...period and the duration of all committee and city council meetings, profane, vulgar, threatening, abusive, or disruptive language is not permitted.
Demeaning, discriminatory, or harassing behavior and speech directed towards others is not permitted.
Disruptive behavior, including disruptive or disrespectful conduct during others' presentations, is not permitted.
Banners, flyers, or signage are not permitted. Backpacks, large bags, and sharp objects are not permitted. Clear bags, not tinted in color, that do not exceed 12 by 12 by 6 inches, will be permitted and are subject to search.
Health food and beverages, including in metal canisters, are not permitted.
Cell phones must be placed on silent prior to entering the meeting room.
Individuals must remain seated.
Public comment speakers are permitted to stand only when providing public comment.
Small handheld devices may be used only while seated,
and the user must refrain from interfering with the view or hearing of other individuals.
Individuals or groups failing to adhere to these rules will be asked to seize such disruptive conduct
and failure to comply will result in their being subject to removal
from the meeting by the sergeant at arms.
Chicago City Council Rules of Conduct for Public Meetings
2023-2027 Pursuant to the Chicago City Council Rules of Order and Procedure
Rule 49, the sergeant at arms sets forth the following rules of conduct
to be followed during the public comment period
and the duration of all committee and city council meetings
Profane, vulgar, threatening, abusive, or disruptive language is not permitted.
Demeaning, discriminatory, or harassing behavior and speech directed towards others is not permitted.
Disruptive behavior, including disruptive or disrespectful conduct during others' presentations, is not permitted.
Banners, flyers, or signage are not permitted.
Backpacks, large bags, and sharp objects are not permitted.
Clear bags, not tinted in color, that do not exceed 12 by 12 by 6 inches, will be permitted and are subject to search.
Health food and beverages, including in metal canisters, are not permitted.
Cell phones must be placed on silent prior to entering the meeting room.
Individuals must remain seated.
Public comment speakers are permitted to stand only when providing public comment.
Small handheld devices may be used only while seated, and the user must refrain from interfering with the view or hearing of other individuals.
Individuals or groups failing to adhere to these rules will be asked to cease such disruptive conduct.
Good morning members of the City Council. The meeting will begin shortly. Please remember to log in to your devices. Thank you.
Threatening phones must be placed on silent prior to entering the meeting room. Individuals must remain seated. Public comment speakers are permitted to stand only when providing public comment. Small handheld devices may be used only while seated and the user must refrain from interfering with the view or hearing of other individuals.
individuals or groups failing to adhere to these rules will be asked to seize such disruptive conduct and failure to comply will result in their being subject to removal from the meeting by the sergeant at arms.
City of Chicago City Council Rules of Conduct for Public Meetings, 2023-2027
Pursuant to the Chicago City Council Rules of Order and Procedure, Rule 49,
The sergeant at, arm sets forth the following rules of conduct to be followed during the public comment period
and the duration of all committee and city council meetings, profane, vulgar, threatening, abusive, or disruptive language
is not permitted, demeaning, discriminatory, or harassing behavior and speech directed
towards others is not permitted, disruptive behavior, including disruptive or disrespectful
conduct during others' presentations, is not permitted, banners, flyers, or signage
are not permitted, backpacks, large bags, and sharp objects are not permitted, clear
bags, not tinted in color, that do not exceed 12 by 12 by 6 inches, will be permitted and
are subject to search, health food and beverages, including in metal canisters, are not permitted,
cell phones must be placed on silent prior to entering the meeting room, individuals must remain
seated, public comment speakers are permitted to stand only when providing public comment,
small handheld devices may be used only while seated and the user must refrain from interfering
with the view or hearing of other individuals, individuals or groups failing to adhere to these
rules will be asked to cease such disruptive conduct and failure to comply will result
in their being subject to removal from the meeting by the sergeant at arms.
City of Chicago City Council Rules of Conduct for Public Meetings, 2023-2027 Pursuant to the Chicago City Council Rules of Order and Procedure, Rule 49, the sergeant at, arm sets forth the following rules of conduct to be followed during the public comment period and the duration of all committee and city council meetings,
Profane, vulgar, threatening, abusive, or disruptive language is not permitted.
Demeaning, discriminatory, or harassing behavior and speech directed towards others is not permitted.
Disruptive behavior, including disruptive or disrespectful conduct during others' presentations, is not permitted.
Banners, flyers, or signage are not permitted.
Backpacks, large bags, and sharp objects are not permitted.
Clear bags, not tinted in color, that do not exceed 12 by 12 by 6 inches, will be permitted and are subject to search.
Health food and beverages, including in metal canisters, are not permitted.
Cell phones must be placed on silent prior to entering the meeting room.
Individuals must remain seated.
Public comment speakers are permitted to stand only when providing public comment.
Small handheld devices may be used only while seated and the user must refrain from interfering with the view or hearing of other individuals. Individuals or groups failing to adhere to these rules will be asked to seize such disruptive conduct and failure to comply will result in their being subject to removal from the meeting by the sergeant-at-arms.
Good morning members of the City Council. Please remember to log in to your devices. The meeting will begin shortly. Thank you.
Good morning members of the City Council. Please remember to log in your devices. The meeting will begin shortly. Thank you.
threatening, abusive, or disruptive language is not permitted.
Demeaning, discriminatory, or harassing behavior and speech directed towards others is not permitted.
Disruptive behavior, including disruptive or disrespectful conduct during others' presentations, is not permitted.
Banners, flyers, or signage are not permitted.
Backpacks, large bags, and sharp objects are not permitted.
Clear bags, not tinted in color, that do not exceed 12 by 12 by 6 inches, will be permitted and are subject to search.
Health food and beverages, including in metal canisters, are not permitted.
Cell phones must be placed on silent prior to entering the meeting room.
Individuals must remain seated.
Public comment speakers are permitted to stand only when providing public comment.
Small handheld devices may be used only while seated and the user must refrain from interfering with the view or hearing.
of other individuals. Individuals or groups failing to adhere to these rules will be asked
to see such disruptive conduct and failure to comply will result in their being subject
to removal from the meeting by the sergeant at arms.
Counsel, good morning. If you can please log in to your devices. Please log in to your
devices. We will get started in a moment. Please raise your hand if you need support.
Please raise your hand if you need support. Log in to your devices. We'll get started
in a moment.
Chicago City Council Rules of Conduct for Public Meetings 2023-2027
Pursuant to the Chicago City Council Rules of Order and Procedure
Rule 49, the sergeant at arm sets forth the following rules of conduct to be followed during the public comment period
and the duration of all committee and city council meetings
Profane, vulgar, threatening, abusive, or disruptive language is not permitted
demeaning, discriminatory, or harassing behavior and speech directed towards others is not permitted.
Disruptive behavior, including disruptive or disrespectful conduct during others' presentations, is not permitted.
Banners, flyers, or signage are not permitted.
Backpacks, large bags, and sharp objects are not permitted.
Clear bags, not tinted in color, that do not exceed 12 by 12 by 6 inches, will be permitted and are subject to search.
Health food and beverages, including in metal canisters, are not permitted.
Cell phones must be placed on silent prior to entering the meeting room.
Individuals must remain seated.
Public comment speakers are permitted to stand only when providing public comment.
Small handheld devices may be used only while seated, and the user must refrain from interfering with the view or hearing of other individuals.
individuals or groups failing to adhere to these rules will be asked to see such
disruptive conduct and failure to comply will result in their being subject to
removal from the meeting by the sergeant at arms you know what I just realized
something
City of Chicago City Council Rules of Conduct for Public Meetings, 2023 to 2027 pursuant to the Chicago City Council Rules of Order and Procedure, Rule 49, the sergeant at arm sets forth the following rules of conduct to be followed during the public comment period and the duration of all committee and city council meetings.
Profane, vulgar, threatening, abusive, or disruptive language is not permitted.
Demeaning, discriminatory, or harassing behavior and speech directed towards others is not permitted.
Disruptive behavior, including disruptive or disrespectful conduct during others' presentations, is not permitted.
Banners, flyers, or signage are not permitted.
Backpacks, large bags, and sharp objects are not permitted.
Clear bags, not tinted in color, that do not exceed 12 by 12 by 6 inches, will be permitted and are subject to search.
Health food and beverages, including in metal canisters, are not permitted.
Cell phones must be placed on silent prior to entering the meeting room.
Individuals must remain seated.
Public comment speakers are permitted to stand only when providing public comment.
Small handheld devices may be used only while seated and the user must refrain from interfering with the view or hearing of other individuals. Individuals or groups failing to adhere to these rules will be asked to cease such disruptive conduct and failure to comply will result in their being subject to removal from the meeting by the sergeant at arms.
Good morning and welcome to City Council. The meeting will start momentarily. Please take your seats and silence your phones. Thank you.
Good morning. The Council will come to order. Madam Clerk, please take a quorum roll call.
Electronic voting. Please use your e-device and cast your vote. The voting is now open.
Please log into your device and use your e-voting. If you need support, please raise your hand.
And the voting is now open.
I'm sorry, the quorum is now open.
I will now take a voice vote for those who did not use the e-device.
Alderman Laspata.
Oh, Laspata is present.
And happy birthday.
Alderman Robinson.
Not present in chambers.
Alderman Hall.
Not present in chambers.
Alderman Mitchell.
Mitchell is present.
Alderman Beal.
Beal is present.
Alderwoman Gutierrez.
Not present in chambers.
Alderman Curtis.
Curtis is present.
Alderman O'Shea.
O'Shea is present.
Alderwoman Taylor.
Not present in chambers.
Alderwoman Tabaras.
Oh, Tabaras.
Yes. Oh, not present in chambers. Alderman Burnett. Burnett is present. Alderman Irvin. Irvin is not present in chambers. Alderman Talaferro. Not present in chambers. Alderman Ramirez Rosa. Not present in chambers. Alderman Gardner. Gardner is present.
Alderman Martin. Martin is not present in Chambers.
Alderman Haddon. Haddon is not present
in Chambers. Oh, I'm sorry.
Oh, Alderman, oh
where am I at? Oh, we're working on that. Okay. But I see you
present. I got you present. Rodriguez Sanchez is present and Silverstein
is present. Anyone else I missed? Walk in.
alderman david moore is present anyone else that walked in
okay mayor we have a quorum very well thank you there are 38 39 members that are present
so we do have a quorum
There are a number of members that have requested to participate in today's meeting remotely for reasons stated in Rule 59, and they are as following.
Alder, Coleman, Haddon, Taylor, Clay, Irvin, and Talia Faro.
Madam Clerk, could you confirm their existence remotely?
Yes.
Madam Clerk, could you confirm their existence, please, remotely?
Sure. Alderwoman Coleman.
Present.
Coleman is present.
Alderwoman Taylor?
Here.
Taylor is present.
Alderman Irvin?
Alderman Irvin is present.
Irvin is present.
Alderman Talaferro?
Present.
Talaferro is present.
Alderwoman Clay?
Present.
Clay is present.
Alderwoman Haddon?
Present.
Haddon is present.
Well, thank you, Madam Clerk.
All of the individuals that wish to participate in today's meeting remotely for reasons stated in Rule 59 have been confirmed.
There's a roll call vote.
Madam Clerk, would you please take the quorum?
Please take the roll call vote for the members who wish to participate remotely per Rule 59.
All right.
The quorum roll call vote is now open.
It is now open.
Please use your e-device.
The roll call now is open.
All right.
I will call on those who have not used the e-device.
Alderman Mitchell.
Mitchell is a yes.
Alderwoman Harris.
Harris is a yes.
Alderman Beal.
Beal is a no.
Alderman Curtis.
Curtis is a no.
Alderman O'Shea.
O'Shea is a no.
Alderwoman Nugent.
Nugent is a no.
Alderman Knutson.
Knutson is a no.
Alderwoman Clay.
Oh, Clay is not in chambers.
Clay is absent.
and Alderman Nugent
is a no. The voting
is now closed. Very well. There are
21 yeas, 18 nays.
The majority of the members present
have accepted remote participation
per Rule 59. For the
following members, Coleman, Haddon, Taylor,
Clay, Irvin, and Talia Farrell. Let's stand
for the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge
allegiance to the flag
of the United States of America
and to the republic for which it
stands, one nation under
God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Let's remain standing for our invocation
today, which will be delivered by Reverend Dr. Eddie Williams III. Might we pray? Our Father,
we are grateful for this day, a day that you have made, and we shall rejoice and be glad in it.
We pause to thank you for all of the things that we normally take for granted, our health,
our strength, the roof over our head, clothes on our back and shoes on our feet.
We appreciate you and we are grateful to you.
All that we are and ever hope to be, we give you all the glory for it.
We pray for our city.
We pray for unity.
We pray for love, got a sense of cooperation, oh Lord.
And we also pray for this city council.
Help us to remember the words in the psalm.
that word selah which means to pause and it means to reflect as we deliberate today and do the work
and business of the city help us to pause and reflect upon why we do what we do that we are
servants first of all and i pray lord that you would also grant us the understanding and pause
to remember the words of jesus that blessed are those who take care of the poor and the needy
those that look after those that are the least of these.
We pray that we are mindful as we pause and remember them as well in our deliberation.
Lord, let there be peace, let there be understanding, and let there be solutions
so that all parties may be blessed.
This is our prayer. In Jesus' name, amen.
Thank you. You may be seated.
It's the portion of the meeting for public comments. Mr. Clerk.
The council will now begin the public comment period,
which is limited to a maximum of 30 minutes.
each speaker is limited to three minutes speakers cannot yield or transfer their time to another
speaker any written comments that have been submitted will be posted and made available
for automatic review the first speaker today is fuqua fuqua is not present on zoom our next speaker
is jody wiedeker good morning can you hear me good morning yes we can thank you thank you dear
mayor johnson and chicago city council thank you for your time and listening to me today
again i am here to advocate for the humane measure to ban the sale of new fur in chicago
to some this may not seem very important but this is not just about protecting animals
our world and our environment are in a very precarious place right now and this directly
affects each and every one of us in the way we live our lives avian influenza is disrupting the
agriculture agricultural industry as you have probably seen with the increases and the soaring
prices of eggs the primary reason for high egg prices is the current bird flu outbreak which
has killed millions of chickens on egg farms drastically reducing egg production from the
centers for disease control h5 bird flu is widespread in wild birds worldwide and is causing
outbreaks in poultry and u.s dairy cows with several recent human cases in u.s dairy and
poultry workers fur farming is another industry that forces animals into unnatural unsanitary
situations that cause these crises from the national institutes of health june 2024 highly
pathogenic avian influenza hpai has caused widespread mortality in both wild and domestic
birds in europe in 2023 in july 2023 hpaa h5n1 was detected on 27 fur farms in finland
in total infections in silver and blue foxes american minks and raccoon dogs were confirmed
as you hear all of this is connected so to conclude this common sense legislation is so
much more than animal welfare on behalf of the chicago alliance for animals more than 3 000
members and millions of people worldwide i am urging you to please vote in support of
oh 2023-2983 to protect each other our city the environment and for those without a voice or choice
let's be part of the solution not the problem thank you again thank you very much for your
comments thank you our next speaker this morning is Jesse Johnson our next speaker this morning is Mario
Good morning.
Good morning.
My name is Jessie Johnson.
I just came here to show my support for the mayor because there's been so much talk about what's going on and the things that he's not doing.
And I feel like he's doing a lot for the community.
And I feel like a lot of people are standing in his way.
that he can't get anything done
because so many people are standing in his way
because they don't want him to be successful.
And I'm here to show my support
and I hope that the people will stop standing in his way
so he can get some things done.
Where was the people when Rahm Emanuel was in here?
Why didn't nobody stand up to him?
where were the people with Mayor Daley
who ripped this city apart
why didn't they stand up to him
but everybody wants to stand up to him
and tell him what he's not doing right
and what he's not doing properly
and these people ripped this city off
that's why it's in the shape that it's in
but now you want to blame him for everything
I think it needs to stop
and I think it's sin for what you're doing
to this mayor. And I think it needs to stop right
now. Because you didn't stand up all this courage.
All this courage coming from all these people.
Where was it when Manuel was here? Where
was it when Daley was here? It was nowhere to be
found. So I think you need to give him a chance and let him
do his job. Thank you very much for your comments.
Our next speaker is Mario Phillips.
Good morning.
Good morning.
I don't have a lot to say, but Doge, they recently reported an estimate of $65 billion in savings.
And I know you go to Capitol Hill next month.
If they would propose to you, we'd give you $20 billion to rescind the sanctuary city status.
Would you rescind it?
Because $20 billion can be used a lot.
It could be used even in a municipal bankruptcy, like Mike Duggan did in Detroit in his first term.
So it's not about how long you've been.
it's about the usage of it. Because in 2010, we was about
$14 billion in debt in the pensions. Now we're up to $33 billion. That's almost a 300%
per game. And I don't understand, people don't understand how important it is
to become solvent. Because if we default on the loan, the whole city falls.
So that's how you restructure the debt, by actually dealing with it.
Because it takes a strong will to make a right decision. And that's what you're going to need
to do with that. Also, 1% of the city, 1% of the population
works for the city, us in the private sector, we shouldn't be subsidizing these pensions.
We have defined contribution plans. You all have defined benefit. That means
I can't retire when I want to retire if the market falls, but you can retire whenever you
at will and you won't even feel the effect of that. That's not right to us. So some
of that money, also, if they was to give it to you, you could lobby so they could change pension laws
at the state level so that could free us up. And another thing,
what we could probably do with that money, if they did propose that to you,
where only like 1% or 2% of the schools have like HVAC, welding, or even electrician.
It don't make sense for a kid to go to school for 13 years and not graduate with an income earning skill.
Why all the schools don't have dual enrollment?
Why all the schools don't have more trades in them?
It's 157 schools, and that's only 1% or 2% of them that can do that.
So if they put that deal on the table, because you can see he's an administration that's willing to deal and wouldn't negotiate,
Would you say, give me $20 billion, I'll take this off the table so we can help the city flourish?
Because if we default, we already was in junk status in 2015.
And some of the aldermen were here, and that's why we probably got our credit score lowered last month,
because some of them here, you can't put new wine and old wine skin.
You can't do that, or you ruin the whole wine skin.
So now you want to borrow another $830 million, and they just lowered our credit rating last month?
That's not making sense.
So if we're going to kick the can down, it's going to be a bigger issue later on down the road.
Thank you.
Thank you very much for your comments.
Our next speaker this morning is George Blakemore.
Mayor Brendan Johnson, do not go up to Congress.
Talking about sanctuary, you support the sanctuary.
They will trick you.
It's about the money.
You have used some federal money for sanctuary.
Now, I've been around for 83 years.
Now, I've seen many mayors.
But now you have a rating of 6%.
So I'm urging you to don't let them trap you in sanctuary.
If anyone needs sanctuary, black people need it.
This is Black History Month.
Our history, we are entitled to sanctuary for all the goods, service, contracts, and jobs.
Mr. Blakemore, what makes the black man so unique?
He's the only man in America who was enslaved in America.
Enslaved in America.
So you are a unique man.
So you must embrace your uniqueness.
Now everyone here, 99% of the people here of these are Democrats.
Democrats.
And now you go into another circle with Republicans.
with Reverend
Trump. Don't you go
up there with that
sanctuary. He's going to
use another strategy.
I'm just begging you
because you plan
on losing coin.
Even the people in the
city of Chicago, they're all
on sanctuary.
They don't want it.
Look at the empty seats.
Look at the empty seats.
They don't want it. We don't want it.
So don't go there, because I'm so scared that you might be indicted.
They started asking you questions about the money.
Money is the root of all evil.
So you would have to make an account of the money.
And I don't think you will win when Trump started asking you these questions.
So, you know what happened to the mayor in New York?
He decided to surrender.
And it's time for you to surrender.
And for you to smell your blood.
You are a black man.
You are a black man.
You was a black man and a little black boy before you became a Democrat.
You're still black.
and racism is still alive in the city of chicago embrace your black thank you very much for your
comments all right our next speaker is twan sims good morning committee good morning good morning
good morning mayor morning um oh i got right here in my hand i have an order of protection that was
given to a miss diana williamson this was last year we was talking about remember when i just
kind of was seen to be freaked out. But if you
was a constituent that was consistently ignored, so here's
the number, 2024OP07366.
Her name is Deanna Williamson. She is the head
of the domestic relations. Her and along with a bunch of
cronies and also criminal judges, I've emailed to the committee about
well, some of the committee about, but these are people that are supposed to take
care of you. But you, on the other
hand, oh man, I was
so happy to hear that you're going to Capitol
Hill. I was so happy
to hear that because here, now you get
to feel what it feels like to have
somebody with absolute
almost authority
standing on you.
And how
feet out of your fight might look.
But now we get to see.
But there'll be no bonding you out. The 830
million we say no to.
That way you get to wrestle from your
vantage point, just like the rest
of us out here. Because we got
to deal with it. We got to figure it out.
So you and your think tank, y'all
can figure it out. And the American
people can kind of sit those things out.
That structure,
infrastructure, no infrastructure is coming
to Austin, nor Englewood,
nor South Shore.
None of it's coming those ways.
We got Irvin up here, what?
It's called identity politicking.
Look at those poor black...
But yeah.
We divest it, not poor, because we're always going to figure it out.
We've been figuring it out for centuries now.
But here it is, you want to keep using that identity crap.
Talking about education, we got no education.
Black kids are the least.
Y'all talk about diversity, equity included.
None.
Oh, man, none of us.
It don't include us.
Not our kids, not their future, no consideration.
but y'all still arguing it
because you want to still get the money
and like he said
you might not make it off the hill
and I've been thinking that
with a certainty you might not make it
they got look
you think Vasquez
you think Cecho
you think any of them going up there with you
I guarantee you can offer them a free ticket
they going to duck that one quick
and when Pam Bundy get down here
for your corporate law office
the ones that look
purposely denied me my constitutional
right. I can't wait to see them wrestle with somebody that look.
So, hey, hey, I'm here. Y'all kick me out,
but watch. You might not make it off the hill, Mr. Johnson.
You might not make it off the hill. So y'all can subject me to whatever.
But hey. Thank you very much for your comments. Thank you.
Our next speaker this morning is Osiris King. Hello, Mr. Mayor
Brandon Johnson. As we close out Black History Month, let's talk
about some real black history. A. Philip Randolph was a black labor activist who opposed immigration.
Booker T. Washington and Frederick Douglass were prominent black people in America who
opposed immigration because they saw what immigration does to the black community. So
this charade that you're doing with Donald Trump and Tom Holman, we see through it. It
is a farce. Black people have always been against immigration, legal and illegal, because
Because a lot of poor black people are at the low-wage labor market and we don't need
foreigners taking our jobs and competing with us.
So fighting against illegal immigration is the most black thing you can do.
It is the pro-blackest thing you can do is fighting illegal immigration.
Don't let them tell you otherwise.
Mayor Brandon Judson, I am so happy that you are testifying before Congress because the
people of Chicago, especially on the south and west side, do not support sanctuary cities.
I know the election is over and people are trying to distract you with lunatics protesting
against deportations and Democrats doing what Democrats do. But do not forget that we in
Chicago do not support sanctuary cities, especially the people who live on the south and west side who
had our schools turned into migrant shelters. And for all the people who are mad about Trump
getting rid of DEI and critical race theory, those things were racist.
You cannot fight past discrimination with future discrimination.
If Martin Luther King saw what the Democratic Party has become, he would roll over in his grave.
We want to know where that money went.
$400 million to illegal aliens.
People talk about, oh, reparations this and reparations that,
and you have Democrats talking about all this stuff.
They need to talk about where that money went,
Because that's where their money went. It's complete insanity. And might I say this, a lot of people say Donald Trump is anti-black. Donald Trump has acknowledged that birthright citizenship was meant for black people, for newly freed black slaves. That's black history.
Democrats want to give it to immigrants.
Donald Trump has said that illegals compete with black people for jobs.
Democrats look the other way.
Donald Trump has said that criminal illegal aliens should be deported out of poor black communities,
while Democrats like Mayor Brandon Johnson and others fight tooth and nail to keep them here.
They are not for black people.
They are not.
So y'all can call me a sellout for being black and a Trump supporter.
That's fine. But y'all token, DEI Democrats are a threat to democracy. Y'all are the crazy ones.
So please tell me to all the people who call me a sellout for voting for Trump, which one of us is really selling out, brother?
Thank you very much for your comments. Our next speaker this morning is Daniel Beland.
Good morning, City Council and Mayor.
I know many people are here today to express their frustration with how this city is being run
and how our tax dollars are being spent, but I'm here to say thank you.
As the Executive Director of the Committee for Chicago Mayor Recall, I want to thank you for
demonstrating exactly why a mayoral recall mechanism should be law in Chicago. From day one,
your values have not reflected those of everyday Chicagoans. Instead, they align with CTU puppet
masters and radical activists who sow distrust and division. A mayor should unite the city and
prioritize public safety. You have done the opposite. Your administration includes an
anti-Semitic, anti-law enforcement, external affairs officer, a chief of staff who believes
in peace circles will solve sexual harassment, and a senior advisor who allegedly committed
election fraud in Texas and lacks a legitimate Chicago residence.
Your leadership is failing, and the results speak from themselves.
You say you don't do raggedy, but your leadership has been exactly that.
Chicagoans, regardless of race, income, or religion, want to feel safe in their homes, on their streets, and in their schools.
Yet under your watch, armed juvenile thugs continue to carjack, loot, and rob.
You canceled ShotSpotter without a backup plan endangering two-thirds of the city's population.
Since that time, 34 people have died.
That blood's on your hands and on the Vasquez 19 Progressive Caucus who supported you on that.
You also failed to disclose your conflict of interest in CPS contract talks, benefiting from a deal while replacing the school board with unvetted CTU loyalists.
Firing CEO Martinez days before Christmas for refusing a reckless payday loan proves your priorities lie in union politics, not student success.
The only ones benefiting from a better, safer, stronger Chicago are criminals and special interests.
A recent poll shows you're at a dismal 6.6 approval rating, with support collapsing across all racial and ethnic groups.
Given this overwhelming rejection and the loss of the confidence of the Chicago people, I'm demanding your immediate resignation.
Your administration is incompetent.
Chicago deserves better, and little Dirk deserves his money back.
He needs it for commissary.
Thank you.
Thank you very much for your comments.
Our next speaker is Andrew C.V. Nelson-Bey.
I'm Andrew Clarence Merrill Nelson.
I am a candidate for governor of Illinois in 2026.
And the Chicago Municipal Election should be held in November 2026, the day of the midterm general election.
And its subsequent runoff is to be held in March 2027, first Monday, which is Pulaski Day at Chicago Holiday, and held that way from now on.
I am
Commissioner of U.S. Public Health Service
to be
well I have yet to be
confirmed by the Senate
I suspect our Senate confirmation
hearings will be held
concurrent with your
being in Washington D.C.
shortly I surmise
I
I may run for mayor of Chicago.
If the people want me to run for mayor of Chicago,
if you want Andrew Nelson for mayor of Chicago, you got them.
I'll put it that way.
My mentor is Harold Washington,
Priligé Bill Dock-Walls, himself a candidate for mayor
in 2007, 2011, 2015,
and briefly in 2019.
I ran briefly in 2023.
the will of the people is eternal law of the land
according to former Illinois Governor Pat Quinn
and he's right
so if you want Andrew Nelson for mayor of Chicago
you do indeed have him
and I shall be replacing outgoing Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson
I can serve as governor for two years and run for vice president with J.D. Vance.
In 2030, I shall be running for president of the Cook County Board.
We're placing outgoing Tony Pricklin.
And I am very adept at Chicago politics.
I was born in Michael Reese Hospital.
Raise the dragon banner o'er us.
Raise our ancient loyal chorus.
Fame behind us, fame before us.
Harvard, St. George.
Now, you went to Elgin School.
That's where you were born in Elgin.
You're not a native of Chicago.
Thank you very much for your comments.
Our next speaker is John Cantazera.
Good morning, Mayor Henyard.
Good morning.
Oh, wrong city, but it will be the same end result.
Someone already talked about the 6.5% approval rating.
I want to remind you, you were elected by half, roughly, 52% of 600,000 Chicagoans.
That's about 12% of the population.
You are literally at 6.5%.
Donald Trump could run for mayor of Chicago right now and beat you.
That's how unpopular you are and ridiculous this city has become.
Before I talk about your esteemed Sergeant at Arms and his illegal policies for public speaking,
I want to talk about this bond vote you're all going to take.
$800 million with a $2 billion end price tag.
Ridiculous.
Why?
So the King Grifter over there can give his girl Stacey Gates,
who has been to his house several times to backdoor negotiate contract proposals,
can get her pound of flesh out of the city taxpayers.
Well, the reality is you talked about other labor leaders
being on a leave of absence
while they serve as president
and you're no different as the mayor
are you really that clueless
are your 5th graders you used to teach
really that much brighter than you
you're the mayor, you're negotiating
on behalf of this city
you are not representing the membership
but you are because you're still
technically a member of CTU
while you're negotiating a contract
for the taxpayers of this city
where is the inspector general
where are the rest of you holding them accountable
for this. He should be forced
to fully resign from CTU
while these negotiations are going on.
It is a direct conflict of interest.
But you're all sitting on your hands
and your asses doing nothing.
I'm just telling you, for those of you who
think you're going to vote yes for this
ridiculous bond issue,
just know, we have a giant
PAC fund that will continue to grow at
FOP7, and you will all be on the
target list. We will recruit
candidates, and we will not be able to take maybe all of you
out, but we're certainly going to target
Anybody that votes yes for this, and you're going to say, what has this got to do with the police?
We are taxpayers, and many of us are the primary taxpayers in this city.
So my members are sick of getting a decent contract and then having it stolen out of their back pocket in the same sentence.
It will end, or your political careers will.
I can assure you of that.
And you're going to follow suit with him and Tiffany Hanyard and be in the forgotten pile of politics history.
Thank you.
Thank you very much for your comments.
Your Honor, there are no further speakers who have time to start enough for the public comment period.
Thank you very much. Resolutions. We have one acknowledgement today. The chair recognizes Alderwoman Dow.
Thank you, Mr. President and members of the City Council.
You know, in this body, can you please turn on the mic?
There we go.
Thank you.
In this body, we typically honor the champions for football, baseball, swimming, volleyball.
But today we have an opportunity to honor a champion in the field of wrestling.
And that is David McCarthy, who is a senior at De La Salle Institute in the third ward.
But he is a resident of the 15th ward, who won the state championship of IHSA Class A in boys wrestling.
He's here today with his coach, Jason Davidson, his head wrestling coach at De La Salle,
his sister, Ayanna, and his father, David McCarthy Sr., and I would ask him to rise so he could give him.
I also want to say that David is an A and B student.
And Alderman Chico, he's swole like you.
All right.
All right.
Well, congratulations.
Thank you, Chairwoman Dow, for bringing that acknowledgment to this body.
Next up, communications.
I'm sorry.
Chair recognizes Alder, hello, Gutiérrez.
Thank you, Mayor.
Just wanted to be recognized for attendance.
Madam Clerk, please add Alderwoman Gutierrez to the quorum roll call, please.
The Chair recognizes Alderman Hall.
The roll, too, as well.
Thank you very much.
Madam Clerk, please add Alderman Hall to the quorum roll call.
The Chair recognizes Alderwoman Tabatis.
I just want to be recognized for the purposes of the presentation.
Very well.
Madam Clerk, please add Alderwoman Tabatis to the quorum roll call.
And there are no communications for today.
We do have one committee report, I believe, the Committee on Rules.
The chair recognizes Chairwoman Harris.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Reporting for your Committee on Committees and Rules was met on Tuesday, February 25, 2025, at 10 a.m.
The committee recommends the passage of the following items.
Items 1 through 3 are corrections of the City Council Journal of Proceedings for September 18, 2024, February 21, 2024, and December 13, 2023.
Items 1, 2, and 3 receive due pass recommendations, Mr. President.
If no one wishes to speak, I move to pass these items by roll call vote.
Very well. Thank you very much.
The items have been presented before us.
There's a motion on the floor to approve these items by a roll call vote.
Thank you, Madam Clerk.
If you can prepare the technology and orders, please use your e-vote application to record your vote at this time.
The voting is now open.
The voting is now open.
Please use your e-device.
The voting is now open.
I will now call on those who have not used the e-device for a voice vote.
Alderman Hopkins.
Not President Chambers.
Alderman Coleman.
Yes.
Coleman is a yes.
Alderman Taylor.
Yes.
Taylor is a yes.
Alderman Burnett.
Burnett is a yes.
Alderman Irvin.
Alderman Irvin post yes.
Irvin is a yes.
Alderman Talaferro.
Yes.
Alderman Talaferro is a yes.
Alderman Ramirez Rosa. Ramirez Rosa is a yes. Alderman Knudsen is a yes. Alderwoman Haddon. Yes. Haddon is a yes. Have all those voted who wished? The vote is now closed.
There are 48 yeas and 0 nays.
This matter is passed. Alderman Mitchell, on a motion to reconsider.
I move to reconsider the vote.
All those in favor of the reconsideration of this vote signify by saying aye.
Any opposed say no.
This motion fails. The chair recognizes Chairwoman Harris.
The committee recommends that item 4 through 6 be re-referred to the Committee on Finance.
Item 4 is an ordinance concerning the issuance of the Department of Housing Assistance
and other financial assistance to UNAH Irving Park ALP for acquisition and construction of a seven-story building at 2909-2917 West Irving Park Road.
Item 5 is an ordinance concerning the bond and bond issuance for Chicago O'Hare International Airport Senior Special Facilities Revenue Bond.
TRIPS Obligation Group Series 2025 for the benefit of the borrower.
Aerial Chicago 2, secured by the Senior Master Indentured Promissory Note 2025-2
of members of Obligation Group for financing or refinancing air cargo facilities,
related facilities, debt service, and bond cost issuance.
Item 6 is an amendment of the Municipal Code, Section 2, Desk 45040, to remove requirements of economic disclosure statements in connection with the right of entry agreements, releases of liability, or other similar agreements.
The Committee recommended that these items be re-referred to the Committee on Finance.
If there is no objection, I move approval and recommendation by the first most favorable roll call vote previously applied to item 1 through 3 from the Committee on Committee's Rules Committee report and associated unsuccessful motion to reconsider.
Hearing no objection, so ordered.
The Committee recommended that item 7 be re-referred to the Committee on Health and Human Relations.
Item 7 is Amendment of Immissible Code Chapter 8-16 by adding new Section 8-16064 regarding cannabinoid hemp projects, offenses involving minors.
I move approval of the recommendation that Item 7 be re-referred to the Committee on Health and Human Relations by the same roll call if there is no objection.
Hearing none, so ordered.
The committee recommends that item 8 be re-referred to a joint committee on finance and committee on real estate and housing.
Item 8 is an amendment of admissible code chapter 2-44 by adding new section 2-44160 establishing for non-profit residents investment corporations
to address housing needs by financing, acquiring, owner, and operational, permanent affordability,
mixed income, and environmentally sustainable housing.
I move approval of the recommendation that Item 8 be re-referred to the Joint Committee on the Committee of Finance
and the Committee on the Housing and Real Estate by the same motion if there is no objection.
Hearing none, so ordered.
The Committee recommends that Item 9 be re-referred to the Committee on License and Consumer Protection.
Item 9 is an amendment of Municipal Code 4-4331 to prohibit sale of cannabinoid hemp products within the Pullman-Roseland area.
I move approval of the recommendation that Item 9 be re-referred to the Committee on License and Consumer Protection by the same roll call if there's no objection.
Hearing none, so ordered.
The Committee recommends that Item 10 be referred to a joint committee of the Committee on Pedestrian and Traffic Safety and the Committee on Transportation and Public Way.
Item 10 is an amendment of the Municipal Code Title II and 10 to direct the Commissioner of Transportation to implement plow the sidewalk pilot program and to extend the end date of the program working group to December 31, 2026.
I move approval of the recommendation that item 10 be re-referred to the Joint Committee of the Committee on Pedestrian and Traffic Safety and the Committee on Transportation and Public Way by the same motion if there's no objection.
Hearing none, so ordered.
Item 11 is a resolution amendment for the membership of the Committee on Ethics and Government Oversight for the years 2023 to 2027 by removing all the persons got as a member.
I move approval of this recommendation by the same motion if there's no objection.
Hearing none, so ordered.
That concludes my report.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Is there anything on the agreed-upon calendar, Chairwoman Harris?
Yes.
Oh, we won't pass today.
I have received from the Clerk, Anna and Valencia, a total of 12 items, proposed a degree calendar consisting of congratulatory, commemorative, tribulatory resolutions from the following alterpersons.
Alterperson Hopkins, Alterperson Hall, Alterperson Rodriguez, Alterperson Tavares, Alterperson Ramirez-Rosa, Alterperson Mitz, Alterperson Sposato, and Alterperson Lawson.
I move these in a omnibus, please.
Very well. Hearing no objections, so ordered.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
For new business, the Clerk will call the wards beginning with the 50th.
Zoning amendments, which are referred to the Committee on Zoning, Landmarks, and Building Standards.
Traffic regulations, traffic control signals, and traffic signs, which are referred to the Committee on Pedestrian and Traffic Safety.
Exemption from physical barrier requirements for commercial driveway alley access for parking facilities,
which are referred to the Committee on Transportation and Public Way.
Alderman Person Manaha Hoppenworth has proposed ordinance for a supportive Class IX tax incentive for the property at 4920 North Sheridan Road,
which is referred to the Committee on Housing and Real Estate.
Alderman Hoppenworth also has a proposed ordinance for an honorary street designation as Bob Newhart Way,
which is referred to the Committee on Transportation and Public Way.
Alderman Knutson has a proposed ordinance for amendment of Sections 2.2, 2.18, and 2.19
of the 2025 bond ordinance regarding amortization schedule, which is referred to the Committee on Finance.
Alderman Villegas has a proposed resolution to call on all city departments and sister agencies
to explore alternative social media communication platforms,
which is referred to the Committee on Economic, Capital, and Technology Development.
Alderperson Ramirez Rosa has a proposed ordinance for amendment of Municipal Code Section 4-60-022
to allow additional alcoholic liquor licenses on a portion of North Elston Avenue,
which is referred to the Committee on License and Consumer Protection.
Alderperson Conway has a proposed ordinance for amendment of the Annual Appropriation Ordinance
to transfer funds within the 34th Ward Wage Allowance Account for the year 2025,
which is referred to the Committee on the Budget and Government Operations.
Alderperson Conway also has proposed ordinance for the issuance of bonds for public infrastructure,
community development, and neighborhood improvements through Citi's Aldermatic Menu Program,
which is referred to the Committee on Finance.
Alderperson Conway also has proposed ordinance for the issuance of bonds for capital improvement plan projects,
which is referred to the Committee on Finance.
Alderperson Wackis Pack has proposed orders for the issuance of permits for signed signboards at various locations,
which are referred to the Committee on Zoning, Landmarks, and Building Standards.
Alderperson Burnett has a proposed order for the issuance of permits for signed signboards
at 3218 West Chicago Avenue, which is referred to the Committee on Zoning, Landmarks, and Building Standards,
and the issuance of permits for signed signboards at 3218 West Chicago Avenue,
which is referred to the Committee on Zoning, Landmarks, and Building Standards.
Alderperson Debaris has a proposed order for the issuance of permits for signed signboards
at 6035 South Pulaski Avenue, which is referred to Committee on Zoning, Landmarks, and Building Standards.
Alderperson Lee has a proposed order for the issuance of permits for signed signboards
at 234 West 31st Street, which is referred to Committee on Zoning, Landmarks, and Building Standards.
Alderperson Hopkins has a proposed ordinance for an honorary street designation
as Honorary Mary Ellen Christy Way, which is referred to Committee on Transportation and Public Way.
Alderperson Hopkins has a proposed ordinance for Amendment of Municipal Code Title IV
by modifying Section 4-156-150 to exclude lawfully maintained and operated video game terminals
from automatic amusement device definition, which is referred to the Committee on License and Consumer Protection.
Alder Person LaSpada has a proposed ordinance for amendment of the Annual Appropriation Ordinance
to transfer funds within the Committee on Pedestrian and Traffic Safety for the year 2025,
which is referred to the Committee on the Budget and Government Operations.
Alder Person Quinn has a proposed ordinance for amendment of Ms. McCode Chapter 2-8
by adding a new Section 2-8-036 entitled
Issuance of Bonds and Other Indebtedness Ordinance Requirements, which is referred
to the Committee on Finance. Alderperson
Riley has two proposed ordinance for signed signboards at various
locations, which are referred to the Committee on Zoning, Landmarks, and Building Standards.
Alderperson Robinson has a proposed resolution to
call on the City Council to formally apologize for black citizens
for Historical Injustices, which is referred to the Committee on Health and Human Relations.
Your Honor, that concludes the presentation of all the medic introductions.
Very well. Thank you, Mr. Clerk.
Next up, we have Unfinished Business.
The Chair recognizes Alderman Mitchell.
Mr. President, I am aware of one piece of unfinished business.
It was filed by Alderman Dow, and I defer to her.
Very well. Thank you, Alderman Mitchell.
The chair recognizes Chairwoman Dow.
Thank you, Mr. President.
I filed a Rule 41 notice with the clerk of my intent to call for a vote on SO 2025-0014841,
which is a substitute ordinance authorizing the issuance of general obligation bonds
to finance improvements to public rights-of-way, infrastructure and transportation,
loans and grants, acquisition of property, construction and maintenance of public buildings,
economic programs, and lead service line replacements.
Before I move passage of this item, I first move to substitute this ordinance with the version that all members should have received and would like to make three changes from the previous substitute ordinance.
Number one, in the recital on the first page describing how bond proceeds can be spent,
the reference to loans and grants was revised to limit these to capital projects
and to shorten the list of potential recipients.
Also, a cross-reference to requirements and limitations on loans and grants
was added in Section 2.19C.
In Section 2.18L, a list of potential types of recipients
was replaced with parties for clarity.
Number three, in Section 2.19C,
a new language provides that each grant or loan
shall be only made for a capital project located within the city
at the written direction of the alderman representing that ward
in which the capital project is located,
and the total of loans and grants shall not exceed $75 million.
I move to accept the substitute ordinance as amended by a voice vote.
Very well. All those in favor of accepting this substitute ordinance,
signify by saying aye.
Aye.
Any opposed? In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it.
The chair recognizes. Chairwoman Dowell.
Thank you, Mr. President. I move passage of this item by a roll call vote.
Very well. There's a motion to accept this substitute by chair recognizes.
Alderman Martin.
Thank you, Mr. President. I'd like to be recognized for purposes of roll call.
Very well. Madam Clerk, please add Alderman Martin, a part of the quorum roll call.
Could you clarify, Madam Chair, the roll call vote, the substitute that you're calling for?
Yes. I'm calling for a roll call vote on the substitute ordinance as amended.
Very well. So there's a motion on the floor for a roll call vote for the substitute ordinance as amended.
Madam Clerk, thank you for preparing the technology. Alders, please use your e-vote application to record your vote at this time.
The voting is now open. The voting is now open. Please use your e-vote device. The voting is now open.
Yes, the chair recognizes Alderman Bill.
Mr. President, are we going to have any debate on this?
The call for the substitute as amended to be voted on per roll call is on the floor before us.
We're taking that vote.
No debate?
The body, of course, always has an opportunity to debate, but the motion has been made.
The call for the vote has been operated.
The majority of the body was thinking that we're going to accept the substitute, and then the actual order.
We did, exactly. So therefore, our rolls was ignored, and we went straight to the vote.
So I would like to have discussion on the ordinance.
No one was ignored. We made the motion to accept it for roll call. We did that.
The question was called. The roll call is in front of us. We're taking the vote at this time.
Mr. President, if we're not on an $830 million bond, that is a travesty to the people of the city of Chicago.
We're just asking for a few minutes to step back and allow us to talk about this bond.
I understand your desire, Alderman Beal.
But again, per parliamentary procedure, the chairwoman asked for a roll call vote on the substitute as amended.
And we begin to proceed with the roll call vote.
And I stood up and was not acknowledged.
There was no standing and there was no not no acknowledging.
The vote is in front of us at this time. Thank you, Madam Clerk.
Look, this is out of order. Alderman Bill, the vote is in front of us.
The e-vote application is available. You can cast your vote at this time.
Thank you.
So thank you very much.
So I've spoken to the chair of the committee, and as a matter of a courtesy,
As a matter of a courtesy, I'm going to recognize the chair as a courtesy who wishes to withdraw her motion.
The chair recognizes Chairwoman Dowell.
Thank you, Mr. President.
I move as a courtesy to take back my motion in order to enable debate on this matter.
All right, very well. Thank you very much. We'll accept that.
motion later. Very well. We expect that
we accept that courtesy.
Okay.
So I'm just
wanting to be clear that we're stopping the vote
and we will reopen once the debate
is done. Very well.
Make sure we get all these hands here.
All right. So we have
here
recognizes Alderwoman
Fuentes.
The chair recognizes, my apologies, the chair recognizes Chairwoman Dow.
Mr. President, I would like to...
Yes, the chair recognizes Alderman Lopez.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Before the chair proceeds, I believe we need to make a motion to temporarily suspend Rule 19
for the purposes of undoing that vote that was started,
which is the taking and entering of votes before we proceed.
Thank you, Alderman Lopez. We'll review that rule right now.
So then I would make the motion for the temporary suspension of the rules for the purposes of waiving Rule 19
for negating the previously called roll call on this motion.
Thank you, Alderman Lopez, for that.
So the way it was prescribed was that the roll call vote was improperly initiated
because there were individuals that wished to speak to the item.
And so in this instance, I do not believe that the characterization of Rule 19 in this instance applies.
Thank you for that point of order.
The chair recognizes Chairwoman Dow.
Thank you, Mr. President.
I ask that we suspend the motion.
No, there's no need.
There's no need.
Please, you can speak to the item.
I already made the motion.
I already previously made the motion to allow debate.
That's right.
Do you wish to speak to this item, Chairwoman?
I would like to close.
Very well.
Then the chair recognizes Alderman Burnett.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Wow.
I haven't seen this in a long time, man, since I was looking at TV when I was younger.
But anyway.
So this is a quality of life issue.
Paid streets, safe sidewalks, clean water, and quality of life issues for everyday Chicagoans.
These are some of the basic things that people in our community send us down here to take care of.
Some of our communities can't wait.
Matter of fact, some of our communities have been waiting for a long time.
Some more than others.
Maybe some of them have the luxury of putting off infrastructure maintenance,
but our community need these investments now.
So, you know, I have a unique ward.
I have some central area which is flush with developments and a lot of things going on.
As a matter of fact, the city don't even have to do most of the work.
Some of the new developments do some of the infrastructure work themselves.
Put up lights, new sidewalks, even repair the streets.
But then I have a community out west where most of my menu money go to.
And I've been working on those areas for many years trying to catch up and fix up
to be consistent with everything else that's going on in the downtown area.
Some folks, some of us that have downtown as part of our wards,
we get infrastructure done without even using our menu.
It gets done automatically because of the wear and tear that happens in those areas
by tourists and all of the traffic that come in the central area.
And so, you know, we may walk out in our downtown area and see a whole street being done that we didn't even ask to be done
because it's in a downtown area, and those things get wear and tear.
Fairness to current taxpayers, we are aggressively paying off our past debt over the next decade, 39%.
Chicagoans need infrastructure maintenance, but they shouldn't be asked to pay for past infrastructure and future infrastructure.
It would not be fair to current taxpayers to front load the repayment, as some have called for.
Alternatives will add $80 million per year.
Alternatives put forward by other aldermen will add at least $80 million next year.
that would need to be paid for with higher taxes on Chicagoans.
We need the infrastructure, but we do not need to pay for it all up front
and unfairly burdened current taxpayers.
Deferring maintenance will cost more.
Putting off these investments will only cost more in the long term.
Potholes will grow bigger.
Vacant buildings will catch on fire.
Light poles will fall and bridges could deteriorate beyond repair.
It is much more fiscally responsible to address the problem now instead of waiting for someone else to fix it later.
We cannot kick the can down the road on infrastructure.
This will cost us more.
Supplemental points.
Uncertain federal funding.
Who knows what's going to happen in Washington, D.C.?
Who knows if we're going to get any money from Washington, D.C.?
A matter of fact, right now, Washington, D.C. is threatening to take money from us right now.
We need to become self-sufficient.
I think this is very wise and very smart and very beneficial to make sure that we can self-sustain ourselves for the future, for the infrastructure that we need.
I remember when I first became alderman in the West Loop, and over in 1996 when we were getting ready to have the Democratic Convention,
I would venture to say that the West Loop is the way it is now because we spent millions of dollars on infrastructure work.
Millions of dollars putting up planners and fixing sidewalks and new lights and all of those things.
And it gave the impression to everybody else that this was a happening area and folks started to invest money.
Infrastructure has an adverse effect on our community.
If folks come in your neighborhood and they see broken sidewalks or no sidewalks,
I know some of us, I still have some streets that don't have any sidewalks.
And I know on the west side with those, what is it called, WPA streets,
some folks still have those streets on the south side where they don't have no sidewalks.
And the money we get for our menu is only a certain amount that we cannot pay for all of it at once.
It takes years to catch up on it.
Having this bond to help us to be able to deal with those things
and give Southside and Westside aldermen, in particular, who have areas that are lacking investment
because of how it looks, it's very beneficial to us to have this money to be able to deal with some of those things.
In this bond, there's a list, a myriad of things that's going to different wards that are in need.
For me, even with my menu money, I don't spend it on the East End because I don't need to spend it on the East End.
I'm blessed to have TIFFs on the East End.
I'm blessed to have development on the East End.
But on the West End, on the West End where folks, you know, I get so complacent with this stuff that you have to do it without even folks asking for it because you know it's needed.
And you have to take advantage of the situation when you have the opportunity to be able to do it.
And like I say, when you get these investments, it has a positive effect on your community.
It has a positive effect on the culture of the neighborhood.
Folks would rather stand around and do all types of things on broken, crumbling sidewalks in their neighborhood.
But if it's a decent area and it looks good, people tend to have a lot more respect for that neighborhood.
Long-term projects.
A bond is a common way that cities and government bodies fund long-term projects.
It is common to pay off bonds over the duration of the projects that they are used for.
These projects will last decades, so it is common to pay them off over that time.
Fair share.
We benefit from past investments in our infrastructure, so it is right that we are still paying them off.
Future residents will benefit from these investments, so it is right that they should pay their fair share as well.
Clarifying the language. The substitute that Chair Dow is presenting today clarifies some of the language and language around loans to schools, but we cannot afford to put off any of the actual infrastructure projects.
public safety and quality of life, repairing bridges, filling potholes, maintenance on fire departments and fire station and police department buildings,
fixing sidewalks, streetlights, and traffic signals as well as lead service line replacement.
These are public safety and quality of life projects that will directly benefit Chicagoans.
I don't know if everyone saw the editorial in the Sun-Times today that our transportation commissioner, our water commissioner, our fleet management commissioner wrote, of course, they take all of the stuff that's beneficial to the city.
They put it way in the back. Thank you for putting it in the paper, but they put it way in the back after they put the objections up first.
Then they put the guys who's saying why we need this way in the back.
So folks may not have found it. But if you ask the commissioner of transportation, the commissioner of water,
the Commissioner of Fleet Management, why and how they use this money that would be coming to their departments,
they would let you know, and in that article is expressed that they've been doing this for years.
This hasn't just begun. This isn't the first time.
It happened under Daily. It happened under Ron. It happened under Lori.
And I never saw the shenanigans that's going on right now when those things were being voted on several years in my time and being here in city council.
I don't understand why everything we try to do the way it has been done over the years is such a big deal.
The numbers, $99 million for bridge work, $157.5 million in street upgrades, $168 million in upgrades city facilities, fleet and equipment, $100 million for lead service line replacements, $19 million for sidewalk improvements, $63 million for street lights, $102 million in street resurfacing,
$15 million to improve traffic signals.
All this is very important to people in the city of Chicago and our neighborhoods.
Matter of fact, we've all been talking about this lead pipe removal for some time
and replacement for some time now.
Who knows what's going to happen with that money now coming from the federal government.
We have to do something to make sure our people have clean water
that our kids aren't affected by lead pipes.
I mean, this is a health issue in the city of Chicago,
and if we cannot depend on the federal government, we have to do something ourselves.
We are a city government. This is our city.
These are our people. These are our constituents.
And we need to do something to make sure that we take care of them.
And we need not to be playing games.
This is not the time for us to play politics.
This is a time for us to position ourselves so we become self-sufficient,
so that if anything comes our way, that we are able to still sustain ourselves
and take care of our people in our community.
Critical projects.
This is no extra to cut these projects.
Our disinvested communities cannot afford to put off critical infrastructure repairs and maintenance.
For the city, this is not about the mayor.
This is about West Humboldt Park, East Garfield Park, West Garfield Park.
This is about Englewood, Humboldt Park, Auburn Gresham, Roseland.
This bond is about the city of Chicago.
We need to invest in our city because if we neglect to, we will end up paying for it in the long run.
Now, I've heard a lot of questions. I looked at the press conference yesterday. Our chief financial officer was on WTTW last night. Every question they threw at her, she answered.
For one, they say, does the infrastructure add $2 billion in borrowing costs over other structures?
No.
The illustration, there's an illustration that I have here that illustrates borrowing structures shown to aldermen,
all the aldermen should have got this, have principles of $830 million,
interest of $1.2 billion, and a total principal and interest of $2 billion.
A structure cannot be adding $2 billion in cost where there is less than $2 billion in interest.
This was a conservative scenario without the type of structure that would occur
when the bonds are sold to optimize the bonds for the market conditions.
How many times have we been here and we have restructured our loans?
How many times have we restructured a loan when interest rates have gone down?
How many times have we done that?
With this bond, we will have time to restructure it in the future.
I pray that interest rates go down and things change and we are able to change it.
I can continue to talk, but I'm going to let other folks talk.
But I think I made my point.
I can answer a whole bunch of more questions that were asked in reference to this bond.
But I'm going to tell you, this is not the time to play politics.
I know a lot of folks want to run for mayor, been running for mayor for the past two years.
This is not about running for mayor.
This is about the people of the city of Chicago.
Goal.
Folks don't care about all this shenanigans that goes on down here.
The only thing people care about is what you can do for them in their community.
They care about their streets being paved, their lights being fixed, their alleys being
done, their sewers being repaired.
You know, that's what they care about.
They don't care about all this garbage down here.
They worry about the election when election time comes, which is two years away.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Chairwoman Harris wished to still speak.
So I have Chairwoman Harris, I have Alderman Bill as the next two.
Thank you, Mr. President.
I'm voting on this bond.
I've been here 18 years, and with the exception when we did bonds,
more, I think under Lori, where we put three years of bonding together,
I voted on the bond bill every year of my career.
And I voted on the bond because I believe that as a city, we have to do stuff to keep our infrastructure going.
There is no way that a city this size cannot have a bond, hey guys, cannot have a bond and not be able to do and provide our infrastructure improvements to our community.
And on a real sense, I got a real selfish method in it.
It's called the Eighth Ward.
I want to make sure that the residents of my community get something from the city of Chicago.
I have hundreds of requests for street resurfacing, for sidewalks and curbs, for anything that's in that menu.
My residents have asked me for it.
We keep a detailed file and we try to put the request in on the menu based on when the requests come into our office.
The thought of me having to go back to my community and saying we're not going to approve a bond to do any of that work that's sorely needed in the 8th Ward community,
because now I'm being real selfish about it.
This is about me going home and being able to go back to my ward that I care about and that I love and say, hey, this is what we did as a body.
This is what we give back to the community, that $1.5 million in our menu dollars that go towards taking care of our community.
I would love for us to sit down and have a dialogue about how we pay for it.
And I think that that's a question, but what I would not like to do is throw the baby out with the bathwater.
And so we're just going to throw our bond out.
We're going to go back, start all over from the beginning.
We will never get our construction work bid out for 2025.
We will be into 2026.
figuring out what the menu is going to look like, what a new bond is going to look like.
So I'm asking us to take a look at, let's approve the bond, let's go back and sit down and talk about the financing of the bond,
which is something that can be done.
We can talk about moving that portion of the bond, how we fund it, and the structure of the payment schedules.
Those are the kind of things that can be changed.
And so I'm asking everybody to think of their communities as we sit around and say that we're not going to do an infrastructure program this year,
or maybe not until everybody decides to figure it out on how we're going to be able to deliver infrastructure to our community.
Again, I'm being super selfish.
I want to be able to go back to my community and say this is what I'm delivering to my community, infrastructure package.
So I'm asking everybody to support me in my fact that I want to be a little selfish,
that I'm concerned about what happens in the boundaries of the 8th Ward.
Thank you.
Thank you.
The chair recognizes Alderman Beal.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Mr. President, first of all, nobody has ever said we don't want an infrastructure bond.
Nobody's ever said that.
But what we want is a bond that is responsible and feasible for the people of the city of Chicago.
The fact that we are not paying on this bond for two years until after the next election poses a problem.
The fact that we're not paying on principle for 20 years and having a huge balloon payment is a problem.
So I don't know about you all, but I'm concerned about my kids having to foot this bill and my grandkids having to foot this bill.
That's what the problem is.
The problem is the size of this infrastructure bond.
Now, let me just digress just a little bit.
Because I heard the same argument from the past administration about invest Southwest.
We're going to invest everything on the south and west side of Chicago.
We're going to transform.
The south and the west side of Chicago, all the resources are going to the south and west side.
How's that working for you? How's that working for you?
How is all the infrastructure work that you all voted for on that last bond, how's it working for you?
Now I'm going to tell you, we're all entitled to $1.5 million to spread out.
But when we are selling our vote for a couple of extra streets, it's a problem.
It's a problem.
Now, this is about being physically responsible with the taxpayer money every single day.
Mr. President, let me just say, when we have all the bond rating agencies, all the financial experts,
All the financial people telling us this is a bad deal.
And for us to sit here and ignore that, again, is another problem.
Now, we're supposed to listen to and get the correct information from the administration, the CFO, the budget director, things like that.
Well, those are the same people that told us we will not get downgraded if the budget passes.
Right? Right.
Well, we got downgraded. And they're also telling us and warning us that if this bond passes, we could potentially be downgraded again.
And you all want to ignore that. Come on, y'all. And let me just say, the devil is always in the details.
Now, we may have changed some language in the in the amendment. I get that. But let me just say this.
We have something that's coming March 30th, which is an imbalanced budget, because we need that $175 million from CPS, or we have an imbalanced budget.
Now, most of you all are not going to follow the internal workings of what happens in the budget office.
They can move money around, they can do different things, and you all would never know the difference.
That's why we have to be watchdogs of the people's money up here in the city of Chicago.
Now, if CPS doesn't give us that money, then what's going to happen?
We were promised that that money was coming to us.
We were promised from the CFO.
Right? Right.
Well, we don't have that money yet.
And if we don't have that money by the end of next month, we're going to be faced with another problem here in the city of Chicago.
Just like the problem we had last year when we had an imbalanced budget and we had to come in and do an amendment.
And I warned you all about it then.
I'm warning you about it right now.
That we are headed toward a cliff.
A cliff.
Now, yes, we've made some bad decisions in the past.
And if you're not willing to admit we've made bad decisions in the past, shame on you.
But let me just tell you this.
When you know better, you do better.
And I happen to know better today than I did 25 years ago.
Why?
Because then we relied on the information that was given to us.
Being new to politics, you make bad decisions based on the information that you are given.
Well, now we're not making those bad decisions anymore.
We're being more physically responsible with the people of the city of Chicago and the taxpayers as we move forward.
So, ladies and gentlemen, we're going to hear a bunch of talking points that were given out about all the wonderful things that are happening,
all the wonderful work that's going to be taking place.
You all, we're buying $77 million a year just for our menu, right?
We don't have the resources to complete our menu.
How much menu money is carried over year after year after year?
And that's with $77 million worth of infrastructure.
So how are we going to complete $830 million in a year?
Now, I mean, we can go on and on.
But let me just say, this is physically irresponsible.
The people are asking us to do better.
The people of Chicago are paying attention.
They're not, you know, you can say people ain't paying attention to what's going on down here anymore.
You better not say that.
Because people are paying attention, and if you don't know it, check your mailboxes.
Check your mailboxes and see if people are not paying attention and educating your constituents about what we're doing here on a day-to-day basis.
So, again, Mr. President, this is a bad deal.
I'll say we reduce it.
We change the terms.
And I guarantee you, if you change the terms and reduce it, you'll get a lot more votes and you'll get a lot more people to buy into it.
I'm one of them.
Change the terms.
change their amount
to get more people
on this bond
to get this work done
and I'm not going to sit here
and I'm not going to be afraid
that I'm not going to get
my people going to get
because I fight for my people
okay
so don't be afraid
when they tell you
they're going to pull your projects
don't be afraid
that they're going to maneuver some money
that you ain't going to get
what you're entitled to, by law, you are entitled to get all goods and service.
George, say it again.
So, all right, I take it from here, George.
So, Mr. President, I just encourage everybody in this body to understand that we're all
for infrastructure, we're all for improvement, but we're just not for bad policies moving
forward, and I encourage everybody to vote no.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Thank you.
So we have Alderman Conway, LaSpada, and then Alderman Dow, Chairwoman Dow for the close, unless there's anyone else.
So the chair recognizes Alderman Conway.
Oh.
Well, I'm going to say what Alderman Beal said probably just less eloquently, but probably also a little shorter.
So I want to thank him for his remarks.
Yes, he was very eloquent.
And so Will Rogers once wisely said, if you find yourself in a hole, the first thing you do is you stop digging.
Now, there's no doubt about it.
Our predecessors have left us in a deep financial hole.
And the question is, how will we respond?
Now, what we can all agree on is the need for important infrastructure spending.
And no one disputes that many of these investments are essential.
However, we have to be honest about the back-loaded nature of this bond structure.
And I use the term back-loaded because you may have seen that the Council Office of Financial Analysis
sent us last night, used the term back-loaded.
Now, some, I think, have questioned my motivation for bringing the repayment schedule to light a couple weeks ago.
But COFA calls them like they see them, and they have seen what I and every independent analyst has seen, which is this.
There are no payments on the mayor's bond proposal at all until 2027, accruing interest along the way.
After that, the taxpayers face annual payments of $47 million for 17 years, then $75 million annually from 2044 to 2049,
And then finally, a staggering $137 million per year each year for the six years inclusive of 2050 to 2055.
And as acknowledged by everyone, this totals more than $2 billion,
placing an enormous financial burden primarily on future generations.
More than $820 million of debt service will be paid on this between the years of 2050 and 2055.
Now, my wife and I are raising a 2-year-old, a 4-year-old, and a 5-year-old.
And I know many of you have young children as well.
They will be in their 30s and on the hook for an irresponsible decision I cannot stomach making for them today.
When my 5-year-old is 30, we will be paying $820 million over a period of six years on this very bond.
They won't be able to spend that money on safety.
They won't be able to spend that money on schools, but on debt that we voted on today.
So that's the future.
Now, last week, Chairman Irvin reflected on the past and asked, as many have,
where was everyone when the parking meter deal came up?
It's a great question.
Many of us, nearly all of us, weren't elected yet,
but I suspect most of us, if we could, would go back and vote no, knowing what we know today.
Two who did stand up at that moment, Scott Wagespak and Tony Preckwinkle,
had the courage to vote no despite significant pressure.
They both knew then...
what we all do now, that short-term benefits aren't worth decades of financial harm.
And just like the parking meter deal traded away decades of future revenue,
this bond delays principal repayment, meaning paying down the actual debt for two decades.
The argument that this structure, quote, fits within our existing debt structure,
only works if we won't continue to issue general obligation debt to fund capital projects.
And we all know that's unrealistic.
Chicago will always have capital improvement needs.
Some have also suggested that we should simply defer to the CFO's expertise,
and I will tell you I deeply respect the CFO of this city.
But if we're here relying on expert opinions,
we have to acknowledge that every editorial board in this city
has strongly come out against this bond deal.
They have cited dozens of independent municipal finance experts all warning against this path.
It is time to stop digging, draw a clear line, and ensure we secure a financially sustainable future for Chicago.
Now, here's the good news.
We have alternatives.
We don't have to choose between strengthening investing in our communities and fiscal sanity.
We have the ability and the responsibility to do both of those.
Now, yesterday, I sent you all via email two very responsible bond proposals,
one for $108 million that specifically is allocated to Aldermanic menu projects,
and another targeted, transparent $400 million bond for capital improvements that has a level payment structure,
just like a standard mortgage that working families all over this city have.
We can discuss those specific amounts in committee, but these amounts and that structure would save the taxpayers,
especially of the next generation, over a billion dollars of future debt service.
Something I did want to correct in regarding the Vice Mayor's remarks,
even if you did a level payment standard mortgage for $830 million at a 5% or 5.5% rate,
you would have level payments of between $54 million and $57 million per year.
So wherever $80 million come out, you can get that out of your mind.
That is incorrect.
Now, I also want to tell you something else I put in that mechanism that I sent out yesterday
in case you didn't have a chance to see it.
I put in something there that tracks participation of minority-owned and women-owned businesses,
which was in, by the way, the previous housing bond measure approved last year.
But it is not in the authorization that you're voting on today.
Now, I chose not to file those authorizations as a substitute today
because bond counsel should review and sign off on a portion of this.
In fact, the indenture portion, they have to.
So I will merely close with this.
I know it takes courage to vote no today.
But once we unearth the repayment schedule,
many of you recognize that the mayor's plan here is flawed.
So why are we acting like this is somehow our only option?
Your vote is a no on this plan, not on any plan.
Simply put, we can fund important projects and invest in Chicago,
but we don't have to mortgage our children's future
and saddle them with reckless debt to do it.
If we're committing $2 billion over 30 years,
we can certainly take three more weeks to craft a responsible proposal that meets our city's needs without compromising its potential.
Supporting, I can't emphasize this enough, supporting the mayor's bond deal today almost certainly makes it harder to invest in public safety,
schools, transit in the years ahead.
And we've seen what happens when leaders make short-sighted financial decisions.
And that's why the argument of, this is the way we've always done it, is a terrible argument,
because that's how we got in this mess today.
So let's not make this same mistake.
So please vote no today so we can consider a fiscally responsible way to fund these necessary infrastructure projects.
Thank you, Mr. President.
We have the final three speakers here, unless anyone else.
I have Alderwoman Lee, and then Alderman Lopez, and then Chairwoman Dow.
The chair recognizes Alderwoman Lee.
Thank you, Mr. President.
I wasn't so sure I was going to stand and jump in the debate today.
Like my colleagues, I...
I believe we need infrastructure. We have plenty of needs in the 11th Ward, and we all get the same phone calls from our constituents.
A pothole there, a street that needs to be repaired. I still have WPA streets in my ward as well.
And I've participated in a lot of conversations about this bond deal.
I appreciate the amendment that was made and accepted in the substitute today.
That was something that I had requested to ensure that we had some guardrails around the dollars that could be spent on these organizations or schools,
not wanting my colleagues who want to spend these dollars from their menu funds to be able to do that,
but also making sure that for the rest of us there were some assurances that there were, in fact, guardrails around some of these dollars.
I also asked for another look at the dollar amount as a whole.
I know that there's endless need in this city.
I also know that through the conversations that I've had that there's still about a billion dollars worth of unauthorized bond money or unauthorized bonds from previous years.
So I don't believe that we're going to need 830 for this year.
And I realize that the way that we've done debt service in the city for a long time has gotten us to where we are now.
I don't know that we've seen a day like we've seen today in recent history in this city.
So I think it warrants additional conversation.
I voted for the re-referral to finance last week.
I was hoping to have a little bit more time.
I'm not talking about a month.
I am thinking a week or two to try to get more of us to a place where we'd be comfortable supporting some things.
I do think that we all support infrastructure.
I don't think there's one person in here that doesn't.
But I think we have to – I think we all have to keep each other honest in this conversation, too.
We can't make payments on this bond because we haven't authorized it yet.
This typically is done earlier, and we would have authorized debt service payments,
and we can't do this until this next budget.
And, ladies and gentlemen, we're going to be back here in six months talking about another bond for another year.
So I think we should take the time to get it straight now, or at least get us in that direction.
That's why I cannot support this ordinance as it's written today.
Thank you.
Thank you.
The chair recognizes Audemon Lopez.
Good afternoon, Mr. President and members of the city council.
I rise in opposition to this $830 million authorization,
not because I don't believe in everything my colleagues said.
And to be fair, I do believe it is true.
Our communities cannot wait, as our colleague stated.
Many areas are lacking investment.
But we often hear, and we even heard it last week, the illusion of some nefarious reason why.
The elephant in the room, I think was the term.
The problem that we have here in this room is that we lack institutional memory,
partly because so many are new, partly because some choose to have selective amnesia.
But even as we look at what has happened just from the last administration to now,
Mr. President, we have substitute ordinance 0-2019-9398,
$850 million in general obligation bonds for borrowing to kickstart a five-year capital investment plan,
planned to deal with roads, bridges, equipment, infrastructure, lead pipes, walkways, crosswalks,
everything that we're hearing about today.
It was a two- and a five-year spending plan, at that time touted as Chicago Works by then-Mayor Lori Lightfoot.
The following year after that, this document, O-2020-5749, $2.35 billion in debt for infrastructure, the infrastructure that cannot wait.
2021. Oh, 2021-4788. $660 million in more debt for infrastructure, for everything that I just vocalized.
It was such a good plan, it even got made into a book.
A book that is 200 pages and by far shows every address.
Every location, every ward, every street, every WPA, following that in 2022, 0-2022-3593, for another $1.85 billion, billion, for infrastructure, for, as you guessed it, infrastructure for the five-year plan and everything that we're talking about needing money for today.
Okay, that book came out a little thinner, but it lists everything in both a two-year and a five-year trajectory,
everything that we're talking about, even including new environmental things that we're talking about.
Nearly $5 billion in infrastructure we have borrowed over the last five years alone.
If your war doesn't have it, take a look in the mirror.
If you don't recall the last administration saying this is what we're going to do, as our colleague reminded us, we are $5 billion in the hole just based on what we borrowed.
Not what we're paying it off on, but on what we borrowed to do all of what we're being told that we need money to do today.
And incidentally, folks, that also included funding for your menus through 2027.
Why are you borrowing money for which you already have the authorization to borrow?
We're not even talking about what the payments are going to be, what the debt service is going to be on all of this.
We're looking at what is being presented to us today, which is needing allegedly another $830 million for what we've already borrowed,
$5 billion, so that we can in turn pay back this $830 million to the cost of $2 billion in 30 years.
Which, by the way, that $830 million is only for one year's worth of money.
Because we're going to have to do the same thing again next year, because last year we borrowed $640 million.
And when people say, why didn't you ask this when Daly was around, I could answer you that, ma'am.
I was in high school.
I was in high school.
Why didn't you say it when Ram was here?
I did, actually, because I also had to walk into this job and take the highest property tax increase to pay for everything that was paid for through debt for 30 years.
Why didn't we do it with Lori Lightfoot?
Every one of those, three out of those four debt proposals, I voted against.
Because if you could not articulate how you were going to pay for it equitably, how are you going to distribute it equitably,
How are you going to ensure that it wasn't politics as it is now as we see with the cast of characters behind me who are restricting projects in wards throughout everyone who is not in full support?
We have a problem.
And yes, it can't just be this is how it's done because how it's done has got us $29 billion in the hole.
$29 billion just on general obligation bonds.
We couldn't tax our way out of that.
We couldn't grow our way out of that.
We're on the verge of practically being insolvent because I think between debt and pension,
nearly 43%, if I'm not mistaken, of all of our revenue goes towards things that are in those two categories.
We cannot, cannot, be forced to make these kind of decisions where everything is to be determined,
where everything is, we'll get back to you, where it's, we'll let you know,
and hopefully what we tell you this year won't disappear next year.
this isn't about race
this isn't about racism
it's about that green color
of money
the money that we're taking from every
neighborhood's pockets not just
in this generation but for the next two
generations in the city of Chicago
because next year
there will be an ask for another bond to cover
infrastructure
next year after that
because every year for the next 30 years
while you're still paying off this $830 million, we're going to need more money to borrow, to borrow, to borrow, and to borrow.
We have a spending problem here in the city of Chicago.
And even while we're talking about how we're going to spend for infrastructure,
we could have gladly had a conversation last week when my colleague tried to send this back,
and some of the same people who said no then are saying, well, let's talk now.
Now, every time we try to have a conversation, whether it's about the language, whether it's about the terms, whether it's about how much money those.
Nicely suited people are going to make off of our billions of dollars that we're borrowing.
It's dodge, deflect, and duck.
Like a game of dodgeball.
We can't keep playing those games.
And what should really concern all of us right now, aside from everything that we're talking about,
is the fact that you know who's not here today?
Not one banker is here to see what the outcome is.
Usually this whole section is filled with the $3,000 crowd.
They're not here today.
The outcome isn't even in question that they're worried about.
That is the business as usual that has got to come to an end.
Our city, our residents deserve better options.
We should be able to not only fund menu, but as some of my colleagues said,
have fund equitable options to help those wards that are still always going to be behind
because of gerrymandering or because of lack of investment.
But we're not having those conversations.
We're begging for morsels, for crumbs, as one of our colleagues likes to say,
at a time when we should be baking a whole new set of pies.
Thank you, Mr. President.
Thank you.
There's one more speaker that wished to speak in front of the chair.
Just raised his hand.
The chair recognizes Alderman Riley.
Thank you, Mr. President, colleagues.
First, I want to acknowledge the excellent remarks made by Alderman Beal, Conway, and Lopez.
And I'm not going to repeat those comments.
But during the debate, it was pretty frustrating to hear some of my colleagues
whom I've worked with for many, many years and have a lot of respect for
to go through these ridiculous contortions to justify a yes vote on what we all know is a poorly put-together bond deal
that's going to saddle taxpayers with massive debt in the future
because the technical aspects of this bond deal are deficient.
We're not having a debate over whether or not there's a role for infrastructure investment.
We're not debating the merits of the Aldermanic Menu program.
Every single person in this chamber knows those are very important things.
But to see the contortions my colleagues are going through to get you all to vote for an irresponsible deal is maddening.
To hear one of my colleagues say it, if we don't pass this irresponsible bond deal, there will be complete and total Armageddon.
hmm street poles will fall potholes will proliferate bridges will collapse the river will
flood frogs locusts the plague it's total baloney it's absolute and total baloney and i can tell
you another colleague saying you know what even admitting how deficient this is saying you know
what let's get this done today because infrastructure is important we'll go back and fix that later
trust us. When the government promises to go back and fix something later, you can call BS on that.
That hardly ever happens. So don't put that in your hat as an assurance. But more importantly
here, we have plenty of time to get this right. Even if we took a few more days, we can all come
back here and do this properly. It's the mechanics of the deal. It's not even the merits of the
projects that are proposed to be funded by it. So this idea that we're in a real hurry
and we've got to get this done today or else is absolute and total baloney. So look, you
know, we all have just a couple jobs in this chamber. One of them is to protect the Chicago
taxpayer. And this body has not been doing a very good job of that as of late. And my
colleague, who's not here today, but the chairman of one of our big committees, said,
well, this is routine. This is how we've always done things. And I've been here a bit longer than
him. And as long as some of my other colleagues to say, yeah, there's there's some truth to that.
And that's why we're in such a horrendous budget mess today. Routine and standard operating
procedure is why we're in the hole we're in today. And you all were elected here to make things
better. You were sent here to fix it, to not continue with the routines that have been screwing
taxpayers for decades. You got a job here. This is not whether or not you have infrastructure for
your wars. It's not whether or not we put our friends and labor to work on these important
projects. It's how we do it. And that really, really matters, especially to my colleagues'
children who are two, five, and whatever the other age is, who will be paying
For all this nonsense, for all this irresponsible spending that we don't need to do here today.
So please, colleagues, pump the brakes on this.
This isn't the final vote on a bond deal, but let's make it a first important vote on the bond deal
so we can go back and get this thing right.
I urge the body to vote no.
And before that, though, Mr. President, I invoke Rule 27 and move to postpone this vote
until May 21st, 2025, City Council meeting.
Thank you, Mr. President.
There's a motion on the floor to invoke Rule 27
to postpone this vote until what date was that?
May 22nd?
May 21st.
And then there was a subsequent motion to lay that motion on the table.
But just a second, please. Before we take the vote to lay the motion on the table, Alderman Villegas wishes to participate remotely, invoking Rule 59.
Alderman Villegas, can you confirm your presence online?
Present Chairman.
He is present. Is there a desire to accept this motion by voice vote?
Very well. All those in favor of adding Alderman Villegas to participate remotely per Rule 59, signify by saying aye.
Any opposed say nay. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it.
So there's a motion on the floor to delay this vote until May 21st.
There's a subsequent motion to lay that motion on the table.
Madam Clerk, thank you very much for making the technology available for the motion to lay the motion to lay this vote on the table.
So, in other words, if you vote yes to lay this motion on the table, you wish not to accept a motion to delay this vote until May,
and then you wish to return back to the initial motion for the passage of this item.
Alders, please use your e-vote application to record your vote at this time.
The voting is now open.
The voting is now open.
Please use your e-device.
The voting is now open.
This vote is for the motion on the table.
Correct.
The lay on the table.
Correct.
I will now call on those for a voice vote.
Alderman Hopkins.
Hopkins is a no.
Alderman Yancey.
I can't move past you, no.
I can't move past you.
If you're here, I have to take the vote.
Alderman Nancy is a yes.
Alderman Coleman.
Yes.
Coleman is a yes.
Alderman O'Shea.
O'Shea is a no.
Alderman Taylor.
Yes.
Taylor is a yes.
Alderman Irvin.
Alderman Irvin votes yes.
Irvin is a yes.
Alderman Talaferro.
Yes.
Alderman Talaferro is a yes.
Alderman Villegas?
No.
Villegas is a no.
Alderman Haddon?
Yes.
Haddon is a yes.
Have all of those voted who wished?
Haddon is a yes.
Okay, the voting is now closed.
For state law, there are 25 yays, 25 nays.
Per state law, in the event of a tie, the chair, president of the body, is allowed to cast a vote, and I am an aye.
This motion passes.
The chair recognizes Chairwoman Dow.
Thank you, Mr. President.
I'll be brief.
I want to say three things.
One, I think we all agree that infrastructure is very important in the city.
It's crucial.
And this bond issuance does just that.
It provides infrastructure for our current and future residents.
And it's the foundation of what makes this city great.
I think the second thing I want to say is that, you know, we have to be able to adapt.
And this bond is an example of adaptation.
One, it talks about a bond limit up to a certain amount.
We may spend less. We may spend much less.
Secondly, the bond issuance offers the flexibility necessary to ensure that at any given point,
We can right-size or mold the repayment schedule so that it benefits our communities at its maximum level.
And we can do that while ensuring that not a single cent of this money goes to anything besides infrastructure.
I guess the last thing I want to say is, you know, people keep comparing this to a mortgage.
mortgage. We're not mortgaging the future of our children. In fact, we are building
the roads that they're going to use. And having them pay their fair share to use these
roads, like they do today, is good public policy. So with that, I would urge the body
to vote yes on this bond deal
so that we can move our city forward.
Thank you.
Question is being called here
for the passage of this item, again, by roll call vote.
Does that still stand, Chairwoman Dowell?
That motion still carries?
Yes, I'm sorry, Mr. President.
I move the motion to call this ordinance
for a roll call vote.
Very well.
Thank you, Madam Clerk, for providing the technology today.
Alders, please use your e-vote application
to record your vote at this time.
The voting is now open.
The voting is now open.
Please use your e-device.
The voting is now open.
Please raise your hand if you need any help.
The voting is now open.
I will now call on those who have not used the e-device for a voice vote.
Alderman Yancey, not present.
Alderman Coleman.
Coleman is a yes.
Coleman is a yes.
Alderman Taylor.
Yes.
Taylor is a yes. Alderman Irvin. Alderman Irvin votes yes. Irvin is a yes. Alderman Talaferro. Yes. Talaferro is a yes. Alderman Villegas. No. Villegas is a no. Alderman Haddon. Yes. Alderman Haddon is a yes.
have all those voted who wished
the voting is now closed
there are 26 CAs 23 nays
this motion passes
Alderman Mitchell on a motion to reconsider
I move to reconsider the vote
all those in favor of the reconsideration of the vote
any opposed say no
no the motion fails
for miscellaneous
Alderman Mitchell anything
Ms. Pratt
I'm not aware of any...
I believe it's the...
I'm not...
Unfinished.
Just the date and time of the next meeting.
Is that correct?
Except for the ordinance setting the date and time for the next meeting, I'm not aware of any miscellaneous...
Very well.
For the date and time for the next meeting, Audubon Mitchell?
I've handed up an ordinance to the clerk setting the date and time for the next meeting.
Very well.
Thank you much.
Madam Clerk, please read the ordinance.
Be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Chicago in the next order of meeting at the City Council of the City of Chicago
shall be held on Wednesday, March 12, 2025, beginning 10 a.m.
in the Council Chamber on the second floor, City Hall, 121 North LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois.
This ordinance shall take effect and be enforced from and after its passage.
Gregory Mitchell, Alderman Seventh Ward.
Very well, Alderman Mitchell.
Alderman Mitchell.
I move that matters in the omnibus to be passed by the first and most favorable roll call vote
by the Committee on Rules and the Associated Unsecessual Motion to Reconciliation.
Hearing no objection, so order on the omnibus, Alderman Mitchell.
I move that matters in the honors be passed by the first most favored roll call vote by the Committee on Rules and Associated Uncertainly Motion to Reconsider.
Hearing no objection, so ordered.
Alderman Mitchell, in a motion to adjourn.
There being no further business before the body, I move that we adjourn.
Hearing no objection, so ordered.
This meeting is adjourned.
I'm missing, man.