It’s a classic Chicago story: An alderman wants something done in their ward, and the mayor’s office twists their arm to get a favor back in exchange.
But in this case, the proposed trade chip is the fate of West Loop homeless encampments.
And an official in Mayor Brandon Johnson’s administration is taking the unusual step of acknowledging the would-be quid pro quo took place, calling it a typical example of “how political will is created.”
Ald. Bill Conway is crying foul after Johnson’s administration said they would have the city remove the tents in which people are sleeping downtown only if Conway voted in favor of two pillars of the mayor’s progressive policy agenda.
The conflict between Conway and Johnson’s administration begins with the encampment near Union and Ogilvie stations, which Conway said is a trouble spot for drugs and violent crime in the ward. Two recent shootings in the area have exacerbated his concern.
As part of his efforts to get the tents removed, Conway said he spoke with top Johnson adviser Jason Lee in early October while aldermen were at City Hall for meetings. Conway said he shared with Lee his concerns about recovered guns, propane tanks and drug packets found in the viaducts that are now crowded with tents.
Lee pulled Conway into a copy room behind council chambers and offered to help remove the homeless camps, but Conway said he tied the action to the alderman supporting two Johnson initiatives: an increased real estate transfer tax on properties over $1 million to help fund citywide homeless services and an end to the tipped wage for restaurant workers.
A day after their in-person conversation, Lee and Conway spoke again by phone, and Lee reiterated his requests, the alderman said. Conway recalled asking Lee whether City Hall was able to do more than had already been done at the sites, as he was running into bureaucratic problems.
Lee responded, “We won the election. Where there’s a will, there’s a way,” and added, “Special problems require special intervention from the mayor,” according to Conway.
Conway also recalled Lee saying that the administration’s progressive allies would “raise hell” if they helped clear out the viaducts, but City Hall was willing to make that happen because Conway’s votes “give us all the ammunition we need to justify why this is a critical intervention.”
“I was shocked by what he said,” Conway told the Tribune. “I wasn’t going to bargain with public safety.”
In an interview, Lee acknowledged linking the issue of the camps with support for the “Bring Chicago Home” tax increase on property sales over $1 million and the One Fair Wage ordinance to eliminate the subminimum wage for tipped workers. But he defended it as an appropriate deal.
“What I expressed to Ald. Conway is that … there’s a perception that doing something like removing encampments is not necessarily in line with progressive values and that it could be perceived as a callous act disconnected from the realities of what the unhoused and other vulnerable populations are going through,” Lee said.
“Ald. Conway demonstrating his commitment to progressive values, including eliminating the subminimum wage but most importantly Bring Chicago Home, is helpful to neutralize some of the criticism he might face in pursuing that.”
Asked about Conway not wanting to negotiate with public safety, Lee said police would continue responding to issues with the encampments.
“Ald. Conway is new so I’m not sure what his frame of reference is,” Lee said. “There was never any notion that we would not continue to support efforts to secure public safety to the extent possible in these encampments. The issue is removal.”
Officials with the Chicago Coalition for the Homeless did not directly address questions about the discussions between Conway and Lee. But Ali Simmons, a senior case and street outreach worker at the organization, said they oppose all encampment sweeps.
“That is not the way to go about connecting people to services,” Simmons said.
In the end, Conway voted for neither Johnson initiative. He missed a vote on the subminimum wage — he said he was sick — and voted against Johnson’s plan for a transfer tax hike.
And the encampments are still there.
Conway had been working with City Hall departments, including Streets and Sanitation and Family and Support Services, to address the homeless camps under the viaducts but said he recently learned plans to remove tents were canceled by the mayor’s office in October. City officials disputed that there were final plans in place.
The conflict between Conway and Lee follows a recent controversy involving Johnson City Council floor leader Ald. Carlos Ramirez-Rosa, who was accused of threatening developments in the wards of three aldermen if they didn’t take the mayor’s guidance on specific issues.
Ramirez-Rosa has denied the threats but stepped down as floor leader and Zoning Committee chairman in the face of criticism from colleagues.
It also comes at a fraught time for Johnson, who on Wednesday is looking to pass a relatively uncontroversial budget while navigating deep tensions in City Council over migrant spending.
Conway said he has referred the matter to the city Inspector General’s Office.
But Lee said he doesn’t see a problem with the exchange.
“It’s a pretty standard conversation about how legislation and policy interacts and how political will is created,” Lee said. “Obviously we wanted Ald. Conway to support that agenda and explain to him the linkage between the two.”