Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson sat down Wednesday for a wide-ranging interview with City Hall reporters Alice Yin and Jake Sheridan. Here is the full transcript of the interview, lightly edited for clarity:
Q: Thank you so much for making the time, mayor. We’re going to get started right away: What are the main ways you’re proud of your second year?
A: Well, I think it’s a culmination of not just one year. But I’m just incredibly proud of the coalition that shifted the political dynamics in this city, where the control and the dominance had been concentrated into the hands of a few people.
So, I’m proud that, as the most pro-worker city in America, we have been able to successfully ensure that workers are respected and seen, paid time off. I don’t think it’s a time to stop celebrating the fact that we abolished the subminimum wage, particularly at a time where cities are being forced to revert back to the painful days of not respecting workers. The $1.25 billion bond investment that has produced one of the most innovative approaches toward building more affordable homes with the Green Social Housing ordinance. We’re also very proud that I promised that we would prioritize public safety in this city, and in the month of April was the fewest shootings as well as the fewest homicides since 1962.
So between building a safe and an affordable big city, which is really unheard of outside of Chicago, I’m very proud that we have put ourselves in a position to be the leading example of how to center workers and build, again, a safe and affordable big city.
Q: You’ve compared yourself before to Harold Washington. What do you think is the main way you two are different?
A: Well, I don’t think I’ve compared myself to Mayor Harold Washington. I think what I’ve said is that since Mayor Harold Washington, many of the things that we are pushing were either eliminated, eroded or, quite frankly, just dismantled. We are in a slightly different political context right now, where the way information spreads and moves, it doesn’t have to be accurate in order for it to be news. That’s just the political climate that we’re in, because everybody believes that they get to report and break a story, right? So you have social media influencers now, right? We’re just in a much different sort of communications apparatus.
I believe what’s most important though is that the coalition I’ve described, that was the coalition that made it possible for many of the transformative measures that were taken a generation ago. And it’s requiring that same coalition to build a safe, affordable big city. I think we’re all different because we’re all uniquely designed for the particular time period in which we’ve been called to serve. I don’t have to be anyone else in order to be effective. I just have to be myself. And that’s what’s different about me. I’m who I am.
Q: You talked about some of the opposition you’ve faced. Do you think this time period has a Burke, a Vrdolyak? Who do you think those people are?
A: Well, it’s clear that there is an entire financial interest that is attempting to intimidate working people. This recent pack of millionaires who don’t have a vision for Chicago, right? The only thing that they want is to regain control and power so that the interests of the ultra-wealthy in this city and this country can be maintained. That is the operation of the federal government right now, where billionaires have unfettered access to power.
And their formation, where they are pointing their direction right at me, it’s clearly not an attempt to make our city safer, because we’re doing that. Whatever the motives are, it’s not about building more affordable homes, because I’m doing that. It’s not about investing in young people and mental, behavioral health, because I’m doing that. What I am ascertaining from a group of incredibly rich individuals is that they are the ones who are intimidated by the fact that we have a far more robust approach to how we govern in this city. And I’m not going to back down from millionaires and billionaires. As working people, we have to come together to ensure that we have a safe and affordable city.
I will say this last point, though, is I’ve said from the very beginning that the democracy and government that we’ve inherited will not be the one that we pass on. So, there are far more voices that speak independently than we probably have ever had. But in the midst of all of that, we have still been able to build homes, to stand up for workers, to ensure that we’re investing in public education. And so you had an era where there was rubber stamp and it was absolutely chaotic: massive school closings, shutting down mental health clinics, dismantling and destroying public housing, disrupting the financial apparatus and stability of our city. All of that chaos happened under rubber stamp. All of it. And what we’ve been able to do by opening up spaces where people can have real dissent, it’s how we’re able to move the city forward, and I’m humbled that we’ve been able to do that.
Now, I do regret that I have not effectively communicated with the people of Chicago of the work that we’ve done. I have to put that same amount of effort that I put forth to get things done in this city, I have to put that same effort toward communicating with the people of Chicago, and I’m going to do a much better job of that moving forward.
Q: To that point, you said notably last fall it’s natural for people to feel “uncomfortable” because, “If I were behaving in status quo, things would seemingly feel steady, but it would be a steady path on destruction.” How much longer do you think Chicagoans can tolerate feeling uncomfortable, though, before they lose patience?
A: I think the way in which I would answer that is that, here’s a question that I’ve asked myself: How long do people have to wait in order for government to actually see them and show up for them? They don’t have to wait anymore for that. They don’t, because it’s here.
You saw that we were able to pass Green Social Housing, something that I ran on. And people have been waiting for this type of transformation for years in this city. I don’t know if I would necessarily say that folks have been patient, but it certainly is a virtue. But think about how long we’ve waited for a mayor to actually believe in public education. We’ve had to wait decades for that, and now that you have someone who believes in public education, so much so that I send my own children to our public schools. The proof is that we were able to settle a contract where there are more critical investments for neighborhoods all across the city than we’ve seen in any other contract.
Now, look, respectfully, I do understand the frustration, because of some of the crises that I inherited certainly had an impact on the pace of transformation. I share in that frustration. But it took years for the city of Chicago to be dismantled in a way where, certain parts of the city we’re still excavating the rubbish and the ashes from the dismantling and disinvesting in our neighborhoods. And so I share in that frustration, the things that I have wanted to do, I have not been able to do them as fast as I would like. And moving into these next couple of years, it is proof positive that everything that I set out to do — we’re going to hire more young people, we’re going to hire more detectives, we’re going to drive violence down in the city, we’re going to stand up for working people, we’re going to build more affordable homes — we’ve been able to do that.
And we have to do a better job at effectively communicating, because what I did miscalculate was the extent in which those who oppose my vision, the extent to which they would go to and through to define me or to distort our work. It’s like the lesson that I’ve been working through in Bible study, where Jesus warned of the yeast of the Pharisees and Herod, that if you’re not speaking emphatically about the work that you’re doing, that people who oppose you, who do not believe in you, they’re going to spread and rise dissent in order to undermine and dismiss the work that you have been doing.
So something that I’m doing now with “Lakeside Chats,” and going to senior homes, and talking to our high school students, and talking more to the business community, doing town hall meetings, all of that work. While I was working to stand up government, one of the things that I did miscalculate was my responsibility to make sure that we’re standing up the very coalition that elected me.
Q: Some of that dissent has come increasingly from progressives in the City Council. They’ve raised issues like transparency, the way you handle transit, ethics. What’s your message to them?
A: Well look, there’s, again, no secret that there’s been some degree of frustration with some members of the City Council. There’s nothing surreptitious about my administration. But what I have to do a better job at is engaging City Council members more frequently and earlier. And we’re doing that.
Q: You have notably avoided detailing your September conversation with Pedro Martinez. What’s the reasoning behind not wanting to get in front of his narrative?
A: My father taught me something that was important. He said leaders should not seek — I’ll try to say this as direct as I possibly can — that true leaders don’t just simply seek praise. You seek results. That’s how you’re defined. And there’s conversations that have happened in these walls for generations. There’s something sacred about having conversations that are meant to be private. He’s got a family. I have a family. Why would I speak of a private conversation and break that trust and confidence? Now, we obviously have our disagreements, but he’s another human being.
Q: But you did say his version of what happened is not true. So wouldn’t you want to provide details on what actually happened to gain trust?
A: To gain trust with who?
Q: Well, if Chicagoans want to believe your statement that his version of events isn’t true, wouldn’t you want to back it up with what actually happened?
A: It was a private conversation. There’s something sacred about that. When I was asked directly, was it true or not, of course I had to speak the truth. I’m not going to go into details and break confidence and trust in the people who come to me in confidence, that somehow, if they share something with me, that Mayor Johnson will break those rules. Do you understand, I have multiple conversations with so many people all over the city, where people share things with me in confidence and they want to be able to work through those things. Just because someone breaks that confidence doesn’t give me permission to do the same.
Q: Why didn’t you replace him in May 2023?
A: I wanted to demonstrate that we could work with people. I’ve answered that question multiple times. I mean, I could have, but this was the nature of my approach, that I wanted to give people an opportunity to demonstrate that they can stand alongside me. Now, obviously that wasn’t the case. It’s a lesson learned and it was an error on my part to believe that someone giving me their word, that they would keep it.
Q: Is it true that you two had an earlier mutual understanding that he would gracefully step aside if it ever came that you two disagreed?
A: Everyone who serves this city and works under my direction have all made it very clear that if there ever came a point where such a thing could not exist, that they would gracefully move on.
Q: As mayor of Chicago, you certainly have the authority to hire and fire who you choose. But why have so many firings been difficult or controversial when the time comes?
A: It’s a great question, Alice. It’s a great question. It gives me something to think about.
Q: Do you think the controversy is all external, or is this an area of being an executive that you think you could use improvement with?
A: Improvement on firing people?
Q: Yeah, there is a method, a strategy to doing it. There is a way to move about firings that can elicit or not elicit media attention or detractors from other areas of government.
A: There is. Many people have not stayed here. There are folks who have been dismissed, and no one ever knows about it.
Q: When it comes to hiring, we hear there have been some notable candidates rejecting top jobs — Kam Buckner, Clayton Harris, and this nationwide search for CTA has not appeared to generate results. Why has it been hard to attract talent?
A: We just put forth two incredible names, Frank (Francisco Velez) and Mike (Michael McMurray). Frank is going to head up OEMC, and Mike is going to head up Aviation. Very talented individuals. We are breaking ground across the city building more affordable homes. Between Commissioners (Lissette) Castañeda and (Ciere) Boatright, these are incredibly talented individuals. When I appointed Superintendent (Larry) Snelling, there were many people who praised that decision. And Dr. (Olusimbo) Ige established a playbook for how the entire country would respond to congregate settings and outbreaks of diseases. Chief (Sendy) Soto is building out an homelessness operation that, as of date, there’s not a single person who is on a waiting list looking for shelter, not a single family. That’s just to name a few.
The talent that we have amassed, you’re not driving violent crime down in the city of Chicago, and at the same time investing in ways that we have seen that have clearly been unprecedented without talented people. Our administration is one of the most diverse administrations in the history of Chicago. Now I’m not sure this is what you were getting at, but 45% of my administration is Black. I think they’re incredibly talented. 25% are Brown, incredibly talented. 8% Asian, highest you’ve probably seen ever, incredibly talented. 30% white, incredibly talented public servants.
We’re not transforming the city in the way in which we’re doing it without talented people who deeply care and love this city. So I would argue, not only have we attracted some of the most talented people, but people do want to work for this administration, and those that we have selected have demonstrated their power, their love, their influence, and, yes, their talent.
Q: Your chief of staff has been criticized for how she presided over HR issues, including how long she took to fire staffers, or her suggestion of peace circles for someone accused of harassment. How does that engender faith in her potentially being the next interim leader of our school district?
A: We have worked internally incredibly hard to create a working environment that speaks to our values. I have not made a decision on who will lead the school district, but what I can say emphatically is that, as someone who has served on the Illinois State Board of Education, someone who was duly elected as a state senator and someone who has been chief of staff of an administration that is the most diverse, progressive, talented, loving people, it is a clear demonstration of her skill set. Are we perfect? We’re human. We’re human, and we continue to be humbled by this position, but it doesn’t cause us to cower or fret or panic in the midst of controversy.
My chief of staff, essentially, was the project manager that responded to a global crisis that no one in the country had an answer for, helped operationalize the chaos at the border, where there were 4,000 human beings sleeping on the floors in police districts. Someone had to help lead that. And then not only did we rectify that attack that we were under by the governor of Texas, we built a ‘One System’ initiative that opened us up to a 126% increase in shelter beds. It takes a pretty special person to be able to help pull that off.
Q: Looking forward to the next budget, if you do propose a property tax hike for your next budget after the $300 million pitch last time got nixed, how would you be able to persuade alderman that this time, it’s necessary?
A: I put together this working group, because it’s going to take all of us to respond to the financial malfeasance that for too long was the accepted form of how we do finances, financing and budgeting in the city of Chicago. We’re taking a different approach. We’re bringing people together, because that’s what it’s going to take in order for us to create economic security. And the business community, the philanthropic community, labor, community-based organizations, my office, all of us will participate and be part of coming up with solutions. And there’s not just one solution. There are multiple solutions that I believe we have to not just explore, but work to communicate to the people of Chicago the ‘why’ as well as the ‘what.’ And we have started that process much earlier, meeting with respective caucuses within the City Council. We’ve already put potentially 40 revenue ideas on the table. And I fully anticipate a very robust, lively conversation around all of this. The expectation is that we all work hand in hand, stand shoulder to shoulder and show up for working people in the city.
Q: What are your biggest priorities in the next year?
A: I truly believe that we can have something that’s unique. Right now, if you look at what’s happening in other major cities, the average prices homes in New York and Los Angeles, we’re talking $1.1 million, $800,000, $900,000. I want to build the safest, most affordable big city in America, and I’m going to continue to prioritize working people in this city to ensure that actually becomes the reality. Thank you both.
