Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Payroll tax out, food and medicine tax in… for now
Next Post: Chicago GOP chief to file ethics complaint against Claypool
Posted in:
* DNAInfo…
Groups across the city are pushing the state to ditch laws banning rent control in Illinois as rental markets in Pilsen, Logan Square and Hyde Park heat up.
State Rep. Will Guzzardi (D-Logan Square) has introduced a bill in Springfield that would repeal a 1997 law passed under Republican Gov. Jim Edgar.
“The fear was the bogeyman of rent control,” Guzzardi said of the Rent Control Preemption Act at a Tuesday news conference in Kenwood. […]
The average rent for a one-bedroom apartment in Logan Square has increased by 40 percent to $1,250 at the end of 2016 from $895 at the end of 2011.
* The Sun-Times turns a big thumbs down…
Under a rent control system, a city caps rent increases for a certain percentage of apartments. The goal is to maintain a supply of affordable rental units, even in areas where housing costs are shooting up. New York and Los Angeles, for example, have rent control rules. But by disrupting market forces, rent control inevitably creates a dangerous disincentive for developers to build new housing and for landlords to properly maintain existing units. Rents for some apartments hold steady while rents for others shoot up to make up the difference when the demand is high. An illegal black market develops as one renter quietly tries to pass an apartment along to another renter — sometimes demanding a kickback — without the landlord catching on. […]
One way City Hall can help residents caught in the cross-hairs of gentrification is through transit-oriented development. This is a creative and far-sighted effort to build a greater number of living units near transportation hubs than would be normally be allowed. By requiring a large number of affordable units in the new construction, aldermen are helping longtime residents stay in their neighborhoods.
Transit-oriented development also works naturally to produce more affordable living opportunities in a city. Because the building typically is located right next to a CTA L stop or Metra station, residents are less likely to need a car. And the building can be designed with fewer parking spaces, bringing down the cost.
* On to the next topic…
U.S. presidential candidates would be barred from appearing on the ballot in Illinois unless they release five years of their income tax returns under legislation introduced today by Senator Daniel Biss (D-Evanston).
Biss says the measure is designed to ensure Illinois voters have important information about the financial interests of candidates who seek the most powerful and influential job in the world.
* And, finally…
Ambitious legislation in the Illinois House would restrict the hours pharmacists can work each day, limit the number of prescriptions they can fill each hour, require break time during their shifts and provide whistleblower protection if they expose safety problems. But the bill already is drawing heavy opposition from lobbyists and skepticism from Gov. Bruce Rauner.
The measure represents one of the nation’s most aggressive responses to concerns from pharmacists that growing pressure to work faster increases prescription drug errors.
The move comes as states beyond Illinois mandate break time. A rule is in the works in Minnesota to require bathroom and meal breaks; pharmacists there complained they are afraid to drink liquids during a shift because they may not have the time to go to the washroom.
Filed last week, the House bill is the latest reaction to a Tribune investigation that found half of 255 pharmacies tested in the Chicago region failed to warn about prescriptions for potential drug interactions that could be harmful or fatal.
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 11:06 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Payroll tax out, food and medicine tax in… for now
Next Post: Chicago GOP chief to file ethics complaint against Claypool
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
As someone who is very closely aligned with Guzzardi’s politics in most cases, this is disappointing.
Every student in intro to microeconomics learns how to literally diagram the inherent problems of rent control. It is essentially always bad public policy, enacted by the economically ignorant to appease the masses because it sounds good.
The Sun-Times is exactly correct.
Comment by PJ Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 11:11 am
== rent control inevitably creates a dangerous disincentive for developers to build new housing and for landlords to properly maintain existing units==
My question is if developers are building units right now anyway. Anecdotally, it seems like “yes”, but I’d like some numbers. If they’re not, it seems like there’s very little disincentive.
Still- seems like a simpler solution is just “build more housing”.
Comment by Arsenal Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 11:18 am
Whether they are or not, it creates a strong disincentive either way.
If you aren’t going to get fair market value for your leases, then you would rather take your business elsewhere, which just creates an even bigger housing shortage. Rent control, given enough time, actually makes renting much more difficult.
Comment by PJ Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 11:27 am
** Biss says the measure is designed to ensure Illinois voters have important information about the financial interests of candidates who seek the most powerful and influential job in the world. **
No, this is just more of the Trump Derangement Syndrome from the left.
Comment by Duh Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 11:30 am
Re Daniel Biss’s proposal, there have been other theories floated but I’d assumed this was one of the reasons why Trump was so quick and unusual in declaring his candidacy for 2020. If any states do pass laws to this effect, I’m assuming a lawsuit from Trump that whatever were the rules governing candidacy, when he declared, must still be applied at least to him, a kind of “ex post facto” argument. No idea if that would fly legally.
Comment by ZC Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 11:32 am
Rent control is a terrible idea. Expand the LIHTC is you want more affordable housing.
Comment by Ron Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 11:36 am
==No, this is just more of the Trump Derangement Syndrome from the left. ==
Oh for pete’s sake. We have this argument about tax returns every time someone runs for office. It doesn’t matter who they are or which party they come from. Somebody is going to “demand” that tax returns are released.
As to the policy, the idea is just silly.
Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 11:37 am
Rent control doesn’t help anyone in the long run and takes a new class of bureaucrats to monitor.
From a Politico article, citing a book “Antifragile,” by Nassim Taleb.
“…big government, which Taleb faults for suppressing the randomness, volatility and stress that keep institutions and people healthy. “As with neurotically overprotective parents, those who are trying to help us are hurting us the most,” he writes.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/02/steve-bannon-books-reading-list-214745
Comment by cdog Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 11:42 am
Why not income tax returns for other offices ?
Comment by Union Dues Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 11:42 am
===…unless they release five years of their income tax returns…===
Better make that the latest five years, or we’ll be getting Trump’s 1040EZs from his teens. Just sayin.
Comment by PublicServant Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 11:42 am
It’s called inflation. Better idea is to give rent vouchers. How will you pay for it? More taxes???
Comment by Rocky Rosi Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 11:45 am
Mayor Emanuel would never permit rent control. The only hope for Chicago is to improve its tax base. The poor must go.
Comment by Cook County Commoner Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 11:48 am
Would the presidential candidate tax return bill pass constitutional muster. If the state can’t require congressional candidates to live in their district (because the federal constitution doesn’t require it), can Illinois impose the tax return requirement on presidential hopefuls?
Comment by titan Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 11:49 am
Will G. got his name mentioned for something that seems sort of progressive-ish.
It is tough to believe that he any other goal, given the nation-wide as to how rent control works in New York.
Comment by Gooner Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 11:50 am
On tax returns.
From what I have seen, Rauner has only released the front and back of his 1040.
Without supporting schedules, etc., a 1040 is useless as far as knowing in what an individual is involved.
Comment by cdog Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 11:52 am
Guzzardi’s numbers are flawed. He is really saying that rent went up 40% over 6 years. Rent normally goes up 5% a year. This is to cover increases in property taxes, electric, gas, waste, water and sewer. The problem is that all of those items are going or went up more than 40% over 6 years.
I have about 150 units so I know a little bit about this. My property taxes are more than my mortgage on a lot of them. Factoring in these expenses, I bet a landlord in the 40% example that Guzardi gave isn’t making much if any more amount of money than he was 6 years ago.
Comment by Kan_Man Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 11:52 am
Housing around transit centers would be nice if neighbors wouldn’t be allowed to veto the developments.
Comment by a drop in Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 11:56 am
Rent control not a great idea. Bigger issue is zoning laws that discriminate against density, height, number of units/people in a building, etc. Too much NIMBYism
Comment by the rent is too damn high Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 11:56 am
Props to the anti NIMBY sentiment above. Chicago has way too many NIMBYs.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 11:59 am
It’s just a bill, but I don’t think people realize how harmful this is. Business people and employers see this kind of thing and just shake their heads and think our leadership is hopeles. Just another reason to leave.
Comment by Driveby Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 12:02 pm
I’m OK with the pharmacist’s bill. Have a couple of friends in that profession; some of them are overworked by the big chains.
Comment by RNUG Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 12:05 pm
Senator Biss, why are you leading with your chin?
From a Reuters article:
“Little is known about Madigan’s personal wealth. In 2014, after seeking to impose a 3 percent tax on Illinois’ millionaires, Madigan refused to release his income-tax returns to show if his plan would personally impact him. In a news conference, he offered only that he made at least $1 million “in a good year.””
Link is: http://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-illinois-madigan/
So you want to make the ‘rules’ apply to the other guys, but not your own?
Might want to think about where this proposed legislation could go. Rauner might actually be in favor of this, as long as it was applied equally to all the state legislative leaders, as well as all candidates for governor.
This could turn into a fiscal version of Term Limits.
Comment by Judgment Day Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 12:07 pm
No time to pee? The pharmacists better organize.
Comment by Da Big Bad Wolf Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 12:08 pm
So wait a minute, Will Guzzardi come to Hyde Park screams about rent being to high and teams with KoCo to do it. Wonder how Rep. Mitchell feels about that.
Comment by HydeParker Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 12:16 pm
Agree on the points raised above about why the Biss bill would only apply to Presidential elections and not everyone else. Also could be a constitutional issue as the method and manner of Presidential elections is largely a federal matter.
Comment by Ron Burgundy Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 12:20 pm
1.) If there is a housing shortage, the marketplace will fix the problem.,
2.) Why should we care if wealthy people run for office?,
3.) The post-Watergate rush to demand tax returns from office holders has resulted in what? Answer: Nothing. It is time to get over it.
That is all.
Comment by Keyser Soze Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 12:27 pm
Affordable housing would best be provided by an expanded LIHTC program that was more available and usable for developers. Seems that there is no shortage of demand for affordable housing units anywhere.
Comment by Deep South Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 12:33 pm
Re Daniel Biss’s proposal
If none of the candidates submitted their tax returns, then Illinois would have no say whatsoever in electing the President?
Comment by ANONIME Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 12:41 pm
Guzzardi should put his money where his mouth is, buy a rental property, and offer below market rents.
Comment by Just Observing Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 12:48 pm
Biss proposal:
Sure it would be a popular bill to introduce, but why stop there? Why not blanket it for anyone running for office in Illinois instead of just president?
Comment by Clark Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 12:52 pm
5,10,15,20,25…oh I need to pee. Where was I?
Comment by CLJ Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 12:54 pm
You can debate the politics of Biss’ bill, but I don’t see any legal questions. Each state gets to determine the qualifications for appearing on its ballot in any election, including presidential. Every state has different signature requirements to get on the presidential ballot, for instance. I don’t see why imposing one more requirement would be unconstitutional.
Comment by PJ Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 1:09 pm
–Every state has different signature requirements to get on the presidential ballot, for instance. I don’t see why imposing one more requirement would be unconstitutional.–
If I had the case, I would argue signature requirements are procedural and thus left to the states, like picking primary dates, etc. This I would argue, adds a qualification for office that does not appear in the Constitution and therefore should be struck down.
Comment by Ron Burgundy Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 1:53 pm
Politicians vote for record property tax increases to fund their interest groups and then later push for rent control because neighborhoods are unaffordable and their constituents are angry.
Do you think passing Econ 101 should be a requirement for all elected officials?
Comment by Lucky Pierre Wednesday, Feb 8, 17 @ 3:48 pm
Seriosly Pharmacists ? I call ahead and wait in line they aren’t in that big of a hurry. Support your local phamcists get good customer service. The minnesota law is ridiculous.
Comment by NothsideNomore Thursday, Feb 9, 17 @ 8:42 am