Mayor Lori Lightfoot is putting the final touches on an $8-billion-to-$10-billion plan to replace lead service lines carrying water from street mains to roughly 360,000 Chicago homes, top mayoral aides said Tuesday.
Water Management Commissioner Randy Conner and Budget Director Susie Park refused to say how the massive, multi-year replacement program would be financed or how long it might take to eliminate the risk to Chicago’s drinking water.
Nor would they say whether homeowners would be asked to share the cost of replacing their lead service lines — and, if so, at what level.
Conner said only that top mayoral aides have scoured the country for examples of how other cities have replaced their lead service pipes and hope to roll out a program “in the coming weeks” that learns from the successes and mistakes made by other municipalities.
“There’s a few ideas that are out there, but we want to make sure they’re totally packaged correctly to make sure we get the biggest bang for our buck and how to present it to our constituents,” Conner told a virtual meeting of the City Council’s Committee on Economic and Capital Development.
Conner provided a cost estimate only under pressure Ald. Gilbert Villegas (36th), the committee chairman who also serves as Lightfoot’s City Council floor leader. Villegas noted that Philadelphia, New York and Fort Wayne, Ind. have “insurance programs” where homeowners share the cost.
“If I had to do it on the back of an envelope, chairman, it would probably be somewhere between $8 billion and $10 billion for … Chicago. And that’s today. Not doing a deep dive. Just looking at the surface and understanding what’s under the ground in the city of Chicago. That includes part of restoration,” Conner said.
“No funding source is off the table. We’re looking for money everywhere. We’re checking the couches for all the quarters and the nickels to make sure this program is funded.”
At a time when the stay-at-home shutdown triggered by the coronavirus has blown a $700 million hole in Lightfoot’s budget, Park said the city is looking at a “multitude of funding sources.” The city has “a little bit set aside for a pilot” — but it’s only $5 million, she said.
“Obviously, at that dollar amount, it will take us all to get to that level. And we absolutely do need federal and state assistance for this program,” Park said.
No city in America has more lead service lines than Chicago. They desperately need to be replaced at a cost that could range from $3,000 to $10,000 for each of the impacted properties. Restoration and labor costs compound the price tag.
As a mayoral candidate, Lightfoot accused Mayor Rahm Emanuel of engaging in a “cover-up” of what she called a major public health issue.
She argued then that concerned homeowners couldn’t wait for results of a $750,000 study to determine the cost of and potential funding for a plan to replace lead service lines.
“Whatever it takes, this administration has a moral obligation to make this right,” she said then.
Two months after taking office, Lightfoot insisted Chicago’s drinking water was safe. But she also paused meter installation citywide after another round of water tests at metered homes showed more elevated lead levels.
Asked then whether she was still committed to replacing lead service lines, Lightfoot said she was “looking at different ways and models from other cities.” But, she warned that the “challenges are great with that program.”
During the campaign, mayoral challengers Paul Vallas and Ja’Mal Green warned Chicago could face a water crisis akin to the one in Flint, Michigan unless the city halted main-line construction and started a cost-sharing plan to replace lead service lines.
Both candidates proposed expediting distribution of water testing kits and to supply water filtration systems in the short-term— at a cost of up to $15 million.
Green suggested giving homeowners a choice. They could pick their own contractor and assume the entire cost. Or let the city do the work and share the cost. Property owners would have paid their share over five to 10 years, through an additional fee added to their property tax bill.
For low-income homeowners, Green wanted a “Lead Be Gone Assistance Fund” that would accept private donations and draw revenue from the city’s $205 million vehicle tax fund.
Vallas would have bankrolled lead service line replacement with a Neighborhood Conservation Fund that provided grants, low-interest loans and partial subsidies, depending on income levels.
Seed money would have come from excess TIF dollars, developer fees and by asking the state to “stop diverting corporate personal property tax replacement dollars.”
