Union leaders for city workers have been informed by Daley aides that they should prepare their workers for as many as 1,000 layoffs in the near future due to the city's continuing budget woes. With the city facing a $400 million shortfall, Mayor Daley is slated to unveil the 2009 budget on October 15 and layoffs look to be a major part of saving money. Said Ald. Ed Smith (28th), "Probably everything will have to be done with layoffs." Daley is also eliminating 3,000 vacant positions. The layoffs are projected to save in the neighborhood of $100 million.
The hardest hit union looks to be Laborers Union Local 1001, who will see 300 layoffs in the Streets and Sanitation Department.
That's likely to mean major changes in garbage collection, tree trimming and other housekeeping services. Possibilities range from lengthening the time between pickups -- once-a-week now in most neighborhoods, twice-a-week in congested areas -- to privatizing recycling and shrinking crew sizes.The union proposed alternative plans, including charging a $10 monthly collection fee. An aide for the mayor denies that garbage pickup would be affected but did suggest that it might lead to an increase of crews with just one laborer instead of two."They put an average of 350 trucks out-a-day. To cut 300 bodies -- they're probably gonna go to every other week pickup. That's probably the only way they can do it. Either that, or every 10 days," said Lou Phillips, business manager of Laborers Local 1001.
"You're gonna have to look at your garbage an extra three or four days -- and I don't know when they'll be able to get to your bulk. It's gonna create a rodent problem. You might even see a difference in the Loop area, as clean as the Loop is. That's the showcase."



Oh for fucks sake!
Broke, failing economy, no universal health care global warming and two endless wars. And now, drowning in garbage.
Fuck you Mayor Daley and all your criminal friends. We don't need one more awful thing!
FYI, all buildings larger than three units have private trash pickup as it is. Chances are, the city already doesn't pick up your trash. So this means your neighbors (who receive a city service you pay for but do not receive) will start using your dumpsters (which you pay for and they do not) when theirs get full.
I keep waiting for the street cleaning revenue generation program to be expanded to a weekly, year-round schedule.
We could have more cops and garbage collectors is we weren't diverting $500 million to subsidizing TIF debacles like Wilson Yard. But that would make too much sense.
mikely1 - actually, the city provides trash service for buildings with 4 units or fewer.
While everyone pays taxes but doesn't receive trash services from the city, everyone does benefit from the trash getting picked up. It is a public health issue.
It's funny, this will actually disproportionately affect those with the most clout, as they tend to live in single-family homes where the city picks up garbage. Those of us who rent will largely have our garbage picked up as usual.
This stinks (bad pun intended)
As for this disproportionately effecting those with "clout," i am not so sure. I have zero clout and rent in an apartment, but I have never lived in a building with more than 4 units. No one in my family has clout. Like many Chicagoans, they live in modest single family homes in neighborhoods that are not considered "hot" or "up and coming."
Meanwhile, there are many people with lots of clout and lots of money living in expensive condos throughout the city as well as single family homes. In fact, I think Daley himself lives in a townhouse, which I think would have private garbage pick up (please correct me if I am wrong on either count).
And I said before garbage pick up is a public health issue and a rodent issue, so it has the potential to have a negative impact on all of us regardless of who provides our trash services.
Maybe it's a housekeeping issue. Maybe the feds are closing in on Al Sanchez and it's time to clean house before the Feds do it for them.
The City could move the discussion beyond a mere “taxes v. cuts” analysis without incurring debt by “monetizing” non-core (as opposed to strategic) assets. For example, the City receives rent from wireless carriers for dozens of telecommunications (“cell”) sites. Aggregate site rent is likely to run into many hundreds of thousands – perhaps millions – of dollars per year. The City could sell 20-30 years of these rent receivables for $100,000-120,000 per site, i.e., $10-12 million for 100 sites. Although the resulting proceeds would not close the budget gap, hundreds of jobs could be saved – by selling income streams few are even aware of.
The City could move the discussion beyond a mere “taxes v. cuts” analysis without incurring debt by “monetizing” non-core (as opposed to strategic) assets. For example, the City receives rent from wireless carriers for dozens of telecommunications (“cell”) sites. Aggregate site rent is likely to run into many hundreds of thousands – perhaps millions – of dollars per year. The City could sell 20-30 years of these rent receivables for $100,000-120,000 per site, i.e., $10-12 million for 100 sites. Although the resulting proceeds would not close the budget gap, hundreds of jobs could be saved – by selling income streams few are even aware of.