CHICAGO (CN) — Cook County Judge Kathleen Burke issued a written order against the "Bring Chicago Home" voter referendum on Monday morning, siding with the local real estate lobby over homelessness alleviation activists and the city's progressive leadership.
The referendum, set for the March primary ballot, would ask voters whether Chicago should restructure how it taxes real estate sales.
Currently, Chicago's real estate transfer tax is set at $3.75 per $500 for the entire value of the property, a flat rate of 0.75%. Like the failed Illinois tax reform referendum from 2020, the proposed Bring Chicago Home rules would introduce tiers to the taxation. The transfer tax for properties worth less than $1 million would decrease to 0.6%, while it would increase to 2% for properties sold for between $1 million and $1.5 million. Properties sold for over $1.5 million would be subject to a 3% transfer tax, or $15 per every $500 of the transfer price, almost quadruple the current rate.
The revenue generated by the increased tax on expensive properties would be earmarked to fund homelessness alleviation efforts, with supporters saying in could generate up to $100 million annually for the cause.
About 6,139 people in Chicago experience homelessness on any given day, the majority of them Black men, according to the city's January 2023 point-in-time survey. An August 2023 report from the local advocacy group Chicago Coalition for the Homeless — also one of Bring Chicago Home's main backers — further estimated that 68,440 people were homeless in Chicago as of 2021.
Early primary voting, including on the referendum question, has already begun in Chicago. But Burke's order commands the city Board of Election Commissioners to "not count and suppress any votes cast on the referendum question at the March 19, 2024 primary election," and to not "publish any tallies or results of any votes cast on the referendum question."
The Chicago Board of Election Commissioners clarified the question will remain on the ballot regardless of Burke's order, as it lacks the authority to remove the question.
"The ruling of the judge technically invalidates the referendum, but for now it's staying on the ballot," said Max Bever, the board's public information director.
"The board is not moving forward with any voter notice," he added.
The city council voted to approve the Bring Chicago Home referendum last November. But a collection of landlords, real estate agencies and property investment firms, potentially on the line for millions, sued the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners in January hoping to kill the vote.
The real estate interests claimed the referendum unconstitutionally conflated three separate questions for voters: one for each proposed tax rate change. They also claimed the to the referendum was an example of "logrolling," when an unpopular suggestion — raising taxes — is joined to a more palatable proposal — reducing them.
Burke sided with the real estate interests in a Friday night ruling from the bench, but did not issue a written order on the issue until Monday morning. She did not explain her reasoning for the decision in the order, instead citing court records that have not yet been publicly released.
Bever said the board will formally announce its plan to appeal the decision on Tuesday, though added that the lack of clarity on Burke's part, along with a dearth of related legal precedent, complicates the next steps it could take.
"We're in the same position of many others of trying to parse the court's order... It speaks to how rare binding city-wide referendums are, that there's no immediate precedent," Bever said, pointing out Chicago voters haven't seen a binding city-wide referendum on their ballots since 1992.
Opponents of the referendum celebrated Burke's decision over the weekend in spite of the unanswered questions. Proponents fumed over the Cook County judge bending to monied interests.
“We are gratified in the judge’s ruling, which underscores the necessity of presenting policy questions to the public with fairness, detail, and transparency,” Farzin Parang, Executive Director of the plaintiff Building Owners and Managers Association of Chicago, said in a prepared statement Friday night.
"Chicago voters should be furious," countered progressive city councilor Maria Hadden, Bring Chicago Home's lead sponsor in city hall, in her own statement. "Today, Judge Kathleen Burke ruled in favor of the real estate lobby, which has been determined to prevent Chicagoans from voting to Bring Chicago Home."
"The fact that a small, ultra-wealthy special interest group is taking action to undermine the duly elected legislative body of our city while simultaneously disenfranchising the voters should provoke anger and fear in everyday citizens." Hadden said in the same statement.
Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson, who also supports the referendum, stated Friday that the city is "exploring every legal option available" to overturn Burke's decision.
"We firmly believe the referendum is legally sound and the final arbiter should be the voters of the City of Chicago," Johnson's office said.
The city previously filed to intervene in the case on the election board's behalf, but Burke shot down that motion on Monday — also without explanation.
Over the weekend the city filed a new motion to stay both that order denying intervention, and the enforcement of Burke's ruling against Bring Chicago Home. The city appealed both decisions to the Illinois First District Appellate Court on Monday afternoon, and argued the appeals process warrants holds on the rulings.
The city criticized Burke's denial of its motion to intervene as an abuse of judicial discretion, noting as Bevers did that the elections board lacked the authority to substantively contest the real estate lobby's claims. That was Chicago's job, Bevers said, not the election commissioners'.
"The board failed to raise any substantive arguments in response to the plaintiffs’ arguments that the referendum violated the Illinois Municipal Code and the Illinois Constitution. This is because the board defendants were not authorized to raise such arguments," the city wrote in the filing.
"We were the improper target in the first place," Bevers agreed Monday.
Chicago also warned the court that Burke's order went against state Supreme Court opinion which states "an attempt [by the courts] to check the free expression of opinion, to forbid the peaceable assemblage of the people, to obstruct the freedom of elections, if successful, would result in the overthrow of all liberties regulated by law,"
"For the past week, Chicagoans have been voting and today the Court decided their votes should be suppressed. The Illinois Supreme Court stated the harm in such an injunction," the city argued.
Follow @djbyrnes1
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
Additional Reads
-
California certifies March 5 primary election results April 12, 2024 -
-
Southern California bird smuggler sentenced to time served April 12, 2024 -
