Tax Turmoil! Johnson Changes Head Tax Plan Mid-Game, Leaving Public Riled
A volatile and highly charged public comment period defined a recent Chicago City Council meeting, where Mayor Brandon Johnson’s proposed budget and his administration’s policies on taxation and immigration faced a relentless barrage of criticism and fervent support. The session highlighted the deep divisions within the city—between working families and corporations, and between those demanding cuts and those calling for increased investment.
The Opening: Quorum and Remote Participation
The meeting commenced with the verification of attendance, confirming a quorum with 36 members present and 14 absent. Crucially, a motion was approved to allow remote participation for several Alders—Coleman, Fuentes, and Ramirez—after their online presence was verified by the Madam Clerk. A moment of solemnity followed with the Pledge of Allegiance and an invocation delivered by Father Ryan Brady, who prayed for the city, its leaders, and its service members.
The calm quickly dissolved once the floor opened for public comments.
Public Comment Period: A Three-Minute Crucible
The 30-minute public comment window, strictly limiting speakers to three minutes, became an arena for raw emotion and pointed political attacks, primarily aimed at Mayor Johnson and his progressive allies.
The Veteran’s Fury: Attacks on Johnson’s Character and ‘Black-on-Black Crime’
The first speaker, Dennis White, a self-proclaimed veteran, patriot, and Black man, set a confrontational tone. White refused to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance, labeling Mayor Johnson “anti-American.” His central attack focused on the immediate impact of the administration’s financial policies, accusing the Mayor of committing a “black-on-black crime” by raising property taxes on the South and West sides of Chicago.
White also criticized the Mayor for allowing “teen takeover” events and highlighted the tragedy of a 14-year-old’s death, contrasting the Mayor’s safety with his “150 police details” against the grief of ordinary families. The veteran then went after Johnson’s personal finances, specifically a reported $5 million in the CTU pension plan, demanding the Mayor “tax yourself on that one right there.”
His tirade broadened to include several Alders—Fuentes, Vasquez, and Lopez—whom he bizarrely labeled “Hispanic KKKs” for their support of “anti-ICE protests,” emphatically demanding, “We want these illegal out.” White concluded his time with a theatrical flourish, holding up the Constitution and asserting, “We the People. It doesn’t say Brandon Johnson,” before issuing a final, scathing wish: that he would rather see the Mayor in an “orange jumpsuit” than voted out, urging the Department of Justice (DOJ) and “Trump” to “get this man out of office.”
Environmental and Economic Hardship: The Southeast Side’s Plea
The atmosphere shifted as David Barbosza, a third-generation resident of the 10th Ward and speaker for the Southeast Environmental Task Force, offered a more somber, community-focused appeal. Barbosza described the crippling financial pressure on his neighborhood, where his parents are considering selling the family home due to the “burden [that] has become too heavy,” even as the cost of living skyrockets.
He drew a stark contrast between struggling families and the “large corporations and industrial facilities” in the neighborhood that “operate, make profits, and benefit from being in our community without sharing the responsibility.” Barbosza eloquently listed the consequences for residents: polluted land and air, truck traffic, asthma, and cancer clusters—the inevitable result of being a “dumping ground” for industry.
He pleaded with the City Council to support the Hazel M. Johnson Ordinance and to recognize the reality in the 10th Ward, where “40% of our community makes less than $40,000 a year.” His message was clear: corporate benefit must equal corporate contribution, linking environmental health directly to economic and family stability.
The Battle Over Hemp: Jobs vs. Ordinance
The debate then turned to regulation with Dominic Cupas, General Manager of Smoke Station, arguing vehemently against the proposed Quinn Hemp Ban Ordinance. Cupas revealed that THCA hemp sales now account for 78% of their business after pivoting post-pandemic. He warned that banning hemp would force the closure of his store, causing four people to lose their jobs, including single parents and staff members who would be forced back into abusive family situations.
Cupas argued that the ban had “no basis in reason” when alcohol, which causes severe health issues and 88,000 annual deaths, is “freely sold and regulated tightly.” He conceded that the hemp market is “regulated insufficiently,” but rather than a ban, he proposed a solution that aligns with the city’s financial needs: “regulate it, to tax it.” Cupas warned that a ban would repeat the “damage caused by disastrous war on drugs and prohibition era gangsterism,” leading to job losses and the forfeiture of “hundreds of thousands of dollars in annual tax revenue.”
Budget Showdown: Youth Jobs vs. Corporate Tax Breaks
The core budget conflict was personified by two subsequent speakers.
Brandon Eert, a 24-year-old resident of the 44th Ward, passionately supported the Mayor’s proposed 2026 fiscal year budget. He accused Alder Bennett Lawson and the 25 other Alders who presented a budget alternative of exacerbating “the worst income inequality our city has seen.” Eert cited grim statistics—one in four Chicago youth live in poverty, and 94% cite mental health issues—and championed programs like One Summer Chicago, which gave 30,000 young people jobs.
He warned that the alternative budget “threatens thousands of these summer jobs while lining the pocketbooks of mega corporations,” concluding that “Giving tax breaks to billionaires does nothing to protect the future leaders of our city.”
This perspective was sharply contradicted by Danielle Carter, whose highly emotional speech started with a tearful plea about lines of hungry Chicagoans. Carter quickly transitioned into a furious denunciation of the Mayor’s budget, which she implied prioritized immigrants (“illegal aliens”) over citizens. She challenged the authenticity of the prior speaker, asking, “What in the Tyler Perry movie audition is this with the fake cries?”
Carter focused on the burden of high property taxes, especially on senior citizens, and then listed a number of Mayor Johnson’s appointees who are set to receive substantial raises under the proposed budget, including:
Michael J. McMurray: $58,000 raise
Chris Black Brown: $15,000 raise
Angela Tarber (Dept. of Environment): $30,000 raise
She concluded, “That’s where the money going,” suggesting the budget serves the administration’s staff rather than the city’s needy.
The Call to Tax the Rich: Homeowner Solidarity
Jimmy Rothschild, a homeowner and resident of the 33rd Ward working for the Jewish Council on Urban Affairs, brought the focus back to the homeowner crisis, noting his own property tax bill went up “about 75%.” Rothschild argued that the increase is hurting everyone—”in Alb Park where I live… on the south side… on the west side.”
He slammed the 26 Alders who signed onto the alternative budget, arguing it “takes the burden for supporting our neighbors off of the corporations who can afford it.” Pointing to major development across the street at Google, he insisted, “We know that money exists in the city. We should be asking them to pay a little bit more, not the homeowners who are struggling.” Rothschild concluded by urging the Council to “Pass the Protecting Chicago budget” to ensure investment in communities, youth programs, and safety.
This call was echoed by Alex Goldenberg of United Working Families, who accused the 26 Alders of “playing games” and called for them to “publicly renounce the letter” that proposed cutting 5,100 youth jobs. Goldenberg framed the budget as a moral choice: “We’re either going to tax rich corporations, tax working families, or make cuts to vital services.” He passionately argued that the budget’s progressive revenue measures, including the “corporate head tax,” were essential to build a movement to fight for progressive change at the state level, urging the Council to “stop playing games” and “tax the rich corporations.”
The Mold Crisis: A Plea for Federal Help
The final emotional appeal came from P. Ray Easty, who came to ask for a “West Side favor.” Easty spoke of a devastating flood two years prior and the resulting severe mold problem in West Side homes. He noted that while $426 million in Community Development Block Grant disaster recovery funds had been secured, 91% went to infrastructure, leaving housing needs, like mold remediation and furnace replacement, unmet.
Easty asked the Mayor to simply amend the action plan to redirect federal funds toward housing support. His second, highly political, request was for Mayor Johnson to “push whatever beef you got with the president to the side” and “make a friend” to ensure federal resources flow back to Chicago, thereby easing the city’s budget and tax burdens.
Conclusion
The meeting adjourned its public comment period with no further speakers, leaving the City Council to deliberate on a budget plan that has clearly polarized the city. The divide is not just political, but starkly economic, pitting Chicago’s beleaguered homeowners and service-dependent youth against the city’s corporations and a deeply skeptical faction of the electorate.
