Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel is proposing a bold new plan to rebuild the city’s aging infrastructure. He has lined up financing giants including Citibank NA, Citi Infrastructure Investors, Macquarie Infrastructure and Real Assets Inc. and JPMorgan Asset Management Infrastructure Group willing to invest $1.7 billion in Public Private Partnerships with the city.
Chicago knows how partnerships can sour. Former Mayor Richard Daley’s sale of the city’s parking meters is now widely recognized as a poorly negotiated partnership that locked the city into a bad deal (for the city, not the investor partners) for 75 years.
Dozens of websites and tons of business literature warn about the perils of partnerships. They all say pay attention to the details now or pay the price later in litigation over ambiguities, poorly drafted language or an unanticipated and unpredictable future; make sure you really trust your new partner shares your interests and vision; and above all don’t rush into it until you are absolutely certain.
The Daley administration’s parking meter deal is a case study in what not to do. Daley rushed the City Council to vote giving them only a few days to understand the complex deal. The public was shut out entirely.
The Morgan Stanley-led parking consortium negotiated circles around the Daley administration. The city made promises to the consortium that hurt the city – for 75 years. They promised to pay the parking consortium when the city needed its streets for street fairs or traffic management. They have to pay for lost revenue from drivers who use disability license plates and placards to park for free in metered spots. And they promised it wouldn’t allow any parking facilities to open nearby.
Now, Chicago is battling a $200 million dispute over demands for compensation to privatized garages because it allowed new parking to be built in other nearby buildings. Chicago is also fighting a $13 million charge by the private parking operator that it has been too lenient in dispensing disabled parking permits (which allow free parking in metered spots).
The City Council is pushing back and the vote has been delayed at least a week but Emanuel claims he won’t modify the current proposal and is offering to write several executive orders – that don’t have the legal force of a city ordinance – to fix some of the current flaws. That’s a warning sign that the deal is another rush job that Chicago will regret. It’s better to get it right now with a few simple fixes. Illinois PIRG just released their recommended changes to the plan. Here’s some additional thoughts.
First, make sure every deal is analyzed by the Inspectors General long before the ink is dry. Had the IG looked at the parking meter deal before it was finalized, the city would have been in a much stronger negotiating position, and might not have entered into the agreement at all.
Second, don’t give up public control of public assets. The city council needs to evaluate – in open public session – and ultimately decide if a specific deal advances, or hurts, the public interest over the long run.
Finally, public actions and decisions should be transparent to the public with rigorous open meetings and freedom of information rules.
The parking meter deal was the “fool me once” moment. The Mayor and City Council should make sure this proposal isn’t a “fool me twice” decision.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.