Mayor Brandon Johnson declines to veto budget passed by his City Council rivals
Mayor Brandon Johnson on Tuesday declined to veto a $16.6 billion spending plan passed by his rivals on the City Council, allowing it to go into effect without his signature.
"I will not veto the budget approved by the Chicago City Council," Johnson said at City Hall. "I will not add my signature affirming the budget as presented. In this moment, I will not add the risk and speculation of a government shutdown to the profound worries Chicagoans face."
The mayor's decision averts an unprecedented city government shutdown at the end of the year. The city must have a spending plan in place by Dec. 30, or wouldn't be able to pay city workers or contractors in the new year. Essential workers such as police officers and firefighters would have to work without pay.
Johnson had raised objections to a measure in the budget backed by his opponents that allows the city to sell a portion of the debt owed to the city for unpaid fines and fees. The mayor's opponents have estimated that would allow the city to bring in about $90 million in revenue in 2026, but Johnson has called that proposal "immoral."
The mayor said, with that debt sale plan in the budget, he was not willing to sign it, even though he was willing to let it go into effect without his signature.
"There are some elements of this budget that, quite frankly, I don't want to give a signal to the people of Chicago that I support what I believe is one of the most detrimental and immoral aspects of this budget," Johnson said. "You can still call out the wins, while also calling out the most egregious aspect of what these individuals put forward, which is morally bankrupt."
The mayor's decision clinched a major victory for the opposition bloc of aldermen who passed the budget plan over his objections.
Ald. Gilbert Villegas (36th) said it's a good thing that he and the rest of the coalition aligned against the mayor were able to show the City Council can serve as a check on Johnson's executive authority.
"The mayor feels that when he proposes something, that it's the gospel, and it's not," he said. "This is the first time in city's history that the City Council was able to pass a budget despite the mayor's opposition. What people saw was history."
Ald. Scott Waguespack (32nd) said he hopes to see a change in Johnson's approach to negotiating with the City Council, but he doesn't expect it will actually happen.
"It was a difficult budget season for many of us to be constantly harangued, and called immoral, and called wicked," he said. "I think we're expecting a lot more of that kind of rhetoric, and that's really unfortunate for the people of Chicago."
Despite conceding the budget battle, Johnson still declared victory, arguing more than 98% of the budget being enacted was from his original proposal, and that his rivals reversed course on plans to increase the city's garbage collection fees.
"My clear lines were: do not raise the garbage fees, do not collect grocery taxes, and do not raise property taxes; and invest in young people, and invest in affordable housing and invest in mental health. Those are all wins," he said.
While the mayor has repeatedly said he would have vetoed any budget that included a property tax increase or reinstating a grocery tax, aldermen never proposed those as part of their budget.
Ald. Bill Conway (34th), one of the most outspoken members of the mayor's opposition on the City Council, said Johnson effectively abdicated his leadership position by simply letting the aldermen's budget plan to take effect without his signature.
"His role in this was either sign the budget or veto the budget, and he somehow found a third road that showed even less leadership in this process," Conway said.
What's in the 2026 budget passed by the Chicago City Council?
The City Council approved a $16.6 billion spending plan opposed by the mayor last week; with a 29-19 vote to approve the tax revenue package to fund it on Friday and a 30-18 vote to approve the rest of the budget on Saturday.
While the spending plan backed by the mayor's rivals passed without a veto-proof majority, members of the opposition bloc behind the budget have expressed confidence that an actual veto would have convinced more alders to join them in overriding Johnson, rather than risk a shutdown.
In lieu of the controversial corporate head tax backed by the mayor, his opponents' budget will rely on an increase in the city's plastic bag tax; overhauling the tax on off-premise liquor sales; legalizing video gambling terminals in Chicago; and opening up new advertising opportunities, such as naming rights for bridge houses along the Chicago River, selling banners on light poles, and placing ads on city vehicles.
It also proposes bringing in nearly $90 million from selling some debt owed to the city for unpaid fines and fees, including parking tickets, ambulance fees, and water bills.
In a bid to limit the impact of that debt collection on the city's poorest residents, Johnson signed an executive order prohibiting the city from selling individual city-administered medical debt, such as ambulance fees, and establishing rules for selling debt owed to the city.
Johnson said that approximately $800 million in medical debt is owed to the city, and his executive order prevents the city from selling that to debt collectors.
The mayor also signed a second executive order requiring the mayor and City Council to approve any police overtime spending above what has been budgeted for in 2026. The Police Department has regularly spent more than its allotted overtime budget in the past several years.
Under the order regarding police overtime, any overtime requests beyond what is approved in the 2026 budget would have to be reviewed by the Office of Budget and Management at least three months in advance. Requests for additional overtime would have to outline the operations requiring additional overtime; the districts, units, or job titles affected; the funding source to be used to pay for it; and any steps taken to limit excessive overtime and support officer wellness.
Johnson said he could seek changes to the approved budget even after the beginning of the year, though he declined to elaborate.
"We all agree that the budget is a living document, and so there are elements of this budget that we already have flagged that we'll start to go through a process to ensure that the numbers are matching," he said.
The mayor's budget team has argued the alternative budget plan will leave a $163 million shortfall that would have to be filled midyear with spending cuts, layoffs, or new taxes.
Johnson's critics said their budget plan includes $46.6 million in spending cuts and other efficiencies, but the mayor's budget team estimated their proposals would save only $6 million, claiming many of their proposals already were in the mayor's budget plan, or are simply not feasible.
Aldermen also estimated $6.8 million in new revenue in 2026 from legalizing video gambling, but the mayor's budget team claimed that move would result in a loss of $3 million next year, because it would force the city to lose out on $4 million payment from Bally's casino, and only a small fraction of businesses who apply for a video gaming license would actually get approved in 2026.
In proposing to increase the city's plastic bag tax from 10 cents to 15 cents per bag, aldermen estimated $8.7 million in new revenue, while the mayor's budget team claimed that move would generate only $5.2 million, due to a likely drop in shoppers using plastic bags.
The alternative budget estimated $6 million in new revenue from a new 1.5 tax on off-premise liquor sales, replacing the current volume-based tax, with different rates for beer, wine, and spirits. However, the mayor's budget team estimated that move would actually result in a $4.2 million loss for the city.
The biggest sticking point for the mayor's budget team was aldermen's proposal to bring in $89.6 million from selling some debt owed to the city for unpaid fines and fees. Johnson's aides said the plan is simply not feasible and wouldn't generate actual money from the city, claiming there is no realistic way to find investors to buy debt for things like unpaid parking tickets when the city has no authority to seize vehicles or place liens on property for such debt.
The mayor's team also cast doubt on the aldermen's plan to bring in an estimated $6 million by allowing "augmented reality advertising" on city property in games or apps like "Pokemon Go." Johnson's aides said, because no other cities have allowed such advertising, it would require lengthy research for the city to set up a legal framework for such a proposal, making it virtually impossible for the city to make any money from such a venture next year.
Johnson said Tuesday that his push for a corporate head tax will be back in the mix next year when his office crafts a budget plan for 2027. As for why it failed this year, he blamed "significant donors who spent millions of dollars to convince a handful of alders that it was better to protect their interests than protect working people."
This year's budget battle was the most contentious since the infamous "Council Wars" of the 1980s, when Mayor Harold Washington regularly butted heads with a 29-member City Council majority of mostly White alderpeople led by now-convicted former Alds. Edward Burke (14th) and Ed Vrdolyak (10th).
In 1984, the budget battle lasted until the very last day of the year, after Washington vetoed a spending plan passed by the City Council, and the two sides reached a compromise to pass a budget just hours before the year-end deadline, following aldermen's failure to override him.