* While the coverage of yesterday’s tax hike vote in the Chicago City Council was pretty good, the most interesting part - at least to me - was not delved into.
The Sun-Times’ Mark Brown, for instance, listed all 29 members who voted for the tax hikes and the 21 who voted against. Brown also mentioned that the mayor’s budget passed on a 37-13 vote, as did the other stories.
What I’d like to know, though, is who were the wimps? Which members of the city council voted against the tax hikes and for the mayor’s budget? That info is nowhere to be found. It doesn’t even appear to be available online.
* Even so, Brown’s column was darned good and summed up the lapdog situation pretty accurately…
If you’re sitting at home trying to figure out how the City Council could approve $276 million in tax and fee increases — including an $83 million property tax hike — when you’re already ticked off about what you’re paying now, then that may be the problem. You’re sitting, when what you really ought to be doing is moving forward.
Confused? Let me try to explain it the way the aldermen explained it.
Mayor Daley needs the additional tax money so he can continue to “move the city forward,” said Budget Chairman Carrie Austin, the first of many to invoke the mayor’s pet phrase.
“We can move the city forward,” followed Ald. Ariel Reboyras (30th).
“Do we sit still, or do we move forward,” said Ald. George Cardenas (12th).
“We must continue to move this city forward,” said Latasha Thomas (17th). “If you believe that the city needs to move forward . . . then you must vote yes.”
Ald. Ginger Rugai’s version: “I think we have to, as I think everybody has said, move forward.”
Or Ald. Leslie Hairston: “This city is at a critical point. We can decide to move forward or stand still.”
“I’m going to vote to continue to move our city forward,” said Ald. Tom Tunney (44th).
Ald. Ike Carothers (29th) set the record, invoking at least six variations on moving the city forward.
* More city council stories…
* Sun-Times: Twenty years after the death of former Mayor Harold Washington, the City Council honored Chicago’s first African-American mayor on Tuesday, then cast a vote that stirred the ghosts of Council Wars.
* Tribune: Brushing off a rare show of opposition, Mayor Richard Daley won easy City Council approval Tuesday of a spending and tax plan that will tap into the wallets of just about everyone who lives, works or plays in Chicago.
* CBS 2: City Council Passes Budget, Tax Hikes - Big Property Tax Hike, New Tax On Bottled Water Approved
* ABC 7: City Council votes to increase taxes, fees
*** UPDATE *** Thanks to a couple of commenters, I found the roll calls on all votes at the Tribbie blog. They don’t break it down, but I did. According to that list, here are the “wimps” who voted against the property tax hike but for the mayor’s budget…
Brookins (21st), Suarez (31st), Waguespack (32nd), Banks (36th), Allen (38th), Laurino (39th), Daley (43rd) and Levar (45th).
* And here are the seven aldermen who consistently voted against the property tax hikes, against the mayor’s budget and against the other tax hikes as well…
Fioretti (2nd), Preckwinkle (4th), Jackson (7th), Foulkes (15th), Munoz (22nd), Reilly (42nd), Moore (49th).
*** UPDATE 2 *** Ald. Carothers talks about “heavy lifting”…
Or is it largely a tax increase to maintain the status quo?
- Don't Worry, Be Happy - Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 10:52 am:
The Tribune in the print edition lists how all of the aldermen voted on each of the property tax hike, the other taxe hikes, and the budget. They don’t seem to have it online, however.
The City Clerk as a matter of policy does not post unanimous votes, which is 99.99% of them, and does not post divided votes until AFTER the journal is approved by the full City Council at the NEXT meeting. This allows aldermen a chance to change their votes and builds in a roughly one month cooling off period between a vote and naming names.
- take it easy - Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 11:31 am:
Interesting that Pat Dowell, normally an Independent, backed Daley completely. Shrewd political move for the Alderman looking to also be Committeeman. Who’s going to be the first to tell Ken Dunkin that his 15 minutes of fame are about up?
I have a lot more respect for the aldermen who voted “yes” on both than those who voted for the spending but then voted against paying for it. Want services? Pay for them.
That being said, contrary to what the Mayor said, it looks like the residents of the 42nd Ward are going to be doing a heck of a lot of that lifting. In terms of total dollars, the 42nd is going to take the real brunt of that property tax hike. Our homes cost a lot, and as a result, the total amount that we pay is going to be far more than the rest of the wards. Nice of the rest of the city to dump it all on us.
What the Mayor needs to remember is that although 42 may be paying for all his failure to control spending, the reason is that 42 has a lot of people with a lot of money. In about three years, the people of 42 are going to remember what the Mayor thought of them and they are going to start writing their “anybody but Daley” checks. At this point, there are at least two people named “Jackson” who would be a great improvement in that office. Whichever one decides to run has got my vote.
- B-no name nickname needed - Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 12:35 pm:
Skeeter i live in 42 and think you are way off base. don’t forget a majority of the office properties, which pay most of the real estate taxes are in 42 and the rest are in 2.
sandi jackson voted against both, but she had the audacity to complain about her office cash allocation the moment she was elected. all of the nays on the budget and taxes will have their hands out for new schools, capital improvements and olympic events in their wards.
So Daley is increasing taxes to fund his projects on the backs of the people. The Daley approach to the cost of living in Chicago seems to be nothing more then for Daley to decree, let them eat cake.
Both the candidates for State’s Attorney made the “wimps” list: Tom Allen and Howard Brookins.
- Just Observing - Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 2:19 pm:
Rich, can your (or someone else) better explain to me the rationale some might have had for voting for the budget but against the tax hikes? Not just that they are wimps or morons, but how would they expect the budget to be paid for? Details. Thanks!
Just Observing - many aldermen had suggested other areas to raise funds rather than property taxes. There was no proof that taxes needed to be raised as much as was proposed. So, yes you can support a budget and not raise more taxes than needed.
Avy, according to the Tribune’s list, Stone voted for the mayor’s other taxes, while voting No on the budget and the property tax hike. I used that list because it was the only one available.
- Carl Nyberg - Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 10:46 am:
How does the budget move the city forward?
Or is it largely a tax increase to maintain the status quo?
- Don't Worry, Be Happy - Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 10:52 am:
The Tribune in the print edition lists how all of the aldermen voted on each of the property tax hike, the other taxe hikes, and the budget. They don’t seem to have it online, however.
- Levois - Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 10:53 am:
That’s all they got, moving the city forward? They can do better than that.
- Tom - Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 10:55 am:
Here is the list
http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/clout_st/2007/11/daley-budget-an.html
- Underdog - Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 10:56 am:
The Trib has the roll call for the 3 tax/budget votes in its blog:
http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/clout_st/2007/11/daley-budget-an.html
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 11:01 am:
OK, thanks. Still, nobody does the work to show who the wimps were. Guess I’ll do it in a bit.
- Hugh - Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 11:20 am:
“It doesn’t even appear to be available online.”
The City Clerk as a matter of policy does not post unanimous votes, which is 99.99% of them, and does not post divided votes until AFTER the journal is approved by the full City Council at the NEXT meeting. This allows aldermen a chance to change their votes and builds in a roughly one month cooling off period between a vote and naming names.
- take it easy - Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 11:31 am:
how did manny flores vote?
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 11:35 am:
“Take it easy,” why not just click on that link I provided instead of asking others to do your “work” for you?
- phocion - Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 11:58 am:
Interesting that Pat Dowell, normally an Independent, backed Daley completely. Shrewd political move for the Alderman looking to also be Committeeman. Who’s going to be the first to tell Ken Dunkin that his 15 minutes of fame are about up?
- Skeeter - Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 11:59 am:
Great note. I fully agree.
I have a lot more respect for the aldermen who voted “yes” on both than those who voted for the spending but then voted against paying for it. Want services? Pay for them.
That being said, contrary to what the Mayor said, it looks like the residents of the 42nd Ward are going to be doing a heck of a lot of that lifting. In terms of total dollars, the 42nd is going to take the real brunt of that property tax hike. Our homes cost a lot, and as a result, the total amount that we pay is going to be far more than the rest of the wards. Nice of the rest of the city to dump it all on us.
What the Mayor needs to remember is that although 42 may be paying for all his failure to control spending, the reason is that 42 has a lot of people with a lot of money. In about three years, the people of 42 are going to remember what the Mayor thought of them and they are going to start writing their “anybody but Daley” checks. At this point, there are at least two people named “Jackson” who would be a great improvement in that office. Whichever one decides to run has got my vote.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 12:02 pm:
Excellent point, phocion.
- B-no name nickname needed - Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 12:35 pm:
Skeeter i live in 42 and think you are way off base. don’t forget a majority of the office properties, which pay most of the real estate taxes are in 42 and the rest are in 2.
sandi jackson voted against both, but she had the audacity to complain about her office cash allocation the moment she was elected. all of the nays on the budget and taxes will have their hands out for new schools, capital improvements and olympic events in their wards.
- Ghost - Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 12:39 pm:
Go Jackson
So Daley is increasing taxes to fund his projects on the backs of the people. The Daley approach to the cost of living in Chicago seems to be nothing more then for Daley to decree, let them eat cake.
- Carl Nyberg - Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 1:59 pm:
Both the candidates for State’s Attorney made the “wimps” list: Tom Allen and Howard Brookins.
- Just Observing - Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 2:19 pm:
Rich, can your (or someone else) better explain to me the rationale some might have had for voting for the budget but against the tax hikes? Not just that they are wimps or morons, but how would they expect the budget to be paid for? Details. Thanks!
- Ghost - Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 2:25 pm:
Just observing, they will double the cities money at the new casino of course.
- Levois - Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 3:31 pm:
Sandi Jackson a chicken? OUCH!
- babs - Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 3:32 pm:
Just Observing - many aldermen had suggested other areas to raise funds rather than property taxes. There was no proof that taxes needed to be raised as much as was proposed. So, yes you can support a budget and not raise more taxes than needed.
- JakeCP - Wednesday, Nov 14, 07 @ 10:30 pm:
I am not surprised at all to see Vi Daley being one of the wimps. Oh wait actually I am because she is usually a staunch Daley supporter.
- Avy Meyers - Thursday, Nov 15, 07 @ 3:52 am:
Ald. Berny Stone voted against the Mayor across the board and you failed to list him.
- Rich Miller - Thursday, Nov 15, 07 @ 7:50 am:
Avy, according to the Tribune’s list, Stone voted for the mayor’s other taxes, while voting No on the budget and the property tax hike. I used that list because it was the only one available.
- Avy Meyers - Thursday, Nov 15, 07 @ 12:09 pm:
Sorry Rich, my mistake.