Stone's Corrupt Practices Continue

I remember during the course of the campaign, I saw a video clip somewhere, where Ald. Stone described his pattern of corruption along the lines of, "I do something for them, and they do something for me. What's the matter with that?" I'm paraphrasing here from memory.

One of the problems (aside from the outright corruption involved) is that this isn't what Stone practices.

Perhaps my definition of corruption and is a little different than Stone's. Stone seems to think that he has to be caught (by the Feds) with money in his freezer to be called corrupt. I disagree.

But we have a perfect example of why I think Stone is corrupt right now. A prospective new business owner took possession of 6969 Western Ave in January. According to him, he cleaned out the building, which he believed he had to do before he could apply for the necessary permits. When I talked to him about this, he didn't seem to think that he needed a zoning change when he moved in. He suggested that he had talked to the city about all the costs that were involved before he took possession.

It appears that he talked to the wrong person.

Because now he has applied for a zoning change that he isn't required to have. In Chicago, this has notoriously meant that some kind of money changes hands, whether directly or to the alderman's campaign committee. But what interests me about this example is how it is different from the alderman's own words. Unlike the alderman's simplistic description of his corruption above, the alderman expected something upfront, before he'd do anything for the person asking for help. What Stone expected first, before he'd even help this prospective business owner, was control over his window space.

You see, when this person started renting this space on Western Ave, he had no idea he was renting next to (actually, near) Stone's main opponent. And Stone's campaign wanted to use that empty storefront to send a signal to his opponents and the voters in the ward. So instead of helping this gentleman, walking him through the permit process, it was suggested that it would be wiser to wait until the election was over. "Don't want to stir up trouble."

Instead of opening up his business, the alderman interfered and took control of this property. He required something first, before he'd use his office to help start a new business in the ward. This is, to my way of thinking, corrupt. We already pay the alderman almost $100,000 (for part time work) to help the people who live and work in the 50th Ward. They shouldn't be required to bribe or do favors for the alderman to get him to do his job. If Stone needs to be bribed, then he shouldn't be drawing a salary from the city at all.

Outside of Chicago, bribery is most rampant in places where people do not make an adequate living, and they use their office or power for personal gain. No one can argue that Stone is underpaid, that he can't live quite comfortably off of $100,000 a year.

But Stone argues this is how Chicago works. I'd suggest that it is evidence of how Chicago doesn't work. These kind of impediments to starting a business or improving a home (or whole neighborhood) hurt the ward and hurt the whole city. They don't help it. When you walk or drive around the ward and wonder why there is so little business activity here, you will understand. Stone won't help new businesses move into the ward without a little something, something first. So why should they want to move in here? There's lots of better business environments very close to the 50th, without all the political obstacles.

It seems to me that only in Berny Stone's mind can Stone not be considered corrupt. I've tried to convince people to take these kinds of things to Patrick Fitzgerald (after all, the alderman has dared us to do so!). There's more to this story, but I wanted to focus on one aspect: evidence of Stone's unethical behavior and his resistance to change and growth in the neighborhood (that doesn't directly benefit him). Ald. Stone is corrupt, no question about it.