Letters: Will Michael Madigan saga send a message?

The conviction and sentencing of former Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan should give pause to those in positions of trust who are tempted to misuse those positions for personal gain. But those who succumb all seem to be of a common mindset: They are too smart to get caught.

Madigan may nonetheless receive a “get out of jail free” card. On the day that he’s due to report to prison, the man in the Oval Office may grant Madigan a pardon just for the pleasure of thumbing his nose at Chicago and the state of Illinois.

— Dan McGuire, Bensenville

Madigan’s freedom

Former Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan was convicted in February and could have been taken into custody then instead of at his sentencing four months later. He was found guilty of corruption, and he should have been considered a dangerous criminal.

The same thing happened when he was sentenced. He walked out of the courthouse after his hearing and is due to surrender himself for federal prison in October, in four months. He hasn’t assaulted anyone but is still a dangerous felon who should not have been released. That’s a total of eight months of freedom he doesn’t deserve.

In regard to those 200 letters the court received on his behalf, they are completely irrelevant to the determination of his sentence. Who cares if he has helped friends over the years? Most of us have. Lots of politicians help people.

Finally, his age and family matters are also completely irrelevant. I take issue with the judge, who said Madigan’s age matters regarding his sentence.

It doesn’t.

— David Rubin, Des Plaines

A tradition in Illinois

With the sentencing of Michael Madigan, our state is once again the focus of corruption in government. It’s become a tradition like growing corn or soybeans that Illinois voters elect people who inevitably end up on the wrong side of the law.

Maybe it’s time to plant crops that are more resistant to graft and the promise of power.

— Bob Ory, Elgin

A distant dream?

Although I had a momentary sense that justice had been served after reading about the Michael Madigan sentencing, I quickly returned to reality. This is Illinois after all. Madigan amassed a $40 million fortune no doubt largely due to his tax-related law practice.

How is this clear conflict of interest even allowed in our state? How much time could Madigan devote to this profitable endeavor while being our speaker for decades? ComEd remains unabashed in seeking dramatic rate increases. Ethics reform remains a distant dream that our pols refuse to entertain. Our state is hemorrhaging money to partially fund a failed pension system, and we clearly lose businesses and taxpayers every day due largely to Madigan.

While some pols will give momentary lip service to the sins of Madigan, they knew of and abetted this ingrained system. At the end of the day, he will have well-connected legal representation to challenge his conviction, and his family will enjoy the millions of his questionable gains.

Somehow, I have to feel there already is some dealmaking going on to help the former speaker. We will see how this conviction ultimately affects Illinois, but the history is well documented. It’s business as usual.

— Brad Johnson, Crete

Gratitude for Madigan

In the 1980s, the MacBride Principles for Fair Employment in Northern Ireland became law in Illinois and made it into a city of Chicago ordinance and into federal law. At the time, a few dozen U.S. corporations employed 11% of the population of Northern Ireland; these Irish workers faced job discrimination. Supporters of the Illinois part of the campaign are saddened that former Illinois House Speaker Mike Madigan has been sentenced to 7.5 years in prison for corruption.

State Rep. John McNamara, who led the planning sessions, directed us to win the support of Madigan. Campaigners went door to door collecting signatures on letters of support for MacBride from all residents in Madigan’s district with Irish surnames.

Madigan was initially distant, but he responded to his constituents’ overwhelming support for MacBride. He assigned an aide to the campaign. Soon thereafter, Madigan committed to MacBride, and it eventually passed in the Illinois House and Senate. It required another campaign to get Gov. Jim Thompson to sign it.

As the crucial politician, Madigan never even hinted at a quid pro quo. We gratefully remember that Madigan served his constituents honorably.

— Christopher and Mary Fogarty, Chicago

Madigan a criminal

The Sunday editorial on Michael Madigan (“The sad application of justice in the Madigan saga”) closed with: “We feel sorry for Madigan and his family.”

He’s a criminal, he cheated the system, he squeezed people and corporations, and his family knew it. How does someone gather such wealth on a state lawmaker’s salary?

More Top Picks Best Model Railroad Sets For Adults

Madigan should pay more back to the state for his dishonesty. It caused us to pay more via taxes and fees!

— Dan India, Deerfield

A walk of shame

Michael Madigan’s conviction made me think of a new tourist attraction for Chicago like the Hollywood Walk of Fame. We could have a “political walk of shame.” The federal plaza in Chicago would be an ideal location: Politicians after their conviction could walk out to a freshly poured cement square and create handprints.

The walk would make for a long day of reading Illinois politicians’ misdeeds.

— Jerome C Malon, Chicago

Vote on project

On Tuesday, for the first time since the Connected Communities Ordinance made it possible in 2022, a developer will force a City Council vote on a project that its local alderman had rejected. The transit-oriented development project at 1840 N. Marcey St. in Lakeview — including 615 rental units, 124 of which are affordable — was approved by the Chicago Plan Commission last June but has languished in the Zoning Committee since.

In our former roles at the Department of Housing and mayor’s office, respectively, we helped draft and pass the legislation that makes this revisit possible. Our work ensured that proposed developments with at least 20% affordable housing located near transit in low-affordability areas must be called for a council vote. Why? We had seen far too many proposals stopped by aldermen without having to publicly defend their rationale.

But this project and others like it are not simply neighborhood-level matters to be settled by the loudest voices in a community meeting. Rather, they have citywide implications.

Here’s why: Chicago needs an equitable distribution of affordable housing: The city is extremely segregated by race and income, and our affordable housing is highly clustered in South and West Side neighborhoods. An opportunity to place 124 affordable units in one of the highest-amenity, most walkable and transit-rich parts of the city with no public subsidy does not come often.

All Chicagoans benefit when more people can live and work near transit. Adding 615 new households boosts the local economy with millions of dollars in spending and tax revenue over 10 years. Significantly, the 124 affordable homes near transit would give low-income households access to more than 1 million jobs within 30 minutes, not to mention countless other educational opportunities and health care necessities.

Chicago has already decided and affirmed often to embrace dense, affordable housing near transit, most recently via the Connected Communities Ordinance in 2022. It’s both wrong and harmful to relitigate principles already established, creating a time-and-uncertainty tax that disincentivizes and makes the kind of development we need more costly.

So what’s next? A vote on 1840 N. Marcey St. in the City Council on Tuesday. All aldermen should consider this a decision with citywide impacts. Chicago needs housing options, capital investment, construction jobs and tax revenue.

We urge the City Council to support this opportunity to bring affordable homes to transit-rich communities with amenities and access to jobs and opportunities.

— Marisa Novara, vice president for community impact, Chicago Community Trust, and Juan Sebastian Arias, executive director, Elevated Chicago

Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email [email protected].