CHICAGO | Politics and Current Events

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Agreed.

Rahm pissed off a lot of people when he correctly closed all of those nearly vacant schools. Sure there was a lot else he didn't reform, but that was a bold move for sure.

It's silly to say Rahm was a "fake reformer", he certainly took the first steps towards reforming Chicago's image world wide. There's a lot he didn't do, but the guy spent almost the entire time he was in office dealing with one unpopular task after another. And yes, history will frame him as such especially if Lightfoot follows and mops up. But someone has to turn over the couch and send the roaches scurrying before the exterminator can come in and spray. That's very much what he did.

In fact, I've been starting to wonder if his surprise retirement isn't in some way related to the big corruption crackdown on the likes of Burke and Solis. Solis' sudden retirement was very similar to Rahms just a few months earlier. I almost wonder if Rahm didn't somehow decide "this is so fucked up, I'm calling the Feds" and wear a wire on Solis getting the ball rolling.

People act as if Rahm did nothing to attack corruption, but the first things he did when elected was strip Burke of his personal security detail and then take control of garbage collection and street sweeping, two oft abused aldermanic powers, away from the aldermen. Sure he focused on more big picture financial issues like underenrolled schools, pensions, funding infrastructure improvements, etc, but he didn't totally ignore the festering culture of corruption.

It's easy to overlook what Rahms impact has been, but during his tenure we basically saw all branches of the CTA overhauled and brought back to the 21st century, all gas sewer and water infrastructure rebuilt, all streetlights replaced, serious issues with the school system at least mostly addressed, a serious attempt to fix the pension issue, park building boom (Riverwalk Bloomingdale, etc) funded by federal dollars, the beginning of reform of the buildings department, a turn around of our flagging tourism image (literally setting records for visits every year of his tenure), and a littany of smaller things.

Pretty damn impressive.


The point is whoever comes next has a much much better jumping off point than Rahm did when he took office. This election is critical because it is a choice between a Trump style "let's undo everything Obama did" regressor and the option to continue to build on what is essentially a clean slate.

I'm in favor of poisoning and stomping every last cockroach, not righting the couch so they can all go back to their nests.

[Vlajos]

The only problem I have with the above is, the City has not made it out of the financial abyss yet. Rahm started the city on the correct path, but we still need someone that will be extremely tough with the public employee unions and attempt to control spending. Obviously Prekwinkle will do none of that, but I don't have a lot of confidence in Lightfoot.

[SIGSEGV]

Vallas endorsed Lightfoot (probably not too surprising).

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by SIGSEGV

Vallas endorsed Lightfoot (probably not too surprising).

Good, he was my first choice, but had no chance to make it to the runoff so I voted for Daley.


Anyway, Carlos Ramirez Rosa is at it again, being a complete douche.

"Plans for a controversial $95 million West Side police academy sailed through the City Council.

The construction contract passed 38-8. The council also passed the necessary zoning change without debate.

Northwest Side Ald. Carlos Ramirez-Rosa, 35th, said aldermen who backed Emanuel’s push for what he termed “a new shooting gallery for cops” would face the electoral consequences, either in the April 2 runoff or in four years. He pointed specifically to more than two dozen aldermen to whom the mayor contributed campaign money last fall.

“So City Council, sometimes it seems you only understand things that are crude,” Ramirez-Rosa said at a news conference before the meeting. “Vote with the community today, or whether it be in four weeks or four years, we will vote you out. See, Rahm Emanuel’s leaving. He’s not going to cut you those $20,000 checks anymore.”

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...313-story.html

Funny, because the Alderman Mitts, whose ward it's in, wants it. She represents the community.

Anyone see that Alderman Sposato called Ramirez a pile of shit the other day? So true.

[the urban politician]

What's wrong with the Police Training Academy anyhow?

Sounds like a good idea to me. After all, aren't all these 'criminals are the real victims' types actually arguing that police need better training?

Or is the CTU just pissed that money is being spent here instead of on showering them with more unnecessary raises and costlier benefits?

[moorhosj]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

What's wrong with the Police Training Academy anyhow?

Sounds like a good idea to me. After all, aren't all these 'criminals are the real victims' types actually arguing that police need better training?

Or is the CTU just pissed that money is being spent here instead of on showering them with more unnecessary raises and costlier benefits?

Not everything is the CTU, they aren't that powerful. I support the training facility as it addresses the biggest criticism from the DOJ report on CPD. However, I can understand people in poor communities who would rather see that money spent on economic development in their wards than a facility to train a group they feel has historically been oppressive to them (also a criticism from the DOJ report). It's a complex issue.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by moorhosj

Not everything is the CTU, they aren't that powerful. I support the training facility as it addresses the biggest criticism from the DOJ report on CPD. However, I can understand people in poor communities who would rather see that money spent on economic development in their wards than a facility to train a group they feel has historically been oppressive to them (also a criticism from the DOJ report). It's a complex issue.

But that's the problem. The extremely poor community where this is located wants this. In fact, the Aldermen Mitts ran on it and beat a challenger opposed to it. 38 aldermen voted for it. It was only 8 that voted against it. I'm guessing it was mostly idiot "socialists" like Ramirez that voted against it.

[moorhosj]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

But that's the problem. The extremely poor community where this is located wants this.

And maybe the protests are coming from people in other communities who aren't getting this kind of investment. Garfield Park isn't the only area of the city that wants investment. I think their point is that $90 million could be spent supporting multiple communities. I don't really agree with them, but I also don't think it's as hypocritical or idiotic as people are making it out to be.

To put it another way, if this facility went to Englewood, would it be justifiable for people in Garfield Park to complain about a lack of investment in their community?

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by moorhosj

And maybe the protests are coming from people in other communities who aren't getting this kind of investment. Garfield Park isn't the only area of the city that wants investment. I think their point is that $90 million could be spent supporting multiple communities. I don't really agree with them, but I also don't think it's as hypocritical or idiotic as people are making it out to be.

To put it another way, if this facility went to Englewood, would it be justifiable for people in Garfield Park to complain about a lack of investment in their community?

Personally, no, the new facility can only go in one area obviously.

I think the protestors are morons that are always going to protest something. Best to ignore as the City Council did. And good that Sposato called Ramirez Rosa out as the "pile of shit" he is.

[the urban politician]

That’s because it has become a cool thing to complain. Especially against the establishment. It’s a great way to make friends, meet girls, maybe even score some good weed

[lakeshoredrive]

Originally Posted by moorhosj

A strong case could be made that Rahm was a financial reformer (tying tax increases directly to pensions, closing under-utilized schools, negotiating with CTU). Lightfoot seems to be focused more on corruption.

This seems like the ideal order for me. Rahm came in and steadied finances and improved the business environment. Lightfoot can follow by improving the political environment through reforms.

You make a really good point about this

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by Stockerzzz

^ Communities cry "disinvestment!" for all that woes them. But when public investments are made in underutilized communities they complain harder.

God forbid the investment actually encourages economic development. Then the cries of "Gentrification!" ensue.

But African American Aldermen were all for this. It was the democratic socialist Ramirez Rosa that was the primary complainer it seems. The other funny thing is from the Tribune's photos of the protesters in City Hall, they were all white kids.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

Personally, no, the new facility can only go in one area obviously.

This is not true, the new facility is consolidating three separate facilities into one and merging police academy with firefighting academy. There's no reason the city couldn't decide to spread the wealth again with separate facilities. I'm not even sure they get much efficiency from co-locating, it's just a gimmick.

On the other hand, I do support better training for cops and if this facility allows them to experience a more realistic version of street scenarios, I'm all for it.

The flip side of this is what happens to the current Police Academy site? Hopefully gets redeveloped as mixed-use with a smaller police station on site. It sits right on the Blue Line so good transit access at Loomis. The Fire Academy site in the South Loop will probably just become a vacant lot or more auto-oriented retail... yawn

[Vlajos]

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...314-story.html

Chico has now endorsed Lightfoot.

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...314-story.html

Chico has now endorsed Lightfoot.

Has anyone endorsed Preckwinkle? That's now Chico, Wilson, and Vallas. Mendoza and Daley are the only two left and I have a feeling Lightfoot doesn't even want Daley's endorsement so Preckwinkle can't use it against her.

Let's hope this ends up being more like 80-20 landslide against Preckwinkle. I'm hoping for a career ending embarrassment here.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Has anyone endorsed Preckwinkle? That's now Chico, Wilson, and Vallas. Mendoza and Daley are the only two left and I have a feeling Lightfoot doesn't even want Daley's endorsement so Preckwinkle can't use it against her.

Let's hope this ends up being more like 80-20 landslide against Preckwinkle. I'm hoping for a career ending embarrassment here.

Nope, not a single one. I would love to see Prekwinkle below 40%. I have yet to see a single sign for Prekwinkle. They are all over for Lightfoot, including my front yard!

Now if we can crush all the remaining "democratic socialist" Ramirez Rosa wannabes in the run off, I will be very happy. Letting idiots that don't understand basic economic principles like supply and demand into the City Council is dangerous.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Let's hope this ends up being more like 80-20 landslide against Preckwinkle. I'm hoping for a career ending embarrassment here.

She still gets to be Cook County Board President if she loses

[LouisVanDerWright]

^^^ I know, but maybe if we embarrass her enough she will go away?

Originally Posted by Vlajos

Now if we can crush all the remaining "democratic socialist" Ramirez Rosa wannabes in the run off, I will be very happy. Letting idiots that don't understand basic economic principles like supply and demand into the City Council is dangerous.

I've actually decided I'm fine with this as long as they don't get a majority. The pinkos in places like the NW side and SW side are just going to spread it all over the place.

[emathias]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Yep, and what I love about Rosa and Guzzardi is that those idiots got EVICTED for not paying rent. What a bunch of losers. I'd love to know what their credit score is.

I'm sure their answer would be that credit scores are EVIL. I should not be judged on my past behavior, that's a violation of my civil rights!

Not paying rent is pretty stupid. Even at times when my budget was chaos, rent was always the first thing I paid simply because without a place to stay everything else would probably fall apart or become incredibly difficult. For similar reasons, I always keep one credit card paid up even if I didn't have enough money to about being late on some other consumer credit - in today's society, you need a credit card to function. Pretty much when I was fine financially everything got paid of course, but if things got tough the priority list was rent, electric and gas, phone, insurance, one credit card, internet, other credit cards, any other random payments. I haven't owned a car in two decades, but even when I needed a car and had a car payment, it and/or car insurance came after rent - I wasn't about to risk criminal charges if I had an accident.

I get that rent for an office is a little different from over home, but you still need to have a base of operations if you want to be successful.

I don't think credit reports are evil, but I do think they're both overly simplistic and over-valued by a lot of businesses that use them to evaluate people. I get there is a lot of value for smaller loans to be able to have a simple way to quickly decide whether to grant credit, but the more significant a loan is the less I think relying on a credit report as anything more than a starting point for the discussion is smart. Both because someone with excellent credit who's never had to handle hard times is wildly unpredictable if they do run into hard times, so may be far riskier than they appear, and because someone with mediocre credit who's had hard times may be far more reliable than their score would indicate. I've had times when my credit score was terrible, but I've always made creditors whole and never just let something get written off. But I've had friends who had excellent credit just walk away from things, sometimes very significant things, when they ran into difficulties.

[emathias]

As a gay man, I still wouldn't *only* vote for a candidate because they were also gay. But if chosing between two qualified candidates, I have no problem making it a deciding factor. Most of the time you can't really know how well someone will perform anyway, so might as well give a chance to someone "in the family." In the case of Lightfoot, I'd actually forgotten she was gay before I decided I'd choose her over Preckwinkle and it was just an added bonus.