Last week, Mayor Brandon Johnson endorsed Ald. Daniel La Spata’s ordinance to lower the city’s default speed limit to 25 mph, which they claim will save lives. Also, Johnson allowed Chicago’s use of ShotSpotter to end. The gunshot detection technology, which cost the equivalent of 60 police officers, was helping save the lives of an estimated 85 shooting victims a year, according to analysis by the University of Chicago Crime Lab.
While these city leaders are preoccupied with finding ways to milk city drivers for more money, there’s virtual silence on another rash of street takeovers. Is anyone disturbed that such a preoccupation with traffic safety ignores the real havoc being wreaked in many communities by those who disrupt or block traffic, take over intersections and street-race with no real consequences? This problem has been plaguing an increasing number of communities, including downtown.
Everyday Chicago drivers who commit minor infractions are punished far worse than those who damage property and the public peace.
Consider vehicle-related fines. Many residents suffer significant financial setbacks from red light, speed camera and parking fines as well as the requirement to purchase a city sticker. Investigative magazine Mother Jones reports that Chicago issues more than 3 million tickets annually, far more than Los Angeles and New York City combined, generating 7% of the city’s operating budget in 2016.
Thousands of Chicagoans are driven into bankruptcy by these costs. A ProPublica Illinois analysis from 2018 showed that traffic and vehicle compliance tickets prompt so many bankruptcies of Black Chicagoans that the court here leads the nation in Chapter 13 filings. Chicago is punishing these residents, while there are few consequences for lawbreakers who would damage property or disrupt the community.
ProPublica reports that eight of 10 ZIP codes with the most accumulated ticket debt per adult are majority Black, accounting for 40% of all debt.
La Spata’s ordinance would effectively punish this group further for driving. Johnson stated that he fully supports the ordinance, saying, “It’s a matter of how we implement it, so it’s done in an equitable way,” whatever that may mean. If it becomes law, it would extract income from residents who are increasingly forced to transport themselves, in part because public transportation has become unreliable and is perceived to be unsafe.
Chicago needs a nuisance ordinance to aggressively crack down on those who damage public or private property, trespass, violate the public way, take over city streets, disrupt college campuses or interfere with commerce. Unfortunately, such offenders have become increasingly emboldened as they are rarely arrested for these types of offenses and, if arrested, are rarely charged. Furthermore, there are few financial consequences for the damage they cause.
A nuisance ordinance should state that anyone rioting, looting, violating the public way, disrupting traffic, physically assaulting a police officer or even publicly calling for such behavior will be arrested and prosecuted under charges of mob action or reckless conduct. Police would have the power to ticket, impound vehicles, confiscating personal property, revoke licenses and levy heavy fines. The city could sue in cases in which there was serious property or economic damage.
Children younger than 18 could be detained until a parent arrived, and parents of offenders could even be fined when their children do property damage, disrupt commerce or are truant from school. Meanwhile, the city could also pursue restitution for individuals or groups that seriously damage public or private property. There needs to be consequence for their actions.
Chicago, as a home rule city, has broad powers to improve public safety. Specifically, it can create an ordinance on any issue “for the protection of the public health, safety, morals and welfare.”
In the 1990s, crime rates went down after there were enough police on the street to ensure local police beat integrity and real-time response to 911 calls. Policymakers also recognized expectations about the rule of law affect crime rates — a focus on quality-of-life crimes signals to criminals that laws will be enforced. This has been increasingly missing from the city’s public safety efforts.
Unfortunately, it seems La Spata and Johnson are more intent on making law-abiding citizens pay heavily for minor infractions in traffic while ignoring the obvious criminal problems before us. A city nuisance ordinance would be a return to the expectations that there are very real consequences for criminal behavior that disrupts people’s lives, damages their property or threatens their commerce.
For law-abiding Chicagoans, it’s a quality-of-life issue.
Paul Vallas is an adviser for the Illinois Policy Institute. He ran for Chicago mayor in 2023 and in 2019 and was previously budget director for the city and CEO of Chicago Public Schools.
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.
