"Chicago’s 50 aldermen wield local veto power over development in their wards, a legacy of machine politics known as Aldermanic Privilege. It results in back-scratching, delays, and dysfunction. It also makes it difficult to have honest and professional conversations about housing." It is a two edged sword. If you are trying to do something that the alderman believes that their community doesn't want, which he is therefore opposing (which is in itself a problem, since the "opinion" of a community can be difficult to really determine, but reelection depends on a majority of the residents in the community supporting the alderman), it is very difficult to get through the approval process. However, if the alderman supports the project, approvals are expedited and needed support forthcoming. Chicago is still the city of the first Mayor Daley, whose method was a trade of this for that. While that was rumored to have sometimes been inappropriate pay offs, it was also the way that the city could get something that it needed in exchange for giving the developer something that they needed. We needed a variance to add a fourth floor on one of our buildings in Wicker Park. We sought the alderman's support. He pointed out that we had some extra space on the alley behind our building. He also pointed out that many of the other buildings on that block had buildings that did not have extra space sufficient on the alley to accommodate a garbage storage area. We agreed to allow the city to position a large garbage dumpster on our extra space to accommodate the other properties on our end of the block. This didn't cost us anything and solved a neighborhood problem. In exchange, the alderman supported our request and the variance was granted.
Yes, though this is a slippery slope to strongman/authoritarian rule. There are growing examples of situations where the "benevolent strong man" is preferable to our current system, but the question remains: what safeguards are in place to prevent abuse? What keeps the crazies from abusing that power?
Looking into it, I think the mayor dropped a zero. There is info noting a commitment of the city to create 200,000 housing units over the next 10 years. There is also a recent announcement from the Governor to provide $27.8 billion to create 327,000 affordable housing units in the State, which includes the acquisition of existing compromised buildings for restoration, as well as new units. That pencils out to $85,015 per housing unit. My guess is the Mayor's round numbers should have been 100,000 units for $11billion.
"Chicago’s 50 aldermen wield local veto power over development in their wards, a legacy of machine politics known as Aldermanic Privilege. It results in back-scratching, delays, and dysfunction. It also makes it difficult to have honest and professional conversations about housing." It is a two edged sword. If you are trying to do something that the alderman believes that their community doesn't want, which he is therefore opposing (which is in itself a problem, since the "opinion" of a community can be difficult to really determine, but reelection depends on a majority of the residents in the community supporting the alderman), it is very difficult to get through the approval process. However, if the alderman supports the project, approvals are expedited and needed support forthcoming. Chicago is still the city of the first Mayor Daley, whose method was a trade of this for that. While that was rumored to have sometimes been inappropriate pay offs, it was also the way that the city could get something that it needed in exchange for giving the developer something that they needed. We needed a variance to add a fourth floor on one of our buildings in Wicker Park. We sought the alderman's support. He pointed out that we had some extra space on the alley behind our building. He also pointed out that many of the other buildings on that block had buildings that did not have extra space sufficient on the alley to accommodate a garbage storage area. We agreed to allow the city to position a large garbage dumpster on our extra space to accommodate the other properties on our end of the block. This didn't cost us anything and solved a neighborhood problem. In exchange, the alderman supported our request and the variance was granted.
Yes, though this is a slippery slope to strongman/authoritarian rule. There are growing examples of situations where the "benevolent strong man" is preferable to our current system, but the question remains: what safeguards are in place to prevent abuse? What keeps the crazies from abusing that power?
Looking into it, I think the mayor dropped a zero. There is info noting a commitment of the city to create 200,000 housing units over the next 10 years. There is also a recent announcement from the Governor to provide $27.8 billion to create 327,000 affordable housing units in the State, which includes the acquisition of existing compromised buildings for restoration, as well as new units. That pencils out to $85,015 per housing unit. My guess is the Mayor's round numbers should have been 100,000 units for $11billion.