Johnson's stubbornness won't improve Chicago's fiscal pictures

Mayor's 2025 plan should contain cuts but doesn't

Logic dictates that when faced with a gargantuan hole in your budget cutting expenses would be a priority. Mayor Brandon Johnson sees things differently. With a looming half-billion-dollar budget deficit for the upcoming fiscal year, he’s pursuing remotely possible revenue streams; and foregoing the certainty of new money through cuts.

He recently shared his 2025 plans for undergirding the city finances. The mayor opted to continue his pattern of programs minus the funding. There is the exception of taxing hemp. Hemp sales will be at best an unreliable revenue stream if the tax initiative passes.

The product is already banned in two Southwest Side wards, and state and some local lawmakers think the taxing is a state not city responsibility. Add to that, there’s a cry to ban hemp so a hemp tax as a money-maker seems a remote possibility at best.

On that issue, Johnson’s mindset may very well be “big risk equals big reward.” With the trouncing of his “Bring Chicago Home” initiative took and the historic drubbing his proposed $300 million property increase experienced; one would think the mayor would opt for a more conservative, plausible and smaller revenue reach than looking at a hemp tax. Additionally, there is no solid number on how many dollars that tax would pour into city coffers.

Taking more measured, tiny, conservative steps would be understandable as Johnson heads into this year with a 14percent approval rating-the lowest of any mayor in Chicago history. The poll, commissioned by the Illinois Institute with M3 doing the actual polling between January 21 and 23 showed 80 percent of the respondents had an unfavorable view of the mayor, with 65 percent responding very unfavorable. Exactly 798 Chicago registered voters were polled. The margin of error was 3.74 percent. These results demonstrate the opposite of one of Johnson’s favorite mantras-"the people of Chicago want…” These numbers make it clear he is not hearing what Chicagoans want.

The non-revenue focus on hemp involves, according to the Chicago Sun-Times, exploring restricting the sale of hemp products to those age 21 and older, establishing testing and maximum dosage requirements, prohibiting packaging that mimics candy, adding point-of-sale warnings and introducing scalable fines and a “three-strike” rule for enforcement.” Team Johnson hasn’t shared why the city should devote resources to this area when it has not been identified as main culprit in criminal activity and has such a small audience.

With data showing that the city has lost approximately 700,000 residents in the last five years, Johnson’s counterintuitive plan calls for building more houses. That is in light of predictions the city for the next five-to-six years will continue to lose population.

Besides no significant proposal for new revenue, the mayor failed to offer any plans for reducing crime - an area that for most of Johnson’s term leads as an issue that needs more focus.

Thirty-second Ward Alderperson Scott Waguespack said he was surprised that with the precarious finances there was no financial positions of the Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) and the Chicago Public Schools-both have been propped up in recent years with federal dollars from the COVID 19 relief fund.

Chicago’s budget hole will continue to get deeper unless Johnson realizes the sure source of additional dollars comes from stricter spending and budget cuts from all city departments. City hall and Chicago’s treasury will benefit from an audit that identifies excesses and redundancies throughout the system. The mayor might be shocked to see how many millions of dollars can be gained.

---

Mr. Johnson goes to Washington

After mulling the prospect for about a week, Mayor Johnson decided he will travel next month to the nation’s capital to testify before a House committee to discuss sanctuary cities.

Hopefully, and the other mayors from Boston, Denver and New York City, who also are scheduled to testify, will collaborate beforehand and present a single, but comprehensive front to House committee.

There is the possibility they can change some minds, although they won’t change any votes.