For a mayor who campaigned on breaking Chicago’s old way of doing business, Brandon Johnson sure has spent much of his administration dodging questions about ethics reform. At almost every turn, he has fought good governance reforms with either stalling tactics or by lobbying to kill reforms at the committee level. This September, he has a rare chance to reset that narrative.
More Top Picks Swim Goggles
In a city where reform moves slowly — if at all — the chair of the City Council Ethics Committee and the outgoing executive director of the city’s Board of Ethics are making another push, with a long-delayed package of updates to the city’s ethics ordinance planned for a hearing on Wednesday.
The amendments, which draw on recommendations made by the Board of Ethics, would close various loopholes in the existing ordinance and address issues that have arisen in recent campaign cycles. Most of the proposals were introduced in May 2024 and have sat in committee without a vote ever since.
This is not a massive new compliance regimen. The proposed changes are small, commonsense measures bringing Chicago more in line with good government practices, including restrictions on the use of city property in campaign videos and images, and “stand by your ad” provisions that hold candidates responsible for their campaign communications.
Most significantly, the revised ordinance would hold the owners, operators and managing partners of businesses with city contracts to the same campaign finance restrictions as the businesses themselves. Under current law, contributions from “entities doing business with” the city are capped at $1,500 — but in races with the caps lifted for individual donations, which happens routinely, especially in more high-profile races, the owners of those firms routinely give tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars.
A Better Government Association Policy analysis of the previous mayoral race found over $700,000 in donations to the incumbent and the two runoff candidates from the owners and senior executives of firms holding city contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars.
Restricting a corporate entity that does business with the city to a $1,500 donation while the owner cuts six-figure checks makes a mockery of pay-to-play protections, which are nominal at best. With caps on personal donations almost certain to be lifted again in the next mayoral cycle, now is the time for the City Council to bring Chicago’s laws in line with those of other major cities, including New York City and Los Angeles.
Meaningful reforms have happened during this administration, but not because of this administration. When the City Council unanimously passed a landmark ban prohibiting registered lobbyists from donating campaign cash to the mayoral campaign coffers, it was a victory driven by the City Council, the chair of the Ethics Committee and good government groups advocating for passage, not the fifth floor of City Hall. The same was true when council members made changes to the selection process for the inspector general, added term limits to that office, and garnered more protections and safeguards from executive interference in the inspector general’s investigations. These reforms didn’t pass because Johnson championed them; they passed in spite of his administration.
We are now seeing an executive director of the Board of Ethics retire without a known replacement, two members of the board serving on expired terms and no named chair of the ethics board, despite the BGA calling for one for over a year.
With a vote before them in the Ethics Committee, members of the City Council have an opportunity to set themselves apart from an administration that has lagged on ethics reform. The city is counting on them to make the right decision.
Bryan J. Zarou is vice president of policy at the Better Government Association.
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email [email protected].