Below are the Chicago Public Schools appointees of Mayor Brandon Johnson who (so far) have rejected his demand that the district take on hundreds of millions more in high-cost debt to cover a pension payment that by law is the responsibility of Johnson’s own city government.
There’s former CPS CEO Pedro Martinez, of course — he was fired for his refusal to do so. Also Johnson’s first handpicked school board — all seven resigned last year rather than do the mayor’s bidding to ax Martinez over his failure to make the payment. And now Macquline King, the interim CEO whom Johnson favored just a few months ago to succeed the outgoing Martinez, has joined this list, having seen firsthand just how difficult it is to plug a deficit in the hundreds of millions without making classroom cuts.
Don’t forget the vast majority of members chosen by voters in November in Chicago’s first-ever school board elections. Eight of 10 of the people’s school board members don’t support the mayor on this issue, either.
And yet still. Still.
Johnson presses on, seeking to saddle a school district drowning in junk-rated IOUs with a $175 million pension payment. As we’ve written before, such a plan risks further tarnishing both the city and CPS in the eyes of credit ratings agencies. It shouldn’t be considered in the present circumstances.
So why are we here again?
Because Johnson — despite what the law says — would prefer not to cover that cost out of the coffers of his city government, which (for now) “enjoys” a credit rating several notches higher than that of CPS.
Eleven school board members — a majority of that 21-member board — sent a letter last week to King saying they just can’t possibly vote for a budget that doesn’t assume responsibility for the pension payment nor allows for borrowing to handle the cost. Unsurprisingly, nine of those board members were appointed by Johnson; two others were elected with the backing of Johnson’s staunch ally, the Chicago Teachers Union.
More Top Picks Best Activity Centers For Babies
Because it didn’t include the pension payment, Johnson recoiled at the balanced budget that King (to her credit) proposed, allowing for schools to open tomorrow without the threat of midyear budget cuts. Now, under intense pressure from City Hall, these 11 beholden board members want to throw a school system that has endured more than its share of chaos back into the financial maelstrom. The budget vote is scheduled for Aug. 28.
And the reasoning these 11 give in their letter for disrupting the school year? “This will allow for greater clarity and accountability in the budget process,” they write.
Greater clarity? Nonsense. Further chaos.
We’ve weighed in before on this tedious and seemingly endless debate over whether CPS should contribute to the Municipal Employees’ Annuity & Benefit Fund, which covers many nonteaching CPS employees as well as workers for the city and other sister agencies. It’s fair to consider whether, in a perfect world, CPS should be helping support a retirement fund that covers many of its own employees.
We don’t live in that perfect world. State law makes that pension fund the responsibility of the city and the city alone. The proper forum to consider reapportioning responsibility for MEABF is in the state Capitol in Springfield.
Take your complaints and arguments there, Mayor Johnson, instead of upending the 2025-26 school year for the students and their families about whom you claim to care so much.
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email [email protected].