Chicago Politics

Update From City Hall 12.19.25

Chapters

Description

Mayor Johnson hosts a media availability.

Transcript

0:00 We know that we're on the reporters today.

0:32 Yeah, yeah. Let them talk. They are? You're feeling good. It would be a lot. Yeah. That'd be really mean. That is awesome. Do stuff. Do stuff. I'm inspired. We do letters first.

1:04 Start it. A lot of happens. We have friends. He's got a tribute to basketball in the press room. Change.

2:03 That was a good point.

7:40 As I've said and as our entire administration has repeated, the two budget packages are substantially similar. In fact, I believe it was their presentation to council that quantified the difference at about 1.6%. In other words, our proposals are 98.4% similar. But in that 1.6%, I have serious concerns about the revenue projections and about the plan to sell Chicagoans' debts to debt collectors.

8:11 both because I do not believe there is any way to actually sell that debt and because I don't agree that this is a principled way of raising revenue by aggressively going after those with the least ability to pay. After today's vote, it is clear that at least 20 other members agree with me. Even so, the vast majority of this proposal, which protects Chicago, is the most important thing here. And we protect Chicago by investing in community safety through investments in our community violence intervention as well as violence prevention and intervention programs.

8:46 We continue our investment in young people, 30,000 youth jobs, so that we can expand our youth employment programs for the fourth year in a row. Investments in our Department of Law so that we can protect our city from federal overreach and the illegal attempts to withhold federal dollars. We make the largest investment in our public schools in the history of Chicago, with a $500 million investment so that every single school community has the resources that they need to succeed, and it maintains our investments in mental health and crisis response teams

9:19 so that we can continue to expand our work around mental health care. In a difficult budget year, our proposal managed to make historic investments that will benefit all of our residents and our city as a whole as we manage to contain costs without mass layoffs or cuts to vital services that the people of Chicago rely upon. And even more importantly, without balancing this budget off the backs of working people. That has always been my red line, and we were able to maintain that. We did ask corporations and big tech through increasing the PPLT and through our smart techs

9:53 to put a little bit more skin in the game so that we can fund the services that make our city the most amazing city in the world. We also introduced our own final proposal today that makes the full advance pension payment with a responsible approach that does not rely on speculative revenue that ultimately is a one-time fix that disproportionately hurts working families. I know we're going to be back at it again tomorrow, but with that, I'm happy to answer any of your questions. All right, we're going to do one question just to get through everybody,

10:25 and questions are not mandatory, so only if you have one. Go ahead. Hi, Mayor. Hi. Do you plan to veto this proposal? Well, look, you know, I've expressed my concerns about, you know, how this budget that ultimately went forward today with the 29 members who supported it, that state law requires us to pass a balanced budget. Again, there are some serious, significant concerns that I have. And, you know, quite frankly, the concern that troubles me just as much as the fact that there are some concerns about whether or not it's actually balanced

11:02 is the fact that there's an attempt to sell off debt, to send debt collectors after working people. Again, I don't believe this is a principal approach towards how we balance our budget, and it's something, of course, that I will have to weigh as we move forward. But look, negotiations are still prevalent. This process is not over just yet. And, again, members of the city council will have more time to look at a proposal that essentially not only secures the investments that we've always said we need to secure,

11:38 but we put forth revenue based upon ideas that we've received from the council members to ultimately allow us to pay our full pension, advanced pension payment. So we do that without going after working people or putting poor people in a position where debt collectors would aggressively, quite frankly, harass them. Just a quick follow-up on your proposal. When would you want to see a vote on the proposal that you introduced today? And do you consider that a compromise plan?

12:09 And if so, can you kind of talk about how this is a compromise plan? Well, it most certainly is a compromise plan. And as I indicated, you know, some of the ideas that we have put forward in our updated proposal receives – we receive those ideas from other members of city council. So that's how compromises work. And that's what I've said from the very beginning, that I'm going to continue to fight and protect working people, fight for and protect working people. And having ideas that I could work with that ultimately allow us to do that,

12:42 But that's why we put forth those considerations. As far as, again, when this process could happen, we are still in conversations with all of our alders to continue to make space, because there is time, to have the council review the updated proposal. Because, look, there were a number of members who were in support of us challenging corporations to put more skin in the game, but they were concerned about paying the full advance pension payment.

13:15 Now we have a package that allows us to do that without sticking it to working people. I mean, kind of those same people you were just referencing, they've been saying that for weeks, right, that they could potentially support the head tax but they wanted that full advance. Why wait until the morning of a final or at least final vote on the revenue to show that you're willing to do that and introduce it? Well, look, those ideas we had been contemplating for some time, and our team needed the ability to run through those numbers.

13:49 And there was always, you know, intentions of putting that plan forward. In fact, this conversation did not begin this morning. There are members of the city council who knew what our intentions were and decided to move ahead anyways. And, you know, I can't speak to their motivation, But what I can speak to is that this budget is based on speculations that I have serious concerns about, and a number of members of city council have those concerns as well.

14:20 And furthermore, there's an opportunity to actually move forward collectively with this compromised approach without, again, going after working people and poor people. I guess on that amendment, or you... So depending on how they receive that in the, I guess, the coming hours, next few days, does that weigh into your decision on to veto? Or is that something you're comfortable essentially letting go into next year before it could potentially be approved?

14:51 You know, it's got to go through rules and all that. Yeah, I mean, look, and thank you for elevating that. There are a number of steps that still have to be taken. We're looking at all of it, and I put forth a path that gets us to the result that all of us were working towards without, again, relying upon speculative and unsubstantiated assumptions, and particularly relying upon, you know, an approach towards going after revenue

15:25 that, you know, I don't believe is morally right, quite frankly. Mayor, there are only a handful of days left in the year before this budget needs to finally pass. What's a deadline? What's a reasonable deadline? What's the deadline you're using to make a decision on a veto that would add time to this process? Look, I would like to be able to give the working people of this city the best christmas gift that we can possibly give them and that's the gift of not balancing this budget off of speculation and further not balancing this budget off of practice that again

15:57 i don't believe is solid in terms of of of our principles you know look there are people right now who are struggling every day to make the ends meet and you know the people who have the least ability to pay and who have been suffering through a great deal of turmoil because all of the cuts that are coming from the federal government, this is just, I believe, not only short-sighted, but it comes up bankrupt to me morally because I believe there's a stronger

16:29 approach to being able to balance this budget without, again, going after working people and poor people. So, you know, I would like to be able to get this done in time for the celebration of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ's birthday. But, you know, you're using language like morally bankrupt. I mean, it's harsh criticism. Do you think that makes it rise to the level of deserving a veto? It's not clear, and it's really important for the city to understand that right now. Which part is not clear? Whether you want to veto this or not.

17:01 Well, look, you know, that decision has not been made. What I've said repeatedly is that if I have a particular moral and I express that, that's not necessarily being harsh. I mean, we do have some fundamental disagreements here, but I've made that clear from the very beginning that I don't believe that this is a principle that should be applied in a moment in which so many families are suffering, right? Is it morally reprehensible to know that the federal government is cutting services from people?

17:31 Yes, it is. Just like I believe that seeking, have you ever had a debt collector call you and harass you over and over again? Do you know what that feels like? So then I don't know if it's fair to then to characterize my critique of something as harsh if you never experienced the type of brutality that comes with being poor. I believe it was James Baldwin that said that, you know, if you less you have been poor, you wouldn't know how expensive it is.

18:04 Mayor, we're seeing aldermen, even on the left, who are... Is that quite loud? I can move it. No, no, that's not you. That's not you. You are projecting. That's a good thing. Okay, cool. They got you in the back. We're seeing aldermen, even on the left, not quite won over yet by the moral urgency of your tax the rich, please, and instead argue about the fiscal responsibility angle. What do you make of that concern, winning out with them? Is that progressive? Who's morally on the left that you're describing? Which ones are you talking about? Just some members on the Progressive Caucus are prioritizing the advance pension and the borrowing over, you know, the head tax.

18:41 No, no, no, they're not. There are members who support the head tax, the Progressive Caucus members. In fact, I believe all of the Progressive Caucus members support the corporate head tax. But they wouldn't vote for a budget with that head tax if it didn't have their requirements for the pension and the borrowing. So that's what I mean by that's their priority. Which is their priority, the corporate head tax or having the advanced pension and not having the borrowing plan? Oh, OK. Well, people did vote for first of all, this budget. Ninety eight percent of it is essentially the same.

19:12 So here's what we're talking about. We're talking about we're either going to fund it with, you know, you know, challenging these corporations, these big corporations to put more skin in the game. or you're going to, you know, use practices that I do believe are incredibly harsh. And, you know, you have to speak to those individuals, you know, why they believe that that particular approach was worthwhile their vote. You know, but, again, our position is very clear.

19:42 The vast majority of the people in the city of Chicago agree with me, right? In fact, just for fun, if you wish, Mitt Romney has an article in the New York Times today, and Mitt Romney also agrees with me. He literally says that wealthy people like him should be taxed more, and that includes a large corporation. So there's no disagreement there. But, again, we have a proposal that's in front of people now where they get a chance to not only opine on those measures, but they actually get a chance to go through the democratic process.

20:15 And I believe that we should continue to have these conversations so that those individuals who you might be referring to could have more opportunities to engage. And my colleague Talia wants to ask about the Trump administration vetoing your CTA safety plan and threatening to withhold $50 million in federal funds. Yeah, you know, look, you know, the plan that was put forward by CTA is sound. It's a comprehensive plan that includes police officers, prevention efforts, wraparound services, technology,

20:53 you know, using essentially the same comprehensive approach that we have used to drive violence down in the city of Chicago. That's led to nearly 30 percent reduction in homicides, 35 percent reduction in robberies. So that comprehensive plan that we put forward is one that I believe is sound, and I do support what they put forward. So at this point, it seems like what the Trump administration is doing is what they've always done. They just sort of arbitrarily make up elements and things that don't necessarily speak to something that's ground and solid.

21:28 Good afternoon. Good afternoon. In the It Takes Two to Tangle department, you habitually place blame on every tug of war between yourself and the White House, squarely on President Trump. When will you take accountability for your part in the counterproductiveness since the buck passing has reached the point even for people who don't care for Trump as kid stuff old? I felt like your question was a riddle.

22:02 it's really not a riddle you said it takes two to tango every time like the Broadview situation that's on strong I don't represent Broadview I want to understand your question so if you could just try to disentangle it for me are you saying that what am I doing to make sure that the city of Chicago is measuring up to the expectations that I have of myself as mayor I always hold myself accountable Right. And it doesn't give the federal government the authority to behave unconstitutionally.

22:35 This is not about what my response is. This is about the failure of the Trump administration that has used arbitrary standards to ultimately move his political agenda. Right. And so we're going to continue to make investments in the people of Chicago. But I put forth a half a billion dollars towards Chicago public schools. And President Trump is defunding schools across this country. He needs to be held accountable. So still more butt passing. Well, anyway, now that Broadview Village President Katrina Thompson has declared in the editorial that she's not going to abide any route of his protesting,

23:12 that you and the governor stirred up to make her predominantly black village collateral damage over the ICE facility, when will you admonish Broadview protesters from rocking a near Tulsa program there? And we've heard over and over, that's not me, that's Trump, and the platitudes about what a great leader she is, but nothing about the name of these rioters protesters that she's even called out.

23:48 I've always said that I believe in the First Amendment and people's right to be able to peacefully assemble. And if people work outside of the structure of the First Amendment, they should be held accountable. You know, peacefully assembling to be able to make your point clear to the government is a fundamental right to our democracy. In fact, this room doesn't exist if we don't have that fundamental right in place. And when people act outside of those parameters, they should be held accountable.

24:19 Good afternoon, Mayor. I found a sweater in my closet for you. Well done. In this compromise proposal that you introduced today, it scraps the video gambling terminal legalization, instead calls for a casino at Midway Airport. What would that look like, and why is that a better option for Chicagoans at this point? Well, look, one of the things that we know as our airports continue to become increasingly busier, which is a testament to our growing, vibrant economy, that here is an opportunity to create more spaces for individuals

25:00 who engage in gambling to be able to do that, particularly as our airports, again, become increasingly more busier. As far as the structure there, those are elements that we would obviously still have to work out and work through. And one of the things that I thought was useful in this particular iteration of what was proposed is that it doesn't disrupt what's happening at other spaces, particularly as Bally's looks to come online.

25:33 So that would be an ongoing conversation, and it's a relevant opportunity for us to generate revenue in a space that is becoming increasingly busier. I mean, I do believe that we should have some level of decorum, right, particularly to ensure that, to the point that you're raising, that we don't overly saturate these spaces. But that's something that can continue to be worked out in the rules-making process

26:08 and, of course, as we establish some parameters of what is best as it relates to this particular form of gambling. Mayor Johnson, I've talked, I've interacted with hundreds of thousands of real Chicagoans, real working people who say that it's your budget that they're worried about, it's your property taxes that they are afraid will force them out of their homes.

26:42 they resent their hard-earned tax dollars going to pay for safaris for example for ctu members they resent that balloon rides multi-million dollar vacations around the world um there are obviously questions questions right right yeah well the business leaders they want me to ask this question they say that it's hard enough uh to uh retain qualified workers um when they see

27:12 headlines every single day of um you know people you know women being punched in the face uh working downtown um a woman uh okay pushed out of a wheelchair and raped on a cta platform well we need the question you even said it was an isolated incident when bethany mcgee was uh set on fire 26-year-old Bethany McGee, a very, very cold, heartless response to that tragedy. She's fighting for her life. And, of course, real Chicagoans still resent the fact that you don't pay your own water bill,

27:43 your own bills, water bill. Here you are saying that you don't want debt collectors, but your own plan, if you don't mind, I'd like to ask my question. I'm more than happy to ask the question. Your plan would hire more attorneys to go after debt, the debt. So the question is, how would your attorneys determine whose debt to go after, by race, by zip code?

28:14 And this just looks like another, probably another discrimination lawsuit that will be filed against the city if your plan actually goes through. Well, look, we've always said that people who have the ability to pay their debt should do it. And what our plan does... Did you not have the ability to pay your water bill? And so as your question is related to the budget that I proposed, is that the way we will determine how the city captures that debt

28:51 is based upon people who have the ability to pay. Quite frankly, there are a number of individuals who don't live in the city of Chicago that have accumulated debt over the years. As you may know, the city as a whole, going back almost 30 years, is roughly $8 billion of debt that has not been collected. So we put forth a strategy to make sure that we have people in place within the various departments to be able to, you know, contact those individuals that have the ability to pay these debts and ensure that they set up a well-situated opportunity to do just that.

29:36 Thank you for that question. Hi, Mayor. Hi. My question is, so WGN did analysis that all, if not most, of the orders of this alternate block were paid by Michael Sachs. I wanted to know what you make of that in relation to the vote on this alternate budget. Well, look, you know, I have not seen that report. I'm certainly aware of the contributions that this individual has made to multiple people.

30:09 You know, and look, there's no secret that I believe that the wealthiest individuals in this country have a heavy hand in how our politics are carried out and how those dollars influence decisions that decision-makers make in government.

30:41 It's no secret, right? And again, this is not a new phenomenon. I've quoted Justice Brandeis multiple times. You could have a democracy or wealth in the hands of a concentrated few, but you cannot have both. And what we have seen over and over and over again is that the wealthiest have attempted to not just rule but to dominate. And that's not sustainable for our democracy.

31:12 And I think at a particular junction in our nation's history where the wealth gap continues to grow, where a corporate CEO makes 200 times the amount of the average employee, that's just not a sustainable economy at a time in which affordability is front and center for most Americans. That's why I'm working hard to invest in people in this city to build the safest, most affordable big city in America with cuts to SNAP, cuts to education, cuts to transportation, cuts to housing, you know, cuts to good paying jobs.

31:49 It's why this budget is is was was clear when I presented it to ultimately protect working people. And, you know, the heavy hand that the ultra rich have in our society right now, I do believe that it is a threat to our democracy. Hi, Mayor. Two votes now suggest that you've lost the argument for asking corporations to put more skin in the game through a head tax. When is it time to accept 98.4 percent of your budget as a win and just move on? Well, you know, look, 80 percent of the people of Chicago agree that the corporations who receive the largest tax break in the history of America should put more skin in the game.

32:30 That fight is not over. You know how many times people fought for civil rights, women's rights, the rights to vote? Wouldn't that have been a shame if we would have had that same question for people a generation ago, that you've lost it? Why not just give up? For the people of this city, I will never give up the fight for working people. That fight will never be over, not until there's equity and justice for every single Chicagoan in this city. Okay, if I could just follow up with that, just for a second, Mayor, if you don't mind.

33:01 so that suggests that you've got a veto pen ready to go for this or is there some do you have some play before tomorrow's vote when the the budget side of stuff comes up so i'm not playing games no i didn't mean playing games but okay but do you have a card to play if you will that would prevent the vote that Thank you. Theoretically, it could happen as soon as tomorrow on this full budget. You know, again, this is not about, you know, playing a card game or any of the sort.

33:32 I mean, what I've said repeatedly is that there is an opportunity to continue to build on this work to build compromise, right? I've never said that the corporate head tax is the end all be all, right? To the point that I believe that you've already expressed, that there are significant revenue drivers in this budget for corporations to put more skin in the game. That's because we fought for it. It's not because someone just decided to willingly to submit to those ideas.

34:06 So the personal property lease tax, the smart tax for social media. These are gains that had we not put forth this fight, it would not exist. So what I'm offering, as I've continued to offer, the ideas that have been submitted to me, we have found a pathway to be able to do it all. You know, the 98.4%, you're right, that is a win. That's a win for the people of Chicago. But I'm not sitting here patting myself on the back, particularly because there's still $90 million out there

34:40 that there are a number of city council members that are, that for whatever reason, that they're comfortable with a speculative approach that, quite frankly, undermines the authority that has been granted to us by the Constitution to pass a balanced budget. So that's what this is about. This is not about, you know, my commitment with the people of Chicago to this particular form of revenue. It's about making sure that our budget is balanced and that we have a better way to do it without going after the most vulnerable people in our society.

35:13 Take two. How are you doing? Well, it takes two, according to one particular reporter. That's right. I get it. I get it. The Motown fan in me appreciates that, Mayor Johnson. A tangentially budget-related question. The group representing online sports wagering websites has sent a letter to your team raising concerns about the plan to impose new regulations and new fees and suggesting that they will stop taking wagers from bettors in Chicago on January 1

35:49 if they don't either, A, get some clarity about regulations, or, B, get an agreement to pause their enforcement for six months. If you had an opportunity to take a look at that, they say they've been talking to your office. Where are those conversations now? Thank you for that question. We have been in conversations with this entity or industry. Jung, do you want to add more to that? Thank you, Mayor. Yes, we've been in conversation with the industry groups.

36:20 It seems like they were initially confused about the licensing framework that already exists today for sports wagering, and so they would be able to and are invited to apply for the existing license framework. Good afternoon. Good afternoon. We already know how do you feel about the budget, but if tomorrow the city council approve this budget, what are you going to do? Are you going to sign it or are you going to veto?

36:51 I know that you have said multiple times how do you feel about it, but I would like to know what are you going to do? Yeah, I haven't made that decision yet. I haven't made that decision yet. All right, you all. Be well. See you tomorrow.

Sources and methods: how we get and count this data · report an error