3 Comments - Add Your Comment

Since the Second City limped in fourth in the Olympic race, pundits have called for Chicago to dedicate itself to another large scale project to replace the catalyzing power of a Games. There has been no shortage of ideas — making Chicago the safest city in America by 2016, reforming the educational system, rebuilding our infrastructure, and even hosting an international cultural festival. Chicago should forego the temptation to work on an Olympian scale and devolve power to the neighborhoods. This is the time to think small.

Under this approach, a pool of philanthropic and city dollars would be divided equally between all 50 wards. Each ward would develop a participatory budget process where residents would decide how to spend these funds. One ward might decide to tackle teen violence. Others might focus on rehabilitating housing, building small business incubators or creating literacy programs for immigrants. In my South Side neighborhood bordering the site of the proposed Olympic Stadium, I would opt for a greening program that would convert Drexel Boulevard into an arboretum and establish a land bank to finance community gardens on the vacant lots that will now not be developed for the Olympics. Once residents determined their ward’s program focus, they would also decide how the funds would be dispersed and track program progress.

This ward-by-ward approach offers a number of benefits. First, in a city where many criticized the Olympic effort as too top-down and opposed the Games because they don’t believe city hall, it is a chance to reduce the public trust deficit. It hands decision making and program implementation to the citizens. Residents — not bureaucrats, aldermen or the mayor — will set community priorities and determine who receives these public funds. Residents also ultimately bear the responsibility for good and bad decisions alike.

Given its sheer scale, the project will inevitably produce programs that effectively address Chicago’s needs. Just as policy and program experimentation by the 50 states led to welfare and health care reform at the national level, the 50 wards would function as the municipal equivalent of the “laboratory of federalism,” producing innovative approaches to problems that could later be implemented citywide. Equally important, we will also learn what does not work.

Finally, the project recognizes Chicago’s diversity, scale, and unique community assets. By necessity, Chicago’s Olympic venues were limited to a small number of neighborhoods. Participatory budgeting, however, would bring benefits and programming to each ward. It also recognizes that priorities vary across the city. What residents of Chatham view as important might not have the same appeal in Lincoln Park. It would rely on the city’s deep bench of local non-profit organizations, community development corporations and neighborhood social service agencies to deliver programs. These needs-based organizations are often more creative, nimble and cost effective than large public bureaucracies and would bring added efficiencies to the 50 projects across Chicago.

I looked forward to welcoming the Olympics to Chicago. The Games were a chance to energize and engage all Chicagoans. Participatory budgeting in our 50 wards offers us the same opportunity — only we won’t be the spectators, we will be the participants, and the end game will be a better city.

Levesque is a lawyer who works in the West Loop.

3 Comments - Add Your Comment

Copyright 2011, Chicago Journal
141 S. Oak Park Ave., Oak Park, IL 60302, 312/243-2696
To view any of the other websites owned and operated by Wednesday Journal, Inc., click on the appropriate link.
Chicago Parent magazine • Skyline • Wednesday Journal
Forest Park Review • Riverside Brookfield Landmark • Austin Weekly News
Developed by: Zero Degree Production | Powered by: Snowflake