Chicago taxpayers should be alarmed by Treasurer Melissa Conyears-Ervin’s decision to divest taxpayer dollars from U.S. Treasuries as a political protest. This isn’t responsible fiscal management. It’s dangerously unserious, and the city cannot afford it.
As a Cook County commissioner who has spent the last decade scrutinizing budgets, debt structures, liquidity needs and fiscal policy across multiple levels of government, I feel compelled to raise a serious concern regarding the city treasurer’s public announcement.
Treasuries are the safest, most liquid instruments available to any municipality. They protect payroll, stabilize cash flow and safeguard pension dollars. Walking away from them to make a partisan statement is a breathtaking violation of fiduciary duty, especially when Treasuries have delivered record investment earnings for Chicago — more than $370 million last year alone.
If the treasurer wants to gamble with public money, the City Council and the mayor must act immediately. Chicago taxpayers deserve the following, without delay:
- A full, public financial impact analysis detailing how much yield Chicago is forfeiting and how much additional risk and liquidity strain this political move imposes.
- A complete disclosure of the treasurer’s alternative investments: what they are, whether they meet standards of safety and liquidity, and how they will deliver comparable returns.
- A clear reaffirmation that city investment policy is not a partisan tool. No mayor, treasurer or administration should be allowed to weaponize the city’s cash portfolio.
- A return to a professional, fiduciary-first investment framework grounded in financial discipline, not political theater.
Chicago is already burdened with massive pension liabilities, high borrowing costs and fragile investor confidence. Politicizing the city’s most essential financial safeguards only puts taxpayers in greater jeopardy.
The mayor and the City Council must intervene before taxpayers pay the price.
— Commissioner Sean M. Morrison, Cook County Board of Commissioners
Downtown distinctive
Regarding the editorial “Chicago tourism fundamentally is about downtown, not all 77 neighborhoods” (Nov. 16): I completely agree that Choose Chicago must put 99% of its energies (if not 100%) into promoting downtown. No other city has a downtown area — the Loop and Near North — quite like Chicago, while every city has residential neighborhoods where the normies live.
Give me your singular cultural attractions that don’t exist anywhere else!
— Michele Steele, Chicago
Fixation on downtown
I must invite the Tribune Editorial Board to rejoin us here on planet Earth. In two editorials this week, the board tells us what’s worth focusing on in Chicago is the struggling downtown area. Real, honest concerns about taxes and affordability are boiled down to how this mean old progressive mayor is just not nice enough to rich people.
Let me reassure everyone: Businesses exist solely in relation to their bottom line. They come to Chicago because it’s a great place to live, with easy transit, and a very diverse economic base. And they come knowing full well the costs of locating in an urban core and leave because they think they can make more profit elsewhere. Best of luck to the Arlington Heights Bears, who were oh-so-committed to Chicago until we refused to pay for another stadium and sell out the lakefront to private development.
Is that supposed to scare us into thinking nobody’s going to want to come to the lakefront anymore? International tourism really depends on one extra cool museum from the guy who made Star Wars who could have put it literally anywhere else? It’s a song and dance as old as civilization, and it only ever leads to a race to the bottom.
The board is bewildered that Choose Chicago dares to mention anything but The Bean. Sorry to Pilsen, Jefferson Park and Edgewater, but your businesses couldn’t possibly handle more customers, so there’s no point even mentioning you exist! It doesn’t matter that roads, rail lines, river taxis and buses lead to downtown, so why bother advertising the amazing breadth of restaurants, museums, cultural centers and public spaces throughout the city that need the economic activity just as badly?
And let’s be real here. The values of commercial properties in the core of the city are not down because the mayor floated a head tax that didn’t pass (“Own a home in Chicago? You should be cheering for commercial property values in the Loop,” Nov. 17). Commercial property values are down for the exact same reason they’re down nationwide: COVID-19 demonstrated you don’t necessarily need a downtown office to profit. Cushman & Wakefield reports show essentially every major U.S. city is having some kind of unprecedented commercial vacancy hovering between 20% and 25%.
Chicago’s Central Area Plan proposes what the editorial board is demanding. C’mon now, editorial board.
— Phil Nicodemus, Chicago
Idea to help Chicago
I don’t think Andy Shaw’s idea (“The paradox of billionaire philanthropists,” Nov. 18) to help address the city’s budget conundrum is Pollyanna-ish at all.
Let’s go!
— Rick Gray, president, CA3 Homeowners Associatio, West Loop
Illinois insurance rates
Regarding the article “Pritzker renews push for oversight” (Nov. 14): I want to clear up a few misconceptions because the debate over insurance rates in Illinois is too important to be distorted. Before lawmakers consider upending a system that has protected consumers for decades, let’s start with the facts.
Illinois insurers are already required to submit detailed actuarial documentation to justify a proposed rate increase. These filings are not rubber-stamped. They undergo review by a state regulator to ensure rates reflect real risk — not arbitrary pricing — and every increase must be actuarially sound. Any claim that insurers can raise rates without limits simply isn’t true.
It’s also misleading for anyone to suggest the Illinois Department of Insurance lacks oversight authority. The current framework balances transparency, flexibility and competition. And it works. Illinois has one of the most competitive insurance markets in the nation, with more than 200 companies offering homeowners coverage. That competition keeps prices in check. Our average annual premium is $1,143, which is below the national average of $1,337.
HB3799 would replace this effective model with a rigid “prior approval” system and impose requirements and lengthy approval delays that could destabilize the market. Independent analysis shows that shifting to this model could increase premiums by 20%, which works out to be about $230 per household. That’s exactly what happens when regulators suppress actuarially sound rates: Insurers pull back, choices shrink and consumers pay more. California’s experience is a warning, not a road map.
We should also be clear about what’s driving costs. Construction and materials prices have surged nationwide. Lawsuits and legal system abuse add pressure. And Illinois led the country in tornadoes last year. These aren’t abstract factors; they directly affect claims and underwriting.
In 2023 alone, Illinois homeowners insurers posted a 30.3% underwriting loss. Over the past decade, the cumulative loss is 8.3%. Insurers aren’t raising rates for convenience; they do so to remain solvent and to keep promises to policyholders.
The Illinois Insurance Association and our member companies remain committed to working with lawmakers and regulators on thoughtful, balanced solutions that safeguard consumer choice, promote affordability and maintain Illinois’ robust, healthy, competitive insurance marketplace.
— Kevin Martin, executive director, Illinois Insurance Association, Springfield
Note to readers: As part of our annual Thanksgiving tradition, we’d like to hear from you about what is making you feel thankful this year. (Sincere thoughts only, please.) Email us a letter of no more than 400 words by Sunday, Nov. 23 to letters@chicagotribune.com. Be sure to include your full name and your city/town and use the subject line “Thankful.”
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.
