Entries associated with the tag "Carrie Austin":

Who says the City Council doesn’t do anything except rubber stamp the mayor’s agenda and pass toothless resolutions praising cops and high school football champions? Sure, aldermen did all this today, but they also got at least seven other ithings done:

(1) Four months after consenting to tens of millions in property tax hikes, the council enthusiastically passed a resolution sponsored by budget committee chairman Carrie Austin urging home owners to contact the city’s Tax Assistance Center for help in determining if they can find a way to reduce their bills.

(2) The council unanimously voted in favor of creating two more TIF districts while the mayor proposed a third.

(3) Ed Burke's proposal to ban trans fats died long ago, but today he introduced an ordinance that would require fast food restaurants to display the calorie content of the food they serve. “Diabetes is raging in America. People need to change their lifestyles and change their habits, and people need to be aware of this,” he said. He shrugged off the possibility that people already have a hunch that Whoppers aren’t good for them, saying “You have to start someplace."

(4) Second Ward alderman Bob Fioretti appeared stunned at the succession of reporters who wanted to talk to him about his ordinance that would ban the small plastic bags often used by drug dealers. “Can you believe it?” he asked, shaking his head. Fioretti later agreed to hold the item because a couple of his colleagues wanted to look it over more carefully, but it’s all but a sure thing at the next meeting: “Even the big guy is saying, ‘Yeah, we ought to ban those things,’” Fioretti said, nodding toward the mayor.

(5) The aldermen agreed the city should pay $195,000 to a public housing resident who said police falsely arrested him and threatened him with a running chainsaw in 2004. They signed off on another settlement, for $190,000, to an 80-year-old woman who says she and her grandson were roughed up by police during an illegal search of their apartment in 2006.

(6) Without pause or comment the council signed off on Daley’s reappointments of two CTA board members for new six-year terms. Those are the guys who overseeing governance of the transit system that aldermen have repeatedly complained about and mayor himself recently called “costly and inefficient.”

(7) They celebrated—with cake—the 100th birthday of former alderman Leon Despres, who was often a lone voice of independence during the reign of the first Mayor Daley. A succession of aldermen who have little in common with Despres other than the title stood and praised him. “I suspect we have never had such an erudite member of this body,” said Burke. “I wish I could have had the distinguished career of Len Despres,” said 50th Ward alderman Berny Stone. “A lot of people could learn from someone who sticks to what he believes in like Len Depres,” said 33rd Ward alderman Richard Mell.

Angry demonstrators clogged the common space just outside City Council chambers Wednesday morning, protesting, among other things, the Daley administration's proposed tax increases on beer, wine, and spirits. "What's the most expensive ingredient in beer?" one sign said. "Taxes!" 

Protests or press conferences of some kind happen before nearly every full City Council meeting, but this one attracted some recent converts to civil disobedience, such as aldermen Eugene Schulter and Patrick Levar. Both are reliable Daley votes in the council, but this time both ripped the idea of taxing alcoholic beverages, saying that would only succeed in driving "mom-and-pop stores and taverns" out of the city.

It's obvious that the mayor's 2008 budget plan is going to have to change. Daley has even said so, announcing that he's willing to slash some of the nearly $300 million in proposed new taxes, including more than $100 million in property levies, and at least delay some spending, such as for additional cops and recycling services. The mayor is a skilled enough politician that he can present this as a thoughtful, generous compromise. In fact, he'd hardly  be the first public official to anger everyone with the specter of a gargantuan tax hike, then show apparent benevolence by implementing a slightly smaller one.

On the other hand, the mayor doesn't have a choice this time.

While some aldermen have moaned about the booze taxes, others have blasted the tax on bottled water or the jacked-up fines for parking violations, and just about everyone has run from the massive property tax increase.

Leading the property tax bitch-fest--it doesn't rise to the level of a "revolt" or even "coffee-cup rebellion"--are the northwest- and southwest-side white and Latino guys who are usually the mayor's closest allies. "The property tax stuff is no good," said 38th Ward alderman Tom Allen, who then asked this reporter for ideas to generate more revenue.

That's the problem right now: just about everybody agrees that the new taxes stink, but they don't know what else to do. Some aldermen have proposed things like scaling back a couple of the TIFs downtown, selling off city-owned plots of land, or fining people who hang signs without a permit, but these ideas don't have widespread support or won't generate enough to replace existing proposals. A few aldermen have groused that budget talks have so far focused on which ways to raise money rather than where fat can be trimmed. 

Most, though, have accepted Daley's argument that any significant cuts will keep Chicago from "moving forward," as his ongoing campaign slogan proclaims. "It's to the point where what used to take a day to get done is going to take a week," said 30th Ward alderman Ariel Reboyras.

But the mayor has to make some choices. He knows his budget doesn't have close to a council majority. Black and "independent" aldermen appear to be more open to many of the tax ideas than the mayor's usual friends, but they're only going to support them if Daley gives them a few gifts in return--such as additional funding for the Inspector General's office or an agreement to settle the police torture lawsuits. 

Daley's not going to make those deals. So instead he's got to appease the aldermen who represent the bungalow belt. "In this environment, there's not a lot the mayor can promise you--or threaten you with, which he never did openly, but it happened," said Brian Doherty, alderman of the conservative 41st Ward on the far northwest side. "The old patronage-type government is gone, there are new aldermen in the council, and people are against this property tax increase. It makes for an interesting time."

Doherty's prediction: "They'll keep lowering the property tax until they get 26 votes."

That's what other mayoral allies, such as council budget committee chair Carrie Austin, are already talking about.

But don't expect many more spending reductions. These aldermen are now hoping manna will drop from the sky. On the off chance that doesn't happen, they're wondering how high they can raise vehicle stickers and other fees, how fast parking meters can be leased to a private company, and what the odds are that the state will deliver Chicago a casino.

Mayor Daley's budget speech Wednesday made one point overwhelmingly clear, if it wasn't already: He has no fear of Chicago voters.

Why should he? Back in February, the mayor was reelected by winning every single ward and 71 percent of the votes cast citywide. While voters in a few wards took out their frustrations on their aldermen, choosing to send would-be reformers to the City Council, the last few months have shown that Daley has more than enough council support to ram through just about whatever he wants, from a police reform initiative that gives him more power over who's investigating allegations of misconduct to a new Office of Compliance that most observers believe undercuts the work of the independent Inspector General.

Daley can hardly be blamed for thinking citizens of this city have given him leave to run the place however he sees fit. They have.

So here are some of the consequences: nearly $300 million in new taxes, fines, and fees, affecting just about everyone who lives in the city or even passes through. Own a home or even rent one? You'll be paying more. Enjoy having a beer once in awhile? The beer tax is going up. Have a car here? You'll be paying more for your next parking tickets, which, as anyone who's been here awhile knows, are pretty much impossible to avoid. Comforted by the idea that you might get police to show up for an emergency? The charge on your phone bill to cover 911 is going up.

Mayor Daley explains that the new revenues are essential to "keep Chicago moving forward." That's the same slogan he used as his campaign theme last winter, and the mayor's strategy for winning this round appears to be the same as the one he employed to hold onto his throne: Show everybody they've got nowhere else to go.

In his budget address, Daley repeatedly compared Chicago to "other cities" where services have been cut and the quality of life is, by his estimation, lower. The message is that if you don't want Chicago to become Detroit or Cleveland, you're going to have to place your trust in the Daley administration, along with more of your money.

"During these tight times, cities and states around the nation are increasingly under pressure to cut services and make substantial layoffs to balance their budgets, steps we've avoided in this budget, so far," Daley said. "I believe that the people of Chicago know that if we propose raising taxes it's because we've exhausted every other option. I believe they also know we've made real progress over the years because of their ongoing support and that we'll continue to invest their tax dollars to improve our quality of life."

In these "tight times," the mayor's budget grows last year's by tens of millions of dollars, which Daley said is necessary because of labor costs and the need to build more libraries. "Today, there are still communities without branch libraries in our city. They provide safe havens for our children and residents," he said. "For the first time, we would provide an ongoing, dedicated funding source for the library system."

In other words, you can blame the unions for the tax increases. Or you can decide to oppose them and punish the children.

All that was missing was a suggestion that opponents of the budget were racially motivated. 

Of course, this is a proposed budget--the City Council will be holding hearings over the next couple of weeks to scrutinize the plans in detail.

Expect some resistance. Aldermen know they'll be forced to take the heat from exhausted and embittered voters. Already, a few are shaking their heads "no."

Some aldermen noted that the payroll would only shrink by a handful of positions next year. One suggested that the administration work harder to dump ineffective or corrupt employees whose incompetence costs the city millions of dollars in legal fees each year. Others mentioned the high price of defending abusive cops.

Another alderman pointed out that Daley is proposing to save money by merging the Department of Buildings with the Department of Construction and Permits--four years after the mayor split them into two in a supposed cost-savings move.

"Who wants the title of 'The Best Unaffordable City'?" said Billy Ocasio, alderman of the 26th Ward. "Under this budget, we will be the most unaffordable, highest-taxed city in the nation."

That doesn't mean the council won't approve most of it. "We won't be, as you in the media like to put it, a rubber stamp," vowed 34th Ward alderman Carrie Austin, a Daley loyalist who chairs the council's budget committee. 

Uh-huh.

The city's inspector general runs an independent office that investigates charges of corruption. Under a court settlement the city agreed to earlier this year--complemented by an executive order from Mayor Daley--the IG's responsibilities include looking into all new allegations of "unlawful political discrimination in City employment." In other words: flagrant examples of hiring, promotions, and firing based on politics, the kind of thing that led to the convictions last summer of Mayor Daley's patronage boss and three other city workers. 

But the Daley administration and its City Council allies created a new office Wednesday charged with making sure each city department is adhering to that same court settlement. That technically means the new Office of Compliance will be responsible for making sure that there is no "political discrimination in City employment," and that if there is, another office--the inspector general's--will be able to look into it.

Most people seem to find this redundant, but the arrangement's clear to the mayor. "There's a difference between investigations and compliance," he said Wednesday. "This is compliance. No one has violated the law whatsoever dealing with compliance. And that's what you have to have--you have to have a compliance officer, simple as that."

Simple as that.

The ordinance passed the council's Committee on Budget and Government Operations on Tuesday. Committee chairman Carrie Austin said she thought committee members unanimously backed the measure until 49th Ward alderman Joe Moore squawked up, asking for a formal vote. Moore said Austin never slowed up to ask if anyone was opposed. In the end, both agreed that Moore was the only committee member to go on record against the plan.

When Austin introduced the ordinance before the full council Wednesday, Moore cut her off and asked for a chance to speak. Once he had the floor, he ripped into the ordinance, calling it "an end run" around the Shakman decree that prohibits politically driven hiring and firing.

Austin responded on behalf of the mayor. "The inspector general was part of these discussions. Maybe he didn't agree with everything, but he was part of the discussions," she said. "I believe this office will help the city of Chicago and not do harm to it."

The ordinance passed by a 43-6 vote, with Bob Fioretti (2nd), Toni Preckwinkle (4th), Leslie Hairston (5th), Sandi Jackson (7th), and Ricardo Munoz (22nd) joining Moore in opposition. One of Moore's allies said "five or six" other erstwhile "progressives" probably would have voted against the ordinance, but they weren't lobbied to do so by Moore or the other nays.

Afterward, Fioretti told reporters he didn't think the ordinance would pass muster with the federal judge overseeing the Shakman decree. Hairston said it was absurd to create a new department when the city is facing a gaping hole in the budget.

Austin, meanwhile, defended the ordinance by suggesting that the city's record of corrupt hiring practices wasn't really as serious as critics made it out to be. "I believe that with this office, the trouble we may have appeared to have been in--I mean, it didn't look so good for awhile--I think this office will help that," she said.

Another mayoral ally, the 45th Ward's Patrick Levar, expressed concerns about the ordinance for other reasons. "I believe people can be hired on their merits, but I'm not opposed to helping a neighbor, either," Levar said, a longtime upholder of patronage. He said he'd be watching to see if the Office of Compliance was really helpful or just a hindrance to effective hiring. "I'll give them a year and see what they come back with," Levar said.

The mayor was more straightforward when the subject turned to a new law allowing restaurants to welcome dogs to sidewalk cafes. "Many people want to be able to walk their dog to a restaurant," he said.

"Should the dogs be able to order foie gras at a restaurant?" joked Channel 7's Andy Shaw.

"As long as they order a salad," Daley said. "You can order a salad and get foie gras."