All but lost for Bring Chicago Home referendum

Tuesday’s primary election for Chicago proved the probable death knell for the much heralded and championed Bring Chicago Home referendum, which would have imposed a tax increase on properties sold over $1.5 million, taxed at 0.6 percent on the first $999,999 of the sale price, 2 percent on the next $500,000, and 3 percent on the rest.

In what was a surprise to many in City Hall, as well as residents, voters defeated the proposal by a resounding “no” with voters by a 53.6 % vote and only 46.4% vote saying “yes”, this despite a publicized effort by Mayor Brandon Johnson, and supportive alder people such as Maria Hadden of the 49th Ward, and State Res. Kelly Cassidy, both Democrats.

As we have noted before opposition was fiercest by building owners and managers, and their group, Building Owners and  Managers Association of Chicago, mounted a vigorous campaign to first take the vote off the ballot, which they did with the cooperation of an appeals court, but when it reached the Illinois State Supreme Court they declined to hear it, saying that the Court could not interfere in the legislative process.

.

The supporters despite some intense retail politics, including door knocking all over the city, and Hadden and Cassidy appearing at the polls, along with other elected city and religious leaders, were on hand at polling places to answer questions; all to no avail.

What is known is that the Association did mount a full court press of its own to malign, say some, in their efforts to defeat the measure which would have generated $100 million to fight the ever increasing homeless population of Chicago, estimated at the last point in time count to be 700,000.

While in some quarters there was sympathy for the building owners, they never offered an alternative, and the specter of a property increase amongst all classes of real estate is an unwelcome alternative that few want to see.

Had the measure passed the burden would have fallen on commercial properties and few homeowners. In fact, it contained a tax cut that would have benefited most of them on properties sold between $1million with a cut to 0.6 percent on the first $999,999, of the sale price, and 2 percent on the rest.

As The Chicago Sun Times reported, “The lowest turnout in at least 80 years for a presidential primary would have appeared to favor the Chicago Teachers Union, the CTU-affiliated United Working Families and progressive unions that had proven their ability to turn out their own voters in a low-turnout election by electing Johnson last year,” and largely driving this recent effort, after previous failed attempts in the past.

“Ald. Carlos Ramirez-Rosa (35th), the mayor's former City Council floor leader, made no attempt to hide his disappointment”, added the Sun Times.

"This is not the result we wanted. We're gonna have to take a real hard look at what happened and figure out how to move forward from here," said Ramirez-Rosa, who was instrumental in getting the binding referendum through the City Council and on the ballot after years of failure.”

Also expressing disappointment, in their report, and a possible reason for defeat was, “Johnson’s First Deputy Chief of Staff Cristina Pacione-Zayas [who] addressed the referendum at the Northwest Side party of newly elected state Rep. Graciela Guzmán.”

“We’ll continue to work. The issue is not going away,” Pacione-Zayas said, attributing the results to the court battle over whether referendum votes would be counted, which could have caused potential confusion among mail-in voters.”

With over 95 % of the votes polled, supporters are hoping that the uncounted mail in votes, 100,000 can give them a “Hail Mary Pass”, but with that count not coming until early next week, at least, that hope might prove to be more of a wish than a hope,

The political loss for a Jonson supported initiative cannot be dismissed, although it’s early enough in his term to salvage defeat, but some who never wanted to see him in office, are smelling blood in the water as was noted by the report:

"Bad policy should be defeated, and voters saw that it was bad policy," said veteran political strategist Greg Goldner, who quarterbacked the campaign against the referendum.

"It can't build affordable housing. It can't solve homelessness. It can't provide mental health services. It can't solve the migrant crisis. It can't provide affordable housing for teachers and vets. It can't do all of those things for a revenue stream that has proven to be unpredictable," he added. In the end, Goldner said, voters agreed the referendum was "poorly constructed, poorly defined" and a "very cynical public policy initiative."

While Goldner’s remarks ignore the enormity of these problems faced in cities across the country, with “solution” being a relative term, nonetheless, his comments reflect a deep dissatisfaction with Johnson, especially by the local white business elite, who did not want, as noted before, another Black mayor, after the defeat of former Mayor Lori Lightfoot.

In a larger sense, the opposition to progressive politicians in Democratic led cities has surfaced as business communities nationwide have expressed what they feel is a “lurch to the left,” noted Richard Florida, a professor at the University of Toronto’s Rotman School of Management, in a recent interview with Crain’s Chicago Business, who added that while some companies left some larger American cities such as Seattle, and others, “they were trying to make statements, and say . . . “Look, Chicago and New York and San Francisco are no longer as well governed. They have been captured by a liberal elite.”

He added that when some of those companies moved to Austin, Texas and Miami, Fla.,they found much of the same problems with poverty and homelessness.

It’s easy, as the old cliché stated, that the grass is always greener on the other side of the fence, but tracing a different trajectory, albeit progressive, also takes partnership, as well as a reality check.

Bring Chicago Home faces judicial hurdle

“Bring Chicago Home” advocates faced a hurdle in their efforts to increase the real estate transfer tax as a dedicated revenue stream to fight homelessness in the city, a long standing problem further exacerbated by the increase of over 182,000 migrants, mostly from Venezuela.

On Friday Cook County Circuit Judge Kathleen Burke invalidated the ballot referendum that was to appear on the March 19th Chicago primary ballot, in a ruling pending from a lawsuit against the Chicago Board of Elections that she labeled vague and unconstitutional, and was welcome news to those opposed to the proposal, namely the Building Owners and Managers Association of Chicago, the Chicago Apartment Association.

The proposed ordinance  had long faced opposition by these groups and others and the ruling now removed the question from the voters, but since the ballots have already been printed, any votes will not be counted.

While an appeal is expected by supporters, the dilemma of how to begin to solve a long standing problem hangs in the balance with 682,000 unhoused people, not counting the migrants, who are living on the streets, sheltering on CTA buses and El trains, and doubled up with others and family members or other places not designed for human habitation.

The $100 million dollars in expected revenue leaves supporters including Mayor Brandon Johnson, in a bind to solve the social dilemma.

As CBS News Chicago reported, “Specifically, the Bring Chicago Home proposal would create a tiered system for the real estate transfer tax for property sales in Chicago:

• The transfer tax for properties valued at less than $1 million would drop from 0.75% to 0.60%

.

• Properties sold for between $1 million and $1.5 million would pay a 2% transfer tax, nearly triple the current rate

.

• Properties sold for $1.5 million or more would pay a 3% transfer tax, four times the current rate.

Meanwhile those bringing the suit are elated, and according to THe Chicago Tribune: “In a statement Friday, BOMA Chicago Executive Director Farzin Parang said the group was “gratified” by the ruling, which “underscores the necessity of presenting policy questions to the public with fairness, detail, and transparency.”

“This referendum would be a backdoor property tax on all Chicagoans, and it is important that our elected officials not mislead voters otherwise,” Parang said.

Earlier he had also the The Chicago Sun-TImes, ““The way that they worded this question was just sort of politics and it was vague and it was trying to manipulate people into thinking that they were getting a tax cut when this is, functionally, a property tax increase on everybody," and, "We’re just gratified that the judge agreed with us.”

In a revealing statement, Parang also “said that, had the binding referendum remained on the ballot, Johnson and his allies would likely have won.”

The Times also gave a reality check on local politics when they opined, “That’s because the March 19 turnout is expected to be low, and the person the mayor assigned to quarterback the campaign — Emma Tai, former executive director of United Working Families, a group affiliated with the Chicago Teachers Union — marshaled field operations for Johnson’s winning mayoral campaign.”

Framed in terms of racial disparity the mayor said in November, in a statement to the Tribune, “"We know that homelessness is up since 2019, and that Black Chicagoans account for 69% of our city's unhoused population, and one in four Black students in the Chicago Public Schools, unfortunately, will experience homelessness at least once during their lives. Bring Chicago Home is an important measure that I believe will help rectify this wrong,"and furthermore, "My administration will continue our mission to support Chicago's unhoused, and I will remain resolute in my belief that housing is truly a human right."

In a long racially segregated city, race cuts deeply, but others have fought back from some of the same communities affected, and one in opposition was the Southland Black Chamber of Commerce, and according to the Tribune:

"I think they just assumed that since the $1 million price tag was put on there, this is a rich person's tax to help poor people,'' said Cornell Darden Jr., chairman of the Southland Black Chamber. "But we didn't see it that way."

He said, as others have noted, “ if property owners paid the increase, they would simply pass it on to renters.”

"It can help increase the problem of homelessness by raising rental prices," said Darden.”

It was evident that the opposition has planned, organized and funded a formidable opposition, and the Tribune also reported that. “The group’s website, “Protect Chicago Homes,” states that the decrease for lower-value sales is a distraction from the hike borne by other property owners. “With no plan for how to spend this New Property Tax, they’ll be coming after your house next” to adequately fund affordable housing developments.”

Supporters state that while there would be a dedicated revenue stream, the monies would be governed by an advisory board.

In a statement after Burke’s ruling, Baker called for the city to “sit down together to develop a real plan for better homelessness prevention and to further housing stability.”

Until then, he said, the group would continue its campaign to inform voters “how tax burdened Chicagoans are and the need for policy solutions that do not rely on real estate taxes.”

Critics charge that those opposed had years, (dating from the Lightfoot administration, when the plan was first broached and later abandoned, by the mayor, who then developed an alternative tiered tax cut plan of hers, but no revenues to help the homeless) to develop an alternative plan for discussion, but this was never done.

Hovering in the background, like a many headed hydra, there are reports of “Other opposition groups . . . . One is Keep Chicago Affordable, which appears to be an extension of the 501(c)(4) nonprofit group Chicago Forward. Both are led by Resolute Public Affairs. It has not yet raised or spent any money.”

A noted leading advocate is Ald. Maria Hadden of the 49th Ward told local media:

"These are the same companies raising your rents and deconverting your condos, displacing you and your family from our neighborhoods," she wrote in a statement. "Chicago voters should be furious."

While Hadden has led a group of 19 like minded alders, it is important to note that the effort has been led by the Chicago Coalition for the Homeless, but also the aforementioned SEIU Healthcare, United Working Families, Communities United, ONE Northside and the Jewish Council on Urban Affairs.  But, despite their collective effort they have had to face the powerful, and wealthy Chicago real estate owners, and, of course, a larger budget to fight with, plus political fire power, as Friday’s ruling has shown.

On March 6th an appellate court ruled that the referendum could stay on the ballot, overturning the appeal by the Building Owners and Manager's Association, with weeks to spare before the March 19 primary. In essence, Presiding Judge Raymond Mitchell said that his court's decision was to not interfere in the legislative process, stating specifically that "Courts do not, and cannot, interfere with the legislative process." BOMA has not made a decision as of this writing whether or not to appeal to the Illinois State Supreme Court. DG

10 March 2024 9:34 CDST

Chicago charter schools examined by school board

On Thursday the Chicago Board of Education voted on extensions for the city’s charter, selective enrollment, and magnet school contracts, and especially the 49 charter schools. Ahead of the vote protestors demonstrated with the familiar hand lettered placards asking that the Board preserve school choice.

The result of the vote was to extend the charter contracts between one and four years and not the usual, and expected 10 years, bringing questions from the heads of some of those schools, and some hand wringing on what has become a worrisome concern for the leadership of those schools.

In a larger sense the issue is a focus on privatization of the nation’s public schools which we have seen under the Trump Administration, when Betsy De Vos was the head of the Department of Education, bringing the issue to the forefront.

It will be tough sledding for charter leaders with the election of Brandon Johnson as mayor and his former roles as teacher and organizer for the Chicago Teachers Union, as they favor strengthening neighborhood schools, and the Board agreed in December with a resolution  to do just that.

It’s no secret that Chicago public schools, especially in low income neighborhoods, have been underfunded, and suffer from inadequate resources, aging physical plants, and often inexperienced teachers; but, with a student population that is predominately Black and Brown, in a city that has long suffered from racial segregation, the lack of political will by prior mayoral administrations has exacerbated those problems.

Notably the closing of over 50 schools in those neighborhoods by former Mayor Rahm Emanuel in 2013 did not help the perception that the city was disenfranchising Black students.

Caught in the middle, say some educators and parents groups, are lower income Black children whose neighborhood schools are felt to be inadequate. And, in a protest held the day before the Board met many of those parents were there to express their frustrations and fears, that they might lose their favored charter schools.

“How could we possibly eliminate a family's ability to choose the best school for their child?" Noble Schools CEO Constance Jones said. ""How can this board claim to support a quality public education when it is actively trying to get rid of schools exactly that, “ reported ABC7 News.

Of the total of 49 schools, most did receive 4 year contracts, with one receiving a one year contract, and the Board cited those on the shorter end, but overall needed to meet benchmark standards of special education, and students who are English language learners.

For the leadership of the Board a central concern is that the charters are essentially a private school system in a public system funded by public monies and should be held accountable to do the very best for students with taxpayer money.

Elizabeth Todd Breland, board vice president said at Thursday's meeting,“I still maintain that as a private operator getting public money, there should be a higher level of scrutiny,”

The areas of focus for them are academics, finances and operations, corresponding also to state and federal law, points which are not always held in the public arena. And, none of the schools met, or exceeded in those categories at this time.

The end result was that over half of those schools received a contract extension for four years, and forty percent for three years, and none got 5 years.

Taking a closer look at the numbers, we see claims that 75 percent of Chicago public school children are educated in charter schools, but there is also the dwindling population of school age children, especially in Black neighborhoods, due to out migration, has shown a corresponding reduction in student population; and, for some the question of evaluation, and contract extensions is critical, as it is with neighborhood schools. 

An ongoing debate is whether students do better in charter schools, socially, and academically, and a decades old media discussion showed that on standardized testing charter school Chicago students performed no better, or worse than public school students. While some objected to that, former Mayor Rahm Emanuel, was one.

The Washington Post, in 2014 coverage found that to be the case, but supporters now say that has changed in favor of the charters.

Diffen.com reported this:

“A 2013 study by Stanford University's Center for Research on Education Outcomes (CREDO) concluded about two-thirds of charter school students perform the same or worse than students in traditional public schools, while about a third of students perform better in a charter school setting. CREDO's director told NPR that African American and Latino students, as well as students whose first language is not English, experienced particularly impressive gains in performance while enrolled at charter schools. However, critics have countered that charter school policies like fines for misbehavior drive students from poor families to drop out. Charter schools also tend to have fewer accommodations for students with disabilities such as autism.”

It’s sure to be an ongoing debate, and both sides will undoubtedly be forced to examine their stances, but as of now, Chicago charter schools are under the microscope.