Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
Next Post: It’s all one thing
Posted in:
* Press release…
Speaker Michael J. Madigan issued the following statement Tuesday:
“Lori Lightfoot’s election marks a moment in our city, our state, and our nation’s history when those who have too often been marginalized and excluded are stepping forward to claim their seat at the table. Mayor-elect Lightfoot inspired Chicagoans with her message and impressed them with her record of accomplishment in both the public and private sectors. As Chicago and Illinois face major decisions, her election sends the clearest message yet that we believe that these decisions should be made by a government that reflects the diversity and the experience of Illinois’ citizens.
“I’m proud to welcome Mayor-elect Lightfoot to a Capitol where women, people of color and members of the LGBTQ community are serving in critical leadership roles within the House Democratic Caucus. I believe Illinois is strongest when Chicago succeeds and when all are heard; I look forward to working with Mayor-elect Lightfoot as I have with Chicago’s mayors throughout my career to strengthen our state, our city, and our communities.”
Notice that he didn’t mention any of the reforms she wants to accomplish.
posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Apr 9, 19 @ 9:04 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today’s edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
Next Post: It’s all one thing
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Who, again, did the 13th Ward organization support for Mayor?
Comment by Steve Tuesday, Apr 9, 19 @ 9:27 am
Steve, the organization was neutral. The ward’s voters picked Lightfoot like every other ward.
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Apr 9, 19 @ 9:29 am
Just asking. It wasn’t supposed to be a sarcastic comment.
Comment by Steve Tuesday, Apr 9, 19 @ 9:33 am
My guess is the Speaker does discuss some of her reform ideas real soon.. taking away aldermanic privilege will be a non starter for him.. I doubt he wants some 5th floor mayoral aid making zoning and liquor license decisions for the 13th ward
Comment by NotRich Tuesday, Apr 9, 19 @ 9:35 am
No specifics either of how the Speaker will “strengthen our communities” or restore citizens faith in state government through running things exactly that same as he always has.
Comment by Lucky Pierre Tuesday, Apr 9, 19 @ 9:49 am
–…taking away aldermanic privilege will be a non starter for him–
“Privilege?” I think supporters prefer “prerogative.” Sounds less monarchist, although the practice is baronial and obviously corrupt, as shown by a steady stream of aldermen over the years to Oxford, WI.
–I doubt he wants some 5th floor mayoral aid making zoning and liquor license decisions for the 13th ward–
How’s about the rule of law, applied objectively, transparently and evenly across the city, instead?
Rokyo wrote “Boss” in 1971, which begat the Sun-Times “Mirage” series in 1977.
Both demonstrated vividly that Chicago’s impenetrable zoning and licensing systems are designed specifically to promote payoffs — illegal or with a veneer of legality — to politicians and bureaucrats to grease the wheels.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Apr 9, 19 @ 9:59 am
The Speaker has no reason to have a beef with Lightfoot. I think the two will be able to work together.
Comment by Powdered Whig Tuesday, Apr 9, 19 @ 10:36 am
Everyone loves aldermanic prerogative when it shuts down the noisy neighbor on the corner. Everyone hates aldermanic prerogative when it’s someone else’s street corner that is being preserved.
But like it or not, the legislative tradition of “aldermanic prerogative” … I will support what you think is best for your neighborhood if you will support what I think is best for mine … is not only normal and commonplace, it has been specifically protected by the US Supreme Court under the generally-known term of “log-rolling.” The common practice of “I’ll scratch your back if you scratch mine” also extends between the Executive and the legislative branches. It’s an integral part of budget-making.
The problem alleged in Chicago is that elected officials are accused of using the aldermanic approval process to shake folks down for business or for campaign donations or both. No one is defending that practice and everyone believes it is already covered by current criminal laws. See Rod Blagojevich.
Comment by Thomas Paine Tuesday, Apr 9, 19 @ 10:38 am
“Boss” 1971 and the Mirage sting- 1977. If you think it hasn’t changed since then, you’re not paying attention.
You try that these days and the city’s IG and possibly the DA for the Northern District of Illinois will come to see you. The city IG especially has his and his office’s contact info available. Its 2019, not 1971
Comment by lp Tuesday, Apr 9, 19 @ 10:41 am
–“Boss” 1971 and the Mirage sting- 1977. If you think it hasn’t changed since then, you’re not paying attention.–
LOL, did you miss the news on Burke shaking down Burger King over a parking lot permit?
That’s aldermanic prerogative, in action. A fast-food operator has to pay off to pave a parking lot.
Do you want to look up how many aldermen have gone to prison since the 1970s for shake downs tied to aldermanic prerogative?
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Apr 9, 19 @ 10:49 am
Might also take issue w the assertion they were “designed to promote payoffs”. Boss dealt w Daley’s history and the Mirage showed inspectors were breaking the law, not somehow the law was arranged to help everyone be on the take. Those caught up in the Mirage were fired and did time
Comment by Miraging Tuesday, Apr 9, 19 @ 10:50 am
I didnt miss Burke nor did i miss the ones going to jail. That was one occurrence out of how many inspections each year? The vast majority- 98% - are law abiding and do it correctly.
Comment by Lp Tuesday, Apr 9, 19 @ 10:53 am
“Diversity’ is irrelevant to the larger issue of competence.
I really don’t know anything about her, but she appears to be quite intelligent.
I sincerely wish her, the citizens of Chicago and Illinois the best.
Comment by Nonbeleiver Tuesday, Apr 9, 19 @ 10:53 am
See the IG’s reports and efforts. They didnt exist back in the day. I also raise you.
https://igchicago.org/
Comment by Lp Tuesday, Apr 9, 19 @ 10:56 am
I’ll raise you - have you ever had a neighborhood issue or plan that residents in your area didnt like and that came from the bureaucrats at city hall or the town where you live? Its good to have the alderman make them reconsider or listen to what the residents say will or wont work.
Comment by lp Tuesday, Apr 9, 19 @ 11:05 am
–I also raise you.–
–I’ll raise you –
Yeah, well, I’m not Lazarus, but if I ever need the service, I’ll know where to look.
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Apr 9, 19 @ 11:14 am
there are too many decisions left to the Chicago City Council. take stop signs, for instance. why an ordinance for that? why not leave many seemingly routine measures to the civil servants? most of the line department officials do a fine job. an elected official should concentrate on wide policy measures. not stop signs.
Comment by Amalia Tuesday, Apr 9, 19 @ 11:16 am
Amalia,
Stop signs, light stop lights, need an ordinance in order for police to enforce the law.
Comment by phocion Tuesday, Apr 9, 19 @ 11:43 am
-there are too many decisions left to the Chicago City Council -
Mayor Elect Lightfoot’s only policy guidance so far is essentially the same. That the technocrats in the executive branch will be more consistent or more able to make these decisions.
That might be true, but I’m not sure what evidence we have to believe it either way.
Meanwhile, we are seemingly inevitably taking the schools out of the technocrats hands and handing them to new elected officials. Again, maybe those electeds will make better decisions, but what evidence do we have?
Both the elected school board and the aldermanic prerogative reform are just power grabs dressed up as good governance. In reality, it’s just an incoherent policy framework that is neither more or less “democratic” just different.
Comment by Lurker Tuesday, Apr 9, 19 @ 11:49 am
Amelia’s point about needing an ordinance for a canopy and other basic services. Agreed. That shouldnt be necessary.
For aldermanic prerogative though, its good that residents can appeal to the elected official closest to them when a project or plan from bureaucrats is proposed and the alderman’s suggestion from constituents taken into account when the full council votes on things.
Comment by lp Tuesday, Apr 9, 19 @ 11:51 am
=some 5th floor mayoral aid making zoning and liquor license decisions for the 13th ward=
I don’t think the absence of aldermanic prerogative will mean decision making by the Executive branch; rather, these legislative zoning and licensing decisions will be made by the entire City Council, though the Mayor can veto, as they can today.
I would also expect most recommendations by the local alderman would still be accepted by the entire Council. However, there will be some decisions (like locating the Children’s Museum on Grant Park land) that may be considered “issues of citywide interest”, where the Council will be free to disagree with a single alderman’s decision, but that these will be the exceptions, not the rule.
I think the Mayor’s concerns about aldermanic prerogative are more about preventing corruption, eg. Ald. Burke using that prerogative to allegedly hold up Burger King driveway permits until BK contracts with Burke to do its Illinois property tax appeals.
Comment by James Tuesday, Apr 9, 19 @ 12:50 pm
have you ever had a neighborhood issue or plan that residents in your area didnt like and that came from the bureaucrats at city hall or the town where –Its good to have the alderman make them reconsider or listen to what the residents say will or wont work.–
You seem to be confusing the concept of democratic representation with that of the undemocratic practice of aldermanic veto-power of any and all development in a ward, including the mundane and ridiculous.
Or maybe you have a goo-goo reason why a Burger King has to go to Ed Burke to pave a parking lot?
Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Apr 9, 19 @ 12:50 pm
LL: I support Fair Maps.
MJM: Have you met my lawyers yet?
Both in Unison: Good talk.
Comment by Weil Tuesday, Apr 9, 19 @ 12:51 pm
===a goo-goo reason why a Burger King has to go to Ed Burke to pave a parking lot===
I cannot wait to see the response. lol
Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Apr 9, 19 @ 12:53 pm
Perhaps Chairman Burke was concerned about storm water runoff from the paved parking lot. He likely just wanted them to use modern “green” environmental techniques/materials to lower the impact. /s
Comment by City Guy Tuesday, Apr 9, 19 @ 3:42 pm
“Or maybe you have a goo-goo reason why a Burger King has to go to Ed Burke to pave a parking lot?”
It must have something to do with Ald. Burke’s encyclopedic knowledge of the history of Chicago corruption.
Comment by Keyrock Tuesday, Apr 9, 19 @ 11:33 pm