CHICAGO | Politics and Current Events

[LouisVanDerWright]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ Huh?

I did post the headline, here's my post:

You can do better lol! Step it up!

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by LouisVanDerWright

Apparently there was an ordinance floated at city council today that would ban developers or agents from contacting a property owner for six months after they get a "no" in response to prospecting...

Just read that Rosa wants to almost double the city hotel tax. Chicago already has one of the highest in the nation. I'm sure that will be great for convention business.

Also, Rosa's DSA comrade, Rossana Rodriduez has proposed a $35/worker head tax for all company's with over 50 people in Chicago. That will be a great way to discourage jobs being located in here.

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/gove...ad-tax-big-way

[Chisouthside]

Read the article, not just mail. And I can relate, I had developers knock on my door numerous times asking information about the building i was renting in Pilsen at the time. it's annoying.
'That's contact via email, phone calls, dropping by the house or sending a letter.'

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by Chisouthside

Read the article, not just mail. And I can relate, I had developers knock on my door numerous times asking information about the building i was renting in Pilsen at the time. it's annoying.
'That's contact via email, phone calls, dropping by the house or sending a letter.'

^ Yeah that's annoying, so better tell the GOVERNMENT about it. Then they can pass a brand new law to intervene. Great way to go about addressing problems

[moorhosj]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

^ Yeah that's annoying, so better tell the GOVERNMENT about it. Then they can pass a brand new law to intervene. Great way to go about addressing problems

If we just get rid of government, we won't have anymore problems!

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by moorhosj

If we just get rid of government, we won't have anymore problems!

Don't be silly. There's a difference between what I'm saying and anarchy

[moorhosj]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Don't be silly. There's a difference between what I'm saying and anarchy

No, we get it. Big government for landlords, small government for individual homeowners.

so better tell the GOVERNMENT about it. Then they can pass a brand new law to intervene. Great way to go about addressing problems

Remember how you liked when landlords ran to the government to write a law for tax breaks on their vacancies, then they wrote a new law to intervene? It seems sometimes you do like problems solved this way.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by moorhosj

Remember how you liked when landlords ran to the government to write a law for tax breaks on their vacancies, then they wrote a new law to intervene? It seems sometimes you do like problems solved this way.

^ Sorry, bud, but you don't get to call that a double standard

Arguing for tax breaks is not the same as asking for a new law to be passed for every little nuisance

If you knew anything about the property tax appeal system you'd understand that nobody is out there "passing new laws to give landlords breaks". You have to appeal the existing taxes using a lawyer.

The only people trying to "pass new laws" are the ones trying to eliminate the ability to appeal your taxes based on vacancy.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by moorhosj

No, we get it. Big government for landlords, small government for individual homeowners.

How is it that I'm advocating for "Big Government for landlords"?

If your argument is the tax relief thing, you are making zero sense. Temporarily reducing your property tax bill is not the same thing as expanding Government and passing new laws

Stop being lazy

[the urban politician]

Come to think of it, show me this supposed law pushed by landlords where landlords get a tax break for vacancies. I'd like to see it. I can't seem to find it in my searches.

[moorhosj]

Originally Posted by the urban politician

Come to think of it, show me this supposed law pushed by landlords where landlords get a tax break for vacancies. I'd like to see it. I can't seem to find it in my searches.

I obviously touched a nerve here. I'm pretty sure you know that the vacancy tax break has existed for a while. There doesn't need to be a new law written when something already exists.

On the other hand, a new tax law was passed 2 years ago that included additional tax breaks for landlords at the Federal level.

“If you purchase your property via a pass-through entity – such as an LLC, S-corporation, sole proprietorship, or partnership – you can further minimize your tax implications. The new tax laws have effectively brought the tax rate for pass-through entities down to 29.6 percent,” says Allen Shayanfekr, CEO/co-founder of Sharestates.

“There are also new bonus depreciation rules,” says Samuel Tae, director of International Tax for Ryan, LLC. “These allow a taxpayer to immediately deduct from their taxable income 100 percent of certain capital expenditures and property improvements.”

There is nothing small government or fiscally conservative about these changes.

[the urban politician]

Originally Posted by moorhosj

I'm pretty sure you know that the vacancy tax break has existed for a while. There doesn't need to be a new law written when something already exists.

Ahhh, so despite saying this:

Remember how you liked when landlords ran to the government to write a law for tax breaks on their vacancies

..You couldn't come up with anything. As I suspected.

There is nothing small government or fiscally conservative about these changes.

Yet you insist on going off on this tangent (just like you weirdly did a few pages ago when talking about food stamps) because you're simply unable to come up with an apples to apples argument.

Appealing your taxes has absolutely nothing to do with expanding Government and you know it. That's like saying that I received a speeding ticket and appealed it and won, hence by doing so I am pro big Government. Makes zero sense...

[the urban politician]

The question is......will the deadbeat pay his rent this time?

https://blockclubchicago.org/2019/09...waukee-avenue/

Of course, in his world view he doesn't have to pay his rent because there is no such thing as private ownership. How convenient!

[the urban politician]

^ Already happening. We get Section 8 inquiries into my north side properties all of the time.

I have no issues with that as long as they are willing to pay market rents, which I assume they are.

[IrishIllini]

Originally Posted by Stockerzzz

https://www.chicagotribune.com/polit...5je-story.html

I’m fine with all of those suggested increases, especially the garage parking tax . I pray we never have to bear witness to another parking podium again. At least a standalone garage can easily be demo’d for a higher use.

[LouisVanDerWright]

We should have a special tax for vaping, tax the shit out of it.

[k1052]

Originally Posted by Stockerzzz

https://www.chicagotribune.com/polit...5je-story.html

Kind of amazing how strong the sentiment is for more cigarette tax.

Lightfoot seems to be on the right track boosting fees on single rider FHVs. I wish that the city would just outright implement congestion pricing for at least River North and the loop M-F during business hours but I think that will have to wait until NYC does it's thing.

[IrishIllini]

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/comm...ing-task-force

Very surprised to see only 800 affordable units were delivered between 2015 and 2018. Anyone remember off hand how many units were delivered in that timeframe? It has to be way under 10%. Maybe under 5%?

I don’t understand how this has become such a politicized issue. For CTU to join the rally is bizarre unless I’m missing something. Most CPS faculty and staff wouldn’t even qualify for affordable housing?

[k1052]

The union's apparent focus on the ARO is misplaced. I personally think the requirement is possibly too high especially in the downtown 20% zones. Really you're never going to tackle a housing problem without getting at the zoning that keeps lots of housing from getting built and in our case that means going after aldermanic prerogative.

Now 10% citywide onsite over 10 units if there is lots of land zoned for higher density residential as of right with waived parking requirements plus you don't have to dance with the alderman? Then we are talking.

[k1052]

The legal weed map downtown expanding a bit.

City plans to loosen weed-free zone downtown

https://www.chicagobusiness.com/mari...-zone-downtown

Retail marijuana sales would be allowed west of State Street, rather than LaSalle Street, in River North, although the banned area would extend farther north than the original boundaries, under a draft ordinance being circulated ahead of a key City Council zoning committee hearing tomorrow.

The revised boundaries would exclude retail marijuana sales between Lake Michigan and State Street north of the river. In the Loop, the exclusion zone would remain the same: stretching between the Chicago River and the lake south of the river.

Lightfoot’s original proposal would have prohibited retail marijuana shops from Lake Michigan to LaSalle Street in River North and between the lake and the Chicago River in the Loop. From north to south, the banned zone would have extended from Oak Street to Ida B. Wells Drtive.

The City Council’s zoning committee is expected to take up the ordinance tomorrow afternoon.

While an improvement it still doesn't make a lot of sense to me. I can walk into any convenience store in the zone and buy alcohol. When I lived in SF there was a large dispensary right on Market Street (for the pearl-clutchers about Michigan or State St) and I walked past it several times a day...there were no problems.