Lawmakers weigh Chicago voter-guided Chicago charter
(The Center Square) – A proposal being weighed in the Illinois House would allow Chicago to create its own city charter, which the lawmaker behind it said could simplify many of the complexities that have led to fiscal and other governmental issues in the city.
State Rep. Kam Buckner, D-Chicago, described his legislation, the Municipal Home Rule Charter Act, as a bill that allows the city to create a constitution-style document for the city – which is one of the only major U.S. cities to not have one.
He said it provides a structure that would streamline the city’s government and give voters a say in its creation.
“It does not decide how power should be divided between the mayor and the city council. It does not decide what our budget process should look like. It does not dictate ethics rules, public safety policy, labor policy, education policy, or tax policy,” Buckner said. “The people of Chicago can have a serious conversation about how their city government should be organized and ultimately [the bill] allows them to decide for themselves.”
The city’s governmental structure is currently guided primarily by state laws passed in Springfield and ordinances passed by aldermen in the city, along with unwritten tradition.
Buckner’s bill was brought back up for the first time publicly since April during an out-of-session hearing by the House Executive Committee on Tuesday.
Joe Ferguson, president of the non-partisan Civic Federation, said that the retrospectively unpopular fiscal decisions could have been avoided by the government, and the charter could create more responsibility among the government.
“What does it mean for Chicago to have no charter? It means that there is no coherent, enforceable structure to the way government works here. Inadequate transparency, fractionalist politics and almost constant fiscal crises are just some of the issues that haunt Chicago,” Ferguson said.
He noted the city’s sale of its parking meters for $1.15 billion in 2008 could’ve been more thoroughly scrutinized or rejected if the city had a charter creating a stronger system of independent fiscal analysis for the council.
Rep. Theresa Mah, D-Chicago, asked what the point of the process is when there are already guiding laws and ordinances in the books.
Ferguson explained a charter would be easier to enforce.
“State law, municipal ordinance, customary practice absolutely is the case. But there is one broad distinction, and then I’ll go into the particulars, they’re unenforceable,” Ferguson said. “The mayor is the equivalent of the president and the speaker of the house. But customary practice and actual rules and the law have the mayor presiding over the council.”
He explained that many of the roles providing oversight to committees of the council are selected directly by the mayor.
A charter, under the proposal, would be written by 10 charter commissioners who would be chosen by Chicago voters in a nonpartisan election. The 10 members would select another member to come in and serve as the chair – a total of 11 members.
Buckner said the group wouldn’t have final say over the charter, as it would again be left up to voters.
“Any proposed charter would go before Chicago voters at the November 2030 general election and would take effect only if a majority of voters approve it,” Buckner said.
Sunny
