Interesting how this AP story makes it seem like Chicago’s 2009 city budget is really cutting costs and streamlined.
Aldermen have approved Chicago Mayor Richard Daley’s $6.2 billion budget amid worries over the economy.
The budget, approved 49-1 on Wednesday, calls for as many as 635 layoffs, selling city assets and new fees and taxes.
It requires the hiring of fewer police officers, but stipulates that no officers or firefighters will lose their jobs. The city also won’t fill 1,600 vacant positions.
My guess is dishonesty on the part of the city and journalistic laziness on the part of the AP.
Still, one alderman – my old one, in fact – voted against it. Hot damn! Was it because the alderman in question pierced through the charade, the misrepresentation, and wanted to stand up for the taxpayer? No. No, he was protesting the severity of the “cuts”.
Alderman Billy Ocasio cast the lone dissenting vote. He says most of the layoffs affect “people who do the work and get paid the least.”
A week or so ago, I was watching Chicago Tonight, specifically a piece on Sikia, a brand new, 11-day old “fine-dining” restaurant in Chicago’s impoverished (and often dangerous) Englewood neighborhood.
“Fine-dining” in Englewood? My immediate reaction…one of suspicion. Political suspicion. I mean, I don’t doubt that the restaurant is amazing and the food is excellent. It’s the location.
There’s a reason why people have reacted with statements like “I can’t believe it’s in Englewood“. People can’t believe it’s in Englewood because, really, there’s no economic reason for such an establishment to organically pop up in Englewood. In the last ten years, Englewood has experienced more than 700 murders (within a population of roughly 40,000). And 43% of that population live below the poverty level.
So Q: What sensible businessman would open a “fine-dining” restaurant in such an incongruent environment? (Attention hyper-sensitive PC crowd: not saying that residents of Englewood are unworthy of “fine-dining”…I simply question Sikia’s market potential given the the high crime rate and limited disposable income.)
The answer is that a business, in all likelihood, would not open something like Sikia in Englewood. Considering the investment, it’s just too risky. But a government-subsidized culinary school with an unlimited – yes, unlimited (see below)- supply of taxpayer funding? Bingo! Risk is no longer a factor.
Sikia is the facility of Washburne Culinary Institute, a school housed at the very new and very expensive Kennedy-King College campus (63rd and Halstead). It’s purpose is respectable enough: to provide Washburne students with industry experience and showcase their talents. The Trib calls the concept “innovative”. Ostensibly, I agree.
But Sikia wouldn’t exist without the gross financial irresponsibility (and, consequently, taxpayer slap-in-the-face) that lies at its base. Follow the connection. Sikia is the product of Washburne Culinary Institute and Washburne Culinary Institute is directly affiliated with Kennedy-King College, housed at the new Kennedy-King campus. This campus, for those of you unaware, opened years behind schedule and $62,000,000 over budget – yes, that’s 62 million dollars! – in July of 2007. Mayor Daley deflected criticism over last year’s boondoggle with the following statement (see video here [exact quote at 3:22]):
But again, when you say it cost overrun, you know what the thing that bothers me? It’s alright in the suburban area to build quality education facilities. But when it comes to Chicago it seems the media always talks about cost overrun. There’s no cost overrun when you put the best for a facility like this at Kennedy King. I have no problems justifying any cost overruns in regards to any program for Kennedy King or city colleges or board of education because you want to build the finest. And that’s what some people said, ‘Let’s not build the best for Washburne. Let’s make it the second or third best.’ Why? [emphasis mine]
Ugh, you heard it. The very concept, the very notion, of “cost overrun” doesn’t exist for the Mayor. Not when you “want to build the finest”. Of course, “the finest” in education happens to involve $62 million worth of waste, excess, negligence and/or fraud. Migraine forthcoming…
“Sikia is symbolic of peace and harmony and depicts two fish biting each other’s tail with the message that “no one should bite the other”.
How ironic that, figuratively speaking, Sikia is bitting the other in the relationship, the taxpayer. I don’t know how else to put it: Sikia is a product of the flagrantly inefficient and demonstrably reckless philosophy that guides the Mayor (and his cronies’) taxpayer-funded educational investments. No matter how “innovative” the program, this place stinks. Plain stinks. I mean, locating the facility in Englewood and making it “fine-dining” – it’s as if the decision-makers don’t even want the restaurant to get out of the red.
What’s more, Mayor Daley appears to be proud of his ability to keep such a system going. He boasts with triumphant self-importance cloaked as public gratitude (see video here [exact quote at 4:24])::
Education is the answer to all the ills of society. And that’s why I want to thank the taxpayers – you are the taxpayers in Englewood, you are the taxpayers in Chicago – for helping the board of education and City of Colleges. We did not wait for state government. We did not wait for federal government. If we did, we’d be still out on the streets walking around waiting for another answer or waiting for money. We in Chicago get things done because it’s a priority of getting things done. It’s not a dream; it’s a reality.
Wow. It’s like anti-inspire. Cologne coming to a (subsidized) store near you!
Last week, I completely forgot about my Rando Thursday Whatever. Yikes. So this week’s edition will be extra rando. Yes!
I picked up a Reader for the first time in months. Politically, it swings consistently left but at least I don’t feel dumber after reading it. In today’s straight dope, we are reminded of the uselessness – no, harmfulness – in continuing to manufacture pennies (and, egad, nickels).
Q: Long ago you determined that it still cost less than a penny to mint a penny. It’s a far different world today, and I find it hard to believe that the cost of minting a penny is less than the face value.
A: It’s true that as of 1998, when last we discussed this topic, minting pennies wasn’t a losing proposition. Each one then cost about four-fifths of a cent to manufacture, giving them a low but still positive profit margin — or seigniorage, as it’s known in the currency biz — of 20 percent. But that was then. Stamping out a one-cent piece now costs about 1.25 cents. Given pennies’ vestigial role in the economy, the government’s insistence on minting them has gone from pointless atavism to expensive hobby.
…And the penny’s not even the big problem. The reigning negative-seigniorage champ is the humble nickel, which now has an extravagant price tag of about 7.7 cents.
You probably have heard of the stink Northwestern graduates made when they heard who their commencement speaker is going to be. Yes, it’s Mayor Daley and hey, I sympathize. I certainly wouldn’t want, nor find inspiration in, such a bastion of cronyism and slush funds. But, come on, these brats are complaining for all the wrong reasons:
“I thought we’d have someone with a much higher profile, especially after [Northwestern] President Bienen hyped it so much,” said senior Simon Lu. “I thought it would be someone with a national or international profile…I was hoping someone more famous would show up.”
And now I’ll leave you with a classic skit from Mr. Show, which isn’t at all public, nor worthless for that matter:
More! What up with that?
