Chicago City Council group sends 2027 budget demands to Mayor Brandon Johnson, including no corporate head tax

A group of 26 members of the Chicago City Council, the same group that torpedoed Mayor Brandon Johnson's 2026 budget, sent the mayor a letter with their demands for the city's next fiscal year.

Calling themselves the Chicago City Council Budget Accountability Coalition, they wrote to the mayor that while the current budget gap forecast is lower than previously estimated, "it remains a fiscal challenge of the first order," one which they believe three principles should anchor.

The three principles function as demands for the mayor as he drafts his budget for the next fiscal year, as the group indicates they will not vote to approve a budget that includes them.

First, the group says, there should be no property tax increases.

"Chicago's homeowners, renters and businesses already shoulder a heavy property tax burden. Adding to it is not the way to close this gap, and we will not ask them to carry more," they write.

Second, the group is refusing any head tax or "tax on job growth."

"A great city should court employers, not punish them for the act of putting people to work. We will not support a head tax, or any levy that makes it costlier to keep and create jobs for Chicagoans," they write

Their third demand is that the budget does not rely on "Springfield revenues that have not been approved."

"The City cannot balance its books on the assumption that the General Assembly will act," they write. "If Springfield acts, let it bring relief in its season. We should not spend what has not yet arrived."

Instead, they demand the mayor "reduce the recurring cost of City government" before raising taxes or otherwise raising revenues for the city.

The alders say in the letter that the mayor's own commissioned report in 2025 identified $1 billion in savings through efficiencies from the city, including "retiring long-vacant positions, cutting management overhead, reforming procurement, disciplining overtime, civilianizing posts that don't require a sworn officer, confronting health and workers' compensation costs, shedding surplus fleet and real estate, and ending programs that duplicate one another or deliver too little."

They also want the city to identify how much of the main deficit drivers the mayor's office has identified, specifically the amount paid to settle police misconduct lawsuits, are permanent and structural versus how many are one-time payments, apparently to determine if the one-time expenses like lawsuit settlements justify means to increase revenues, which they describe as "a permanent tax."

They are also demanding that "one-time money" not "paper over a permanent problem."

"Borrowing, refinancing, reserves and asset sales have no business underwriting recurring operations," they write, instead demanding they only be used for one-time costs or "fund reforms that lower expenses for good."

The coalition write they "recognize spending cuts alone may not responsibly erase the entire deficit," but that once those cuts are "on the table" they "are prepared to weigh reasonable, locally controlled revenue options." They specifically call out debts already owed to the city.

CBS News Chicago reported in April that the city's Inspector General found more than $8.1 billion in overdue debt owed to the city, some of it dating back to the 1990s. That includes $1.6 billion in unpaid emergency medical services, like ambulance rides and millions owed to the city by Chicago Public Schools and Chicago Transit Authority employees.

"Our position is plain: No property tax increase. No head tax or tax on job growth. No counting Springfield money that has not been approved," the councilmembers write. "Within those bounds, we stand ready to work with you — to pass a responsible budget that protects essential services and sets Chicago on firmer fiscal ground."

This same group of alders wrote and advanced the alternate FY2026 budget that Chicago is currently operating under. While Mayor Johnson's 2026 budget did not include any property tax increases, it did reintroduce the corporate head tax the city did away with permanently in the 90s, which would have made companies with at least 500 employees pay $33 per employee per month. The corporate head tax would have applied to 175 corporations in Chicago.

The group of alders instead advanced a budget raising revenue by hiking the plastic bag tax, liquor taxes, allowing ads on light polls and city vehicles, and legalized video gambling terminals in the city of Chicago.

Mayor Johnson's office responded to the letter in a statement, writing in part, "We welcome and appreciate good faith engagement from alderpeople and all other stakeholders as we begin the FY2027 budget process. These conversations should be constructive and solution-oriented, and we encourage our Council partners to come to the table not only with a list of what they will not support, but with concrete solutions for closing the projected."

"We welcome all ideas, but they need to be grounded in revenues and savings that can be realized. We have seen the consequences of relying on speculative revenue proposals in the past, such as the vehicular debt sale," the statement continues. "The corporate caucus also pursued selling Chicagoans' medical debt to private debt collectors as a source of revenue, an approach Mayor Johnson blocked through executive order. We should be mindful of those lessons as we consider new revenue."

The budget demand letter was signed by:

• Ald. Brian Hopkins (2nd Ward)
• Ald. Pat Dowell (3rd Ward)
• Ald. Desmon Yancy (5th Ward)
• Ald. Greg Mitchell (7th Ward)
• Ald. Michelle Harris (8th Ward)
• Ald. Anthony Beale (9th Ward)
• Ald. Peter Chico (10th Ward)
• Ald. Nicole Lee (11th Ward)
• Ald. Marty Quinn (13th Ward)
• Ald. Raymond Lopez (15th Ward)
• Ald. Stephanie Coleman (16th Ward)
• Ald. Derrick Curtis (18th Ward)
• Ald. Matt O'Shea (19th Ward)
• Ald. Ronnie Mosley (21st Ward)
• Ald. Silvana Tabares (23rd Ward)
• Ald. Monique Scott (24th Ward)
• Ald. Felix Cardona, Jr. (31st Ward)
• Ald. Scott Waguespack (32nd Ward)
• Ald. Bill Conway (34th Ward)
• Ald. Gilbert Villegas (36th Ward)
• Ald. Emma Mitts (37th Ward)
• Ald. Nicholas Sposato (38th Ward)
• Ald. Samantha Nugent (39th Ward)
• Ald. Anthony Napolitano (41st Ward)
• Ald. Brendan Reilly (42nd Ward)
• Ald. Timmy Knudsen (43rd Ward)
• Ald. Bennett Lawson (44th Ward)
• Ald. James Gardiner (45th Ward)
• Ald. Debra Silverstein (50th Ward).

Full statement from Mayor Brandon Johnson's Office

We welcome and appreciate good faith engagement from alderpeople and all other stakeholders as we begin the FY2027 budget process. These conversations should be constructive and solution-oriented, and we encourage our Council partners to come to the table not only with a list of what they will not support, but with concrete solutions for closing the projected deficit. From day one, this administration has been clear that we will not balance the budget on the backs of working people or by cutting critical services Chicagoans rely on. Mayor Johnson's three budgets have implemented more than $740 million in cost savings and efficiencies, without cutting critical services Chicagoans rely on.

Chicago did not arrive at an $882 million projected deficit overnight. This administration inherited longstanding structural challenges and obligations, including pension and debt-service costs, settlements stemming from past conduct, and rising costs associated with inflation. While one-time costs such as settlements contribute to this year's gap, Chicago still faces a structural imbalance that requires structural solutions.

We welcome all ideas, but they need to be grounded in revenues and savings that can be realized. We have seen the consequences of relying on speculative revenue proposals in the past, such as the vehicular debt sale. The corporate caucus also pursued selling Chicagoans' medical debt to private debt collectors as a source of revenue, an approach Mayor Johnson blocked through executive order. We should be mindful of those lessons as we consider new revenue. The Johnson administration's SMART Tax is already generating revenue and demonstrating the importance of pursuing sustainable revenue sources. As we move through this process, we encourage the Council to pursue solutions that put the interests of Chicago taxpayers and the long-term fiscal health of the City ahead of corporate interests.