Chicago Finances/Ratings Downgrade

[Chicago60614]

Originally Posted by helena101

If we have a "desirable urban core that people want to live in", why are people leaving for other cities and other states?

Downtown has gained 63,000 new jobs since 2010 and the population was up in the downtown area by around 50,000 people during the 2000's with around 12,000 new residential units built since then with steady occupancy of nearly 95%.

If you're going to fight one way on the city, you aren't going to win any debates trying to say downtown is in any current trouble.

The city has problems and many people are moving away, and the blue collar and lower-educated jobs are in trouble throughout the region. Manufacturing is still in the dumps. Those pains are real and I agree, but the overall numbers for the region is a mix of the good and the bad. White collar Chicago is doing quite well, especially in the city. Blue collar not so much. The combined picture is fairly stagnant.

The previous report about the large number of projects going on is real, but much of it is rooted in white collar and corporate sectors - hence why downtown is doing so well. It's not a vision or fudging the numbers. It's just the one large part of the overall region that's actually doing very well.

I mean they backed everything up in their articles:

"The March issue of the publication ranks metropolitan areas across the country based on new and expanding company growth. World Business Chicago (WBC) tracked 624 expansion projects accounting for more than 21,000 jobs created and $6.8 billion in investments in 2014**; approximately half of these projects were included in Site Selection’s rankings.

Both the central business district and neighborhood expansion remained strong. Chicago’s ranking took into account 95 companies expanding in neighborhoods outside of the central business district, comprising more than 2,800 jobs created and $1.3 billion in investment.

The industries showing the most growth were manufacturing, education, retail and business services and include companies located across dozens of neighborhoods including Avondale, where Coyote Logistics has created 500 new jobs; Ashburn, where Oak Street Health is creating 300 jobs; Clearing, where Meade has created 200 jobs; Archer Heights’ Focal Point which created 50 jobs in 2014, and many others across the Near North Side, Near South Side, Lower West Side, Pullman and West Town neighborhoods, among others."

[Chicago60614]

Also just to point out on the obsession with population stats. Of the 200,000 loss during the 2000's for the city, 115,000 of those were African Americans aged 19 and younger. Another 40,000 or so were elderly white people. Not exactly two groups that are at the forefront of the economic engine of the city. The adult population stayed roughly the same. Large increase in whites under the age of 35, fairly steady for blacks and Hispanics, lower of the older white population.

It also points to why those 50 schools finally closed and why they closed where they did.

[animatedmartian]

Originally Posted by Chicago60614

I think you're a little confused on what happens during bankruptcy (which no one is even talking about at the moment for Chicago). The Detroit situation was entirely different from the Chicago situation. Detroit has terrible finances and public sector issues, but the private sector of the city and most neighborhoods were also gutted and non functioning for the most part. The private sector is where Chicago and Detroit are very very far apart.

Detroit was already hopeless in its finances and being able to support any city services before bankruptcy. Bankruptcy is a means to sort through your past responsibilities and repackage them for the future. Hypothetically a bankruptcy does not mean hiking taxes sky high and draining all services and resources - it's a means of making sure that DOESN'T happen.

Chicago closed 50 public schools because those schools had been losing enrollment for decades and were up to 70% empty when they were closed. It was terrible to close them, but the real pain was that it hadn't been done slowly one by one over decades, but instead the district just ignored the obvious and waited until it HAD to be done and then it had to be done all at once.

The city won't get through anything unscathed, but you're coming at this from a very unrealistic angle as far as how the dynamics of it all work, public and private, etc.

I'll admit I'm not privy to the timetables on Chicago's fiscal crisis, but everyone seems to make it out as if it needs to be urgently fixed within the next year or something. The differences in Detroit and Chicago's private sectors was what I alluded to but the point I was trying to make is that a bad government can damage a good city regardless of circumstances.

The hike in taxes and cut in services is specific to however much debt and how big the budget deficit is and whatever negotiations take place, which again I admit, is not something I have specifically looked up on about Chicago. Though if Chicago currently has a budget surplus, then I would be confused at why there is an apparent fiscal crisis.

[Vlajos]

Originally Posted by animatedmartian

I'll admit I'm not privy to the timetables on Chicago's fiscal crisis, but everyone seems to make it out as if it needs to be urgently fixed within the next year or something. The differences in Detroit and Chicago's private sectors was what I alluded to but the point I was trying to make is that a bad government can damage a good city regardless of circumstances.

The hike in taxes and cut in services is specific to however much debt and how big the budget deficit is and whatever negotiations take place, which again I admit, is not something I have specifically looked up on about Chicago. Though if Chicago currently has a budget surplus, then I would be confused at why there is an apparent fiscal crisis.

The fiscal problem is almost entirely related to pension oligations of public employees.

[animatedmartian]

Originally Posted by Vlajos

The fiscal problem is almost entirely related to pension oligations of public employees.

Yes. What's your point?

[jonnynonos]

You really would have to dig deep into the finances to know how much trouble the city is in.

That is what ratings agencies do.

Moody's is currently saying that they think Chicago is good for its debt burden... But not by much, and the trajectory is headed one way.

[Chicago South Sider]

Originally Posted by Chicago60614

Also just to point out on the obsession with population stats. Of the 200,000 loss during the 2000's for the city, 115,000 of those were African Americans aged 19 and younger. Another 40,000 or so were elderly white people. Not exactly two groups that are at the forefront of the economic engine of the city. The adult population stayed roughly the same. Large increase in whites under the age of 35, fairly steady for blacks and Hispanics, lower of the older white population.

It also points to why those 50 schools finally closed and why they closed where they did.

Compared to almost every other metropolitan area in the country, Chicago's growth rate is below par. It will be interesting when all these other metros pass it up in population.

[Maintainschaos]

Originally Posted by Chicago South Sider

Compared to almost every other metropolitan area in the country, Chicago's growth rate is below par. It will be interesting when all these other metros pass it up in population.

There's not another MSA that would pass Chicago for decades. CSA is a different beast. I'm not saying that places like Chicago and Philly aren't growing very slowly, but it's going to be a while before there is another MSA of Chicago's size.