jeffrey harley | Chicago Reader

Recent Comments

Re: “Why did the drunk driver who killed Bobby Cann get only ten days in jail?

The following statement in this article is very troubling: "Instead, the judge said during an earlier hearing that, taking into account the defendant's "gait" and "arm swing" in the video footage, he didn't appear drunk, so he wasn't convinced that San Hamel was impaired."

This statement shows the judge rejected science and objective evidence submitted on the record to the court indicating a .15BAC 3 hours after the crash. 10 days in jail makes me sick.

Also, for all of you out there victim blaming Cann, and from what I can tell online there's no shortage of you, consider that when Cann entered the intersection against a green light, from his vantage point there was a car turning North onto Larabee and another "the second car" behind it in the distance. The silver Mercedes that took his life bypassed both cars, in a right turn only lane at 65mph to kill him. That's not something someone can anticipate. You can view the intersection here:,-87…

I'm sad for Cann's family to have this all drawn out for years only for the victim to see 10 days in jail. I hope their retribution comes in civil court.

13 likes, 2 dislikes
Posted by jeffrey harley on 02/09/2017 at 4:30 PM

Re: “The CHA’s ‘supervoucher’ program: a desegregation strategy that never was

300% FMV rates in the super-voucher program is the result of half a century of segregation in this City, a trend that is not slowing. It's impossible to quantify the benefits of the voucher program without also factoring in a public safety budget, police brutality settlements, and jail incarceration expenses that result in billions of dollars of liabilities to taxpayers- not to mention promising lives lost. It's laughable that such a small portion was going to help people live in some of Chicago's thriving communities, while our elected leaders used anecdotal stories to stir populace outrage. It's sad that Rep. Schock was the leader to carry the torch on this issue while spending 100K of our money on his tacky Cheshire cat office interior. For shame.

13 likes, 20 dislikes
Posted by jeffrey harley on 04/28/2016 at 11:26 AM

Re: “The next great cause in Chicago: A financial transaction tax

Why doesn't this poorly researched article mention Rep. Flower's 2014 FTT proposal HB2929? Her bill would have added 1 dollar on agricultural options and 2 dollars on all other future agricultural contracts. To address the comments above, these products are not offered on any other exchanges and there is a carve out for retirement accounts. It's not like they can just jump ship to another exchange, at least not until those services migrate. Seems odd to quote a 2013 bill when it's not even the most recent proposal. The latest proposal would drum up an expected 10-12B in revenue. You could have at least read about it, here's the link to the actual bill:…

Here's the link to the bill's talking points (though obviously biased):…

2 likes, 11 dislikes
Posted by jeffrey harley on 07/15/2015 at 3:28 PM

Re: “Dogs bite man in the Hungarian drama White God


I saw this movie last night at the Music Box based on your recommendation. I thought this movie was a beautiful mess but ultimately tried to blend too many genres. On one hand, it wanted to be a serious drama with political and social class undertones but then it would pivot into the absurd. The acting was a little sub-par and I never really understood the father's arc when he suddenly bonded with his daughter after being so callous. Despite all this, I can say I did enjoy the film.

1 like, 1 dislike
Posted by jeffrey harley on 04/08/2015 at 10:07 AM

Re: “Just when you thought it was safe, here comes another debate over TIFs


Thanks for the response. I'm familiar with the clause you cite but that clause is merely a public finding rather than a test. Illinois municipalities need not prove anything under the clause you cite above; rather, they must meet the blighted definitions contained in (Division 74.4-3) where the legislature lays out the criteria for declaring parcels blighted. If you read many of the City's redevelopment plans, very few of them even attempt to demonstrate a "but for" argument.

I quibble with this because some states have chosen to use a "but for" test that The Reader (and other publications) often cite colloquially. That is, some states have chosen to add a tall legal hurdle to implement a TIF area by showing that development wouldn't occur "but for" the TIF designation. For example, take a look at Wisconsin's laws on TIFs: (…). For better or worse, Illinois eschews this position.

3 likes, 1 dislike
Posted by jeffrey harley on 04/03/2015 at 2:57 PM

Re: “Just when you thought it was safe, here comes another debate over TIFs

Mick, where are you quoting "but for" from in your article? That language does not appear anywhere in the Illinois Tax Increment Allocation Act, nor does it appear anywhere in the City's TIF program. I ask because you give readers the appearance that there is some "but for" test the City must pass to utilize TIF money on a project. That is not the case.

3 likes, 3 dislikes
Posted by jeffrey harley on 04/03/2015 at 1:28 PM

Re: “Why aldermen are mum about Chicago's violence: They're not sure what to say

How are you any better than Ald. Lane, Potshot, to call her beliefs nonsense? I found her statements to be hitting the closest to what I perceive to be a root cause: the decay of the family. Whether religion is at the center or not doesn't really matter. It's a tough obstacle to tackle when we've prioritized the individual so much as we have today.

We place such a high value on 'freedom' in America but individual freedom comes with larger societal issues. We grant people the freedom to buy guns, get divorced, father more children etc. and then we wonder why the next generation faces greater hardship. We watch swaths of our City murder and maim each other while school shooter stories break out seemingly every week partly because we place such a high value on the individual right to bear arms. We once even thought that slaves should count as 3/5 a vote, that Native Americans had no legal claim to their land, and that women should not be given the right to vote, too. Blindly believing that the Constitution affords you the moral right to do something isn't that different from believing the Bible affords you the right to do something either. Both are quite dated documents today.

18 likes, 8 dislikes
Posted by jeffrey harley on 06/03/2014 at 2:32 PM

All Comments »

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.