supporter of Democrats across the nation,” he said.

>>>#ad: Don't Miss Today's BEST Amazon Deals!
Originally Appeared Here

Get more in-depth, daily coverage of Chicago politics at The Daily Line.

Aldermen over the weekend appeared within striking distance of a deal with Mayor Lori Lightfoot on a blueprint to establish civilian oversight of the Chicago Police Department, an agreement that has eluded the parties for more than a year. 

Negotiations were still underway as of Sunday evening. If the camps hammer out an agreement by Tuesday, an ordinance could clear the City Council on Wednesday, dispensing with the thorny issue before the council’s August recess. If they fall short, it wouldn’t be the first time a compromise made it inches from the finish line before falling apart.  

On March 6, 2020, Lightfoot’s staff was preparing to roll out a major policy victory, culminating from months of negotiations over how to design a civilian board that could oversee policy and leadership of the Chicago Police Department.  

The mayor’s communications team was exchanging kudos for a round of positive press suggesting a deal was at hand. The Sun-Times quoted Grassroots Alliance for Police Accountability (GAPA) coordinator Desmon Yancy saying he was “very excited” to have struck an agreement with the city on a plan that would “transform public safety and policing across Chicago.”   

It was a welcome dose of good news for the mayor’s team on the same day a teacher’s aide at Vaughn Occupational High School tested positive for the novel coronavirus, marking one of the city’s first documented cases.  

But by Monday, the deal had collapsed. 

RELATED: Years in the making, showdown set over civilian oversight of CPD   

Adam Gross, an attorney and lead negotiator with GAPA,  got a call from Lightfoot’s office on March 9 alerting him to some tweaks attorneys in the city’s Department of Law made to the ordinance, including a clause saying the mayor would get “final determination” over policy decisions if the civilian commission hit a stalemate with the police department.  

Gross sent an alarmed email to Deputy Mayor for Public Safety Susan Lee, the mayor’s lead negotiator on police oversight, saying his group never agreed that “the Commission needs to move forward with whatever the Mayor says.” The email was one of thousands of internal messages unearthed by a hack of the Jones Day law firm in April.  

“You added final late last week and never said that’s what it means,” Gross wrote. “That’s changing something huge for GAPA, based on one word, at the eleventh hour, without explanation,” Gross added. 

 “I asked to add final because I thought that is what we agreed on,” Lee replied, adding that it would only apply to rare cases when the commission and department were locked in stalemate.  

But Gross dug in, saying the “GAPA groups have now discussed the issue and affirmed that this principle is foundational and will not move forward without it.”  

New compromise in the offing 

The disagreement was never resolved. But 16 months later, Lightfoot and aldermen behind the grassroots Empowering Communities for Public Safety ordinance — a successor to GAPA — could be on the verge of striking a compromise that would allow them to finally fulfill the mayor’s 100-day campaign promise.  

The City Council Committee on Public Safety is scheduled to reconvene at 5 p.m. Tuesday to vote on the compromise ordinance, which Ald. Roderick Sawyer (6) said he and Ald. Harry Osterman (48) would spend the weekend negotiating with Lightfoot’s office.   

RELATED: Potential ‘compromise’ on civilian oversight of CPD brewing as committee set to meet Friday  

Sawyer told aldermen during the Friday public safety committee meeting that he and Osterman met with representatives from the mayor’s office, who earlier in the week shared the draft of a potential compromise ordinance that’s “about 80-85 percent” complete.  

“We are working tirelessly in getting this done, and I believe we are extremely close,” Sawyer told his colleagues on Friday. He added that “we believe [the draft] gets us almost there,” but both sides needed the weekend “to get this nailed down to have something to present” on Tuesday. 

Lightfoot wrote in a written statement on Friday that “recently, there has been significant progress made between relevant stakeholders and I look forward to continuing the conversation over the weekend in an effort to reach consensus on a path forward.” 

The mayor said she is “firmly committed to passing a comprehensive, effective, and workable form of civilian oversight of the Chicago Police Department and its relevant accountability agencies.” 

The 27-page draft — circulated among aldermen and obtained by The Daily Line on Friday — would empower the civilian commission to draft and mandate police department policy. The mayor would be able to reject the commission’s policymaking decisions, but the City Council could then override her veto by a two-thirds vote. 

Finance committee chair and Lightfoot ally Ald. Scott Waguespack (32) endorsed that model on Thursday, telling The Daily Line that empowering the mayor with a check by the council reflects “the same thing that can happen now on other ordinances.”  

The Empowering Communities for Public Safety proposal itself is the result of a compromise between the previously competing GAPA and Civilian Police Accountability Council (CPAC) ordinances. The two coalitions introduced their combined proposal in March, and Lightfoot introduced her counterproposal in May, eight months after announcing she was breaking off negotiations with the GAPA group. 

Among the sharpest differences between Lightfoot’s proposal and the Empowering Communities for Public Safety ordinance was a discrepancy over who would have final say on police department policy, with the mayor long arguing it should rest in her office while grassroots activists and ECPS sponsors have insisted the civilian-led commission should have final say. 

If approved by the public safety committee on Tuesday, the compromise ordinance would go to the full City Council for a vote Wednesday morning.  

Ald. Raymond Lopez (15) expressed his “frustration” on Friday that aldermen will discuss “probably the most significant” civilian oversight plan in the city’s history at 5 p.m. the day before it goes to City Council, saying it “seems ridiculous…that is the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard.” 

Both Lopez and Ald. Nicholas Sposato (38) voted “no” on the motion to recess the meeting and reconvene Tuesday evening. 

Multiple speakers expressed frustration during the meeting’s public comment period that an oversight ordinance had not yet been passed, and Sawyer said sponsors of the ECPS ordinance are “wanting to do this before we adjourn for the summer. We want this done by Wednesday at the full City Council meeting.” 

GAPA emails among those hacked, published in April   

A review by The Daily Line of 475 hacked internal emails, supplemented by interviews with multiple members of the GAPA coalition and former officials in Lightfoot’s administration, offer a rare glimpse at the grinding process by which civilian police oversight went from a lofty campaign promise to an ordinance on the brink of passage to a political dead end, leaving the issue open for more than a year.   

The open government group Distributed Denial of Secrets published the more than four gigabits of emails on April 19 after identifying them among a cache that had been stolen from the law firm Jones Day and shared by unknown hackers. Lightfoot has declined to comment on any of the emails, saying she does not want to “credit them as a credible news source” and warning that the emails may have been fabricated.   

The Daily Line shared all GAPA-related emails with their senders or recipients in an effort to verify their legitimacy. None doubted the credibility of the emails.   

The original GAPA ordinance grew out of the Police Accountability Task Force convened by former Mayor Rahm Emanuel in 2016. The task force was chaired by Lightfoot, then the president of the Chicago Police Board, and Lightfoot supported the police oversight plan through her 2019 mayoral run.   

Sawyer and Ald. Harry Osterman (48) introduced a version of the ordinance (SO2019-4132) on June 12, 2019. The plan envisioned a three-member District Area Council elected for each of the city’s 22 police districts, whose members would help appoint members of a citywide police oversight commission. The District Area Councils and citywide commission largely remained the same in the most recent iteration of the Empowering Communities for Public Safety ordinance.

During the first months of Lightfoot’s administration, her staff kept a weekly progress calendar to track promises the new mayor had committed to dispatching during her first 100 days — including establishing police oversight. Lee attended regular negotiation sessions accompanied by Lightfoot’s chief of staff Maurice Classen or Chicago Police Department chief of staff Robert Boik. On the other side of the table were up to a dozen GAPA negotiators, typically with Gross at the center.

The summer of 2019 brought to the forefront legal questions over the District Area Council elections and uncertainty over whether the City Council would need a supermajority vote to add new election infrastructure. The legal thicket pushed back negotiations by months, and by mid-summer it became clear the administration would not hit its 100-day deadline.   

But by February 2020, the two parties had come to a tentative agreement. In a Feb. 21 email, Gross sketched out a nine-part bulleted list, drawing up a timeline of negotiating procedures between the police department and the civilian commission over new department policies.

“If the Commission likes what gets drafted, they’re done. The Commission can vote on the policy,” one point reads. “If the Commission doesn’t like it, then they continue to have to have good faith negotiations until they work it out.”   

Gross added in the sequence that if negotiations became deadlocked, then “after some period of time…the Commission can notify the Mayor.” If the mayor agreed with the commission, it could direct the commission to vote on a policy. If she did not, the commission would “return to the negotiating table and continue to try to build consensus with CPD.”   

“That is my understanding of the proposal as well,” Lee responded five minutes later.      

Yancy wrote back to Lee on Feb. 29 that he was “happy to report” the GAPA coalition had voted that day to “move forward in support” of an ordinance Lee had sent earlier in the week. 

“We look forward to working with you to address these issues and to pass a transformative ordinance on March 18, 2020,” Yancy closed.  

The GAPA negotiators thought they had agreed to a model that would give the commission the final say in policy decisions. But officials in Lightfoot’s administration affirmed, both in the internal emails and in interviews, that they always intended for the mayor to have tie-breaking authority on disagreements between the department and the civilian commission.  

City attorney Scott Spears sent an email on March 6, 2020 to Lee, Lightfoot adviser Michael Milstein and Assistant Corporation Counsel Jeff Levine saying Spears had made “a few minor edits” to the ordinance, including the “Addition of ‘final determination’ to policy-making process when Mayor is involved.” He attached a red-lined version of the ordinance.   

Levine followed up in a March 9 email to Lee and Milstein saying the issue of mayoral control is “the one biggie for me — the commission could thwart or hamper effective CPD functioning though [sic] issuing unhelpful [general orders] or blocking necessary ones.”  

That was the same day Gross pounced on the addition of the word “final,” saying it violated a “foundational” principle of his coalition.  

Lightfoot vs. aldermen on policymaking veto power 

Even if the mayor’s administration had come to an agreement with GAPA in March 2020, there was no guarantee their proposal would have passed out of the public safety committee on March 10, emails show. 

Over two years of negotiations, Lightfoot has publicly and repeatedly backed up her insistence that she should have the final say on matters of police policy developed by a civilian commission.  

“There has to be accountability, but we can’t divorce accountability from not just me as mayor, but any mayor,” Lightfoot said when asked about the legislation in March. “I wear the jacket, as every mayor does, for violence in the city, for crime in the city. And the notion that we are going to outsource that to someone else and have no responsibility, no ability to impact it — I don’t know anybody who thinks that that’s a good idea.”  

Many aldermen disagree. 

Following a round of aldermanic briefings on the ordinance during the week of March 2, Jerel Dawson, deputy director of the mayor’s office of intergovernmental affairs, sent a series of notes to Lee and Milstein reflecting a wide array of concerns aldermen had aired. Among them were a question listed from Ald. Rossana Rodriguez-Sanchez (33): “Why have Commission if Mayor has ultimate say?”  

Dawson on March 9 sent Lee and Milstein a whip count that marked four public safety committee members as a “yes” on the ordinance, including committee chair Ald. Chris Taliaferro (29). Dawson listed another seven aldermen as “leaning no” or “likely no,” and seven others as “undecided” or “TBD.” 

“Doesn’t look like this is going tomorrow in committee but will keep you posted,” Lee responded. 

Ald. Matt Martin (47), whom Dawson indicated was “leaning no,” told The Daily Line earlier this year that he was prepared to vote against any oversight measure that left the mayor with final authority over police policy.  

“When you look at the failed policies with our various public safety institutions over the years, those have been policies that typically CPD and/or the mayor’s office have had the final say over,” Martin said. “You don’t have to look very far to find examples of how that’s gone wrong…and whoever the mayor has been, if they consistently did an exceptional job of creating new policy and modifying existing policy, I don’t think we’d be in the position we are in today, with the police department subject to a federal consent decree.”  

A week after the proposal stalled in committee on March 10, the city was frozen in pandemic-induced lockdown.  

Emails show Lee and other administration officials made an attempt weeks later to revive talks — but their ordinance never made it back to the public safety committee. Stakeholders acknowledged that talks between city leaders and GAPA were further strained amid the summer 2020 uprisings following the murder of George Floyd.  

Even as the odds waned, officials pointed to the looming 2020 election as a deadline for when the city needed to set in place a commission structure that could be subject to elections.   

“What should we do with GAPA?” Lee wrote in a March 27 email to Classen. “If we don’t do it in April, it won’t get done for three years.”

Lee and Gross declined to comment for this article. 

Related:  

>>>#ad: Don't Miss Today's BEST Amazon Deals!
Originally Appeared Here

Get more in-depth, daily coverage of Chicago politics at The Daily Line.

CHICAGO — The Chicago Plan Commission is set for a marathon meeting Thursday as commissioners prepare to consider approving the next phase of the Roosevelt Square mixed-income development, a controversial luxury housing development in Uptown and nearly a dozen additional development proposals combining for more than 1,000 new homes across the city.

Also on the agenda for the meeting set to begin at 10 a.m. is the long-awaited renovation of the Ramova Theatre in Bridgeport.  

The proposal (O2021-1102) from Related Midwest to build 222 new apartments and rehab 184 apartments on the properties around the intersection of Roosevelt Road and Taylor Street on the Near West Side in the 25th and 28th wards represents the next phase in the Roosevelt Square development. Redevelopment of the site as Roosevelt Square began in 2004, according to a presentation from the city’s Department of Planning and Development.  

Plans for the next phase of the Roosevelt Square mixed-income development are being built on the site of Chicago Housing Authority’s former Addams, Brooks, Loomis, Abbott (ABLA) Homes and were unveiled earlier this year.  

The developer is proposing to build a new six-story, 67-unit residential building with ground-floor commercial space and 33 parking spaces at 1002 S. Racine Ave.; two new six-story, 70-unit residential buildings with 40 parking spaces each at 1257 W. Roosevelt Rd. and 1357 W. Roosevelt Rd.; and the rehabilitation of the building at 1322 W. Taylor St. to include 15 residential units as well as the National Public Housing Museum and a 37-space parking lot.  

According to the presentation, a community market was secured for the proposed new residential building at 1002 S. Racine Ave. as the result of community input.   

Additionally, 40 percent of homes will be Chicago Housing Authority units, 25 percent of the units will be affordable to households making 60-80 percent of Area Median Income and 35 percent of the units will be built at market rate.  

Block Club reported in March that Roosevelt Square’s second phase, which includes the proposal to be considered Thursday, was met with mixed reactions from residents on the Near West Side, citing concerns the mix of affordable housing in this phase is not enough.  

4600 Marine Drive  

A controversial proposal (O2021-1931) by Lincoln Property Company would bring a 12-story, 314-unit residential building at 4600 N. Marine Dr. in the 46th Ward in the surface parking lot at Weiss Hospital. Some neighbors of the proposed development have stood in strong opposition to the plan, saying Uptown does not need more luxury housing as poorer renters are pushed out, according to reporting from Block Club.  

According to a presentation from the city’s Department of Planning and Development, the developer has reduced the building height from 14 stories to 12 stories, reduced the number of apartments from 350 to 314, “activated” the Wilson Avenue street space with a bike room and glass enclosure, incorporated bird safety and low reflective glass, incorporated rideshare management and committed to adding electric vehicle charging stations in the garage, among other changes.  

The courtyard building would include landscaped terraces on some floors and building amenities including a “dog room with direct access to outside” and yoga and fitness facilities, according to the presentation. Parking is located “internal to the building,” according to the presentation.  

To meet the city’s Affordable Requirements Ordinance, the developer is planning to offer eight on-site apartments affordable to households earning 60 percent of the Area Median Income and would contribute nearly $3.1 million in lieu of including the remaining required 23 units.  

Ramova Theatre  

Members of the Plan Commission are also set to consider a proposal (​​O2021-2057) from Tyler Nevius to renovate the existing Ramova Theatre at 3506-20 S. Halsted St. in the 11th Ward.   

Nevius is planning a 1,800-person capacity live entertainment venue, an approximately 4,000-square-foot restaurant and an approximately 5,000-square-foot brewery.   

The COVID-19 pandemic put Nevius’ plans on hold during the past year, but the Sun-Times reported in March that he wants to proceed with his plans.   

The $28 million restoration of the Ramova Theatre would be a “catalyst for the rejuvenation of the Bridgeport neighborhood with a truly transformative mixed-use development,” according to a presentation from the city’s planning department.  

Fulton St. Co. proposals  

Developer Fulton St. Co. has two proposals up for consideration on its eponymous street on Thursday, including one plan (O2021-1027) to build a 34-story building with 433 residential units and ground-floor commercial space at 1215 W. Fulton Market in the 27th Ward. The $160 million proposal includes ​80 accessory parking spaces, electric vehicle charging stations and 112 bicycle parking spaces.   

The developer plans to build on-site all 87 affordable units required under the Near North Pilot of the Affordable Requirements Ordinance, 43 of which will be available for households earning 60 percent of the Area Median Income and 44 units available at 100 percent Area Median Income, according to a presentation from the city’s planning department. 

Another Fulton St. Co. proposal (O2021-304) would build an 11-story building with ground floor commercial space and offices on the above floors and to renovate an existing historic six-story building to house commercial or office space on the ground floor with office space above at 917 W. Fulton Market in the 27th Ward. Combined, the two buildings are set to include 17,860 square feet of retail space, 372,662 square feet of office space,111 parking spaces and 73 bike parking spaces, according to the development application and a presentation from the city’s planning department.   

An atrium is proposed to connect the existing historic building and the proposed new building, the presentation shows.  

Plan Commissioners are also set to consider the following items:  

• A proposal (O2020-1898) from City Club Apartments to build a 19-story and a 6-story residential building that would be connected at the base to include 333 residential units, a 5,000-square-foot restaurant with outdoor patio on the ground level and 145 parking spaces at 3630-36 N. Lake Shore Drive in the 46th Ward. The developer plans to include 11 affordable units on-site, according to a presentation from the city’s planning department. The residential component of the $100 million development would include fitness space, a pool, saunas, open space, dog runs and other recreational amenities, according to the presentation.  
• A proposal (O2021-1968) from FRC Realty to build a 39-story, 303-unit residential building at 1017-1039 N. LaSalle St. in the 2nd Ward. Based on feedback, the developer has decreased the building height by about 40 feet and reduced its density from 406 units to 303 units, according to a presentation from the city’s planning department. Of the 30 affordable units required by the city’s Affordable Requirement Ordinance, the developer is planning to include the minimum eight units on-site and pay $4.1 million in in-lieu fees for the additional 22 affordable units. According to the presentation, the Annunciation Greek Orthodox Cathedral at 1017 N. LaSalle St. and the six-unit apartment building and coach house at 1015 N. LaSalle St. will both remain.  
• A proposal (O2021-2086) by Regal Mile Studios to build a film studio and “supporting offices” including a communication service establishment, an office, parking space and other uses at 1431-1525 E. 77th St. in the 5th Ward near the Chicago Skyway. According to a presentation from the city’s planning department, Regal Mile Studios added a public plaza to the development at the community’s request. The proposal includes multiple studios and a one-story green room. In addition to 250 construction jobs, the film studio is expected to bring about 300 production jobs and 34 permanent full-time studio jobs, according to the presentation.  
• A proposal from Elam Industries (SO2020-3873) to build a five-story, 10-unit residential building with eight interior parking spaces and two outdoor parking spaces at 3006-3012 E. 78th St. in the 7th Ward. The property has long sat vacant, according to a presentation form the city’s planning department.   
• A proposed amendment (O2021-2102) to a planned development by Art in Motion Charter School to “allow for a temporary school use” at 7522 S. Greenwood Ave. in the 8th Ward, according to the Plan Commission agenda. The school is seeking to accommodate its 9th and 10th grade students in an existing two-story building on the property while its permanent school at 7501 S. East End is undergoing expansion, according to a presentation from the city’s planning department.  
• A proposal (02021-2145) from Illuminarium Experiences to allow for commercial uses within the Crystal Garden space at Navy Pier at 600 E. Grand Ave. in the 42nd Ward. Illuminarium Experiences is proposing to bring “motion picture production and virtual reality” to the Navy Pier space allowing “visitors to experience real world, filmed content” including a safari and the planet Mars “in an immersive environment, all without the use of glasses or wearable hardware,” according to a presentation from the city’s planning department. The company uses a canvas 350 feet long and 22 feet tall, “state-of-the-art laser projection,” spatial audio, 3D-touch technology in the floors, combined with scent and other technologies to “engage one’s entire visual and sensual framework,” according to the presentation. Crain’s reported on the proposed immersive experience in June as a way for Navy Pier to attract more visitors. The company plans to invest about $30 million in the Chicago location and $15 million to $20 million annually to bring new “spectacle content” to all its locations.  
• A proposal (O2021-1957) from RIU Hotels to build a new 28-story, 388-key hotel at 150 E. Ontario St. in the 42nd Ward. Based on feedback, the developer has pared back the number of guest rooms from 410 to 388, reduced the building height from 390 feet to 345 feet, removed the ballroom and meeting rooms and coordinated with the Chicago Department of Transportation on a guest loading zone, according to a presentation from the city’s planning department. The development is projected to cost $145 million and would bring approximately 150 permanent hotel jobs to the city’s downtown, the presentation shows. 
• A zoning application (O2021-2467) by Benedictine Sisters of Chicago to allow the “future redevelopment of a senior living facility” at 7430 N. Ridge Blvd. in the 49th Ward. No immediate changes are proposed at the existing Benedictine Sisters convent. 

A proposal (O2021-1953) from Glenstar for a 297-unit residential development at 8535 W. Higgins Rd. was on Thursday’s Plan Commission agenda, but the proposal will be deferred until next month, officials announced. Aldermen on the City Council Committee on Zoning, Landmarks and Building Standards voted last month to defer a zoning change until next year in an attempt to sabotage the plan at the request of Ald. Anthony Napolitano (41), who is opposed to the plan.

Related: Committee’s move to block O’Hare-area apartments could risk fresh lawsuit from developer, officials warn

>>>#ad: Don't Miss Today's BEST Amazon Deals!
Originally Appeared Here

Members of the Chicago City Council meet on Wednesday, May 26, 2021. (WTTW News)

Allowing members of the Chicago City Council to hire and fire ward superintendents violates court-imposed restrictions designed to prevent city jobs from being doled out to political supporters, according to the Chicago’s watchdog.

Inspector General Joseph Ferguson’s conclusion after a two-year probe brought a furious reaction from some alderpeople, who want to hang on to the power to pick the person charged with responding to complaints, snow removal and trash removal in their wards, since they’ll be held responsible on Election Day by voters.

The change could mean a significant loss of power – and clout — for members of the City Council, many of whom relish their positions as the ultimate authority in their ward, and would serve to significantly curtail aldermanic prerogative — the largely unwritten, decades-old practice giving aldermen a veto over ward issues. Efforts by Mayor Lori Lightfoot to do just that have been unsuccessful.

Ferguson, who will leave office in October after serving 12 years as the city’s watchdog, said in a statement that the Department of Human Resources and the Department of Streets and Sanitation had already agreed to update the city’s hiring plan to comply with the Shakman Decree, which governs political hiring and firing in Chicago.

Those changes are designed to comply with the law while giving alderpeople input on who should be hired because they “must routinely work in close coordination with their assigned ward superintendents” but not the final say, Ferguson said in a statement.

Ward superintendents — who report not to the alderperson, but the commissioner of the Department of Streets and Sanitation — have the power to cite individuals and businesses for a host of infractions, including illegal dumping and snow-covered sidewalks.

The power of alderpeople to hire and fire ward superintendents — who earn between $75,400 and $121,200 annually — stemmed from their traditional role focused on hyperlocal issues that are of the utmost importance to residents of their wards and virtually no interest to anyone outside the boundaries, like business sign permits.

Despite efforts by Lightfoot that have advanced in fits and starts, alderpeople have consistently bucked her efforts to chip away at aldermanic prerogative. The City Council voted 25-24 in June to reject a proposal backed by the mayor that would have given the commissioner of the Department of Business Affairs and Consumer Protection the final say on permits for signs in the public way from a larger package of new laws.

While Lightfoot said the measure was designed to reduce red tape faced by businesses, alderpeople refused to change rules that have been in place for decades that require each sign application to be approved by the full City Council.

That requires the support of the ward’s alderperson, since other members of the City Council rarely — if ever — overrule their colleagues on purely local issues, following the unwritten rules of aldermanic prerogative. 

Lightfoot acknowledged at an unrelated news conference Thursday that aldermen jealously guard their power to pick their ward superintendent, and called the issue “the third rail” of Chicago politics.

Lightfoot said members of the City Council should have the power to address quality-of-life issues, which is at the center of the duties of the ward superintendent.

A ward superintendent should be “aligned” with the alderperson’s vision for the community and be familiar with the community, Lightfoot said.

“Taking away that tool from the alderman, given the localized needs that are there, that doesn’t make sense to me,” Lightfoot said.

Lightfoot’s remarks highlighted another point of conflict between her and Ferguson, both former federal prosecutors who have known each other for decades.

After Lightfoot took office, she and the city’s watchdog found themselves at odds over several issues, most focusing on the city’s lagging efforts to overhaul the police department in the wake of 17-year-old Laquan McDonald’s murder in 2014 and a 2017 Department of Justice investigation that found Chicago police officers routinely violated the constitutional rights of Black and Latino Chicagoans.

City hall observers on Thursday were surprised that Lightfoot objected to a finding that would serve to scale back the power of alderpeople. Her first act as mayor was to strip aldermen of the power to block a host of licenses and permits.

During the 2019 campaign, Lightfoot repeatedly said it was necessary to reduce the power of aldermen to root out corruption, but never proposed a plan to change the city’s massive zoning code to end aldermanic prerogative and does not have enough votes to push it through.

Contact Heather Cherone: @HeatherCherone | (773) 569-1863 | [email protected]

>>>#ad: Don't Miss Today's BEST Amazon Deals!
Originally Appeared Here

The American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois on Thursday sued the Chicago Police Department for the release of information related to the department’s expanded social media monitoring task force announced last summer.

The lawsuit, filed in Cook County Circuit Court, alleges that CPD violated the Illinois Freedom of Information Act when it “failed to release any requested records regarding its expanded social media monitoring task force” to the ACLU last year.

With the lawsuit, the ACLU is seeking an order requiring Chicago police to release said records, pay civil penalties and attorney fees, among other relief.

At issue is the social media task force Chicago police and Mayor Lori Lightfoot announced in August 2020 following protests in Chicago and around the world after a police officer killed George Floyd by kneeling on his neck for nearly 9 minutes in Minneapolis in late May.

Chicago also saw multiple rounds of looting throughout the city in the summer months, after which Lightfoot and police unveiled the new task force to monitor online activity that could indicate any future plans.

“As we’ve seen over these past few months, social media platforms have repeatedly been used to organize large groups of people to engage in illegal activity,” Lightfoot said in announcing the task force on Aug. 14.

Lightfoot said the 20-person unit within the Crime Prevention and Information Center would be focused on 24-hour social media monitoring of all open source information, reviewing key term searches and relevant pages or accounts.

The ACLU said it sent CPD a FOIA request on Aug. 26, 2020, seeking public records related to the department’s expanded social media monitoring, including the purpose for the initiative, the criteria under which they would monitor particular accounts, how that information would be used and more.

The ACLU and CPD corresponded multiple times over the scope and nature of the request, culminating in CPD’s denial of the FOIA request on the grounds that it was exempt because complying would “compromise” law enforcement’s investigative work and effectiveness.

In its lawsuit, the ACLU argued that the exemptions Chicago police cited don’t justify withholding the records requested and that as such, CPD has violated FOIA.

“CPD’s record on respecting personal privacy is abysmal,” attorney Ariana Bushweller, who was was part of the legal team filing the lawsuit, said in a statement. “With that history, CPD must provide public records that answer basic questions about why the City is monitoring social media accounts, who has access to the information collected, and how the information is being used. The public needs this information to learn whether this latest surveillance is wrongfully targeting Black and Brown people, as has too often been the case across the country, including the surveillance of Black activists.”

The ACLU of Illinois has previously expressed concerns over police monitoring of online activity, criticizing CPD in 2019 over the department’s use of aggregation companies such as Dunami and Geofeedia, which can comb through vast amounts of data from social media sites like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and many others, and can plot them on a map to look for trends.

Despite the criticism, Chicago police have expressed their support for the continuing use of such software, saying it’s particularly key to gang enforcement efforts as communication has shifted online.

>>>#ad: Don't Miss Today's BEST Amazon Deals!
Originally Appeared Here

Illinois on Thursday became the first state in the U.S. to ban police from lying or using deceptive tactics while interrogating minors.

Gov. J.B. Pritzker signed Senate Bill 2122 into law, prohibiting law enforcement from using deceptive tactics against those they are interrogating who are under 18 years of age.

Pritzker’s office said in a statement that while the use of deceptive tactics like lying was deemed permissible in 1969, members of the 7th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals as well as the Illinois Court of Appeals have since condemned the practice “because of the risk it poses in producing false confessions.”

Terrill Swift, whose conviction was vacated in 2011 after he served 15 years in prison based on a false confession to a crime he didn’t commit, said at the bill signing that he believed the new law could have saved his life.

“This bill, I truly believe, could have saved my life,” Swift said. “When it was first brought to me, it touched me in that sense, that it could have saved my life. But the reality is, I can’t get what I got back. So moving forward I want to try and help make sure that this doesn’t happen again.”

“This happens so much,” he continued. “And there’s something that needs to change. Granted, this bill passing is a great step but we still have so much work to do. We still have so much work to do because there are so many brothers and sisters still there now wrongfully. And we can all agree that one day in prison wrongfully is too long.”

The measure’s original sponsors, state Sen. Robert Peters and state Rep. Justin Slaughter, garnered bipartisan support for the bill that culminated in a near-unanimous vote to pass it in both houses during the spring legislative session.

Though few Americans realize it, police regularly deceive suspects during questioning to try to secure confessions, from saying DNA placed them at the scene of a crime to claiming eyewitnesses identified them as being the perpetrator. Detectives also can lie about the consequences of confessing, saying, for instance, that admitting responsibility is a quick ticket home.

Minors – who have been found to be two to three times more likely to confess to crimes they didn’t commit – are especially vulnerable to such pressure tactics, said Laura Nirider, co-director of the Center on Wrongful Convictions at Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law, who consulted on the bill together with the national Innocence Project and the Illinois Innocence Project.

Though it is currently legal for police in all 50 states to lie during interrogations, Oregon and New York are considering similar legislation, said Rebecca Brown, policy director at the national Innocence Project.

Illinois has in recent years uncovered at least 100 wrongful convictions predicated on false confessions, 31 of them involving people under 18 years of age.

SB 2122 was supported not only by individuals who themselves falsely confessed to crimes, but also by the state’s Chiefs of Police, the Illinois State’s Attorneys’ Association, and the Office of Cook County State’s Attorney Kim Foxx.

“Today is about putting words into action as we continue to work to correct the wrongs of the past – wrongs inflicted by law enforcement, including prosecutors,” Foxx said in a statement Thursday. “True reform requires that lawmakers and prosecutors revisit past practices that have caused harm to ensure they never happen again. I commend the bill sponsors and advocates for championing the legislation and Governor Pritzker for advancing justice in Illinois.”

Pritzker signed SB 2122 along with three other measures: Senate Bill 64, which provides that anything said or done during restorative justice practices may not be used in a future proceeding without consent; Senate Bill 2129, which allows a county state’s attorney to petition for resentencing if an original sentence no longer “advances the interests of justice;” and House Bill 3587, which creates a task force to study ways to reduce Illinois’ prison population with resentencing.

“An essential tenet of good governance is recognizing the need to change the laws that have failed the people they serve. My administration has infused that value into everything we do,” Pritzker said in a statement. “The four bills I’m signing today advance the rights of some of our most vulnerable in our justice system and put Illinois at the forefront of the work to bring about true reform. Together, these initiatives move us closer to a holistic criminal justice system, one that builds confidence and trust in a system that has done harm to too many people for far too long.”

>>>#ad: Don't Miss Today's BEST Amazon Deals!
Originally Appeared Here

RAY HANANIA — Op-Ed writer, author, radio host, podcaster

Ray Hanania is an award winning political and humor columnist who analyzes American and Middle East politics, and life in general. He is an author of several books.

Hanania covered Chicago Politics and Chicago City Hall from 1976 through 1992 at the Daily Southtown and the Chicago Sun-Times. He began writing in 1975 publishing The Middle Eastern Voice newspaper in Chicago (1975-1977). He later published “The National Arab American Times” newspaper (2004-2007).

Hanania writes weekly columns on Middle East and American Arab issues as Special US Correspondent for the Arab News ArabNews.com, at TheArabDailyNews.com, and at SuburbanChicagoland.com. He has published weekly columns in the Jerusalem Post newspaper, YNetNews.com, Newsday, the Orlando Sentinel, Houston Chronical, and Arlington Heights Daily Herald.

Hanania is the recipient of four (4) Chicago Headline Club “Peter Lisagor Awards” for Column writing. In November 2006, he was named “Best Ethnic American Columnist” by the New American Media. In 2009, Hanania received the prestigious Sigma Delta Chi Award for Writing from the Society of Professional Journalists. He is the recipient of the MT Mehdi Courage in Journalism Award. He was honored for his writing skills with two (2) Chicago Stick-o-Type awards from the Chicago Newspaper Guild. In 1990, Hanania was nominated by the Chicago Sun-Times editors for a Pulitzer Prize for his four-part series on the Palestinian Intifada.

His writings have also been honored by two national Awards from ADC for his writing, and from the National Arab American Journalists Association.

Hanania is the US Special Correspondent for the Arab News Newspaper, covering Middle East and Arab American issues. He writes for the Southwest News newspaper group writing on mainstream American issues.

Click here to send Ray Hanania email.

>>>#ad: Don't Miss Today's BEST Amazon Deals!
Originally Appeared Here

(WTTW News)

It won’t be smoke-filled, but members of the Chicago City Council will head to a backroom at City Hall on July 26 to start crafting new ward boundaries that could shape Chicago politics for the next decade.

In order to use computers loaded with specialized mapmaking software, alderpeople will crowd into the so-called map room to craft the boundaries for each of Chicago’s 50 wards in much the same way they did in 2011 — finally rejecting calls, echoed by then-candidate Lori Lightfoot, to empower an independent commission to craft the maps and put an end to handshake deals between political rivals.

In January, Lightfoot called the process by which maps were drawn in 2011 “a relic of the past.” 

“If you look at the ward boundaries, they don’t make any sense and they don’t respect neighborhood boundaries,” Lightfoot said nearly six months ago. “Aldermen have a very specific role to play, and they should, but this can’t be a backroom, closed-door deal that the public has no insights into.”

The final ward maps will have the power to make or break the careers of individual politicians, and either ease — or exacerbate — the roiling tension between the Chicago City Council and Lightfoot, who has passed major policy initiatives on the slimmest of margins and suffered her first City Council defeat last month.

Lightfoot’s spokesperson did not respond Monday to a request for comment from WTTW News about the start of the ward remapping, or why she did not push for an independent commission as she promised during her successful 2019 campaign for mayor. Since taking office, Lightfoot has declined to endorse plans to craft an independent commission.

The new map would take effect in time for the 2023 municipal elections — assuming it is not blocked by a judge.

Even as the mapmaking begins, alderpeople will have to wait until Aug. 16 for data from the 2020 census to be released to city officials. That crucial data has been delayed for months by the COVID-19 pandemic as well as legal challenges brought by former President Donald Trump.

A new Chicago ward map will take effect in time for the 2023 municipal elections — assuming it is not blocked by a judge. (WTTW News via Google Maps)

While Gov. J.B. Pritzker signed into law new maps of districts for the state legislature, Illinois Supreme Court and Cook County Board of Review in June that were designed to cement Democratic control of the General Assembly, partisan advantage is not at the center of the debate over new Chicago ward maps.

Instead, the fight — which the City Council’s Latino Caucus signaled Monday would be contentious — will center on race, and the delicate balance of political power in a city with a population that is approximately one-third Black, one-third Latino and one-third white.

Neither the City Council’s Latino Caucus nor the Black Caucus endorsed calls to empower an independent commission to draw the maps, saying alderpeople were best equipped to make sure the maps are equitable.

“Chicago’s Latino population is strong, despite what we know is significant undercounting, and it’s important that our communities have the power to change the political structures that have long worked to disenfranchise communities of color,” said Ald. Roberto Maldonado (26th Ward), the chair of the Latino Caucus’ redistricting subcommittee.

Maldonado and other Latino members of the City Council have said the 2011 remap did not accurately reflect Chicago’s Latino population and vowed in January not to “get played again.”

The Latino Caucus has 13 members, and there are 13 wards where Latinos make up a majority of residents. Ald. Raymond Lopez (15th Ward) left the caucus in 2019.

At the same time, Ald. Jason Ervin (28th Ward), the chair of the 20-member Black Caucus, has vowed to maintain the 18 majority Black wards represented by Black alderpeople.

The remapping effort will be led by 8th Ward Ald. Michelle Harris, the chair of the City Council’s Rules Committee and Lightfoot’s floor leader. 

Harris faces a tough task in finding 41 votes for a map that groups approximately 54,000 residents into each ward that can pass muster with courts charged with ensuring Black and Latino Chicagoans can exercise their political power.

State law requires Chicago wards to be “nearly equal as practicable” while being as “contiguous” and “compact” as possible.

Harris did not respond to a request for comment from WTTW News about the remapping effort, which is the first she will oversee. In 2011, former Ald. Dick Mell (33rd Ward) led the process — aided by the now-indicted Ald. Ed Burke (14th Ward), who has seen his clout wane at City Hall as his legal woes mounted.

In 2011, members of the City Council’s Reform Caucus vowed to offer an alternative map but fell just short of blocking the map drawn by Mell and backed by former Mayor Rahm Emanuel.

In 2021, an alternative map could come from the 13-member Chicago Ward Advisory Redistricting Commission. Created by a coalition of community groups lead by Change Illinois, the commission has promised to draw a ward map “that is truly reflective of the diversity of Chicago.”

The decision by Harris to open the map room in two weeks — before census data is available and sooner than many alderpeople expected — will not change the commission’s timeline or effect members’ work, said Chaundra Van Dyk, project manager for Change Illinois.

The commission is determined to convince 10 aldermen to give up their power to draw the ward map and potentially consolidate their power and punish their enemies.

If the map crafted by Harris fails to get 41 votes, it would force a referendum that would put the competing maps up to a vote, officials said. The deadline to trigger a special election on ward maps is Dec. 1.

An effort led by the Harris and Ervin to change the threshold needed to approve the maps from 41 votes to 34 votes, or a two-thirds majority vote, fell short during the final days of the General Assembly.

Contact Heather Cherone: @HeatherCherone | (773) 569-1863 | [email protected]

>>>#ad: Don't Miss Today's BEST Amazon Deals!
Originally Appeared Here