The Return of The Chicagoist Reader Meet-Up
Cubs Combat Casino
Notre Dame Fan Takes It Too Far, Allegedly Punches Clausen
County Sales Tax Rollback Vetoed - Here We Go Again
PHOTOS: Peaches And Amanda Blank At Metro
Have you dropped by Grant Park this summer for the city's Movies in the Park? Even if you haven't, there are a whole bunch of great movies playing in a park near you.
Why are we bring this up in a post on politics? Because it's one of the many things that we love about Chicago: it connects us more with who we are as a city of neighborhoods. We were thinking about this earlier this week as we were sprawled out on a blanket in the park, covertly sipping cheap red wine and enjoying Double Indemnity.
Getting together with friends and neighbors to kick it in the park and watch classic movies is one of the many benefits to living in a gigantic metropolis, something that a city with a budget for parks and recreation and creative leadership can do. It's part of what living here, working here, and yes, paying taxes here, makes this city such an awesome place to live.
So when we read articles in the press about how the Mayor is asking his departments to cut back on spending - to the tune of 2% across the board, we have to wonder what kind of impact that will have on the services that we use and enjoy.
When it comes to funding public works - be it schools, roads, or the kinds of intangibles that give a city it's personality - there are often no easy answers. Does the city raise taxes? Does it cut services and programs perceived as frivolous? “We always turn to management improvements first," said Chicago's Chief Financial Officer Paul Volpe.
Based on past experiences, it would seem that the city is setting the table for a tax increase, given the decline in the housing market and the tough times that many cities (not just Chicago) are facing in the current economic climate. The lack of support at the federal level (the war in Iraq is quickly catching up on half a billion dollars, a number that will be inaccurate in just a few weeks) doesn't make things any easier. The lack of management innovations, however, have put Chicago in the precarious position of having to pay for the patronage of the past today. Much has been made of the cost of defending the city from allegations of police abuse under Jon Burge, and while cutting Burge off might save a few bucks, it's only a few.
We're not going to enumerate point by tedious point all the ways that the city could wisely save money. The would eat up far more bandwidth than Chicagoist could ever hope to occupy in our corner of the Web. We will leave you, however, with some ideas.
In 1992, when Stephen Goldsmith became mayor of Indianapolis, he presented both the city government and public sector workers with a new challenge: managed competition. The essence of this management experiment was that public sector units would compete with the private sector for contract work in the city. The local government supported those units by giving them the tools necessary to put together a competitive bid for work that normally would be performed exclusively by the municipal government. City contracts went to the lowest bidder. Contrary to conventional wisdom, the majority of contracts didn't go to private companies; in fact, many of those bids went to public units in the city government. The by-product of this management innovation was that the city's leadership (the Republican mayor and his political appointees) was confronted with the true costs of patronage, and was obligated to trim much of the fat off the public payroll at the middle management level. This was no easy feat for the newly elected mayor of Indianapolis, who had political favors to pay back, and found himself in the uncomfortable position of having to eliminate city jobs among people that he had hired. Even more surprising was the increase in productivity that the city experienced among front-line workers, who were now deeply motivated to increase productivity and cut costs, often resulting in more efficient work and larger bonuses for city workers that developed these cost cutting measures. Even more stunning was the fact that much of this work was done withing the framework of collective bargaining agreements, leaving union contracts largely intact.
Chicago is no Indianapolis, and management innovations such as managed competition certainly have their pitfalls. We raise this example, however, to point out the lack of thought, the dearth of big ideas that sometimes permeates the Fifth Floor of City Hall. For the Second City, a metropolis of 2.9 million people, we'd like to see bigger answers than just across the board cuts in budgets and more tax increases. Why can't Chicago be a model for other cities? Why do we always have to lag behind when it comes to new ideas, even ones that are risky? Raising taxes on city residents while cutting back on services might balance the budget in the short term, but wouldn't we all be better off if the chief executive of the City of Chicago, our elected leader, proposed and supported more imaginative ways to deliver the best of what we all dream of? Even in failure, such innovations might also suggest success.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
Even in your odd hypothetical, all that would probably happen is they would cut one movie from the schedule. I'm sure we can all live with that.
I have an idea - how about cutting out the companies that get paid to go over the bills that go to the city and then forward them to the city, where they then go over them themselves and decide what to pay. Of course, that system may have been hampered by the patronage list outing that had the names of at least two people in the one company (that I know of) that provided that service at insane fees. Ha. Doubt that will happen.
The managed competition idea sounds good in theory, but wouldn't all the patronage employees weigh down city departments' abilities to compete competitively?
How about putting a tighter lid on the TIF funds, for starters? That could release some tax money. That stands as much chance of happening as managed competition, though, which would force the city to really look hard at patronage, something Daley will never do.
Still, the idea that some $40 million, likely from a TIF fund, will go to the CBOT and Merc for their highly lucrative merger should make any true supporter of capitalism and free markets--as well as honest govt--sick to his stomach. I love how those trading type glorify the free market but have no problem taking a government handout.
"Why can't Chicago be a model for other cities? Why do we always have to lag behind when it comes to new ideas, even ones that are risky? Raising taxes on city residents while cutting back on services might balance the budget in the short term, but wouldn't we all be better off if the chief executive of the City of Chicago, our elected leader, proposed and supported more imaginative ways to deliver the best of what we all dream of?"
Great sentiments, but you are just pissing in the wind. This city is reactionary and, despite claims to the contrary, lacks anything resembling a progressive civic culture--or even a healthly civic culture. Blame it not only the selfish, cynical leaders, but on the residents, who allow these jackals to remain in power. Don't worry: We will all get a wake-up call soon enough, whether through skyrocketing property taxes (renters, take note--you pay as well, indirectly) or continued decreases in services we used to take for granted--transit, police, fire, infrastructure, etc. And once Chicago's bonding authority degrades, then you are in real trouble.
I hate "Double Indemnity."
But I love movies in the park.
Given Daley's near-fanatical commitment to outdoor entertainment as evidenced by the creation of Millenium Park I highly doubt Movies in the Park is in any danger.
Kevin, this is the second time this week you've speculated about what horrible thing "may" happen to Daley or what he "may" do in the future. Not quite playing fair in my opinion.
guest #6: Somethings don't require a Magic 8 Ball to speculate on.
Really, it would be nice if this mayoral administration relied a little more on management science, and less on robbing Peter to pay Paul.
The CME/CBOT are laying off 400 with our without the Tiff. It's laughable to give a company like the MERC 40 million. Do people in Chicago realize how many not millionaires but multi-millionaires where created by the MERC demutualized and going public in the first place? It really pisses me off that Daley would even consider giving them any money. I think he is reached his expiration date and I voted for him. I think we need term limits on all elected positions.
So you think it's responsible to just suggest that Daley is going to cut Movies in the Park when no one's even heard a whisper of that?
What if someone wrote an article suggesting that you are going to be convicted of a felony in your lifetime and, to back it up, they said "some things you just know."
guest #9: I made no insinuations that Movies in the Park were going to be cut. Rather, I used a popular and unique Park District program as a jumping off point to illustrate the potential that Chicago has to lead the rest of the nation in doing many of the things that governments do best, while also commenting on the lack of management science and innovative techniques and experimentation that our city suffers from.
I did however speculate on a tax increase, and I stand by that. I hope I'm proven wrong.
As guest #4 pointed out, this administration is quite reactionary, and any notions of civic progress are hard to come by.
By the way, according to the linked site, the cost of the war is actually coming up on HALF OF A TRILLION dollars. We passed $500MM long ago.
In fact, the cost of the Iraq war to the City Chicago alone is currently $4.67 BILLION.
Yep the Terroists are winning they are bleeding us dry. Stupid Bush/Chaney!
2% cut in spending = "cutting to the bone"
Hyperbole maybe?
Civic progress sounds creepy. I prefer they stay our of my life entirely.
In 1992, when Stephen Goldsmith became mayor of Indianapolis, he presented both the city government and public sector workers with a new challenge: managed competition. The essence of this management experiment was that public sector units would compete with the private sector for contract work in the city.
Wasn't that called hired trucks? And if we were to open it up to actual competition, wouldn't you baffled Nort' siders just complain about how it's 'only Daley's pals' who get the contract? And how would the sub-human, knuckle dragging, blue collar union thugs (that the K-robs of the world adore) be a little upset to find out that their 45 minute coffee breaks are now part of a management competition?
Wow, 2%, Big Freaking Deal. How about Kevin take the lead on this one and cut 2% from his always long-winded columns.
I did however speculate on a tax increase, and I stand by that. I hope I'm proven wrong.
You speculated on the tax increase, or the Chicago Sun-Times, whose online article I read last night was headlined "Is Daley setting stage for tax hike?"
You speculated on the tax increase, or the Chicago Sun-Times, whose online article I read last night was headlined "Is Daley setting stage for tax hike?"
Hear that K-Rob? Not even Chicagoist readers are buying into you now. Next stop: Chicago Reader!
Way to lift a newspaper headline, Kevin, and claim it as your own political analysis. Now can you see why people don't take you seriously?
Guest #16: No. Hired Trucks was the contracting scandal that occured in Chicago. If you read the academic literature on Managed Competition (in particular check journal articles written by Osborne and Plastrik in Government Executive, you'll find answers to all of the rhetorical questions you've raised.
Hired trucks was essentially turning to the private sector though, right? It was just that some people didn't like which side of the private sector got the call.
Hired trucks was essentially turning to the private sector though, right? It was just that some people didn't like which side of the private sector got the call.
Good question. Yes, Hired Trucks was privatization, and no doubt there were many people that didn't like where in the private sector those contracts went. Hired Trucks was a scandal however, not because city work was privatized, but because it was discovered that private firms were being paid by the city for doing little or no work, had mob connections, orwere tied to city employees, who were supposed to be barred from participating in the program.
I'm not advocating broad privatization of city services; I think there are certain things that are inherently governmental, and probably are best kept in the hands of the public sector, even if it costs more on the bottom line.
Managed Competition sets publicly owned units up to build competitive bids against the private sector for public work, and gives public employees the freedom to make changes in how the work is done, often leading to substantial cost savings. The government, of course, has to empower those workers, and back them up when they want to make changes to their work.
I raised this example not as a blanket pronouncement that privatization and managed competion are intrinsically good, but rather to point out that new ideas and innovative management in government is lacking in Chicago. It's sad that it took an Indiana Republican to come up with a new public management theory that worked. Better government and quality public services are supposed to be the provence of Democrats, not the GOP.
Yes, Hired Trucks was privatization, and no doubt there were many people that didn't like where in the private sector those contracts went. Hired Trucks was a scandal however, not because city work was privatized, but because it was discovered that private firms were being paid by the city for doing little or no work, had mob connections, orwere tied to city employees, who were supposed to be barred from participating in the program.
So you mean this scandal had absolutely nothing to do with the same "let's get to Daley" mentality to seems to permeate everything you and your type writes, while yanking it under the table to a fantasy of Fitz showing up with an indictment?
It's time to be honest with yourself K-Rob. Everything your particular type of person has cooked up over the last 20 years has been geared to getting to Daley. And everything you've done has been a miserable failure.
Better government and quality public services are supposed to be the provence of Democrats, not the GOP.
Yeah, Yeah!!! Let's make it partisan.
Once again, what would your beloved labor types say if you were to get your wish? Do you, Mr. Labor-Lover, really want to privatize things?
Say dumbass, Movies in the Park are sponsored, no tax dollars are used to support it.