The mayoral debate Chicago needs: Here are the questions
Chicago voters wanted a second round in the race for mayor, and they got one. But now that an April 7 runoff has been set, what should the candidates be talking about?
For the most part, not the stuff in their TV ads. Though it was appropriate for Mayor Rahm Emanuel to do a little bit of a mea culpa in his latest spot, he is not now and never will be Mr. Warm and Fuzzy. His foe, Jesus "Chuy" Garcia, will win a personal popularity contest every time. Nor should the ads emphasize the "Mayor 1 Percent" stuff that Garcia has been peddling:
Though Emanuel has handed out some corporate goodies, his ladle has been far, far smaller than Garcia suggests, and is considerably smaller than the boodle Richard M. Daley dispensed.
I'll have more on the latter after I finish up a research project. Meanwhile, here's the debate I'd like to see.
The first thing on the agenda is money. Not because people don't count, but because they do.A city whose bond rating was just lowered to two levels above junk won't be able to keep schools open, pay police or do any of the other things we all need without the economic resources to pay the tab.
At the top of the money list is worker pensions, a subject on which Emanuel, pending Illinois Supreme Court review, has made some progress but still faces a $550 million increase in payments in the year that begins Jan. 1, just for police and fire.
Garcia says anyone now on the payroll ought to get what they've been promised no matter what, with no changes or concessions. If you really believe that, sir, how are you going to get the money? Isn't some shared sacrifice, in which taxpayers pay more and workers get less, the fairest and sanest way out of this mess?
Emanuel, meanwhile, needs to tell Chicago how he'll handle that $550 million police/fire cliff. And he needs to tell the city if he has a Plan B in case the courts throw out his earlier pension deal covering city laborers and white-collar workers.
TAX TALK
Next at the top of my list is taxes. To both men, I pose this question: Are there any circumstances under which you'd agree to a hike in property taxes over the next four years, perhaps as a last resort? If not, what is on the table?
So far, Emanuel has ducked on property taxes, while Garcia has seemed to rule them out, as well as a commuter tax and a levy on LaSalle Street financial transactions. That's cool, guys. But how are you going to pay the bills? This one particularly applies to you, Mr. Garcia, since you want to freeze and potentially end the city's red-light camera system, which annually pulls in tens of millions of dollars. How would you replace that money, sir? And, Mr. Emanuel, why don't you drop the facade and concede that the cameras are at least as much about raising revenue—a sin tax of sorts—as they are about safety?
BOOSTING CHICAGO'S ECONOMY
Another key area the two need to debate in the five weeks left is economic development.
Let's start with improving the Chicago Transit Authority, which much of Chicago uses to get to work. Does either candidate have a funding source to extend the Red Line south to the city limits? Garcia at one point seemed to throw out the possibility of a gasoline tax for transit capital work but has been silent on the issue since. Is he still for the idea? How about Emanuel?
Tax-increment financing, otherwise known as TIF, has been and remains a big issue. Emanuel, when he ran four years ago, suggested that the era of big downtown TIF deals was pretty much over but since has approved funding for a Wolf Point office building, a Near West The mayoral debate Chicago needs: Here are the questions - Blogs On Politics - Crain's Chicago Business:
