The Blog

Fioretti for Mayor! Looks like he is already laying out his platform...

For Daley to have such an arrogant attitude, concerning any doubt expressed about his ability to justly control the OPS, is a perfect example of a 'what the fuck' moment. As Shaw's question succinctly points out, Daley HAS HAD effective control and oversight over the OPS, and we know what he has done, and failed to do, with it. Without even getting into his dereliction of duties during his stint as State's Attorney, during Daley's time as mayor, police abuses have increased dramatically, albeit in usually petty and less outrageous ways than the recent, clearly criminal actions of a few, off-duty thugs-with-badges. There are many CPD officers who feel all too free to slip over the line between proper police conduct and a range of misconduct that runs the gamut from verbal abuse to full fledged beat downs, from blatant perjury in traffic court cases to felonious activities properly subject to state and federal prosecutions. Officers are taught, during their training at the Police Academy, that they have a duty to NEVER BREACH THE PEACE, as in, never act in such a way as to be the cause or source of a violation of criminal or civil law, nor ever a cause or source of instigating a violation of criminal or civil law. In plain english, 'cops ain't supposed to START SHIT, they're supposed to clean it up'. Their duties include not merely the enforcement of law, but the investigation of criminal acts, the gathering of evidence as to the identity of the perpetrators and the arrest of same. Their duties DO NOT include either protecting citizens, as bodyguards, provoking citizens to commit criminal acts or to commit even misdemeanor criminal acts against citizens, whether on-duty or off. Our police officers are, for the most part, hard-working, dedicated individuals, doing an, at best, difficult and stressful job, but there are far too many who find it has been all too easy to bend and break the basic rules governing their conduct. This is because, under this mayor, police misconduct has NOT been seen as a negative, but rather, as a positive and effective tool in achieving a low-level of constant, cautious fear in the hearts and minds of all citizens, fear of the police, fear of the authorities, fear of 'city hall', fear of the 'powers-that-be' and fear of engaging in any conflict with same. For this mayor to insist on his police force adhering to the standards of conduct specified 'on paper' would require that he want to do so. His dismal history in these regards proves, beyond any doubt, that he does not. While there are some situations in which police officers need to feel less restricted in their behavior, where and when a certain, controlled brutality is the only effective means to counter some citizens choice of actions, these occasions are few and far between and are usually not what the average citizen is objecting to. It's the commonly disrespectful, routinely harsh and unnecessarily abusive treatment many citizens have experienced, when circumstances bring them into contact with the police, which have been treated as 'no big deal' by the OPS, found to be 'without merit' on a regular basis by the OPS and tacitly approved of by the OPS and the mayor's neglect and inactions. Even if we were not considering this mayor's competence in the oversight of police behaviors, the mayor, whoever he or she may be, already has authority over the police department, via the power to appoint the police chief, the power to establish policies concerning police activities and the power the mayor's office has over the OPS, namely, the appointment of it's authorities. For Daley to even propose that he is fit to be 'in charge' of investigating police misconduct and determining whether or not it has occurred, is another example of his state of mind. This city is Daley's Kingdom, and any who dare to question his 'birthright' to same are subject to the 'wrath of the leprechaun'. As in, he'll mumble you into submission.

Of course the mayor's got his minions keeping close track of everything every one of the aldermen say and do, how else can he know who to thank and who to fuck over? The boys in the Kremlin could learn a few things from mayor mumbles. At least this guy Lance wasn't wearing a wire.

Unfortunately, people like Lance and what he did for his boss are the reason the media in Russia doesn't exist.

The Mayor has a TERRIBLE record on police issues from Burge on down. What about the Acevedo brothers? Or giving a meritorious promotion to Peter Dignan? Lots of torture, abuse, drug dealing, cover ups, violence Sheehan, Joyce, lots of bad people, lots of racism

As Mick and Ben's analysis of each of the alderman in our 50 wards shows, there are maybe 5 truly independent alderman at this point in the game - Moore, Preckwinkle, Waugespack, Dowell, and Fioretti (and I think there is a big question mark if Fioretti is going to play with others at all - from what I have seen, the lawyer in this guy won't shut up or share the stage with anyone.) Maybe Jackson, but I don’t think it can be called independence so much as self-aggrandizing opposition that is going to come out of her. I hope I am wrong. I think the mayor has the council pretty well under thumb - I would just encourage any of them to keep getting under his skin as often as possible - it is nice to see him try to give respect toward any dissention. I fail to see how the tactics of Cook county Dems are any different than those of Roves efforts at the national efforts, but I have always felt Daley would have made a great Republican - if only the NRA would be rational - one issue can make all the difference I guess. Oh well, the press now has an opportunity till the July meeting to discuss the merits of the OPS changes, and to inform the public on better solutions. Let’s see if the press lives up to its obligations. The big question in my mind is if the fourth estate is getting under his skin, or is under his thumb? The next month might be telling.

Strange. I said Fioretti was going to eventually run for mayor after the first city council meeting when they were sworn in and he postponed a vote in a committee he was on. He said something about not being a rubber stamp and the way he said it made me thing, "This guy is gearing up for a run at mayor, possibly for the next election."

> there are maybe 5 truly independent alderman at this point in the game - Moore, Preckwinkle, Waugespack, Dowell, and Fioretti wha? may i ask, what do you mean by truly independent? what is your evidence for this assessment?

Ben, Mick, Defied Daley Often come on now guys what do you mean by "often" in this context? often relative to what? to the total voting record? no way on a few highly-publicized stunt votes maybe

often, as compared to the average for all aldermen, which is never? you guys are not helping when you portray the pseudo-opposition as opposition, you're contributing to the problem

The only truly independent Alderman at this point is Waguespack - he didn't have a patron - he cobbled together the funding from unions, business, and most importantly from residence who wanted a say on the development of their community – that makes him independent of any political influences other than the constituents of the 32nd ward. As for the others, I think they are independent from Daley - though beholden either to a patron or the unions (Fiorriti may be the exception because he can finance his own campaign for alderman - not for mayor - and he needs to show that he can play well with others before any of his colleagues takes him seriously - I think a big hurdle for him - this is a lawyer who just can't shut up and listen and doesn't appear to value anyone else’s opinions.)

> The only truly independent Alderman at this point is Waguespack Tell ya what, Waguespack's 1st full meeting was 5/21. The proceedings should be posted soon (it's late, it normally goes up the afternoon of the day of the next meeting, last Wed). When it goes up, what say let's browse through it together and see if we can find any evidence of Waguespack's independence. http://www.chicityclerk.com/citycouncil/journals/

So what, 5 out of 50 aldermen are 'independent'. Big fucking deal. NOTHING HAS CHANGED. Daley will still get his way, these 5 will find that the 'leverage' they think they got will turn around to bite them all in the ass. Richie jr. hasn't gotten where he is today by letting amateurs fuck up his game, he'll eat 'em up and shit 'em out without even farting once.

You're the guy that makes book on all this political shit, right? That's gotta be a way more lucrative gig than working the games....... So, what's the line on this one, does Daley get OPS or not, it's gotta be heavily weighted in the mayor's favor. Do you take American Express?

...give Waguespack a few meetings before jumping down his throat, jeez. what exactly have YOU all done recently besides bitch and moan?

1-3: agree 4: certainly for City Council vets 4 should be w/o exception for the frosh, let's revisit this before the opportunity to vote when we have a voting record to look at 5: you lose me

My whole point was that the city council is under thumb - you’re correct that nothing has changed. You don't measure political independence by the record of one council meeting - what Mick and Ben were trying to show is the potential - and I still think that Waguespack and Dowell have the best potential on the new city council - they are up against a lot of dead wait, so instead of standing on the sidelines gearing up to beat the hell out of them, lets look at what the next generation is going to put their efforts - Daley and about 20 of the old guard of Alderman are in their last term - Richie Jr. got were he is because he was born into the right family - and those 5 don't think they have any 'leverage' - they know what they are up against - but this city deserves better than Daley and the rest of the 45 rubberstamps on our council. Get a grip - both of you.

Moore Defies Daley: Often Moore doesn't need help from the press promoting his mythology about himself.

Mick, thanks for another excellent report & analysis from Council chambers, far beyond what's available elsewhere. And thanks to the Reader for paying you to be there!

> You're the guy that makes book on all this political shit, right? no but I'll byte OVER/UNDER: Number of votes in opposition to Daley control of OPS based on history as prologue I would have handicapped this at 0 (zero), which admittedly is not going to get much action on th downside but after reading Mick's report maybe 11 is the push anything greater than zero is progress

>...give Waguespack a few meetings before jumping down his throat, jeez. no with the Chicago City Council a few meetings means a few months how many TIFs and bone-headed developer subsidies will he vote for while he is getting a feel for the place? I guess a 1st 100 days thing would be WAY to much to ask from a Chicago alderman, you know, a legislative agenda or something

Well, how many TIF's and bone-headed developments has he voted for? You’re an ass if you’re going to advocate for reform, and then start beating up on Waguespack before he even hits the ground running. This isn't about the first 100 days - it's a four year commitment to work with and empower the residence of the 32nd ward to have input and influence in the development of their community. Until you have something to criticize Scott about - relax.

I hold him responsible for ALL his votes

Too bad Hugh has only got one vote, with his dedicated attitude, he could pull off that FIRE ALL INCUMBENTS campaign all by himself. I can see him now, running all day, from polling place to polling place, from the furthest northern precincts, all the way down to the southern borders of the city, speed voting like the Tasmanian Devil on a meth binge. If only there were such a thing as a 'masked crusader', Hugh would be his secret identity. You tell 'em!

> You don't measure political independence by the record of one council meeting a LOT of real damage can be done in 1 Council meeting

"they are up against a lot of dead wait, so instead of standing on the sidelines gearing up to beat the hell out of them, lets look at what the next generation is going to put their efforts" No doubt- and for all the folks who hate the influence the developers have, here's a crazy idea- donate some friggin money to the Waguespacks out there so they are beholden to people in addition to lobbyists. or in the common vernacular: "put yer money where yer pie hole is"

"I hold him responsible for ALL his votes" and.... so what? I mean no argument with the concept, but how exactly does that translate into meaningful reform?

Vi Daley voted for the Dept of Cultural Affairs ordinance. Was someone else missing?

Hugh is holding someone accountable for votes that haven't even been cast?! What a moron - critical of one alderman who has been in office for one month, doesn't have a voting record that he can be critical of, and who beat the 75 year old Rostenkowski/Gabinski machine - way to win over allies in your struggle for a more enlightened and independent city council. Don’t worry Scott, we’ll stand by you as long as you remain independent, despite these type of extreme fanatics, and we understand what you are up against. The residence of the 32nd ward spoke and selected you as our representative, not an ass like Hugh, and we understand that it is going to take patience to institute reforms.

An angry and motivated minority of the 32nd Ward, mostly yuppies who wanted to slam the door after they got in, squeaked out a majority in a low turnout runoff thanks to Labor $. Now I can't even find Waguespack's office or Waguespack. My neighbor says she goes across the border to Vi Daley's office to get any real city services or even a parking pass. Looks like the real new alderman of 32nd Ward is 311.

His office is located across the street from Costco on Clybourn. Matlak, true to the bitter end, thought he wasn’t a public servant paid by the cities residences, and refused to lend any assistance toward a smooth transition of services to the residences of the 32nd ward – he did not hand over the parking passes for Cub night parking, nor any files on bad buildings, nor follow through on any of 100's of request for services from the constituents the 32nd Ward. Your neighbor needs to put her anger aside and get used to the fact that a majority of her neighbors had enough of Matlak giving zoning variance after zoning variance and making it virtually impossible for anyone to afford to live in the 32nd ward. If you haven't seen Alderman Waguespack, you must have been on vacation during the two months. He has met with each of the four police district commanders, with each of the chamber of commerce, held several community meetings (I saw him Wends. night at the Roscoe village community meeting), been meeting with school principles, and is in his office every day working with volunteers from the community to give everyone in the 32nd ward a say. Get over it Ted - you were exposed for the unresponsive, arrogant, petty hack that you are.

Thankfully, there were enough voters whose aim was better than 'missing ted's'; the rare occurrence of the voters whacking out a clouted hack with a volley of well placed shots is refreshing, to say the least. Matlak's ignoble exit is typical of his 'character', he always was a pouty-faced mama's boy, prone to throwing tantrums when things didn't go his way. It's great he finally got the spanking he deserved. Look for teddy to surface somewhere in the clout machine's ranks, pulling down a juicy slice of the taxpayer-financed pie, they do take care of their own, especially the 'fallen warriors', even while they're mocking him behind his back. Now, if only there were more wards with residents who aren't resigned to be eternally bent over and spread wide, we might see some actual progress in ridding this town of the ancient systems of favoritism so costly to us all. One can dream, can't one?

The point of 5 is to maximize the votes for a SINGLE challenger in any given contest with 2 or more candidates challenging the incumbent, thus, defeating the strategy of deliberately splitting the dissatisfied voters efforts, by the machine putting up shill candidates, [as in the most recent mayoral contest, as well as, historically, the Daley / Byrne / Washington primary, (when Harold won because of the split of the 'white' votes between Byrne and Daley), and, more recently, the Clinton / Bush Sr. / Perot presidential election]. No one with any experience in Chicago-style politics believes Brown was anything BUT a shill candidate, with the other black challenger, (what was his name?), being there to split the dissatisfied black vote. As it turned out, the machine was worrying about the wrong thing, Daley was a shoe-in, with two weak 'challengers', and the aldermanic races were where the action was. Also, multiple challengers, however 'independent', increase the risk of an incumbent getting enough votes to avoid facing a run-off, what with the typically unified efforts of the clout monkeys and the typically pathetic participation levels of the rest of us commoners making it less likely for a given incumbent not to get the required 50% + 1 votes on election day. (This not even considering the abilities of the machine to nudge their guy or gal over the finish line with a little 'creative' vote counting) Yes, this mathematically based strategy seems to be intuitively counter to our sense of what elections are all about, ie., selecting the best person as our public representative, but, as you may appreciate, it's difficult, at best, to get enough voters to register and vote, let alone unite behind a single challenger in a multiple challenger contest.

Poor little Mick, so desperate to be a "somebody" but can only "rage against the machine" on the ink smeared pages of a free paper that includes in its revenue stream ads for escort services, and columns like Savage Love. Little Micky, why don't you run for office ? Because you could not draw flies to feces ? It is much easier to lob hand grenades from the cheap seats than to actually do something besides dip your poison pen into a cyanide inkwell. Between Ben "One Trick TIF" and angry Lil' Mick, there is a lot of anger management issues at the Reader and based on Fran "Bottle Blonde Skokie Resident" Speilman usual dose of vinegar laced articles, that must be what is required to work the City Hall beat. Lance is free to tape record whatever he wishes, just as you are free to bitch about not being on the invite list for the Mayor's schedule. Your pithy thumbnails about each of the aldermen are classic symptoms of someone with a Napoleonic complex. Please get some help. And if you noticed, Sandi "Hair Weave" Jackson does not even know how to vote or what she is voting on. On more than one occasion she comes running into the chambers and hearing her name called shouts "Here" as if they were taking attendance instead of a roll call. However I am glad that Scott Hodes can now go screw himself because this new law about Public Art has basically castrated him. But keep on spitting in the wind Lil Mickie, once your face is covered with phlegm you will wise up.

Thank you Lil' Mick, 'One Trick TIF' Ben, and anyone else in the press for exposing how my tax dollars are being so misused. I am glad to know that the public has been taken out of Public Art, our law enforcement officials will continue to abuse their authority without fear of prosecution or of elected representatives placing any checks or balances, the TIF districts will expand until every area of the city except the very blighted manufacturing areas (the very target of creating TIF districts in the first place) are designated one, the continued shell game that serves as an excuse for the CTA's crumbling state, our schools that will continue to dumb down the test until finally the Mayor looks like he has been successful, and the eventual suspension of those meddlesome democratic elections all together. All of us can now keep spitting in the wind, our faces nearly covered in phlegm, we will be so blinded we will never wise up and get rid of these incompetent shits. Now back to my escort service ads and reading Savage Love - the treatment of the tax payer being bent over isn't savage enough - but they love us. And please - just let 'Orion' have his/her say and don't get into a long thread of him/her ridiculing everyone’s input - ignore Orion - no one reading this blog respects him/her - we understand how little respect toward the reader/press/or taxpayers Orion has.

If 'orion' HAD balls, I'd say that they're a bit sweaty today. Maybe he's just waking up from a long, Friday night's worth of being told "No, I don't do THAT for any amount of money", by his 'life partner'......... On the other hand, this post is really way too long, too many words, for it to be our own, lovable 'orion', seems like it must be an 'orion' wannabe. In any case, is this any way to talk about your co-conspirators in city hall?

So, what do you think of the quoted post by "5 vs 45 = business as usual"? DOES it "sound like a plan?"????

I think that once the taxpayers get their second installment of their property tax bill, they will begin to realize that Ben has been doing Chicago a huge service by focusing on the TIF abuse, that the Obama's/liberal "new politics" and mainstream press should be ashamed for endorsing Stroger and his clout driven management style that is ruining this county. I think that voters through out this country are beginning to realize the quality of personnel in our 'elected' officials is at an all time low - (I can't think of one elected representative of mine whom I have any respect for.) I think that many of the problems we have outlined, like education dependant on property taxes, TIF laws, election laws and the machines undemocratic use of them concerning ballot access, and so many other things can only be solved within the state legislature, not the city council. I think our state is the most corrupt in the nation, and we are in a world of hurt by not insisting on better representation. And I think you post your VOTE ALL INCUMBENTS OUT too often. Your point 5 makes absolutely no sense. Select the best person who steps forward. Supporting new faces like Sharon Denise Dixon, Dowell, and Waguespack are the best things we can hope for. In the end, events in China, Pakistan, and the morons we have sent to Washington, are going to adversely affect this nation for generations. We can't even get things right in a city council election, and there is little hope we are going to clean house of the pieces of shit who claim to be fighting for us, when in fact they are interested in one thing only, maintaining their current positions and preparing to sell us out. Good luck on getting people organized with your platform and plan. Get out their and circulate petitions - but do it outside the combine of the two established parties - neither one is open to anyone with convictions or principles. Finally, I think by responding to 'nutroot' blogers like 'Orion' you only encourage assholes like them to ridicule the conversations on blogs like this.

> [Waguespack] doesn't have a voting record yes, he does, it just hasn't been published yet http://chicityclerk.com/citycouncil/journals/ he cast hundreds of votes at his 1st meeting, 5/21 stand by

> So what, 5 out of 50 aldermen are 'independent'. ... NOTHING HAS CHANGED. Q: What do you call a Chicago ordinance that passes with only 39 votes in favor? A: A LAW! > "No," Daley said. "No, no." Maybe a little dissent shouldn't matter to Daley, but it DOES, big time. Maybe if he keeps telling himself & the press it doesn't over and over he can convince himself or someone else.

> ... counter to our sense of what elections are all about, ie., selecting the best person uh, yeah let's work together to encourage people to keep their heads in the game when voting

From our City Clerk's office: "Please look for the next meetings Journal and Guide for the May 23rd meeting no later than the middle of next week." let's meet back here middle of next week and begin our object assessment of the independence of our new aldermen

One more thing that I am thinking, I agree with many above, Hugh is an Ass! The idea that you can judge the independence of any given official based on the votes cast at one meeting is ludicrous. Hugh reminds me of the type of person who thinks that if anyone were to disagree with him, they then lack independence and are worthy of his scorn. Hugh should give his last name, file petitions to run, and let us judge him on a voting record. All bitch and no substance.

“4: certainly for City Council vets 4 should be w/o exception for the frosh, let's revisit this before the opportunity to vote when we have a voting record to look at” – Hugh on this blog responding to the man with a plan. Later Hugh claims that the Freshmen already have a voting recording to implement the man with a plan plans. What a moron.

> The idea that you can judge the independence of any given official based on the votes cast at one meeting is ludicrous. Yeah, well, some people think FOUR YEARS was not enough to evaluate Rey Colon's independent cred.

> The idea that you can judge the independence of any given official based on the votes cast at one meeting is ludicrous. There's no practice swings in the Chicago City Council.

No practice swings, I agree, but before you gear up on beating up on the new blood, follow your own advice of revisiting this when they have a voting record to look at. Stop being an ass, admit you got out of hand, and help support a group of seven who might show some dissension, rather than giving everyone the impression that in Chicago it is Daley’s way, and everyone is for it, mostly due to the fear of retaliation. That's a shameful way to conduct the peoples business.

Hugh, if you are so smart about the ins and outs of Chicago council politics, why don't you run for office next time around? Put your money where your mouth is, instead of whining. And if MT is right and matlak did not hand over documents or tossed them, no one could move anything forward without having to start all over. Not handing them over should be a crime, especially if those are public documents.

Scorn is the best approach when you have nothing else to say.

The 11 who voted against the public arts ordinance were right, but got plowed under by the Daley machine aldermen. Whether it was Scott Hodes or anyone else who objected, the ordinance went from one extreme to the other and wasn't worth passage. I guess the good thing now is that we won't have Naturus or Tillman deciding what art goes into a building. But expect more cows, more million dollar beans, more useless art decided upon by aldermen who barely have time to clean the streets. And Hugh is worried about a few dozen votes on stop signs?

"Anger Management Reader": How nice to suggest that I be ignored and then proceed to incorporate all of my points in your post. "I will not be ignored, Dan" You people cannot help yourselves, especially when you are called out.

I, for one, WANT you to keep posting, you bring many positive and effective things to this board, namely, you share with us a viewpoint and perspective that we all need to be well aware of, and you do so much more honestly and blatantly than the majority of liars, manipulators, hustlers and mealy-mouthed motherfuckers who share your points-of-view. Keep up the great work of 'telling-it-like-it-is' from where you live and we'll all be better informed as to exactly what we're 'dealing with'. Don't blush, you know you deserve the many accolades you receive here.

Is there any way to effect aldermen once they are elected?

besides hitting them upside their heads with a brick? (just sorta kidding...) It seems to me that there isn't any effective way to compel an alderman to do anything. There are ways to persuade, the obvious ones involving money, and lots of it, all 'contributed' in a lawful manner, one can try to communicate with one's alderman, by writing letters, seeking a personal meeting, discussing one's concerns with the alderman's staff members, by volunteering to work for the alderman's (or the party's) political campaigns, favorite charities, community programs and the like, but, no, I don't believe there is any direct way or means to affect the alderman's actions, albeit, the closer one gets to an election, the greater are one's chances to get their attention. Being part of a larger group of citizens seems to help, as the value of a single voter is at an all-time low. I'm sure there must be a system or procedure for any elected official to be 're-called', but I'm also equally sure that these procedures would have been designed to make it as difficult as possible for citizens to do so. Would you care to elaborate on your question?

> ... before you gear up on beating up on the new blood, follow your own advice of revisiting this when they have a voting record to look at. Stop being an ass geez! such defensiveness! it's almost as if you already KNOW what we will learn about our New Vanguard, before the record of their 1st meeting gets posted! maybe we will see scads of dissenting votes, fearless expressions of dissent, and spirited debate on the issues of the day maybe in the "New Business Presented by Aldermen" section we will see innovative reform legislation, I don't know, maybe Councils rules changes opening up Council processes, new protections respecting the rights of minority viewpoints, new controls on City hiring and contracts, new oversight for City inspectors, calls for hearings... so chin up!

It appears that the whole process of legislation (which is what aldermen do isn't it) is dependent on the absolute ignorance (mostly through elaborate obfuscation) of the electorate. We are not able to contact an alderman to tell them how we may want them to vote on an issue if we do not understand the issue at hand of if the legislation is worded (and how often is that) in a way that we again do not understand. But for the moment, let's say that these concerns were eliminated (like with magic fairy dust or herbal remedies) how is it that informed citizens, like major corporations or Tony Rezko, would be able to get a legislative representative to vote the real (an not paid for) interests of the communities they are paid to represent?

From Anger Management Reader - I am sorry if you found my opinions a little harsh - and I did not write "Scorn is the best approach when you have nothing else to say." - I have no idea who posted that. What can you do beside post the same suggestions over and over, start to organize, start a website that tracks your elected officials voting record, provide a link to who funds their campaigns (and their relationships to their patrons in IL - Madigan, Blago, Stroger, Joyce, Hynes, Burke, Daley, Osterman, Jackson, the list goes on and on, nearly all of them were born into a political family and the IL democratic party is not open to those who merit support) and avoid the nutroots political analysis that our political powers could care less about. Don't focus your efforts on the city council, local governments are governed by state law, and that is the source of corruption in IL. The reader is doing a great job with Mick and Ben covering local issues, but what is going on in Springfield, that is were the real action is. I'm a cynic. I don't believe, until those who merit support are willing to step forward and have an organized public that is sick and tired of being manipulated and lied too, will we have a chance of reform. And until the mainstream press gives challengers and ISSUES equal coverage, incumbents will continue to win. Organize. That is my best advice. The Neighborhood Capital Budget Group went out of business for a reason. They understood what harm the TIF districts were doing, and the mismanagement of the CTA that was going on, but because they failed to communicate with those who would be most effected by it, and tried to rely on funding from Corporations and the governments themselves, they failed. Organize, at the local level and track your elected representatives, the LSC, the SSA, the TIF districts, the CDBG grants given to the local not-for-profits, the board membership of those not-for-profits (and their interest, which is usually real estate, and their relationship to your local representatives), ask how board members of your local Development corporation are selected, whom are they accountable too, and how does the community get a say in how their neighborhood is developed. Organize, and fund your organization with small donations from your neighbors only. Live up to the principles you are fighting for by insisting that every member has a vote in who represents them within your organization. Don't post on blogs your frustrations, organize at the local level and start connecting the dots and you will see just how corrupt, and fragile, the political establishment in your neighborhood is. Then educate your neighbors, register them to vote, select the best person in your neighborhood who is willing to take on the political establishment, get a really good election lawyer, circulate petitions, and carry through on your proposal. But without an organized opposition, and I doubt Chicago is ready to do any of this in its 50 wards, much less focusing on what is going on in Springfield, without organizing, your dead in the water.

> it's almost as if you already KNOW what we will learn about our New Vanguard, before the record of their 1st meeting gets posted! It's almost as if YOU already know! I don't know about 'scads' but I do know that I will follow your advice and wait until they have a record, and a record of several council meetings not just one, before we should pass judgment. You just can't admit that you overreacted, can you?

> So what, 5 out of 50 aldermen are 'independent'. > NOTHING HAS CHANGED. Maybe something is changing. What is the fundamental news event underlying Mick's post? A dissenting vote in City Council, and dueling comments from an alderman & the Mayor. A dissenting vote on the floor is an alderman announcing "Press, see me in the hall afterwards for a pithy sound bite." Press gets sound bite, marches it over to Daley, Daley says something amusing, and they have a 1/2 minute for the evening news. A common enough mechanism, but we are not used to it anymore. In effect, the aldermen can pose questions to Daley in the press, not on the floor of Council chambers god forbid but at least on the record. Daley would prefer not to have to answer anyone, aldermen in particular. This is what annoys the heck out of him, not the handful of dissenting votes per se, but the inordinate attention paid to the loser aldermen by the press and the public. Keep it up long enough, where will it end? Will the public start thinking maybe there is more than one way of doing things? Will experience show that asking questions and testing ideas leads to better government? Who knows? Stay tuned, loyal City Council watchers!

Or will City Council fall prey to "politics," "Council wars" will return, the wheels of government will grind to a halt, and civilization as we know it will end, as Daley suggested in his inaugural address? Stay tuned!

Interesting concepts, Hugh, especially if taken a few steps further. What might the result be, if one or more of these newly elected alderpersons should engage in an organized, thought-out plan to challenge the mayor, and his rubber-stamps, to publicly, on-the-record, explain and justify EVERY single action being taken by this city council? [Well, maybe not EVERY single action, but certainly every single SIGNIFICANT action, (though, there may be VERY significant actions occurring that APPEAR to have little significance).] And/or if the same strategy were used to attempt to force actual DEBATE on the issues brought before the city council? Maybe these fresh, new faces could review the antics of the Vrdolyak 29, during Harold Washington's entire term in office, for the many insights into how aldermen CAN effectively screw up a sitting mayor's game plans. Even if the results were to be no different, the entertainment value of this kind of 'stand-up' behavior would be fucking priceless. And, of course, even appearing to be willing to face off against the mayor, and his many rubber-stamps, would go a long way in impressing the relevant ward residents as to the value of reelecting these first-termers next time around. I look forward to the sport of it all.

Maybe something is changing. Instead of beating up the obvious incompetent and corrupt morons who have been sitting on our council for far to long, we have folks like Hugh beating up newcomers who are casting the dissenting votes and then stating that there not real reformers on his own anticipation. Just admit you over reacted and stop every one from thinking your an ass.

> ... an organized, thought-out plan to challenge the mayor, and his rubber-stamps, to publicly, on-the-record, explain and justify EVERY single action ... this is Daley's fear > ... Daley isn't used to following a legislative process that involves aldermen defying him ... Daley managed to avoid debates and now re-elected he wants to continue to avoid defending his administration. He lacks the skill set for it. Nothing in Daley's resume prepares him for operating in a divided government. How will Daley react? Poorly, if Mick's early reports indicate: ridiculing aldermen from the podium, following aldermen around with tape recorders.

If this type of public challenge to the mayor's absolute control of the council comes to pass, maybe we could solve some of our budget problems by signing a deal with ESPN to cover all city council meetings, it sounds like they'd be decent competition with the WWF.

> ... the entertainment value ... the sport of it all > ... deal with ESPN ... Our Fair City has any number of entertainment-sports options, democratic processes are in short supply. It's starting already (see Daley's inaugural), over the next months much will be made of a false dichotomy: Whaddya want Chicago, hyper-efficient mono-government or Council Wars fisticuffs? But Vrdolyak is gone, it's doesn't have to that way, if our aldermen and Mayor so choose. Some Cities manage to maintain some level of open processes and collegiality.

Not this one, hugh, not this one.....

Daley, and his minions and excuse-makers, routinely play the extortion-style cards of 'we'll have to cut programs for the most needy', 'everything will go to hell if we have to explain and justify what we in government do', 'we're taking care of the 'people's business', so shut your pie-hole' and 'the sky is falling, the sky is falling, so, we'll need to raise taxes to hire a favored, contractor to do the repairs'. Always the same song, always the same excuses, always the same results. It's getting real old, this repeatedly sung tune, and it gets more and more expensive every year. One might think that Daley and his cohorts don't want anyone but the wealthy to live within the city and/or county limits..... Though, they've effectively established economic segregation throughout this city and county already, neglecting those areas where the common folk live, thus, depressing their property values, both for the purpose of appearing to help the owners, by keeping their taxes down, and the future purpose of enabling the acquisition of said properties by those wealthy, 'investors' who definitely plan ahead, and depend upon those properties ' values being suitably depressed. Oh, what a tangled web they weave, as they practice to deceive..... A little sunlight shone under a few rocks would be oh, so welcome...

Scott Waguespack's First Legislative Volley A shot across the bow of the Machine? Cameras in Council chambers? A raft of rules changes opening up processes? Um, no Three (3) rebates of garbage pick-up fees for a condo associations http://www.chicityclerk.com/citycouncil/journals/052307meeting/09NewBusiness/pgs1808-1857.pdf#page=21 Three (3) signs: a car dealer, a Mexican restaurant, and an eye glass shop http://www.chicityclerk.com/citycouncil/journals/052307meeting/09NewBusiness/pgs1858-1890.pdf#page=3 Seven (7) sidewalk cafes and five (5) canopies http://www.chicityclerk.com/citycouncil/journals/052307meeting/09NewBusiness/pgs1858-1890.pdf#page=4 We've got 'em where we want 'em now!

Maybe Scotty doesn't want to peak too soon.....

so Waguespack will be more successful by pissing off his constituents? come on man, after 8 years of the Mat-HACK, don't you think there's a backlog of stuff his ward wants and needs?

WHOA! Don't wanna rock the boat! best to take Uncle Berny's advice: "Shut up and listen." come on man, after riding into office in part on a tide of discontent over local control of development, don't you think he might manage ONE measly minor reform in that area? widening the neighbor notification radius? requiring REAL mailing lists instead of the the crappy property tax payer listings? require neighborhood meetings? internet posting & e-mail "interested party" distributions of zoning applications, hearing notices, agendas, minutes? publishing of disclosures from applicants for zoning changes including campaign contributions? re-notification on re-scheduled hearings? did getting elected surprise him? hasn't he been dreaming on this day for a year now? isn't he nominally the most experienced of the lot in municipal civics?

Waguespack was SO busy with the 3 trash rebates and 3 signs and 7 cafes and 5 awnings that he had no time for anything pro-active? That does not bode well for the future because this level of background noise is fairly routine.

Why don't you call Waguespack up and make those suggestions? You aren't one of these 30 year olds living in Mom's basement who can't handle the real word, are you?

Why do you have it in for Waguespack? He's got four years to fight for some reforms, has been in office for about a month, and your expecting one guy to change the corruption in city hall in one meeting. Come on. You need to relax. He has accomplished more in his 30 something years than have you, and after 75+ years of Rosti-domination, the 32nd ward now has an alderman who is responsive to their needs and will be fighting for reform. And we don't expect it to happen in a month. Hey Scott, don't get discouraged by this level of background noise, ass wipes like Hugh will bitch regardless of any progressive reforms or the time it takes to build toward them. Stick to your guns, the residents of the 32nd ward know what your up against.

hugh's running low on his supply of preperation h, things are getting irritated down there and hugh needs to vent.

Sandi Jackson Shows What She's Made Of! Not just another pretty face in the Chicago City Council! One (1) handicapped parking space http://www.chicityclerk.com/citycouncil/journals/052307meeting/09NewBusiness/pgs1808-1857.pdf#page=5 Two (2) signs: a car wash and a liquor store http://www.chicityclerk.com/citycouncil/journals/052307meeting/09NewBusiness/pgs1808-1857.pdf#page=33 YEAH! Sandi! YEAH! Way to show Daley who's Boss, Jacksons!

What happened with hubby's detailed, 10-point Chicago City Council reform proposal? http://forum49.org/docs/CityCouncilReform.pdf

the jackson household must have run out of tp, so they had to use that 10-point proposal to wipe their asses with.

You're a Rey Colon fan, what were his great legislative efforts at that city council meeting you're beating Jackson and Waguespack up for? I'll wait for you and Colon to enlighten all us on your consistent reform efforts. I know how you hold our Alderman accountable for EVERY Vote.

> I'll wait for you please don't, look him up yourself & report back, pitch in http://www.chicityclerk.com/citycouncil/journals/

Jackson Pillow Talk With pillow talk like this, you might think ONE of these reform proposals from BEFORE the election might have crept into the Jackson City Council legislative agenda. I'd hate to think Jesse Jackson Jr.'s 10-point City Council reform plan was all bluster, he being the son of a preacher man and all. Oh, well, maybe NEXT meeting, huh? REFORM 1 - Make it illegal for developers and City contractors to contribute to aldermanic or mayoral campaigns within one year of receiving a zoning change, city building permit, or city contract. REFORM 2 - Limit all campaign contributions to mayoral, city clerk, city treasurer and aldermanic campaigns to $1,000 per individual and $5,000 per political action committee. The same limits would apply to in-kind contributions. Forbid campaign contributions from business firms or labor unions, although business and labor PACs can contribute. Current campaign finance rules allow unlimited contributions from individuals and businesses. REFORM 3 - Prevent city officials including aldermen, from collecting city pensions if convicted of a felony related to their public duties. REFORM 4 - Prevent aldermen or other elected city official from running for any city office if convicted of a felony related to their duties. REFORM 5 - No longer allow the mayor to appoint replacements for aldermen who die or resign. REFORM 6 - Give the city inspector General jurisdiction over aldermen and city Council employees. REFORM 7 - Reduce the number of City Council standing committees from 27 to 10, require them to meet at least 10 times a year and post agendas of proposed legislation one week in advance of meetings on the City Clerk's Web site. Any legislation which has not been considered by a committee within six weeks of introduction shall automatically go to the floor of the council for debate and a vote without having to pass a motion to discharge the committee which currently requires a 2/3 majority vote. REFORM 8 — Allow political minority factions in the city council to appoint a least one staff member to represent and provide information to the minority on each standing committee as done in the US Congress and Illinois legislature. REFORM 9 - Post the divided roll call vote for the entire tour year term to the city council, all aldermanic campaign contributions, and attendance at City council committee meetings an he city clerk's Web site. REFORM 10 - Broadcast all city council meetings (including committee meetings) on cable TV and the Internet.

a few tweaks, for the 'jackson family's proposed 'reform lite': reform 1 - make it 5 years. reform 2 - knock a zero off the end of both limits, ie., $100 for individuals and $500 for pacs. reform 3 - since these folks present themselves as being worthy of our trust, ANY felony conviction during their term in office should loose them their public pensions, as, being servants of the public, by choice, they've accepted the sworn duties of the office 24/7/52. reform 4 - ditto the above, ANY felony conviction during your term means you're barred for life from not only holding public office, but from being employed by ANY government agency, directly or INDIRECTLY, ie., NO business employing ex-felons, convicted while holding public office, shall be granted ANY business with city or county or state government, period. reform 5 - Grant the city council the authority to appoint, by a super-majority vote of the council, the temporary replacement, said vote being taken only AFTER 3 public hearings are held, to garner the opinions of the voters who choose to attend and to honor the voters opinions, should the voters object to the proposed replacement, by a majority showing of hands of those in attendance at all three hearings, and, further, that an election to replace the temporary replacement be held on the next regularly scheduled election day, be it a primary or general election. reform 6 - Give the Inspector General jurisdiction over EVERY city employee, whether elected, appointed or hired and have the Inspector General be an elected position, requiring a candidate to garner no less than 2/3rds of the votes cast on election day OR no less than 1/2 of the total number of registered voters as of that election day, WHICHEVER IS THE GREATER NUMBER. reform 7 - make that ONE MONTH advance notice, make that at least 12 times per calender year, make that 4 weeks from date of introduction, and require a minimum of 1 public hearing on ANY matters that a SINGLE alderman requests be discussed at said public hearing. reform 8 - better make that 3, even if only as non-voting committee observers. reform 9 - post ALL roll call votes, it's only bytes and bites, doesn't cost anything significant for the minimum extra disk space. reform 10 - why not either buy time on the cheapest broadcast station or establish a UHF station for the sole purpose of same, broadcasting in analog, even after the switch to digital. There's plenty of room in the broadcast bandwidth for this to not only be feasible, but possibly becoming very popular on the county and state levels. Put some real teeth into this and we all might have a chance at honest government. Add the ousting of machine hack incumbents at every opportunity, that is every election, and that might be the smell of the breath of fresh air we've been holding our breaths in anticipation of for so very long.

I gave a call to Waguspacks office looking for a set of petitions we filed to get work done on our street, did he have the files? No. Seems old Mr. Matlak never gave up the files and now we have to start all over again - jsut as the person above stated. You think this is funny Hugh? Maybe you should try to do something good on your block and then have the old alderman screw you over without you even knowing it. My new alderman is at least open to helping me out. Maybe he can't do what he wanted to in the first few weeks because he has to deal with the old aldermans garbage.

"REFORM 5 - No longer allow the mayor to appoint replacements for aldermen who die or resign. " by FAR the most important one on there - hold a goddamned special election, for christ's sake! this is why Matlak was such a disaster to begin with, when you owe your position to the mayor instead of the electorate, of course you're going to be keeping that in mind 24/7 as issues come up where the Mayor's interests conflict with your residents.

actually, reforms 1, 2, 6, 7 & 10 are the really important ones, especially if beefed up, as 'jackson the reformer?' has suggested they be. Limit the flow of cash, empower the Inspector General's office and require the position to be filled by the voter's choice, require ALL city council, (and, eventually, ALL county and state), business be completely exposed and available to the public, and broadcast ALL activities where laws and policies are made and decided, both on the Web, on cable and over the airwaves, and you'll see a world of difference in both the behaviors of those elected and the participation levels of those who elect them. Too bad our present 'public servants' will NEVER, EVER, make ANY of it happen.

Number 5: Listen dumb-ass, that is a matter of the state legislature, not the Council re: appointment of replacement aldermen. And there are elections. The appointments are not for life. IF they are doing a bad job vote them out. You do not give the public much credit for having common sense. Oh I forgot, only counterculture bloggers know what is good for the people.

Apply the same reforms to the county and state governments, then see how many of the rats jump ship. That is, the ones who're left after the voters fire all incumbents.

> And there are elections. The appointments are not for life. IF they are doing a bad job vote them out. It's not so easy. Incumbency, even for just a few short months, is a massive, usually insurmountable advantage. You can sell legislative services such as zoning changes and property tax subsidies to raise campaign cash. You have a taxpayer-funded office & staff & phones and mailings.

> [Waguespack] has accomplished more in his 30 something years 1st blush you might expect Waguespack to be the most likely frosh to hit the ground with his feet running. > Why don't you call Waguespack up and make those suggestions? How do you know I haven't? Anyway why does a guy with his resume need a dumb guy like me to call him about how to fix City Council?

Toni Foulkes STEPS UP! SEIU's creature in City Hall. Hundreds of thousands of dollars of union dues thrown in. So... Son of big box? A substitute ordinance crafted so as to call aldermen on their bluffs ("I’m all FOR raising the minimum wage, just not THIS proposal.") so that it might actually PASS and provide some actual relief to Chicago's union workers instead of just mountains of press coverage? Sorry An awning! For a income tax-slash-travel agency! http://www.chicityclerk.com/citycouncil/journals/052307meeting/09NewBusiness/pgs1808-1857.pdf#page=42 Thanks, SEIU! Why to wrassle control of the means of production! Viva la revolucion!

I'm sure you know very well that this 'boring-ion' character, posting as 'orion', also knows very well the crap he's dishing out in his comments, and, that your responses are meant to turn his bullshit into enlightenment. Sort of a 'good cop', 'bad cop' exchange of comments. On the off chance that there are any readers of these comments that take 'orion's' views as anything close to meaningful, I'll just point out the obvious flaw in his many ludicrous statements. 'Boring-ion', aka 'orion', has one thing that runs through all of his posts, namely, contempt. His goal is to stimulate contempt in others, encourage contempt for himself, and, thus, distract others from thinking. He fails. He tries again. He fails again. He continues to try. He continues to fail. In this way, he succeeds in never accomplishing anything. I, for one, fully appreciate his success.

For those who appear to have abandoned this thread of comments, due to the irritating nature of the buzzing mosquito going by the name of 'orion', please don't let it be that easy for the bug to chase you away from this fertile ground for conversation. When you've got something to share, post it, I guarantee your post will be read, considered and engaged in.

Joann Thompson Plays it Slow Another union creature in City Hall. Freshman Alderman Thompson's campaign was financed almost EXCLUSIVELY by the unions. She is proof of concept that a special interest can buy an office in Our City Hall. Surely her opening legislative record will show early indications of the union's agenda in City Hall. Let's look and see if we can see some clues as to what all the fuss was about. GRANT OF PRIVILEGE TO JJ FISH/CHICKEN & MOMO'S STEAK TO MAINTAIN AND USE SIGN ADJACENT TO 6201 SOUTH ASHLAND AVENUE A proposed ordinance to grant permission and authority to JJ Fish & Chicken & Momo's Steak to maintain and use one sign adjacent to 6201 South Ashland Avenue, which was Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Public Way http://www.chicityclerk.com/citycouncil/journals/052307meeting/09NewBusiness/pgs1808-1857.pdf#page=43 Geez. Hardly seems worth it.

Geez, hugh, we KNOW you've got better things to do than pick nits. How about an opinion on this: "retro June 24th - 1:09 p.m. This post is so rich in very interesting questions, that I took the liberty of making it easier to follow. "Re: f.kennedy June 24th - 1:14 a.m. Monday is the BIG night for ASCO, the Association of Sheridan road Condo Owners, the decision will be made on Wednesday at the 48th Ward Z&P committee. You have several block-clubs in Edgewater who will be opposing it, but MAS has her Z&P committee stacked with the votes she needs. But be sure to ask how long that moron of an alderman has known about the shaky financial situation of Hollywood house. Why she is now proposing to establish a TIF advisory council after several request to establish one for the Clark/Ridge TIF? How will that council be accountable to ANYONE in the community, since she will appoint the 10 members (likely the same people who sit on EDC, ECC, SSA, UDC, Uptown Chamber, possibly the Edgewater Chamber, unless they have the guts to oppose the property taxes being ported out of Edgewater and down to the uptown entertainment district). Make sure you ask how many SBIF grants have been awarded in the 48th ward, and when they say this is new, ask how many have been awarded in the city? What is the measurable success of the SBIF program? Ask Fraser to fully explain how the communities' failure to approve this TIF is going to leave 190 senior citizens homeless, and IF that is the case, why the hell did they wait, when they have known for two years about Hollywood House, and then spring this TIF proposal at the last minute on the community? Ask how the Andersonville and Devon streetscapes were funded, and why the need for TIF funds on Argyle for that streetscape? Ask why the Bryn Mawr TIF hasn't funded small businesses (Salon Echo was never paid, don’t let him say they were awarded a grant), and why it is taking more than FIVE YEARS for Nookies to live up to its obligations? Has Pierce or Senn received any TIF funds, and if not, why would McCutcheon need money generated from this TIF and not Swift? What schools outside of the Loop have received TIF funds? If your going to use TIF dollars to fund Sheridan as a three-lane road north of the Hollywood intersection, doesn’t it have to be in the TIF district? And exactly where is that traffic going to go – Hollywood to Ridge? Why traffic calming/greening on Foster, (a state highway eligible for state funds,) and not on Hollywood/Ridge, where there are very serious traffic problems? And the library – how many more years is she going to use that damn thing as a campaign promise – every other alderman has gotten a new library built, IS Mary Ann THAT INCOMPETENT? And, please point out that NO TIF DOLLARS were used for assisting the property that houses the Little Mexican Café and Chase, and that after ALL our tax dollars went into the Goldblatts building to subsidize Borders, (over the objections of Women & Children’s book store and other small independent book stores), they are shopping around, looking for someone to lease this store. But please do not get hung up on CTA stations funded with TIF dollars - it isn't going to happen, and funding a CTA station will not affect the EAV of properties, so it shouldn’t be funded with TIF dollars. Ask when the SB Friedman study was made available for the community to review, who has read it, why only a few weeks, for a community of over 60,000, was the study made available for review, and if all they are relying on is the greater than 35 year old buildings, couldn't we just make the entire city of Chicago a TIF district and get it over with. Fix the amount of money generated from our property taxes going to the County, Schools, Water Reclamation, Police and Fire protection, and so many other programs and governing bodies that are funded with property tax dollars, and fix it for the next 23 years so that we stop playing this game of dividing half the taxable property in each ward and just let the mayor have his secret budget to fund the developers who fund him and his hacks' campaigns once and for all. I hope you raise hell. Sheridan road has the votes to defeat this ill conceived proposal. I think like most things in the 48th ward, its fixed and this is a dog and pony show - Rickover - 5440 Sheridan - the aldermanic elections - the committeeman selection - they don't give a shit what the taxpayers of this ward want. They have manipulated EVERYTHING, and are putting lipstick on a pig and calling it Democracy. And Quigley endorsed the fat bitch. Don't forget about that either." I suggest everyone planning on going to this meeting print this gem of a comment out and bring it with them, along with their own, personal bullhorn, they'll need it, to be heard over the shout-down tactics that the 'bitch' will be having her clout monkeys use, to suppress the community's opinions."

Pat Dowell's Opening Legislative Blitzkrieg Designated the Official One to Watch by certain pundits, the most likely freshman to lead the revolution. Surely in her legislative initiatives we will detect the future direction of the New Vanguard. All the toil & sweat & speechifying has lead up to this: Three (3) handicapped parking spaces http://www.chicityclerk.com/citycouncil/journals/052307meeting/09NewBusiness/pgs1808-1857.pdf#page=5 Two (2) repeals of "No parking" zones http://www.chicityclerk.com/citycouncil/journals/052307meeting/09NewBusiness/pgs1808-1857.pdf#page=14 Two (2) rebates of garbage pick-up fees for condo associations http://www.chicityclerk.com/citycouncil/journals/052307meeting/09NewBusiness/pgs1808-1857.pdf#page=21 Her campaign promise? “I won’t be Dorothy.” Being alderman: How hard can it be? Tillman did it for years! This is EASY!

For giving us example after example of why we can not build Rome in a day! If only these 7 new faces could have accomplished what you have done at one meeting, all our problems would be solved. Shame on them - the audacious dolts! Keep up the good work of going over the minutia of council journals to point out that these new alderman are doing their jobs of servicing the constituents who elected them. And to think, we could have had such accomplished leaders like Matlak and Tillman instead of the likes of Wag and Pat who have proven that all the promise won't be lived up too by their record of one month. Thank you. What would we do with out Hugh?

It's the OCD. At least, when hugh's at the keyboard, he's not scratching his arms raw.

Not much to add - just wanted to be the 100th commentator to this entry. Their all under thumb - Patrick Fitzgerald gets under his skin, which is about the only thing that will bother him, any real threat to his power. Aldermen are like mosquitoes to this mayor, slightly less irritating than the press or the residence of this city.

You should have said 'trained mosquitoes', or fleas, they're almost all so talented at sucking up.

The counter must be off - and 'trained mosquitoes' is fine with me - trained monkeys if you think he finds them entertaining.

It's not the counter. It's the content of the following posted comments that someone at the Reader isn't fond of. I wonder why? "5 vs 45 = business as usual June 15th - 1:45 p.m. So, Hugh, do you approve of the following: "The simple, and incredibly effective beginning of a solution, to our present, political morass, is, amazingly, one that seems to be beyond our ability to appreciate and act on, namely, FIRE THE BASTARDS, and deal with those who replace them in the same manner, should THEY prove to be no better. 1) REGISTER TO VOTE 2) Determine who the INCUMBENTS are and make a list of same before every election. 3) Bring this list with you when you GO TO VOTE on election day 4) With few exceptions, DO NOT VOTE FOR ANY INCUMBENT 5) If there are 2 or more CHALLENGERS listed for a given office, cast your vote according to this formula: a) If the INCUMBENT is listed FIRST, vote for the CHALLENGER who is listed LAST or b) If the INCUMBENT is NOT listed first, vote for the CHALLENGER who IS LISTED FIRST In the beginning of this 'house cleaning' process, don't concern yourself about who the challengers are, focus on voting out basically ALL INCUMBENTS, as the incumbents are the people who have brought us to the present sad state of affairs. Don't waste your time, efforts and hearts on buying into the false premise that those presently in public office can be 'persuaded' to do anything substantially different than what they have been doing, they've proven themselves to be both incompetent and dishonest 'employees' and deserve only to be fired. If you must reelect any given incumbent, think long and hard about your reasons to do so, compel that specific incumbent to give you those reasons, by studying their past actions, the effects and effectiveness of same and demanding they provide believable proof that they will not continue the failed and harmful activities of their fellow, soon-to-be former 'public servants'. Talk is cheap and plentiful. Feeble excuses abound. We will always have the government we deserve, and what we deserve will always be the result of the efforts we choose to make, or fail to make." Well, buddy, does this 'sound like a plan'?" and "re amr & bkray June 18th - 5:49 a.m. Thank you both for your thoughtful comments, as thought-full comments are what I am seeking to encourage. amr has provided us with many, specifically helpful and practical suggestions, albeit they are not easy ones to implement. Without, in any way, suggesting that his ideas are beyond the capacity of many citizens to accomplish, my proposed 'election experiment' is designed to BEGIN the process of steps it will take to reach the point where amr's suggestions can, and will, and must, be effective. Before effective organizing can be seen as possible and attractive to many potential voters, there must be the broad sense that there is hope for success. Most citizens do not see much hope for success in 'taking on the political establishment', at least not in the traditionally futile manners. What better way for this to be achieved, than for the many disenfranchised to experience the real power they possess in their individual votes, united in a simple strategy that every citizen can easily remember and execute? The essential weakness in people insisting on voting only FOR a candidate they like is the obvious lack of worthy candidates. My suggested strategy by-passes this weakness and focuses on concentrating our votes for ANY single challenger, for the purpose of voting OUT incumbent candidates for reelection, thus, disturbing the 'flow' and continuity of their political power structures. Sort of a 'divide-and-conquer' strategy applied TO those who have been using it to remain in control of our governance for so very long. I would greatly appreciate it if those who are thought-full would be so kind as to think about the elements of my strategy, and comment on same. Imagine what might happen if enough citizens hear about this strategy, decide to give it a try, implement it and see that a majority of entrenched incumbent, political establishment office holders have been voted out of office, even if just on a local level. I'm sure that such an occurrence, here in the bastion of established political clout, would have an interesting effect on politicians state-wide, if not nation-wide. Because, as I have stated, perhaps to some, too many times before, my suggested strategy is designed to decimate the foundations these control freaks have built, for the sole purpose of keeping themselves in control of our governance. The theory of representative democracy has been subverted by exploiting it's weaknesses, namely those mentioned by bkray, so, why not exploit the weaknesses of the established political control-freaks? Don't limit yourselves to thinking that the only weakness is independent, honest candidates running for office. The major weakness in the strategies of the entrenched incumbents is that they have yet to figure out how to deny citizens their right to vote, though they have done a pretty good job at discouraging many from bothering to do so. By-pass those factors that discourage voting and implement a strategy that encourages voting, if for no other purpose than to enjoy the feeling of firing those unworthy of holding public office, namely, most all of the incumbents, on every level of government. I await your observations." They may be a bit wordy, but, so are some less thought-provoking comments that remain. So, why were they removed?

you can't build Rome unless you start

Would you like to be more specific, or is it a secret?

Thanks for sitting on the sideline and criticizing Wag and Pat as they get a crew together, set up an office, and try to attend to their constituents concerns without any effort of their predecessors helping in a responsible handover of bad buildings, pending development, parking concerns... Your great expectations of reform should have come first. Rome empowered their senate and debated reforms prior building the great city…right? Or were they debating the merits of democracy while the emperor AND the senate did nothing to address the common mans concerns while the city fell apart (playing a fiddle while the city burned, or something like that). Any way, you need to get a perspective on what these new alderman are attempting to do. And you need a little patience. Thanks again. You're such a help. What would we do without you?

i take it that you'd choose to reelect both Wag & Pat, should they both exhibit the qualities you desire in your representative. What is your opinion of the remaining aldermen and alderwomen? And the folks in the state legislature? And the state executive branch? And the state judicial branches? Should any, some, most or all of the above be reelected?

Should Wag & Pat be advocates for reform and serve their constituents during the next four years, yes, I would reelect them. Of the remaining Alderman, I would wait for four years to see what their records are with the exceptions of Stone, Banks, MA Smith, Schulter, Burke, and Pope. All serve in Wards that have outgrown them and need new leadership. There are way too many in the state legislature that I can't comment on them in this blog, but if they can't pass a budget, fund our schools, fund their pensions, come up with a sensible transportation capital budget program that funds CREATE and public transportation improvements, or reform our election laws and redistricting process - get rid of them. I LOATHE BLAGO - BIGGEST FRAUD THIS STATE HAS EVER HAD - AND CAN NOT WAIT FOR HIM TO BE INDICTED. Don't think Ann Burke should be a State Supreme Court justice, but don't know a whole lot about that branch. Some should be reelected - most shouldn't, but few decent people want to work with these people - and I can't blame them.

"...but if they can't pass a budget, fund our schools, fund their pensions, come up with a sensible transportation capital budget program that funds CREATE and public transportation improvements, or reform our election laws and redistricting process - get rid of them." Well, most all in the state legislature have been there for more than one term, and, THEY are the ones who've gotten us to this state of affairs we're in now. They haven't been able to fix what they've broken yet, and they won't likely do so before the next election, so, will you "get rid pf them", when you get the chance? ".....don't know a whole lot about that branch." And that's the problem. The judicial branch is the authority that determines how the laws that the legislative branch creates are applied onto the citizens and what, in each, specific situation, the laws mean. Kinda an important branch of government, don't ya' think? And, yet, we don't generally know much of anything about those individuals who are put up for election, or appointed, to the district, circuit and supreme court positions. What we do know is that they are, like the legislative and executive branches, primarily from either the Dumbicratic party or the Retardian party. Do we really believe that the problems we experience in our daily lives come from everywhere BUT the activities of our three branches of government? Said governments consisting primarily of Dumbocrats and Retardicans. Does it make you think, just a little?

My state Sen. isn't up for reelection but I wouldn't vote for them and would consider an alternative. Doubt anyone is going to run against my rep, and even if they did, they wouldn't be in any better position to change those things I care about, so I will probably voter for them. It certainly is an important branch of government, and I follow some recommendations on voting for judges, but I don't like the idea of partisan justice or races disgust me and I wish it was reformed to an appointed position. I won't vote for my congressional rep or for Durbin, but I don't know if I will vote against them either - if the Dems nominate Biden, Richardson, or Clinton - I am likely to vote for them. If Bloomberg steps in as an independent, I may vote for them. I think Obama will flame out soon, but I would never vote for someone so inexperienced for Pres. I think it is fine to advocate for reform, but if you want people to take you seriously, you have to get on the ballot so people can have an alternative. I know I wouldn't want to go to work everyday with the current crop of reps we have, and I don't think most decent people are interested in working with such screw ups - Its a catch 22 - we need them replaced by decent people, and no decent person would participate in such a corrupted process. Sad state of affairs. But I don't have the broad brush you have - I need an alternative to vote for.

"But I don't have the broad brush you have - I need an alternative to vote for." And THAT'S the crux of the problem. Sort of the political version of inertia. I have suggested that the political answer to overcoming this inertia is to engage in a strategy of voting out ALL incumbents, making very few exceptions, to stimulate public and media interest, as well as encourage those "most decent people" to believe that they've got a chance to get elected. The objection to this strategy that I've read the most is the fear of electing "someone so inexperienced", but I find that we can't afford to let the reality of "...we need them replaced by decent people, and no decent person would participate in such a corrupted process." to enable this inertia to continue. We, as citizens, have to take the chance of voting out practically all incumbents, if only for the effect this will have on both inspiring the voters to participate and encouraging those citizens who want to run for office to do so. Changes can't happen overnight, but the beginning of change can. All it will take is a concerted effort on the part of enough citizens, both those who are registered, but rarely vote and those who haven't bothered to register, because of the reasons you've stated, ie., few people worthy of being voted for. If you truly want to effect changes, you'll have to have more faith and courage, and take a chance on cleaning out all of the incumbent, political hack 'professionals', as 'risky' as this might appear to you to be. Our founding fathers took far greater and substantial risks to create a country of rights and freedoms, we owe it to their legacy to do a lesser version of the same. We're blessed with the opportunity to do so WITHOUT the need for bloodshed, so, why don't we just do it? HAVE NO DOUBT, VOTE INCUMBENTS OUT may seem extreme, but, in reality, what we've accepted as government is truly the 'extreme' reality.

We've had this conversation before. I have more courage than you might think, but I don't have a lot of faith in your system. I suggested to you before that you take all your energy and ideas and start organizing, registering voters, create a website dedicated to tracking reps votes and campaign donations, and getting an alternative on the ballot. I will never pick someone to act on my behalf by voting with numbers or voting against someone simply because they are an incumbent. As far as our founding fathers and their legacy, I have had too many experiences to believe that it is going to be a simple change. We're in a world of hurt, and unfortunately it is going to have to get a whole lot worse before your fellow Americans wake up and get involved. But I wish you all the luck. And I hope that you start focusing on the notion of a meritocracy and less of a democracy, it doesn't really exist.

I think that the essence of what you are saying comes to this: 1) Even if most all citizens were to vote and even if there were people of 'merit' to vote for, the greater percentage of voters wouldn't recognize, appreciate and vote for those candidates of 'merit'. 2) You don't agree or support the concept of 'shaking things up' or breaking up the organized political monopoly enjoyed by both 'major' parties. 3) You believe that my strategies to dismantle these two parties stranglehold on the electoral processes to be devoid of the concept of merit. 4) You believe in the possibility of 'winning' the 'game' of politics by 'playing' the 'game' by the rules written by these same two dominant parties. 5) You omit acknowledging the many unwritten rules by which these two parties play the game. 6) You appear to believe that my strategy can't possibly achieve it's desired effect, for reasons unspecified, but implied in your statement "I will never pick someone to act on my behalf by voting with numbers or voting against someone simply because they are an incumbent.". 7) You also imply that by voting using the traditional reasons, you have a chance of electing someone who will act on your behalf. I question every traditional assumption and premise and I encourage others to do the same. I invite any who wish to share their thoughts and conclusions to do so. What we don't need is "less of a democracy". What we do need is more. More citizens participating. More citizen thinking. More citizens questioning. More citizens engaging in conversations about essential ideas and ideals. And fewer citizens giving up. Fewer citizens allowing themselves to be distracted by the minutia, so they don't see anything close to the bigger pictures. Ever hear of the "Kansas City Shuffle"? Our professional politicians are experts at it.

Let me know when you try and get on the ballot and run. You can start circulating petitions for state rep seats in August - start using your name so we know who you are and help get more citizens participating, thinking, questioning, engaged... And don't you give up. Get on the ballot and then watch just how unprofessional our professional politicians really are.

While I think you've said enough for me to understand your perspectives, bear with me for a few more questions, to clarify a few things. Are you saying that a mass 'firing' of incumbents, by utilizing the focussed strategy of HAVE NO DOUBT, VOTE INCUMBENTS OUT, would result in no meaningful or effective changes in the ways in which both the voters and potential candidates perceive and utilize the electoral processes? Are you saying that continuing to conform to the established political norms will better serve the purposes of getting us out of the "world of hurt" we are in? Are you saying that you believe citizens will be more likely to begin to participate, in greater numbers, and with much improved consideration, in the political processes by potential candidates acting in the same, general ways in which those in the two major parties do? Are you saying that you've considered and rejected the concept of the voters removing from office the majority of politicians currently responsible for our "world of hurt", because you do, indeed, fear the possible consequences, as you imagine them to be? What do you believe would likely be the consequences of, say, 70% - 90% of current incumbents, on all levels of government, city, county, state and federal, being voted out? What do you believe would be the effect of same on the voters who chose to do so? On those citizens who have, so far, not sought public office, but who would, if there was a chance of success? Do you disagree with this analogy: Picture two glasses, each containing a liquid. Glass #1 contains 75% urine and 25% pure, clean drinking water. Glass #2 contains 100% pure, clean drinking water. How many drops of pure, clean drinking water will have to be added to Glass #1, before you would consider drinking from it? How many drops of urine would have to be added to Glass #2 before you not consider drinking from it?

I think that our current governmental system is a lot like glass #1, and I don't think we have the ability or patience to allow it to become clean drinkable water. Look, I don't want to discourage you from challenging the current two party system - I want you to challenge it. But do it by organizing your neighbors. You standing up for what you believe on a blog as one voice, as opposed to an organized opposition who represents hundreds of voices is like your drops of water. The challenge is to get enough drops of water into one glass, and it doesn't have to be drinkable, just 51% water to really start making a difference. Good luck, you have no idea what you’re up against. Cleaning up pollution isn't easy my friend.

Thank you, sincerely, for your honest and respectful opinions concerning my humble attempts and concepts. I may have a greater estimate of the effectiveness of this comment board, in reaching people interested in social, economic and political changes, than either you do or is warranted. The difficult part of cleaning up our currently polluted governments seems to be in inspiring enough citizens to take action, and this is why I've suggested what is, to me, the least difficult means, namely: just remember to vote for only challengers, regardless of party affiliation if presented with the option, vote for candidates from any 'party' BUT the Dumbocrats and Retardicans concentrate your votes in multiple candidate races by using the formula - If incumbent is listed FIRST, vote for challenger listed LAST or If incumbent is NOT listed first, vote for challenger who IS LISTED FIRST seek to fire as many incumbents as possible and deny retention to all offices you have the opportunity to shake things up in the simplest way possible avoid getting distracted by personalities and mud-slinging, the typical techniques used to manipulate and deceive by-pass the usual behaviors exploited so effectively by those in power force those in power to choose between respecting the will of the voters or denying the validity of the election results, thus showing themselves to be what they effectively are, dictators disguised as public servants One wouldn't bother to drip drops of clean water into a glass filled primarily with urine, one would empty the glass, wash it thoroughly, then fill it with clean water repeatedly voting out all Dumbocratic and Retardican incumbents will, in time, open up the door to those 'clean water' candidates we so badly need refusing to continue to be fooled is the only way to no longer be fools

If you follow your proposal, you’re going to loose the 25% of fresh voices, and likely replace with more polluted hacks. Some of those incumbents are worth keeping and merit support - most don't - but at least 25% do.

That's why, in my previous posts, I've included the statement that one should make exceptions rarely and thoughtfully. Vote FOR whoever you choose to, just remember that incumbents, especially long term incumbents, have an incredible advantage over challengers, because, most voters are accustomed to believing that a challenger candidate should be required to convince voters to vote them INTO office, but the incumbents don't have to convince voters to ALLOW them to REMAIN in office. It's a fundamental difference in perspective and voter attitudes.

Willie Cochran Represents The Reader identified his "Patrons" as "local powerhouses Bishop Arthur Brazier and Reverend Leon Finney." Let's see if we can detect the Revs' agendas: A rebate of garbage pick-up fees for a condo association http://www.chicityclerk.com/citycouncil/journals/052307meeting/09NewBusiness/pgs1808-1857.pdf#page=22 Permission for ten (10) earth retention systems for the University of Chicago http://www.chicityclerk.com/citycouncil/journals/052307meeting/09NewBusiness/pgs1808-1857.pdf#page=44

Apparently, 'last reply' wants to avoid intelligent discussion of any ideas or concepts he doesn't agree with, for whatever his reasons. The mark of a truly 'open' mind.