Mayor Brandon Johnson continues to claim a confidentiality agreement bars him from sharing information about the sale of Chicago’s parking meter system with aldermen and the public, even as the system’s owners say they lifted the restrictions and nothing is stopping him.
Johnson said Wednesday that “the confidentiality agreement is still in effect.”
But earlier Wednesday, Morgan Stanley, the controlling partner in the Chicago Parking Meters LLC ownership group, told the Tribune it had released the city from confidentiality agreements.
And on Monday, the ownership group sent Johnson’s administration a letter releasing it from such restrictions, documents obtained by the Tribune show.
The disagreement over what Johnson’s administration can share with the public and the City Council has become a key focus for aldermen as they vet the sale of the parking system to a new owner, New York-based investment firm Stonepeak Holdings.
Some aldermen have zeroed in on the confidentiality agreement Johnson and his staff have repeatedly cited when asked to share more information. The aldermen said they did not learn of the confidentiality agreement until mid-May and argued it is “without precedent” for the city. They have also argued Johnson has not sufficiently shared staffers to help them analyze the sale.
The ongoing sale would mark the first transfer of the system infamously privatized by then-Mayor Richard M. Daley in a 75-year lease now widely canned as a disastrous transaction for the city.
Some on the council believe they could now finally have the ability to improve the deal by threatening to reject the sale, which requires their approval, and using that leverage to win concessions.
It’s a high-stakes gamble: The owners have argued aldermen have no such right. Rejecting the deal would open up the city to a lawsuit and “financial catastrophe,” attorney Dan Webb told Johnson’s administration in a letter sent last week on behalf of the owners.
But as aldermen test their footing, Johnson’s team has taken a step back.
The mayor has argued that only aldermen have the ability to approve or reject the deal to explain his noninvolvement. Repeatedly pressed by reporters, he has not publicly weighed in on what he believes aldermen can and should do, though the city has retained law firm Jones Day to support aldermen with their independent analysis.
That posture has drawn criticism from several aldermen, including a group of 22 City Council members that slammed him in a letter last week, promising to vote “no” on the deal not because of its merits, but because Johnson’s administration “has systematically withheld the information necessary for property evaluation.”
Johnson briefly explored in January an effort to buy the system back for the city, but quickly abandoned the idea after submitting a bid. In their letter, aldermen demanded information tied to Johnson’s bid.
According to the parking meter’s owners, nothing is stopping Johnson’s administration from sharing that information with them and the public.
In a statement to the Tribune on Wednesday, a spokesperson for Morgan Stanley Infrastructure Partners said the company has released the city “from the terms of the NDAs related to both the City’s bid and Stonepeak’s purchase in order to provide the members of the City Council with information to aid in their review of the proposed transfer.”
Separately, the letter sent to Johnson’s administration Monday by Chicago Parking Meters CEO Dennis Pedrelli said a confidentiality agreement signed last August does not bar Johnson’s administration from sharing the purchase agreement and an array of information the two companies involved produced to answer City Council questions.
Aldermen now have the purchase agreement, shared with them by Chicago Parking Meters, but still do not have documents related to Johnson’s bid to buy the system.
Asked to explain why he said a confidentiality agreement is still in effect despite Morgan Stanley saying otherwise, Johnson cited another communication sent by the company to his administration last week.
“I believe we actually just got (a letter) on the 12th, recently. The confidentiality agreement still exists,” he reiterated.
The letter Johnson appeared to refer to, also obtained by the Tribune, said that “disclosure by (his administration) to the members and staff of the City Council, as part of the City, will not breach the terms of the Confidentiality Agreement.”
Johnson spokesperson Allison Novelo reiterated Thursday the administration’s view that it cannot share information tied to its bid because of a confidentiality agreement.
