Tag Archives: Chicago region

Criticizing cities and ICE activity in complex suburbia

Posted on by

President Donald Trump often criticizes American big cities, particularly Chicago as he has mentioned the city multiple times in his first and second term. Just yesterday in the Arizona service for Charlie Kirk, Trump highlighted Chicago:

Photo by cottonbro studio on Pexels.com

Trump told mourners that one of the last things the slain conservative activist and Illinois native said to him was, “Please, sir. Save Chicago.” Trump then launched into a familiar refrain, saying, “We’re going to save Chicago from horrible crime.”

One of the Trump administration’s actions regarding Chicago includes recent ICE activity. While all the details are hard to come by, it appears however that this activity has not just affected people living in Chicago; there has been ICE activity in numerous suburbs. An ICE facility in Broadview. ICE agents approaching people in numerous suburbs, as far as 40 miles out from the city.

These actions hint at the complexity of the Chicago region and suburbs across the United States. Even as some Americans have long associated cities with racial and ethnic diversity, this diversity has increased in suburbs in recent decades. The American suburbs are full of people of different racial and ethnic groups as well as large numbers of recent immigrants to the United States.

So when Trump says Chicago has problems, does he mean just the city or is the whole region in question?Again, from the Kirk service:

Trump later took aim at Gov. JB Pritzker, declaring, “You have an incompetent governor who thinks it’s OK when 11 people get murdered over the weekend. … He says he’s got crime [under control]. No, they don’t have it under control, but we’ll have it under control very quickly.”

Both the city of Chicago and its suburbs have the same governor. Only one of the Chicago collar counties in Illinois voted for Trump in 2024: McHenry County. (There are portions of the greater Chicago area in southeastern Wisconsin and northwestern Indiana but they may not be part of the same conversation.) Are the problems some see in Chicago also ones they see present in suburbs?

When mass transit is or is not for suburbanites

Posted on by

As Illinois politicians debate what to do about multiple mass transit agencies in the Chicago region, a group of suburban mayors weighed in:

Photo by Constanze Marie on Pexels.com

The Suburban Mayors Coalition for Fair Transit criticizes new taxes proposed in a bill approved by the state Senate to avert a $771 million shortfall facing Metra, Pace and the CTA in 2026.

A $1.50 delivery fee on online orders, excluding groceries and medications, dubbed the “pizza tax” is “regressive, (and) disproportionately burdens low- to moderate-income families,” officials said.

Mayors also panned expanding a real estate transfer tax from Chicago to the suburbs, and allowing the new Northern Illinois Transit Authority to acquire or develop land near train stations for projects such as condos with retail space.

That concept would strip away power over zoning and parking from municipalities and give it to an nonelected board, they argued.

Three major issues seem to be at stake for suburban officials:

  1. Taxes and funding. Will more funds be raised from the suburbs? Will that tax money then be sent in ways that benefit suburban communities and residents?
  2. A loss of local control. More taxes affecting local residents imposed by other government bodies. Not having complete control over local land.
  3. Representation on the board that would oversee a new regional transit agency. How many suburban officials should be there? Should it be evenly balanced between suburban and Chicago interests?

All of this gets at a major reason suburbanites like the suburbs: they like local control. They generally do not like the big city dictating what will happen. They want what they think is best for their suburban community.

Perhaps this is elsewhere in the letter but it strikes me what is missing is a sense of how regional mass transit could be used by suburbanites and improve suburban life. Take the issue of suburban traffic: single communities cannot often address these issues as suburban residents commute from suburb to suburb. Could mass transit help? Or could mass transit help provide suburban residents access to more jobs and housing opportunities?

If the funding and representation issues were worked out, would a majority of suburban communities then want a regional mass transit agency? How many would be interested in more mass transit present in their communities?

Changing racial and ethnic diversity in the Chicago region

Posted on by

New estimates from the Census Bureau show changing populations in the Chicago region:

Photo by Kelly on Pexels.com

Metro Chicago’s Asian population is growing faster than any other racial or ethnic group, Census Bureau estimates show. Of the estimated 9.4 million people in the Chicago metropolitan statistical area in 2024, roughly 764,000 are Asian — almost 80,000 more than in 2020, data show. During that span, the Hispanic population also grew from about 2.22 million to more than 2.32 million. Meanwhile, the metro area’s white and Black populations both declined. White population fell from 4.83 million to 4.64 million, and the Black population declined from about 1.56 million to 1.50 million.

If these patterns continue, what significant changes could come to communities and the region? How does this affect residential segregation in the region (thinking back to the high levels of white-Black segregation documented in American Apartheid)? Or political representation and policies? Or day to day lives of residents? Looking at the regional level could obscure important differences at other levels.

I am also reminded how the city of Chicago has had roughly similar sized populations of white, Black, and Latino residents in recent years. Do the patterns above suggest that the city might be headed toward four groups being roughly evenly sized at some point?

Who will lead the way to address the need for hundreds of thousands of housing units in Illinois?

Posted on by

A new study suggests Illinois needs a lot of new housing:

Photo by Curtis Adams on Pexels.com

Illinois has a shortage of about 142,000 housing units and must build 227,000 in the next five years to keep pace with demand, a number that would require recent annual production rates to double, according to a new economic study.

The joint study published Tuesday by the Illinois Economic Policy Institute and the Project for Middle Class Renewal at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign found that although the rental and for-sale housing markets in Chicago and Illinois as a whole remain more affordable than many coastal cities, such as New York and Los Angeles, and some other states, Illinois still faces a severe housing shortage that is escalating affordability challenges.

National housing shortage estimates are wide-ranging, with Freddie Mac citing 3.7 million and the National Association of Realtors reporting 5.5 million.

And the recommendations for how to do this?

The authors suggest a variety of solutions, some of which Chicago officials and other state leaders are already working on, including easing zoning restrictions, quickening permitting processes, offering tax incentives to convert commercial buildings to residential units and increasing surtaxes on short-term rentals such as Airbnb. Aldermen recently took a step toward giving themselves the power to ban Airbnb and other short-term rentals from opening in their wards, a move that could potentially lead to an increase in housing supply.

This is not a new issue. And even drastic changes right now would not lead to 227,000 new units in five years. This is a long-term project that needs to be addressed.

One thought: this is an opportunity for Illinois to do something that could help lead the way in the United States. Here is why. It is a blue state and Chicago and its region dominates politics and perceptions. (This is not to ignore those living outside the Chicago area; there are just fewer of them.) It has more affordable costs compared to numerous other important cities. Chicago is still an important, world-class city. If Illinois could make a serious dent in providing affordable housing across the state, it could become a model for numerous other places. What works in Illinois might not work at all in New York City or Seattle or San Francisco or other super-heated housing markets. But it might work in Cleveland, Nashville, Denver, and other American metropolitan regions. Figure it out and Illinois and lots of areas could benefit.

For numerous reasons, it seems like politicians and business leaders in American cities and regions are hesitant to truly tackle affordable housing. But those who get out ahead of it can (1) help people living there and (2) provide models and tools for others to learn from and use.

Will there ever be another Naperville in the Chicago area?

Posted on by

The suburb of Naperville, Illinois is marked by several characteristics: rapid growth from the 1960s onward, particularly between 1980 and 2000, and lots of land annexation; wealthier suburban residents and numerous white-collar jobs; and a lively downtown with national retailers, local stores, plenty of restaurants, and a nice Riverwalk. Will any Chicago area suburb trace a similar path in the future?

Here is why I would guess no:

  1. Limited population growth in the Chicago suburbs. The whole region is not growing much. Population growth in the suburbs could still be uneven; some places are perceived as more desirable or are more affordable and they could grow faster will others stagnate or even shrink. But explosive population growth in the Chicago area looks like it is done.
  2. At multiple points in Naperville’s history, leaders and residents discussed possible development and regulatory options. They tended to choose growth and in particular forms. These sets of decisions helped give rise to the particular traits of Naperville today. Even if another suburb tried to pursue the same path, not all the pieces might fall together in the same way.
  3. When Naperville grew from 1960 onwards, it was closer to the edge of the metropolitan region. Land was cheap and available. The city could annex land without running into other communities. That growth has since moved out further beyond Naperville’s ring, out to places like Aurora and Plainfield and Oswego. Any future Naperville will be 10-30 miles out from Naperville.
  4. Naperville itself – and other older suburbs – will likely change in the future. If Naperville wants to continue to grow in population, it will need to grow denser and taller. Infill development on small parcels could add lots of townhouses, condos, and/or apartments. Redevelopment in desirable areas and around mass transit options could lead to taller or denser buildings. This all could happen in numerous Chicago suburbs but this will move them away from homes dominated by single-family homes and lifestyles.

For more insight behind the argument above, see these published papers involving Naperville: “Not All Suburbs are the Same: The Role of Character in Shaping Growth and Development in Three Chicago Suburbs;” “A Small Suburb Becomes a Boomburb: Explaining Suburban Growth in Naperville, Illinois“; and “More than 300 Teardowns Later: Patterns in Architecture and Location among Teardowns in Naperville, Illinois, 2008-2017.”

Booming coyote population in the Chicago suburbs

Posted on by

Coyotes also want to live in the suburbs:

Photo by Michelle Chadwick on Pexels.com

The suburban coyote populations are growing rapidly which means there will likely be more interaction with people but both Erickson and Ramono say it’s not really the coyotes’ faults.

“We invited them when we built all these suburbs,” Erickson said. “We said, ‘Hey, there’s more food here. There’s more habitat here.’ We invited these animals in here.”

They say when we experience mild winters three to four years in a row, the population can increase 18 to 27 percent. The old and sick and late-littered animals survive, animals that would normally would die off.

In five years, the population could double.

They also say rural coyotes may only live two years because there are pressure on them. In suburban areas, we have coyotes live to 13-years-old because of the all of food and the lack of pressure.

I have seen coyotes running across busy four-lane suburban roads and through suburban backyards. I have heard them howl at night in an open field next to a neighborhood. I have read plenty of online claims regarding the threat of coyotes to local pets. Coyotes are now fixtures in suburban Chicagoland.

They are evidence that some species can thrive in suburbia. As noted above, suburban areas provide food and places to live while limiting pressure (competition for food? predators?). The typical suburbanite may not like their presence but coyotes are here to stay for now.

At what point would communities take action against coyotes? When I have read online claims of the threats to pets, I could imagine that an uptick in coyote/pet interactions could move people to act given the love Americans have for their pets. Or perhaps signs of coyotes taking out other wildlife that suburbanites like or are used to.

Area Median Income limits for the Chicago region

Posted on by

I recently read about a proposed affordable housing development in the Chicago suburbs that invoked the Area Median Income for the region:

According to a memo, The Residences at River Point would set aside one-quarter of the apartments for households making 30% or less of the area median income. Roughly half would be earmarked for households making 60% or less of the AMI, and the rest would be for those making 80% or less of the AMI.

According to the federal Housing and Urban Development Department, the AMI for the Chicago metropolitan area, which includes Kane County, is $50,976 for a four-person household.

The AMI is set by HUD who has a chart of the various cutoff points for the AMI for the entire region. From the City of Chicago:

For those who have not run into these figures before, several things from this chart might stand out:

  1. The AMI depends on household size. Discussions of housing and affordability can often focus on median household incomes but HUD adjusts for the total number of people in the household. This fits with housing with more space and bedrooms generally being more expensive.
  2. The AMI figures are for an entire region. The Chicago region includes more than 9 million residents and hundreds of municipalities. While the AMI limits for Chicago might differ quite a bit from other regions, there can be quite a bit of variation within the region as well regarding incomes and housing prices.
  3. These income guidelines apply to a number of programs but are not the only metrics that might be used regarding housing affordability.

Religious groups and white flight in the Chicago area

Posted on by

With the new pope hailing from the changing suburbs of Chicago, I was reminded of the scholarly literature on religion and white flight in the Chicago region. This affected numerous religious groups, including Catholics, Protestants, and Jews, who with growing Black populations in Chicago in the twentieth century left for the suburbs. When I looked at Protestant groups and white flight from Chicago between 1925 and 1988-90, I found all but one of the groups studied ended up with more congregations in the suburbs:

Between 1925 and 1990, the rate of suburbanization differed by Protestant denomination. Some denominations were already more likely to be in the suburbs (their suburban presence predated mass suburbanization), some moved to the suburbs in increasing numbers, and some hardly moved at all. The general pattern among these groups was an increasing percentage of their churches in suburban locations, a process that was underway by the 1930s and 1940s and continued after World War II…

In this study, churches were influenced by settlement patterns in the Chicago region and the presence of numerous churches already existing in suburban communities. In addition, the racial and ethnic identity of some denominations helped dictate their choices for new suburban locations.

This article built on important work by multiple scholars about white flight in the Chicago area. Mark Mulder in Shades of White Flight looked at how The Christian Reformed Church and The Reformed Church in America churches, both Dutch Reformed denominations, moved to the suburbs. Irving Cutler in The Jews of Chicago examined how Jews moved to suburban communities. Eileen McMahon in What Parish Are You From? analyzed how one Catholic parish responded to changing neighborhood populations, including moving to the suburbs.

These works on the Chicago region also drew on findings regarding white flight in other American metropolitan areas. John McGreevy in Parish Boundaries looked at how Catholics responded to race in multiple Northern cities. Gerald Gamm compared the responses of Catholics and Jews in Boston in Urban Exodus. in Souls of the City, Etan Diamond considered multiple religious groups in the expanding suburbs of Indianapolis. Darren Dochuk looked closely at the case of a Baptist church in Detroit as they made the case for moving to suburbia.

As the story is told of American suburbanization, particularly after World War Two, the story should include the role religious institutions and adherents played in supporting white flight. I say more about the ways this played out with evangelicals in Sanctifying Suburbia.

Is mass transit best pitched to Americans through comparisons to places where it is plentiful and works well?

Posted on by

Many Americans and American communities have resisted using mass transit or devoting more money to mass transit. In reading a recent pitch for Americans to prioritize it more, I was struck by one line of argument: describing places where it worked well. Might this help convince people?

Photo by Alec Adriano on Pexels.com

The discussions of the possibilities and perils of mass transit in the Chicago region included these comparisons. First, a contrast to another American city:

One of my stepdaughters recently relocated to Atlanta and returns home with a greater appreciation of our transit system.

A sprawling region like Atlanta can highlight how places with more transit in place – like Chicago – are appealing.

Second, comparisons to other major cities shows how far Chicago and other American cities can go:

“My wife had to go to Japan for work earlier this year. She was blown away that the train was 20 seconds behind schedule and how effusively the people apologized for it. I’m like 20 seconds?” Buckner said.

On vacations, Buckner subjects family to his transit nerdiness. Istanbul’s train terminal has a library inside. London has one of the best in the world. Beijing’s rapid transit is top-tier. Paris’ is fantastic. Seamless, quick and clean.

There are all world-class cities, like Chicago. If have efficient and elegant mass transit, why shouldn’t Chicago?

One issue might be whether a sufficient number of Chicagoans have been to these places. How many have gone to Atlanta, driven around the metro area, and found the traffic and experience worse than getting around Chicago? Or gone to Beijing or Paris and used the mass transit.

Another issue is that these comparisons may resonate and still pale to the issues of mass transit in Chicagoland or the liking people have for driving.

Overall, it appears to be hard to convince Americans to move away from driving. Whether they deeply like it or not, it is often the default after decades of policy decisions, cultural narratives, and choices made by numerous actors,

In a metropolitan transit system, should the city or suburbs get more votes?

Posted on by

As actors in the Chicago region consider the possibility of consolidating multiple transit agencies, the issue of voting members came up:

Photo by Alex Qian on Pexels.com

The MMA would have three directors appointed by the governor, five by Chicago’s mayor, five by the Cook County Board president and five by the chairs of the DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry and Will county boards.

Republican Rep. Dan Ugaste of Geneva said, “what’s very important to us in the collar counties and probably in some suburban Cook, as well, is how is this going to work? If we’re talking simple majorities, once we get to the voting structure — that’s going to effectively allow all these five other collar counties to be silenced if Cook and Chicago work together.”

Democratic state Rep. Eva-Dina Delgado of Chicago, who is sponsoring the MMA bill, countered that “for a long time it has been city versus suburbs. We have to change our mindset around that, as well, and see this as a regional issue.”

There could be many different ways to figure out the formula for the number of votes from each part of the region. Some options:

  1. Equal number of suburban and city votes, meaning an equal number from Chicago and equal number from the suburbs (with some way of figuring out which suburban areas are represented).
  2. More votes from Chicago compared to the suburbs. City residents may use transit more.
  3. More votes from the suburbs compared to Chicago. There are many more residents overall in the suburbs compared to the city.
  4. Wild card: more appointees at the state level than either local interests such that the governor or state leaders retain control over which way votes might go.

Beyond the complications of local Illinois politics, the broader issue is that American cities and the suburbs around them do not always see eye to eye on transit and other regional issues. If either side feels that they have to “win” this portion of the negotiations, does this limit what can be accomplished? Or if one side does not really want to participate but also may not want to be locked out of the political process, where does that lead?