What’s New

When Mayor Lori Lightfoot unveiled We Will Chicago two years ago, the initiative to create a citywide plan was touted as having the potential to reshape Chicago, ending decades of racial segregation that has kept low-income Black and Hispanic residents in communities that lack investment. 

In the years that followed, more than 100 residents and civic leaders selected by the city gathered behind closed doors to discuss a collective vision for the city’s future. But despite long meetings, dozens of ideas debated, and countless promises, the 150-page draft released earlier this summer for public comment lacked specific policy recommendations and a time frame to be implemented. Instead, the document offers 40 goals and 150 objectives.

“How is it going to affect policy decisions or budget priorities [if policy recommendations] are not in the plan,” said Amalia NietoGomez, the executive director of Alliance of the Southeast, one of the organizations that hosted community meetings on the plan. “We’re disappointed.” 

The city collected a list of more than 600 “preliminary” policy ideas from the residents and civic leaders who helped draft the plan. But those ideas, critics say, are at the bottom of the We Will Chicago website, like footnotes.

City Bureau reporters interviewed a dozen people who spent a year in “research meetings” with the city, working on a vision for Chicago. While all commended Lightfoot’s administration for tackling nuanced topics, they said Lightfoot is missing an opportunity to implement real change and address Chicago’s systemic inequities by not including tangible steps to change the city’s policies and hold public officials accountable. Some wondered why meetings were closed to the general public and whether there was sufficient community participation for the plan to be truly “for and by the people.”  

The public comment period closed November 1. That same day, a dozen people protested in front of City Hall, with signs that read, “Our Plan, Not The City’s Plan” and “‘We Will’ Be Heard!” They were part of a coalition that had asked the mayor’s office to extend the deadline. They argued that when they surveyed neighborhood residents in the city’s south and west sides, many had yet to hear of the plan.  

“Right now, we go on our experience, and our experience is: we’ve been shafted for decades and decades and decades,” said Leone Bicchieri, founder and executive director of Working Family Solidarity, one of the members of the coalition. Bicchieri said the coalition wants the city to engage in a candid conversation that results in specific policy commitments, including a promise that investors and developers are not going to run the show.

Leone Bicchieri, founder and executive director of Working Family Solidarity, said he wants real talk from the city, not vague promises. Davon Clark for City Bureau Credit: Davon Clark/City Bureau

The city said in a statement to the coalition that it would not extend the deadline, arguing that it had spent 18 months with 115 Chicago residents and 25 community partners to co-create the We Will Chicago draft. The city also said it had gathered “critical resident input before and during the drafting phase through over 3,000 surveys, 150+ neighborhood events, and focus groups with over 250 residents.” 

Kathy Dickhut, the Department of Planning and Development (DPD) deputy commissioner, said in an interview with City Bureau that the priority was creating the goals and objectives, which is why less time was spent on the policy ideas. Before going further with the policy ideas, she said they would have to be flushed out and undergo an equity analysis. But she added that once the broad plan is adopted, the city will look at those 600-plus ideas and develop actionable policies or programs.

“This is a ten-year sort of vision, so we have a lot of content to work with,” Dickhut said. “We are just at the beginning of this.”

For now, the city plans to create a companion document of the policy ideas and publish it with the final version of the plan, which is expected to be approved by the city’s Plan Commission in January. Any policies or programs that come after would need City Council’s approval.

The timing of the $4 million plan isn’t lost on those keeping track of Lightfoot’s promises to uplift Chicago’s economically distressed neighborhoods. Delmarie Cobb, a longtime political consultant, said that with the February mayoral election on the horizon, the plan is a tangible item Lightfoot can point to to show voters—and her opponents—she got it done. 

A citywide plan, which Lightfoot set as a top priority of her first term, became ever more important as the calls for racial justice grew louder in the wake of George Floyd’s murder and news stories highlighted the racial inequities that affect almost every aspect of Chicagoans’ daily lives, from policing and health to housing and parking tickets.

“MAKE NO LITTLE PLANS”

We Will Chicago is the city’s most sweeping acknowledgment, to date, of racial and ethnic inequities and the role public officials have played in creating them. Framed by the city as a “historical reckoning,” the draft’s opening pages summarize how redlining, school closures, the construction of the federal highway system and other urban planning choices have perpetuated racial and ethnic inequity.

Chicago’s last urban planning initiative of this scale, the 1966 Comprehensive Plan under Mayor Richard J. Daley, was both too vague to gain traction and too specific to earn the votes needed for City Council approval. While it informed some development in the following years, it mostly faded into irrelevance. Over the next five decades, the city made no big plans; instead, it focused on regional and neighborhood planning. 

The city touted We Will Chicago as the first citywide planning initiative since 1966. Both plans articulate how development can align with residents’ needs and priorities but they do so in different degrees of detail.

Christina Harris, the director of land use and planning at the Metropolitan Planning Council, a local nongovernmental organization that helped the city shape the We Will Chicago planning process, said the distinction is in the word “comprehensive.” A comprehensive plan includes specific zoning and land-use policies. 

Some states require cities to create comprehensive plans every ten to 20 years. Illinois does not. The state leaves the choice to municipalities, but provides guidelines for comprehensive planning processes if municipalities choose to do one. For example, a comprehensive plan is not official until it’s been approved by the corporate authority, which in Chicago’s case is City Council. 

By comparison, the state has no requirements for a “citywide” plan, which is what the city is calling its plan. And that gives the city flexibility.

“It’s really more of a citywide vision,” said Chloe Gurin-Sands, also of the Metropolitan Planning Council. “It’s not a land-use plan. It’s not a comprehensive plan. It’s supposed to be guiding decisions about the direction that the city wants to move towards.”

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

Lightfoot promised a plan for and by Chicagoans, which she restated in a letter included in the draft of the plan: “I want this plan to be OUR plan—not one crafted only by City staff.”  

The city’s engagement strategy included research meetings led by city staff and outside consultants, neighborhood forums led by community groups and programming by Honey Pot, an artist group that specializes in engagement and facilitation.

Honey Pot, whose contract is worth more than $283,000, was hired to explain the plan to people in creative ways at farmers markets, street festivals, and other in-person and virtual events. Their strategy included hiring more than 20 artist-organizers to put on around 80 events and share community feedback with each of the research teams involved in drafting We Will Chicago.

In documents reviewed by City Bureau, artist-organizers cited a lack of marketing support and a short engagement period as challenges in their outreach efforts. While they found the community engagement work moving and meaningful, they also encountered a deep disconnect and lack of trust. They said most community members they talked to were unfamiliar with the plan but skeptical that the city would actually heed their input and reverse decades of inequitable investment.

“It was hard,” Marlon Billups, who goes by the artist name Jo de Presser, said in an interview with City Bureau and other Honey Pot leaders and core members. 

Meida Teresa McNeal, Honey Pot’s artistic managing director, said there were just five of them doing all the administrative work, like keeping track of meetings and the broad strategy, and troubleshooting issues. And because of the pandemic they had to scramble to figure out ways to build meaningful connections with people virtually, which was a world apart from the face-to-face work Honey Pot is known for.

McNeal said the group intentionally moves slow because they want to build a space where people feel comfortable sharing, and that takes time. Ideally, she said, the engagement work would have been two-years long. But the city was operating on a fast timeline that gave them just three to four months to engage with people, she said.

What’s more, the city’s strategy kept changing, which meant Honey Pot—and the artists they hired—was constantly adapting. 

“We were building a ship on a ship that was still being built,” said Jennifer Ligaya, an artist,  sound and performance composer, and a Honey Pot core member. 

THE PLAN TO MAKE A PLAN

To draft the plan, the city identified several areas of focus: transportation and infrastructure; environment, climate, and energy; arts and culture; housing and neighborhoods; lifelong learning; and economic development. (Another topic, civic engagement, was added later on). Chicago residents were invited to apply to join a research team addressing one of those topics, or “pillars,” as the city called them.

More than 320 people applied. The majority of the applications were for “community partners,” a designation that allowed them to host meetings. Among the criteria used to select people, the city looked at the applicants’ experience, evidence of their local connections, and potential to engage with that community. In the end, the city selected 115 volunteers, most of whom were leaders in groups or organizations working on the specific topics the city was tackling, and 25 community partners.

None of the research team members were paid, though each group was led by several paid consultants and Honey Pot artist-organizers. About a third of the research team members identified as Black, a third as white, 17 percent as Hispanic/Latinx, and 10 percent as Asian. Two people identified themselves as American Indian/Alaska Native. 

The vast majority, 61 percent, said they were women. 

Iyana Simba, a director at the Illinois Environmental Council and the co-chair of the environment, climate and energy team, said her cohort was pretty diverse, and included a mix of residents and representatives from environmental justice organizations. 

Overall, Simba said the research team meetings were more in-depth than she expected. She felt folks needed an understanding of the city’s environmental history to participate. She is proud of their work, including a policy proposal that would create accountability measures around environmental impact assessments. 

“So we really did try to cover everything, but there might be things that we missed, or we messed up on,” she said.

LACK OF SPECIFICS

Over the course of these meetings, the research teams brainstormed goals and objectives that the city later refined into the 40 goals and 150 objectives in the We Will Chicago draft.  

One of the goals under the “economic development” section was to “build and sustain generational wealth and shared prosperity for Black and Latino communities.” One way to achieve that goal, the plan says, is to grow “community wealth through local, democratic, shared ownership and control of neighborhood assets.” 

Separately, a goal under the “housing and neighborhoods” section is to “prevent Chicagoans from being involuntarily displaced, especially those that have been historically marginalized.” And one way to do that is for the city to “increase community ownership opportunities and options for Black, Latino, Native American, Asian, and immigrant residents to collectively own land and properties.” 

But the draft doesn’t say how exactly the city is going to implement those ideas, which is why some community leaders feel the city is wasting an opportunity to enact real change. During the We Will Chicago process, public housing residents who have for decades asked to share ownership and control of the buildings they once called home watched the land be sold to private developers. Moreover, many of the southeast side residents who provided input on We Will Chicago’s environmental and public health priorities were at the same time fighting the city to stop the relocation of a metal shredder facility from Lincoln Park to their neighborhood. They won the battle—at least for now.  

Victoria Moreno, a civil rights analyst for the federal government who participated in the housing and neighborhoods research team, said that after discussions group members had to vote on the spot on items to be adopted in the draft. “But what they were bringing back to us, which was supposedly based on our discussions, felt pretty distant, and very specific to revisions that had been done internally,” she said.

Moreno said a lot of the language had acronyms and terminology that were foreign to her. 

“It just was very technical,” Moreno said. She later added, “I still feel like I’m not sure how it’s actually going to translate into day-to-day life for people living here.” 

WHO GETS TO BE IN THE CONVERSATION?

In total, the city held roughly 90 research team meetings beginning in July of 2021. Each meeting typically lasted two hours and was not open to the public, a tension point for some research team participants who believed they should have been. Meeting notes, however, were usually made public a week after meetings were held. [Editor’s Note: City Bureau was a subcontractor hired by SB Friedman Development Advisors, a city contractor, to take notes at the so-called “pillar meetings” through its Chicago Documenters program. The contract was worth $70,000.]

Bill Garcia, an information technology engineer who participated in the transportation and infrastructure research team, wondered if it was even possible to get a comprehensive or representative view of what the public wants. 

“The type of people that come to local government meetings and this type of thing, they’re generally of a certain situation or status,” Garcia said, explaining that the folks who participated in his group had the time to do so, and to do it for free. 

“It was great but, you’re taking two hours out of your day every few weeks—it adds up over time,” he said. “You’re taking time away from your family.”

On the other hand, Garcia said the process could have gone on longer because the topics they were discussing were so big. [Editor’s note: Garcia regularly accepts paid assignments to document public meetings through City Bureau’s Chicago Documenters program.] 

Chris White, an organizer with Alliance of the Southeast, is among members of a coalition who want Mayor Lori Lightfoot to extend the public comment period for We Will Chicago.

When Mayor Lori Lightfoot unveiled We Will Chicago two years ago, the initiative to create a citywide plan was touted as having the potential to reshape Chicago, ending decades of racial segregation that has kept low-income Black and Hispanic residents in communities that lack investment. 

In the years that followed, more than 100 residents and civic leaders selected by the city gathered behind closed doors to discuss a collective vision for the city’s future. But despite long meetings, dozens of ideas debated, and countless promises, the 150-page draft released earlier this summer for public comment lacked specific policy recommendations and a time frame to be implemented. Instead, the document offers 40 goals and 150 objectives.

“How is it going to affect policy decisions or budget priorities [if policy recommendations] are not in the plan,” said Amalia NietoGomez, the executive director of Alliance of the Southeast, one of the organizations that hosted community meetings on the plan. “We’re disappointed.” 

The city collected a list of more than 600 “preliminary” policy ideas from the residents and civic leaders who helped draft the plan. But those ideas, critics say, are at the bottom of the We Will Chicago website, like footnotes.

City Bureau reporters interviewed a dozen people who spent a year in “research meetings” with the city, working on a vision for Chicago. While all commended Lightfoot’s administration for tackling nuanced topics, they said Lightfoot is missing an opportunity to implement real change and address Chicago’s systemic inequities by not including tangible steps to change the city’s policies and hold public officials accountable. Some wondered why meetings were closed to the general public and whether there was sufficient community participation for the plan to be truly “for and by the people.”  

The public comment period closed November 1. That same day, a dozen people protested in front of City Hall, with signs that read, “Our Plan, Not The City’s Plan” and “‘We Will’ Be Heard!” They were part of a coalition that had asked the mayor’s office to extend the deadline. They argued that when they surveyed neighborhood residents in the city’s south and west sides, many had yet to hear of the plan.  

“Right now, we go on our experience, and our experience is: we’ve been shafted for decades and decades and decades,” said Leone Bicchieri, founder and executive director of Working Family Solidarity, one of the members of the coalition. Bicchieri said the coalition wants the city to engage in a candid conversation that results in specific policy commitments, including a promise that investors and developers are not going to run the show.

Leone Bicchieri, founder and executive director of Working Family Solidarity, said he wants real talk from the city, not vague promises. Davon Clark for City Bureau Credit: Davon Clark/City Bureau

The city said in a statement to the coalition that it would not extend the deadline, arguing that it had spent 18 months with 115 Chicago residents and 25 community partners to co-create the We Will Chicago draft. The city also said it had gathered “critical resident input before and during the drafting phase through over 3,000 surveys, 150+ neighborhood events, and focus groups with over 250 residents.” 

Kathy Dickhut, the Department of Planning and Development (DPD) deputy commissioner, said in an interview with City Bureau that the priority was creating the goals and objectives, which is why less time was spent on the policy ideas. Before going further with the policy ideas, she said they would have to be flushed out and undergo an equity analysis. But she added that once the broad plan is adopted, the city will look at those 600-plus ideas and develop actionable policies or programs.

“This is a ten-year sort of vision, so we have a lot of content to work with,” Dickhut said. “We are just at the beginning of this.”

For now, the city plans to create a companion document of the policy ideas and publish it with the final version of the plan, which is expected to be approved by the city’s Plan Commission in January. Any policies or programs that come after would need City Council’s approval.

The timing of the $4 million plan isn’t lost on those keeping track of Lightfoot’s promises to uplift Chicago’s economically distressed neighborhoods. Delmarie Cobb, a longtime political consultant, said that with the February mayoral election on the horizon, the plan is a tangible item Lightfoot can point to to show voters—and her opponents—she got it done. 

A citywide plan, which Lightfoot set as a top priority of her first term, became ever more important as the calls for racial justice grew louder in the wake of George Floyd’s murder and news stories highlighted the racial inequities that affect almost every aspect of Chicagoans’ daily lives, from policing and health to housing and parking tickets.

“MAKE NO LITTLE PLANS”

We Will Chicago is the city’s most sweeping acknowledgment, to date, of racial and ethnic inequities and the role public officials have played in creating them. Framed by the city as a “historical reckoning,” the draft’s opening pages summarize how redlining, school closures, the construction of the federal highway system and other urban planning choices have perpetuated racial and ethnic inequity.

Chicago’s last urban planning initiative of this scale, the 1966 Comprehensive Plan under Mayor Richard J. Daley, was both too vague to gain traction and too specific to earn the votes needed for City Council approval. While it informed some development in the following years, it mostly faded into irrelevance. Over the next five decades, the city made no big plans; instead, it focused on regional and neighborhood planning. 

The city touted We Will Chicago as the first citywide planning initiative since 1966. Both plans articulate how development can align with residents’ needs and priorities but they do so in different degrees of detail.

Christina Harris, the director of land use and planning at the Metropolitan Planning Council, a local nongovernmental organization that helped the city shape the We Will Chicago planning process, said the distinction is in the word “comprehensive.” A comprehensive plan includes specific zoning and land-use policies. 

Some states require cities to create comprehensive plans every ten to 20 years. Illinois does not. The state leaves the choice to municipalities, but provides guidelines for comprehensive planning processes if municipalities choose to do one. For example, a comprehensive plan is not official until it’s been approved by the corporate authority, which in Chicago’s case is City Council. 

By comparison, the state has no requirements for a “citywide” plan, which is what the city is calling its plan. And that gives the city flexibility.

“It’s really more of a citywide vision,” said Chloe Gurin-Sands, also of the Metropolitan Planning Council. “It’s not a land-use plan. It’s not a comprehensive plan. It’s supposed to be guiding decisions about the direction that the city wants to move towards.”

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

Lightfoot promised a plan for and by Chicagoans, which she restated in a letter included in the draft of the plan: “I want this plan to be OUR plan—not one crafted only by City staff.”  

The city’s engagement strategy included research meetings led by city staff and outside consultants, neighborhood forums led by community groups and programming by Honey Pot, an artist group that specializes in engagement and facilitation.

Honey Pot, whose contract is worth more than $283,000, was hired to explain the plan to people in creative ways at farmers markets, street festivals, and other in-person and virtual events. Their strategy included hiring more than 20 artist-organizers to put on around 80 events and share community feedback with each of the research teams involved in drafting We Will Chicago.

In documents reviewed by City Bureau, artist-organizers cited a lack of marketing support and a short engagement period as challenges in their outreach efforts. While they found the community engagement work moving and meaningful, they also encountered a deep disconnect and lack of trust. They said most community members they talked to were unfamiliar with the plan but skeptical that the city would actually heed their input and reverse decades of inequitable investment.

“It was hard,” Marlon Billups, who goes by the artist name Jo de Presser, said in an interview with City Bureau and other Honey Pot leaders and core members. 

Meida Teresa McNeal, Honey Pot’s artistic managing director, said there were just five of them doing all the administrative work, like keeping track of meetings and the broad strategy, and troubleshooting issues. And because of the pandemic they had to scramble to figure out ways to build meaningful connections with people virtually, which was a world apart from the face-to-face work Honey Pot is known for.

McNeal said the group intentionally moves slow because they want to build a space where people feel comfortable sharing, and that takes time. Ideally, she said, the engagement work would have been two-years long. But the city was operating on a fast timeline that gave them just three to four months to engage with people, she said.

What’s more, the city’s strategy kept changing, which meant Honey Pot—and the artists they hired—was constantly adapting. 

“We were building a ship on a ship that was still being built,” said Jennifer Ligaya, an artist,  sound and performance composer, and a Honey Pot core member. 

THE PLAN TO MAKE A PLAN

To draft the plan, the city identified several areas of focus: transportation and infrastructure; environment, climate, and energy; arts and culture; housing and neighborhoods; lifelong learning; and economic development. (Another topic, civic engagement, was added later on). Chicago residents were invited to apply to join a research team addressing one of those topics, or “pillars,” as the city called them.

More than 320 people applied. The majority of the applications were for “community partners,” a designation that allowed them to host meetings. Among the criteria used to select people, the city looked at the applicants’ experience, evidence of their local connections, and potential to engage with that community. In the end, the city selected 115 volunteers, most of whom were leaders in groups or organizations working on the specific topics the city was tackling, and 25 community partners.

None of the research team members were paid, though each group was led by several paid consultants and Honey Pot artist-organizers. About a third of the research team members identified as Black, a third as white, 17 percent as Hispanic/Latinx, and 10 percent as Asian. Two people identified themselves as American Indian/Alaska Native. 

The vast majority, 61 percent, said they were women. 

Iyana Simba, a director at the Illinois Environmental Council and the co-chair of the environment, climate and energy team, said her cohort was pretty diverse, and included a mix of residents and representatives from environmental justice organizations. 

Overall, Simba said the research team meetings were more in-depth than she expected. She felt folks needed an understanding of the city’s environmental history to participate. She is proud of their work, including a policy proposal that would create accountability measures around environmental impact assessments. 

“So we really did try to cover everything, but there might be things that we missed, or we messed up on,” she said.

LACK OF SPECIFICS

Over the course of these meetings, the research teams brainstormed goals and objectives that the city later refined into the 40 goals and 150 objectives in the We Will Chicago draft.  

One of the goals under the “economic development” section was to “build and sustain generational wealth and shared prosperity for Black and Latino communities.” One way to achieve that goal, the plan says, is to grow “community wealth through local, democratic, shared ownership and control of neighborhood assets.” 

Separately, a goal under the “housing and neighborhoods” section is to “prevent Chicagoans from being involuntarily displaced, especially those that have been historically marginalized.” And one way to do that is for the city to “increase community ownership opportunities and options for Black, Latino, Native American, Asian, and immigrant residents to collectively own land and properties.” 

But the draft doesn’t say how exactly the city is going to implement those ideas, which is why some community leaders feel the city is wasting an opportunity to enact real change. During the We Will Chicago process, public housing residents who have for decades asked to share ownership and control of the buildings they once called home watched the land be sold to private developers. Moreover, many of the southeast side residents who provided input on We Will Chicago’s environmental and public health priorities were at the same time fighting the city to stop the relocation of a metal shredder facility from Lincoln Park to their neighborhood. They won the battle—at least for now.  

Victoria Moreno, a civil rights analyst for the federal government who participated in the housing and neighborhoods research team, said that after discussions group members had to vote on the spot on items to be adopted in the draft. “But what they were bringing back to us, which was supposedly based on our discussions, felt pretty distant, and very specific to revisions that had been done internally,” she said.

Moreno said a lot of the language had acronyms and terminology that were foreign to her. 

“It just was very technical,” Moreno said. She later added, “I still feel like I’m not sure how it’s actually going to translate into day-to-day life for people living here.” 

WHO GETS TO BE IN THE CONVERSATION?

In total, the city held roughly 90 research team meetings beginning in July of 2021. Each meeting typically lasted two hours and was not open to the public, a tension point for some research team participants who believed they should have been. Meeting notes, however, were usually made public a week after meetings were held. [Editor’s Note: City Bureau was a subcontractor hired by SB Friedman Development Advisors, a city contractor, to take notes at the so-called “pillar meetings” through its Chicago Documenters program. The contract was worth $70,000.]

Bill Garcia, an information technology engineer who participated in the transportation and infrastructure research team, wondered if it was even possible to get a comprehensive or representative view of what the public wants. 

“The type of people that come to local government meetings and this type of thing, they’re generally of a certain situation or status,” Garcia said, explaining that the folks who participated in his group had the time to do so, and to do it for free. 

“It was great but, you’re taking two hours out of your day every few weeks—it adds up over time,” he said. “You’re taking time away from your family.”

On the other hand, Garcia said the process could have gone on longer because the topics they were discussing were so big. [Editor’s note: Garcia regularly accepts paid assignments to document public meetings through City Bureau’s Chicago Documenters program.] 

Chris White, an organizer with Alliance of the Southeast, is among members of a coalition who want Mayor Lori Lightfoot to extend the public comment period for We Will Chicago.

The Chicago Bears were defeated by the Miami Dolphins on Sunday afternoon at Soldier Field. They lost 35-32 which doesn’t even come close to telling the story of what happened inside the lines for this game. It was a sensational football game.

The best part of the game is the fact that the Chicago Bears lost while seeing their star quarterback continue to develop his game. Their draft stock wasn’t hurt at all in fact it was helped out significantly based on some other matchups around the league.

Justin Fields playing well is the single number one important thing for this franchise so winning or losing isn’t really here nor there in 2022. Things will be different in terms of expectations in 2023 but for now, they need to see Fields get better.

The season started off really rocky for him. It was to the point where there were whispers about people not believing he was going to be the guy long-term. Then, he kind of flipped a switch where he started playing very well and understanding the NFL game.

Part of understanding the NFL game is becoming aware of your strengths and utilizing them to the best of your ability. For Justin Fields, that is making plays with his legs. He certainly did that in this game against the Dolphins.

Justin Fields put on a historic performance in the Chicago Bears loss on Sunday.

Fields ran for 178 yards on 15 carries which led the Bears by over 140 yards. The next closest was David Montgomery who had 35 yards on 14 carries. The amount of ground he is able to cover as a quarterback is actually insane.

The cool thing about this mark is the fact that Fields broke the NFL record for the most rushing yards by a quarterback in a single game. It broke the previous mark set by Michael Vick during the prime of his career. Fields had a rushing touchdown as well.

He wasn’t just a dynamite runner in this game either. He also threw for 123 yards and had three touchdown passes which is absolutely insane. His total offense was unlike anything we’ve seen from a Bears quarterback ever.

Justin Fields is finally developing into the star quarterback that we all thought he would. After trading Roquan Smith and Robert Quinn, the defense isn’t very good but that will be worked out in the coming future. Right now, seeing Fields put up monster numbers is good enough.

The Bears are coming for the NFC North. It won’t happen in this year but you can bet that the Minnesota Vikings, Green Bay Packers, and Detroit Lions did not enjoy what they saw from Fields today. He is slowly but surely developing into that guy that we all thought he’d become.

Read More

Reader senior writer Ben Joravsky riffs on the day’s stories with his celebrated humor, insight, and honesty, and interviews politicians, activists, journalists and other political know-it-alls. Presented by the Chicago Reader, the show is available by 4 p.m. Tuesdays through Fridays at chicagoreader.com/joravsky—or wherever you get your podcasts. Don’t miss Oh, What a Week!–the Friday feature in which Ben & producer Dennis (aka, Dr. D.) review the week’s top stories. Also, bonus interviews drop on Saturdays, Sundays, and Mondays. 

Chicago Reader podcasts are recorded on Shure microphones. Learn more at Shure.com.

Chicago Reader senior writer Ben Joravsky discusses the day’s stories with his celebrated humor, insight, and honesty on The Ben Joravsky Show.

Read More

Reader senior writer Ben Joravsky riffs on the day’s stories with his celebrated humor, insight, and honesty, and interviews politicians, activists, journalists and other political know-it-alls. Presented by the Chicago Reader, the show is available by 4 p.m. Tuesdays through Fridays at chicagoreader.com/joravsky—or wherever you get your podcasts. Don’t miss Oh, What a Week!–the Friday feature in which Ben & producer Dennis (aka, Dr. D.) review the week’s top stories. Also, bonus interviews drop on Saturdays, Sundays, and Mondays. 

Chicago Reader podcasts are recorded on Shure microphones. Learn more at Shure.com.

Chicago Reader senior writer Ben Joravsky discusses the day’s stories with his celebrated humor, insight, and honesty on The Ben Joravsky Show.

Read More

Read More

College Football is always amazing but sometimes it has just an extra bit of flare. This week’s action was so interesting and created some major shakeups to what promises to be a very exciting College Football Playoff reveal on Tuesday. Notre Dame was a big part of it.

It is a bit surprising to hear that at this point too because of what has happened with them this season. They were not as good as some might have expected but they still are a decent team that deserves respect.

That became even more true on Saturday when they played a hand in helping turn the College Football Playoff field upside down. They defeated the Clemson Tigers by a final score of 35-18. It was one of the biggest upset victories of the season for any team.

Clemson was seen as a fraudulent elite team by a lot of people going into this game because they didn’t have the strongest schedule by any means. However, Notre Dame was not the game that anyone expected to see them humbled.

The Notre Dame Fighting Irish pulled off a huge upset over the Clemson Tigers.

Now, with this loss, Clemson is probably done with a very outside chance of making it to the College Football Playoff when it’s all said and done.

This wasn’t the only upset on the weekend either which is the only thing that could save them in the end. Georgia absolutely smoked Tennessee so they will fall out of the top four for sure after being ranked number one.

Alabama was also defeated by LSU so they have two losses. Those three teams (Alabama, Tennessee, and Clemson) now all need a lot of help from other teams in the nation.

Georgia is for sure going to be ranked number one, Michigan and Ohio State are going to be either two or three, and one of TCU or the losing Tennessee should be in the four-spot. The other will be five. Then, Alabama, Oregon, and Clemson could all bee in the 6-8 range.

The fact that Notre Dame helped turn this all upside down is amazing. They are getting to be a major spoiler in a year that didn’t go well for them. That is nice to know because we can be a little bit more confident in them making it to the Playoff in the coming years.

When this thing expands from four teams to 12, Notre Dame could be one of the at-large teams in almost every season if they play their cards right. Coming up with this huge win over Clemson surely will help people’s confidence in them.

They have no chance this year but Clemson might not anymore either and it’s all because of the Irish. Hopefully, they can now finish the year strong.

Read More

It’s not lost on anyone in the state of Arizona the effect that current Chicago Blackhawks forward Max Domi had as a member of the Arizona Coyotes.

Since being a commoner on the ice for the Desert Dogs, Domi has seen time with the Montreal Canadiens, Columbus Blue Jackets, and Carolina Hurricanes. Those were all while struggling to find his spot on rosters flooded with talent.

Domi’s signing with the Chicago Blackhawks prior to this season saved his career and is giving him a shot to be a leader on a roster that needs severe help in the leadership category.

It’s all but written in stone that the Blackhawks are in a rebuilding phase. He is also on a much cheaper Patrick Kane and Jonathan Toews who might be gone by the trade deadline. Domi’s veteran status is one that will shine through after those moves are potentially made.

Max Domi has fit in very well with the Chicago Blackhawks this season.

Domi currently sits second on the Blackhawks in power-play goals, contributing to the team’s sixth overall position in the NHL power-play percentage rankings.

Domi also ranks second in forwards with time on ice per game at 18:04 behind only Patrick Kane. His seven points (4-3-7) and 25.0 shooting percentage are important markers as well.

The Blackhawks’ reliability on Domi is playing an important part in the games they are winning and is giving him value in his NHL career.

Domi’s spot on the Kane line is providing him with the opportunity to play with one of the team’s top players and he is surrounded by guys who are able to help him produce.

Domi’s experience with the Canes in the playoffs provides a veteran for the future who when they do make playoff runs is able to be counted on.

Additionally, Domi has been a top-line guy in Arizona. That is another team in a similar position as the Blackhawks and flourished there throughout his time.

Extending Domi holds many positives for the Blackhawks, and shouldn’t be a surprise if the news breaks as the season progresses or even in the postseason.

Read More

The Chicago Humanities Festival (CHF) offers a full slate of conversations and programming exploring art and culture today at the Music Box Theatre (3733 N. Southport). Highlights include a (sold out) conversation with filmmaker Jim Jarmusch at 1 PM; a 35mm screening of Charlie Chaplin’s 1921 silent The Kid accompanied by a live performance from guitarist Marc Ribot (4 PM, tickets here); and “Whistleblower,” a conversation between activist Chelsea Manning and artist and activist Nadya Tolokonnikova of the group Pussy Riot. Manning will discuss her recent memoir README.txt and talk with Tolokonnikova about political activism, trans rights, and institutional transparency (7 PM, tickets here). A full schedule of upcoming CHF events is available at the festival’s website. (SCJ)

Facets presents the 39th annual Chicago International Children’s Film Festival through November 20, and today’s offerings include Afro-Futurism, a special family program geared toward those ages eight through ten (2 PM, Logan Center for the Arts, 915 E. 60th). It’s an hour-long presentation of six short films, including writer and director Ebony Blanding’s Jordan (2022), in which a tween mermaid enthusiast discovers an ailing water creature, and makes a magical wish. This is a non-ticketed event, but festival passes and information about online and in-person screenings is available at the CICFF website. (SCJ)

Here are some concert options for tonight with links to past coverage by our music writers:

Billy Corgan’s Smashing Pumpkins are scheduled at the United Center with Perry Farrell’s Jane’s Addiction (read a 1988 preview of their show that year at the then-named Cabaret Metro here), and the android pop of Poppy (6:30 PM, 1901 W. Madison, $79-$185, all-ages, tickets at Ticketmaster).
Will Sheff of Okkervil River appears at Old Town School of Folk Music’s Maurer Concert Hall tonight; Mmeadows opens (8 PM, 4544 N. Lincoln, $26-$28, all-ages, tickets at the venue’s website).
Elastic Arts executive director Adam Zanolini presents compositions inspired by Phil Cohran with a new ensemble including Zanolini on bass, piano, flute, and more; Fred Jackson on saxophone, flute, percussion, and voice; and Naydja Bruton on drums. Pianist and arranger Sharon Udoh will perform a solo set (3429 W. Diversey, second floor, $15, all-ages, tickets available at the door).
Local “trash-blues necromancers” Tijuana Hercules play Reggies Music Joint tonight. They open for blues-rock band Left Lane Cruiser, and the James Dean Joint is also on the bill (9 PM, 2105 S. State, $15, tickets at Ticketweb).
The indie-rock duo OK Cool perform at Burlington Bar tonight; space rockers Dreamjacket, the folk-rock of Joe Baughman & the Righteous Few, and Chicago’s Jacob on the Moon (aka artist and producer Jacob Dinneen) are also scheduled. (9 PM, 3425 W. Fullerton, 21+, $10 at the door). (SCJ)

Deeply Rooted Dance Theater takes the stage tonight at 7:30 PM at the Auditorium Theatre (50 E. Ida B. Wells) with a program of four pieces, including the world premiere of Q After Dark, a celebration of Quincy Jones created by four Deeply Rooted company members—artistic director Nicole Clarke-Springer, associate artistic director Gary Abbott, creative/executive director Kevin Iega Jeff, and Joshua L. Ishmon—with live music by a super ensemble of musicians led by Sam Thousand. The other pieces are Vespers by Ulysses Dove (accompanied by an electronic score by Mikel Rouse); an excerpt of Madonna Anno Domini by Clarke-Springer, featuring music by Culoe De Song and Aretha Franklin; and a revival of Aisatnaf, choreographed by Iega Jeff, in which “a woodland creature frolics to ‘Ballet Fantasy for Strings and Harp’ by Lee Holdridge.” Tickets are $25-$69 at auditoriumtheatre.org. (KR)

Siah Berlatsky’s gender-bending spoof of Shakespearean romances, Malapert Love, got an outing this past August with the Artistic Home as part of their developmental Summer on the Patio series. Now the playwright (who graduated this past spring from ChiArts) gets a full run of her comedy with the Artistic Home, opening in previews tonight at 8 PM at the Den Theatre (1331 N. Milwaukee.) As Berlatsky (who is trans) told the Reader this past summer, “I’ve interacted with Shakespeare for a long time, and I’ve always adored all of the tropes and the stock situations that are used in those plays to sort of advance the language and the poetry. And obviously the queerness and the homoeroticism has always really interested me. So really what the play started out as was that I wanted to make a response to a Shakespeare comedy specifically with all of those tropes that I love so much and make it a more explicitly modern piece.” Julian Hester directs. Malapert Love runs through 12/11, Thu-Fri 8 PM, Sun 3 PM (no show 11/24); tickets are $15 for previews through 11/9, $35 during the regular run 11/11-12/11 ($15 students/seniors). Information and reservations at theartistichome.org. (KR)

Read More

The Chicago Humanities Festival (CHF) offers a full slate of conversations and programming exploring art and culture today at the Music Box Theatre (3733 N. Southport). Highlights include a (sold out) conversation with filmmaker Jim Jarmusch at 1 PM; a 35mm screening of Charlie Chaplin’s 1921 silent The Kid accompanied by a live performance from guitarist Marc Ribot (4 PM, tickets here); and “Whistleblower,” a conversation between activist Chelsea Manning and artist and activist Nadya Tolokonnikova of the group Pussy Riot. Manning will discuss her recent memoir README.txt and talk with Tolokonnikova about political activism, trans rights, and institutional transparency (7 PM, tickets here). A full schedule of upcoming CHF events is available at the festival’s website. (SCJ)

Facets presents the 39th annual Chicago International Children’s Film Festival through November 20, and today’s offerings include Afro-Futurism, a special family program geared toward those ages eight through ten (2 PM, Logan Center for the Arts, 915 E. 60th). It’s an hour-long presentation of six short films, including writer and director Ebony Blanding’s Jordan (2022), in which a tween mermaid enthusiast discovers an ailing water creature, and makes a magical wish. This is a non-ticketed event, but festival passes and information about online and in-person screenings is available at the CICFF website. (SCJ)

Here are some concert options for tonight with links to past coverage by our music writers:

Billy Corgan’s Smashing Pumpkins are scheduled at the United Center with Perry Farrell’s Jane’s Addiction (read a 1988 preview of their show that year at the then-named Cabaret Metro here), and the android pop of Poppy (6:30 PM, 1901 W. Madison, $79-$185, all-ages, tickets at Ticketmaster).
Will Sheff of Okkervil River appears at Old Town School of Folk Music’s Maurer Concert Hall tonight; Mmeadows opens (8 PM, 4544 N. Lincoln, $26-$28, all-ages, tickets at the venue’s website).
Elastic Arts executive director Adam Zanolini presents compositions inspired by Phil Cohran with a new ensemble including Zanolini on bass, piano, flute, and more; Fred Jackson on saxophone, flute, percussion, and voice; and Naydja Bruton on drums. Pianist and arranger Sharon Udoh will perform a solo set (3429 W. Diversey, second floor, $15, all-ages, tickets available at the door).
Local “trash-blues necromancers” Tijuana Hercules play Reggies Music Joint tonight. They open for blues-rock band Left Lane Cruiser, and the James Dean Joint is also on the bill (9 PM, 2105 S. State, $15, tickets at Ticketweb).
The indie-rock duo OK Cool perform at Burlington Bar tonight; space rockers Dreamjacket, the folk-rock of Joe Baughman & the Righteous Few, and Chicago’s Jacob on the Moon (aka artist and producer Jacob Dinneen) are also scheduled. (9 PM, 3425 W. Fullerton, 21+, $10 at the door). (SCJ)

Deeply Rooted Dance Theater takes the stage tonight at 7:30 PM at the Auditorium Theatre (50 E. Ida B. Wells) with a program of four pieces, including the world premiere of Q After Dark, a celebration of Quincy Jones created by four Deeply Rooted company members—artistic director Nicole Clarke-Springer, associate artistic director Gary Abbott, creative/executive director Kevin Iega Jeff, and Joshua L. Ishmon—with live music by a super ensemble of musicians led by Sam Thousand. The other pieces are Vespers by Ulysses Dove (accompanied by an electronic score by Mikel Rouse); an excerpt of Madonna Anno Domini by Clarke-Springer, featuring music by Culoe De Song and Aretha Franklin; and a revival of Aisatnaf, choreographed by Iega Jeff, in which “a woodland creature frolics to ‘Ballet Fantasy for Strings and Harp’ by Lee Holdridge.” Tickets are $25-$69 at auditoriumtheatre.org. (KR)

Siah Berlatsky’s gender-bending spoof of Shakespearean romances, Malapert Love, got an outing this past August with the Artistic Home as part of their developmental Summer on the Patio series. Now the playwright (who graduated this past spring from ChiArts) gets a full run of her comedy with the Artistic Home, opening in previews tonight at 8 PM at the Den Theatre (1331 N. Milwaukee.) As Berlatsky (who is trans) told the Reader this past summer, “I’ve interacted with Shakespeare for a long time, and I’ve always adored all of the tropes and the stock situations that are used in those plays to sort of advance the language and the poetry. And obviously the queerness and the homoeroticism has always really interested me. So really what the play started out as was that I wanted to make a response to a Shakespeare comedy specifically with all of those tropes that I love so much and make it a more explicitly modern piece.” Julian Hester directs. Malapert Love runs through 12/11, Thu-Fri 8 PM, Sun 3 PM (no show 11/24); tickets are $15 for previews through 11/9, $35 during the regular run 11/11-12/11 ($15 students/seniors). Information and reservations at theartistichome.org. (KR)

Read More