tThe City Council found itself genuinely nervous a couple of months ago: That’s when it learned that the city was projecting a $982 million deficit by 2025. By law, the council must pass a balanced budget by the end of this year. Where is the city going to find that kind of cash? Mayor Brandon Johnson says he remains committed to his progressive vision, not to mention ensuring his wife’s office gets an $80K shine. But when a billion dollars are at stake, something has to give.

A QUARTER OF A CENTURY OF DEFICITS

This isn’t the first time Chicago has attended the “Oops, We Don’t Have Enough Money” rodeo. The city has faced the brink of a “structural deficit” every year since 2001. We like to spend more than we earn, okay? He’s very snotty. But this year the feeling is different, as experts maintain that the city is completely exhausted. In the past, mayors have resorted to austerity measures. Think: corporate taxes, privatization of services, cuts to public programs and layoffs in cities. But these are often short-term solutions and do not address the root of the problem. Remember when Mayor Richard M. Daley leased all the parking meters to a private investment group for 75 years? It closed a budget gap in 2008, sure, but it effectively set aside billions in passive city income for decades to come. Great, great.

2025 SPENDING DESTRUCTIONS

The city spends billions on services each year, but 2025 features a number of fun little extras. These include, but are not limited to, a new contract for the fire department with back pay; additional OT payment for police; 150 million dollars for migrants; and the $175 million in non-teacher pensions that Chicago Public Schools did not include in its budget, arguing that it is the city’s responsibility. Oh. Meanwhile, Chicago is losing revenue opportunities, critics argue. Last year, the mayor opted to skip the automatic inflation-linked property tax increase, fulfilling a campaign promise. Maybe you have to eat your words.

AND NOW WHAT?

Whatever solution the City Council accepts, it is unlikely to curb Chicago’s budget deficit problems. The city’s population has declined every year since 2015, a fact designed in a laboratory to incite endless infernal debates over Thanksgiving dinner. Fewer working Chicagoans means fewer taxpayers, which means less income. And we know exactly what to do to get people to stay: higher property taxes!