Update on a new tool that we are sending to Alders related to the budget, but before we go through that, I want to take a moment to reiterate my shock as well as the horror that we all experienced of the arson attack that took place on the Blue Line.
This is an absolute failure of our criminal justice as well as our mental health institutions.
This individual was charged with dozens of felonies over the past three decades
He was clearly seriously mentally disturbed and was a danger to himself and to others
The system that we had failed to intervene and now we have a woman who is fighting for her life
And I am praying for her and her full recovery
We're also praying for her family at this time
This is a horrific tragedy that should have never happened.
Our CTA system provides roughly one million rides per day.
It is critical in this moment that we reassure riders and make the necessary investments
so that riders and workers feel safe on our trains.
My administration has been in touch with CPD as well as with CTA about this incident.
The transit bill that passed in Springfield includes additional funding for public safety, but also for mental health services as well as services for our homeless population.
I do believe it's critical in this moment that we expedite those dollars so that we can immediately take strong action that will ensure that nothing like this ever happens again.
I hope you all will join me in praying for this young woman, as well as her family, that not only does she survive, but that she heals.
Now I want to give a quick update before we take just a few questions.
We sent out this tool, which you can see on the screen, which offers aldermen yet another opportunity to provide my administration with recommendations or ideas that they may have around revenue or other cost-saving measures.
there's been a lot of noise around possible efficiencies so we want to make sure that we
are giving aldermen every single opportunity to put forth concrete ideas to help us move forward
with this budget our priorities are clear we want to ultimately pass a budget that protects the
programs that poor and working chicagoans rely upon we want to maintain our investments in
community safety programs, and we want to fund it to the extent possible under our Home
Rule authority with progressive revenue, meaning taxes that are paid by large corporations
or wealthy people rather than regressive taxes which tend to fall primarily or predominantly
on poor and working people.
We have been quite consistent on our priorities, but we are always open to new ideas.
We remain open to compromise and working with anyone on the council,
and we will continue to engage and offer opportunities to provide feedback throughout this budget process.
Thank you, and now I'm willing to accept questions for many of you,
but also you have chairman
Irvin with us, our budget director
Guzman, our chief financial officer
Joe Jurowski and our
comptroller, Mr. Mike
Pelsky.
We'll just go down the list here.
Good afternoon.
You kind of said there's been a lot
of noise about this. This feels almost
like you're challenging the city council
as opposed to engaging
with them if you
see the difference. You're saying
And they've been telling us to make these changes or look at efficiencies,
and you've previously said we haven't actually gotten those proposals.
Audermon Irvin has said the same.
Is this really about engaging with the city council or calling them out?
This is about engagement.
How much will you consider what they provide in-house?
Soon, can you provide the turnaround if they're asking to evaluate a tax proposal?
Yeah, well, we'll take every single proposal seriously.
That's why we started this process, if you remember, well back in April,
as well as this budget has been before the city council for over a month now.
Our team is fully available.
We've made adjustments to our calendars so that we can assert ourselves in this moment.
And as far as how soon, it just depends on how soon those ideas and recommendations come to us.
Good afternoon.
Good afternoon.
I know you addressed the blue line, but yesterday you called safety on the CTA your top priority when it comes to transportation.
And you referenced those dollars we're going to be getting from Springfield.
How will you specifically be changing safety measures on the CTA for riders who are moving forward?
Yeah, well, again, this is an awful, awful, tragic incident.
and safety as a whole is my top priority, not just for public transportation.
And so there are appropriations that have been dedicated specifically around safety,
but even more specifically around homelessness as well as mental health services.
So now we have a governing structure that will allow for all voices to come together
to think strategically about where those investments should rest.
And so it's going to be a combination of all three, mental health and behavioral health care services.
So that's going to require person power, but also for the homeless,
which includes our ability to be able to ensure that those who are unhoused are not relying upon the public transportation as temporary housing.
And as far as how we show up with law enforcement or security agencies, those things will be debated.
But just know that it's a top priority and that funding that we need from Springfield.
I know people are looking at a year from now, but we're calling on Springfield to send that with some expediency.
Are any of those changes something that would be visible to riders?
Will they be able to see the difference with those dollars and those changes?
Oh, absolutely, right?
Look, we have a housing crisis across America, right?
And so with the support services for those who are unhoused,
the expectation is that there are less people on the train that are there
because they have nowhere to live.
Same thing for mental and behavioral health care services.
We already see a visible transformation in our city
because we have more care programs that spread throughout the entire city of Chicago.
The anticipation is that we'll see more of that.
Same thing with the level of security and support that's actually visibly recognizable
on the actual transportation system.
More officers then and more visible officers.
I think it's too early to speculate what that absolutely looks like,
but again, the funding from Springfield is the most important thing.
Without that funding, then none of this will be visibilized.
Mr. Mayor, if I could just follow up with one question about CTA.
Brendan Riley, and I know you guys have heard him talk about this before,
But New York City having a police officer patrolling intermittently on the trains or buses, that that would have an impact.
I mean, is this something that you've talked to the alderman about recently?
Is it on the table, the possibility of having police officers?
Because now it's my understanding, correct me if I'm wrong, but they're on the platform patrolling, but they don't actually get on the train.
Well, I do know that they interact not just on the platform but in and off the train as well.
You know, look, I think there are a variety of ways in which we can see this manifest.
I think what's most important is that there's actually funding to do it.
Now, our ability to ensure that that funding matches the desired outcomes, that's something that we'll continue to work through.
So as long as people know that my top priority is to make sure that that funding comes from Springfield,
it goes towards all the areas of need that will, you know, strengthen safety on our public transportation system.
That's the most important thing.
If I can just ask one more question.
Sure.
I mean, you're looking around, but you're not looking at Casio, by the way.
That was pretty smooth.
We know that one of the things that you focused in on when you were running
and that you wanted to address homelessness, the crisis of homelessness
and people with mental health problems on the street.
And unfortunately, that did not pass.
The voters rejected that.
Are you thinking that there needs to be a more concerted effort?
Take another look at that proposal of trying to address the mental illness,
you know, the people on the street, the random punchers.
I mean, this all indicates, you know, there's people on the street that need help.
Yeah, they do.
They do need help.
There are a number of people who are suffering severely from trauma and mental illness.
And it is becoming increasingly more dangerous. It's why, you know, again, I've made the investments that I've made to reopen our mental health clinics. We have expanded the care program, but it has to go wider and deeper, quite frankly.
And it's why in this budget, we put forth the first of its kind social media amusement and responsibility tax that will be solely dedicated to this this need so that you can't have a mayor unilaterally.
or defund something that's so critical to our overall safety and well-being.
This is a big deal.
This budget means a lot to so many people across the city,
challenging these large corporations and the ultra-rich to pay their fair share.
It is a matter of community safety.
Should we look at other ways in which we can generate revenue progressively
to respond to the mental health crisis that also dovetails into homelessness as well as crime?
Absolutely.
It's why we expanded our shelters by 126%.
We actually have beds that are available for people in this budget.
We have funded our rapid rehousing program as well.
So we're doing our part, and we know we have to do more.
That's why I believe that our efforts in Springfield collectively will be critical to ensure that these programs are fully funded
because it is a matter of keeping people safe.
Thank you for those questions.
Hi again.
You're pretty resilient. Thank you for hanging around the last few days.
I want to ask again a question I think Alice asked you earlier about Alderman O'Shea's suggestion during his City Club appearance with Alderman Irvin and others about asking unions to come to the table and see if there are any concessions they're willing to make in order to help get to yes on a budget.
Is that something you're open to or does that take you down a layoff path that you don't want to go down?
Well, first of all, let me just say that we've worked with our labor partners and there have been a number of means of cost savings that we've already implemented.
And it's important that before we ask for more layoffs, we should make sure that corporations stay at the table.
That's what's most important here.
But I'll pass it over to our budget director because we do have some things in the immediate as well as measures that we're looking at long term.
But, again, the corporations have to come to the table first.
And right now we just haven't seen that.
Yeah, thank you for the question.
And I will continue to reiterate, as I do every time I get in front of an alder, that we don't stop talking to the unions.
We're constantly talking to our labor partners about not only operational items, but also our budget.
They're actively involved in those conversations.
In fact, a number of them sit on the budget working group that was created by this mayor,
actively talking about solutions for resolving the city's fiscal condition.
In particular, we are constantly at the moment talking with our labor partners around the cost of health care.
Because as we know, health care is one of the costs that goes up in not only our budget, but it's being debated at the federal level as well.
And so we do not stop talking to our labor partners.
We are constantly engaged in conversations around our budget with our labor partners, and that doesn't stop.
What I will say is this mayor has put a red line on layoffs.
We are not laying off because what that ultimately means is that there will be a cut in service provisions.
And what we have asked continually of our alders are which service cuts are you okay having in this budget?
And to that, Matt O'Shea has not given one proposal.
And another question, money-related.
Is this also a follow-up from Alice's question?
No, I think this one might be my own question.
We have not, I don't think, had a chance to hear from you since the city treasurer announced her plan to stop investing in T-bonds
and other instruments of investment that the United States government has laid out
and to ask the council for approval to continue doing that going forward.
I'm wondering if you believe that's an appropriate shift for the city's investment portfolio
and also your thoughts about Alderman Irvin's role in kicking that to rules.
Well, first of all, the city treasurer, I believe, is initiating a conversation
around what role does government have moving forward in terms of how we protect our democracy and working people.
And she's well within her jurisdiction to have that as a consideration.
we have not had a substantive conversation about
What that means long term, but I'll continue to look and engage with her and other elected officials
as we find stronger ways to hold systems accountable, to make sure that we're protecting our democracy.
As far as the alderman's decision to use the parliamentary procedures that have been used in practice for a very long time,
it's not unreasonable or it's not unheard of where that type of action has been taken.
Given their relationship, should he have recused himself in your view?
You know, look, he's an alderman.
I mean, his ability to legislate as well as use his authority,
and I don't believe it's my position to dictate how an alder who is duly elected
should conduct himself, particularly when they're working within the confines of the rules of city council.
Hi, Mayor.
Hi.
Another labor question here.
Okay, your own.
The trade unions have come out against your TIF surplus.
which the CFL said earlier would impede construction.
Are their concerns valid, or do you think the trades are on the wrong side here?
Well, look, the TIF surplus is being used to make sure that our workers,
as well as our public institutions, are supported,
because we know that the Chicago Public Schools is still woefully underfunded by the state of Illinois,
and I know there are efforts to make sure that the school district is fully funded,
like schools are being pushed to be fully funded across the state of Illinois.
So I don't think it's ever a bad idea to ensure that we're protecting workers, that we're protecting the black student success funding, that we're protecting and investing in making sure that we have safe passage.
I believe that's great that we're doing that.
Same thing with our parks.
We just had an announcement yesterday where Alderman David Moore has been working on the Ogden Park for a very long time.
And the state of Illinois, along with the city of Chicago and our TIF dollars, are being used to expand park programs.
And, you know, if you hear from any family across the city, whether you're on the north side of Chicago or the south side of Chicago, we need more investments in our parks and our libraries.
So I think we're always going to be on the right side when we're investing in people.
Can you also opine on the scrutiny over Congressman Chewy Garcia?
Do you agree with the criticism that his ballot maneuver was anti-democratic?
And how does it feel to see a fellow progressive under this national scrutiny?
Well, let me just say, you know, Congressman Garcia has just a long track record of progressive leadership.
I mean, he's, you know, a member of the Rainbow Coalition, right, that led to significant transformation.
You know, as far as, you know, this particular race and his decision not to run, you know, that was a personal decision for him.
And, you know, my hope and my expectation is that he gets the quiet time that he deserves and needs in this moment.
And, you know, I just hope that, you know, his long track record doesn't get undermined in this moment
because I think he's done such an incredible job at building coalition and fighting for working-class people.
And that's the focus that I'm going to maintain.
Hey, Mayor.
Hey.
Some of the alders think this portal really is just a way to slow the whole process down
and really is more of an effort just to shut down their ideas.
Can you comment on that?
And also, why not just do it the old-fashioned way and bring everybody into a room and hash it out?
I mean, not just say, hey, if you want to reach me, but why don't you proactively bring everybody,
including labor, corporations, alders, anybody, and just hash it out instead of doing portals and whatever?
Well, I mean, look, there's three things that I believe that we're talking about.
People want a more open, transparent process.
So we're providing that.
There's been mid-year hearings.
That's something that we've never done.
We worked with city council to be able to accomplish that.
I think that was important.
You know, as far as slowing it down, that's what they asked for, right?
Because many folks thought that this was moving at a speed that was so –
they just thought it was moving at a pace that was too fast for them.
So the slowing down process is also another reaction and response to what they've asked for.
And I think the third thing is we've done that, right?
Those are called budget hearings.
My team has always made themselves available.
The chairman run these committee meetings.
You know, many of them have been, I believe, quite useful.
I've had one-on-one conversations.
So in that regard, I guess I never really consider myself old-fashioned, but thank you for humbling me.
I guess we are kind of already going through the process that is, quite frankly, old-fashioned.
So we're going through the process.
the way it has historically gone, but we've added some other elements to it
that I believe is good for the modernization of our government.
Again, through mid-year hearings, starting to process well back in April,
we've had community town halls, roundtables, one-on-one conversations.
We've had briefings.
I've sat and spoken with business leaders.
That's why, quite frankly, I'm a little taken aback by some of the pushback from the corporate head techs
because when I talk to CEOs, it doesn't come up.
They talk about community safety and how the city can strengthen its efforts to better fund those programs.
So we're literally responding to the things that people say they care about,
whether that's slowing the process down, having more hearings, engaging earlier, talking to multiple entities.
The EY report brought every single industry to the table.
We're literally talking to everyone.
So it's been a great exercise, and I believe we're going to ultimately pass a budget that protects all of Chicago.
And in terms of labor, I know Annette just said, you know, layoffs are off the table.
But there's a lot of other things labor can do besides layoffs.
I mean, there's a lot of concessions.
So are you also saying that you will absolutely consider zero concessions from labor?
What concessions are you referring to?
Just a second.
Yeah, which concessions?
Benefits, furloughs.
I mean, there's a lot of things that you can go to besides layoffs.
So layoffs is kind of the extreme, right?
Well, we've already talked about benefits, and furloughs, again, that's a reduction of services.
Yeah, what I would say is furlough days, one, can only be done unilaterally on our non-represented staff,
which is less than 10% of our staffing.
And it's not been shown that it actually saves money,
because until someone says that they want a reduction in services,
the services are expected to continue at the volume and at the pace that they currently exist,
which means we're now doing them with people on overtime, which is more expensive.
So until, you know, someone, again, tells me what services they'd like for us to cut back on,
furloughs are not going to produce the amount of savings that people think that they're going to produce.
All right. Thank you for that question.
Forgive me if this is a crazy, silly, stupid question, but what about the city?
You have more than 100 employees.
Has the city taxed the head tax?
We're not a corporation.
So only.
Yeah, it's just for corporations, right?
When the initial tax was put forth by Richard J. Daley, at that time we had more than 15 employees as well.
But this is about corporations, right?
Right, because we don't, government doesn't exist to draw a profit.
Government exists to actually serve people.
It's a difference.
And that's not a crazy question.
I've had several ask, so thank you.
You're welcome.
And then back to Garcia.
The critics are going to say that you really didn't answer her question,
and you're giving him a pass.
And if it had been someone that you might not agree with,
there would have been all kinds of people saying that what he did was absolutely wrong.
Why are you still defending him?
I don't know if I would characterize it as to be defending him.
I mean, I think what your colleague.
Well, I mean, okay, because I think what Congressman Garcia has done over the course of his career,
I think those aspects are worth defending.
If you're asking me to opine, you know, on, you know, how he decided to retire, again, I think that's a personal decision.
I can't tell you why he decided that this was the time for him to leave.
And I wish him well in his retirement, and we're looking forward to continuing to build on the progressive movement that he's been a part of.
Thank you all very much.