City Council - Regular Meeting

thank you

Hello, hello, hello, hello. Can everyone please take their seats? Can everyone please take their seats and silence their phones? Can everyone please take their seats and silence their phones?

Good morning, members of the City Council. The meeting will begin shortly. Please remember to log into your devices. Thank you.

Good morning. Good morning and happy holidays. Welcome to today's city council meeting. Thank you for coming out. The meeting will convene momentarily. In the meantime, please take your seats and be cognizant of your neighbors. Thank you.

Good morning, members of the City Council. The meeting will begin shortly. Please remember to log into your devices. If you need any assistance, it will be available. Thank you very much.

This one.

The council will come to order. Madam clerk, please take a quorum roll call.

Good morning, members of city council. Good morning, members of city council. Please use your e-device. Please use your e-device to log in your attendance. Thank you.

She's going to have time.

I will now go through members who have not logged in using their e-device. Alderman Laspada. Not in chambers. Alderman Robinson. Not in chambers. Alderman Mitchell is in chambers. He is here. Alderwoman Harris. Not in chambers. Alderwoman Ramirez. Not in chambers. Alderwoman Gutierrez. Not in chambers. Alderwoman Coleman. Not in chambers. Alderman O'Shea is present. Alderwoman Taylor is not in chambers. Alderman Mosley. Not in chambers. Alderman Rodriguez. not in chambers. Other person Fuentes is here. Alderwoman Rodriguez Sanchez, not in chambers. Alderman Sposato, not in chambers. Alderman Gardner is here. Alderwoman Haddon, not in chambers and Alderwoman Silverstein, not in chambers. Oh, Alderman Rodriguez is here. Your Honor, we have a quorum.

Very well, we have 38 members present. 12 are absent. A quorum has been established. There are a number of alders that have requested to participate in today's meeting remotely for reasons stated in Rule 59. Madam Clerk, can you confirm the following alders' presence online? Alders Harris, Ramirez, Coleman, Taylor, Mosley, Rodriguez-Sanchez, Sposato, Haddon, La Spada, and Gutierrez.

Alderman La Spada. He's present. Alderman Laspada, are you there? I am present, yes. Alderman Laspada is present. Alderman Sposato.

Nick Sposato's here.

Alderman Sposato is present. Alderwoman Coleman. Alderwoman Coleman, can you hear us?

Thank you, welcome.

Present.

Alderman Coleman.

Alderman Coleman is here. Alderman Mosley.

Alderman Mosley is present.

Alderwoman Harris. Here. Alderwoman Harris is present. Alderwoman Haddon. Present. Alderwoman Haddon is present. Alderwoman Ramirez. Present. Alderwoman Ramirez is present. Alderwoman Gutierrez. Alderwoman Gutierrez, can you hear us? Alderwoman Rodriguez Sanchez. Present. Alderwoman Taylor. Here. Alderwoman Taylor is here. Alderman Gutierrez, can you hear us now?

What's that?

Except for Gutierrez, right? All right. Can I get a motion for the approval for the all the following alders to participate in today's meeting remotely? It's been moved. All those in favor of the participation of those members remotely signify by saying aye. Any opposed say nay. Depending the chair, the eyes have it. Please please rise for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. Please remain standing for our invocation, which will be delivered today by Reverend Dr. Christopher Ringer from the Chicago Theological Seminary.

God of creation who spoke this world into being and called it good. We thank you for this city, its people, its neighborhoods, and its hopes. We ask your guidance today in the labor of building a city where every life is regarded as sacred, a city where all have the resources needed to live, work, and thrive, a city where everyone has the opportunity to realize their own unique gifts and potential, You have made us for a community, for a shared life, a shared responsibility, and a shared hope. Incline our ears to hear every voice anew. Steady our hands to serve the whole city. And soften our hearts towards the lives of neighbors we do not yet know. strengthen and sanctify the hearts and minds of this body to remember the most vulnerable among us. May your spirit align our policies and priorities with your purpose. May your steadfast love heal whatever may have been broken by our passions. Bless this body in finding common ground for the common good, where the good of one is bound to the good of all. All of these things we ask, trusting in your creative, sustaining, and redeeming power. In Jesus' name, amen.

Amen. You may be seated. Public comments.

President.

The Council will now begin the public comment period, which is limited to a maximum of 30 minutes. Each speaker is limited to three minutes. Speakers cannot yield or transfer their time to another speaker. Any written comments that have been submitted will be posted and made available for automatic review. Our first speaker today is Ito Asui-Moro.

Good morning, City Council, Mayor Johnson, and members of the Mayor's Administration and Chicago residents. My name is Itohan Itoh-Syke-Bogo. I'm originally from the West Side. I'm a new South Side resident in the Third Ward and an organizer with the Chicago Black Voter Project. I first want to commend you for enduring consistent verbal and emotional assault in these chambers with the utmost professionalism, dignity, and class. I affirm your humanity and the truth that you do not deserve that treatment, regardless of whether or not we agree politically. I want you to imagine a new Chicago with me. In Chicago, people are raised in equitable and prosperous communities, from the beaches of Edgewater to the bungalows of Roseland. Public schools and libraries are fully funded and staffed, filled to the brim with eager students from the southeast side to homes on the 5,900 blocks of Austin like the one I was born in. Residents who reflect the beauty of design have Chicago roots five generations in, or are newly American immigrant residents from all over the world. We live in racial harmony because everybody has the opportunity to start a business, pursue higher education, and raise a family without discrimination or interference. Care teams are dispersed throughout the city when a neighbor struggling with their mental health is making unsafe choices that endanger those around them. They are met with de-escalation practices and compassion. Youth peacekeepers mediate disagreements among their peers and train others to follow in their footsteps. Good Kids, Mad City has transformed their communities so much that places in the city are experiencing unrecognizable peace. Police overtime is capped because policing is no longer a catch-all for everything. Chicago voters in West Garfield and Auburn Gresham and the low end are engaged voters who know and love their alder. Our seniors are leading civic education instead of carrying voting on their backs. And they are not pushed out of their homes due to rising cost of living, but able to pass their properties on to families prepared to steward them. In fact, families are flocking to Chicago, not just businesses. We are growing a city for the many instead of just profit for the few. Chicago is a place where anyone who wants to work hard and live well can form roots because of you, because this city council and this mayor's administration was able to do what few watching believed you could. You came to an agreement and balanced this budget on smart, fiscally responsible policy choices of taxing corporations in a position to make a larger investment and adjust what their senior leaders pocket to reflect the demand of our current crisis, instead of making residents of a city who trusted and elected you vulnerable to predatory collections. You rejected any measure that could harm us. You set a precedent for years to come. Thank you for your long nights, your diplomacy, and your- Thank you very much for your comments.

Our next speaker this morning is Jasmine Smith,

Good morning, everyone. Activist Jasmine Smith with Chicago Alliance Against Racism and Political Repression. A lot of you all of us know my story. I am advocating for my two loved ones, Lester Owens and Rico Clark, who was wrongfully convicted 17 years, 15 years now still in prison fighting for their justice back in court on post convictions. So this year, there are a total of 41 survivors that was all wrongfully convicted by Forber, Brian Forber, Kevin Eberle, and John Foster, who are still on our force to this day. So I stand in front of you all just because a lot of you are indecisive when it comes to the checks and balances and accountability and transparency when it comes to the police. But let's talk about the numbers. Y'all had a budget of $80 million for wrongful lawsuits to be dished out. Y'all blew through that $80 million within months. We as city taxpayers are almost a billion dollars in in wrongful conviction settlements. I am dealing with a hundred of cases right now that are back in court for post convictions of being wrongfully convicted. They haven't even got out yet. And they will get out because we fighting for them. We got a hundred cases that's pending right now for lawsuits that the numbers are not even published yet. This is a serious matter and to be told that this this council, y'all don't even want to sit down and talk about the solutions when it comes to the money that's being the millions that's being pushed out for misconduct. Why is these officers still on our force? Why are you all the minutes are even trying to take away the cap on their overtime? That's $200 million that's already been spent to this day for overtime. I've seen many officers in the bars, on the clock. Liquor bars, cigar bars, just hanging out, milking the clock. There's no checks and balances. There's no transparency with that. The police have never had any transparency in this city, because if they did, a lot of them would still be on the force. I'm encouraging you all that's indecisive and that's being paid by the FOP to really just look at the many lives that are suffering behind bars for things that they didn't do. If they are innocent in prison, where's the criminals? They still on our streets. Y'all supposed to protect and serve your constituents. There's no protection when the wrong people are in prison and when the people that actually did these crimes are still roaming our streets. There's no question of right or wrong when it comes to police transparency, accountability in the city. Y'all need to listen to us. And then a lot of all them is talk when we come up here because we are organizers, but we are constituents too. organizers, activists, and however you want to call it. We are fighting for our communities and fighting for people that deserve to be heard by you all that we voted for. So y'all need to do more.

Thank you very much for your comments. Our next speaker this morning is Adjua Prior.

Good morning. My name is Adjua Pryor. Thanks for having me. Chicago is special. Almost everyone who's ever been here loves Chicago more than most cities. But Chicago is only special because of the people that are in the city. By threatening their well-being, you are threatening the very makeup of this city. This city contains legacies of strong, kind, communal, hardworking, and nurturing people, people who believe in you, people who have entrusted you with their very lives and the lives of their children. Those are the people who are being forgotten by this council, the people who opened the building before we got here and the people who will vacuum the floor after we leave. This council has forgotten the people who cleaned the streets and fixed their cars, who removed the garbage you thankfully decided not to tax, the people who launder your clothes, the person that made your morning cup of coffee, the people that teach your children. This council is listening to corporations with no end to profit in sight over the pleas of the people who put you here. What do you want your children, nieces, nephews, and niblings to remember when they grow up? What do you want your young neighbors to remember? Do you want them to remember the time that their parents lost their jobs? Do you want them to remember the time their grandmother lost the family home because she went bankrupt after her hospital bill and debt was sold to a collector? Do you want them to remember the winter when they didn't have heat? Do you want them to remember their last school year in Chicago because their family couldn't afford to stay? Or do you want them to remember the time you stood up for them, the time you stood against corporate exploitation, the time you actually used your power for the people and for their future? The city of Chicago is already in a deficit. Do you really want to use the people's debt to leverage the city's? Doesn't that seem a little heartless and fiscally backwards? Stand up. Demand one one-thousandth of a percentage of profit from these companies that have no commitment to this city. And use that money to support the people who have committed their lives to this city. Thank you.

Thank you very much for your comments. Our next speaker is Angel Thomas.

Hello, city council.

My name is Angel and I'm seven years old.

I love learning and I love school. But I was told I cannot get help.

I need because I go to a Catholic school.

That doesn't feel fair. I am still a child. I still live in Chicago.

And I still deserve help learning.

And I still deserve help learning, just like other kids. I learned that all kids are supposed to get free and fair education, no matter where they go to school.

So I don't understand why am I told no. If CPS is not helping,

If CPS is not helping our children, then I don't think they should get more money. So I don't think they should get more money than they are asking for.

I think CPS should be checked.

I think CPS should be checked.

Forensic auditor. Forensic auditor.

Forensic auditor.

Auditor.

Auditor.

To make sure they're helping every child.

to make sure they help in every child. Please make sure kids like me are not forgotten.

Please make sure CPS is fair.

And please help for all children lower.

All these people here for United Working Families and CTU are supposed to be here for me and every student.

But I think they are here for political reasons that don't allow for every child in Chicago. For every child in Chicago. Thank you for listening to me.

Thank you very much for your comments. Our next speaker this morning is Amy Masters.

Good morning, Mayor Johnson and members of the council. My name is Amy Masters, and I'm with the Building Owners and Managers Association of Chicago, or BOMA Chicago. We represent about 240 large office buildings in the city of Chicago. I want to speak to two narratives that have taken hold of the alternative that have taken hold about the alternative budget. One is about the unpaid debts owed to the city, and the other is about the head tax. First, the debt. We keep hearing arguments about who can't pay, but we're talking about $8 billion of unpaid debt. And the alternative budget only aims to collect an additional $90 million, a tiny fraction of that amount. Many individuals and businesses that owe money can afford to pay. No one wants to burden people. No one wants to burden people facing real hardship, but those who can pay their debts should. And if the city doesn't collect what's owed, then why do we charge these fees in the first place? And are we telling people, even those who can pay, that paying fees is optional? Now the tax on jobs. There's been a lot of rhetoric suggesting that this is a tax on the ultra wealthy. If the goal is to tax the rich, that requires a graduated income tax, and that authority rests with the state, not with the city. What the head tax actually does is tax jobs. For select companies, it's a tax on each employee who works in Chicago at least three days a week. whether that employee earns $40,000 or $400,000. And while the tax has been characterized as being small, it's just one more reason for employers to think twice about keeping their employees working downtown, keeping their business in the city, and even moving here in the first place. Compared to cities across the nation, Chicago tops the list in all the wrong categories. We have We have the highest property tax.

Excuse me. I would ask that the chamber remain under decorum. Sergeant at Arms, continue to make sure that individuals who are in this chamber respect those individuals. Time to speak, please.

Thank you. We have the highest commercial property tax. We have the highest personal property lease tax, and that's before it gets increased with this budget. We have one of the highest sales tax in the nation, and we have one of the highest pension liabilities. Adding a tax on jobs on top of that doesn't make Chicago more competitive. It doesn't attract employers, and it doesn't make them want to stay. and it doesn't create jobs. It does just the opposite. It is a tax on jobs. While we're very aware that businesses are taking on the vast majority of these new budget costs, paying more than 80% of the fees and taxes in this budget, this budget is the best alternative. We know it isn't perfect, and it is the best option we have. We all recognize the fiscal pressures confronting our city today, and a government shutdown would only intensify those challenges, making support today all the more essential. We urge the council to support this alternative budget that protects jobs and positions Chicago to grow. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you very much for your comments. Our next speaker this morning is Brianna Champion.

Good morning. Our message for the last few months has been very clear. Working class families need safety nets to survive these federal cuts. While we, the 99%, are faced with Great Depression level economic crisis, our nation's top 1% is the wealthiest they've ever been. We should have learned from this lesson already. History has shown us what happens when we prioritize property over the people that occupy its spaces, businesses and business owners over the communities that give them purpose, and corporations over the strong cities that are the reason for their success. Our stories of caution may have been ignored, but you will soon really feel them, and now the true work begins. We have guaranteed a Chicago that in 2026 will see devastating cuts to jobs and services because of the choices that was made by you all this week. What is the plan for when SNAP benefits are further depleted and enrollment lists are the longest they've ever been? What is the plan for when you realize the majority of the debt that you sold actually belongs to everyday Chicagoans on the South and West sides? who are trying to hold on to their homes, not businesses. Chicagoans who once known grace for not being able to afford their water bills, but are now forced to file for bankruptcy. What are you going to do when those families are forced to leave Chicago? With them, the businesses will leave too, because Chicago, once the greatest city in the world, is now a barren, debt-ridden city plagued by mass economic crisis. Taxing wealthy corporations was honestly just the start of safeguarding against this level of chaos. It's not a tax on jobs. It's a small contribution and investment for the people that hold those jobs. It remains a common sense solution the majority of Chicagoans agree with. You have chosen the harder path, and I hope you hold that decision with pride, because you alone will have that weight. We are here today, just like we've been throughout this budget fight, pleading with you to do what is needed to avoid calamity. Now we are here asking you what is next. How are you planning to deal with the true fallout of passing this unbalanced alternative budget? You have the entire city of Chicago to answer to. Working-class communities built something powerful together during this budget season and will last beyond this season.

Thank you very much for your comments. Our next speaker this morning is Denise Dooley.

Good morning, Council, fellow Chicago residents, and Mayor Johnson. Denise Dooley, 46th Ward. I'm here today to ask our alders and our mayor to please consider changing your vote or outright vetoing this alternative revenue plan. It's a destructive plan. I'm not the first person this morning to say it. The debt sale in particular will be a nightmare for our city for years to come. I can't think of anything more embarrassing than shifting a revenue burden by sending debt collectors after our lowest income neighbors when we have the very reasonable option to seek support from corporations. With regard to debt collection, we already know this debt pool is made up of people who are struggling to pay their water bills, pay their ambulance fees, and that's who this would impact, the people who are already unable to pay. Going after them as a temporary fix is cynical. It's not in line with our values in this city. It's another step towards the criminalization of poverty, and it's going to cause costly problems for our city in the long term. This kind of disregard for our lowest income residents should have us all very concerned. Rebudgeting at this point will not be easy. That's obvious. Please reverse the vote while there is still time. As difficult as this will be, there is absolutely a better way. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Our next speaker is Adriani Seeley. Adriani Seeley.

Good morning. I'm Adriane. I'm a library worker at Harold Washington Public Library. Over the last month, you've heard from my coworkers and from residents across the city about why our libraries matter. You've heard about how cuts to the library will cut youth jobs, services for unhoused patrons, and crucial programs for children, teens, and adults. You've heard about what it's like to work in understaffed libraries, and you've heard that Chicago loves its libraries. I know this budget season has required all of you to make difficult choices. For any older person here today who feels that they've had to choose to cut funding for the libraries, I'm sorry that we haven't been able to show you everything that we do, how we keep kids and teens engaged in learning and exploring their passions beyond what they learn in school, how we spark the imagination of adults who think they've seen it all, how we help people who are homeless, who are cold during our brutal, brutal winters, who need help, with mental health crises, help with immigration or housing forms, and so much more. We will keep working hard to make the library's value clear to you in the coming year for the sake of your communities and our patrons. To the overwhelming majority of elders here who I hope will choose to support the library's funding today, thank you. No matter what side of the budget fight you've been on, we appreciate you coming together to support library services. With the shadow of a city shutdown looming over us, I'm hopeful that we can continue working for the city in the new year. And as part of that work, we'll continue to show you all and all of Chicago that funding the libraries was the right choice. In the words of my coworker, Sarah, Chicago simply cannot be the greatest freaking city in the world if we have a defunded library system. Thank you for understanding the value of the people's university.

Thank you very much for your comments. Our next speaker this morning is Connie Thomas.

Disclaimer, this is my 11-year-old child. She's autistic, so be patient with her. Come on.

Hi, City Council. My name is Connie, and I'm 11. I'm here because I see people in my city who are homeless, some are families, and some are veterans. Some are elderly, and some are disabled. They are Chicago citizens. I know the city has programs to help people who are new here, and I think helping people is important, but I don't know why people who have lived here their whole lives are still sleeping outside. If the city has homeless programs, they should help everyone, especially people who are already from Chicago. I think the city should be audited to make sure that money is really helping people who need it most. Native Chicagoans Everyone deserves a safe place to sleep. No one should be invisible to their own city. Please make sure the city is fair and honest about how money is spent. United Working Families over here should be in here working for homeless citizens of Chicago, not just the major. Mayor. Mayor. Thank you for listening to me.

Thank you very much for your comments. Our next speaker is Mark Kaplan.

No, I'm serious. Thank you to the Sergeant at Arms for restoring order here.

All right, if it takes longer for the order to be restored, then I will be left with no other choice but to clear the chambers. All right, thank you. Please. Good morning, all the people. Just a second. Hold on a second. Just a second. Just a second. Mark.

Mark, please, one moment, please. Thank you.

Just hold on a second. All right, you may commence. Mark? Mark, you may proceed, sir.

Good morning, all the people. Mayor Johnson.

Morning.

My name is Mark Kaplan. I'm a proud member of Northside Action for Justice. And I'm a little bit older than most people in this room. I was here in 1983 and part of that battle. And despite all the acrimony, the council was able to come together and pass an historic bond that made it possible for the first time to have major improvements in communities on a fair basis all around the city. I just cannot figure out why anyone would support an alternative budget that is going to have us back here in six months trying to solve a crisis and then saying that we have to raise property taxes and force more people out of the city. It does not make any sense to me to have a budget that counts on speculation and going after people in our communities who can't afford to live right now, who are now going to be losing their medical benefits and their food benefits and speculate on debt rather than going with a sure thing, which is asking the richest corporations in this city to pay 0.0125%, less than a thousandth of a percent of their profits towards our collective community public safety. What is the logic in that? Are we a bunch of gamblers? Should we all, maybe everybody buy a Powerball ticket tonight because then we will have a billion dollars and we can put it towards the budget. So I'm asking all of you who are counting on the speculation of this alternative budget, please, don't just buy one. Buy a hundred of those tickets and then whichever one of us wins, We can all put it towards the budget, and that'll be $1 billion less than we have to worry about. I want to thank all of the older people who have stood strong with the Protect Chicago budget, because that's what makes sense. That's all we're talking about here. It's a simple choice. Are we going to vote for a budget that guarantees the money that will be coming in that will protect our communities, or are we going to vote for some speculation? Once again, buy that Powerball ticket if you're for the alternative budget. Thank you.

Thank you very much for your comments. Your Honor, there are no further speakers who have signed up for the public comment period.

Very well, thank you. There are no resolutions today. Next up, then, communications. Is there a hand, Madam Clerk? Whose hand is it? Is there a way to notify?

Is there someone with their hand up online?

Yes, Alderman Gutierrez just wanted to be recorded present in the meeting, please.

Thank you very much. Madam Clerk, could you add? Yes, Alderman, you are now as a part of the roll call.

Yes.

Hold on a second.

She was not identified in the first motion. Do we have to take another motion?

All right. Can I get a motion for the participation remotely for real estate in a row 59 for alder Gutierrez? It's been moved. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed say nay. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. Thank you. Now, Madam Clerk, please add alder Gutierrez to the quorum roll call.

Communications.

Communications. Thank you.

I, City Clerk Anna Valencia, hereby inform the City Council that the following documents were filed in my office relating to the respective subject designated as follows. Annual report for Department of Transportation regarding non-ordinance loading zone activities. Also, determination certificate of City of Chicago regarding revolving line of credit agreement by and among City of Chicago, RBC Capital Markets, LLC, Royal Bank of Canada, as noted December 19, 2025, maximum aggregate principal amount not to exceed $325 million. Funding, loan notification of City of Chicago, multifamily, mortgage, revenue notes, 2025 Series A, Tillman Square Apartments Phase 4 project. Your Honor, that concludes the reports and communications from the mayor and other city officers.

Farewell. We have no committee reports today, and there is also no agreed-upon calendar. A new business, the clerk will read the awards beginning with the first.

Traffic regulations, traffic control signals, and traffic signs, which are referred to the Committee on Pedestrian and Traffic Safety. Alderperson Vasquez has a proposed resolution recognizing virtual no-vote intent for the 2016 revenue ordinance passed by the City Council on December 19, 2025, which is referred to the Committee on Committees and Rules. Your Honor, there are no further... Introductions by Alderman.

Very well. We have no general to be approved today either. So next up we have unfinished business and the chair recognizes chairman Irvin.

Mr. President, Alderman Nugent noticed and filed various items of unfinished business with the clerk pursuant to rule 41 pertinent to the consideration and passage of the 2026 budget. Um, If she doesn't mind, I'll read out those items. The 2026 municipal code corrections ordinance, a series of proposed corrections and revisions to the 2026 budget recommendations and text portions as amended with changes proposed by Alders Lee and Lopez, the 2026 appropriation, annual appropriation ordinance as amended, the substitute 2026 management ordinance, the Motor Fuel Tax Funds Allocation Ordinance, the Motor Fuel Tax Allocation Intergovernmental Agreement with the Chicago Transit Authority and Cook County, the salary resolution, and item number eight is the fiscal year 2026 tax levy i ask that the council discuss this at this time as the entire budget package which consists of the various matters are just identified uh i reserve uh i and chairman dow's right to close the discussion

Thank you, Chairman Irvin. All the woman, Scott, did you wish to be recognized? You do? All right, the chair recognizes Alderman Scott.

Good morning.

Good morning.

This budget has been weighing heavy on my heart, and I'm assuming on my colleagues' heart. It's been a lot. It's been very challenging, very consuming. But when I hear people speak and I hear the mayor and the media, I hear my colleagues in the media, all I hear is darts being thrown. We are discussing, this budget is a $16 billion budget. We are discussing an alternative budget of 1%. 1.6 to be exact. We're discussing 1.6. We're here this morning because it's 1.6. If your kid has an assignment in class, they get 100, they get one wrong, what is that? 1%. 1% of this budget is what we're proposing. And we're getting a lot of darts because of the debt collection. Let's be clear. In Mayor Johnson's budget, there's $110 million to be collected on our residents. Is it a distinction on poor people? Who is it on? Because $110 million, it has to be poor people in there. And what I don't like is for people to prey on Black poor people. Don't prey on my people. Or brown people. So this budget, this $110 million that we're collecting, There's no Black poor people in this budget. I mean, not in this budget, in this debt. There's no Black poor people. There's no Hispanic people that are poor in this $110 million that's already being proposed. See, the alternative budget wants to collect an additional $100 million because there's $8 billion of debt that is owed to the city of Chicago. $8 billion. So 1% of that Oh, I can't vote for the budget because they're asking for a debt collection. So what is the 110 million that is in this budget? Did you all forget that it's $110 million in this budget that is being asked to be collected on debt? I mean, make it make sense. Make it make sense. We are, where's the... Just a second, Alderman Scott.

I want to make sure that you have your respected time. I would ask that the members of the audience hold their responses to give Alderman Scott and other alders the opportunity. Thank you, Alderman O'Shea. There's a lot of good, helpful people around here. We want to make sure that you have your time, okay?

Please categorize in this budget as immoral and morally bankrupt to ask for an additional 100 million that's already being asked in the budget of 113 million. I don't know if there's some confusion, but I want to get it on the record that we're only asking for 16 billion is being asked. We have went along with everything in this budget except a head tax. And this was just additional money to collect of what is owed. So we're essentially setting a precedence because I was asked in my ward if I wanted to add some more red light cameras. I refused to because if that money is not coming back to the west side of Chicago, I'm not going to put my residents or the people that's traveling through my neighborhood in more fines, right? So we're increasing fines, but then we're telling our residents, oh, you don't have to pay them because essentially you're black and poor. or you're brown and poor. When you run a red light, I didn't drive your car. Chico didn't drive your car, that's your debt. When you park at a fire hydrant, that's your debt. When you don't pay water bills, that's your debt. Because water bills come out every, they're not that much. They increase, increase when you don't pay or you feel like you have a right not to pay. So we can't set that message that you don't have to pay because you're black and poor. Don't use my people for political theater. Don't use my people. That's using my people to send your political rhetoric. Don't do that. We have an obligation as legislators to collect on debt. how we do that that's up to the administration how they collect it because they're collecting it right now they collect debt every day you get something in your mail if you owe a parking ticket i've gotten it when my daughter runs a red light i get them if she runs a uh uh run through the speed camera i get them right so this is the debt that people have accumulated regardless if they're poor or not we have Contractors that owe us money. We have sister agencies like CPS, Park District. That's what I'm told. Everybody owes the city of Chicago. So don't use it as we're trying to do predatory calling to collect debt on poor black people. That doesn't go well with me. So again, we're discussing 1% of this budget. This is 1%. The entire budget of the administration is already in place. All we're doing is asking for revisions to 1% of the budget. That's it. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. The chair recognizes Alderwoman Fuentes. Please, thank you. Hold on a second. I'm not going to offer up too many more warnings, you all. I'm trying my best to give people an opportunity to express their appreciation and perhaps even their disdain. I'm just asking you to do it with a little bit of form. That's all. All right. Alder Fuentes.

Thank you, Mr. President and members of City Council. Today, I rise firm on my no vote on this year's budget. At the core of At the core of my decision is a simple principle, fiscal responsibility must come first. Before we debate priorities, programs, or even politics, we have an obligation to pass a budget that is honest, reliable, and truly balanced. This budget is not. It relies on revenue assumptions that are uncertain, unstable, and unsustainable. It assumes revenue will materialize without sufficient evidence, and it pushes real costs into the future through one-time fixes. That is not responsible budgeting. It's wishful thinking. A budget built on shaky assumptions is not a plan, it's a risk. We have listened to statements that all budgets have revenue assumptions, and that is true. Assumptions can be made, but there is a difference between an assumption that is rooted in scientific methods and historical data and assumptions that feel good because the numbers look good. Once again, this is a risk, and when the risk fails, it is all residents and city workers that will pay the price. First, this budget relies on selling our debt. Yes, the original budget has a collection on debt. This budget proposed in addition and the selling of that debt. It's not a structural revenue. It is a short-term maneuver that increases long-term costs and weakens our financial position. You want to assure a credit downgrade? We've done it. Our deficit next year will be greater and we will be here once again trying to grapple with the difficult decisions that we must make to fill a deficit. We cannot continue to balance budgets by shifting obligations forward and hoping future councils will figure it out. We have heard from our colleagues that selling our debt will result in predatory practices. We know that to be true. We cannot continue to move forward with selling of our debt if there's no real guardrails for our families across the city. Second, I want to speak plainly about VGT tax because this too reflects misplaced fiscal priorities. Under this model, any business with a liquor license can apply to install slot machines in their establishments. In effect, we are encouraging the expansion of gambling to every single neighborhood on every single corner across the city of Chicago. Neighborhood bars and restaurants to shore up a budget that lacks reliable revenue. In the 26th ward, Our bars, our restaurants, our family-owned businesses are more than just businesses. They're gathering places, cultural anchors, and family establishments that define neighborhoods like Humboldt Park, Westtown, Logan Square, and Mosa, and Belmont-Craigan. I do not believe slot machines or gaming machines belong in every neighborhood bar or restaurant. I do not believe that every corner bar, local bodega, or family-run restaurant in my ward should become a mini casino. Addiction in my community is a battle we fight every day, including gambling. This proposal will diminish the health of my residents and our community. Gambling have ruined the lives of so many people in our city. And let's not forget the agreement that we have with Bally's and the $4 million in revenue that we will lose with this tax and the union jobs that we will put at risk. This approach? normalizes gambling as a revenue solution, disproportionately impacts working class families, introduces public health risks like problem gambling and addiction, and permanently alters neighborhood commercial corridors. This is not sound fiscal policy and it is not good community policy. Finally, this budget is not structurally balanced. In fact, there are members of the Alternative Coalition that have acknowledged that this budget is not balanced and that we will be back here in January. Because the revenue is unreliable, we are almost guaranteed mid-year cuts without having to come back early to fix it all. We all know what that means. Service reductions, layoffs, and disruption that hits the most vulnerable residents first. A budget that depends on mid-year corrections, or in this case, January corrections. It's deferred harm, and we can't fix it now. Let me be clear about what I do support, though. I support progressive, stable, and reliable revenue that reflects basic fiscal responsibility. Revenue that does not fluctuate based on gambling behavior, economic fatality, or optimistic projections. I support asking those who have benefited the most from our city's economy to contribute their fair share. Rather than relying on regressive and unreliable sources, We must have difficult conversations, but avoiding them is how we end up here year after year. Colleagues, fiscal responsibility is not optional. It's required. It's what we are elected to do. It is the foundation of good governance. Our residents deserve a budget that is honest about cost, realistic about revenue, and fair in how those dollars are raised. I cannot vote yes on a budget that relies on unreliable revenue assumptions, sells off our future through debt, expands gambling into our neighborhood and bars and restaurants, burdens working families, and postpones the hard work of structural reform. Chicago, our neighbors, 26 war deserves better. And for these reasons, I'm a no vote.

If the chair recognizes Alderman Sergio Lopez.

Thank you, Mr. President, members of the city council. First, let me thank every Chicagoan that is paying attention. Every young member, every young person who comes to this chamber with a lot more consciousness than some of the members in this chamber. When we are being attacked by the federal government because there's been a siege on our city, when we see people in the poorest areas of the city of Chicago getting higher property taxes, when people in the wealthiest part of the city are claiming subsidies and vacancies that we also have in our neighborhoods, then we gotta wonder, who are we governing for? So I am thankful for the young people and all the people in Chicago that push back on this regressive budget that is immoral and ethically bankrupt. Because it is unacceptable that in a time like this, we are putting the burden on the poorest people in our city. This is not the alternative budget. This is the billionaire budget. And this is a budget that has name and last name. And I'm not afraid of saying it, because all young people are speaking up. And thanks to them, the youth jobs are back in this budget. So I'm not afraid to call out the billionaire class that has declared Chicago class warfare. Because when you are allowing rich corporations, rich corporations that can afford it, that have record profits, And then we are preventing a bare minimum of $83 million. That is nothing for these corporations. And putting that money and burning working people with those taxes and those fees and fines, how are we going to call that fiscally responsible? How are we calling that moral and ethical? So here's a call on billionaire Michael Sachs. immoral, and I call on him ethically bankrupt because people will suffer with this budget. How can people talk about fiscal responsibility, crying wolf every single meeting here about police overtime, but yet take from the management order, from the managing ordinance, that was taking off the budget? So I don't want to hear again people complaining at police overtime when you vote in favor of such lack of regulation. How are we going to talk about that we are fiscally responsible when we're balancing the, this is not a balanced budget. We're putting fines and fees that will never be structurally sound for a city. It's not sustainable. We're not going to put that on the backs of working people. What a debt collection. You know how many families, you should know that, are struggling with that and property taxes. But yet, we continue to choose to protect those corporations. It's a shame. that we are allowing, in this moment of time, corporations to dictate, and billionaires to dictate, and then call it on behalf of the working people. And let's cut it for what it is. We are going back to the ghost of the past, when we sell parking meters to balance budgets, when we're going back to predatory practices like debt collection, and allowing corporations that can afford it to continue to make money out of our city, yet have no commitment to pay in the very city that where they're making the wealth. So shame on that. So I tell you today, we know who is behind this. When builder associations from downtown come and tell us that this is the way to balance the budget where we have small businesses and small homeowners barely making ends meet that are being brutalized now even by the federal government. And now we're going to tell the same people that we are going to go send debt collectors, predatory debt collectors on them. And we know how that nightmare ends with this kind of deficits created by the administrations of the past. So today, when we see that this budget is not balanced, this budget has so many holes that we will have to count the port holes in the city of Chicago to count how many holes are in this budget. So I tell you today, when we know, and many members of this city council know, that we're going to be back here in six months to discuss layoffs, We're gonna be back in this council to try to help people in debt, in danger to lose their homes. So how you can tell us that this budget is balanced? And how can we tell people in the city of Chicago that is not balanced in the backs of working people? When we know that our communities in this moment in time are barely making ends meet. So make it a prediction. Because history has an interesting way to make reminders. Just like in the 80s, and the same bigotry and the same obstructions continue to attack and divide. And it's very clear what the tactic here is, divide and conquer. That's what billionaire Michael Sachs wants to do. Teach all communities against each other. While corporations make more money, and billionaires like him continue to make even more money. and go try to get us back to the past. So let me make a prediction, like happened in the 80s. When the people of the city of Chicago wakes up, the sleeping giant, we hold this city council accountable. And I hope that Chicagoans are paying attention. And I hope that Chicagoans remember who took those garbage fees out of the budget, who make sure that the young programs are back in the budget, who is fighting for mental health, who is fighting to make sure that we have living wages, and who is fighting for the billionaire class, who is protecting corporations. That is that simple. So today, I remind the city of Chicago, we have the same fight that we have in the 80s. We have the new Verdoliacs trying to come back and balance the budget. And we have an opportunity to stand for our communities. And that's why I stand for my small businesses and my constituents. I'm a no on this immoral, bankrupt, Michael Sachs budget. And we tell Zero Chicago, organize and fight back against the corruption of the past. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thank you. The chair recognizes Alderman Quesada.

I am

Thank you to the sergeant at arms. Thank you. Chair recognizes please. All right, these outbursts continues. I'm going to ask the sergeant of arms to remove the outbursts. Thank you. Alderman Quesada

Thank you, Mr. President, members of the council. I rise to speak in opposition to this alternative budget. I recognize the work my colleagues put into proposing this alternative, but I ultimately believe it falls short of the fiduciary rigor needed to earn my support. This alternate was posed in contrast to a progressive revenue plan that was developed across a year of public engagement and research. This proposal was not meaningfully discussed in the court of public opinion and nor with our respective constituents. In the short time the public has had to react to this new revenue plan, I have heard concerns and fears from my residents about several aspects of this proposal's revenue streams. including the use of one-time debt sales, the lack of structured and long-term progressive revenue that would shift the economic burden away from working class people, and the very risk of mid-year cuts to city services and departments if revenue projections fall short. In this time of incredible social and economic instability in the daily lives of my constituents, a plan that leaves me without complete confidence that we can raise the revenue to meet people's needs is not something that I can support. I want to thank the many Chicagoans, grassroots organizations, workers, and advocates who participated during this budget season to ensure the needs of our communities were heard These needs range from youth employment, to funding to address gender-based violence, to investments in mental health care and our care program, funding our libraries, and much more. I especially want to uplift the work of Good Kids, Math City, the People's Unity Platform Coalition, the Public Health and Safety Coalition, and many others. Because of their advocacy, they helped move the conversation about what a city budget can and should do for our neighborhoods. Addressing historic disinvestment, advancing real solutions to violence, and centering the needs of people impacted by poverty, our city is stronger because of their organizing. This budget is not being considered in a vacuum, Mr. President. Our city is being challenged to respond to an unprecedented and deeply unstable period of wealth and income inequality affecting both our city and our nation. While corporate profits grow at a staggering pace, far too many Chicagoans are struggling to afford housing, utilities, childcare, and healthcare. Our response requires collaboration, creativity, and most importantly, an understanding of the broader political and economic context in which we live in. Historically, corporate taxes were once higher, and those revenues helped build and sustain the public goods that made cities like Chicago strong. They allowed us to invest in reliable infrastructure, public transit, schools, libraries, and services people could count on. Those investments did not weaken our economy. They created the conditions that shared prosperity and long-term growth. Not just growth in private profit, but growth in the public good. Over time, through data proven failed policy strategies like trickle-down economics, those revenue streams were rolled back, organized labor was attacked, and the burden shifted away from corporations and onto working people. The result is what we see today, growing inequality, underfunded services, and recurring budget crises that afflict this council and so many other legislative bodies. The analysis is clear. When we stop asking those with the greatest ability to contribute fairly, the lives of everyday people become less stable, less dignified, while political and economic power concentrates further in the hands of the few. While some of my colleagues raise the point that the difference between this alternative budget and the Protecting Chicago Plan is only 1%, it fails to meet the moment that we are talking about because it does not grapple with the history that got us here or at the scale of the inequality we now face. Instead of advancing a more long-term balanced approach to revenue, such as a modest tax on the largest and most profitable corporations in our city, it relies on regressive or uncertain measures that make life harder for everyday residents, either through higher costs or through the risk of future cuts and layoffs. We heard, this body heard this risk clearly from the Office of Budget Management, which stated that the revenue projections in this proposal amount to roughly a $157 million deficit and could result in mid-year cuts. So yes, a budget is a moral document and a fiduciary responsibility, but it is also a political agenda. And when you displace $100 million from being raised from the largest corporations to instead collecting debt from working people, that is a political choice. Compassion in governance means choosing stability over shortcuts and passing policy that uplifts people. It means protecting the services our residents rely on and making life easier for families who are already stretched thin. It means crafting a budget that does not ask working people to shoulder more risk while concentrated wealth remains largely untouched. At a moment like this, incremental solutions and downward shifting burdens are not enough, and it is not the vision of the brighter future that Chicago can live up to. The privatization of resident debt or public assets follow the same failed strategies that led to the sale of the Skyway and our parking meters. Mr. President, I urge a no vote on this alternative proposal and call on my colleagues to continue working together in the interests of the common good. And to the people of Chicago, I urge you to continue organizing your community, your coworkers, your fellow students as we work to build a Chicago that works for all of us. Thank you. Thank you.

Chair recognizes Alder Vasquez.

Thank you, Mr. President. Good morning to my colleagues on the city council and to the members of the public with us today. Good morning. I am speaking on my opposition to this budget. Having now voted on six budgets prior to this one, I have a deeper appreciation for the challenges we face as a council and as a city. We have governed through a global pandemic, humanitarian crises, a hostile and authoritarian federal administration, and a series of inherited fiscal challenges, as well as those created by the Johnson administration itself, that have culminated in the billion dollar deficits we confront today. And yet, despite unprecedented circumstances, the assignment remains the same. Chicagoans across our city are grappling with a life that has become increasingly unaffordable. While the cost of living continues to rise, wages for most people have not kept pace. Housing is more expensive. Property taxes have risen sharply, driven in part by a Cook County Board of Review that has too often favored commercial real estate interest over the struggles of working people. Healthcare and energy costs are ballooning, and inflation, fueled by reckless economic policy from the Trump administration, has made basic necessities like groceries harder to afford. Working families don't just see these pressures, they feel and live them. In moments like these, our neighbors look to our city government for leadership and confidence. While there are glimmers of hope, the outcomes presented in this budget and the process that produced it make clear how much work remains. Last year's budget process was deeply dysfunctional. Necessary revenue options were left on the table. Tensions between the city council and the mayor's administration were visible, tangible, and at times intractable. In response, I, along with a number of colleagues, negotiated for stronger reporting requirements and a mid-year budget review, which took place in the third quarter. We did so in hopes of improving what had become bad practice in negotiating a multi-billion dollar budget. I appreciate that this year, we at least had an additional month and a half to ask questions and challenge assumptions. But we were still presented with a budget from an administration that appeared uninterested in negotiation and more focused on galvanizing people to choose a side. Either you support their proposal or you're standing with billionaires. The framing was more marketing than substance. The corporate head tax is not the only way to tax the wealthy, and I am in support of the corporate head tax. And we should be taxing those who have benefited the most, especially during times when working families have struggled. But the head tax as proposed only raised $83 million against a $6 billion corporate fund, while this administration simultaneously borrowed hundreds of millions of dollars, both for CFD back pay they said had been set aside, but wasn't. I guess that's the assumptions we talk about. and for misconduct settlements that many members of this council only learned during hearings were being paid through borrowed funds. That debt will cost tens of millions of dollars more in interest. And who receives those payments? Big banks. Billionaires. So if you're taxing the wealthy to raise $83 million while paying hundreds of millions of dollars to the very same interest, the math simply doesn't add up. To then have made oral allies charge others who disagree with the mayor's proposal, even those who had not even voted yet, like our colleague, as being billionaire puppets or not representing their people is hypocrisy that should have been pointed out. Many of us called for efficiencies. Those concerns were dismissed as called to cut headcount rather than engaging in a serious detailed discussion about where savings could be found. While one department has grown so large, it now consumes more than half of the city's operating budget. But that's cutting people. The mayor's proposal also failed to make the full advanced pension payment despite the opportunity to do so, pushing yet another burden onto future generations. The challenges in this budget did not arise in a vacuum. They're the results of decisions made by this administration, eliminating the CPI tax, failing to add structural revenue last year, and assigning contracts with raises we knew would be difficult to fund. So when an administration creates its own fiscal problems, refuses to heed warnings about the consequences of decision-making made by members of this council, refuses to engage in good faith negotiations, and erodes relationships to the point where collaboration becomes impossible, the burden shifts to the city council to figure out how to resolve a budget. The incompetence and dismissiveness is precisely what led to the formation of a coalition of alders. I'd like to commend our colleagues who organized to create a revenue ordinance, even though there are substantial decisions in it that I disagree with. You all exhibited what this administration could not, the ability to collaborate, to engage, and negotiate with each other to the point where you grew to majority in this moment. We all know how challenging that is with leaders who have different views, life experiences, priorities, and motivations. You shared frustration with the mayor and his team. Your shared frustration with the mayor and his team motivated each of you to find agreement. Whereas some of the members of this council spent more time aligning and defending the administration in spite of its faults, you all took action. And in the interest of a council acting as an independent and co-equal branch, I do believe it's an evolution of the council. Some may try to inaccurately characterize this coalition as being similar to the Vodoliak coup during the council wars, but that would be inaccurate. And we have members of this council that we know it's an insult to even try to claim would be the same. There are plenty of people from various backgrounds, identities, and ideologies that found the agreement necessary to build a coalition. We have a lot of people here who we know in the interests of the city are looking out for a first. We may disagree, but it's not the same. This ain't the Berdoliak crew. You're not Mayor Harold Washington. And that coalition learned what I had also experienced, that the city council is not afforded the tools, resources, staff, and data to create the kind of substantial change through the budget process that would have led to better outcomes for our city. As we saw in hearings, the administration has data they refuse to share and then gaslight our members and ask them to create budget solutions without the same data. To put it plainly, you can't ask us to cook without giving us the ingredients. In absence of that information, this coalition has made some decisions that I have very real concerns that keep me from supporting their proposal. Their proposal doesn't address the borrowing, although it does make a full pension payment. It also proposes the city sell its debt to collectors as a way of raising revenue. Yes, the current city collects debt. We know that. It contracts it out. It does not sell debt. That is a problem which will lead to predatory practices towards Chicagoans in a time when so many are struggling. You want a debt collector calling you and having the legitimacy of the Chicago city seal on it? I don't. I have concerns about that. I have concerns about projections of the Aldrich proposal as their budget experts didn't come up to a hearing to be subjected to the same level of scrutiny we give the budget office for the city. Those reasons are in part why I can't support the proposed budget. There is an opportunity, however, to partner with you all, I'm talking to the coalition and the rest of the council, through a management ordinance. Through it, we can create an independent budget office that could run data and provide better analyses and projections. That would empower the council to create better proposals year over year to get better reporting and to be more independent. Similarly, an independent legal council, as first proposed by Alders Riley and Beal, would be helpful to us as a body for a number of reasons. Remember when we could have passed that and we didn't? Let's remember that in 2026. Building the tools that this council will need when we are no longer here is crucial. It doesn't matter who's in that seat or these. We need a co-equal branch. There is also an opportunity for those of us who are serious about finding efficiencies and being fiscally responsible We have one department out of over 30 of them, and that is the only department with a multi-billion dollar budget. We have just one department out of all of them, and there's over 30 of them, that takes up over half of our operating expenses. One department, 50.5% of the operating funds. The other 30 departments, I'm going to bring a number back, an average of 1.6%. 50%, 1.6%. You can't talk about being fiscally responsible and ignoring that. If any department takes up that much of our budget, we need to admit that there is some level of bloat there. Of course, I'm referring to the Chicago Police Department. I'm not talking headcount. But I do believe we need a true and independent forensic audit of the department and others in good faith and in spirit. I ask all of our colleagues across ideologies to partner with us to move a forensic audit forward with the same diligence and responsibility we feel towards other fiduciary duties to the residents of Chicago. If you're not talking about looking at the department, you're not serious about efficiencies. Stop lying to yourselves and everybody else. I guess the progressives are quiet about that this year. With the proper resources... Hey, love it. With the proper resources that can empower the council to be a balanced negotiator, I believe we can get better outcomes and we can do it together. To all the residents of our great city, please always remember that this city government is yours. You are an investor through the taxes you pay. You are our true bosses. We are your employees. Hold us accountable every day as we work through our current and future challenges so that we serve the city to the best of our abilities and deliver Chicago we all love, believe in, and deserve. Thank you.

Thank you. The chair recognizes Alderman Beal.

Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, let me just say I wasn't going to speak today because I'm, you know, suffering with a little bit of bronchitis, you know, but after hearing the rhetoric, I was just compelled to stand and just say a few things, just a few, not much, just a few. But before I start, let me just say this alternative budget was nothing short of amazing. And I'm extremely proud of the group that has led this alternative budget that was led by a group of women. And I think we need to give Alderman Dow, Alderman Haddon, and Alderman Lee a round of applause for pulling off the inevitable. And Nugent, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Nugent. So as we attack people, just understand we're attacking a woman-led movement in this council. So let me just move on from there. Now, I'm also amazed that people are saying the budget ain't balanced. I think my last two speeches, I rose and said, the budget wasn't balanced. This budget wasn't balanced. Budget wasn't balanced. But nobody said a word, but they went down and voted yes anyway. And when we talking about being back here in June, I said we'd be back here in April, and I think we were back here in April. But you still voted for an unbalanced budget anyway. So let me say, when we talk about budgets, all budgets are projections. Up and down, up and down. Some come in high, some come in low. And so the thing is, when we pass a budget, it is the responsibility of the executive branch to carry out the budget we pass. So if this budget comes in high or low, it's what? The fact that the executive branch didn't carry out the budget that we pass. No. So let me just go on a little bit. So Last year, we sat in this very seat and we said over and over again to the budget director, is the money for the fire contract in the budget? Oh yes, it's in the budget. We've set that money aside, that money's in the budget. Now we found out that the money was spent and now we're borrowing to pay for the fire contract. So let me just say, if we're talking about transparency and being forthright, did they come to us and say, ultimate, we have a financial problem. We need to spend the fire money that we set aside. No, they didn't. They spent it and came back and lied to us on why they had to spend it. So who are we going to put faith in now? The same administration told us last year that we would not be downgraded because of the budget. We were downgraded almost immediately after passing the budget. Now we're concerned about downgrades. We're concerned about downgrades now. Well, I'm going to tell you this. The downgrade is going because we did not pay the full pension payment. The downgrade is because once again, we're bailing out CPS with a billion dollar tip suite. Okay? Now, let me tell y'all something about the tip sweep. When you look around and don't have money for the projects in your ward, it's because of the tip sweep. Okay? If we look at all the money that has spent over the years with these tip sweeps, we could have redeveloped just about every ward in this city. Okay? And so let me just tell you this. I don't know if you all saw the tip sheet, but the tip sheet in the Ninth Ward says zero tip sweep. Why did the Ninth Ward have a zero tip sweep? Because I spend every dime that comes in it. And spending that money, I've created over 2,000 jobs and over $2 billion in public-private investment because we had that tip money to leverage to redevelop my ward. So we're taking that tool away from us. So I encourage you all to spend your TIF money. Find projects to spend your TIF money. That way you can redevelop all the wards in the city. And I'm blessed, just like Walter's daddy was blessed to be in a position to leverage TIF money to redevelop certain wards. So now, When you look at these last two budgets, over and over again, we were lied to about what's in these budgets. The fact that we are trying to diminish a woman-led movement really troubles me. Because we have had financial experts and former CEOs, CFOs, budget directors that helped us craft this budget. So you all are undermining just about everybody in the past that sat in the budget chair or the CFO's office or financial experts. We're saying that they don't matter, but the administration has all the right answers. Now, some of you all just sat up and listened to somebody say something about, you know, we don't get the right information. We don't get the right information. We get what they want to give us. And I think now you all see why we push so hard to have our own financial analysis department, our own legal department, our own parliamentarian that you all voted down. Hopefully, Alderman Vasquez is now trying to see the light that we need to put these things in place. So we're going to see if we can work to make that happen. Now, some people brought up VGTs. My, my, my, we brought up VGTs. Let me just say the same people that's saying we don't want VGTs want hemp in their ward that's harming kids every single day. Every single day. And they voted to keep hemp in their ward. They want hemp. Give me hemp that's harming kids. But VGTs could possibly save the lifeline of some of the businesses in your ward because we have an underperforming casino that may or may not be built in 27, 28, who knows. And in a time we need revenue. If you don't want video gaming, put an ordinance in like we did with hemp and say, I don't want video gaming. That's what the legislative process is all about. If you don't want it, you don't have to take it. But I tell you one thing, if you ask any alderman that has on the border of the city if they want BGTs, because everything is going across the street, I bet you they want it. Because all the businesses just locate right across the street. Now, when we're trying to discredit the amount of money for BGTs, that was a very conservative number. Once VGT's is up and operational, it could bring us between $65 and $100 million a year. That's a lot of money. I don't see Bally's bringing that kind of money into the city. And so it's a choice. Just like the liquor tax, it's a choice. Now, Once VGTs is passed, then people can maybe hire two or three more people in their ward in those businesses to create more synergy, more mom-and-pop businesses. That's the lifeline of the city. Now, when we talk about property taxes, let me just say, the reason people property taxes are going up is because downtown is empty. And why is downtown empty? Because we're not doing enough to create the jobs to go back downtown. We're not bringing big businesses into the city to create a downtown that we all were once proud of. And so now that downtown is empty, all those businesses are going in, getting tax reductions, and that money is being spread out to the community. The same people who are fighting to not have their taxes up are the same people fighting to keep big businesses out. We have to create a synergy in this city to bring businesses back into this city. Businesses are the ones that make this city grow. We have to grow jobs and opportunity. We can't keep hitting businesses over the head saying, don't come to Chicago. That's what Bring Home Chicago did. That's why it failed. That's why when you look at this head tax, that's why it's gonna fail. Now, one thing I'm going to tell y'all, be real cautious. Everything that's being pushed has a $100 million tag to it, whether it be the head tax, $100 million. Bring home Chicago, $100 million. What is this $100 million, Mark, that we keep trying to hit? What's it really for? Now, when we talk about what the head tax was supposed to be for, Don't be confused. If you look at everything that was there, it was being moved out of one line, put into another to force all of us to say, oh, I don't want to be against public safety. I don't want to be against this. So they were trying to put us in a corner to vote for the head tax. Well, we're not going to be put into a corner. We're going to continue to grow this coalition. We're going to continue to move forward with what we need to do to grow this city. And I think we are headed in the right direction. Now I'm going to say, I haven't voted for a budget in six years. In six years, I haven't voted for a budget because I have fundamentally disagreed with what was being put in front of us. Now I've been down here for 27 years going on 28. I think I know a little bit about budgets. So I'm gonna just tell you this, this budget, it ain't perfect, but we wanna pick and choose what we wanna fight and what we don't wanna fight. But the same things you all are saying, you're against, you voted for the last two. So pick your lane. Pick your lane, which one you want to be in. So again, I want to thank my colleagues for leading this movement. This was a collective movement. Nobody was shut out. We tried to bring everybody in. So I've never seen a movement quite like this in my 27, 28 years. where people were actually being able to sit down at the table and work their issues out, whether you agree or disagree, this coalition was listening to everybody. So knowing that we listened to everybody, we're gonna continue to listen to everybody because once this budget is passed, we wanna continue to work with everybody to make sure that we don't have a government shutdown. We wanna work with everybody to bring your ideas into the table. So right now, I'm going to tell you, I'm extremely proud to stand up and say I am voting for the alternative budget. Thank you so much, Mr. President. Thank you.

The chair recognizes Alder Rodriguez-Sanchez.

Thank you, Mr. President. Before I go into the speech I prepare, I want to respectfully disagree with one of my colleagues that said that this is just 1% of the budget It's important to me to clarify that there's a moral decision to make here. We can tax wealthy corporations to improve our lives and have some reliable progressive revenue that is so deeply needed, or we can decide that working people are going to pay.

It's a very clear binary.

Will we choose to protect working people or the wealthy? That's a really meaningful difference that can be downplayed. And I also want to clarify that there were numerous opportunities for engagement with caucuses and the proposed budget shifted significantly through negotiations that happened over the last few months. But before getting into numbers or budgets, I want to start with the people, the families, the elders, the young folks, the workers who feel the impact of our choices long after we leave this chamber. I think about the people struggling with substance use at the Kimball Brown Line Station or the encampment at Ronan Park and how I still struggle to provide meaningful care and housing to help them because we don't have the money for it. I think about the mothers who come into my office looking for affordable housing options when they can no longer afford rent in my community. I think about the homeless couple that lives in the park that are looking for shelter where they can remain together and patiently wait for a call from the Salvation Army. I think about the city workers doing the work of three people because vacancies aren't getting filled. These aren't just lines on a spreadsheet. These are lives. And they deserve a government that shows up for them. But to show up for them, we have to face the reality of the moment we're in. Chicago is tearing down a massive structural deficit. And yet the budget before us today fails to meet the scale of the need and the scale of the crisis. The mayor proposed a head tax on large employers, increases to cloud computing taxes, even a social media tax designed to capture revenue from tech giants. But the criticism from business groups have been to ask us to reject revenue and instead rely on vague efficiencies without ever proposing real sources of money. The problem is balancing the budget with hollow promises of cuts and efficiencies without progressive revenue brings us right back to the same austerity logic that starves our schools, hospitals, social services, clinics, public safety nets. That logic, the idea that government should run like a business and trim its way to prosperity, didn't produce prosperity. It never has. It has produced chaos and stability, service cuts, hiring freezes, selling off assets and getting into more debt. These are not visionary solutions. They are stop caps that push the pain onto working families and vulnerable communities. We are told that we should avoid new revenue and tighten our belts. And in doing so, we hollow out the very institutions that bind our city together. This is a moment in which we need to protect our democracy. And we know that when there are vacuums, when there is a lack of presence of government to help people, that's where authoritarianism thrives. Moderates and conservatives insist that we should not tax the wealthy or the large corporations, the same ones who have prospered while working families have been squeezed. They offer no credible alternatives that actually produce new revenue. They only promise savings without specifics. And Ralph Marcher from the Center for Tax and Budget Accountability said on the Sun Times, on an article, an opinion piece, he calls this smoke and mirrors. That's what we are voting on today. That is what this corporate option for a budget is, smoke and mirrors. And we cannot continue down that path. We cannot balance the budget on the backs of poor middle class through layoffs, service cuts, or regressive fees that harm the very people who can least afford it. We cannot pretend that austerity will magically solve our long-term fiscal challenges. Taxing the rich and profitable corporations isn't radical, it's responsible. It means asking those who have benefited most from our city infrastructure and workforce to finally contribute their fair share. It means creating recurring revenue that sustains public services rather than hollowing them out. It means prioritizing people over profit, communities over corporations. James Baldwin said that we made the world we're living in and we have to make it over. And that is exactly what this moment demands. The courage to make our city over more just, more compassionate, more rooted in collective care. So I'm asking everybody here today to vote no. on a budget that sacrifices our people to protect corporations and fails to demand shared responsibility from the wealthy. A budget that relies on one-time fixes and vague promises of future efficiencies will leave us with mid-year chaos, layoffs, and higher costs for working families. We deserve better. Our residents deserve better. We need a budget that calls on corporations who profit most from Chicago to finally pay their fair share. We need this in order to strengthen our democracy and protect our future and not dismantle it. Thank you, Mr. President.

Thank you. Chair recognizes Alderman Will Hall.

Thank you so much, Mr. President. I stand today unapologetically voting no for this budget. The reason being, Mr. President, is when I woke up this morning, I was thinking about my father, and he told me one plus one when I was a kid equals two. What's not adding up to me is that close to two weeks ago, all across the city of Chicago, everybody was up in arms around the tax bills. What I find to be politically hypocritical is that everybody was having these reviews and standing on the side of residents who said, don't increase my property taxes. There was a whole bunch of paperwork shuffled. And on December the 16th, in these very walls, some decided to raise property tax. I'm not here to argue about VGTs. I'm not here to argue about liquor taxes going up. I'm not here to argue about all of the other fees that are going to hurt Chicagoans. But what I am here to say is that it's just not adding up. What's not adding up is the principle that Chicagoans have to once again pay more to live in this city when close to half a million of these people in Chicago, half of the people, half a million people in Chicago, rather, Mr. President, are at or beneath poverty. And so I'm voting no simply because the principle doesn't add up to the particular. And the principle is that Chicagoans cannot continue to be a Hey man, chill out, relax, straight up. So at the end of the day, what's not adding up is that at the end of the day, Chicagoans cannot afford to continue to be used as pawns for agendas that don't make sense. And it doesn't make sense that Chicagoans next year are going to have to pay more to live in a house that they've been providing for their families when we couldn't figure out as a council how to pay for libraries. We couldn't figure out how to pay for the things that are needed to make this city work. But again, I'm here to say that the Sixth Ward is completely against paying for this budget that doesn't make sense. And so what I'm saying to you, Mr. President, is my note is on behalf of the 47,000 people in the Sixth Ward that said, don't add a dollar to my property taxes. Thank you.

Thank you. The chair recognizes Alderman Gardner.

Thank you, Mr. President. I probably stand with my colleague. I heard Alderman Fuentes from the 26th Ward talking about the negative effects of gambling. And I wholeheartedly agree with her. I thought she made some excellent points. And I want to talk about how gambling disproportionately impacts black and brown communities. It also impacts white communities, but that's not as important. It impacts working families, as you guys know, AKA that's a new term for black and brown communities. It's gambling that got us here. It's gambling that got us to a $1.2 billion deficit. And we can blame Maybe introducing or not introducing a head tax or debt collection or racism. The gamble that got us here today is the gamble that we made on migrants.

Or, excuse me.

Yeah, I will.

Okay, just a second, Alderman Gardner. All right, those of you who continue to make outbursts, I'm going to ask that the Sergeant at Arms put you... and a timeout. I'm trying my best to give people this is an important time in our city's history. I want everybody to be engaged. I really do. You're going to have to respect just the decorum here. That's all.

All right.

All right. You ever notice when you start touching upon something that's a little sensitive, people start getting riled up because you're on a nerve. You're actually touching Gardner.

Thank you. Just continue to direct them.

Oh, yeah. I'm talking to you as well.

Thank you.

So getting back to what I was saying, the gamble that we made was on migrants or newcomers or Venezuelan nationalists or residents here illegally. Oh yeah, I do. That's a good point. That's right.

Thank you. Thank you, Sergeant at Arms. Okay. Thank you all. Mr. Gardner, I'm listening, sir.

No one is hated more than he who speaks the truth. I want to be clear. I don't blame the migrants for coming here. We left the trail for them to come. I don't hate on my immigrants. My parents are immigrants to this country. I'm a first generation American. I don't hate on any of these people who came here. They had no choice, but we left a trail for them to come. We gave them over a billion dollars to come here. We invited them with free food, free clothing, free rent, free education. That's why we're here today. We can keep talking about whatever head tax and gambling is bad and all this other stuff. We made the gamble. We gambled on the migrants and we lost. We put over a billion dollars into people who've never paid a nickel into the system. Meanwhile, meanwhile, we told the black community, wait your turn.

Wait your turn.

Sergeant at Arms, Sergeant at Arms, could you remove the people who are making the outbursts, please? Can you do that for us now?

Thank you.

Okay. Please remove those individuals who are making the outbursts, please. Okay. We don't have a problem with people speaking their truth. We just don't want you to have outbursts. Sergeant at Arms, could you please remove the outbursts, please? Thank you. And those of you who make another outburst, I'm going to ask that the sergeant at arms remove you. Just a second, ultimate. We'll give you your chance to continue to speak your truth. Just want some order here. You may continue, sir.

So again, to get back to what I was saying, we told the black community, wait your turn while we gamble on the migrants. We didn't do it just in the city, we did it throughout the country. We told people, wait your turn. And as I said, we rolled snake eyes, right? We lost that gamble. And now we're sitting here staring down the barrel of a $1.2 billion deficit. something Alderman Beal, Alderman Lopez, and myself had vehemently argued against for the last several years, Alderman Napolitano as well, strongly condemning the amount of money that we were wasting. Again, I want to emphasize, I do not blame these people who came here for a better opportunity. But again, we left a trail for them to come. We invited them to come. We pushed them to come here. And we still continue to give money, more and more money, And now we're looking, what are we going to do now? What are we going to do now? What do we got to figure out? I commend a lot of the people who spent a lot of time on this alternative budget and amount of time that you put in it. Is it perfect? Absolutely not. No, it's not. But to Alderman Fuentes' point, I know a bad gambler when I see one. Mayor Johnson, you're a bad gambler. I cannot go with you at all. Fact of the matter is we have to start making decisions and I'm glad to see that the city council is starting to take the steering wheel and starting to take responsibility for the future of this city. It's long overdue. So for those reasons, I'll stand with the alternative budget. Thank you.

Chair recognizes Alderman Haddon. Chair recognizes Alderman Haddon.

Gotcha. Thank you, Mr. President. Just taking a moment to touch all the Zoom buttons here. This is my second budget coming to you guys via Zoom. Not my preference. I'll start just by saying I won't be supporting this budget. A few of my colleagues have mentioned some reasons why. For me, I'll say as someone who's been in this body for more than a handful of years now, but also spent quite a few years before that working with local governments everywhere, I just want to highlight the real issue. And the real issue with our budget is things cost more. We don't have enough revenue. I supported and still support a corporate head tax. It's a progressive revenue option that could yield us some different results. I know that my colleagues, those who worked on ideas that are in this proposal, those who worked on other ideas that aren't in this proposal, we know that our issue is a revenue issue. Um, A lot of people in the public, a lot of people will talk about, why don't you just cut the budget? Or, you know, why don't you find efficiencies? And, you know, I just want to lift up that, you know, this proposal includes a few efficiency recommendations. But even some of the experts at Ernst & Young, you know, couldn't find that many efficiencies. So for the public, for folks who are listening, for the people who have elected us to come here and help run the city and govern these things, I do hope you understand that if it were as simple to balance the budget as to just make cuts, we would have balanced the budget that way already. Even in the alternative proposal before you, for those who felt like a HUD tax wasn't going to help the economy of the city, there aren't many efficiencies because there aren't many efficiencies to be had. And the reason we're in this, you know, don't be fooled by folks who tell you that we're in this mess because of... anything that happened this year, last year, or the year before. The choices of the past that have got us here, whether it's the pensions we owe, the other debts that we owe, the way we've done borrowing, how we've structured our government, there are a lot of past decisions that have brought us here. And those decisions have been made through a lens of business first, corporations first, business as usual, capitalism is going to save us all. It's the same old, same old that's gotten us here. The proposal that I supported was something that didn't even include that many new ideas either, right? The head tax, not even a new idea, something we had before. And I say this just to try and remind people that While the budget decision gets the biggest coverage sometimes for the year, we make the biggest fights. We have the longest speeches. Our city budget has very few levers for us to move. And I'll continue to work with my colleagues for progressive revenue solutions. for alternative options that help us to try new things, to break the mold and to break out of the patterns that we've had before. Don't be fooled. This isn't because of money spent on humanitarian missions. This isn't because of money spent on COVID. We don't need to revise history. We need to stay true to facts. I appreciate the work that a lot of my colleagues put into this alternative proposal, though I won't support it, though I do recognize I'm going to have to side with our budget and finance professionals because they've shown their work and we have to trust their numbers that what's moving forward today still leaves potentially $165 million in a budget gap. But I also know that it was a really good effort for people who believe that they couldn't trust what they were hearing from the fifth floor. We're a 50-person body, I believe, and I think our constituents have elected us to make the best decisions possible for the city of Chicago. I think that though this isn't a budget I'm supporting, I'm impressed with so many people working together. because Chicago does need us to work together as a city council. Chicago needs us to work together because this budget doesn't solve our issues. Whether it passes or doesn't pass today, the problems that Chicagoans need us to solve are going to exist tomorrow. They're going to be waiting for us January 1st. And I hope to see the same energy, the same level of willingness to work together, the same spirit of collaboration in the members of this body as we face those challenges together January 1. I'll be part of that process, as I always am. And I know that, you know, speaking from our progressive caucus, we'll be there as well. This has been a tough and emotional budget. And there are a lot of reasons behind why people are making their decisions today. A lot of it, a lot more of it has to do with personalities and emotions and people's personal relationships. than it does with these numbers. As proponents of the alternate budget have mentioned, their difference, right, like the daylight between their proposal and the mayor's original proposal is less than 2%. And that's when we come down to our dollar amounts. The difference between where people are on trusting, on how they're treating one another, that gap is a lot wider. Many of you know I'm still on medical leave. I have been out for several weeks recovering from a major surgery. And so while I've kept in touch with colleagues and paid attention and my staff have been keeping me tuned in, It's really just this last two weeks, this week and last week, that I've been attending and more actively participating. And I am watching that finance committee meeting this week. I was horrified. by the decorum, by the attitudes on either side of the proposal of how people treated one another. And I was really disheartened to see basically what seems to be just a further degradation of people's relationships We're better than this and our constituents deserve better than this. So whatever the outcome for today's vote, I think that my commitment to constituents of the 49th ward and to residents of the city of Chicago is to continue to bridge our divides, to work harder and better and smarter to help all of us come together. To not let the pettiness, to not let the hurt feelings, to not let the offenses taken get in the way of... honest conversations of facts, of not politicizing everything that should not be politicized for the city of Chicago and to not let all the terrible, terrible tone and political fighting that we're seeing outside of our city seep into this body any more than it has. We shouldn't be here on December 20th making all of our staff Clerk's team, City Hall staff, making people work the way that we have demanded of them in order to get this done. Knowing that just like last year, this delay, even if it ends today, has such an impact on contracts, payment, and all the work involved. that goes on behind the scenes that keeps the city working. We have to do better. We have to do better. I look forward to working with folks. I'll be a no on this proposal. I appreciate everybody. And I hope that we can work on healing from this as we move forward. Thank you, Mr. President.

Thank you. The chair recognizes Alder Manal Hoppenworth.

Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, colleagues. I want to first say Alderwoman Haddon, I miss you. You are my seatmate and I wish you a speedy recovery. We miss your voice and I echo much of her sentiments about how this body can and should do better working together, moving forward. We've never been in this space before and there are real opportunities ahead. But I want to first begin by recognizing the people in my ward and in this gallery and who are listening right now, who showed up and made their voices heard to demand better from all of us. These are people who are our neighbors. They are not outsiders. They are parents like myself, workers, renters like myself, faith leaders, small business owners like myself fighting for a Chicago that works for all of us, not just a certain few. And because of that pressure that you brought, There are some good things that we can realize here. We protected essential city jobs. We preserved youth employment. We maintained domestic violence services. And we kept our libraries whole. So all of that work that you did, it matters. And it shows what's possible when people work together to refuse false choices. So today's vote is not the end of the story. It cannot be. Because at the core of this budget is a decision that will shape Chicago long after this fiscal year ends. The decision to rely on selling our city debt to solve a structural problem is a one-time fix. It does not move our underlying challenges or solve them. It simply kicks a can down the road. It moves them forward and at a higher cost. Even our own city comptroller has warned against this approach. Selling off debt may make the numbers work today, but it increases the risk of a credit downgrade. And it almost guarantees we will be back here next year facing the same deficit with fewer options and higher costs. And we've seen this pattern before. We sold the parking meters. We leased the Skyway. and we're still paying the price. These deals delivered short-term cash, but at the expense of long-term control, flexibility, and public trust, Chicagoans continue to pay the price. Selling off our debt follows that same logic, speed over stability, appearance over substance. and the hope that future councils will figure it out. And when this approach fails, as it has before, the harm does not fall evenly. In the 40th ward, I see exactly who pays the price. In the 48th ward, I see seniors on fixed incomes who feel every cut. every delay when city finances tighten. I see working families who rely on consistent public services to get through the day. I see residences who speak languages other than English, people with disabilities and neighbors without reliable internet, Who are the first to lose access when cost pressures push us to replace people with systems and bots? And I want to be clear about something else.

Migrants are not the problem in this budget.

Migrants are our neighbors. They are our workers. They are parents with kids in our schools. They are small business owners and essential workers who kept the city running during its hardest moments. Pitting migrants against long-term residents is not only wrong, it's dishonest. It distracts from the real issue, which is that we continue to avoid holding the wealthiest corporations accountable to pay their fair share. Chicago's challenges were not caused by people seeking safety or opportunity. They were caused by decades of underinvestment, structural inequality, and repeated decisions to choose one-time fixes over long-term solutions. And when we sell off debt, instead of fixing the structure, everyone pays, migrants included. And I want to speak again that I am a small business owner and I know what it means to operate on thin margins. And when the city's finances are unstable, small businesses, they feel it first. Our small business corridors feel it first and they feel it through uncertainty, service disruptions and future cost shifts. In the 48th Ward, many mom and pop shops are owned by immigrant and refugee families. They don't have buffers. They don't have lobbyists. They just want a city that plans responsibly and governs honestly. This is not abstract. It's real. So I want to ask us something bigger than this vote. What do we want our kids to remember about this moment? Do we want them to remember when things got hard, we sold off our future, that we balanced budgets by delay and deferral? Or do we want them to remember that we stood up, that we refused to trade long-term stability for short-term relief, that we chose fairness, courage, and structural solutions? Because a budget is a moral document. It tells people who we value. It tells people who we protect. And it tells people who we expect to carry the burden. And that is why I am voting no. I'm voting no because selling off our debt is not a solution, it is a delay. I'm voting no because it takes a credit downgrade and leaves us in the same place next year. I'm voting no because migrants, seniors, workers, and small businesses should not pay the price for our unwillingness to demand more from those who have the most. And I'm voting no because Chicago deserves a budget built on structural, sustainable revenue, not one-time maneuvers. And I will continue standing with my neighbors. I will continue defending our migrant communities. And I will continue fighting here and in Springfield for real revenue solutions that fund this city honestly, responsibly, and for the long term. This fight does not end today. Thank you.

Thank you. Chair recognizes Alderman Robinson.

Mr. Mayor. Thank you very much today. I want to thank my staff for providing 1,000 families, not only in the fourth ward, but across the city with coats, toys, and scarves, and hats, food, because many of our families will be struggling this holiday season. And I'm here doing the job of the people of the city of Chicago to pass a budget for the people of Chicago. Many of you know I've served in the Illinois General Assembly for almost six years. I served with the body of Republicans. I wouldn't have thought that I would come to this body, this body that I respected, Mr. Mayor, and hear the same rhetoric, the same rhetoric that I heard for six years, every single budget, the rhetoric that I heard from my Republican colleagues and friends. You see, I respected this body because my godfather served in this body for almost 20 years in the Sixth Ward, former Alderman John Steele, who was a critic of Van Mare Daley. Mr. Mayor, I quizzed him over and over again and questioned, how did we get here? How did we get here? Mr Mayor, we are charging $9 for water and trash and it cost us $50. That doesn't make sense. The math is not mathing. When you think about the price of eggs, Other goods. How can we charge $9 and it costs us $50? This goes back to the old adage of kicking the can down the road. But now we can't even look at raising any taxes because of the current tax bills that are going to devastate the South and West Sides. So again, how did we get here? Respectfully, my colleagues that have been here 20 plus years, as I mentioned, my godfather serving in this body, how did we get here? How did we let the Daley administration, the Emmanuel administration, the Lightfoot administration get us to this point? Whether you like, Mr. Mayor, you or not, You are here to serve the people of the city of Chicago. And we have had the can kick down the road because of previous administrations. I sat here when we gave all the accolades to Annette Guzman for her leadership at the county. But today, we are pitting women against each other. We talked about the women that have put this budget together. I am appreciative of them, particularly my mentor, who was part of this team, part of the reason that I am in this body today. So I am appreciative of her work and the work of the women that put this budget together. But what about the CFO, the comptroller, the budget director, again, that we talk about their experience and we thank them for all their hard work. So are we saying that this is all for naught? The hours of work that they prepared on this budget is in the trash can? That's what we said to our budget folks. The budget that they prepared is trash. We have disrespected the folks that work on the behalf of the city of Chicago. We have stated to them that the budget that they prepared is trash, Mr. Mayor. And we pay these men and women a nice salary, many of them that don't have to be here. Jill, Swatsky, Annette, that's 82 years of combined experience. They could be working for these corporations that we talk about taxing, making a half million to a million dollars a year.

Colleagues, come on.

Why would we disrespect the women that work for the city of Chicago? We owe those ladies an apology. Let me move on. I need to get to my Christmas winter wonderland, provide coats, food for families, not only in the Fourth Ward, but across the city of Chicago. All right. Mr. Mayor, please forgive me for a moment. You know, I heard something that I have to comment on. I have heard again and again, let me remove my trash can. I've heard again and again that we have folks in this body that talk about their parents being migrants. My mother was a migrant. My father was a migrant. Well, what if we had not cared for them? What if we had not provided resources for them? My father was a migrant. My mother was a migrant. But today, We talk about laying out cheese for migrants. Unbelievable. That it's OK to come here. I'm for migrants. I'm for anybody to come to this town. But then we don't care for them. So are we supposed to not feed these folks? We're supposed to send them back to Texas? What are we supposed to do with the folks that came to the city of Chicago? We can walk and chew gum, folks. This is not a migrant and a Black issue. And for my colleague that I respect tremendously, not only has he given his service to the city of Chicago, but another great department. And so to my colleague, do not talk about the Black community. and how it is disconnected from the migrant community. We can walk and chew gum. We have to take care of everybody. And that is why this budget is important. We have to be able to take care of all citizens. And we cannot continue to kick the can down the road. But here we are. We have disrespected our budget director, disrespected our CFO, the comptroller. We've called them liars. Again, I thought that I was coming to a body where we can get things done and we can come together. And we can remove the rhetoric for the citizens that we serve. But I guess I was wrong. So, Mr. Mayor, here we are. My last point is that yes, we will be back. Remember those cuts that we will have, the folks that will be laid off. These are black and brown folks that live on the south and west side. What will our wards look like when we have to lay off folks? Not only what will be happening to their families, but also the services that also will have to be set aside. Because we have put together a budget respectfully to, as my colleague mentioned, the women of this body, I am grateful. And no, this is not a perfect budget. But as someone that represents the loop, someone that is a 20-year Allstate insurance agent, We have to have shared sacrifices. And although this was not perfect, we have to ask our business citizens to share in that sacrifice for one of the greatest cities in the world. There's no other city that benefits from the services that we provide. Go to New York, go to Atlanta, go to Los Angeles. We have a beautiful city and our corporate citizens, unfortunately, have to help us to move government forward. It is important that they share in this sacrifice. Yes, we are sensitive because businesses are the economic engine of our great city. They get it and we get it. We are at a crossroads. It is not, again, solely on the shoulders of the Johnson administration. I talked about my colleagues that have been here 20 plus years. Where were you then? What have you been doing other than sweeping tips? Come on. Where were you to talk to whoever the administration was about making sure that we have a budget for all citizens? And it's not inflated by charging $9. And it cost us $50. That math is not mathing. And so as we come back, I want to work with all of my colleagues to figure out how do we not kick the can down the road again? I appreciate my colleagues coming together, but colleagues, the time is now when we pass whatever we're going to pass today, that we come together to be honest about what's happening in the city of Chicago. And one of the budgets on the table ain't honest, because we are going to be coming back. And we're going to put our families and the city in even worse constraints than it already is. We had a budget director tell us. We had a comptroller tell us. And yes, they've said it before, as one of my colleagues mentioned. But it got to be some truth in it if we keep talking about our credit rate. When do we get our act together and fix our credit rate? When do we do that? And so colleagues, again, we need to get our act together. We need to show the citizens of Chicago there's leadership and that this is not a south or west side, a north or east side, Johnson versus Robinson. This is all of us. The city of Chicago, our residents are counting on us. They need us more so than any other time as we see headwinds coming in from the Trump administration, as we see these taxes coming in that are grappling south and west sides. Colleagues, this is the time for us to get our act together. Thank you.

Thank you. Chair recognizes Alderman Yancey.

Oh, yes. All right, I'm going to shift gears just a little bit. According to the Sun-Times article from yesterday, Allison Davis is a Chicago developer who owes Chicago taxpayers $6 million in real estate debt, $40,000 in water bill debt, and $360,000 in fines and fees related to a senior housing development in a black neighborhood on the South Side. $6.4 million in outstanding real estate debt and corporate debt to the city of Chicago, and this administration approved a planned development for a hotel across the street from the Obama Presidential Center. One person is responsible for almost 7% of the debt that this budget seeks to recover from deadbeat developers who failed to do right by black residents. How many other developers owe millions of dollars to the city and are allowed to get rich off the backs of our residents? There are also tens of millions of dollars owed by city workers, including at CPS, that remain outstanding. Now, when I was a CPS employee in 1996, I had to go through an indebtedness check to ensure that I was being held accountable for any money that I owe to the city of Chicago. To be paid by the city and ignoring your debts to the city is insane. Many of these employees are able to pay their debts to the city, but don't feel compelled to pay. And that's not OK. To be fair, this is not an ideal budget. And frankly, neither is the budget proposed by this administration. And that budget has increased vehicle fines and fees, increases in business licensing fees, increased debt collection, and a historic TIF sweep to fund CPS. And none of that is in dispute by the opponents of this budget that we're voting for today. The hypocrisy of this is also insane and front and center in this debate. So as previously stated, this budget we're voting on today is less than ideal, but we're here firmly between a rock and a hard place. Attacks from the CTU, this administration, and frankly, members of this body, coupled with a lack of goodwill, have made this position inevitable. An unwillingness to listen to our differences and an over-reliance on attacks and shame are not the way to support the citizens of this city. I pray that we all learn from the lessons that have come up in the last few months so that we can figure out how we can create a balanced and responsible budget for 2027. If not, God bless us all because look, this would be absolutely clear. So many of us who have identified as progressive have an issue with the way this budget was presented, the way it was workshopped and socialized, and the way that this administration tried to get votes from us. Look, I also am concerned that a difference of opinion about less than 1.6 of this budget has called my values into question. I have a 20-year career fighting against income inequality, fighting for working people, fighting for affordable housing, fighting against police brutality and for police accountability. And to hear today and over the last couple months that I'm a Trump supporter or that because of this false messaging that I support billionaires over babies is not only false, but it's harmful to this movement. I never said I supported billionaires. And in fact, I have gone on the record to say, I do believe that the wealthy should pay their fair share. In fact, I've been saying that for over 20 years. But the problem isn't about the idealism. The problem is about how we get there. And to pass a budget that relied heavily on borrowing that, frankly, adds to the pain for folks in the city of Chicago, with 30 years worth of continued debt, I spent years protesting this very practice when I was at SEIU in the grassroots collaborative. And I also got elected to do something different than we did before. So if we're gonna do the same thing that we did before, hearing the pressure from my progressive, former progressive colleagues and allies really says that this is more about pushing an agenda than it is about making a real difference in this city. I ain't signed up for that. I signed up to listen to my constituents and be fiduciarily responsible for how we do the work in this city. So I encourage all 50 members of this body to try to put this very difficult budget season behind them and figure out how we get our crap together for next year because the city and its residents deserve it. Thank you.

Thank you. The chair recognizes Alderman Burnett.

Thank you, Mr. President. I wasn't going to say anything today, but I felt inspired by my colleagues' words.

Just a second here. Hold on a second.

Please continue. I felt inspired by my colleague's words to speak today. I am voting no on this budget, not because I feel like I didn't have an opportunity to communicate with everyone, but because there are some things in this current budget that I don't agree with for my generation. And particularly our efforts to legalize processes that we know are harmful. And I'm talking about the video gaming terminals. Our generation has already been damaged by online gambling. And now we want to continue to have a city that is making it more available and accessible to harmful behaviors. And that's just not something I can agree with. Now, it's been commendable to work with my colleagues on this budget to have conversations on both sides and to be able to debate what is truly a 2% difference between the two budgets. And we've come a long way from where we started. It's a blessing to say that the 27th ward had 300 million of TIF surplus available to be able to support our schools and our parks and make sure that our sister agencies are well-funded so we continue to do good work. We're blessed to continue to have the luxury to invest in our community for the next year and the foreseeable future. But time isn't always a luxury. And we, as a council, have to look at making hard decisions today before we are required to make hard decisions in the future. And so this budget seems like we are not trying to make the hard decisions. Whether it's on a garbage tax, a grocery tax, a head tax, we've ignored all of the hard conversations. And it makes me weary because what if? What if we are in a position where our economy isn't at the best state as it could be? What if we have opportunities that don't fall through, where we don't generate the revenue that we need? What then happens? Who falls victim? At some point, we need to address the structural issues with our budget. And I'm glad to say next year, I'll be working with my colleagues to go downstate to fight for some of those issues. But at this point in time, I cannot vote for this budget knowing that we still have so many structural concerns. So thank you, Mr. President. Thank you to the council. Looking forward to working with you all next year on these issues. Thank you.

I have as our final two speakers chairpersons Dow and Irvin. Are there any other alders that wish to speak because we are down to our final two speakers?

I see.

So only Alderman Moore wishes to speak before our final two speakers. Very well. So we will go in this order. Alder is Moore, Chairwoman Dow, and then to close, Chairman Irvin. Chair recognizes Alderman David Moore.

Thank you, Mr. President. I just, as I have some colleagues, I mean, some constituents online watching and then people in here as well. And so just for clarity, because sometimes, you know, I haven't been getting a lot of sleep and nobody has. I just want to make sure as we talk about and everybody give their speech about the revenue and what they're not supporting. Did the revenue budget pass already? Yes. So I just want to be clear. Today is the appropriations budget. And it's what we spend that money on. So thank you all for the speeches. I'm not mad at nobody. You do it on your own time. But the revenue budget has passed already. For the ones voting no on it, you voted no on it. But right now, it's passed already. So today what we're doing, just in case anybody's confused, it's where that money goes. Does it go towards your streets and sand? Does it go towards your CDOT, your street work? Where does that money go? That's the vote you're taking today so you're not confused so that if you hear yeses and noes, it's about where the money goes today because it already passed. the revenue portion already. Just wanted to make clear because people get confused and they're texting me and don't know the difference. And I understand because half of us don't know the difference sometimes. And so at the end of the day, I just want to make clear where we at and what we're passing today. So thank you, Mr. President.

Thank you. The chair recognizes chairwoman Dow.

Thank you, Mr. President. I guess the first thing I want to say is I want to thank my colleagues who worked on this budget, your ideas, your support, your thoughtfulness as we tried to pull together a budget for the city of Chicago. My friend and colleague, Chairman Ervin, always says, that why is, and I might get this wrong, perfect is the enemy of the good. Is that Joe Moore?

Yeah.

Okay, well, how about everyone wants to go to heaven, but nobody wants to die? This is not a perfect budget. No budget is perfect. but it is a living document and it is a document that can be modified and changed as we go along. I think what happened in this council is good for the city of Chicago because we came together and we are working and we will continue that work after this budget passes. I didn't really prepare to speak a lot. I said what I needed to say yesterday, but I do want to say a few things. First on the debt collection. Alderman Scott, thank you for raising the point that there's $113 million of debt in the mayor's proposal. We added 89 million to that. But the reality is that It's on the administration. They're in the driver's seat on how we collect it. If we wanna put guard rails up, if we want to identify the parameters around how we collect that debt, we should do it. They should do it. And we should support the administration in that effort. We have $8.2 billion of debt on the books. $1 billion that has been accumulated over the last couple of years. Secondly, on police overtime, Alderman Ciccio Lopez, that's on the administration to control. That decision should not be made in this body. It is an executive function and that is quantified and qualified in the city budget. I think the last thing I wanna say is that businesses are being taxed. The personal property lease tax, which we raised from 11% to 15% in this budget and in the mayor's proposal. generated last year over a billion dollars, almost a billion dollars. And in this year, 2026 coming up, it will generate another approximately $400 million if we're seeing the trends that has happened before where we usually go over our revenue projections. So I urge everyone in the council here today to vote yes on this budget. Like I said, it's not perfect, but it is a good budget and one that we can work with. And if we keep our, if we keep involved post 2025 and work together as a collective, it'll be good for the city of Chicago. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

You're welcome. Chairman Irvin.

Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you to the staff from our offices, OMB staff, the CFO, Comptroller for the diligence and working with the council throughout this process, Director Guzman, CFO Jaworski, Comptroller Velski. Thank you as well. to the departments and the commissioners for the time attentiveness to our questions and requests. Committee staff, COFA staff, and my vice chair for these newfound snacks, the yogis, again, There's an old African proverb that says that when the elephants fight, only the ground gets trampled. Yesterday, I was at a senior event, and I had a police officer pull me to the side and ask me what would happen if our government shut down. I had another person in Streets and Sands today, this morning, ask me if the check they're going to get on Monday will be the last check that they receive for the year. Think about that. People are dependent on those of us who occupy the seats in this room to craft a reasonable solution. And one that's really, in my opinion, tethered to reality. As Chairman Dow said earlier, everybody wants to go to heaven, but nobody wants to die. Full pension payment. I'm sorry, full advance. Pension payment, everybody wants to go to heaven. More books at the library, everybody wants to go to heaven. No property tax increase, everybody wants to go. No increased fees, no employer expense tax, again, everybody wants to go to heaven. Sell the light poles, sell the bridge houses, again, Everybody wants to go to heaven. The issue around debt isn't the collection of debt, it's the sale of debt. Let's rewind to a point where, my math serves me correct, six members that are currently in this body were here when the parking meters were sold. Let's rewind. That we sold a revenue stream that turned out to be valued far more than what we did. That is similarly the action that we have allowed to occur. Unsecured debt is the debt that you pay the least amount for. To sell eight, 900, a billion dollars worth of debt, potentially for, what's the number, $89 million, why would we enter in such an agreement? Why would we put our residents in those types of positions? Like I said, everybody wants to go to heaven, but nobody wants to die. You get a car, you get a car, you get a car, everybody gets what they want. But where's the other side of that equation? The full advance pension payment. If we go back again, couple years, most of us were here. Remember the executive order stated that we would do this with budget surplus, not the operating budget of the city of Chicago. We have no surplus. We cannot give what we do not have. We haven't taken pension holidays. We have continued to make the payments to the pension funds that have been required by us under state statute to get us to 90% funding in 2055. Let's be clear. The biggest risk of downgrade in net, it's us. The 51 of us in this room, unwilling to make the hard decisions. Again, unwilling to make the hard decisions. As my colleague just talked about VGTs. Why would we trade 20 cents for five cents? We get five cents from a VGT terminal, but we get 20 cents from a slot machine. All things aside, that math, oh no, that's that six, seven thing, does not equate. That's my daughter's new thing with me.

She does that all the time.

The challenge with our debt, and I'm going to go back to this, when you overlay the city debt over the CEDA areas, over the crime stats, over unemployment, over poverty, the color's the same. It's that Crayola red. When I looked at 60624, if you look at West Garfield Park in North Lawndale, The median income in those communities is roughly $38,000. About $500, $600 a week in your take home pay. That's household income, not individual income, household income. It's easy to pay, my colleague to the south, when you have the money. It's easy to pay that parking ticket or that speeding ticket when you have the money. But if you're making $500 or $600 a week with a $100 red light camera ticket, those are decisions that some families just can't afford to do. But now to say, hey, let's take that billion or so in debt and sell it off. to a group of people who don't give a damn about how you come up with the money, but that you just get the money. That's not the type of policy I believe that we want to set forth on our residents. Again, our revenues have to have a greater basis than what I'll call best guess. And granted, yes, there are some fluctuations in budgets, no question. They are estimates nonetheless, as has been stated earlier, those things are correct. But these estimates have to have the basis of reality that works with it. The choice for me is clear. When I took this seat almost 15 years ago, the thing that I think about the most have always been the least of these. Because we in this room are probably in the upper 15% of income earners in the city of Chicago. But some of the communities that we represent, 75% of the 28 board is considered socioeconomically disadvantaged. Those are the individuals that we ultimately have to care about and be responsible and responsive to. One thing I'm going to say in this whole process is that the framers of our constitution are probably all laughing at us right now. because the process of legislating in government is interesting. As my colleague from the 13th war says, it's riddled with traps. It reminds me of that schoolhouse rock song, I'm just a bill. But the reality in this process is truly designed for the two branches of government to work together. And the only way we can do that is if we find some form of agreement. And let me say this, it's time for the narrations to stop on both sides. It's time for us to come together, work and govern effectively. We all know that these numbers aren't the best. However, The later that we move into 2026, under these assumptions, our options continue to become limited. One thing that I will ask today is that in the past, we've made our advanced pension payment January 1, because it gave the pension funds the most time to do and invest those dollars. But I submit to you today, if that payment is made January 1st, our options will become severely limited for 2026. In that sense, until we have an opportunity to come back together and craft a better situation. As I said yesterday, after we finish The pictures and the matching onesies, the eggnog, the New Year's Eve champagne and the bowl games. We gotta come back and fix this. Everyone is watching us. My father once told me, he said, hey, Chicago is the city of big shoulders, the city that works. It's time for us to show that. And I'm going to close with this. That's my first close. I got three. I was at a, about two weeks ago, I was at a funeral. My cousin's daughter passed away and 16 years old. And I was at the service and I'm looking at the program and something struck me. And I looked at one of my younger cousins. He said, I said, why do you have me listed as an honorary pallbearer? And he said clearly to me, he said, Ankh. And I was, it's the second time somebody said that to me, one being Alderman Hall. And so I'm gonna lean into that and I'm gonna get our Ankhs and our T's in this council for us to get together. So those are like our senior members, the seven people that were here during the daily days, all the way through the day. And it's those of us that we've gotta figure out how to move everything forward. Because again, we have a lot of challenges. But we also have a great opportunity. And that's an opportunity to set our city on a path that will bring the revenues that's needed to deliver the services that our citizens continue to expect and want to see from us. So again, as we finish and go into the new year, we all must come back together to fix this because the price of not doing it only continues to go up. With that, I will ask for us to move forward in our process to conclude this portion. of the meeting and move for a roll call vote.

Before you do that, Chairman, before that motion is made, I do want to just take a moment to say happy holidays to everyone and just take a few moments to express my appreciation for the people of Chicago and, of course, this body. You know, we promised to build the safest, most affordable big city in America. That's the agenda that I've been on from the very moment in which I assumed this position. But fortunately for me and all of us in this room, that agenda did not begin when we were sworn in. You know, oftentimes I take a moment to go into what we call the ceremonial office and reflect, particularly at times of great consternation and division. And I go in that room to reflect because it's a powerful room that reminds me of not only why we are here, but who allowed for us to be here. And I'll never forget a moment in my time as mayor when Chairman John Daley came to visit me to offer up his condolences. And I asked him if he wanted to take a tour of the fifth floor, just in case he had never seen it before. So we went into the ceremonial office and he stopped. And if you know Chairman Daley, you know he doesn't stop talking And in that moment, I saw his entire constance. It changed right before me. And I said, Chairman, what is it? And he reverted back to a time when he was a teenager. And he began to describe the room as if it was present. And he said there were men and women from wall to wall in his father's office. He had never seen it that... crowded before. And of course he did not understand the full context and why there were so many business leaders there and leaders who he had grown up to know. And he said there was noise and an energy that he had never seen before. And then he said within a moment the door opened And Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King came in that room and everyone stood at attention. No one moved. Not even his father. Because of the respect and regard that they had for an individual who understood what a multicultural, multigenerational movement could mean for our country. and understood that that assignment was placed on the shoulders of the city of Chicago. As people stood at attention, Chairman Daley said to me, he had never, ever come across that level of power and honor. When we set out to build the safest, most affordable big city in America, we do it in honor of the legacy of those who other power players had to stand at attention. What's so remarkable about that room, though, was that the individual that helped organize Dr. King to come to Chicago was a man by the name of Al Raby and, of course, Dr. Timuel Black, of which Al Raby was, of course, a social studies teacher at Marshall High School that led one of the most consequential strikes in our city's history. who later became, of course, the campaign manager of the first black mayor of this city. Those men understood that none of the work that we do matter if the larger community can't benefit from it. You see, that's my guiding light here. I understand that in serious, intense negotiations, that feelings manifest in a way that sometimes can't be described. In fact, some of those feelings may not have anything to do with the tension in the room, but perhaps something that predates that moment. So I want something to be absolutely clear that the manifestation of feelings and emotions in this moment, it's not tethered to anyone's political ideology. but it's connected to the hopes and dreams of those who came before us. You know, it's a powerful display as we have moved to pass this budget where I said that we have to talk to the people who matter the most. Now, I know as politicians, we do believe we matter the most. Perhaps it's innate. Maybe it's the condition of how politicians are viewed today. It could just be tick-tock. But I'm accountable to not just a body of government, but to the people of this city. As I do know, you all have that same guiding principle. And so we did exactly what I thought was the right thing to do. We held round tables, collecting more than 1,000 responses from residents who attended them. Dozens of community town halls Many of you helped host those meetings. And we did it in every part of the city. You know, it was also Dr. King that warned us of buzzwords. I don't use buzzwords. I actually believe that working people does encompass all of us. And I do believe that you can celebrate the women who helped provide adjustments to my proposal without ignoring the women in my administration. You see, we went to school auditoriums, sat in crowded living rooms. We broke bread with local restaurants. We went to places of worship. We knocked on doors. We spoke with folks directly. People who had never been engaged in the political process before are part of a budget that is ultimately going to affect them. And that is a win. What the people told us and how they informed us throughout this entire budget process. Do you see me on here?

Because I see everybody but me, and I could see everything. I said, I'm hearing everything.

Okay.

I guess every budget presentation needs a Kramer to just bust in the door. Thank you. We see you, Nick. We always see you. But you know, the people of this city wanted a budget that was balanced and it wouldn't be off of the backs of working people. That's all they wanted. They wanted to make sure that if we're going to ask for sacrifice, that corporations must be also be willing to put more skin in the game and that they should go first. They wanted historic investment in our public schools to prevent mid-year cuts. They wanted to see social workers and nurses and adequate staffing in our school communities. There were those who wanted cuts to those investments though. People did. But the relentless organizing and advocacy of people across the city, a citywide coalition that was not confined to these halls Coalitions are defined by our values. They're also defined by our willingness to fight for what is right. And so, no, we are not apologetic about releasing the largest TIF surplus in the history of Chicago when other people told us that we could not do it. We did it. And so, yes, CPS and all of the children of this city will benefit from it. So will our parks. So are libraries, county government, water reclamation, city colleges. That's what it means to fulfill a promise to ensure that the public accommodations that our ancestors fought for, that they could be fully funded. When we went into the neighborhoods in our city, the people gave us their endorsement for youth employment. They also wanted accountability. But they wanted to establish parameters with law without giving hope and aspiration to the very people that we want to live better lives. And so I'm grateful that the attempt to take 5,000 jobs away from all of our young people has been restored in this budget. I'm grateful that the success of this program has led to hope. When we look at what is happening at the federal level, cuts to Medicaid, health insurance costs will continue to go up, cuts to food assistance, reckless militarized immigration enforcement in cities across America, tariffs and trade wars, and now, of course, we finally know why there was such an effort to demonize Venezuela. Of what I told you all two and a half years ago, It was always about the natural resources there. It was never about immigration. So we introduced a budget that reflected our values, that stood firm in those who came before us. See, this budget wasn't drafted or created by me. It was created by individuals who came before me. corporate head tax and the reinstatement of that. That's been a long battle in this city. And it's a battle that is still not over. In fact, the red lines in this budget Did not think it was right to collect a grocery tax, even though it's been in place for 30 years. I did not think it was right to double the garbage fee. I did not think it was right to raise property taxes. What I do believe is what 80% of the people of Chicago have said, what people across America have said. The ultra rich and big corporations paying their fair share in taxes is not a radical idea. It is an idea of justice and hope for not just Chicago, but for all of America. Now, what we want to do is build on the work that every single Chicagoan and every single family is caring about. Loved ones who are struggling with their mental health. Having support from this city and ensuring that we are investing in the very things that help transform our city do not have to be controversial. You know, I will say, with all of these investments, I'm grateful that not only are we seeing a resurgence of our economy, with six cranes standing firm, 18 already confirmed, with 3.5 million people visiting our city, which was the largest, most substantial summer that we have ever had in the history of Chicago, while our airports have been busier than they've ever been, with the fewest amount of homicides Over the course of those three months, something that people did not believe was possible, but that came to fruition because we are building on the hopes and aspirations of those that came before us. And as long as we are on track to build the safest, most affordable big city in America, the fight in this room will always be worth it if we know that the least of these will benefit from this fight. And now, of course, we are on track. by the end of this year to do something that many people didn't think was possible. You know, I want to be clear about something. You know, our goal to build a safe, affordable city has to include all of our city services. It is the full force of government approach. Law enforcement and mental health. Law enforcement and affordable housing. Law enforcement and youth employment. Law enforcement and making sure that we have mental health support services. You know, you think about those awful years where 700, 800, 900 people have been murdered in our city. It's absolutely devastating and traumatizing. But we knew that we could have a safer city if we made the right investments. All this exercise was, was to give the least of these a shot to be seen in this budget. We wanted to make sure that those who have been victimized by crime and those who have had their schools shuttered and those who are looking for affordable homes and particularly public housing, that a budget could actually reflect the very things and the hopes that they have desired for a long time. Despite the fall of different political spectrum lines, whether you are South Sider or North Sider or West Sider, We can put our differences aside. That is not an unreasonable expectation. What we cannot have, though, is a bloated sense of who is responsible for someone else's feelings. I would take full responsibility for actions and activities that come from my administration, but I cannot take responsibility for our emotions that I have nothing to do with. You know, we don't build our hopes on emotions. We build our hope on what is just. And what is just is what I laid out in the Protecting Chicago budget that continued to lay the groundwork for transformation. A budget before you that is 98% of the Protecting Chicago budget. That's good work. This is not about who simply gets credit for the work. This is about who benefits from the work. And so no, that doesn't mean that we will simply just remain obstinate because we don't get everything we want in a budget, no. But it certainly does not mean that we don't continue to fight for everything that everybody deserves. And so I remain seriously concerned about replacing the structural revenue from taxing corporations with a one-time speculative revenue form attempting to sell off Chicagoans' debts to debt collectors. I am concerned about that. And here's the thing. I know you all are as well. It's a legitimate concern. Nobody wants to build their house on speculation. So the 1.67% may sound small, but the impact could be massive to working people. I do think that this proposal is ill-conceived. It sends the wrong message to struggling Chicagoans, and it will not produce the lofty revenue goals that are assumed in this budget. And now I'm being asked to take on that responsibility. that in the midst of our speeches of collaboration, the incredible impact that this shortfall could have, you place it on one person. We are a better body. Doesn't mean that I cannot stand up and live up to the challenge. But if we're gonna work together and if we're gonna stand firm for the values that we all have been elected on, Let's not pick and choose when someone else has to take the responsibility. So if we're sharing it, let's do that. In fact, I will close for the first time with these words, that my budget and finance teams have concluded that this budget over-projected several revenue estimates, which may result in costly mid-year budget shortfall. Potential remedies to these shortfalls will be limited because we have taken aggressive measures to control labor costs next year through a broad hiring freeze and significant vacancy reductions. Unless we find real solutions together, Chicagoans will face the threat of critical service cuts. We also know that we will need to address some of the other revenue items that are premature or potentially inconsistent with the existing statute. You all have called me, sometimes one-on-one, admitting the flaw of not just this process but this budget. Now, of course, it will be our collective responsibility nonetheless. But this certainly includes an unregulated expansion of video gaming with no safeguards for our community and a new liquor tax that may actually reduce city revenue over the subject of litigation. We know we have more work to do in the new year, it's without a doubt. We are heartened to hear that there are members of the council who voted for this budget, who have committed to working with us to fix some of these issues, and I do appreciate that. I do thank all of you for your leadership and your love of Chicago. You know, I remember when I was an organizer and how bothered I was by what we called rubber stamp city councils. I believe it is for the good of our city that we have strong debate. I don't believe it's necessary for us to agree on all. But the 98% of the budget of these investments that people do agree on, that is not just a testament to our value system, but shouldn't that be a sign of collaboration? I mean, how oppositional can I be if 98% of what I asked for, you included it in your perspective? It sounds like I'm at least 98% collaborative. Now, I recognize that I'm not a perfect human being, and I do not fear death, and I do want to go to heaven. For the council members who vote for this budget, who have committed to working with us, and the council members who are voting against this budget. The people of Chicago appreciate you as well. And so I'm proud of the work that we have done to get to this point. I'm deeply, really inspired by the pursuit of this work, because we know that our fight for an equitable society does not end in Chicago. Yes, we have to take it to the halls of Springfield. Yes, we have to challenge the federal government together. Yes, we have to take it to the streets of Chicago to ensure that a just and equitable society can finally be realized. That's what gives me hope in this moment, not because I'm mayor, What gives me hope is that the vast majority of the people of this city feel heard and valued. And even though this 1.67% of this budget could have severe consequences on those very people, their fight has not ended because this vote has been taken. And so I want to thank the people of Chicago for making your voices heard. I wish I could have seen some of the attack ads against me. Maybe it would have emboldened me more. You know, I don't give much attention to political theater. I remember once when State Representative Will Guzzardi was casted as a child sex offender. I've seen some brutality in how political advertisement can just rip people to the core. I wish there was a better way in which we could communicate our advocacy and even our opposition without it necessarily affecting people's character. But let me just say these final words. I promise you, this is the last page. Today marks another important milestone in our struggle to build the safest, most affordable big city in America. Thousands who have made their voices heard Hear me when I say this. As a social studies teacher, I know that losing the battle does not mean that we have lost the war. And while we may not have the majority of the council, I do hearken to the words of Dr. King when he said, if we can figure it out in Chicago, staring at the face of one of the most powerful leaders in our nation's history, He said, doing it right in Chicago gives the hope that the rest of America needs. And so though we may not have the majority of the council, we do have the people. Thank you.

Chairman Irvin. Thank you, Mr. President. I move to concur in the recommendation of the Committee on the Budget and Government Operations and adopt the Substitute 2026 Code Corrections Ordinance, which was ordered to be deferred and published on December 19, 2025 as Substitute Ordinance 2025, I would like to do this by a voice vote. This is the substitute code corrections ordinance.

If it pleases his body to do that by voice vote, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed say nay. This motion passes. We need a motion to reconsider. On the motion to reconsider, Alderman Mitchell. Aye.

President, I'm removed to reconsider.

All those in favor of the reconsideration of this motion signify by saying aye. Any opposed say no. This motion fails. Chairman Irvin.

Thank you. Item number two. is I move to concur in the recommendation of the Committee on the Budget and Government Operations and adopt amendments to the 2026 budget recommendations and text portion. The amendments were proposed by the Office of Budget and Management, Alderman Lee, Alderman Lopez. They were voted on and approved at the December 17th 2025 Committee on Budget and Government Operations meeting and will order to be deferred and published on December 19th, 2025. I move to adopt those amendments and the text portion and to incorporate them into the 2026 annual appropriation ordinance by a roll call vote.

Very well, thank you. The motion has been made. Also includes a roll call vote. Members, you will use your e-vote application to record your vote once it is made available by the clerk.

Voting is now open, the voting is now open. Please use your e-device, voting is now open.

My flight is about to take off. Would you record me as a no vote on this, just in case we need to?

Just a second.

Alderman Laspada, I will take your vote.

I am a no vote on this item. Just in case I lose signal here, I am a yes.

Okay, Alderman Laspada, you are a no on this vote. We are only taking this vote at this time. You say no. I will now call on those that are remote and have not used their e-device. Alderman Yancy. Alderman Harris.

Yes.

Harris is a yes. Alderwoman Ramirez.

No.

Ramirez is a no. Alderman Moore. Alderman Moore. Okay. Oh, you put it on the Evo. Alderwoman Taylor.

No.

Taylor's a no. Alderman Mosley.

Yes.

Mosley is a yes. Alderwoman Rodriguez Sanchez. No. Rodriguez Sanchez is a no. Alderman Sposato.

Nick Sposato is a yes.

Sposato is a yes. Alderwoman Haddon.

No.

Haddon is a no. Alderman David Moore. Yes. Okay, good. Alderman Haddon, you're a no? Correct. Okay, thanks. All right, the voting is now closed.

There are 30 yeas, 19 nays. This motion passes. Alderman Mitchell on a motion to reconsider.

Move to reconsider the vote.

All those for the reconsideration of this vote signify by saying aye. Those that oppose say nay. This motion fails. Chair recognizes Chairman Irvin.

Thank you, Mr. President. I want to correct the earlier statement by Alderman from the 17th Ward about what we're now voting on. This is both the appropriation, which is the appropriation of revenue and expenses, which is the amended 2026 annual appropriation ordinance. which is now before us, as we've combined with the amendments from the previous vote, I move passage of this item also by a roll call vote.

Very well, thank you. There's a motion on the floor for the... Go ahead, go ahead. The chair recognizes Alderman Moore.

Is this item number three, Chairman?

This chair recognizes Chairman Ervin.

This is item number four. So you skipped three? I'm sorry, that is three. I apologize. So we're on number three. On number three, this is the appropriation ordinance. This is both the appropriation of both expenses and revenue or everything.

Very well. Thank you for the clarification. Would you still like to be recognized?

So are you going to recognize me on this one or this based on our discussion?

Did you wish to speak to those items?

Yes.

Okay. I can recognize you.

My apologies. You are correct. All right.

Very well. So let's just make sure that we're clear about the items. Is this item three? This is item number three. Very well. The chair recognizes Alderman Moore.

Yes. Um, I've offered up, um, for your consideration and amendment, um, to the budget recommendations, which would increase the salary of the superintendent of the police department, um, to 300,000 from 284,016. After a young lady here, um, spoke on, um, Danielle, I believe it was when she talked about the different salaries and the increases that everyone was getting, something that I, we pay attention to different things in his budget. I went to go look. And after I saw those increases, which I respect Mr. Mayor for the people that's doing the work, But I thought about the fact that we've, what you've talked about, crime has been reduced. Police morale has been established. The DNC was successful. And for a superintendent in LA to be making over $400,000 and our superintendent is less than 300 is something that I think is just, you know, not right. And so I'm asking this body to consider this amendment.

Farewell. The chair recognizes Chairman Ervin.

Thank you, Mr. President. I did speak with... Alderman Moore, in relation to this, upon seeing his notion, there is going to be a series of cleanup items, I believe. I think there are some little nuances that have to be dealt with. And I would ask that as we do that, probably in the coming weeks, that this is something that we could consider and have it added, because I believe that we will have to make an initial amendment to the budget just based on a lot of little minute changes that have been done and the quick turnaround that was required to get us to this moment. So I just ask that you hold that and we can incorporate that when we come back, which I believe should be by our next meeting with a slight technical amendment to make sure that everything is correct in my estimation.

Alderman Moore, does that satisfy that the amendment process in the coming weeks could address what you have raised?

Thank you, Mr. President. Yes, I'll hold my motion.

Very well. So there's no motion on the floor. Thank you. Now, for the initial motion that has already been made, e-vote applications will be made available at this time for you to record your votes.

The voting is now open. The voting is now open. Please use your device. The voting is now open. I will now call on those who have not used their e-device or on audio. Alderman LaSpada.

No.

LaSpada is a no. Alderman Harris. Yes. Harris is a yes. Alderman Ramirez. No. Ramirez is a no. Alderman Taylor. Alderman Taylor. Alderman Moseley.

Yes.

Alder woman, Rodriguez, Santa. No. Rodriguez. He doesn't know. Moseley is a yes. Alderman Sposato.

Nick Sposato is a yes.

Sposato is a yes. Alderman Haddon.

No.

Haddon is a no. Alderman Taylor. Okay. Mosley, I just want to go back to make sure I heard yes.

Mosley, yes.

Okay. Thank you. Voting is now closed.

There are 30 yeas and 18 nays this motion passes on the motion to reconsider ultimate Mitchell reconsider to vote all those in favor of the reconsideration of this votes and if I'm saying aye, any opposed say nay. Motion fails. Chair recognizes Chairman Irvin.

Thank you, Mr. President. If it pleases the body and if there's no objection, I'll move to concur in the recommendation of the Committee on the Budget and Government Operations and adopt the 2026 Substitute Management Ordinance, which was ordered to be deferred and published on December 19th, 2025, the Substitute Ordinance 2025-0021100

Yeah, I see it.

Go ahead and finish your motion. We'll do it by roll call vote. I see that she's come back online.

The chair recognizes Alderwoman Taylor.

Yes, the call dropped. I'm a no.

Okay. Her call dropped. So she wishes to make sure that the body is aware that if the call had not dropped, she would be a no. Chairman Irvin.

By roll call vote.

Okay. Unless we do the most favorable roll call, which she is already on that one as a no. Can we do that? Not the one that just went. Not the one that we just did, but the most, the first one, then.

Number two? The first two. Could you put the vote back on number two? Put it back up? So we're all very well with it.

Thank you chairman. Madam clerk, if you can put the first vote up the first two votes first two, could you put that one back up on the, put that back up on the screen please. Second second vote. Sorry. The second vote, right?

Correct.

Forget it.

Roll call.

Let's just do the roll call. All right. Look, I'm proud to try to speed it up for you all today. I know how eager you all are to get to the Bears game. All right. Very well. So there's a roll call vote on this item. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Members, please use your e-vote applications at this time.

The voting is now open. The voting is now open. I will now call on those remote and has not used their e-device. Alderman LaSpada.

No.

LaSpada is a no. Alderman Yancey. Alderman Yancey. Alderwoman Harris. Yes. Harris is a yes. Alderman Ramirez. No. Ramirez is a no. Alderman Taylor. No. Taylor is a no. Alderman Mosley.

Yes.

Mosley is a yes. Alderwoman Rodriguez-Sanchez. No. Rodriguez-Sanchez is a no. Alderman Sposato.

Nick Sposato is a yes.

Sposato is a yes. Alderwoman Haddon. No. Haddon is a no. Alderman Yancey. You said no? Okay. Yancey's a no. And Haddon's a no. Not showing up. Okay. Voting is now closed.

There are 29 yeas and 20 nays. This motion passes. Alderman Mitchell on the motion to reconsider.

Motion to reconsider the vote.

All those in favor of the reconsideration of this vote signify by saying aye. Any opposed say nay. This motion fails. Chairman Irvin.

Thank you, Mr.

We just did, yeah, we just did two of them.

Chairman Irvin.

Thank you, Mr. President. I move to concur in the recommendation of the Committee on the Budget and Government Operations and adopt the 2026 Motor Fuel Tax Funds Allocation Ordinance, which was ordered to be deferred and published on December 19th, 2025 as O20250021031 by a voice vote.

Very well, all those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed say nay. This motion passes. The motion to reconsider, Alderman Mitchell.

Motion to reconsider the vote.

All those in favor of the reconsideration of the last vote signify by saying aye. Any opposed say nay. This motion fails. Chairman Irvin.

Item number six, I move to concur in the recommendation of the Committee on the Budget and Government Operations and adopt the 2026 Motor Fuel Tax Funds Allocation Intergovernmental Agreement with the Chicago Transit Authority and Cook County, which was ordered to be deferred and published on December 19th, 2025 as O2025-0021015 via voice vote.

Very well. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed say nay. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. On the motion to reconsider. Audubon Mitchell.

Motion to reconsider the vote.

All those in favor of the reconsideration of the vote signify by saying aye. Any opposed say nay. This motion fails. Chairman Irvin.

All right. I move to concur in the recommendation of the committee on the budget and government operations and adopt the salary resolution, which was ordered to be deferred and published on December 19th, 2025 as R 2025-0021098 by a voice vote.

All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed say nay. In opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. Audit mentioned on the motion to reconsider. To reconsider the vote. All those in favor of the reconsideration of this vote signify by saying aye. Any opposed say nay. This motion fails. Chairman Irvin.

Mr. President, that concludes the items of unfinished business related to the Committee on the Budget and Government Operations.

Very well. Thank you, Chairman. The Chair recognizes Chairwoman Dowell.

Thank you, Mr. President. I move to concur in the recommendation of the Committee on Finance and adopt the substitute fiscal year 2026 tax levy by a roll call vote.

Very well. The chair recognizes Alderman Lopez.

Thank you, Mr. President. Pursuant to Rule 33, we have distributed a second substitute ordinance with regards to the property tax levy for the Chicago Public Library. We ask for the amendment's adoption.

Dave, there's a motion on the floor for a substitute to be adopted, which requires the suspension of the rules. Is that correct? Nope. Nope. Nope. Okay. Has that substitute been made available?

By electronic and printed form.

Yes. Okay.

Would you like to speak to the item? No.

You would not. Do we accept the substitute? We do. All right. All right. Very well. For the substitute to be accepted, apparently a roll call vote has been asked. Okay, so for the substitute, the roll call, Madam Clerk will make the item available. Members, please use your e-vote application to record your vote at this time.

The voting is now open. The voting is now open. Please use your e-device. The voting is now open. I will now call those on remote and who has not used their e-device. Alderman Laspada.

Aye.

Yes or no, Laspada?

Yes.

Laspada is a yes. Alderman Harris. Yes. Harris is a yes. Alderman Ramirez. Yes. Ramirez is a yes. Alderman Taylor. Yes. Yes. Taylor is a yes. Alderman Mosley.

Yes.

Mosley is a yes. Alderwoman Rodriguez Sanchez. Yes. Rodriguez Sanchez is a yes. Alderman Sposato.

Nick Sposato is a yes.

Sposato is a yes. Alderman Riley. Alderman Riley. Not in Chambers. Alderman Haddon.

Yes.

Haddon is a yes. Alderman Riley in the back? No? Okay. Voting is closed. 41-7.

There are 41 yays, seven nays. This motion passes. Alderman Mitchell on the motion to reconsider?

No.

Oh, my apologies. Motion to reconsider. Okay. Alderman Bill on the motion to reconsider. All those in favor? It was just a substitute. Very well. No need for the motion to reconsider because it was just a substitute. Very well. Chair recognizes Chairwoman Dow.

Thank you, Mr. President. I now move that we have a roll call vote on the substitute of the fiscal year 2026 tax levy.

Very well. Thank you. There's a motion on the floor for the recommendation of the tax levy that includes a new substitute and a roll call vote has been requested. The chair recognizes Alderman Moore.

Thank you, Mr. President. I think this is the last item that we are voting on and be able to speak on. And so just real quickly, because I didn't get to say it, I want to thank our finance chair, Chairman Dowell, and our budget chair, Alderman Jason Irvin, they did a yeoman's job this year as last, but really this year. And, you know, as we went through this cycle, communicating and everything, as well as your staff and your team. As I said before, as the press asked me, this was some of the best communication, in my opinion, from start to finish. And so I just, as we continue to go down this path, I think what you talked about even earlier, Mr. President, and collaboration and working together. Each step, we get a little closer. And I can say that at least what I've seen, honestly, and I want to make sure that we continue that so we can continue to be productive for the constituents and our residents of the city of Chicago. So thank you.

Thank you, Alderman Warren. I totally agree. Both chairs, as well as Chairwoman Dowd, Chairman Irvin, the entire administrative staff, and the staff members of all of you, as Alders, have rolled up your sleeves, along with, again, our partners, labor and business, all folks coming together to ensure that we're protecting Chicago. And with that, the motion is on the floor. The roll call vote has been requested. The e-vote application is available to you to record your vote at this time.

Voting is now open. Voting is now open. Please use your e-device. Voting is now open. The final vote of 2025. Praise be the Lord. All right, I will now call those remote and have not used their e-device. Alderman Laspada.

Yes.

Laspada is a yes. Alderman Hopkins. Oh, sorry. Alderwoman Harris. Yes. Harris is a yes. Alderwoman Ramirez. Yes. Ramirez is a yes. Alderman Curtis. Curtis is a yes. Alderwoman Taylor. Yes. Taylor is a yes. Alderman Mosley.

Mosley is a yes.

I'm sorry, did you say yes, Mosley?

Yes.

Mosley is a yes. Alderwoman Rodriguez-Sanchez. Yes. Rodriguez-Sanchez is a yes. Alderman Sposato.

Nick Sposato is a yes.

Sposato is a yes. Alderman Riley. Riley. Alderman Haddon.

Yes.

Haddon is a yes. Okay. Riley is not on the floor. All right, the voting is now closed.

There are 38 yays, 10 nays. This motion passes. Alderman... Alderman Bill on a motion to reconsider.

Motion to reconsider, Mr. President.

All those in favor of the reconsideration of this vote signify by saying aye. Any opposed say nay. This motion fails. Chairwoman Dowell.

Thank you, Mr. President. That concludes the unfinished business relating to the Committee on Finance.

Very well. Thank you, Chairwoman. Alderman Mitchell on any other unfinished business. Are you aware of any?

I'm not aware of any more unfinished business.

Very well. Now, Chairman Irvin.

Thank you, Mr. President. During our portion of introduction for new business, I omitted the introduction of a resolution, and I would beg leave to ask the body that we be allowed to introduce the resolution.

Very well. Leave is granted. Please introduce the resolution.

Again, this is a resolution for the intention to form the Chicago Tourism Improvement District and fixing the date and time of place of a public meeting and public hearing and giving notice thereto. That is what it is. I omitted introducing it during the new business, but would beg Lee to allow for its introduction, as it has some very limited time provisions provided under state statute. You want to come to me? OK. And that the item...

So for the leave has been granted for this resolution, it requires the suspension of rules to take it up to vote on it.

I'm not asking for a vote to be held. I'm asking for it to just be introduced on the Committee on Finance.

Okay, so just an introduction. Yes, it is. Very well. Thank you. For miscellaneous, then... All right, so technically, the chairman asked for leave, which was granted, however, by rules. In order for the resolution to be taken up, the rules have to be suspended. You cannot do it just what they leave, according to our rules. So for the suspension of the rules, all those in favor of the suspension of the rules to take up this resolution, signify by saying aye. Any opposed, say nay. In the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. Now, introduce the resolution again.

Again, this is a resolution of the City Council declaring its intention to form the Chicago Tourism Improvement District and fixing the time and place of a public meeting and public hearing thereon and giving notice there to go into the Committee on Finance.

All right, very well. So the resolution has been introduced, sent to the Committee on Finance. Now to return back to the regular order of business, Chairman Irvin. To return back to the regular order of business? Yeah. All those in favor to return back to the... Okay, well, we have not returned back to the regular order of business. Suspension is still in place. I understand that Alderman Yancey would like to introduce something. The chair recognizes Alderman Yancey.

Thank you, Mr. President. I prepared a resolution to bring both the Department of Finance and the Department of Planning and Development so that we can discuss the recent investigative reporting by the Chicago Sun-Times that's raised real concerns.

Yeah, sorry.

So I'm introducing a resolution to bring the Department of Finance and the Department of Planning and Development before this body. because I've got real concerns about how we're able to allow a developer who owes the city $6.5 million to go forward with a planned development.

You're introducing a resolution to what committee?

To finance, I'm sorry.

Okay, so there's also a resolution to the finance committee with what was stated. All right, thank you. The rules are still suspended. Are there any other individuals that would like to introduce a resolution? The chair recognizes Alderman Hopkins.

Thank you, Mr. President. I just rise on a point of order. As long as we're still under suspension of the rules, I have no objection to introducing these items. I would just request that an electronic version of both items be sent to our email inboxes immediately so we could say that it was introduced and we have copies of it. Thank you. Very well. Alderman Hall.

The President, I rise to offer prayers and support for our colleague, Chairwoman Michelle Harris, who lost her father. And while laying him to rest, she still extended the opportunity to work. So prayers for her and her family during this time.

Very well. Thank you. Alderman Hall. Are there, while the rules are suspended, anything else? Very well. Alderman Irvin on the motion to return back to the regular order of business. Move that we return back to the regular order of business. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed say nay. This motion passes. Now back to the regular order of business, which is miscellaneous. Alderman Mitchell.

So, Mr. President, except for the ordinance setting a date and time for the next meeting, I'm not aware of any miscellaneous business.

And for the date and time of the next meeting, Chair recognizes Alderman Beal.

Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, I'm offering up a substitute resolution. I'm offering up a substitute ordinance for changing of the date and times of the next meeting, if the clerk can pass this out for me, please.

Very well. There's a substitute ordinance that is being provided. for the next date and time of meetings as those are being passed out. Automobile, could you read so the members who are virtual can receive the information.

Sure. Mr. President, this is just a resolution set in the date and time of our next meeting for Monday, December 29th, 2025, beginning at 10 p.m. a.m. 10 a.m. As much as I love y'all a.m. And the next meeting will be Wednesday, January 21st, 2026, beginning at 10 a.m. And this was under Section 2.02025-0021724, approved by the City Council on December 10, 2025, and 02025-0021850, approved by the City Council on December 16, are hereby repealed in their entirety. If there are no objections, Mr. President, I ask for a voice vote.

Hearing no objections, Audubon Moore. The chair recognizes Audubon Moore.

Thank you, Mr. President. I don't have the other one in front of me, but are we striking all the other dates?

Okay, thank you. So all other dates are being stricken? And the next date and time is for December 29th, 2025 at 10 a.m. And then following would be Wednesday, January 21st, 2026, beginning at 10 a.m. Is everybody clear?

That is correct.

All right. All those in favor of the substitute ordinance. Roll call. There's a roll call vote that has been requested for this substitute ordinance in the next date and time for our meetings. Madam Clerk, please make the e-vote application available.

Oh, no, this one. We're voting this one.

And we're clear of those.

The voting is now open. The voting is now open. Please use your e-device. The voting is now open.

I read this for that.

But I read this after the class.

If you need.

Right.

I will now call on those that are remote. Alderman La Spada. Alderman La Spada. Alderman Robinson. Robinson is a no. Alderman Hall. Hall is a no. Alderman Harris. Alderman Chico. Harris is a yes. Harris is a yes. Chico is a yes. Alderwoman Ramirez. No. Ramirez is a no. Alderman Lopez. Can you please keep it down so I can hear? Thank you. Alderman Lopez is a no. Wait, I'm sorry. Alderman Lopez is a yes. Alderman Taylor. Yeah. Taylor, I cannot hear you. Please. Can you say that again?

Yes.

Thank you. Taylor is a yes. Alderman Mosley.

Yes.

Mosley is a yes. Alderman Rodriguez. Rodriguez is a yes. Alderman Talaferro. Talaferro is not here. Alderman Rodriguez Sanchez. No. No. Rodriguez-Santos is a no. Alderman Sposato.

Nick Sposato is a yes.

Sposato is a yes. Alderman Riley. Alderman Riley. Riley is a yes. Alderman Mana Hoppenworth. I'm sorry, I can't hear you. Mana Hoppenworth is a yes. Alderman Manhattan.

Yes.

Haddon is a yes. Laspada, are you there? Okay, the voting is now closed. Did you have Haddon? 37-10.

There are 37 yays, 10 nays. This substitute ordinance passes. On the motion to reconsider, Alderman Mitchell. Move to reconsider the vote. Reconsideration of this last vote signify by saying aye. Any opposed say nay. This motion fails. Now for the omnibus. Alderman Mitchell.

I move that matters in the omnibus be passed by a voice vote.

Very well. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Aye. Any opposed say nay. This motion passes. Alderman Mitchell on the motion to reconsider the omnibus. Move to reconsider the vote. All those in favor of the reconsideration of the vote signify by saying aye. Aye. All those opposed say nay. This motion fails. Alderman Mitchell on a motion to adjourn.

There being no further business before this body, I move that we adjourn.

Hearing no objections to order, the meeting is adjourned.