Regarding the editorial “Mayor’s ShotSpotter intransigence denies political reality” (May 24): For 2 1/2 years, Chicago’s law-and-order City Council members didn’t care about canceling the ShotSpotter contract. Then on Feb. 13, Mayor Brandon Johnson announced he was fulfilling his campaign promise to cancel the ShotSpotter contract.
Only then did law-and-order aldermen begin to feign outrage at his decision. They did not care when community members rallied and marched in Little Village demanding justice for the police killing of Adam Toledo. They didn’t care when Johnson, as a mayoral candidate, and others publicly committed to cancel the ShotSpotter contract at the People’s Unity Platform Mayoral Forum. Did they attend a council committee hearing on the Chicago Police Department’s use of the technology?
Johnson ran his campaign on reimagining how we think about public safety. Canceling the ShotSpotter contract was one step in manifesting that vision. He went on to defeat law-and-order mayoral candidate Paul Vallas with that message. The people of Chicago voted for him knowing he would cancel the contract.
Now, law-and-order aldermen clutch their pearls. Ald. David Moore Jr., 17th, sponsored a city ordinance that would, well, it’s unclear exactly what the ordinance would do or how it would do it. It turns out that lobbyists for SoundThinking, the company behind ShotSpotter, fed the ordinance to Moore and other aldermen, who then continued this country’s great tradition of accepting policies drafted by corporations.
Make no mistake. What happened at the City Council on May 22 was pure political theater. The City Council, a legislative body, does not have executive authority the mayor does. So what did it actually accomplish? Aldermen got their 15 minutes of fame; they got their chance to grandstand in council chambers in front of the cameras, wag their fingers at the mayor and lambaste organizers.
Most importantly, they got their chance to undermine the mayor who vowed to invest in Black and brown communities in a transformative way.
This ordinance cannot force the mayor to reverse his commitment. Instead, it has fortified his commitment to cancel the contract.
— Jose Manuel Almanza Jr., Unete, Chicago
Unfair blame put on mayor
The editorial rants against Mayor Brandon Johnson are tireless and irritating. I put down my Sunday paper after reading “Don Harmon rescues Brandon Johnson on the future of Chicago Public Schools. But at what price?” to write a response.
The Tribune Editorial Board’s contempt for public schools and the Chicago Teachers Union is clear. Sounding the alarm about “leftists now in charge of the city and its schools” is anti-left red-baiting! What purpose does it serve except to detract from the issues?
Please don’t blame the mayor or union for the way public schools are funded. Consider how the whole tax structure pits home and small business owners against public schools and their unionized teachers and staff who deserve quality wages and working conditions. Take big corporations to task for not paying their fair share for the public schools that provide them with educated workers. This is a national and state problem played out in cities and small towns alike.
And please don’t condemn the mayor or union for defending public education and their students who deserve the best. Charter schools, which can pick and choose who they educate, privatize public education. They pull tax dollars from public schools that serve all students. Those with disabilities or whose first language is not English are losing out for lack of teachers and programs to serve them.
And please note that some Tribune readers are independents who don’t necessarily ally with either the Democratic or Republican parties or vote for their electoral candidates. We will, however, stand up for those villainized by the press over their support for working people, public education and unions.
Now, back to the paper to solve puzzles and unscramble the “Jumble”!
— Mary Ann Curtis, Naperville
A plea to DNC protesters
Regarding the letter from William Cory Labovitch (“Fears of destructive protests,” May 29), I would like to echo his plea “to please be respectful for those of us who are trying to have a chance of a lifetime to attend a national convention and support (Joe) Biden’s reelection bid” and to add my own heartfelt request.
As a lifelong Chicagoan who’s not planning on leaving anytime soon, I would like to add, for any of my fellow citizens who feel the need to speak their mind via protests at the Democratic National Convention: Seriously, y’all, don’t make us look like a bunch of jackasses.
Chicago’s got a reputation problem as it is — deserved or (resoundingly) not — but please, please, let’s not give the haters any more talking points, any more easily televised scenes of lawlessness and disorder.
Speak your mind. It’s not only our right; it’s our obligation. But please, I’m begging you: no chaos, no mayhem, no weapons, no wreckage.
They’ve — barely — stopped talking about 1968, after all.
— Regina L. Arndt, Chicago
Restroom situation vexing
On Saturday, my husband and I enjoyed a beautiful day in Chicago. It was the kind of day that makes us happy to be living near such a spectacular city and that makes Chicago such a wonderful tourist destination. We had lunch at the Billy Goat Tavern on Navy Pier, went to a play at the Shakespeare Theater, followed by dinner at Remington’s restaurant in the Loop. We spent some time listening to a very talented street musician and visited Millennium Park. It was wonderful.
Our visit got off to an irritating start, however. We took Metra’s Burlington train from the suburbs, as we often do. Upon arriving at Union Station, we went to the restroom. My husband went in the men’s, and I got in line for the women’s. My husband came out, and I remained in line. I watched as male after male went into the men’s restroom and came out while I remained in line for a total of 15 minutes for the women’s restroom.
It is time public spaces either add more women’s restrooms or make all restrooms unisex. I recall previously waiting at a unisex restroom and listening to a man complain because he had a very short wait in line. Welcome to my world, buddy.
C’mon, we’re better than this.
— Beth Clemen, Western Springs
Lawmakers, clean house
So the Illinois House approved $750 million in tax hikes (with some help for the lower and middle classes). With the economy a major issue for Democrats this election season, why not for once really try to clean house?
With recent stories, thanks to investigative reporting, about millions of dollars of graft and fraud committed by elected officials and their staff, from American Rescue Plan funds for COVID-19 to yearslong corruption, let’s do right by our government for its taxpayers.
— Judy SooHoo, Chicago
Raises at a time like this?
It’s amazing that 5% raises for state lawmakers and other state officials made it into the budget in view of our tight budget restrictions and our terrible state financial situation.
— Richard Prince, Chicago
Assessing for violence risk
In the controversies over the Illinois Prisoner Review Board and pretrial release, focusing on the science rather than the politics would be helpful.
All defendants should be assessed for violence risk before trial. This is a fairly straightforward procedure that can be done by an appropriately trained probation officer or other court personnel. If the individual is at high risk for violence, then the justice system needs to provide interventions to try to reduce that risk. Simply locking people up is an expensive way of fixing nothing. There are interventions that can be used that have outcome data that indicates risk reduction. I know personally, having created interventions and collected post-intervention data.
Further more, data suggests that “gut-level” risk assessment by judges, prosecutors and defense attorneys tends to be fairly inaccurate.
No structured assessment process is perfect, but something more scientific would improve outcomes and possibly save lives.
— Bernard Glos, clinical psychologist, Westmont
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.
