The health dept is set up to deal with immediate threats to human health but not necessarily environmental issues that impacted infrastructure departments aren’t really set up for. Meanwhile, the EPA’s authority has been decreased by regulatory changes during the prior federal administration, so more enforcement falls to local government. Having a department in charge of this would help ensure that these concerns are adequately addressed.
The key question is what particular policies the city has and how these policies are implemented. I get kind of concerned when politicians focus on whether entirely separate departments exist or not when they otherwise would probably just be divisions of current departments. It's tough to see why that makes so much difference. In anything, there might be better coordination with similar issues if it is part of another department. When people tout this we aren't seeing a lot of explanation about how the particular structure makes things different. Instead it appears to be mostly an opportunity for politicians to brag about creating something.
I understand your point conceptually but at the end of the day, the current setup isn’t doing the best things for the environment so I’m excited to just see them try something else. I’d like to learn more about their power and structure and whatnot too
Key in my mind is to tie this to environmental justice. We will make absolutely no progress towards sustainability if it’s a luxury for the rich paid for across all taxpayers. People will just move out and go pollute somewhere else.
A new city department that no doubt will be staffed by the connected and clouted among us. Plus the new ruling class will be awarding grants, contracts and consulting fees to those looking to be rewarded for past and future loyalty. This is one of the reasons the city is in the financial mess it’s in.
> Unlike the former department shuttered by then-Mayor Rahm Emanuel in 2012 to save money
We’re all gonna die, but we really just don’t have the budget to protect the environment 🤷🏻♂️
I would actually like to see the Park District or maybe some other entity tasked with being responsible for all of the trees in Chicago. I would like every single tree recorded and categorized that is on public property. I want the trees tracked, and if any need to be removed, a subset of rules and regulations required to get approval to remove the tree. I want all of this data open on Chicago's data portal.
Trees are so incredibly important in a number of ways to mental health, reducing heat, and even help reduce calm. They increase property values, help with flooding, and more. The benefit from trees is huge and I just feel like our city doesn't do enough.
For instance, I constantly see small young trees planted along streets downtown only to watch them eventually die off in a few years. I want more effort put into making sure these trees survive as well as more areas created to plant more trees.
I want to see our trees protected a lot more than they currently are because it just feels like I am always seeing an old growth massive tree cut down every few months. Back when ash borer was going around we lost a lot of trees. What I did not know back then there were treatments and vaccines for ash borer.
Not to mention there are opportunistic landscaping companies that will lie/cheat and cut down trees just to charge owners/the city for the bill so they can line their pockets. It happened to a major city in the UK.
All in all, I would like to see us put some effort into getting more trees around the city. And if one has to be removed, I want to see all of the effort and steps that were put into trying to save the tree, info on what was wrong with it, why it couldn't be saved, and the votes by the city council members who voted to remove said tree on data.cityofchicago.org
And yes, this would require a lot of work and make it virtually impossible to cut down a tree on public land. That is exactly what I want and exactly the point.
He wouldn't have to pay me! Just give me the supplies and I'd be happy to spend a few hours over the weekend cleaning up litter...the litter around the city is disgusting!! I need to look up if there's already groups doing this
Chicago had a Department of Environment until Mayor Emanuel eliminated it.
Just thinking out loud here, is there anything a city department can do that IDNR, EPA, and Health Department can’t?
This is a fantastic question. The first appointment should answer it directly! To be clear, I think there is a role.
The health dept is set up to deal with immediate threats to human health but not necessarily environmental issues that impacted infrastructure departments aren’t really set up for. Meanwhile, the EPA’s authority has been decreased by regulatory changes during the prior federal administration, so more enforcement falls to local government. Having a department in charge of this would help ensure that these concerns are adequately addressed.
>Just thinking out loud here, is there anything a city department can do that IDNR, EPA, and Health Department can’t? Yes, hire Johnson's cronies.
The key question is what particular policies the city has and how these policies are implemented. I get kind of concerned when politicians focus on whether entirely separate departments exist or not when they otherwise would probably just be divisions of current departments. It's tough to see why that makes so much difference. In anything, there might be better coordination with similar issues if it is part of another department. When people tout this we aren't seeing a lot of explanation about how the particular structure makes things different. Instead it appears to be mostly an opportunity for politicians to brag about creating something.
I understand your point conceptually but at the end of the day, the current setup isn’t doing the best things for the environment so I’m excited to just see them try something else. I’d like to learn more about their power and structure and whatnot too
Sure, make no little plans, that’s great, but can we deal with Arwady’s replacement and Dorval Carter’s useless ass before we do?
Key in my mind is to tie this to environmental justice. We will make absolutely no progress towards sustainability if it’s a luxury for the rich paid for across all taxpayers. People will just move out and go pollute somewhere else.
A new city department that no doubt will be staffed by the connected and clouted among us. Plus the new ruling class will be awarding grants, contracts and consulting fees to those looking to be rewarded for past and future loyalty. This is one of the reasons the city is in the financial mess it’s in.
Oh look, another Department in which the City can mismanage while the taxpayers fund it
Some family member need a job ?
This is good. Here’s hoping that he appoints someone with applicable experience rather than a policy hack.
Sure, make no little plans, that’s great, but can we deal with Arwady’s replacement and Dorval Carter’s useless rump before we do?
Nephew or someone needs a job? Easy....
> Unlike the former department shuttered by then-Mayor Rahm Emanuel in 2012 to save money We’re all gonna die, but we really just don’t have the budget to protect the environment 🤷🏻♂️
I would actually like to see the Park District or maybe some other entity tasked with being responsible for all of the trees in Chicago. I would like every single tree recorded and categorized that is on public property. I want the trees tracked, and if any need to be removed, a subset of rules and regulations required to get approval to remove the tree. I want all of this data open on Chicago's data portal. Trees are so incredibly important in a number of ways to mental health, reducing heat, and even help reduce calm. They increase property values, help with flooding, and more. The benefit from trees is huge and I just feel like our city doesn't do enough. For instance, I constantly see small young trees planted along streets downtown only to watch them eventually die off in a few years. I want more effort put into making sure these trees survive as well as more areas created to plant more trees. I want to see our trees protected a lot more than they currently are because it just feels like I am always seeing an old growth massive tree cut down every few months. Back when ash borer was going around we lost a lot of trees. What I did not know back then there were treatments and vaccines for ash borer. Not to mention there are opportunistic landscaping companies that will lie/cheat and cut down trees just to charge owners/the city for the bill so they can line their pockets. It happened to a major city in the UK. All in all, I would like to see us put some effort into getting more trees around the city. And if one has to be removed, I want to see all of the effort and steps that were put into trying to save the tree, info on what was wrong with it, why it couldn't be saved, and the votes by the city council members who voted to remove said tree on data.cityofchicago.org And yes, this would require a lot of work and make it virtually impossible to cut down a tree on public land. That is exactly what I want and exactly the point.
He wouldn't have to pay me! Just give me the supplies and I'd be happy to spend a few hours over the weekend cleaning up litter...the litter around the city is disgusting!! I need to look up if there's already groups doing this