Mayor Johnson's administration has delivered a scathing response to a proposed alternate budget plan by a majority of city council members, rejecting virtually all of their ideas and dismissing them as either unwise or unworkable.
The 17-page rebuttal was sent to just 23 of the 26 alderpersons who signed a letter outlining their alternative budget proposals. The reasons behind the exclusion of three other names are unclear, but senior mayoral adviser Jason Lee hinted that some members have already begun to peel off from the coalition.
The council's proposed changes include a near doubling of garbage fees for eligible seniors and a 3% tax increase on off-premise liquor sales. However, Johnson's team has deemed these proposals as politically unviable, citing recent property tax increases that will disproportionately affect low-income households.
The mayor's administration has also rejected plans to raise taxes on rideshare services through a corporate head tax, citing concerns about the potential for court challenges and the lack of transferable security interests in municipal debt sales. In contrast, the team welcomes an alternative proposal to apply the city's amusement tax to ride-sharing services in a broader zone.
Despite these rejections, Johnson's administration has defended its original plan to introduce a corporate head tax, arguing that it is necessary to fund community safety programs. The mayor also plans to borrow $166 million to provide retroactive pay raises for firefighters and paramedics, while cutting the advance pension payment by $130 million.
The rebuttal highlights the challenges of finding common ground with the city council majority, who are determined to avoid the corporate head tax. With the full plan rejected as a whole, it remains to be seen whether the council will attempt to negotiate piecemeal changes or revisit their proposals from scratch.
The 17-page rebuttal was sent to just 23 of the 26 alderpersons who signed a letter outlining their alternative budget proposals. The reasons behind the exclusion of three other names are unclear, but senior mayoral adviser Jason Lee hinted that some members have already begun to peel off from the coalition.
The council's proposed changes include a near doubling of garbage fees for eligible seniors and a 3% tax increase on off-premise liquor sales. However, Johnson's team has deemed these proposals as politically unviable, citing recent property tax increases that will disproportionately affect low-income households.
The mayor's administration has also rejected plans to raise taxes on rideshare services through a corporate head tax, citing concerns about the potential for court challenges and the lack of transferable security interests in municipal debt sales. In contrast, the team welcomes an alternative proposal to apply the city's amusement tax to ride-sharing services in a broader zone.
Despite these rejections, Johnson's administration has defended its original plan to introduce a corporate head tax, arguing that it is necessary to fund community safety programs. The mayor also plans to borrow $166 million to provide retroactive pay raises for firefighters and paramedics, while cutting the advance pension payment by $130 million.
The rebuttal highlights the challenges of finding common ground with the city council majority, who are determined to avoid the corporate head tax. With the full plan rejected as a whole, it remains to be seen whether the council will attempt to negotiate piecemeal changes or revisit their proposals from scratch.
I think its pretty clear that the corporate head tax was just too hot of a potato for everyone to handle. The idea is definitely sound, but its got all these pesky hurdles that make it super hard to implement. And let's be real, who wants to deal with court challenges and financial headaches? 
On the other hand, applying amusement tax to ride-sharing services in a broader zone sounds like a decent compromise. Maybe its time for the council and the mayor's team to go back to the drawing board and see if they can come up with something that works for everyone.
this is crazy how Mayor Johnson's team is basically shutting down all the good ideas from the council and pushing their own agenda like introducing a corporate head tax again, even though they said it was off the table before 
and now they're just going to borrow money to give firefighters and paramedics a pay raise while cutting some benefits for other city workers? 
that doesn't seem very responsible.
but $166 million for firefighter and paramedic pay raises seems a bit steep, especially when you consider the council's other proposals like raising garbage fees and liquor taxes. It feels like they're trying to balance budget books instead of finding common ground 
. And what about all those alderpersons who were excluded from the rebuttal? Is that just because their ideas aren't deemed "wise" or "workable"? 
.
And what's up with the mayor's plan to borrow more money for firefighter pay raises while cutting pension payments? It sounds like a classic case of throwing money at problems rather than addressing the real issues 
.
. i think it's kinda sad that a proposed increase in garbage fees for seniors would be deemed 'unwise' - it seems like a no-brainer way to generate revenue 
. but seriously, borrowing $166 million for firefighter and paramedic pay raises might not be the best use of funds, especially considering the pension cut 
. either way, this whole thing just shows how tough it is to balance competing interests 
.
.
i feel bad for those city councillors, they're tryin to make a difference but mayor johnson's team is crushin them 
the corporate head tax idea might be unpopular but it could bring in some serious cash 
. And what's with the ride-sharing tax changes? One day it's corporate head tax, the next it's amusement tax...can we just get some clarity on this already?