Emanuel doubles down
Friday, Jun 23, 2017 - Posted by Rich Miller
* From Adam Collins in Mayor Rahm Emanuel’s press office…
Five simple questions for Gov. No
As near as I can tell it’s been about two weeks since the Governor has taken a single question from the press. With the state of Illinois now one week away from entering a third consecutive year without a budget there are, of course, many questions for the Governor. In that spirit, here are five fairly fundamental questions the Governor has not answered - and perhaps cannot answer.
1) You have said selling the Thompson Center would be “a huge home run for taxpayers of the State of Illinois” and that selling the building would get the state “more than $300 million in cash from a developer.” Is selling the Thompson Center and netting $300 million in cash for the state no longer a priority for you?
2) Your office said yesterday the Mayor’s offer - to meet your original request on the Thompson Center as long as you agreed to sign the city’s pension reform plan - wasn’t a fair deal. While you might not favor the City of Chicago’s plan, it would have no cost - $0 - to the state of Illinois. Given that the state could desperately use $300 million, why would you say no to that offer?
3) You previously said that in order to get the most money from selling the Thompson Center, you needed the city to guarantee maximum density for the site - something they were reluctant to do. Their offer meets your original request. How can anyone believe you have the ability to reach a budget agreement when you can’t even say “yes” to your own plan?
4) Your top education adviser acknowledged that the education funding plan that passed both houses of the legislature gets you 90% of what you are asking for - but said you will still veto it. You’re familiar with negotiations. Can you seriously not say “yes” to a bill that gets you 90% of what you want? Are you seeking a compromise, or capitulation?
5) Earlier this year you praised bipartisan efforts in the state Senate to reach a grand bargain on the budget, saying of it “there is reason for optimism.” According to press reports, a few weeks later you “intervened in the Illinois Senate on Wednesday to stop a ‘grand bargain’ on the state budget.” Was it that you never really wanted a grand bargain to pass, or were you just unable to say “yes” and support the efforts you had already praised?
This certainly appears designed to gin up Chicago reporters ahead of the governor’s 3 o’clock bill signing, where he’s expected to take some questions.
- 47th Ward - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 11:01 am:
Maybe Mary Ann Ahern can drive through the Capitol drive way and check to see if the Governor’s car is parked out front. Maybe she could ask him a few of these, assuming she’s not staking out the Butternut Hut.
- RNUG - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 11:06 am:
Good questions. At this point, it seems like you could give Rauner 100% of what he wants … and he would still say no and demand more.
- Oswego Willy - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 11:09 am:
When you ha Eva person who refuses to take 90% of a victory, and is already in this instance continuing that petulance, meh, what is the real cost to doubling down, Rauner already said “no”, so Rauner doesn’t get what he wants, by Rauner’s own choice.
Yikes, man.
- rod - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 11:09 am:
On point 4. Both the Mayor and the Governor have tunnel vision on CPS. Somehow the Mayor seems to think that the funding mandated in SB 1 will be appropriated year after year and that it will be sufficient even given the money CPS is losing due to enrollment declines. The Governor thinks good management over at CPS inclusive of privatization can fix everything with very limited help from the State. Both visions are messed up.
- Deft Wing - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 11:11 am:
Rahm’s doing great! It’s awesome to buddy up with Madigan, Cullerton & the whole cadre of fiscal geniuses from Chicago, right? I mean, Rahmonia (the biggest city in Madigastan) is only on the brink of a financial Armageddon with its pension liabilities, CPS debts, & other bonded indebtedness, people are leaving, violence is and yet the Tiny Dancer is focused like a laser beam on being re-elected. Somehow.
- Anon221 - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 11:13 am:
RNUG- Rauner is not dissimilar to a PayDay lender. If you don’t pay him back the full amount plus interest, you get rolled for more and more and more.
- PublicServant - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 11:18 am:
===This certainly appears designed to gin up Chicago reporters ahead of the governor’s 3 o’clock bill signing, where he’s expected to take some questions.===
First question goes to McQuery. Oh that’s the last question too… Heh.
- slow down - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 11:24 am:
Our state has long been blessed with many good and tough reporters but the failure of the current press corps as a general matter to confront Rauner with his lies and inconsistencies has been massive and truly harmful to this state.
I won’t hold my breath that today’s Q&A will be any different.
- Ducky LaMoore - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 11:26 am:
@Deftwing
So are these not legit questions? Not that you don’t raise a valid argument. But it is a different argument. It seems like Rauner and his core supporters never seem to have any answers, only deflections.
- Oswego Willy - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 11:30 am:
- Deft Wing -
Who do you think you are, John Kass?
If you’re going to just cut and paste Kassian drivel, you should cite Kass… unless you are Kass then a lot of your comments make sense now, lol
- Ron - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 11:31 am:
Deft, lower income folks are fleeing Chicago. The City is experiencing a huge influx of highly educated, high earning people. Who do you think is buying and renting all the expensive real estate that is being built?
Can you blame black people for wanting to leave crime ridden, no opportunity areas?
The simplest for Chicago is for the state to allow CPS to declare BK. That would go a long way towards fixing the city’s fiscal problems.
- winners and losers - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 11:39 am:
While Rauner may like 90 percent of SB 1 (the extreme local control parts), SB 1 is a sham and a fraud.
(1) Schools have to do nothing. The 27 elements in SB 1 that are claimed to be evidence based are just for show. SB 1 requires schools to do NONE of the 27.
(2) SB 1 would cost over $6.5 Billion TODAY, which will be almost $8 Billion over 10 years.
(3) Has anyone presented a plan to increase State funding for schools by $800 million each and every year for 10 years?
(4) As two noted supporters of SB 1 have stated, the CURRENT formulas would do most of what is claimed for SB 1 IF the current formulas were funded (the foundation level has been frozen since 2008, not increased in 9 years).
(5) But using an old political ploy, some supporters of SB 1 have claimed the current formulas are “rotten”, “the worst in the nation”, and “shameful”.
(6) Those words apply to NOT providing the money, not funding the current formulas or increasing the foundation level as is supposedly required.
(7) The problem is funding, not the formulas.
But funding is extremely hard now in Illinois, so it is an easy distraction to say THE problem is the formulas AND WE ARE FIXING THEM.
- Annonin' - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 11:43 am:
It seems the most legit questions is since there is a long lavish history of zoning scandals in Chicago I would wonder if City Hall types are nervous that GovJunk has a”winner” picked out for the JRTC land and he is just P* a sweet deal.
One might guess that GovJunk is smarter, but the Barney’s warehouse scandal and a few other tidbits suggest otherwise.
- doggonit - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 11:58 am:
These are good questions. The most important is the last one.
Given his patterns of refusal to deal, I’d say Durkin needs to go it alone on the budget.also he’d be saving the governor from himself.
- A guy - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 12:03 pm:
Seriously. To “double down” you need to have something on the table to leverage. What is he doubling down on?
- Pundent - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 12:11 pm:
=To “double down” you need to have something on the table to leverage.=
I dunno, seems like the Thompson Center is a pretty big chip. Rauner certainly thinks it is.
- A guy - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 12:20 pm:
Pundent, I guess you mean “zoning”. The Thompson building already belongs to the state.
- Louis G. Atsaves - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 12:36 pm:
Uh, as Governor, isn’t he supposed to represent Illinois residents, citizens and tax payers and try to get the highest value for the James R. Thompson Center, notwithstanding the City’s efforts and the Madigan 18 month stall?
This isn’t Wrigley Field. This is State Property.
- Oswego Willy - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 12:39 pm:
- Louis G. Atsaves -
I guess Rauner be petulant so no deal is possible is fine by you?
We already know, from Dr. Purvis, 90% just isn’t “good enough”
Welp, if the governor requires 100%, and Rahm leaning on Madigan… lol
- Oswego Willy - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 12:41 pm:
“being”
- Louis G. Atsaves - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 1:18 pm:
@Oswego Willy, I don’t think he is being “petulant.” Sorry to burst your anti-Rauner all the time bubble
But as Governor of Illinois he has an obligation to Illinois residents, taxpayers and citizens to seek the best deal for this State property. Emmanuel’s bricks and obstacles notwithstanding.
Clearly that obligation offends Emmanuel. You as well.
- Oswego Willy - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 1:20 pm:
===I don’t think he is being “petulant.”
But as Governor of Illinois he has an obligation to Illinois residents, taxpayers and citizens to seek the best deal for this State property. Emmanuel’s bricks and obstacles notwithstanding===
Welp, you made it clear, Rauner, himself is holding up the deal.
That’s all I really wanted, LOL!
- Oswego Willy - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 1:23 pm:
Only Raunerites see Rauner himself holding up a deal as someone else… holding up the deal.
Rauner just can’t take wins, even 90% wins.
That’s pathetically masquerades as…
@Oswego Willy, I don’t think he is being “petulant.” Sorry to burst your anti-Rauner all the time bubble
===But as Governor of Illinois he has an obligation to Illinois residents, taxpayers and citizens to seek the best deal for this State property.===
So… you can be a “resident” and not a “taxpayer”, Counselor?
That’s a new dog whistle for me, glad you paraded it out. Thank you.
- Oswego Willy - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 1:28 pm:
- Louis G Atsaves -
‘Tween us, I didn’t want to embarrass you with the “citizen” dog whistle. That would link Rauner to Trump, and I know Rauner fears Trump, as you make clear “citizens”, cause there must be non-citizens, and Rauner doesn’t represent them.
So, I’ll just leave that alone for you.
- Rod - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 1:31 pm:
Ron I agree with you in part. Overall we are losing population in the City, the driver of the loss is African Americans and the decline of the City as a port of entry for Hispanic immigrants due to housing. But not all of the African American leaving are below the poverty line, many have household incomes that are $60-$70 a year. They are neither rich nor truly poor, but they are deeply fearful for their children being slaughtered in the killing wave in the City. You are totally right about the influx of higher income younger people, most of whom don’t have children.
I looked at a stunning statistic the other day for my state rep district 13, Greg Harris. A little over 80% of households in the district had no children under the age of 18 in their homes. A significant percentage of the families with children have their kids in private schools on top of that. The situation here in Chicago is very odd.
- Ron - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 2:04 pm:
“A little over 80% of households in the district had no children under the age of 18 in their homes. A significant percentage of the families with children have their kids in private schools on top of that. The situation here in Chicago is very odd.”
It’s not out of the ordinary for large US cities.
Also, the people leaving are not all poor, but most are lower income. Certainly below the median.
- Rod - Friday, Jun 23, 17 @ 3:29 pm:
The current per capita income for the City of Chicago is only $33,437. A good number of the African Americans that have left Chicago for the south were making that kind of money, which is why they could relocate. There was a time when people on public benefits from Chicago were packing it up and going to places with better benefits, those days are largely over. Its the working poor and lower middle class in Chicago that are going for employment opportunities and to protect their children from the murder epidemic.
- Ron - Saturday, Jun 24, 17 @ 8:06 am:
Yep, lower class folks are leaving.