This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/20/us/lori-lightfoot-chicago-mayor.html

The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Lori Lightfoot Is Inaugurated, Vowing End to ‘Kiss a Ring’ Chicago Politics New Mayor Lori Lightfoot Vows Death to ‘Kissing-the-Ring’ Chicago Rules
(about 3 hours later)
CHICAGO — On Monday morning, Lori Lightfoot will be sworn in as Chicago’s 56th mayor. Alongside the new mayor will be the City Council’s 50 aldermen — clapping, smiling, possibly seething a little — whose power she has vowed to diminish. CHICAGO — With the members of the City Council, former Mayor Richard M. Daley and Mayor Rahm Emanuel looking on, Lori Lightfoot was sworn in as Chicago’s 56th mayor on Monday, lauding the city’s resilience and diversity while also vowing to kill old-style Chicago politics.
Ms. Lightfoot, an outsider candidate who won nearly 75 percent of the vote to become mayor of the nation’s third-largest city, has made it her first major order of business to end what is known in Chicago as aldermanic prerogative. That is an unwritten rule that gives aldermen unfettered zoning and permitting power in their own wards. It is also widely seen as an invitation to corruption. “For years, they said ‘Chicago ain’t ready for reform,’” said Ms. Lightfoot, 56, a former federal prosecutor, addressing the crowd of thousands who had gathered in an arena on a blustery May day. “Well, get ready, because reform is here.”
Many Chicagoans would like to do away with the practice, which is both unofficial and deeply ingrained in the city’s culture — as the Chicago Tribune put it recently, “the grease that oils the machine.” Ms. Lightfoot’s inauguration made history. She is the city’s first openly gay mayor. When she won all of Chicago’s 50 wards in April, the city became the largest ever to elect an African-American woman as its mayor.
Advocates of aldermanic prerogative, also known as “aldermanic privilege,” see it as a legitimate way for residents to have a real say in what happens in their own neighborhood through the decisive sway of their alderman on big things and little ones — a block party, a drive-through proposal, a new building. One of her first orders of business, Ms. Lightfoot said, would be ending an unwritten rule that gives aldermen unfettered zoning and permitting power in their own wards.
Detractors consider it a blatant, bizarre and laughable invitation for classic Chicago-style corruption, and point to the latest investigation into the city’s longest-serving alderman as a case in point. Alderman Ed Burke is accused of threatening to slow approval of remodeling plans for a Burger King restaurant in his ward unless it hired his law firm for tax work; he has denied wrongdoing. “These practices have gone on here for decades. This practice breeds corruption. Stopping it isn’t just in the city’s interest. It’s in the City Council’s own interest,” she said, squaring her shoulders and turning to face the council members directly, as the audience leapt to its feet, clapping and shouting.
One thing seems sure: Chicago aldermen, long accustomed to the special say-so, are unlikely to cede their strongest powers without a lot more conversation. But in an interview last week as Ms. Lightfoot prepared to replace Rahm Emanuel at City Hall, she said she wasn’t backing down. [Read a parting interview with Mr. Emanuel, the outgoing mayor.]
Here’s her plan, in her own words: Ms. Lightfoot was sworn in alongside her wife, Amy Eshleman, and their daughter, Vivian. In her speech, she promised to take on the city’s most pressing problems: gun violence, a lack of good public schools in many parts of the city and a staggering pension shortfall. There were prayers by a rabbi, an imam, a pastor and a priest. Lines from a beloved poem by Gwendolyn Brooks were read aloud. Kilt-wearing police officers marched happily through the crowd, blasting bagpipes.
“Right now, if you want a project — a zoning project, a development project — to happen in a particular ward, you have to have a written letter from the alderman saying that he or she signs off. That’s just something that’s been created. It’s not required under the municipal code. That will disappear.” As Chicagoans who watched the inauguration began to file out of the arena, they said they were thrilled by her promise to curtail the power of City Council members. “They do have too much power,” said Shatina Taylor, 41. “And they abuse it.” (She added that her sister, Jeanette B. Taylor, had just been sworn in as Chicago’s 20th ward alderman.)
“We’re going to introduce an executive order that directs city agencies to identify the ways in which they have given deference to aldermen. And by deference, I mean giving them this unchecked veto right. And directing them that this will no longer be an acceptable policy or practice in my administration.” [Read more about Lori Lightfoot’s history-making election.]
“The machine was built to last. The machine was built on compliance and rewarding those who were part of the machine and aldermanic prerogative is absolutely one of the tools that was used to keep people in line.” Advocates of the practice of granting aldermen extra power — known here as aldermanic privilege — when it comes to their ward see it as a legitimate way for residents to have a real say in what happens in their own neighborhood on big things and little ones: a block party, a drive-through proposal, a new building.
“What will disappear is their unchecked veto right. And if you look at the number of aldermen who have been prosecuted for corruption over the years, clearly one of the unifying threads is abuse of aldermanic prerogative.” Detractors consider it a blatant, bizarre and laughable invitation for classic Chicago-style corruption, and point to the latest investigation into the city’s longest-serving alderman as a case in point. Alderman Ed Burke, who attended the inauguration, is accused of threatening to slow approval of remodeling plans for a Burger King restaurant in his ward unless it hired his law firm for tax work; he has denied wrongdoing and was re-elected to a 13th term several weeks after he was charged.
“I think it’s been corrosive, I think it’s been abused and I think it has prevented us from taking on and tackling some big citywide urgencies like creating housing that’s affordable for people all over the city. So I don’t think it’s a legacy that suggests it’s something we should salvage, it’s something we should modify. It’s something that we have to get rid of.” Later on Monday, Ms. Lightfoot signed her first executive order, which directed city departments to stop honoring the practice in many cases. She said City Council members would continue to have input, but not a veto.
“I had a major C.E.O. say to me just the other day, ‘I’m so glad you’re taking on aldermanic prerogative. It’s ridiculous. It makes it very difficult for us to do business.’ Also just average citizens: They’ve paid their taxes, they work hard every day, they shouldn’t have to go and kiss a ring to get the access to basic city services.” At least some aldermen were supportive.
“There’s no question. This is a very deeply entrenched culture that’s built up over decades. It’s not going to disappear overnight. But what it depends on is complicity by the executive branch. And what our executive order will do is to end that role. There will certainly be instances where aldermen could get together and vote in a bloc and give deference to another alderman. But we’re going to work very hard to call those kinds of things out.” “While aldermanic input is critical in representing the interests of communities, we are working to prevent politics from influencing departmental decisions,” Alderman Michele Smith said in a statement.
[Read more about the challenges ahead for Ms. Lightfoot.]
David Greising, president of the Better Government Association, a nonprofit watchdog group based in Chicago, said Ms. Lightfoot’s order was a first step in curbing “a kissing-the-ring system that is not good for democracy” and “has created a system of endemic corruption.”
But he noted that aldermen would retain some of their authority over zoning, and suggested that it may be difficult to get support for her executive order from the very people who stand to lose power.
“There’s a lot of pushback,” Mr. Greising said. “Aldermen value this power and recognize that if they give it up, it diminishes their ability to have control over what happens in their wards.”
Some have less hardened views on the practice. Asked whether it was a problem or a good thing, Willie Wilson, a Chicago businessman who ran for mayor this year, said he saw it as “a little bit of both.” Mr. Wilson said there were advantages in having aldermen get a louder say to deal with neighborhood-level issues, but also the possibility the authority could be corrupted.
Uncertain was how Chicago politicians might go forward without the city’s longstanding way of doing business.
“What’s going to replace that? How’s she going to administer that in City Hall? Who’s going to be answering for that?” asked Mr. Wilson, who endorsed Ms. Lightfoot in the runoff.
Don Rose, a political consultant who has advised Ms. Lightfoot, said he viewed it as Ms. Lightfoot fulfilling a campaign promise. The details of how to go about it were a little murkier, he acknowledged.
“In some ways, we’re all dealing with intangibles here — people would find it very odd that she’s making an executive order about something that’s an unwritten rule,” he said. “It’s uniquely Chicago.”