Letters: Here's what elimination of the Institute of Museum and Library Services would do to Chicago
The Tribune Editorial Board is right to warn against eliminating federal support for libraries ('Leave libraries alone. They more than pay their way,' April 17). But the stakes are even higher than many realize.
We're not just losing a library agency — the future of libraries is being dismantled.
For decades, the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) has shaped what's possible for libraries and museums nationwide. Through innovation grants and its National Medal for Museum and Library Service — which Chicago Public Library received in 2014 — the IMLS has helped these institutions meet change with imagination and resolve.
We need that leadership now more than ever. Artificial intelligence is rapidly reshaping how we work, learn and access information.
In Chicago, libraries are reported to be the most common source of internet access after smartphones — especially for residents without broadband at home. That means we're not just offering books. We're also offering access to the future.
To prepare our communities for this shift, libraries must invest now: in AI literacy, in public-facing strategies and in staff training to responsibly test emerging tools. That's the kind of forward-looking work IMLS makes possible.
It's how we launched one of the first public library-based Maker Labs, where Chicagoans learn fabrication and design skills. And it's how YOUmedia — a national model for youth development in out-of-school time — was created through the leadership of Commissioner Mary Dempsey, investment from the MacArthur Foundation and support from IMLS. That space helped launch the creative path of thousands of teens, including Chance the Rapper.
Chicago's civic commitment to libraries runs deep — from Cindy Pritzker's founding of the Chicago Public Library Foundation to today's board leadership under Linda Johnson Rice. Mayor Brandon Johnson has affirmed the role of libraries as essential to equity and democracy.
If Congress eliminates IMLS, we don't just lose funding — we also lose our future.
Call your representatives. Donate to the foundation. Get your library card. Visit. Attend programs with your family. A stronger base of library users strengthens this civic institution.
Together, we have a choice. We can let this moment pass — or we can stand with the IMLS and support our city libraries. If we choose the latter, we won't just preserve what works — we'll also accelerate what's possible in the age of AI.
Because what we do now won't just shape the future of libraries. It also will shape the future of our city.
And in a democracy, the future is shaped by those who show up.
— Chris Brown, commissioner, Chicago Public Library
Environmental office
I am glad to see the mayor has acknowledged that reorganization and possible layoffs are on the table for the next city budget due out later this year. Might I offer an idea as to who should go?
On what should be its biggest holiday of the year, the Chicago Department of Environment (DOE) was silent on Earth Day on April 22. No department news release, no informational flyers, not even a tweet.
The DOE has a staff of several people, and did any of them think to celebrate Earth Day? This small example, I believe, is proof of much deeper issues with the department.
If you scroll through the department's sparse social media pages, you'll find that the DOE only tags along with other larger departments. Basic programs such as recycling and composting — large environmental responsibilities! — are still run by another department.
The environment and climate-friendly policies should of course be at forefront of everything the city does. The city should keep a handful of staff inside the mayor's office, vetting new policy and keeping abreast of the latest environmental goings-on. All of the other bloat needs to go.
— Sam Lynch, Chicago
Measles is a threat
Measles — declared eliminated in our country in 2000 — is back, and it's not just creeping in. It's spreading.
As of April 25, there have already been 882 reported cases of measles across the U.S. this year, resulting in three deaths. More than 95% of those infected were unvaccinated. These are not just statistics; these are lives affected by a disease we know how to prevent.
In suburban Cook County, school immunization data from 2023-24 shows that measles vaccination coverage is just above the critical 95% threshold required to prevent outbreaks from spreading. Decreases could open the door for measles to return.
Why is this happening? The answer is heartbreaking: misinformation and vaccine hesitancy.
Myths — especially the false claim that the combined measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine causes autism — have spread far faster than facts. Despite extensive research showing no link between the MMR vaccine and autism, this dangerous narrative continues to undermine trust and put lives at risk.
Let us be clear: Measles is not a harmless childhood illness. It's one of the most contagious human diseases. If one person has measles, up to 9 out of 10 unvaccinated people nearby will get infected. It spreads through the air when an infected person coughs or even breathes. While many recover, measles can cause serious complications such as pneumonia, encephalitis (brain swelling) and, in rare cases, death.
But there is hope — and that hope is vaccination. The MMR vaccine is safe and effective and has been in use for more than 50 years. This week is National Infant Immunization Week, a good time to reflect on how many lives have been saved. Here's something remarkable: From 2000 to 2023, measles vaccines saved an estimated 60 million lives worldwide, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Your decision to vaccinate doesn't just protect you — it also protects your community. When enough people are vaccinated, it stops the disease from spreading, protecting those who can't be vaccinated, such as infants or children undergoing cancer treatment.
Measles is preventable. A resurgence is not inevitable — but it is likely if we don't act.
Let's work together to stop misinformation, raise vaccination rates and keep measles out of our communities.
— Dr. Erik Mikaitis, CEO, Cook County Health, and Dr. Kiran Joshi, interim COO, Cook County Department of Public Health
Trauma of suicide
Regarding the death of Chicago Officer Malissa Torres, this is about as tragic as it comes. All the officers who worked in her district are harmed by this. The procession of the body is as painful as anything human beings are asked to do. But cops are like that for the brotherhood.
I wonder who in the world knew that Torres was hurting? That is what needs to be learned.
Genuine support would offer a continuum of behavioral health services for officers who are exposed to the world's worst trauma as Torres may have been in her years at the Chicago Police Department.
— Michael Sefton, Ph.D., Whittier Rehabilitation Hospital, Westborough, Massachusetts
Antisemitism no liberty
Regarding the letter 'Using Jewish fear' (April 22): Rampant antisemitism on university campuses is not a 'civil liberty.' Block Jewish students from traversing a campus and getting to their classes; infiltrating and disrupting Jewish or Israeli classes; hijacking study halls; and shouting for the destruction of Jews and Israel with slogans of 'Global Intifada' is not 'civil.' And no one should have the freedoms to engage in these heinous activities. Incitement, defamation and threats are not a form of protected speech under the First Amendment.
Intimidation, harassment and vandalism that frighten students also violate Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Title VI prohibits discrimination based on race, color and national origin in programs and activities receiving federal assistance. When universities violate Title Vl, federal assistance can be stopped. Period.
Antisemitism, like racism and any other despicable form of discrimination, must be stopped. Freezing of federal funds is mandated and necessary.
— Patti Perry, Wilmette
Basic humanity of all
Rabbi Yehiel Poupko in his op-ed ('A Jewish appreciation of Pope Francis,' April 23) interprets the strong relations that Pope Francis had with Jews as support for Israel. Likewise, I have seen many interpret the strong relations that Francis had with the Palestinians as support for Palestine.
I think both miss the point by starting from a political position rather than from the basic humanity of all people. Starting from that position, one must decry antisemitism and violence against Israelis. One must also decry Israel's campaign of ethnic cleansing and genocide against Palestinians.
We all have basic rights as human beings that must be respected.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Editorial: Brandon Johnson turns to taxing groceries
Mayor Brandon Johnson has positioned himself as a champion of working families and the poor. But his messaging is getting complicated as it collides with the city's difficult fiscal reality. 'You all know my position. The ultra-rich continue to get away with not having to put more skin in the game,' he said at a Tuesday news conference. But at the same time, Johnson is pushing for a grocery tax that will disproportionately hurt families at the checkout line as they try to put food on the table. His administration is taking an obfuscational messaging approach to explain its position. Johnson insists this isn't a new tax — it's merely a local continuation of a state tax being phased out. But for struggling families, the semantics won't matter. Higher grocery prices are higher grocery prices. '(The grocery tax) was a function that the state of Illinois decided to relinquish, and leave it to the cities to collect the tax,' Johnson said earlier this week. 'So we're not creating a grocery tax, we're just creating a process by which we can collect it.' That's some twisty logic, to say the least. A tax is a tax even when a mayor calls it a 'function.' It's true that when Gov. JB Pritzker ended the state's 1% grocery tax, he left the door open for cities to collect their own — being as state grocery tax revenues flow to municipalities, not state coffers. Chicago stands to lose $80 million in revenue from the change — at a time when it's already facing a $1 billion budget shortfall. But the budget problem is not just Springfield's doing. It's a reflection of City Hall's unwillingness to rein in spending and make hard choices. And now, instead of leading with reforms, the mayor is reaching for the easiest — and most regressive — option on the shelf. The mayor has put himself in a corner on this one. If his goal is tax fairness, it's hard to see how making food more expensive for struggling Chicagoans fits the bill. In a better world, Chicagoans would be getting a small break at the grocery store. Pritzker has acknowledged the regressive nature of the grocery tax and its impact on families. 'Even with inflation cooling off every dollar counts, so I'm proud we're doing what we can to make trips to the grocery store a little easier,' he said in 2024 after eliminating the statewide grocery tax. We have said much the same, noting that the grocery tax does not need to be there, especially since its absence might contribute in some small way to motivating people to cook healthy meals at home rather than stopping at the local fast-food outlet. In a few months, the working group Johnson convened to explore budget cuts and revenue options for addressing the city's structural budget challenges is expected to share its preliminary recommendations, ahead of the mayor's budget proposal later this year. We're interested to see what the group comes back with — hopefully sooner rather than later. We're aware that the city's finances are so grim there may be no choice but to add back the grocery 'function,' or tax. We'll leave our final view on that until we see a fuller picture of ideas. Until now, the mayor's efforts to introduce widespread new revenue sources have been met with stiff opposition and a lack of public support. First, his flagship fiscal proposal, a real estate transfer tax hike dubbed 'Bring Chicago Home,' failed, a rude awakening that Johnson's election was not a mandate for sweeping new tax hikes. Next, an attempt to build support for a $300 million property tax hike fizzled out amid understandable public resistance and pushback from aldermen. We opposed both ideas. We say these outcomes are a reflection of the general sentiment among Chicagoans, most of whom are sick to death of being asked for more as the city gives them more of the same, often worse, public services. The mayor's grocery tax push will certainly be met with resentment. If he wants to make it happen, the grocery tax will need to be adopted as an ordinance by City Council and submitted to the state by Oct. 1 in order for the tax to be imposed beginning Jan. 1, according to the Illinois Municipal League. Even Johnson's supporters may struggle to square this proposal with his progressive ideals. It's hard to claim you're standing with working families while taxing their daily bread. Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@
Chicago Tribune
a day ago
- Chicago Tribune
Editorial: Brandon Johnson turns to taxing groceries
Mayor Brandon Johnson has positioned himself as a champion of working families and the poor. But his messaging is getting complicated as it collides with the city's difficult fiscal reality. 'You all know my position. The ultra-rich continue to get away with not having to put more skin in the game,' he said at a Tuesday news conference. But at the same time, Johnson is pushing for a grocery tax that will disproportionately hurt families at the checkout line as they try to put food on the table. His administration is taking an obfuscational messaging approach to explain its position. Johnson insists this isn't a new tax — it's merely a local of a state tax being phased out. But for struggling families, the semantics won't matter. Higher grocery prices are higher grocery prices. '(The grocery tax) was a function that the state of Illinois decided to relinquish, and leave it to the cities to collect the tax,' Johnson said earlier this week. 'So we're not creating a grocery tax, we're just creating a process by which we can collect it.' That's some twisty logic, to say the least. A tax is a tax even when a mayor calls it a 'function.' It's true that when Gov. JB Pritzker ended the state's 1% grocery tax, he left the door open for cities to collect their own — being as state grocery tax revenues flow to municipalities, not state coffers. Chicago stands to lose $80 million in revenue from the change — at a time when it's already facing a $1 billion budget shortfall. But the budget problem is not just Springfield's doing. It's a reflection of City Hall's unwillingness to rein in spending and make hard choices. And now, instead of leading with reforms, the mayor is reaching for the easiest — and most regressive — option on the shelf. The mayor has put himself in a corner on this one. If his goal is tax fairness, it's hard to see how making food more expensive for struggling Chicagoans fits the bill. In a better world, Chicagoans would be getting a small break at the grocery store. Pritzker has acknowledged the regressive nature of the grocery tax and its impact on families. 'Even with inflation cooling off every dollar counts, so I'm proud we're doing what we can to make trips to the grocery store a little easier,' he said in 2024 after eliminating the statewide grocery tax. We have said much the same, noting that the grocery tax does not need to be there, especially since its absence might contribute in some small way to motivating people to cook healthy meals at home rather than stopping at the local fast-food outlet. In a few months, the working group Johnson convened to explore budget cuts and revenue options for addressing the city's structural budget challenges is expected to share its preliminary recommendations, ahead of the mayor's budget proposal later this year. We're interested to see what the group comes back with — hopefully sooner rather than later. We're aware that the city's finances are so grim there may be no choice but to add back the grocery 'function,' or tax. We'll leave our final view on that until we see a fuller picture of ideas. Until now, the mayor's efforts to introduce widespread new revenue sources have been met with stiff opposition and a lack of public support. First, his flagship fiscal proposal, a real estate transfer tax hike dubbed 'Bring Chicago Home,' failed, a rude awakening that Johnson's election was not a mandate for sweeping new tax hikes. Next, an attempt to build support for a $300 million property tax hike fizzled out amid understandable public resistance and pushback from aldermen. We opposed both ideas. We say these outcomes are a reflection of the general sentiment among Chicagoans, most of whom are sick to death of being asked for more as the city gives them more of the same, often worse, public services. The mayor's grocery tax push will certainly be met with resentment. If he wants to make it happen, the grocery tax will need to be adopted as an ordinance by City Council and submitted to the state by Oct. 1 in order for the tax to be imposed beginning Jan. 1, according to the Illinois Municipal League. Even Johnson's supporters may struggle to square this proposal with his progressive ideals. It's hard to claim you're standing with working families while taxing their daily bread.
Axios
3 days ago
- Axios
Chicago's identity crisis: Who's leaving and who's staying
A new global report suggests Chicago is in the midst of an identity crisis. The big picture: When asked what they love about the city, people's answers were split by how long they've lived here, according to City Pulse 2025: The Magnetic City from Gensler Research Institute, an arm of the design firm that has built several projects in Chicago. Some say they would grow old here while others were making moving truck reservations. Methodology: Gensler surveyed 33,000 anonymous urban residents in 65 global cities in 2024, including over 500 people in Chicago. By the numbers: Residents who have been here fewer than 10 years show a 13% likelihood of leaving compared with those living in other major cities. They are 16% more likely to leave than someone who's been here for more than a decade. Older adults surveyed were more concerned about the city's future. Zoom out: Chicagoans were above the national average in saying their city is a strong place to socialize and find connections. They also said walkability was a huge positive, higher than in most cities. The biggest factors in staying in a city are cost of living, level of crime, healthcare costs, job opportunities and taxes. Respondents said the city is a good place to grow old, showing confidence in affordability, aging and safety. Yes, but: Some were concerned that the city's reputation and identity is getting worse. Zoom in: The report comes days after U.S. News & World Report ranked Illinois toward the bottom of its latest best states ranking. Also, the newly passed state budget calls for more taxes, while Cook County residents are seeing increases to their property taxes and utility bills. The other side: Chicago has been named "Best Big City in the U.S." by Condé Nast Traveler for eight straight years. And our cost of living and tax burdens are less than in Los Angeles and New York City and other global cities. What they're saying: Gensler Chicago's Brian Vitale sees the results as a chance to keep Chicagoans interested in the city. "Chicagoans clearly feel the magic of their city, and that's something to build on," Vitale tells Axios. "We can turn these strengths into lasting experiences by continuing to create neighborhoods that are dynamic, inclusive and welcoming at every stage of life." Tell us Chicagoans: Should you stay or should you go? We'll publish results later in the week.
