The Chicago City Council has given the green light to a series of non-binding referendums, favored by critics of Mayor Brandon Johnson, for the next citywide election. The most debated referendum considers whether aldermen should have independent legal advisors during disputes with the city’s Law Department. This move forms part of an escalating conflict between Johnson and his aldermanic opponents.
These referendums lack legal authority but might influence voter participation in the coming election, reflecting the divide between Chicago’s progressive and moderate factions. Additionally, the council approved a proposal from Johnson for a November ballot item. This question asks whether the city should pursue federal reimbursement for local expenditures on immigration enforcement during Donald Trump’s presidency. In the same general election, federal, statewide, and all Chicago school board seats will be contested.
Key debates erupted over three proposed questions for the February city ballot: the construction of a monument honoring Chicago’s music and arts, the legal counsel for aldermen, and whether the city should withhold funding from entities like the CTA and Chicago Public Schools to recover debts. Following Johnson’s apparent setback, he humorously dismissed concerns about losing legislative control. He explained, “This idea that I’m responsible to control 50 human beings… I haven’t lost the plot.”
The questions for the next municipal election were presented for voting by Ald. Samantha Nugent and her coalition, overriding attempts to delay them by Johnson ally Ald. Jason Ervin. Ald. Brendan Reilly and Ald. Nugent, both on the council, emphasized the importance of these questions despite their symbolic nature. Johnson noted that the state’s General Assembly would need to act to appoint separate legal representation for aldermen, provoking disagreement from Ald. Andre Vasquez.
Johnson further distinguished between this legal question and another about taxing millionaires, meant for Springfield’s approval. He advised, “Listen, if you want to debate my tone, we can.” Ervin supported Johnson, pointing out, “represents the corporation, of which we are part of.” Vasquez countered, stressing urgency due to tensions between the council and the mayor’s office. Aldermen approved the legal representation question for the ballot, but the millionaire tax question failed as Ald. Byron Sigcho-Lopez did not file it timely.
Progressives showed dissatisfaction regarding referendums on a music monument, which narrowly passed, and fund withholding for sister agencies, which passed with a larger margin. Opponents initiated the special council meeting to advance their referendum agenda, following procedural delays in a prior session. The meeting ended with criticisms from Sigcho-Lopez against those obstructing the millionaire tax initiative and the council adjourned amid parliamentary exchanges.
On a separate front, Johnson refrained from announcing plans to address potential closures of grocery stores in the South and West sides. His administration is exploring solutions as the Save A Lot store chain planned to end its agreement with Yellow Banana. Johnson reiterated support for public-private partnerships over city-owned stores. Additionally, regarding fiscal matters, Johnson cited delayed tax disbursements for a possible budget shortfall and endorsed a pledge to reject donations from corporations linked to immigration enforcement.