Are the times a changin’ for aldermen, or is da Boss becoming more almighty?

It’s one of the basic tenants of the Chicago political scene – the alderman is all-powerful, within the boundaries of his (or her) ward.



TUNNEY: Losing to the Cubs?

When the full City Council considers an issue, the viewpoint of the alderman whose ward is directly impacted is given great consideration. It isn’t often that an alderman can’t get his (or her) colleagues to sympathize.

WHICH IS WHY it is unusual to see a pair of happenings now occurring at City Hall – the political squabbling concerning the renovation (long needed) of Wrigley Field AND the replacement of retiring 33^rd Ward Alderman Dick Mell.

In the case of Wrigley, one of the political opponents has been 44^th Ward Alderman Tom Tunney – who has tried to present himself as the man who is looking out for the interests of the people who actually live in the Lake View neighborhood and would have to cope with the additional foot traffic that a renovated ballpark is meant to create.

But Mayor Rahm Emanuel, who is the self-admitted not-much-of-a baseball fan, has taken the lead on this issue – arguing that the presence of the Chicago Cubs impacts the entire city.

Although I’m sure he also realizes that if the Cubs were to wind up taking one of those suburban offers for a new stadium, Emanuel would be the one who would wind up looking weak and ineffectual.

SO ANY THOUGHTS that Tunney had that he’d be the tough guy who’d stand up to the Cubs and the Ricketts family that owns them has pretty much shriveled up.



DEB MELL: Her father's pick? Or Hizzoner's?

Many of Tunney’s objections to advertising signs being erected along with video boards (the oft-mentioned Jumbotron) have been resolved in favor of the ball club. Although when the City Council meets Wednesday (likely to give final approval), Tunney may still have “demands” for his support.

The Chicago Tribune reported that Tunney wants a walkway over Clark Street eliminated, along with reductions in the impact of a proposed hotel where the McDonalds’ franchise is and a 10-year ban on outfield advertising signs.

I’m not going to be surprised if the council winds up ignoring those demands. Because Emanuel wants to get this issue resolved NOW rather than LATER.

THE COUNCIL TAKES the month of August off from public business. The last thing officials want is for this issue to linger for another month of speculation.

DICK MELL: Remaining the boss of his ward

But this isn’t the only issue in which the alderman’s thoughts aren’t being treated with knee-jerk reverence. Although when it comes to replacing Dick Mell, his views may wind up becoming the official stance of Emanuel.

Because Mell has made it known he wants his daughter, Deb (the current state representative for the legislative district that includes the 33^rd Ward) to replace him as alderman.

Emanuel has gone through his self-created process of accepting applications to make it appear as though anybody could have come forth and become the alderman.

BUT EMANUEL HAS made comments implying that he’s not opposed to the idea of a new “Alderman Mell.” He just seems determined to stage the process in a way so it seems that she was HIS choice for the post, and NOT Dick Mell’s pick.

For those who are saying that it is somehow “good government” not to let the departing alderman pick his replacement, keep in mind that former Mayor Richard M. Daley was around for so long and got to make so many aldermanic appointments that he wound up controlling more than half of the City Council.

Do we really think it better than Emanuel gets to reinforce the notion of the City Council as his rubber stamp?



EMANUEL: Showing his authority

Although in the case of the Mells, Dick won’t be irrelevant. For he kept the position of Democratic committeeman for the 33^rd Ward – the political party post that has the authority influence the alderman’s thinking and ensure their future re-election.

WHICH IS WHY it is reality that the most powerful government officials are the ones who double their influence by being committeeman AND holding a political post.

Those are the kind of officials who have the influence to tell the mayor what he ought to do. Which is something I suspect Emanuel isn’t terribly interested in having to deal with.

  -30-

Conspiracy theory, or element of truth?

DAVIS: Clueless? Or Blunt-spoken?

Throughout the decades that Monique Davis has represented portions of the Beverly and Morgan Park neighborhoods in the Illinois House of Representatives, she has made many comments that have been interpreted by some as absurd, if not downright loopy!

But I have always tried to keep in mind the fact that we in this society are not all alike. We don’t look alike. We certainly don’t think alike. The people who voted her into office probably have no problem with her.

SO WHILE MANY people these days are jumping down Davis’ throat for her latest theory (telling a Detroit radio station that many people in her community think the police might have something to do with all the urban violence taking place against young people these days), I’m wondering if she’s on to something.

Davis gave her interview to WCHB-AM in Detroit on Tuesday when she said: “I’m going to tell you what some suspicions have been, and people have whispered to me; they’re not sure that black people are shooting all of these children. There’s some suspicion – and I don’t want to spread this, but I’m just going to tell you what I’ve been hearing – they suspect maybe the police are killing some of these kids.”

WBBM-AM found out about this, and tracked Davis down, reporting Friday her admission that she doesn’t know who is doing the killings, but not exactly denying that she thinks the police could be responsible in some way. On Friday, Davis held a press conference to say that some police officers are among her friends, and reiterated the thought that she doesn't know who killed anyone.

They also gave the Chicago Police Department a chance to respond – finding a spokesman who came up with a comment that technically is a “no comment,” but also makes it clear that the police resent any implication that they’re anything other than heroic in their behavior.

WHAT THIS ISSUE really comes down to is a matter of just how much faith one has in the concept of law enforcement in general – Protectors of the Public? Or Municipal Muscle, meant to keep in line those people whom officials want to pipe down?

Those who believe the former are going to be amongst Davis’ biggest detractors. They’re not going to want to hear any kind of talk that implies police are a problem.

The most hard core of those individuals are the ones who still try to defend one-time Pullman Area police Commander Jon Burge – claiming that the criminal element he was dealing with required the hard-fisted approach that he took toward defendants who later were found to be innocent victims.

I’m sure that particular element is a minority of the overall population. The general trust of police is a larger element.

BUT WE SHOULDN’T discount the fact that there is a sizable number of people who are skeptical of law enforcement authority. Some of them may well have theories that the police are, if not killing young black people, sitting back and doing nothing to try to control the high-crime rates in urban areas.

As for those who may well think there are police going around killing black people, put them at the far opposite end of the ideological train of thought that thinks Jon Burge some sort of victim, and a miscarriage of justice.

Personally, I have never bought into the idea of police as particularly heroic. I’m more inclined to think that the overwhelming majority of police are just human beings – no smarter or dumber than you or I.

Except that they do a particularly difficult job where, if something goes wrong, people can die.

SO IF WE view Davis’ thoughts of a reflection of what is being expressed by the community (or at least a segment of it), perhaps we’d see a lesson in all of this.

Perhaps the police reaction would be to realize they have a perception problem, rather than getting all huffy and hostile toward anyone who doesn’t worship their presence.

  -30-

A mad dash for the firearms finish line

It has been a series of outbursts by local governments all across the Chicago metro area – various village boards and city councils are contemplating whether or not to impose their own laws restricting firearms ownership and storage.


City Halls across the area are addressing firearms

That issue got its big boost on Wednesday when both the City Council and the Cook County Board gave approval to resolutions that make it clear assault weapons (those that fire off multiple rounds of ammunition at a time) are not legal within their boundaries.

IN THE CASE of the county-wide ban, it applies to all 129 municipalities in Cook County – except for those communities that decide to impose their own even-more restrictive measures into law.

Which is an issue several communities are doing – although not every community is feeling the need to take on the issue. Although they’re definitely debating it here – even if the rest of Illinois is ignoring the issue.

The National Rifle Association has tried to counter such talk with their own propaganda. They have issued lists of municipalities that they claim have either rejected the idea, or have failed to act.

As though there is an overwhelming majority of people who are deciding not to take on this issue. The reality, however, is that their lists are incomplete.

THERE ARE JUST as many communities that put the rush on to approve this issue. We literally will have a patchwork of communities, and people are going to have to be very aware of where they are at any given moment when they have a firearm on them.

Just as an example, one NRA list pointed out that the south suburb of Flossmoor failed to approve restrictions on firearms.

Yet the neighboring municipalities of Homewood and Hazel Crest were among the first to approve the idea of firearms restrictions. That kind of split is going to be reality throughout the Chicago area, particularly as other communities spend the next few days taking up the issue.

Not everybody agrees w/ Lege's action

 

But whether they make the “deadline” is another question.

THAT DEADLINE IS the key to this rush of governmental activity.

For when the Illinois General Assembly took its vote July 9 to override Gov. Pat Quinn’s efforts to impose tougher firearms restrictions than the Legislature intended, their “concealed carry” law created a 10-day time period for local governments with home rule powers (those communities of more than 25,000 people) to create their own tougher laws.

That 10-day period, which had some people confused whether that meant working days or calendar days, ends Friday at midnight.

If a municipality does not act by then, state law theoretically would pre-empt them from ever taking on the issue.

HENCE, THE RUSH, and the number of municipal bodies (including the City Council in Chicago) that held special meetings to approve quickly-crafted assault weapons bans.

Although the reality is that many of those resolutions bear a strong resemblance to each other. They include lengthy lists of specific types of weapons that are now banned in those communities – even though the firearms advocates often say that it is too easy to convert other types of weapons into so-called assault weapons, thereby rendering specific lists as worthless.

Which has some local governments hoping that the inevitable NRA-inspired lawsuit focuses on Chicago’s law – making them clear of having to pay significant legal expenses to defend their intentions that do reflect the local will on the issue.

The people who are most eager to oppose stricter local laws on firearms also make their arguments that the gang members (which is how they want to think of too many people who aren’t exactly like themselves) aren’t going to follow any laws – making it necessary for them to have their own weapons for self-protection.

THAT ALWAYS STRIKES me as sounding like certain people being a little too anxious to shoot another human being. Besides, it could be argued that every law will have someone who chooses to ignore it. That doesn't make the law flawed in concept.

Although regardless of which side of this question one comes down upon, this legal rush of activity will come to an end soon. That deadline is approaching.

Unless we get a successful lawsuit against the state contending the Legislature’s actions were improper. If that were to happen, then the real political confusion would set in.

  -30-

Some people are way too touchy!

Where’s the Tylenol?

I feel like I need to reach for a bottle, after learning of the things that get some people all worked up.

WHETHER IT’S JENNY McCarthy, or the bomber who took out the Boston Marathon with one of his explosive devices. The degree to which some people are upset makes me wonder if they’re just determined to be miserable.

As if they’d be upset with themselves if there wasn’t something (anything) for them to get all upset about.

I think I’m more bothered with the people who have nothing better to worry about than the cover of Rolling Stone magazine – which quite often does serious reporting about issues of great significance to our society.

In the upcoming issue, they’re publishing a story about Dzhokhar Tsarnaev – one of the suspects in the explosion in Boston that killed a few participants in the marathon; while also injuring many dozens of others.

I HAVEN’T READ the story yet, although it seems the magazine is trying to write a serious piece of reporting that shows just how an individual can sink to such a contemptible level.

Because it’s the big story, it is the “cover.” Which means Tsarnaev gets his picture on the cover of the Rolling Stone.

That has the kind of people who spend way too much of their time on the Internet making hostile comments. They don’t want him being “glorified,” even though I don’t see how this is glorification.

I wouldn’t be surprised if Tsarnaev himself were to view this as demonification of his persona. I doubt he’s going to be pleased with the image that will be presented of himself.

YET THE OVERLY touchy amongst us want to complain. And they even got at least two significant business interests – the CVS and Walgreens drug-store chains – to say they won’t carry the magazine’s upcoming issue.

Personally, I don’t buy magazines at either store (their selections aren’t that impressive -- I just don't care about "Shape" magazine). But I’m appalled by both actions.

In the case of CVS, they say their roots as a New England-based company make them sensitive to Boston’s feelings on this matter. So now, Rolling Stone can claim they were “banned in Boston.” Maybe sales elsewhere will compensate for the loss, because such a status makes this appear to be a big deal that it really isn't.

I suspect the people who do wind up reading the story will find themselves disappointed. Which is why I wish the Chicago-area-based Walgreens had not made such a decision. I’d always like to think Chicago interests are more common-sense than the rest of the country.

APPARENTLY, THEY’RE NOT always such.

Then, there’s the case of McCarthy – who earlier this week got herself a bigger media platform than the weekly advice column she writes for the Chicago Sun-Times. She’s going to be on Barbara Walters’ television creation – The View.

She’s going to be a regular hostess. But while most of us think of her as nothing more than the Mother McAuley girl who turned a Playboy spread into fame as a not-quite actress but definitely a pop-star, she has in recent years come up with the theory that her son’s autism was caused by vaccinations.

That has the medical community now upset that McCarthy would get a permanent place on a prominent daytime TV show. Even though I’d like to think that real people are too busy working during the day to actually watch The View, it seems they think Jenny is now going to be using the airwaves to spew her theories on the matter.

PERSONALLY, I THINK the people who actually watch the program would be bored to death if she actually did become the single-note clown that they’re predicting she will be. She'd get fired if she actually tried to use the program for an autism crusade.

Do I see the fate of the Republic being threatened by McCarthy’s new job? I can’t!

I’m actually more frightened by all the people who felt compelled to pounce on this issue right when it happened at the beginning of the week. Talk about having way too much free time on their hands.

  -30-

EDITOR’S NOTE: No, I don’t really see any resemblance to Jim Morrison. Then again, I’m the type of person who never really thought one-time Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin bore any resemblance to Tina Fey. I just don’t see it.

 

In either case!

 

Blagojevich took his time to tell us the same ol’ tale – I’m innocent!

I understand the concept of using every bit of time available to ensure that something is of the highest quality possible.

BLAGOJEVICH: I didn't do it!

And when the potential outcome is regaining one’s freedom, I also comprehend that the stakes for former Gov. Rod Blagojevich with his latest criminal appeal are all important.

BUT I HAVE to confess. When I learned that Blagojevich’s attorneys were pushing the 12:01 a.m. Tuesday deadline before filing (and wound up filing the documents with about one hour to spare), I was hopeful that we’d get some new piece of information.

Something of significance that would actually have the potential to convince people that the conviction and 14-year prison sentence received by Blagojevich was seriously flawed.

Something that would enlighten us observers into having a better comprehension of this particular criminal case.

But it didn’t happen.

INSTEAD, WHAT WE got was something that bears a strong resemblance to so many other criminal appeals I have read throughout the quarter-century that I have been a reporter-type person.

Incompetence, combined with negligence, all meant to keep “the truth” from coming out and making us realize that Milorod didn’t do it!

Specifically, the 91-page appeal contends that U.S. District Judge James Zagel was too eager to favor the prosecution.



ZAGEL: Did he blow it?

The appeal continues to harp on all those tape recordings that Blagojevich thinks would have made him appear to be an innocent in the eyes of a jury. His appeal contends that the judge deliberately excluded the bulk of those 33 recordings – while permitting the use of 70 recordings by prosecutors that made Blagojevich look bad.

PERSONALLY, I’M INTRIGUED at the other issue Blagojevich’s attorneys brought up – claiming it is a flaw that Zagel did not provide jurors with a specific definition about how “campaign contributions” and “bribes” are different when it comes to “political deal-making.”

I suspect that there are people who would have interpreted any such definition as political double-talk, and might well have taken it as a negative that they were supposed to even consider such a distinction.

Although when one thinks about it, what is the difference between the two concepts?

Because one can argue that a campaign contribution is bribe-like in that it is money meant to gain some personal attention to oneself. Except that in a bribe, the promise of a “payback” is much more explicit. Sometimes, very specific.

WHEREAS WITH A contribution, it is more vague, and in theory may never be made. You could be giving your money to a political candidate and get nothing to show for it – except the knowledge that for a few seconds, the candidate thought of you as he cashed your check.

My point being that this issue may be so vague that it would be confusing to try to overly define these concepts. It may even offend some that they’re expected to acknowledge a difference.

I’m not convinced that any of this is going to sway anyone. I’m not convinced that the outcome will change one bit as a result of this appeal.

Largely because the arguments made in the appeal are the same ones we have heard all through the Blagojevich saga. If this is what the appeal was going to amount to, why couldn’t it have been filed long ago?

AS MUCH AS I think the length of Blagojevich’s prison term is too much (and yes, one possible outcome of this appeal is that the conviction is upheld but the sentence is reduced), I’m not sure if any Court of Appeals judges will be swayed.

Although in the end, it doesn’t matter what I (or any other would-be pundit) think. It’s just those few judges who will determine whether or not Zagel screwed up seriously-enough to warrant a chance in the Blagojevich verdict.

  -30-

A quarter century passes, but some things about Chicago don’t change

My mind turns back to the time a quarter-century ago when I lived the life of a crime reporter – and let myself become absorbed by the tales of every slaying that occurred in Chicago.

Back in the late 1980s when I was at the now-defunct City News Bureau of Chicago, there were times when I felt like my car (a bright red Ford Escort that was the most expensive vehicle I could afford on a City News salary) WAS my office.

IT WAS IN those days that I developed a habit that I find I still have. I walk into a strange place, and I find myself looking for a pay phone – in case I have to call the office to report details for a possible story.

Even though I now carry one of those Smartphone thingies, it seems so natural to look for a phone, and I find myself disappointed at the lack of public telephones.

But that’s an issue for another day.

The point being that back during my first year at City News when I was one of the reporters who only briefly checked in with the main office in the morning, I was among the people who hung out in the places most likely to result in crime and criminal activity – which means stories.

KEEP IN MIND that the old City News Bureau was the place that covered every single homicide in Chicago and Cook County, and tried to keep up with the violent activity in the rest of the Chicago area – back in the days when the homicide total in Chicago could get ridiculously close to 1,000 per year.

City News was also the entity that kept in daily contact with the Medical Examiner’s office. I remember when I was the reporter who made the daily trip out to the Near West Side every 5 a.m. – just to see if any of our countless other calls throughout the day had managed to miss something.

This is all scut work. As in the miniscule, often mind-numbing, activity that one has to do in order to be able to stumble across the crime that becomes the heart-warming tale of sadness.

While also quickly learning that most homicides are droll enough that they’re rarely worth more than three paragraphs. And for fear of sounding callous and crass, many of the people whose slayings I wrote about 25 years ago were not pleasant people.

THE WORLD PROBABLY is, and has been, a more pleasant place without them.

If there is a lesson I learned from those days, it is that man is incredibly capable of being callous and cruel toward their fellow man. And under certain circumstances, people can be made to do things they find to be repulsive and would NEVER do otherwise.

But the way you learn all of this is by doing the footwork – getting out into the neighborhoods to see daily activity. Heck, there are some parts of Chicago that I know primarily from having seen them when they were the site of a crime scene a score and five years ago.

There’s nothing new about any of this. You learn about the world by getting out and seeing it.

WHAT INSPIRED ME to write this particular commentary was the DNAInfo.com website, which is including among its reporting an attempt to get at the reality of the just over 200 murders that have occurred in Chicago this year.

They literally have sent reporter-type people out to the homes of every single victim – letting them get at details more than just what caliber firearm was used.

It’s nice. I’m sure they have many interesting stories as a result of their work. And those youthful reporters are gaining some experiences that they will look back on fondly later in life.

But it’s nothing new. It sounds a lot like the dispatches that used to turn up in newsrooms all across Chicago – many of which were used by the broadcasters and newspapers of the city to determine which slayings were worth covering. Some things just never change.

  -30-

EXTRA: Run Lisa, run!!! Or, is Sheila the big loser of Madigan’s decision?

Lisa Madigan gained my vote for governor of Illinois. It’s just too bad that it was her announcement that she would not run that caused me to want to support her.

MADIGAN: Postponing a 'promotion?'

Her announcement Monday afternoon caught me off-guard. I bought into her previous talk that she would wait until August to say what she’d do – thereby causing a whole slew of other political people to have to wait before announcing the electoral intentions.

BUT SHE NOW says it would be a problem for her to be governor while her father, the mighty Michael Madigan, served as speaker of the Illinois House of
Representatives.

And her father isn’t giving her any sign that he’s the least bit willing to consider stepping down from the post he has held (with a two-year exception in the mid-1990s) since the early 1980s.

Admittedly, he’s getting up in age. Who’s to say how long he will be able to keep getting re-elected – unless he’s willing to go the Sidney Yates route. As in the one-time member of Congress from the North lakefront neighborhoods who was the butt of many “senility” jokes by the time he finally retired in the mid-1990s.

The fact that Lisa Madigan was willing to come out and bluntly say it would not be practical for state government to have two “Madigans” in prominent posts is a certain honesty that I’m not used to seeing, or hearing, from government officials.

IT MAKES ME want to have someone like her in office – and not just re-election to a fourth term as Illinois attorney general.

MADIGAN: Holed up, and going nowhere!

It makes me wish she were able to run for governor. Because a part of me wonders if she’s going to be in that attorney general post for so long (always being thought of as the “future” governor) that she will go from being the future of the Democratic Party to being its past – without ever being its “present.”

Such as the situation involving the one-time state Sen. Howard Carroll – who served in the Illinois Legislature for many years waiting for the aforementioned Yates to retire so he could move up to Congress.

But by the time that retirement came and his “turn” came about, another candidate came along and wound up winning the post. Which is why we have Rep. Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., amongst our state’s congressional delegation.

COULD IT BE that someone else will wind up coming along and swiping away a gubernatorial nomination from Lisa Madigan in some future year, because she felt the need to hold off from running in this election cycle – one in which she would have had ample funding to run a credible campaign?

DALEY: One less 'name' in his way

That will be the question to which we’ll never truly know the answer.

So now, we get Gov. Pat Quinn with one less opponent – and his primary challenger, William Daley, will face the same problem that Madigan would have faced. As in certain people not willing to even consider voting for him because he has a “connected” name. Although certain others will vote for him just because of that.

Personally, I wonder more about the people who were betting on Madigan to move up so they could have her attorney general post.

SIMON: What will she do now?

HER DECISION TO stay put may have ensured House Minority Leader Tom Cross, R-Oswego, remains in that post, while the big loser may well be another product of a political “family.”

Lt. Gov. Sheila Simon had already said she was not interested in keeping that post, and had dreams of being the “AG.”

She’s going to have to scale back her ambitions if she wishes to remain a political player beyond next year.

  -30-