Entries associated with the tag "Mayor Richard Daley":

I was sort of hoping that Mayor Daley would personally call to tell me he was killing the Central Loop TIF -- you know, sort of the way a vanquished candidate calls the winner on election night. 

As you all know, I've been vainly battling Daley's TIFs for more years than I can count, and this is the first time, the very first time, that he's ever pulled the plug on a meaningful TIF district (last year he killed a couple of loser districts).

So, first of all, I'd like to say you're welcome to all the taxpayers who haven't got around to calling me to say thanks. In the property tax appeal game, most lawyers get at least 10 percent of what they save you on your taxes. By killing this TIF, taxpayers will save about $100 million a year. The way I figure, Chicago's taxpayers owe me at least $10 million -- and I don't take checks.

In reality, we've lost more than we've gained with the Central Loop TIF. Yes, the schools will get up to $50 million in 2009 they weren't getting with this TIF district alive. But the schools will have to wait at least another nine years or so before they regain the $500 million they lost to the Central Loop since 1984.

And by then they'll have lost even more money to all the other TIFs Mayor Daley and the City Council have been creating. Remember, there are still about 160 other TIFs out there, with the city council gearing up to create new ones almost every month.

As Greg Hinz points out in today's Crain's, the reason Mayor Daley gave up on the Central Loop TIF is that its 24-year lifetime was about to expire and he needed Springfield's approval to extend it. This would have resulted in a loud and nasty public fight with Governor Blagojevich that the mainstream media would have had no choice but to cover. Suddenly, the public would be coming face to face with this scam. And the last thing Mayor Daley wants -- be it for his TIFs or his Olympics -- is public scrutiny.

From the mayor's perspective, sacrificing the Central Loop is a small price to pay to keep the larger program going strong.

Besides, he still has the LaSalle Central TIF, which he created in part to replace money he would lose if he had to kill the Central Loop. The LaSalle Central will soon be soaking up far more than a 100 million a year. And if I know our mayor, I'm sure he'll be looking for new downtown TIFs to create in the next year or so. He's nothing if not resourceful.

Of course, he can only get away with this so long as the larger public remains docile and dumb. And there doesn't seem to be any time limit on that. 

A couple months ago I jokingly suggested everyone take a bike ride to Bensenville, but I never thought the city would steal my idea.

Actually, city officials took it one step further. Instead of a bike ride to Bensenville, they're sponsoring a September 21 5K run and walk just up the road at the new O'Hare runway. That's right -- jog beneath the jets and let the takeoffs and landings blast out your eardrums. You can pretend you're an Olympic marathoner, burning up your lungs running through the smog of Beijing. What a fun way to spend a Sunday morning! 

Rosie Andolino, executive director of the O'Hare expansion project, attended last week's City Council meeting, calling on aldermen to join the fun. I'm hoping Alderman Patrick Levar (45th) will show up, just to give back for all the years he, his friends and family have been feeding at the airport patronage trough.

I sort of feel sorry for the payrollers who will probably get dragooned into getting out of bed early on a Sunday morning for this funfest. But I guess there are worse ways to make a living.

By the way, the run isn't free -- the city's charging $30 to sign up. It takes a lot of chutzpah to charge folks 30 bucks to run around a runway that was built with hundreds and hundreds of millions of their tax dollars. But hey, you also get a T-shirt, which is more than most of us will probably get out of the Olympics, Mayor Daley's next multibillion dollar boondoggle.

I'm a little disappointed the run doesn't go through Bensenville's Dead Zone. That's the ghost town Mayor Daley -- with financial help from President Bush -- created when he forced residents to sell their home. Frankly, I think there's a lot of interesting things to see in the Dead Zone. Why, they just nabbed a naked guy who apparently wandered in from a passing freight train, my law enforcement pals tell me.

Now here's a tough choice. What would you rather see: a naked vagabond or Alderman Levar running a 5K?

Boy, that didn't take long.

In July, Mayor Daley promised to purchase and demolish Michael Reese Hospital for no more than $85 million.

He said he'd turn around and sell the property to a developer for at least $85 million, and the developer could build a 7,500-unit housing complex suitable for Olympic housing. All in all, Daley vowed, the deal wouldn't cost taxpayers a cent.

Well, on Sunday, Fran Spielman broke the news in the Sun-Times that the cleanup of the property would cost $32 million, not $20 million, as originally estimated. So Daley will either have to spend more public money to get it ready for resale, negotiate a new deal with Medline Industries to get them to sell it for less, or find a developer willing to pay more than $85 million for the site. We haven't even consummated the deal and it's looking like a boondoggle.

I'm not surprised that the cleanup costs are higher than promised -- the city's notorious for underestimating the cost of a project to minimize public opposition (remember the Brown Line project?). I'm just surprised the news broke so early in the game. Generally, the city doesn't fess up what the real cost of a project will be till about halfway through, when there's nothing the public can do about it. Not that the sheep in Chicago ever actually do anything about the abuses being conducted all around them.

Mayor Daley should give up his dream for the Olympics before we go broke and spend public funds on something we actually need. Maybe it's not too late to ask Oprah to bring back all those Olympians to support a movement to fix up public transportation.

Trust me -- the last thing I want to do is wade in the muck of 49th Ward politics. 'Cause, lord knows, you're all a bunch of lunatics up there.

But, gulp, here I am . . .

I posted yesterday about Don Gordon taking a surprisingly strong stand against construction on Park District property, and that prompted alderman Joe Moore to give me a ring.

"Looks like you're endorsing Don Gordon," he told me.

Well, not really -- just saying I like what he said at the meeting and wished he had said it when he was running for office against you last year.

"Anyone who knows Don Gordon will tell you that in that election his main criticism of me was that I was too critical of the mayor," said Moore. "He was very critical of me in supporting the living wage."

Well, as long as I have you on the phone, how about the latest rumor I'm hearing from your opponents: as soon as Barack Obama's elected president -- if, of course, he is elected -- you'll step down to take a job in his administration and handpick Jim Ginderske as your replacement. 

Moore laughed and said: "Yeah, I'm kind of gunning for attorney general. Give me a break. That shows you how delusional and out to lunch they are. They're not going to get rid of me that easy . . . "

The funny thing is that, given Mayor Daley's attitude toward council independents, he probably wouldn't fill Moore's vacancy with anyone Moore recommended. Back in 1990, when former alderman David Orr became county clerk, Daley selected Bob Clarke over Moore, Orr's preference for the vacancy.

One year later Moore defeated Clarke in the regularly scheduled aldermanic election and the rest, as they say, is history.

The irony of ironies is that Gordon probably stands a better chance of getting Daley's nod than Ginderske or anyone else Moore might recommend -- or at least he did until he started sounding off against one of the mayor's pet causes.

My advise to Ginderske, Gordon, or anyone else who wants to become alderman is to suck up to Mayor Daley, praise his vision, and, most important, endorse the Olympics, no matter how much parkland it paves over. That's still the best bet to get ahead in this town.

It was the Park District's annual make-a-wish night at the Loyola Park Field House Tuesday.

That's when Park District officials -- in this case, Brian Loll and Matt Marino -- hold meetings where the little people parade past and tell them what improvements, additions, expansions, or new programs they'd like to see for their local parks.

Before the meeting began, Loll and Marino assured folks that they would take careful notes and convey suggestions back to parks superintendent Tim Mitchell and other Park District big shots, who were preparing next year's budget.

With that, the peasants made their pleas for money to fix floors and roofs, trim weeds, plant gardens, hire staff, restore cut funding, and even, in one extravagant instance, build a swimming pool. 

I was hoping someone might suggest the Park District raise money by selling the Streeterville office it bought for $22 million, but that didn't happen. So for me the highlight came when Lincoln Park resident Tom Tresser played a wild card and called for "a sunset on TIFs ."

Pointing out that the city's 160 or so tax increment financing districts divert about $37 million a year in property taxes away from the Park District alone, Tresser said "We wouldn't be fighting for scraps" if the city stopped creating TIFs. "It's our money," he said. The audience clapped, but neither Loll nor Marino said a word. They didn't bat an eye, just took it all down along with the plea for cleaner bathrooms in the Loyola Park field house.

Personally, I'd love to be there were they to bring this suggestion before Mitchell, a former mayoral chief of staff, who knows as well as anyone how the system works: "Uh, boss, you know the mayor's favorite honey pot -- the one that feeds him $500 million a year in property taxes? Well, some nut on the north side wants us to shut it down."

Actually, I have a funny feeling Tresser's suggestion won't make it to Mitchell, much less Mayor Daley. The mayor gets red in the face over relatively little things, like the foie gras debate. The suggestion of a moratorium on TIFs would probably turn him purple. 

I'm sure there will be plenty of seats available when the Plan Commission meets Thursday to discuss Mayor Daley's plans to borrow $85 million to buy and demolish Michael Reese hospital.

What's that? You didn't know the meeting was even on the calendar [pdf]?

Well, of course not. When it comes to throwing a fundraising bash in Millennium Park intended to feed the fantasy that the games will magically make our lives better, the Olympic planners can't send out enough press releases (I think I got three) inviting the media to show up. (And if you want to see who pitched in some cash, read the report from Crain's.)

But they don't send out any announcements for a meeting that will explain the finer points of their plans to get started on building a 7,500-unit (give or take a couple hundred) Olympic Village--such as how in the world we're supposed to pay for it without bankrupting our schools and parks.

And they hide the meeting on a weekday afternoon.

Too bad. I for one am really looking forward to the city's first public explanation of how they're borrowing $85 million but not really spending the money.

I'll keep you posted--or you can see the fun for yourself at at 1 PM Thursday in the City Council chambers.... 

The City Council's great debate over the Children Museum is over, and the burning question is this: How did we do with our predictions? 

Overall, not so bad. The council voted 33-16 with one absentee (alderman Carrie Austin) to approve Mayor Daley's proposal to move the Children's Museum into Grant Park over the wishes of local alderman Brendan Reilly and many of his constituents. Mick predicted the vote would go 35-15 for the mayor; Ben, ever the optimist, had it going 31-19. Here's where we blundered.

Second Ward alderman Robert Fioretti: We both predicted he would vote against the mayor, but he wimped out. Some days he's acted like an independent; now he's behaving like one of the boys, albeit slicker and smoother. So what's he angling for?

Third Ward alderman Pat Dowell: Ben picked it--she voted against the mayor. As she called out to Mick before today's vote, "You had me wrong." Glad to hear it.

Fifth Ward alderman Leslie Hairston: Voted against the mayor after we predicted she wouldn't. Obviously she has more guts--or more vocal lakefront constituents--than we thought.

Thirteenth Ward alderman Frank Olivo: He voted with the mayor. Ben: "I thought his boss, Michael Madigan, would make him go to bat for Reilly, Madigan's former legislative aide. Boy, did I misjudge Madigan's loyalty. I wouldn't want to be in a foxhole with him." Mick: "A 'no' vote would have required Olivo to say something other than 'aye.'"

Fifteenth Ward alderman Toni Foulkes: We predicted she would vote against the mayor, but she voted with him. Got to give credit to--gulp--Orion, one of this blog's leading fans/critics. He hit this one right on the head when he wrote, "Ring up another one we have flipped."

Twenty-first Ward alderman Howard Brookins: This was a late-hour flip--trust us. The mayor must have put the squeeze on. And hard.

Twenty-second Ward alderman Rick Munoz: We had him voting against the mayor--in fact, we thought this one was a no-brainer--but he didn't. Is he going the way of Helen Shiller? Does this mean he won't be able to lead the independent caucus anymore?

24th Ward alderman Sharon Denise Dixon: We assumed she traded her vote for the Ogden-Pulaski TIF deals. But she proved us wrong. West side!

26th Ward alderman Billy Ocasio: A resounding 'yes' when we'd both predicted  no. Ben: "I didn't really believe he had the guts to buck the mayor--Mick made me do it, I swear." Mick: "Mayor Daley made Ocasio do it--I swear."

41st Ward alderman Brian Doherty: We predicted he would vote with the mayor, but he rebelled. There must be more opposition to the museum on far northwest side than we realized (which just goes to show you what lackeys alderman Margaret Laurino and Patrick Levar are).

44th Ward alderman Tom Tunney: Ben was right and Mick was wrong--he voted against the mayor. Mick: "To my shock, he stuck up for the lakefront, not the man."

47th Ward alderman Eugene Schulter: Same as Tunney. Mick: "In other words, he caught hell from his ward."

Congratulations, Mayor Daley, the International Olympics Committee yesterday named Chicago as one of three four finalists to host the 2016 games.

Now I have some advice if you want to win the nod: lie.

Keep saying the games will cost no more than $500 million in public money, even though they're going to cost much more than that.

Keep saying that construction in Jackson, Lincoln, and Douglas parks will last no more than ten months, even though it will probably start years in advance of 2016.

Keep saying the games will benefit south-siders, even though it will force residents out of their neighborhoods by jacking up land costs and property taxes.

Keep saying the Olympics will bring recreational opportunities for inner-city kids, though it there are no current plans to leave poor neighborhoods with much in the way of public facilities.

Keep saying it's all about putting Chicago in the international spotlight, even though it's really about doling out contracts, sparking real estate deals, and feeding your ego.

Keeping saying it will be governed by an open and transparent process, even though major deals will continue to be made behind closed doors and budgets and building plans will be kept out of public view.

Keep saying whatever you have to say to stall the opposition. 'Cause once you win the games, it won't matter what the opposition says. You can plow them over like a bunch of trees in Jackson Park.

In other words, stick with the game plan. It's got you this far, after all. 

All week cynics were telling me there was no way the residents would win round one of their case against the Latin School soccer field in Lincoln Park.

On one side, you had a collection of cloutless north-siders worried about coming up with the money to pay their lawyers.

On the other, you had the Park District and the city, with almost unlimited access to taxpayer dollars, and Latin, one of the wealthiest private schools in town. 

Plus Mayor Daley wants the field and, as we all know, the mayor generally gets what he wants around here. The case, of course, is being held in the Daley Center, and as more than one lawyer has jokingly told me: "They don't call it the Daley Center for nothing."

Well, Cook County circuit judge Dorothy Kirie Kinnaird stunned us all this afternoon.

She didn't give the residents the complete victory they wanted, but she came pretty close.

Ruling that the residents made a persuasive argument that the field could only be built with approval from the Chicago Plan Commission, she prohibited Latin or the Park District from installing "lighting, permanent or fixed goal posts, permanent or removable bleachers or signage." Furthermore, the scoreboard, which has already been installed, "may not be lit, connected to lighting, or otherwise used."

In addition, Judge Kinnaird temporarily nullified the contract the Park District has signed with Latin--the one giving the school exclusive prime-time use of the field.

She did, however, allow Latin and the Park District to finishing installing the artificial turf.

The residents wanted Judge Kinnaird to halt all further work on the field. But after the judge read her ruling, they were feeling pretty good with what they got. I for one hope their lawyers get to start grilling Park District, Latin, and city officials under oath for the inside story on this deal.

Judge Kinnaird's restraining order will be in effect until at least May 20; during that time the residents will gather evidence to ask the judge to make her ruling permanent. In contrast, Park District and Latin lawyers said they will probably appeal to have the temporary restraining order lifted. Other than that, they'll be reviewing their options.

And what are those options? Well, Latin has to decide whether it wants to press on with construction if there's a probability a judge will void their contract. After all, what's the point of them spending up to $2 million to build a field if they don't get exclusive rights to use it?

And the Park District has to decide if it wants to waste even more taxpayers dollars installing a field that some court may eventually force them to pay for--or remove.

At Wednesday's hearing, Latin's lawyer argued that the Park District has to cover all construction and removal costs if a judge orders the field removed. Latin says it's going to cost $2 million to install the field. Lord knows how much it would cost to take it out. If the Latin contract gets nixed, then the school may have to chase after the Park District to get its money back. In other words, more lawyers, more litigation--any way you look at it, the taxpayers get screwed.

Of course, all of this could have been averted had Park District officials gone to the Plan Commission for approval of the field, as the law clearly states they should. Then again, if they had, residential and aldermanic opposition might have killed the deal. So they tried to sneak it through.

I guess the judge's ruling means that even in Chicago you're occasionally supposed to play by the rules.  

You never know what injustice is going to stir the soul of a Chicago alderman.

For instance, a few days ago aldermen Tom Allen (38th Ward) and George Cardenas (12th Ward) were moved to outrage by the $75,000 Shakman compensation award to Jay Stone, son of alderman Bernard Stone (50th Ward).

Federal monitor Noelle Brennan awarded Stone the money on the grounds that his 2003 campaign for 32nd Ward alderman was unfairly torpedoed by the throngs of patronage workers who were dispatched by Donald Tomczak to work for Ted Matlak, the incumbent.

"We've got potholes to fix. We spend $20 million on snow removal and the federal monitor decides in her infinite wisdom to give somebody $75,000 because they lost an election? Can I sign up for that program?" Allen told the Sun-Times.

Cardenas was even hotter. "It's an outrage. This is crazy," he told Spielman. "The monitor has no clue."

I realize it may seem odd that Alderman Stone's son would claim benefits for the excesses of a machine that his father has loyally served. And, yes, Matlak probably would have beat Stone in 2003 -- though not by as much -- even without Tomczak's muscle.

But you can't blame Jay Stone -- an passionate independent -- for the politics of his father, who didn't even support him in the race.

Furthermore, political campaigns are at the heart of the Shakman case. The compensation awards stem from a lawsuit filed by Michael Shakman in 1970 after his unsuccessful run for delegate to the state constitutional convention. Shakman argued he lost because because of all the payrollers forced to campaign for his machine-backed opponent.

Eventually, Shakman's lawsuit freed payrollers from having to campaign for the machine. And it freed independents, like Jay Stone, from having to face an election-day patronage steamroller. It's one thing if all those city workers really were for Matlak. It's another thing if they were coerced. Funny, Matlak didn't do nearly as well after the feds shut down Tomczak's political organization (Matlak lost to Scott Waguespack last year).

So, yes, Allen could have filed for Shakman compensation, provided, like Stone, he had enough guts to go up against anyone with as much clout and city workers as Matlak had back in 2003.   

I appreciate that aldermen Allen and Cardenas are finally speaking out against wasteful city spending. But I find it curious that they choose to take their first great stand over the relative peanuts dished out to Stone. I mean, just think of all the potholes we could have filled and the snow we could have plowed with the money saved from, oh, let's see, Hired Truck, the Duffs, the Soldier Field renovation, overruns at Millennium Park, the Block 37 underground train station, and countless TIF handouts to well-connected downtown developers. Funny, those scandals and deals came and went with nary a peep of protest from Cardenas, Allen or most of their council colleagues.

I suppose the aldermen are selective opponents of wasteful spending. As long as it's Mayor Daley doing the wasting, it's OK. 

"If you're gonna write a story, make sure you put this in--'Take that, Mayor Daley!'"

The speaker was Frank Coconate, calling to gloat about his big Shakman settlement victory.

Coconate is the former city worker Mayor Daley loves to hate. A northwest-side political activist who blew the whistle on city corruption, Coconate was fired from his job in the Water Department in 2005 on the grounds of "a pattern and practice of serious misconduct."

That firing took place just a few days after he was seen on TV news report sitting in a city truck and wearing a Jesse Jackson Jr. for Mayor button.

The case against Coconate's pretty pathetic, though I can understand why Daley wouldn't want him around. The guy's a major pain in the neck to the mayor, constantly calling reporters to push stories that make Daley and his political puppets, especially those on the northwest side, look bad. 

Coconate's triumph stems from a lawsuit filed almost 40 years ago by Michael Shakman. In 1983, the city settled the case, agreeing to stop considering political influence in personnel decisions. But in 2006, U.S. circuit court judge Wayne Andersen, upset by several patronage-related scandals (PDF), ordered Noelle Brennan, a lawyer, to oversee city hiring. And last year the city agreed to set up a $12 million compensation fund for victims of discrimination.

According to Brennan, she has received 1,528 complaints and awarded about 1,500 settlements.

In September Coconate submitted a claim arguing that he had been denied promotions and overtime work because of his independent political beliefs.

On March 26, Brennan sent him a letter. "I have reviewed your Claim Form along with all supporting documentation you submitted," she wrote. "Your award amount is as follows: $75,000."

That's one of the largest settlements Brennan awarded. (Jay Stone, son of 50th Ward alderman Berny Stone, was also awarded $75,000 in a controversial decision.)

"It must be killing Daley," says Coconate. "'Cause there's nothing they can do about it. They can't appeal it. They gotta pay it. I'd frame the check except I'm broke and I have to cash it."

It may not be the last of his payouts. After the city fired him, Coconate appealed (scroll down) to get his job back. He lost the first round, heard by a city-appointed administrative officer. But he's appealed to the Cook County Circuit Court. If he wins, the city will have to award him back pay -- probably more than $300,000 -- give him his job back, and pay his legal bills.

The money of course will come from property taxes, meaning the public will pay for the games the mayor plays.

Yesterday Mayor Daley held a press conference to announce that help was on the way for the city's poor beleaguered residential property tax payers.

He was going to have the Cook County Board of Review extend the deadline for filing tax assessment appeals. You now have until March 31 to appeal.

Pardon me for being unappreciative, but: thanks for nothing, Mr. Mayor.

I know these things get complicated, so I'll be brief. The most important element in determining how much we pay in property taxes is the levy -- that is, the amount of property tax dollars Mayor Daley wants to spend. Our levy keeps rising because Daley keeps spending more and more money every year thanks to TIFs, the mayor's favorite tax boondoggle.

The mayor either doesn't realize this or doesn't want to admit it. So when the public cries for tax relief, he proposes to tinker with the assessment -- the one part of the taxpaying process he should have nothing to do with. As faithful readers ought to know by now, your property tax bill is basically determined by multiplying the amount your property is valued at (i.e., its assessment)  by the tax rate. If the board of review lowers your assessment, will you pay less in taxes? Absolutely. But the overall amount of property taxes that Mayor Daley's government -- and, let's face it, he controls all aspects of local government -- will remain the same. So the burden of payment will shift from those who know how to play the tax-appeals game to those who don't.

Who generally applies for assessment cuts? Commercial property owners who have the savvy to hire sharp, clout-heavy lawyers who know enough to contribute campaign dollars to the three members of the board of review.

So the mayor's great reform proposal means that the sharpies will get a break and everyone else -- the usual collection of suckers and saps -- will pick up the slack. In the name of cutting our taxes, the mayor will be raising them. And all so he can win some headlines in his ongoing PR campaign to convince the public that he truly cares about taxing them out of their homes.

Please, Mr. Mayor -- no more property tax relief. The taxpayers can't afford it. 

I've never been a fan of Governor Rod Blagojevich. Back when he was first running for state rep, Blago pretended to be a reformer even as his father-in-law, alderman Richard Mell, ushered him to the head of the line of wannabe northwest-side politicians. Once elected governor, in 2002, Blago cut Mell out of patronage deals and tangled with him in a very public family feud. So on top of everything else  (Rezko, federal indictments, the Public Official A hoohaw), he isn't very loyal.

Still, I have to admit I have a soft spot in my heart for the governor's proposal to let senior citizens ride the CTA for free. Back when Harold Washington was mayor, I knew a city planner who had an idea for making the CTA's trains and buses free for everyone. Dreaming big, he planned to enlist the help of then-powerhouse congressmen Dan Rostenkowski and William Lipinski to pay for it with a hike in the federal income tax -- a progressive tax hike. He claimed Mayor Washington supported his idea, even if it didn't stand a chance. Man, those days are gone.

In contrast, the CTA bailout plan will be paid for with hikes in the sales tax -- the most regressive of taxes -- and the real estate transfer tax, one last slap in the face of beleaguered home owners.

Almost as soon as Blagojevich announced his plan, the powers that be ripped into it, probably because they can't stand the governor either. The Chicago Tribune even found a nice little old lady -- 87-year-old Marion Cheney  -- who said she didn't want the break if it meant service had to be cut. "I'm not going to turn down a free ride," Cheney told a Tribune reporter, who interviewed her while she was writing the Belmont bus. "But if it costs too much money for the CTA, they can have my dollar. I don't want them to have to cut routes because I'm getting a free ride."

Words to live by. I hope Sam Zell was reading as he pushes on with his plan to duck out of paying property taxes by selling Wrigley Field to the state.

Mayor Daley was among those who promptly blasted Blagojevich's plan. "Any politician can give things for free, but there's no such thing as a free lunch," Daley lectured reporters over the weekend. "Someone has to pay for it."

Amen, brother. Though I have to say the mayor's fiscal restraint caught me by surprise. By coincidence, I'd attended the party-down scene at the January 8 meeting of his Community Development Commission, where city officials were throwing around property tax dollars like confetti: $75 million to Rush University Medical Center, $8.5 million to Grossinger Auto, and a to-be-announced TIF handout to a consortium of developers led by former First Ward alderman Ted Mazola to build a bunch of town houses in a swamp down by Wolf Lake, on the city's southeast side. And that's just one CDC get-together -- they meet once a month.

So on the city pushes with its massive transformation, tearing down public housing, closing schools, selling off property on the south and west sides, moving out the poor people, and driving up the cost of living with higher fines, fees, and taxes. Then free rides for seniors get condemned as a waste.

It's a great day to be a zoning lawyer, or a lawyer working on commercial property tax appeals, or a developer, or an alderman-turned-developer, or a Daley-administration-aide-turned-lobbyist, all merrily riding the gravy train. But it's not such a great day for old ladies riding the bus.   

On December 31 I was putting the finishing touches on a story praising Mayor Daley for taking a strong stand against a state handout to the Cubs, while warning readers that his steadfastness was probably only temporary.

By January 3, when the story came out, Daley had already caved. "I have an open mind," Daley told Fran Spielman of the Sun-Times. "I always have an open mind on an issue. And why not?"

Let me tell you why not: there is absolutely no public benefit whatsoever to this deal. Under the proposal being floated by Zell, the state -- specifically, the Illinois Sports Facilities Authority -- would buy Wrigley Field for a nominal sum as low as $1, then undertake a revamp of the stadium, building new parking, concessions, seats, etc. (Already the Cubs have landed the city's permission for additional seating and advertising -- never mind the ballpark's landmark status.)

It's a great deal for Zell. By agreeing to fix up the ballpark, the state raises the value of the Cubs franchise, which is already valued at around $1 billion. And it's a good deal for whoever buys the Cubs. The new owner would not only be off the hook for construction costs but would save millions by being exempt from property taxes.

As for public benefits, the deal's backers say they would require the new owner to sign at least a 30-year lease with the state. Big deal. The Cubs aren't going anywhere, with or without a state handout. Ownership would be stupid to: Wrigley Field is a cash cow. No matter how inept the team is -- and the Cubs, famously, can be very inept -- the seats sell because people love going to the "Friendly Confines." They wouldn't have the same allegiance to a new ballpark. Just ask the White Sox, who only sell out when they do well, and sometimes not even then.

In exchange for this "benefit," we the taxpayers will lose at least $50 million in property taxes (and that is a very conservative estimate) over the next 30 years. And that's so that one billionaire can make more money selling to another billionaire, who will then make more money running the team.

Now that Daley's showing signs of giving in, the main hope for killing the deal falls to 44th Ward alderman Tom Tunney, who says he's reluctant to back a handout for Wrigley.

Stay strong, Tom.   

It was a typical year in Chicago. There were the giants who did the stepping and the ants who got stepped on. Here's a look at some of the winners and losers in 2007. --Ben Joravsky and Mick Dumke

Winner: Photoshop. With the help of the photo editing program, Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr. extended his political reach without having to miss any karate sessions at his favorite dojo. One and the same picture of him was used on billboard and campaign literature for each candidate he endorsed -- his wife Sandi included. When asked why Jackson didn't just pose with his wife, whom he presumably sees now and then, a congressional aide said: "That's the winning formula, the winning strategy."

Loser: Cook County commissioner William Beavers. The self-proclaimed "hog with the big nuts" thought his daughter Darcel's election as Seventh Ward alderman was in the bag. Then he realized that Jackson had secured every billboard around, saturating the south side. Sandi Jackson went on to trounce Darcel Beavers.

Winners: Ducks and geese. Critics of alderman Joe Moore’s foie gras ban vowed to overturn it, but the legislation never advanced. As a result, animal rights advocates say, fewer fowl have iron rods thrust down their throats in force-feeding.

Losers: Lovers of foie gras and haters of Moore’s ordinance, including Mayor Daley, aldermen Berny Stone and Tom Tunney, and Moore’s 49th Ward opponent Don Gordon, who mostly succeeded in inspiring animal rights activists to rally support for the ban across the city.

Winners: Service-sector unions, which became major players in the City Council by helping bankroll the victories of self-proclaimed reformers and independents such as Bob Fioretti, Pat Dowell, Sandi Jackson, Toni Foulkes, Joann Thompson, Brendan Reilly, and Joe Moore.

Losers: Service-sector unions, who watched while many of those "independents" sank into the comfy cushions of their City Council seats and voted for TIFs, higher taxes, eminent domain deals, and other Daley administration initiatives.

Winners: Mayor Daley, who was able to enjoy a bike ride around Paris; Governor Blagojevich, who chilled at a Blackhawks game; Michael Madigan, who continued to bring home big bucks as a property tax appeal lawyer; and Emil Jones, who kept dreaming of new casinos in Illinois ... while CTA bailout plans crashed in the general assembly.

Losers: CTA riders, at least some of whom are wondering if they should choose the more efficient option of skateboarding to work.

Winner: Former 42nd Ward alderman Burt Natarus. By losing his reelection battle to Brendan Reilly, Natarus no longer has to put up with ceaseless whining from Gold Coast constituents.

Loser: Brendan Reilly. Since he’s had the job, Mayor Daley’s all but called him a bigot for opposing the move of the Chicago Children’s Museum to Grant Park and a kid hater for asking questions about plans by Children’s Memorial Hospital to move to the Gold Coast. Plus he has to answer all those calls that used to go to Natarus.

Winners: The boys and girls soccer teams from the Latin School, one of the city's wealthiest and most exclusive private schools. The Park District gave them (as in for free) prime lakefront park property to build a soccer field.

Losers: Pretty much all of the public high school soccer teams, who have to play on lumpy, potholed, precariously uneven fields.

Winners: Elite athletes from around the world. Mayor Daley is planning to spend untold billions building them state-of-the-art track, swimming, field hockey, and equestrian facilities for the 2016 Olympics.

Losers: Chicagoans, who don't have, among other things, consistent access to swimming pools, well-lit gyms, unslippery basketball courts, or a single indoor running track.

Winner: Congressman Luis Gutierrez, who in exchange for obsequiously endorsing Daley for reelection won a pledge from the mayor not to use any public money for the 2016 Olympics.

Loser: Congressman Gutierrez. Once safely reelected, Daley broke his promise and got the council to commit $500 million for the Olympics.

Winner: Mayor Daley. Thanks to TIFs, Daley's getting well over $500 million a year in off-the-books property taxes that he's pretty much free to dish out to favored developers, businesses, cronies, and friends.

Losers: Voters, who reelected Daley with more than 70 percent of the ballots, seemingly on the grounds that Chicago's not as bad as Gary or Detroit. In the words of a one-time civil rights activist who's now a key Daley ally, "But don't those flowers look nice?"

Over the next few days we'll be looking back on the political highlights and lowlights of 2007. Feel free to weigh in (we know you will). --Ben Joravsky & Mick Dumke

"Most aldermen, most politicians, are hos." Former 20th Ward alderman Arenda Troutman, who was defeated in February after being indicted on federal charges of taking $10,000 in payoffs from an FBI mole posing as a developer.

"Fifty aldermen sitting in the City Council are hos. I want to change that culture. I don't want to be one of them. I don't want to be sitting in the City Council and have someone call me ho." Unsuccessful 50th Ward aldermanic challenger Salman Aftab, speaking at a candidate's forum during last winter's campaign.

"Alderman Schulter has always been concerned about the small businesses in his ward." Alderman Gene Schulter (47th), answering a reporter's question about his proposal to use eminent domain to force about 20 merchants on Western Avenue to sell their property to the city.

"Dorothy is busy taking care of the business of the Third Ward!" Political aide Jacky Grimshaw, explaining why her boss, former Third Ward alderman Dorothy Tillman, failed to attend a campaign forum. Tillman lost the election to challenger Pat Dowell.

"In boxing, the challenger meets the champion in the ring and they fight it out. If there's another challenger, he meets the champion in the ring. If there's a third, he meets the champion in the ring. Do the three challengers meet the champion in the ring all at once and join up and beat the shit out of him?" Alderman Berny Stone (50th), explaining why he skipped an aldermanic debate. Stone won in a hotly contested runoff.

"I'm the hog with the big nuts." Cook County commissioner Bill Beavers explaining his role on the county board.

"Their job is to protect us, not to hurt us." Alderman Walter Burnett (27th) explaining the responsibilities of the Chicago Police Department.

"You mean you don't want children from the city in Grant Park? Why? Are they black? Are they white? Are they Hispanic? Are they poor? You don't want children?" Mayor Richard Daley, playing the race card in his effort to overcome local opposition to moving the Children's Museum to Grant Park.

The city blinked.

That's the initial reaction from people in Lincoln Square regarding the city's retreat from plans to use eminent domain to force out all the businesses on the east side of the 4800 block of North Western. On the proposed deal the land would have been turned over to an undetermined developer, who would replace the existing buildings with condos and retail. Funding for the acquisition was to come out of the Western/North TIF.

It was actually one of the more interesting twists on use of the program. TIFs (or tax increment financing districts) are intended to subsidize development in blighted communities that would otherwise find it difficult to attract investment. In this case, however, 47th Ward alderman Gene Schulter was seeking public funds to keep private development out -- at least a certain kind of private development.

Schulter contended that the commercial strip, with its booming residential base, was starting to attract the interest of big-box chains. By beating the big boxes to the punch, he said, his plan would actually protect small businesses and help keep the community free of too much traffic and congestion. Sure, in this case protecting small businesses meant threatening them with government seizure of their property. But the declaration of eminent domain alone would help keep the Best Buys at bay: there's no market for land the city can snatch at will.

It was a classic case of the up-is-down, down-is-up logic peculiar to TIFs. As mandated by state law, the city commissioned a consultant's report, which argued that the area needed a TIF handout to stave off blight and underdevelopment. Meanwhile Schulter and planning officials kept insisting that tens of millions were needed to prevent overdevelopment.  

Most TIF deals are consummated in the shadows, with hardly any opposition. This one attracted major heat from the start. Merchants and property owners on the block didn't want to sell, and resented the threat of being forced to. It was, they said, downright un-American for the city to snatch one person's property only to turn it over to someone else. The Castle Coalition, a national property-rights organization, rallied to the cause. On December 5 some 300 residents showed up for a rally at Chicago Soccer, a sporting goods store at 4839 N. Western. After the meeting, a large group of protesters marched over to Schulter's Lincoln Avenue office to demand that he drop the scheme.

On Monday, December 10, just two days before the City Council was scheduled to vote on the proposal, Schulter called several merchants to his office to tell them the city had had a change of heart. (Schulter has since said he'll submit a revised ordinance to the housing committee in January.)  

Why'd the city back down? Schulter says what he's maintained all along: the plan was never written in stone, and he listens to the desires of his community.

I suspect the December 5 demonstration had something to do with the turnaround. Residents left Schulter's office that night vowing to turn up at City Hall in even greater numbers if the matter came to a vote. Of course, the last thing Mayor Daley or his planning department needs is a storm of protest. If a big crowd showed up to scream and yell over a TIF project, the mainstream press might have to start asking questions about the slush fund that sucked up some $500 million in property taxes last year. The fewer people who know about TIFs, the better.

During his ten-year reign as president of the CTA, Frank Kruesi made so many blunders it's hard to know where to begin.

He wasted time, money, and effort on projects that were either redundant or needlessly extravagant (think Pink Line, Brown Line reconstruction, and of course the idiotic underground station at Block 37). At the same time, he overlooked basic repairs and maintenance, with the result that service is slower and less dependable than it's been in years.

But perhaps his greatest failing came in his role as chief public representative of the agency he headed. The man was consistently arrogant, rude, and contemptuous of anyone he deemed beneath himself -- that by and large being everyone he ever met. Over the years I don't know how many people -- aldermen, congressmen, CTA staffers, ordinary riders -- told me how much they despised him for his treatment of them -- and of the public. One of the most memorable meetings I've ever witnessed occurred three years ago at Clemente High School, where dozens of riders turned out to protest yet another one of Kruesi's doomsday budgets. Kruesi infuriated the long-suffering crowd, spending much of the evening rolling his eyes or whispering to CTA board chair Carole Brown (who apparently couldn't stand the guy either).

The group he alienated as much as any were the people he needed the most: state legislators he was counting on to send more transportation dollars to keep the trains and buses running. When Daley finally bowed to reality and replaced Kruesi with Ron Huberman last spring, most legislators I know rejoiced that they'd no longer have to deal with him.

So having ousted Kruesi from the public payroll for his divisiveness and ineffectiveness, what has Mayor Daley decided to do with his longtime friend? Put him back on the payroll as the city's chief federal lobbyist in Washington.

Let's get this straight: Daley's hiring an insufferably arrogant and ineffective negotiator for a $143,000-a-year position that requires tact, diplomacy, and the ability to schmooze congressmen and federal regulators?

"His job is to help make sure our relationship with the federal government is as productive as it can be toward helping to improve the quality of life for all Chicagoans," Daley said in a press statement, released just after the mayor took off for Italy on yet another one of his international junkets.

Why did the mayor appoint a man so eminently ill-suited to this important post? As near as I can tell, there are two reasons. (1) He wanted to take care of a loyal factotum of long standing (Kruesi's been working for Daley in one capacity or another since the 70s). (2) Because he can.

Not long after Cook County commissioner William Beavers blasted critics of board president Todd Stroger for picking on the guy because he's black, I got a call from an outraged north-sider.

She wanted me to slam Beavers for playing the race card.

But I won't do that. I think Beavers has a point.

Beavers is the sort of politician who makes no bones about what he believes in or who he is: an old-fashioned, patronage-loving machine Democrat. What infuriates him are so-called independents who pretend they're courageous reformers out to topple the throne, then bow to it meekly.

With the exception of commissioner Mike Quigley, the county board is full of just these types of phonies. They rant and rail against Todd Stroger, but when it comes to Mayor Daley they look the other way. The fact is, Todd Stroger, like his father before him, is a cog in Mayor Daley's machine. The mayor's own brother, Cook County commissioner John Daley, sits at Stroger's side at commission meetings. The board operates largely as an extension of City Hall. If you're going to criticize Stroger, you ought to be consistent and criticize the mayor.

But most county board reformers wouldn't dare do that. Instead they polish their reform credentials by pounding on Stroger -- he doesn't have enough power to punish them. He's not popular in their districts. On the contrary, the so-called reformers score points with their voters by bashing Stroger. Meanwhile, they won't say a word about Daley. As a matter of fact, I just got off the phone with a nice young man who wants to be a committeeman. True to form, he ripped into Stroger. When I asked about Mayor Daley he said no comment.

No comment? If you're running as a reformer, how can you have no comment about a mayor who's presided over scandal after scandal while the schools fall apart, the CTA collapses, and taxes skyrocket, millions diverted into TIF funds? The answer, he told me: he wants to get elected.

Is there waste, inefficiency, and nepotism at the county level? You bet. Could Stroger have better handled the budget mess? Absolutely. But there's more to reform than squawking at a stand-in. And at least Beavers, the "hog with the big nuts," lines up behind all the bosses, not just the white ones.

In this scene, taped at Monday's budget hearing, we learn a lesson in how to interpret the code words of City Hall.

The speakers are Third Ward alderman Pat Dowell and budget director Bennett Johnson III; the topic is tax increment financing districts.

Dowell used to work in the city's planning department, so she's one of the few aldermen who understands how the TIF program really works.

In this exchange, taped by AlderTrack (props on the new site, guys), she presses Johnson to see whether schools, parks, and taxpayers stand to get anything back for the $700 million (that's Johnson's own figure) they're losing to the city's 156 TIF districts.

Johnson, who's quite smooth, promises to run her questions by the city's lawyers, as though the issue she raises was an intriguing but radical concept in need of investigation. In fact, in the suburbs people have already challenged the legitimacy of pouring money into TIFs while schools and other public necessities go underfunded.

What Johnson's really saying is that he'll have the boys and girls in legal cook up some cockamamie justification for why they can't do what the mayor was never going to let them do in the first place. It's his way of letting Dowell know that her idea isn't going anywhere. As everyone should know by now, the mayor is never going to loosen the reins on his favorite slush fund.

Still, give Dowell credit. She's one of the few aldermen brave enough to link the massive tax hike the mayor's proposed to one of its leading cause: runaway TIFs.

May more follow her lead. 

Apparently, the best way the U.S. Olympic Committee can get its message to Mayor Daley is to use the press.

If you recall, when they wanted him to break his promise to use no public money to pay for the 2016 Olympic games, Olympic committee vice president Bob Ctvrtlik went to the media.

"We definitely want the government to have some skin in the game," Ctvrtlik told reporters on March 7. "We had been assured by the mayor that this is the case with the city of Chicago."

Within a week Daley not only reversed his long-standing pledge not to use public money but had slammed through the City Council a Rube Goldberg financing scheme likely to cost taxpayers at least $500 million if, God help us, we get the games.

Last week Ctvrtlik's boss, UOC chairman Peter Ueberroth, came to Chicago and told reporters that if Daley doesn't improve his act, the International Olympic Committee will award the games to another city. "You have to care about  and develop real friendships globally if you're going to be successful in the Olympic movement," Ueberroth said.

In other words, Chicago has to start making nice to IOC shot callers.

This may not be so easy for Daley to do. It's one thing for the mayor to sign on to a plan to waste public tax dollars -- he does that all the time (think $40 million handout to the Merc). But it's another thing to actually get him to be ingratiating or solicitous. Daley doesn't suck up to people, people suck up to Daley. If the mayor wants to do something, he just does it -- to hell with the opposition (think the destruction of Meigs Field). In the case of the Olympics, Daley probably figured all he had to do was invite the IOC to McCormick Place, feed them deep-dish pizza, take them on a bus tour of the city, and the games were his.

Now he knows better. We're number four.

Of all the half-truths, lies, and distortions streaming out of City Hall after the mayor called for tax increases totaling $158 million in the face of a $193 million budget shortfall, my current favorite comes from 36th Ward alderman William Banks.

"I've been in the City Council for 25 years and I've never voted for a property tax increase," he told reporter Fran Spielman. "I don't intend on voting for one now."

Banks wants the public to believe that he and his council allies are always taking a courageous stand against rising taxes for Chicago's beleaguered citizens. But, as he ought to know, this is not exactly true. The fact is that Banks and his councilmates have been routinely hiking property taxes over the last few years every time they create a new tax increment financing district.

What's the correlation between TIFs and property taxes? In a nutshell, a TIF freezes the amount the government can take in property taxes from a TIF district for up to 23 years. To compensate for the money they're not getting from the TIF districts, the city, county, schools, and parks have to raise tax rates. There are now over 150 TIF districts in the city -- with new ones proposed every month, soaking up well over $400 million a year in taxes.

Nobody really know how much these TIF districts add to the average taxpayer's bill. And nobody, except for a few academics, is looking into it. Certainly, not Mayor Daley, who pretends as though TIFs magically create new tax revenue out of thin air. It's important for city officials to perpetuate the myth that TIFs are free money because the less people know about TIFs the easier it is for the mayor (and his favorite aldermen) to spend them anyway they want. Actually, I'm starting to think Mayor Daley's fooled himself into believing that TIFs don't raise taxes. Why else would he so cavalierly propose something as wasteful as -- to pick just one recent example -- forking over $40 million to subsidize the merger of the Mercantile Exchange and Board of Trade.

I suppose it's OK for Alderman Banks and Mayor Daley to fall for their own disinformation -- obviously they make more than enough money to pay their tax bills. It's just a little harder for the rest of us schmoes to keep up. 

It's funny the things that enrage Mayor Daley.

Aides and city employees indicted or carted off to jail on corruption charges? Hey, stuff happens.

The CTA's breaking down physically and financially? Hey, man, don't bother me, I got to catch a plane to Paris. My buddy Frank did his best.

But one alderman dares to tell the mayor he can't do what he wants? Look out, mama -- Katie bar the door.

Witness how Daley reacted to rookie alderman Brendan Reilly (42nd), who after weeks of community meetings decided to go with the majority of his constituents and oppose the mayor's plans to move the Chicago Children's Museum to Grant Park. Daley laced into Reilly, albeit screwing up his name. He was so riled he misquoted Reilly in his efforts to tarnish him. Reilly and his constituents, he insisted, were child-hating bigots whose opposition imperiled the future of the entire city. His face got red. His hair fell across his forehead. He snarled. He sneered. He threatened.

It was a vintage Daley temper tantrum. People at City Hall tell me he throws them all the time. It seems to be an effective tactic: most aldermen fall in line. To cite just one example, the council voted 35-5 for Daley's grand scheme to bring the 2016 Olympics to town, despite knowing full well we can't afford them. They figured the city wasn't going to get the games anyway, so why piss off the mayor with a "no" vote? And if the International Olympic Committee were to award the games to Chicago? Well, that's a risk the aldermen were willing to take. Better to risk public bankruptcy than the mayor's wrath.

In his tirade against Reilly, Daley said he was standing up for Chicago's children. "I hope you understand what this fight is all about," he said.

Who's he trying to kid? This fight is not about children -- it's about patronage, and it's about power. The mayor has both in spades, and he wants to keep them, particularly with his Olympic dreams on the line. As story after story points out, one of the biggest things Chicago has going for it in the eyes of the IOC is the notion that Daley's an all-powerful mayor (a benign tyrant, if you will) who can get whatever he wants. Want to shut down Washington, Jackson and Douglas parks for months, maybe years? Want to divert millions, if not billions, of property taxes from the cash-starved schools? Want to soak the taxpayers for billions in order to throw a three-week party? Mayor Daley can get it done. No one dares cross him.

Except, it turns out, Reilly. I didn't think he had this kind of guts when he was running for office in February, but he's shown signs of it before. I can only hope his council colleagues aren't afraid to emulate him.

The city announced today that it's facing a $217 million budget shortfall and might have to raise taxes in the coming year.

Big surprise.

As you may recall from last year's tutorial on taxes, budgets are projections. Each year Mayor Daley predicts how much money he expects to generate in taxes and fees and how much money he expects to spend. If the latter is greater than the former, he has to raise taxes to make up a deficit. If not, taxes remain flat.

Last year at about this time, Daley was gushing that his managerial expertise had left the city flush and there would be no need to raise taxes. On the campaign trail last fall he announced that the city was facing a $65 million shortfall, the lowest in five years. Now he's saying the economy was worse than expected, with the real estate market sagging--hence the huge deficit.

I don't think the economy's the big difference. The difference is that Daley was running for reelection last year and this year he's not. Think of the increases in taxes and fees as Daley's way of saying thanks for your vote, suckers.

And the city did hit you with tax increases last year--they just didn't tell you about it. I know, I know, in today's article about the looming deficit, the Trib claimed that "taxpayers escaped any increase a year ago."

I don't know why, but the big papers aren't telling you the whole story about your property taxes. Every time the city creates a tax increment financing district it effectively raise your property taxes, as the other taxing bodies raise their tax rates to compensate for the loss of revenue. There are now 153 TIFs in Chicago, diverting over $400 million a year in property taxes. And the city keeps creating new TIFs almost every month. TIFs feed the slush fund the city uses to line the pockets of the mayor's developer friends.

In a month or two the second-installment property tax bill will come out, and scores of home owners on the west and south sides will get clobbered with tax hikes approaching 100 percent. In addition, the soaring taxes will make communities like Washington Park, Woodlawn, Garfield Park, and Lawndale unaffordable for poor or working-class people who might want to live there.

The only mystery is who Daley will blame for the coming tax hike. I predict he'll blame an economic downturn, Cook County assessor Jim Houlihan for the high assessments, and the general assembly for not giving him more money for the schools. I guarantee he won't say a word about the TIFs.

I can understand why Mayor Daley stiffed former 20th Ward alderman Arenda Troutman at yesterday's ceremony for the new Kennedy-King campus in Englewood.

After her indictment last year, she turned into one of his more vocal critics in the council, even voting against the Olympics.

But Shirley Coleman? The mayor's people didn't invite her to yesterday's ceremony either, and she was one of Daley's most loyal council supporters. She provided one of the three flip-flop votes he needed to kill the big-box living-wage ordinance, and it probably cost her last April's election to Joann Thompson, who was backed by the unions.

Although, come to think of it, Coleman also voted against the Olympics, a desperate, last-ditch move to stave off defeat by showing she wasn't a complete Daley puppet.  Maybe that's why the mayor snubbed her at yesterday's ceremony. He has a very long memory.

Any way you look at it, this should be a lesson for other loyalists thinking about the mayor's TIFs, taxes, and Olympics. Vote against him, even once, and you're exiled.

As we head into another round of the never-ending fight over the so-called 7 percent property tax cap, I think it's wise for Chicagoans to brace themselves for a significant rise in taxes when the next installment comes out this summer.

This realization hit me yet again at a press conference put together yesterday by Cook County assessor James Houlihan and several ministers from around the city. Held on the steps of First Baptist Congregational, at Washington and Ashland, it was intended as a show of support for the cap--which in fact is not a cap at all but a home owner's exemption of $20,000. Passed in 2004 to help limit the hit taxpayers were taking as a result of rising reassessments, the "cap" is set to expire this year, in which case the home owner's exemption would plummet back down to $4,500. 

It's not as though Houlihan's press conference was without heavy hitters. There was the Reverend Jesse Jackson, who spoke pretty accurately about our property tax system when he said, "There's always some scheme afoot that rewards the wealthy and punishes the poor." But it wasn't so much who was there as who wasn't--Mayor Daley--that mattered. Despite the mayor's rhetoric about how he worries John and Jane Bungalow may get taxed out of their longtime family homes, he's never really lifted a finger to push tax relief through the Illinois General Assembly. 

He was supposed to show up at yesterday's press conference, or at least send a representative. But no one from the mayor's office came. Instead Daley hastily put together his own press conference unveiling a new proposal for an independent police oversight board. Set at City Hall at the same time as Houlihan's press conference, it drew most of the mainstream media away and became front-page news. There was next to nothing about Houlihan's press conference.

It's unfortunate that the property tax issue doesn't receive more attention. Sure, it's complicated; sure, there are sexier topics. But it's hardly as though this is a minor issue without relevance to anyone's life. By Houlihan's calculations, taxes on the west and south sides could more than double without the tax cap. I've been studying the impact of coming tax bills on the west side, where land values are soaring because of approaching gentrification. Come August, people can expect to get tax bills of upwards of $5,000, nearly four times what they had to pay last year. If I were cynical, I'd say the rising property taxes were all part of the mayor's plan to force west-side homeowners into foreclosure, so the city can claim their tax-delinquent property and auction it off for cheap to well-connected developers.

In actuality, Daley's probably playing a different game, holding back his support for the 7 percent cap until he sees how much school funding the state will pony up for. Only after that's decided will Daley will know how much of a property tax break he's willing to give the little people. Don't expect much.

If Mayor Daley ever wants to get out of politics, I think he could have a great career in comedy. Certainly his latest proposal is classic stuff, even if the joke's on us. 

Last week the Metropolitan Mayors Caucus, an organization of 272 area mayors put together by Daley, proposed creating a new wing of the state education bureaucracy intended to guarantee "transparency" in educational fundiing. As Fran Spielman has reported in the Sun-Times, under the proposal, "school districts would develop long-term financial plans that include multiyear forecasts of revenue, spending and debt. Long-term capital improvement plans would also be required." The state would be authorized to withhold funding from school districts that "thumb their noses at the reforms and remove recalcitrant administrators."

Well, what about recalcitrant, thumb-nosing mayors? Make no mistake, the man most responsible for deception in education funding here in Chicago is the very fellow who's proposing to reform it.

I'm talking, of course, about tax increment financing districts, of which Chicago has at least 150 (one more was recommended by the city's Community Development Commission on April 10, the day Daley and the caucus unveiled their proposal).

The really funny part about Daley's so-called reform is that it doesn't even mention TIFs, the single greatest source of duplicity in an already confusing property tax morass. Transparency? What a joke: in Chicago roughly $400 million a year in property taxes is diverted into off-the-books accounts controlled by Daley and his favorite aldermen. The TIF money doesn't appear on any budget, and it's not itemized on your property tax bills, which lie about how your tax dollars get spent. Tax bills lead Chicagoans to believe half of their tax dollars go to the public schools, when in fact the schools forfeit at least $200 million a year to the mayor's worthy causes: e.g., subsidies for luxury condos in Logan Square and commercial leases in the Loop.

Daley had a chance to promote "transparency" last summer, when Cook County Board commissioner Mike Quigley proposed that the county itemize TIF expenditures on tax bills. Mayor Daley dispatched a few aides and aldermen to the county board meeting to make sure the commissioners killed Quigley's bill. In a particularly memorable moment during the debate, "independent" board member Larry Suffredin, echoing comments from one of Daley's chief TIF advisers, said that  putting the information on the tax bill would only confuse taxpayers. 

I suppose it's better just to keep them in the dark.  Or make 'em laugh.

If there was any hope that changes in the City Council would led to more independence, it was squelched by a series of comments offered by alderman Carrie Austin of the 34th Ward.

In an interview with Sun-Times City Hall reporter Fran Spielman, Austin made no secret of her desire to replace former alderman William Beavers (Seventh Ward) as the head of the council's budget committee, a position her late husband, former alderman Lemuel Austin, also held.

Among her credentials Austin, the new head of the council's black caucus, cited her "longevity and loyalty to this administration."

Trouble is, the City Council's supposed to be the check that balances the mayor. If Austin had any backbone she'd be lining up the aldermanic votes she needs to be budget chair with or without Daley's blessing. And then she'd use her chairmanship powers to act as fiscal watchdog on how the city spends billions of property tax dollars.

In reality, of course, chairing the budget committee is a plum position not because of its fiscal oversight but because of the jobs the chair gets to fill in exchange for staying blindly loyal to Daley.

Come to think of it, we don't even need the budget committee, considering there's already a finance committee chaired by another mayoral loyalist, alderman Edward Burke (14th). If you recall, the budget committee emerged out of Council Wars, as former Reader staff writer Gary Rivlin explains in Fire on the Prairie, his book about Mayor Harold Washington. In 1986 black aldermen wanted Burke removed from the chair of finance because, as alderman Dorothy Tillman put it, "Why show a racist like Burke an ounce of sympathy or respect?" But 48th Ward alderman Marion Volini countered by insisting that Burke keep his chairmanship on the grounds that in her lakefront community he "is seen as the only thing between Washington, tax increases, and widespread cronyism."

So now we have two rubber-stamp committees looking the other way while Daley does what he wants. And of course lakefront voters--out of apathy, idiocy, and all-around cluelessness--rewarded Daley with more than 70 percent of the vote in February's municipal election, even as the CTA collapses. I guess Volini had it wrong: lakefront voters really don't care about tax hikes and cronyism (PDF)--not to mention essential city services--so long as it's Daley and not Washington who's  mayor.

Yesterday Mayor Daley weighed in on Christopher Kozicki, the former building department employee who got a cushy job with the planning department after testifying in former patronage chief Robert Sorich's corruption trial last year.  During the trial Kozicki admitted to having altered the rating of the 19-year-old son of a high-ranking union official to ensure that he'd be hired as a city building inspector. Pointing out that this had endangered public safety, city inspector David Hoffman recommended in December that Kozicki be fired.

Pish posh, the mayor now replies. Firing Kozicki might deter other city employees from participating with prosecutors in corruption investigations, and we can't have that, can we?

So Kozicki--who got his original city post through the mayor's brother, Cook County commisioner John Daley--gets to keep his $130,000 job, though no one seems to know what he does or how he's qualified.

Meanwhile Sorich, another Bridgeport native son, and two other former city officials convicted in the corruption trial are free on bond pending their appeals. So-called appeal bonds are rarely issued, and when they are, attorneys say, it's a sign that a conviction is likely to be overturned.

In the shower of praise for Mayor Daley at his endorsement press conference, Senator Barack Obama left out one local matter on which he and the mayor disagree--Promontory Point.

For the last year or so, Obama has been participating in the effort to keep the mayor from removing the distinctive limestone rocks at the Point in Hyde Park and paving it over with concrete as part of a multimillion dollar lakefront revetment project.

With Obama distracted by his run for office will Daley feel free to start pouring concrete? The senator's old friends in Hyde Park will be watching.

Far be it fro