Chicago aldermen use their power over city zoning laws to reward friends and backers with multimillion-dollar opportunities, to amass thousands of dollars in campaign contributions and to determine who can live, do business and prosper in their wards.
By letting politics and narrow self-interest control how the City of Chicago is carved into business and residential strips, the city council has created a jumbled, arbitrary system of zoning often described by planners as one of the worst in the nation.
More Top Picks Best Desk Chairs For Hip Pain
And since the council has the ability to transform land values virtually at will, property owners are forced to seek the indulgence of their alderman, creating opportunities for favoritism and corruption.
Chicago aldermen have almost complete authority to reject or approve any project in their wards, no matter the size, merit or impact of the proposed development. In the last three years, the Committee on Zoning overruled an alderman just once-when a team of politically connected developers persuaded the council to ignore then-Ald. Martin Oberman`s objection to a high-rise development in Lincoln Park.
A six-month Tribune investigation of the Chicago City Council has revealed a body permeated by patronage, conflicts of interest and wasteful spending.
But no city council function is more subject to such abuses than zoning.
To examine the city council`s role in zoning, reporters reviewed records of the more than 600 zoning changes that went before the council`s Committee on Zoning from January, 1984, through December, 1986-changes that affected everything from tiny single-family houses on the Northwest Side to major downtown real estate developments
Among the findings of the investigation:
– Near-total sway over zoning enables an alderman to shape development and population patterns in the ward. With no questions asked by the council, two Southwest Side aldermen have rezoned large sections of their wards in what business and civic leaders contend is an attempt to control business and residential development. A North Side alderman rewrote an entire section of the zoning law so a friend could add on to his house.
– Aldermen routinely generate campaign contributions from persons and firms seeking zoning changes, sometimes receiving contributions within weeks of their favorable votes. Developers say it is difficult to turn down such requests because of the local alderman`s power to decide whether a project will be approved.
– A total of 191 zoning changes-more than 30 percent of all the changes approved by the council from 1984 through 1986-were requested in the local alderman`s name, without disclosure of the property owners` identities. Many of these properties also were held in secret land trusts that usually make it impossible to identify the owners through other public records.
– In each of the 191 cases, the city, rather than the property owner, paid to notify neighbors and handle other paperwork required for rezoning. It is difficult to put a price tag on this service because the cost of a zoning change can vary with the number of neighbors who must be notified.
At the center of the council`s role in zoning is the Chicago Zoning Ordinance, a 30-year-old book that governs the way property is used. The ordinance actually is a series of maps that defines the zoning designation of every plat of land in the city.
A change in zoning classification can mean a dramatic increase or decrease in land value. A change from R1 to R7, for example, is the difference between the right to build a single-family house or a huge condominium project.
Chicago zoning officials have acknowledged that the city`s zoning system is outdated and largely unenforceable, a key reason why expressways are littered with billboards and neighborhoods are marred by incongruous building patterns.
The Committee on Zoning, which makes recommendations to the full city council, is supposed to make decisions based on presentations from the applicants and advice from city planners, but records show that these recommendations are often ignored by the committee, even in cases when the planners argue that rezonings are disruptive.
City law requires that a property owner applying for rezoning name himself and any co-owners. But when a Chicago alderman sponsors a rezoning request, the property owner`s identity does not have to be disclosed.
Almost every other major U.S. city requires the disclosure of ownership in zoning cases.
”Most do it because they want to question the owner at the hearings,”
said Thomas P. Smith, editor of Zoning News, a publication of the American Planning Association. ”They want to direct their questions to him about what he is doing with the property. They would ask different questions of a person who is in the hazardous waste business versus someone`s grandmother.”
Another reason for disclosure, said Dorothy Nepa, zoning administrator in Denver, is to make sure that a council member has no business or personal ties to someone who wants a zoning change.
A situation where property owners` identities routinely are kept secret, Nepa said, ”would be ideal for graft.”
In many cities, zoning hearings are run like court hearings. Council members are not permitted to meet privately with applicants beforehand.
”At the hearing, the council member from the district generally takes the lead in discussion,” said Nepa. ”But he must come to the council with clean hands-without having made a decision.”
That is how zoning works in other cities.
This is how zoning works in Chicago:
On the chilly morning of Dec. 16, 1986, Josephine Fulton, 45, a housewife, took a bus from her West Side neighborhood to City Hall. For two hours, she sat in city council chambers, awaiting her turn to speak.
Fulton was upset because the Committee on Zoning was about to consider a change that would permit a grocery near her house to qualify for a liquor license.
The committee chairman, Ald. Terry Gabinski (32d) finally called on Fulton to testify. She said she believed liquor sales would attract loiterers and vandals to her residential neighborhood.
City planners backed Fulton`s claim, telling the committee the change would be an ”unwarranted intrusion” in the neighborhood.
Gabinski deferred the matter-not because of the objections of Fulton and planners but because the local alderman, Wallace Davis (27th), had been in a traffic accident the night before and could not make the meeting.
More Top Picks Eureka Powerplush
Later that day, according to both Davis and Fulton, a member of Davis`
staff told Fulton that the alderman would oppose the change, although he had introduced it under the provision that does not require ownership disclosure. Davis said he changed his mind because of mounting community opposition.
Fulton went home thinking she had won the battle.
Today, the two-story grocery at Huron Street and Homan Avenue has its new zoning, and its owners have applied for a liquor license.
In the intervening months, Davis, facing federal indictment, was defeated by Sheneather Butler, whose father and political mentor, Rev. Jesse L. Butler, has a personal interest in the store.
Ald. Butler placed the zoning change back on the committee`s agenda without notifying neighbors. With her support, the change cleared the committeee and was approved by the council.
”Nobody told me,” Fulton said recently when informed of the change.
”Nobody around here knew about it.”
In an interview, former Ald. Davis, now on trial in federal court on charges of taking bribes from a city contractor, said Jesse Butler owns the building, which is held in a secret land trust, and that Jesse Butler originally asked for the zoning change.
In an initial interview, Jesse Butler would not confirm or deny whether he owns the property. In a subsequent interview, he said he does not own it.
He admitted, however, that he has applied at various city agencies for building permits and permission to install a grease trap on the property. He also said he was leading the effort to obtain a liquor license for the building, though he would not explain why. Butler`s name does not appear on any public records pertaining to the liquor license application.
Several times, Butler made statements to reporters that indicated he has an interest in the property.
For instance, asked whether liquor would be sold in the building, Butler said: ”It wouldn`t look good for a minister to have a liquor license. I just got rezoned for rehabilitation and enlargement.”
Butler, who works as an aide to Cook County Sheriff James O`Grady, also claimed that Davis withdrew his support for the rezoning because his daughter decided to run against Davis. Davis denied that was his reason.
Ald. Butler, who wrote a letter asking the city`s Department of Inspectional Services to move quickly in granting a building permit for the store, said she had no idea her father might have an interest in the building. She said another man, Ata Yasin, had told her that he owns it.
Yasin did not return telephone calls or respond to messages left at his store.
Jesse Butler would not describe his interest in the property or his relationship to Yasin in any detail except to say that he once sold Yasin another grocery. Jesse Butler said there was no need for reporters to talk to Yasin because, ”Anything he can tell you, I can tell you.”
The way in which the grocery was rezoned is not unusual. At least 35 of the 50 current aldermen have sponsored zoning changes for unidentified business and property owners.
In some cases, the aldermen were helping constituents who could not afford the $250 zoning fee, city records show. But the records also show that most of the nearly 200 private interests rezoned by the local alderman have been restaurants, liquor stores, bars, real estate developments, car washes and large private homes. By waiving the zoning application fee for 191 anonymous petitioners, the city lost $47,750 in revenue over three years.