Ald. Gene Schulter (47th) appeared to backpedal away from a proposal that would have authorized the city to seize properties along Western Avenue in Lincoln Square. After a week of grass-roots roots action from groups like Save Lincoln Square (including a late-night march on Schulter’s ward office, captured here on video), the alderman issued a statement Monday afternoon that described his new stance.
Dear 47th Ward Residents,
Today, I met with representatives from a number of businesses on the 4800 block on N. Western Avenue to further address concerns regarding implementing acquisition authority. As I have stated from the beginning, this is going to be a collaborative process. Language is now being changed in the ordinance to assure many of the property owners and other stakeholders that we are in this process together. Under the new language, the City of Chicago states any acquisition north of 4807 N. Western Avenue will occur only on a volunteer basis, where the terms of purchase are mutually acceptable. The City will not seek to acquire any such properties by condemnation.
The City will also make every effort to achieve a mutual agreement with the owners of the Walgreens building. However, the City will reserve the right to acquire this property involuntarily if necessary.
Previously, I asked the City Council to defer voting on this issue at the City Council meeting on November 13, 2007 to give us more time to review the language. In consideration of the new changes, the matter will once again not go before the full City Council on Wednesday, December 12, 2007, but will return to committee for review.
I would like to also take this opportunity to thank the many residents of the 47th Ward who have called, written, and emailed their thoughts and views on this issue to my office expressing both support and concerns. I hope that we continue to work together as a community to move forward in achieving our shared goals for Lincoln Square.
I’ve had the pleasure of meeting Schulter a few times, and he seems to genuinely care about what happens to his Ward – he did grow up in the North Central ‘hood, so he’s made some decent trade – offs between development interests and folks who are wary of large – scale changes to the landscape. He’s also no dummy – if you want to continue being Alderman, better listen to your constituents; unlike Matlack, who was tossed out over one too many teardowns in his Ward.
Schulter backed off on allowing taller buildings south on Western around Irving when the neighbors complained. He does have a way of “caving” into community pressure.
The location on Western was appropriate for taller buildings, but the “nimby neighbors” on side streets complained. Now if he wanted to allow those on a side street comprised of brick two and three story buildings I could understand the complaints, but on Western Avenue it was appropriate. Sometimes an alderbeast needs to do what is right. Of course only if the alderbeast agrees with me.
Dmac, irishpirate,
I’m just old and have been around Chicago for a long time, so pardon my deep and abiding skepticism.
Schulter initiated the original plan for redeveloping this area, according to the Tribune. If community agreement was of any real importance to him, he could have sounded that out before introducing the original ordinance.
The city has many ways to condemn without exercising its condemnation / eminent domain powers, and do it in a way that allows Schulter to implement his original plan while saying his hands are clean. Does anyone remember what Bernie Hansen did to the Times Square game gallery on Broadway to move that deal forward? But then rumor had it that Hansen’s Kent Realty had a big commission riding on the deal. Certainly Schulter has no ulterior motives here!
I’ve met Schulter a couple times and had a favorabe impression, but my standards for local politicians are not high. I’d like to think that he just got a little over enthusiastic. His ward has come a long way. Give him credit for attempting to change course gracefully.
Joe,
Please tell the story about Bernie Hansen and Times Square. We’re still suffering with the fool he appointed to replace him.
Times Square was a well-known spot for about 30 years. In the late 60s through the mid-70s when the area was known as “Newtown” it was a prime destination for adolescent runaways and for the “chicken-hawks” (middle-aged males) who preyed on them. It was basically a video game / pinball arcade.
Times Square was on the west side of the 2800 block of Broadway, several doors north of the alley. The parcel from the alley north to Surf (now Bed, Bath & Beyond, etc.) was the subject of an assemblage. Times Square was the only holdout, and it had a lease that ran for another dozen or so years.
A relative of the owner was one of my employees. According to my employee his uncle, who owned Times Square, did not want to give up the business he’d been running for many years. He was, however, according to my employee, bluntly told by Bernie Hansen that the special business license he needed to operate would not be renewed when it expired – for starters. Feeling that he had a gun to his head, he negotiated a buyout of his lease.
Kent Realty, in which Hansen had an interest, was the broker for the property owners, with a sizable commission riding on completing the assemblage.
Some of this is hearsay – obviously – and some of it’s based on recollection that goes back more than a dozen years, so it can’t be taken as wholly factual.
I know the facts of more situations like this, but won’t tell them, including tales from people who paid to get things done and boasted about how little it cost, and what the going price of each of the local north side aldermen was. The only thing that’s changed about the way the system works during my 30+ year tenure in Chicago is how careful the players have become about disguising their motives and their actions.
Just for grits and shins I ran the following google search: schulter and “kent realty”.
Guess who is a real estate agent?
By no means does that means that the esteemed and wonderful Alderman Schulter has done anything naughty involving any particular thing.
Just pointing it out.
Personally if I were an alderbeast, I prefer to keep my night job as an ugly crack whore, I would want to be an attorney specializing in tax appeals. Certain politicians in town have become wealthy doing that. The names Burke and Madigan come to mind.
Of course when you represent the owners of the Hancock and you get a percentage of the savings that can be quite lucrative. I’m just saying.
I once had a real estate tax attorney acquaintance who went to jail for bribing Harry Semrow, who was on the Board of Tax Appeals.
His defense? “Everyone pays Harry. Why single me out?” Ah, Chicago!
Joe, I’m not a neophyte in the ways and mores of our fine “city on the take” – I always thought Royko’s proposal to change the city’s seal to the Latin version of “where’s mine?” was sadly appropriate. And I’m also aware of Schulter’s “part – time” job – but I continue to give him the benefit of the doubt in most cases, since he’s at least made attempts to keep his district’s citizens mollified in the past when they really started to raise hell.
I’m also not disputing that Schulter may have been trying to pull a fast one on his neighbors – hey, it wouldn’t be the first time. But I’ll give him the credit to see the writing on the wall here, at least as things stand today.
Dmac,
I have no reason – beyond the fact that he’s a Chicago alderman – to question Schulter’s integrity.
I was only suggesting that “it ain’t over till it’s over.”
Real bummer about Times Square. By the time I started frequenting it in the early 80s it was certainly a safe place to be. Kids my age went on dates there, had birthday parties there, etc.
I always thought that Hansen guy was a crook.