t)R CHICAGO 
 
 A BILL f-OK TUL RK.OH . N! ^ 
 MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT , \M i H 
 EXPLANATORY STATFMF.NT 
 
 UnD presented for public CONSrDERATIO^v 
 
 BV THE 
 
 Jo BUREAU O'-' PUBLIC FFFICllNCV 
 
 OCTOBER, 1917
 
 PRIOR PUBLICATIONS. 
 
 '^PreparlnK and AdnilnlMterlngr the Dudset ol Cook Codniy, tlllnoU. 
 r, l»ll. 
 
 >^»t>'oMed KurrkaMC of Totlne; MacMoM by the Board of Election Commluloaeni 
 Mt (be City of Cbirauo. HajPi lUll* (Unt of Print.) 
 
 itrrei I'm- i . i ' >il«l in Jhe City of CUJcacoi Aa inqntry Into PovIiib Materials, 
 Sleibix!- < . (f )u>iiii(M. June, 1011. <Out of Prtat.) 
 
 . iroOHiM «>f \V liter IMpeK In the City of Chicago. Jnly, 11)11. (Out of Prlat.) 
 
 ^A<lii<ii>'»ira«i<>u of (he Ollloe of Ktcorder of Co«>k County, Illluola. September, 
 
 l)»i 1. 
 
 ^A I'U-K r.T I'libllolty iu the Office of County Treasurer. October, 1911. (Ont of 
 
 rrl...(.( 
 
 ItepalriuK Aupbolt Pavementi Work Done for the City of Chicago Under Con- 
 Irut't of 11*11. October, 1011. (Out of Print.) 
 
 The MunlcliMil Court Actvi Tvro Related Propoaltfons Upon WUch the Totcra 
 of t uit'iiKo u ill tic AMked to Pam» judKnieitt at the JBUectlon «if November 7— 
 \o(e \*>. t)oiober »l, 11)11. (Out of Print.) 
 
 0. Tlif \>ttier Worki* Myntem of the City ot Chicago. By Dabney H. Hnnry. De- 
 ceuiber. IJUI. (Out of Print.) 
 
 lO. ilureitu of sirertat Civil Service' Comnilaaloni and Special Aaaeaament Acconnt- 
 luK ^>Mteal of the City of Chicago. l>eeeniber, 1011. (Out of Print.) 
 
 It. A il 111 in hit ra I ion of the Office of Coroner of Cook County* lUlnola. December, 
 lUtl. 
 
 AituitiilMiruiluu of the Ollioe of Sheriff of Cook County, Illlnola, December, IWll. 
 
 Pia. A il III I OIK I r» lion of the Office of Clerk of the Circuit Court and of the Office of 
 CIrrti of the »uperlor Court of Couk County, llUnola. December, lUll. 
 
 The Jiidu*-" uud the County Fee Offices. December 19, 1911. <Ont of Print.) 
 
 <;eueral >unin>nry and Concloalona of Report on the Park Govcmmeuta of 
 Cbleauo. December, Ittll. 
 
 UC Tbc I'lirk (i'wverumenta of Chicagoi An inquiry Into Their Orsanlxatlon and 
 Meihuds of Ad ml ab*t ration. December, Itlll. 
 
 Il7. OOlcen of «he Clerki* of the Circuit and Superior Court«i A Supplemental Inquiry 
 ^ luiw Their OrKanuatlon and Method* of Adminlatration. November, 1B1:£. 
 
 IS. A4miniHirailon of the Office of the Clerk of the County Court of Cook Conaty, 
 lillnMlM. November, 1912. 
 
 ^0. Office of SherliT of Cook County, IlUnoias A Supplemental Inquiry Into Its 
 tiritnuiKatlon and Methuda of Administration. November, 1912. 
 
 20. Gro^Tlnv Coat of Klectiuaa In Chicago and Cook County. December 30^ WZ, 
 
 :tl. The Vn'tilng Marhine Contrnrt. A Protest Agalaat Its Recognition In Amt 
 Purm by the City ;Coiincil of the City of Chicago. Jannary l. 1813. 
 
 22. The OllU'e of (he County TreoMurer of Cook County, Illlaota. Aa Inquiry Into the 
 
 AiioiinNiratlon of It* l<*inaoce« with Special Reference to the (iueatlon of 
 luierCMi on Public Funda. November, 1913. 
 
 23. The Mneieea Local Goveramenta la Chicago. December, 1913. 
 
 24. The (loud tuMuen to Ite Voted Vpon April 7, 1014. March 80, 1814. 
 
 25. A Src«iud Plea for Publicity In the Office of County Treasurer. July 0, 1814. 
 
 :'(]. The Nineteen Local Ooveruments la Chicago. (Second EUlltlon.) March, lOlB. 
 
 -V, UnlflcHtlo-i f'f r o'-nl Corcrnmcnts In Chlcasro. January, 1017.
 
 THE CITY MANAGER PLAN 
 FOR CHICAGO 
 
 DRAFT OF A BILL FOR THE REORGANIZATION 
 OF THE MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT, WITH 
 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT 
 
 PREPARED AND PRESENTED FOR PUBLIC CONSIDERATION 
 
 BY THE 
 
 CHICAGO BUREAU OF PUBLIC EFFICIENCY 
 315 PLYMOUTH COURT
 
 CHICAGO BUREAU 
 
 OF 
 
 PUBLIC EFFICIENCY 
 
 TRUSTEES 
 
 Julius Rosenwald, Chairman 
 Alfred L. Baker, Treasurer 
 
 Onward Bates Victor Eltinq 
 
 George G. Tunell Allen B. Pond 
 
 Walter L. Fisher Frank I. Moulton 
 
 Harris S. Keeler, Director
 
 TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 Page. 
 
 INTRODUCTION 4 
 
 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT 5 
 
 The Need for Reorganization 6 
 
 Bill Embodying the Immediate Program 7 
 
 Main Points of the Proposed Bill 8 
 
 The Mayor to be Elected by the Council 9 
 
 Savings from Fewer Elections 9 
 
 Size of the Council 10 
 
 No Fixed Tenure for Mayor and Department Heads 10 
 
 Non-Partisan Elections and the Recall 11 
 
 Council Vote Required to Pass Ordinances 11 
 
 Redistricting of Wards a Necessity 13 
 
 When the Proposed Changes Would Become Effective 14 
 
 DRAFT OF A BILL for the Reorganization of the Municipal Gov- 
 ernment of the City of Chicago by Providing, Among Other 
 Things, for the Election of the Mayor by the City Council, and 
 for the Non-Partisan Election of Aldermen; by Fixing the Num- 
 ber of Aldermen at SS, One from Each Ward; and by Extend- 
 ing the Term of Aldermen to Four Years, Subject to Popular 
 Recall 17 
 
 APPENDIX A— 
 
 Reprint of Extracts from the Report of the Bureau on Unifica- 
 tion of Local Governments in Chicago, Published in .January, 
 1917, Setting Forth Reasons for Favoring the City Man- 
 ager Plan of Government for Chicago 49 
 
 APPENDIX B— 
 
 Simple Government. Reprint of an Editorial from the Econo- 
 mist, Chicago's Financial Publication 57 
 
 APPENDIX C— 
 
 Tables Giving Population and Registration of Voters by Wards, 
 Showing the Need for Redistricting of the City into New 
 Wards 59
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 In presenting to the public the draft of a bill for the 
 reorganization of the municipal government of Chicago 
 along the lines of the city manager plan, the Chicago 
 Bureau of Public Efficiency believes that it is directing 
 attention to one of the greatest needs of the community. 
 The purpose in embodying the plan in the form of a 
 concrete bill is to facilitate action in getting something 
 done to improve conditions. With that end in view, the 
 Bureau invites consideration of the measure and sugges- 
 tions for its improvement so that there may be if possible 
 substantial unanimity upon the subject when the time 
 comes for its presentation to the Legislature. 
 
 Organized groups of various kinds, public officials, and 
 individual citizens are invited to send to the Bureau in 
 writing their views upon the bill herewith presented and 
 the subject matter with which it deals. tFpon request, 
 speakers for meetings will be supplied by the Bureau to 
 explain the bill and the two-fold program of govern- 
 mental reorganization for Chicago to which the Bureau 
 is committed. That program is : (1) ultimate — the uni- 
 fication into one municipal entity of all the local gov- 
 erning agencies within metropolitan Chicago, under a 
 plan of simple, centralized, responsible government; (2) 
 immediate — the application to Chicago as soon as possi- 
 ble of a modified form of the city manager plan of gov- 
 ernment, with non-partisan elections. 
 
 In the preparation of the bill and the accompanying 
 explanatory material, the Bureau, in addition to its reg- 
 ular staff, has had the services of lawyers especially fa- 
 miliar with bill drafting, and the assistance of Mr. George 
 C. Sikes, former secretary of the Bureau. In the matter 
 of advice upon legal questions involved, Mr. Henry Scho- 
 field of the Chicago bar has been particularly helpful. 
 
 Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency. 
 Harris S. Keeler, Director. 
 October, 1917.
 
 THE CITY MANAGER PLAN FOR CHICAGO. 
 
 EXPLANATORY STATEMENT. 
 
 In its report on Unification of Local Governments in 
 Chicago, published in January of this year, the Chicago 
 Bureau of Public Efficiency urged the merger into one 
 municipal entity of all the local governments ^\^thin the 
 area comprising what might be termed metropolitan Chi- 
 cago. That area is substantially the territory within the 
 limits of the Sanitary District. A plan of government 
 was also outlined in that report, which is an adaptation 
 to Chicago of the city manager plan. Complete unifica- 
 tion cannot be effected, of course, without extensive mod- 
 ifications of the Constitution of the State. The General 
 Assembly of Illinois, at its last session, voted to submit 
 to the people the question of calling a convention to 
 revise the Constitution. That proposition will be passed 
 upon by the voters at the election of November, 1918. 
 
 While awaiting the constitutional changes necessary 
 to complete unification, it is possible by legislative action, 
 with the approval of the people of Chicago on a referen- 
 dum vote, to apply to the present city the plan of gov- 
 ernment outlined and recommended by the Bureau. In 
 the report published in January last, the Bureau recom- 
 mended that the Legislature of Illinois should give Chi- 
 cago at once a modified form of the city manager plan of 
 government. It was urged that the change should be 
 made to take effect, if possible, with the municipal elec- 
 tion of 1919, when the term of the present mayor expires.
 
 6 Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency 
 
 After the publication of its report in January, the 
 Bureau undertook the drafting of a bill embodying in 
 concrete form its plan for reorganization of the city 
 government of Chicago, without the unification features 
 that must await constitutional authorization. By the 
 time the draft of the bill was completed, the session of 
 the Legislature was well advanced, and the outlook for 
 enabling legislation for Chicago was so discouraging that 
 it seemed inexpedient to present the measure. 
 
 THE NEED FOR REORGANIZATION. 
 
 Continuous developments in the municipal situation 
 ever emphasize anew the need for radical reorganization 
 of the government of Chicago. To be sure, the spirit of 
 pessimism is in the local atmosphere, and in many quar- 
 ters the idea prevails that the prospects of accomplish- 
 ment do not justify the putting forth of the effort neces- 
 sary to bring about needed changes in government. 
 
 The Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency has faith that 
 the spirit of aggressive progress that made Chicago what 
 it is still lives ; and the Bureau believes that that spirit 
 can be enlisted in a movement for the reorganization of 
 municipal government on lines of efficiency and economy 
 calculated to promote the public welfare. The Bureau 
 appeals to citizens, civic organizations, the press, and 
 public officials to join earnestly in the movement for 
 governmental reorganization in this community. The 
 program has two main aspects, as follows: (1) ultimate 
 — the unification into one municipal entity of all the local 
 governing agencies within metropolitan Chicago, under 
 a plan of simple, centralized, responsible government; 
 (2) immediate — the application to Chicago as soon as 
 possible of a modified form of the city manager plan of 
 government, with non-partisan elections, under which re-
 
 City Manager Plan for Chicago 7 
 
 sponsibility would be centralized, the ballot shortened, 
 political partisanship eliminated as far as possible, and 
 the incentive to efficiency on the part of city officials in- 
 creased. 
 
 BILL EMBODYING THE IMMEDIATE PROGRAM. 
 
 The ultimate program was outlined in the report of the 
 Bureau on Unification of Local Governments in Chicago, 
 copies of which may be had free on application by letter 
 or in person at the office of the Bureau. The immediate 
 program was also indicated briefly in that report. It is 
 embodied more fully in tlie draft of a bill printed here- 
 with, described as a ''Draft of a Bill for the Keorganiza- 
 tion of the Municipal Government of the City of Chi- 
 cago by Providing, Among Other Things, for the Election 
 of Mayor by the Council, and for the Non-Part isan Elec- 
 tion of Aldermen ; by fixing the Number of Aldermen at 
 35, One from Each Ward; and by Extending the Term 
 of Aldermen to Four Years, Subject to Popular Recall." 
 
 Tlie preparation of this bill has involved much work 
 and study. The Bureau presents it to the public for con- 
 sideration and suggestions in the hope that the draft as 
 it stands, or as it may be modified after discussion, may 
 have the support of the community, be enacted into law, 
 and be adopted on a referendum vote as part of the city 
 charter of Chicago. If the jjlan proposed is to become 
 effective by April, 1919, when the term of the present 
 mayor expires, it will be necessary to have action upon 
 it at a special session of the Legislature. While no 
 special session has been announced, and while it is un- 
 certain whether or not one will be held, the movement 
 for legislation to reorganize the city government of 
 Chicago should be under such headway that Governor 
 Lowden can reasonably be urged to include the subject
 
 8 Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency 
 
 in the call, in case he decides to convene the General 
 Assembly in special session. 
 
 The Bureau is in full agreement with those who hold 
 that this is no time for mere experiments in social and 
 governmental reconstruction. The time does call, how- 
 ever, for such businesslike reorganization of govern- 
 mental systems as is necessary to efiSciency and economy. 
 National governments engaged in war operations have 
 been obliged to make changes in the direction of sim- 
 plification and centralization of responsibility in order 
 that they may function more effectively. City govern- 
 ments should follow the same example, instead of con- 
 tinuing to waste taxpayers' money lavishly through cum- 
 bersome and ineffective governmental methods that need 
 overhauling. The Bureau contends that the changes sug- 
 gested in the bill herewith presented are supported by 
 experience and by the judgment of the best authorities 
 on practical questions of government. 
 
 MAIN POINTS OF THE PROPOSED BILU 
 
 The main purpose of the bill is to apply to Chicago a 
 modified form of the city manager plan of government, 
 with non-partisan methods of electing aldermen. The 
 bill also reduces the number of aldermen from 70 to 35, 
 one alderman from each ward, and extends the term of 
 aldermen to four years, subject to popular recall. Other 
 features of the bill are incidental to these objects. 
 
 In form, the bill is an amendment of Article XII of the 
 Cities and Villages Act. Article XII of that Act is the 
 portion of the city charter based upon the so-called Chi- 
 cago charter amendment of the Illinois Constitution, 
 adopted in 1904. Some of the provisions of the bill that 
 may seem superfluous to the layman are legally neces-
 
 City Manager Plan for Chicago 9 
 
 saiy to negative the application to Chicago of portions 
 of the Cities and Villages Act which are inconsistent with 
 this proposed special Act for Chicago but which would 
 apply unless otherwise explicitly negatived. Not all the 
 provisions of the bill are new. In some instances, it has 
 been necessary to restate either in form or substance 
 matters which are already in the statutes. 
 
 The Mayor to Be Elected by the Council. 
 
 The term city manager is not used in the bill. The 
 title of mayor is retained for the executive head of the 
 city government. But the bill aims to give to Chicago 
 the essence of the city manager plan of government, 
 which is the vesting in an executive chosen by the council, 
 and subject to its continuous control, of responsibility 
 for administration. Extracts from the report of the 
 Bureau issued in January last, reprinted in this docu- 
 ment, explain why the city manager plan is favored for 
 Chicago. 
 
 Savings From Fewer Elections, 
 
 The reason for electing all the aldermen at one time, 
 for a four-year term, subject to popular recall, is econ- 
 omy. This plan, when put into operation, would give 
 Chicago a regular city election only once in four years, 
 whereas now there is a city election every year. On the 
 basis of laws then in effect, the Bureau, at the time of the 
 issuance of its report on Unification of Local Govern- 
 ments in Chicago, estimated that the money savings by 
 reducing the number of city elections as proposed would 
 amount to approximately $700,000 a year. Since that 
 time, however, the Legislature has passed a law greatly 
 reducing the cost of registrations of voters prior to pri-
 
 10 Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency 
 
 maries and elections; also a measure designed to save 
 money by providing for larger election precincts in the 
 future. As compared with costs under the present laws, 
 the saving to taxpayers from the elimination of three 
 city elections in every four-year period, for which the 
 bill makes provision, is calculated by the Bureau at 
 $1,740,000, or an average annual saving of $435,000. In 
 these calculations, no definite allowance has been made 
 for the cost of special recall elections, the number of 
 which cannot be foretold. However, the figures do allow 
 for the cost of supplementary elections in all wards fol- 
 lowing the regular quadrennial city elections. In many 
 wards there will be no supplementary election. It is as- 
 sumed roughly that the cost of special recall elections 
 will not be larger than the savings from the elimination 
 of supplementary elections. 
 
 Size of the City Council. 
 
 The question of the size of the city council is one on 
 which there are sharp differences of opinion. There 
 seems to be quite general sentiment in favor of a smaller 
 council than 70 members. Some, however, want a body 
 of 50 members, while others think that the number of 
 aldermen should be 21, or even as low as 15. The Bureau 
 suggests a council of 35 aldermen, one from each ward. 
 
 No Fixed Tenure for Mayor and Department Heads. 
 
 The mayor, to be chosen by the council, would serve 
 without fixed tenure, being subject to removal at any 
 time. He would name all heads of departments except 
 the comptroller and the city clerk, who would be chosen 
 by the city council. The heads of departments, like the 
 mayor himself, would serve without fixed tenure, and
 
 City Manager Plan for Chicago 11 
 
 need not be residents of the city at the time of their ap- 
 pointment. Members of such bodies as the civil service 
 commission and the board of education would continue 
 to have the duties and tenure now fixed by statute. 
 
 Non-Partisan ElectionB and the Recall. 
 
 The provisions for the non-partisan election of alder- 
 men take up considerable space in the bill, but the prop- 
 osition is fairly simple in essence. It is that all nomina- 
 tions for alderman shall be made by petition only. A 
 petition must be signed by not less than one per cent 
 nor more than three per cent of the voters of a ward. 
 The candidate receiving a majority of the votes is elected. 
 There are no primaries. Instead, provision is made for 
 a supplementary election, in case no candidate has a ma- 
 jority, to be held three weeks after the first election. At 
 the supplementary election the choice is confined to the 
 two high candidates at the first election and the one re- 
 ceiving the most votes at the supplementary election is 
 elected. 
 
 An alderman may be recalled after he has been in 
 office a year. The recall proceedings are instituted by 
 the filing of a recall petition signed by 25 per cent of 
 the voters of a ward. There will be no occasion for a 
 city-wide recall, as under the proposed plan aldermen 
 chosen by wards will be the only elective city officials — 
 disregarding municipal court judges and attaches, who 
 do not come within the scope of this bill. 
 
 Council Vote Required to Pass Ordinances. 
 
 The attempt has been made in framing this measure to 
 avoid changes in substantive law unless imperatively 
 necessary. It does seem necessary, however, to touch the 
 subject of franchise grants. The purpose of the bill is
 
 12 Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency 
 
 to place upon the majority of the city council and their 
 agent, the mayor, responsibility for the management of 
 city affairs. This means that a majority of the alder- 
 men elected should be able to make ordinances effective. 
 The bill so provides. The veto power is retained in the 
 mayor as a means of placing upon him the responsibility 
 for directing the attention of the council to faulty ordi- 
 nances. But it is stipulated that a vetoed ordinance may 
 be repassed by the vote necessary to its passage in first 
 instance. Although the majority of the aldermen should 
 bear the responsibility for legislation and for adminis- 
 tration while they are in ofiSce and should have authority 
 to act commensurate with the responsibility, there are 
 limits to the power they should have to bind the City be- 
 yond their term of ofiSce by bond issues and franchise 
 grants. Provisions of existing law that would continue 
 to apply to Chicago after the adoption of the proposed 
 Act require a referendum on all bond issues of the City. 
 Therefore, that matter calls for no treatment in the bill. 
 As to franchise grants, however, the situation is differ- 
 ent. It manifestly would be unwise to allow a majority 
 of the aldermen to pass ordinances granting franchises 
 for long periods that future councils could not revoke. 
 Three methods of dealing with the situation have been 
 suggested. One is to require a two-thirds vote of the 
 council for the passage of franchise ordinances with a 
 longer life than five years. This is the number of alder- 
 men required at the present time to pass a franchise over 
 the mayor's veto. The objection to it as the sole pro- 
 vision on the subject is that it would enable a minority 
 of the council — perhaps actuated by unworthy motives — 
 to block a proper project supported by a majority of the 
 public-spirited members of the council. It has the merit 
 of making possible quick action on matters to which there
 
 City Manager Plan for Chicago 13 
 
 is little opposition. The other suggestions are for the 
 use of the referendum, either mandatory or optional. 
 The bill embodies all three suggestions, and provides that 
 an ordinance making a franchise grant of more than five 
 years' duration shall not become effective (a) unless ap- 
 proved by two-thirds of the aldermen elected, or (b) un- 
 less it provides for a mandatory referendum upon its 
 adoption, or (c) unless it is to be subject to an opportu- 
 nity for a referendum on petition of five per cent of the 
 voters. 
 
 Redistricting of Wards a Necessity. 
 
 Another matter that seems to require attention in this 
 measure is that of redistricting the city into wards. 
 Shiftings of population have made the present appor- 
 tionment highly inequitable. The 25th ward, for exam- 
 ple, with a population of 95,541, according to the school 
 census of 1916, and with 46,120 registered voters in 1917, 
 has only two aldermen, the same number as other wards 
 with half the population and in some cases less than a 
 quarter of the number of registered voters. Tables pub- 
 lished in the appendix give comparative figures by wards 
 of population and number of registered voters. It is 
 shown by these tables that five outlying wards, with ten 
 aldermen, have a total population about the same as 
 eight designated interior wards, with sixteen aldermen. 
 This, of course, is not equal representation. 
 
 It is particularly difficult for a council based upon an 
 inequitable apportionment to cure the defects. The in- 
 voking of outside aid in some way becomes almost im- 
 perative. The people of Chicago, by their vote upon the 
 proposed charter of 1907, showed themselves hostile to 
 reapportionment of the city into wards by direct enact- 
 ment of the state Legislature. Therefore, the plan em-
 
 14 Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency 
 
 bodied in the bill has been worked out. It is the one 
 feature of the bill admittedly experimental in nature, and 
 based upon a priori reasoning rather than upon actual 
 practical trial somewhere. However, it seems to the Bu- 
 reau that it is well calculated to lead the City out of a 
 difficult situation, and that at the worst it can do no 
 harm. The plan is to enable any group of aldermen com- 
 prising one-fifth or more of the council to present a re- 
 districting ordinance to the people for adoption or rejec- 
 tion, in case the council shall fail to take satisfactory 
 action on the subject. 
 
 WHEN THE PROPOSED CHANGES WOULD BECOME EFFECTIVE. 
 
 If it should be found impossible to secure action from a 
 special session of the Illinois Legislature so as to put 
 into effect at the time of the mayoralty election of 1919 
 the plan of government presented herein, the next move 
 should be to secure action early in the regular legislative 
 session of 1919. Even if a mayor be elected by popular 
 vote in 1919, under existing laws, for a four-year term, 
 it does not necessarily follow that there must be a wait of 
 four years before the plan herein advocated can be put 
 into effect. There is no constitutional guaranty that 
 either an alderman or a mayor shall be allowed to serve 
 out the full term for which he was elected. The General 
 Assembly, by appropriate legislation, can shorten the 
 term of either the mayor or the aldermen.* Whenever 
 
 •Inasmuch as some persons have the impression that the term of 
 a city official cannot be shortened by legislative action, after his elec- 
 tion, Mr. Henry Schofield was asked by the Bureau to furnish it with 
 a legal opinion on the point. Mr. Schofield says the power of the Legis- 
 lature in this matter is not open to doubt, as it has been passed upon 
 by the Supreme Court of Illinois. (People v. Brown, 83 111. 95; Crook 
 V. People, 106 111. 237.) There is a constitutional inhibition against 
 extending by legislative action the term of a public official, but none 
 against shortening the term of a municipal official.
 
 City Manager Plan for Chicago 15 
 
 this plan is put into effect, it will involve shortening by a 
 year the term of the hold-over aldermen — half the city 
 council — elected for a two-year term a year in advance 
 of the first election under the proposed Act for choosing 
 35 aldermen for a four-year term to constitute the entire 
 city council. If the Legislature should pass the proposed 
 bill in 1919, to become effective when adopted by the 
 people on a referendum vote, that bill could make the 
 term of the mayor elected in 1919 end, say, in 1921, and 
 provide for the installation of the new plan of city gov- 
 ernment in 1921, or at any other time that might be 
 specified.
 
 DRAFT OF A BILL 
 
 for the 
 
 Reorganization of the Municipal Government of the 
 City of Chicago by Providing, Among Other Things, 
 for the Election of the Mayor by the City Council, 
 and for the Non-Partisan Election of Aldermen; 
 by Fixing the Number of Aldermen at 35, One 
 from Each Ward; and by Extending the Term of 
 Aldermen to Four Years, Subject to Popular Recall 
 
 Section 1 amends Article XII of the Cities and Villages Act by 
 amending Sections 1 and 7 of Part Two thereof, and by adding to said 
 Part Two fifteen new sections; by repealing Sections 3 and 4 of Part 
 Three of said Article XII, and by adding to said Part Three nine new 
 sections; by repealing the whole of Part Four of said Article XII, and 
 by adding to said Article XII four new parts to be known as Parts 
 Four, Five, Six, and Seven. 
 
 PART TWO. 
 
 Concerning the Municipal Officers. 
 Section 
 
 1. Mayor Elected by Council. 
 
 7. Office of City Attorney Abolished. 
 
 8. Duration of Term of Mayor. 
 
 9. Qualifications of Mayor. 
 
 10. Mayor — How Commissioned. 
 
 11. Temporary Disability of Mayor. 
 
 12. Mayor Not a Member of Council. 
 
 13. General Duties of Mayor. 
 
 14. Mayor to Prepare Annual Budget. 
 
 15. City Clerk— Election of— Tenure — Duties. 
 
 16. City Comptroller — Election of — Tenure — Duties. 
 
 17. City Treasurer — Appointment of — Tenure — Duties. 
 
 18. Qualifications of City Officers. 
 
 19. Clerk and Comptroller — How Commissioned. 
 
 20. Heads of Departments — How Commissioned. 
 
 21. Departments — Creation — Number — Powers — Heads Appointed 
 
 by Mayor. 
 
 22. Certain Offices Abolished— OflJces Subject to Mayor's Power of 
 
 Appointment. 
 
 PART THREE. 
 
 Concerning the City Council. 
 Section 
 
 9. Council — How Composed. 
 
 10. Aldermen — Number of. 
 
 11. Aldermen — Terms of. 
 
 12. Salary of Aldermen. 
 
 13. Organization of City Council — Presiding OflScer. 
 
 14. Elections by Council. 
 
 15. Council to Create Executive Departments. 
 
 16. Vote Required to Pass Ordinance Over Veto, 
 
 17. Yeas and Nays — Certain Majorities Necessary. 
 
 18. Repeal.
 
 18 Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency 
 
 PART FOUR. 
 
 Concerning Municipal Eiections. 
 Section 
 
 1. General Municipal Elections — Held Quadrennially — Terms of 
 
 Aldermen Elected Prior to First Quadrennial Election. 
 
 2. Aldermen — One From Each Ward. 
 
 3. Candidate Receiving Majority Elected — Supplementary Elec- 
 
 tions — Swearing in of Votes. 
 
 4. Propositions Not to Be Submitted at Supplementary Elections. 
 
 5. Nominations by Petition — Party Nominations Prohibited. 
 
 6. Candidate for Alderman May Withdraw. 
 
 7. Ballots — Form — Type — Order of Names — Rotation by Series — 
 
 Allotment by Precincts — Party Designations Prohibited — 
 Separate from Other Ballots Having Names Thereon. 
 
 8. Challengers and Watchers at Polling Places. 
 
 9. Certificate of Election — Issued After Supplementary Election. 
 10. Election Laws Apply Where Consistent Herewith. 
 
 PART FIVE. 
 
 Concerning the Recall and Removal of Aldermen. 
 
 Section 
 
 1. Aldermen Subject to Recall. 
 
 2. Procedure to Effect Removal — Form of Petition. 
 
 3. Petition — Proceedings on Filing of — Election Ordered by Coun- 
 
 cil — Election Authorities Notified. 
 
 4. Nominations of Candidates for Alderman at Recall Election. 
 
 5. Ballots — Proposition Submitted — Names of Candidates. 
 
 6. Ballots — Manner of Counting — Supplementary Election. 
 
 7. Reimbursement of Alderman Retained in Office at Recall Elec- 
 
 tion. 
 
 8. Recall and Supplementary Recall Elections Deemed Special 
 
 Elections. 
 
 PART SIX. 
 
 Concerning the Redistricting of the City Into Wards. 
 
 Section 
 
 1. City to Have Thirty-Five Wards. 
 
 2. Additional Territory to be Annexed to Existing Wards. 
 
 3. City to be Redlstricted after Adoption of this Act. 
 
 4. When Redistricting Ordinance Takes Effect — Substitute Ordi- 
 
 nance May be Submitted. 
 
 5. Failure of Council to Act— One-Fifth of the Aldermen May Sub- 
 
 mit Redistricting Ordinance. 
 
 6. Redistricting Ordinance Submitted — Form of Ballot 
 
 7. Redistricting Ordinance Submitted — When Approved and in 
 
 Effect. 
 
 8. Election and Ballot Laws to Apply Where Consistent Herewith. 
 
 9. Redistricting in 1931 and Decennially Thereafter. 
 
 PART SEVEN. 
 
 Concerning the Adoption of This Act. 
 Section 
 
 1. Act to be Submitted to Popular Vote. 
 
 2. Form of Ballot — Adoption.
 
 A BILL 
 
 FOB 
 
 An Act to Amend an Act Entitled, "An Act to Pro- 
 vide FOR the Incorporation of Cities and Villages/' 
 Approved Aprel 10, 1872, as Amended by Subsequent 
 Acts. 
 
 Section 1.] Be it enacted by the People of the State of 
 Illinois, represented in the General Assembly: That an 
 Act entitled, "An Act to provide for the incorporation of 
 cities and villages," approved April 10, 1872, as amended 
 by subsequent Acts, be and the same hereby is amended, 
 in pursuance of Section 34 of Article IV of the Constitu- 
 tion, to provide a system of local government for the City 
 of Chicago, by amending Sections 1 and 7 of Part Two of 
 Article XII of said Act so as to read as Sections 1 and 7 
 of Part Two herein, and by adding to said Part Two fif- 
 teen new sections to be known as Sections 8, 9, 10, 11, 
 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, and 22; by repealing 
 Sections 3 and 4 of Part Three of said Article XII, and by 
 adding to said Part Three nine new sections to be kno\vn 
 as Sections 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17 ; by repealing 
 the whole of Part Four of said Article XII, added by Act 
 approved June 27, 1913; and by adding to said Article 
 XII four new parts to be known as Parts Four, Five, Six, 
 and Seven ; which amended sections and new sections and 
 parts shall read as follows :
 
 20 Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency 
 
 Part Two. 
 
 concerning the municipal officers. 
 
 [Section 1 and Sections 8 to 22, both inclusive, of Part 
 Ttvo do not become operative until the expiration of the 
 term of the mayor in office when this Act is adopted by 
 the voters.] 
 
 Section 1. Mayor elected by council.] The mayor 
 shall be elected by the city council. The first mayor 
 elected by the city council shall be the lawful successor 
 of the mayor in office when this Act is adopted by the 
 voters. 
 
 §7. Office of city attorney abolished.] From and 
 after the adoption of this Act the office of city attorney 
 of the city of Chicago shall be abolished. 
 
 <§8. Duration of term of Mayor.] The maj^or shall 
 have no fixed term but shall hold his office during the 
 pleasure of the city council. 
 
 §9. Qualifications of mayor.] Any competent per- 
 son who is a citizen of the United States shall be eligible 
 to hold the office of mayor. 
 
 §10. Mayor — ^how commissioned.] The mayor shall 
 be commissioned by warrant under the corporate seal 
 signed by the city clerk and the president of the city 
 council. 
 
 §11. Temporary disability of mayor.] The city 
 council may provide by ordinance for the discharge of 
 the powers and duties of the office during a temporary ab- 
 sence or disability of the mayor. 
 
 §12. Mayor not a member of council.] The mayor 
 shall not be a member of the city council but the council 
 may provide that he shall have a seat therein, with the
 
 City Manager Plan for Chicago 21 
 
 right of introducing ordinances and other measures, and 
 of debating but not of voting. 
 
 <^13. General, duties of ma yob.] The mayor elected 
 by the city council as herein provided shall have all the 
 powers and perform all the duties now or hereafter pre- 
 scribed by law or by the city council for the mayor, ex- 
 cept as herein otherwise provided. He shall be the chief 
 executive officer of the city and, under the direction of 
 the city council, shall administer the executive power of 
 the city. He shall have the sole power to appoint and to 
 remove at will the head of every principal department 
 of the city government, except the city clerk and the city 
 comptroller. He shall not be required to prefer charges 
 against any officer removed by him nor shall he be re- 
 quired to state the cause of such removal. He shall give 
 notice to the city council of every appointment made by 
 him, and he shall give like notice of the death, resignation, 
 or removal from office of any officer appointed by him. 
 The city council shall have no power to reinstate any 
 officer removed by the mayor. 
 
 §14. Mayor to prepare annual budget.] Prior to 
 the close of each fiscal year of the city, the mayor shall 
 prepare and submit to the city council an estimate of the 
 expense of conducting the affairs of the city for the fol- 
 lowing fiscal year. Such estimate shall be prepared and 
 submitted at such time as the council may designate and 
 shall set forth : 
 
 (1) An itemized estimate of the expense of conduct- 
 ing each department and office of the city government. 
 
 (2) Comparisons of such estimates with the corre- 
 sponding items of expenditure for the last complete fis- 
 cal year, and with the expenditures of the current fiscal 
 year plus an estimate of the expenditures necessary to 
 complete the current fiscal year.
 
 22 Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency 
 
 (3) A detailed statement of the total probable in- 
 come of the city from taxes and all other sources for the 
 current and also the following fiscal year. 
 
 (4) The amounts required for interest on the city's 
 debt, and for sinking funds and the pa^Tiient of bonds 
 as required by law. 
 
 (5) The total amount of outstanding city debt with a 
 schedule of maturities of bond issues. 
 
 (6) Such other information as the council may direct 
 or require or as the mayor may deem necessary to the 
 end that the council may fully understand the money ex- 
 igencies and demands upon the city for the ensuing fis- 
 cal year. 
 
 It shall be the duty of the city clerk, the city comptrol- 
 ler, and every other officer of the city government, upon 
 the request of the mayor, to prepare and submit to him, 
 in such form as he may prescribe, all such information as 
 he may deem necessary or proper to enable him to pre- 
 pare the estimate herein required of him. 
 
 § 15. City clerk — election of — tenure — duties.] The 
 city clerk shall be elected by the city council. He shall 
 have no fixed term but shall hold office during the pleas- 
 ure of the city council. He shall perform the duties now 
 or hereafter prescribed by law or by the city council for 
 the city clerk. 
 
 §16. City comptroller — election of — tenure — du- 
 ties.] The city comptroller shall be elected by the city 
 council. He shall have no fixed term but shall hold office 
 during the pleasure of the city council. He shall be the 
 chief accounting and auditing officer of the city. He shall 
 have the power and duty — 
 
 (1) To keep an account of all appropriations made by
 
 City Manager Plan for Chicago 23 
 
 the council and of all expenditures made or contracted 
 to be made under such appropriations; 
 
 (2). To require daily reports to him from each depart- 
 ment and officer of the city showing the receipt of all 
 moneys by such department or officer and the disposition 
 thereof ; 
 
 (3) To devise, install, and maintain accounting pro- 
 cedures for the city adequate to record in detail all trans- 
 actions affecting the ac^iuisition, custodianship, and dis- 
 position of values, including cash receipts and disburse- 
 ments ; and to present the recorded facts periodically to 
 officials and to the public in such summaries and analyti- 
 cal schedules in detailed support thereof as shall be nec- 
 essary to show the effect of such transactions upon the 
 city's finances and as to each department or office of the 
 city government; 
 
 (4) To prescribe the methods of keeping accounts by 
 all departments and officers aad the form of all financial 
 reports and statements to be rendered by them ; 
 
 (5) To direct and supervise the work of all book- 
 keepers and other employes charged with keeping books 
 of financial account in all departments and offices of the 
 city government; 
 
 (6) To audit and approve for pa>Tnent all claims and 
 demands against the city, and to prepare and disburse 
 all warrants drawn upon the city treasurer; 
 
 (7) To take charge, custody, and control of all deeds, 
 leases, warrants, vouchers, books, and papers of any kind 
 the custody and control of which is not given to any other 
 officer. 
 
 The city comptroller shall have such other powers and 
 perform such other duties as are or may be hereafter 
 prescribed by law or by the city council for the city
 
 24 Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency 
 
 comptroller ; Provided, the city comptroller shall not ex- 
 ercise a general supervision over officers of the city, ex- 
 cept as herein provided, and shall not be required to 
 submit any report of estimates of moneys necessary to 
 defray the expenses of the city as provided in Section 
 17 of Article VII of the Act above referred to by its 
 title. 
 
 § 17. City treasurer — appointment of — tenure — du- 
 ties.] The city treasurer shall be appointed by the 
 mayor. He shall have no fixed term but shall hold office 
 at the will of the mayor. He shall perform the duties 
 now or hereafter prescribed by law or by the city council 
 for the city treasurer. He shall be the head of the prin- 
 cipal department charged with the administration of mat- 
 ters relating to the receipt, custody, and disbursement of 
 moneys belonging to the city. 
 
 §18. Qualifications of city officers.] Any compe- 
 tent person who is a citizen of the United States shall 
 be eligible to hold the office of city clerk, city comptroller, 
 or the head of a principal department of the city govern- 
 ment. 
 
 §19. Clerk and comptroller — how commissioned.] 
 The city clerk and the city comptroller shall be commis- 
 sioned by warrant under the corporate seal signed by the 
 city clerk and the president of the city council. 
 
 § 20. Heads of departments — how commissioned.] All 
 heads of principal departments of the city government 
 shall be commissioned by warrant under the corporate 
 seal signed by the city clerk and the mayor. 
 
 § 21. Departments — creation — number — powers — 
 heads appointed by mayor.] The executive powers and 
 duties of the city shall be administered through depart- 
 ments of the city government. Such departments shall
 
 City Manager Plan for Chicago 25 
 
 be as many in number as the city council shall deem nec- 
 essary, and shall be created and established, and the scope 
 of the powers and duties thereof shall be prescribed, by 
 the city council by ordinance. Every such department 
 shall be deemed a principal department of the city 
 government, and shall have at its head one officer whose 
 title shall be fixed by ordinance and who shall be ap- 
 pointed by the mayor without the approval of the city 
 council and who shall have no fixed term but shall hold 
 office at the will of the mayor. Every such department 
 shall contain such bureaus or divisions as the city coun- 
 cil may provide. Except as otherwise provided in this 
 Act, all the powers and duties now or hereafter pre- 
 scribed by law or by the city council for the officers of 
 the city government or any of them shall be distributed 
 among such departments and the officers thereof. The 
 city council may at any time by ordinance discontinue 
 any such department or change the scope of its functions 
 and powers or combine such functions and powers with 
 those of any other department or departments. No offi- 
 cer holding any office which may at any time be discon- 
 tinued by the city council shall have any claim against 
 the city on account of his salary after such discontinu- 
 ance. 
 
 § 22. Certain offices abolished — offices subject 
 TO mayor's power of appointment.] No legislative or 
 executive officer of the city government, except aldermen, 
 shall be elected by popular vote after the expiration of 
 the term of the mayor in office when this Act is adopted by 
 the voters. After such time all offices and places of em- 
 ployment not within the classified civil service of the city 
 created by the city council shall be subject to the mayor's 
 power of appointment and removal at will, without the 
 concurrence of the city council, and after such time the
 
 26 Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency 
 
 city council shall have no power to create any such oflQce 
 or place of emplojTnent exempt from the mayor's 
 power of appointment and removal; Provided, that 
 such members of the law department, except the 
 head thereof, as may be by law from time to 
 time exempt from such classified service, shall be ap- 
 pointed and may be removed at will by the head of such 
 department. The term of any office or place of employ- 
 ment not within the classified civil service, created by the 
 city council after the adoption of this Act by the voters, 
 shall terminate at the expiration of the term of office of 
 the mayor in office when this Act is adopted by the voters, 
 and the city council shall have no power to make any 
 longer term for any such office or place of emplojTnent. 
 All other offices and places of employment not within the 
 classified civil service of the city created by the city coun- 
 cil shall terminate on the expiration of the terms of 
 those in office at the expiration of the term of the mayor 
 in office when this Act is adopted by the voters ; Provided, 
 that every such officer or employe then holding office or 
 employment shall continue in the discharge of his duties, 
 subject, however, to the mayor's power of appointment 
 and removal, until the city council shall have provided for 
 the discontinuance of the duties of such office or place of 
 emplojnuent or for the transfer thereof to a department 
 or other officer or employe of the city government. Any 
 officer or employe to whom the city council may by ordi- 
 nance transfer any part or all the duties or powers of any 
 officer or employe whose office is hereby terminated shall 
 as to such powers and duties be deemed the successor of 
 such officer or employe whose office or place of employment 
 is so terminated. Any officer on whom the city council 
 may by ordinance devolve the duties of city marshal 
 shall possess the power and authority of a constable by 
 common law and under the statutes of this state.
 
 City Manager Plan for Chicago 27 
 
 Part Three. 
 
 concerning the city council. 
 
 [Sections 9 to 17, both inclusive, of Part Three do not 
 become operative until after the first quadrennial election 
 of aldermen provided for in Part Four, Section 1, of this 
 Act.] 
 
 Section 9. Council — how composed.] The city coun- 
 cil shall consist of the aldermen. 
 
 ^10. Aldermen — number of.] The number of al- 
 dermen shall be thirty-five, one from each ward. 
 
 <§ 11. Aldermen — terms of.] Subject to the recall and 
 removal provisions of this Act, aldermen shall hold their 
 oflBce for the term of four years and until their successors 
 are elected and qualified. 
 
 ^12. Salary of aldermen.] The aldermen may re- 
 ceive for their services such compensation as shall be 
 fixed by ordinance not to exceed $4,000 per annum for 
 each alderman. The salaries of the aldermen elected at 
 the first quadrennial election provided for in this Act 
 shall be fixed by the outgoing council. 
 
 ^13. Organization of city council — presiding offi- 
 cer.] A regular meeting of the city council shall be held 
 not more than five days after certificates of election shall 
 have been issued to the aldermen elected from a majority 
 of the wards at a general election for aldermen. The 
 city clerk shall fix the time and place for holding such 
 meeting and shall give at least twenty-four hours' notice 
 of the time and place of such meeting by mail to each 
 of the aldermen elected. Such meeting shall be called 
 to order by the city clerk, who shall preside over it until 
 a temporary presiding oflScer thereof shall have been
 
 28 Chicago Bureau of PMic Efficiency 
 
 chosen and shall have taken his seat. At such meeting, 
 or as soon thereafter as may be, and annually there- 
 after, the city council shall elect one of its members to act 
 as its presiding officer for one year. Such presiding of- 
 ficer shall be known as the president of the city council 
 and shall be entitled to cast one vote on all questions. 
 In the event of the absence or disability of such presi- 
 dent, the council shall choose one of its members to act 
 as temporary presiding officer. Whenever a vacancy oc- 
 curs in the office of president, the city council shall elect 
 one of its members to serve as president during the re- 
 mainder of the unexpired term of president. The election 
 of president shall be by roll call to be recorded on the 
 journal of the proceedings of the city council, and the 
 votes of a majority in number of the aldermen elected 
 shall be required for a choice. 
 
 §14. Elections by council.] The mayor, the city 
 clerk, and the city comptroller shall be elected separately 
 by the city council by resolution concurred in by a ma- 
 jority of the aldermen elected on a ''Yea" and "Nay" 
 vote which shall be entered on the journal of its proceed- 
 ings. By resolution, adopted in like manner, the city 
 council may at any time remove the mayor, city clerk, 
 or city comptroller. Upon a vacancy occurring in any 
 such office by death, resignation, removal, or otherwise, 
 the city council shall fill such office by election in the man- 
 ner hereinabove provided. 
 
 <§ 15. Council to create executive departments.] The 
 city council shall have power to create and abolish execu- 
 tive departments of the city government and the office of 
 head of each such department. 
 
 "§. 16. Vote required to pass ordinance over veto.] To 
 pass an ordinance over the veto of the mayor shall re-
 
 City Manager Plan for Chicago 29 
 
 quire so many votes, and no more, as are required to pass 
 such ordinance in the first instance. 
 
 § 17. Yeas and nays — certain majorities necessary.] 
 The ' * Yeas ' ' and ' * Nays ' ' shall be taken upon the passage 
 of all ordinances and on all propositions to create any 
 liability against the city or for the expenditure or ap- 
 propriation of its money and in all other cases at the re- 
 quest of any member. The **Yeas" and "Nays" when 
 taken shall be entered on the journal of the proceedings 
 of the city council. The concurrence of a majority of all 
 the members elected in the city council shall be necessary 
 to the passage of any ordinance or proposition as afore- 
 said and to the passage of any resolution, but an order 
 directing any officer of the city government to do or re- 
 frain from doing any act or thing which lawfully may be 
 the subject of an order may be adopted by the concurring 
 vote of a majority of the aldermen present at any meet- 
 ing and voting thereon; Provided, the concurring vote 
 of two-thirds of all the aldermen elected shall be required 
 to sell any city or school property. A permit or license 
 for the use of any street, alley, highway, bridge, viaduct, 
 or other public place shall require the concurring vote 
 of a majority of all the members elected in the city coun- 
 cil, but no such permit or license for a period of more 
 than five years shall be granted, (a) unless the ordinance 
 making such grant receives the concurring vote of two- 
 thirds of all the aldermen elected, and unless it contains 
 a declaration that it shall take effect without either the 
 mandatory or optional referendum to the voters in this 
 section provided for, or (b) unless such ordinance pro- 
 vides that the question of its adoption shall be submitted 
 to the legal voters of the entire city, and that it shall not 
 go into effect unless approved by a majority of such legal 
 voters voting thereon, or (c) unless such ordinance pro-
 
 so Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency 
 
 vides that it shall not go into effect until the expiration of 
 sLxty days from and after its passage, and that, if within 
 such sixty days there is filed with the board of election 
 commissioners of the city of Chicago a petition, signed by 
 the legal voters of such city equal in number to at least 
 five per cent of the legal voters of the city voting at the 
 last general election for aldermen, demanding that such 
 ordinance be submitted to a popular vote, then such ordi- 
 nance shall not go into effect unless the question of ita 
 adoption shall first be submitted to the electors of the city 
 and approved by a majority of those voting thereon. 
 Upon the filing of such a petition it shall be the duty of 
 said board of election commissioners to submit the ques- 
 tion of the adoption of such ordinance to the electors of 
 the city at the next general, municipal, or special election 
 in and for the entire city to be held not less than forty 
 days from and after the filing of such petition ; Provided, 
 that, if at the time of filing such petition no date shall 
 have been fixed for the holding of any such general, 
 municipal, or special election within three months from 
 and after the date of such filing, then the city council 
 may by ordinance order and fix the date for holding a 
 special election at which the question of the adoption of 
 such ordinance shall be submitted to a popular vote. The 
 city council is hereby expressly authorized and empow- 
 ered to direct that any such ordinance be submitted, or 
 that it may be submitted, to a popular vote, as above 
 provided, and that whenever so submitted such ordinance 
 shall not go into effect unless a majority of the electors 
 of the city voting thereon shall vote for its adoption. 
 It shall be the duty of the city clerk to certify promptly 
 to said board of election commissioners the passage of 
 any ordinance directing the submission of the question of 
 the adoption of such ordinance to a popular vote, or or-
 
 City Manager Plan for Chicago 31 
 
 dering and fixing the time of holding any special election 
 herein provided for. 
 
 ^18. Repeal.] Sections three (3) and four (4) of 
 Part Three of Article XII of the Act above referred to 
 by its title are hereby repealed; said repeal to be in 
 force and effect and to become operative at and after the 
 first quadrennial election of aldermen herein provided for 
 in Part Four. Part Four of Article XII of the Act above 
 referred to by its title, being an Act approved June 27, 
 1913, is hereby repealed; said repeal to be in force and 
 effect and to become operative from and after the adop- 
 tion of this Act by the voters. 
 
 Part Four. 
 
 concerning municipal elections. 
 
 Section 1. General municipal elections — held quad- 
 rennially — TERMS OF aldermen ELECTED PRIOR TO FIRST 
 
 QUADRENNIAL ELECTION.] A general election for alder- 
 men shall be held on the first Tuesday of April every 
 four years, beginning in the calendar year of the expira- 
 tion of the term of the mayor in office when this Act is 
 adopted by the voters. The term of office of all alder- 
 men who are elected at the election of aldermen next 
 preceding the said first quadrennial election of aldermen 
 shall be only until the aldermen are elected at such first 
 quadrennial election of aldermen, and are qualified. 
 
 ^2. Aldermen — one from each ward.] At such quad- 
 rennial elections one alderman shall be elected from each 
 ward. The alderman elected from any ward at the first 
 quadrennial election shall be the successor of the alder- 
 men from such ward whose terms expire at that time. 
 
 §3. Candidate receiving majority elected — supple- 
 mentary ELECTIONS — swearing IN OF VOTES.] The caudi-
 
 32 Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency 
 
 date receiving a majority of the votes cast in any ward 
 for alderman at any quadrennial election or special elec- 
 tion shall be declared elected. In the event that no can- 
 didate receives a majority of such votes, a supplementary 
 election shall be held in such ward three weeks subsequent 
 to the day of holding such quadrennial or special election. 
 At such supplementary election, the names of the candi- 
 dates receiving the highest and second highest numbers 
 of votes at the preceding quadrennial or special election, 
 and no others, shall be placed on the official ballot. The 
 candidate receiving the highest number of votes at such 
 supplementary election shall be declared elected. There 
 shall be no previous revision of the registry for any such 
 supplementary election which shall be deemed a special 
 election under the election and ballot laws in force in the 
 city of Chicago, and every legal voter who is not regis- 
 tered shall have the same right to vote at such election 
 as is given unregistered, but otherwise qualified, voters 
 at special elections, in accordance with the provisions of 
 such election and ballot laws in force in Chicago. 
 
 ^4. Propositions not to be submitted at supplemen- 
 tary ELECTIONS.] No propositiou calling for the approval 
 or disapproval of the voters of the city of Chicago shall 
 be submitted at any such supplementary election. 
 
 §5. Nominations by petition — party nominations pro- 
 hibited.] All nominations for the office of alderman at 
 any quadrennial or special election shall be by peti- 
 tion. All petitions for nomination of candidates for the 
 office of alderman shall be signed by registered 
 voters of the ward equal in number to not less than 
 one per cent nor more than three per cent thereof. All 
 such petitions, and the procedure with respect thereto, 
 shall conform in all other respects to the provisions of the
 
 City Manager Plan for Chicago 33 
 
 election and ballot laws in force in the city of Chicago 
 concerning the nomination of independent candidates for 
 public office by petition; Provided, that no petition for 
 nomination for the office of alderman shall be valid which 
 contains a statement of, or reference to, any political 
 party or any political principle. No political party now 
 or hereafter organized or recognized by or under any law 
 of this state shall have the right to make any nomination 
 for the office of alderman from any ward. 
 
 •^G. Candidate for alj)erman may withdraw.] Any 
 candidate for the office of alderman may withdraw his 
 name as a candidate for such office by filing with the board 
 of election commissioners of the city of Chicago, not later 
 than twenty days before the holding of the election, his 
 written request signed by him and duly acknowledged 
 before an officer qualified to take acknowledgments of 
 deeds; whereupon his name sliall not be printed as a can- 
 didate upon the official ballot. 
 
 § 7. Ballots — form — t\"pe — order of names — rotation 
 
 BY series — allotment BY PRECINCTS — PARTY DESIGNATIONS 
 prohibited SEPARATE FROM OTHER BALLOTS HAVTNO NAMES 
 
 THEREON.] Ballots uscd at any quadrennial or special 
 election held under the provisions of this Act in addition 
 to other requirements of law shall conform to the follow- 
 ing requirements : 
 
 (1) At the top of every ballot the following words shall 
 be printed in capital letters : 
 
 "For Alderman of ward." 
 
 (2) Immediately below said words shall be printed 
 in small letters the direction to voters: **Vote for one." 
 
 (3) Following thereupon shall be printed the names 
 of the candidates for the office of alderman from the ward 
 in which the ballots are to be used and below the name
 
 34 Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency 
 
 of each candidate shall be printed his place of residence, 
 stating the street and number (if any) ; the names of 
 candidates shall be printed in capital letters not less than 
 one-eighth nor more than one-fourth of an inch in height, 
 and immediately at the left of the name of each candidate 
 shall be printed a square, the sides of which shall not be 
 less than one-fourth of an inch in length; the names of 
 all candidates shall be printed in a column and arranged 
 in the order hereinafter designated ; all the names of can- 
 didates shall be printed in uniform type; all places of 
 residence of such candidates shall be printed in uniform 
 type; all squares upon said ballots shall be of uniform 
 size ; all spaces between the names of the candidates shall 
 be of uniform size. 
 
 (4) Said ballots to be used in any ward shall be pre- 
 pared in as many series as there are candidates for the 
 oflBce of alderman from such ward ; the ballots of the first 
 series shall contain all the names of the candidates, one 
 immediately follo^\dng the other in alphabetical order ac- 
 cording to their surnames, and the order of names in one 
 series shall be preserved in the next subsequent series 
 except as hereinafter provided ; the name appearing first 
 in said first series shall in the second series be printed 
 after all the other names; the name appearing first in 
 said second series shall be in the third series printed 
 after all the other names, and so on successively, the name 
 at the top in any series being placed at the bottom in 
 the next succeeding series, and the name next to the 
 top in any series being successively advanced to the top 
 in the next succeeding series until the name of each 
 candidate shall appear at the head of the list of candi- 
 dates in one series. 
 
 (5) Each precinct of any ward shall be allotted at
 
 City Manager Plan for Chicago 35 
 
 least as many ballots of any one series as there are quali- 
 fied voters in such precinct. Every precinct in such 
 ward shall be allotted a different series of ballots unless 
 there are more precincts in such ward than there are 
 series of ballots printed for such ward. The first precinct 
 of each ward shall be allotted the first series of ballots 
 prepared for such ward, the second precinct of such 
 ward the second series, and so on successively until the 
 entire series of ballots shall have been exhausted, where- 
 upon the next precinct of such ward shall be allotted the 
 first series of ballots and so on in rotation until all the 
 precincts of such ward shall have been supplied with the 
 requisite number of ballots; Provided, however, that in 
 the event there are more series of ballots than there are 
 precincts in any one ward, then the ballots for such ward 
 shall be so distributed in said ward that an equal number 
 of each series of ballots as nearly as possible shall be 
 allotted to each precinct of such ward irrespective of the 
 number of precincts in such ward. 
 
 (6) On the back or outside of the ballot of each pre- 
 cinct so as to appear when folded shall be printed the 
 appropriate words designating said ballot followed by the 
 designation of said precinct, the date of the election, and 
 a facsimile of the signature of the proper election official. 
 
 (7) No party circle, platform, principle, appellation, 
 or mark whatever shall be printed upon said ballots. 
 
 (8) The ballots for the office of alderman shall be sep- 
 arate from any other ballots used at a municipal election 
 except that any proposition not required by law to be sub- 
 mitted on a separate ballot from that containing names 
 of persons to be voted for may be submitted in the 
 manner provided by law upon the same ballot as that used 
 for the election of aldermen.
 
 36 Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency 
 
 ^8. Challengers and watchers at polling places.] 
 Any candidate for the office of alderman from any ward 
 may appoint in writing over his signature not more than 
 one representative for each place of voting in such wards 
 who shall have the right to act as challenger and watcher 
 for such candidate at any election at which his name is 
 being voted on. Such challenger and watcher shall have 
 the same power and privileges as a challenger and watcher 
 under the election laws of this state applicable to Chi- 
 cago. No political party shall have the right to keej) 
 any challenger or watcher at any polling place at any elec- 
 tion for alderman unless candidates for some office other 
 than that of alderman are to be voted for at the same 
 time. 
 
 ^ 9. Certificate of election — issued after supplemen- 
 tary election.] No certificate of election shall issue to an 
 alderman elected at any such quadrennial election until 
 after the time fixed herein for the supplementary elec- 
 tions following such quadrennial election. 
 
 <§>10. Election laws apply where consistent here- 
 with.] All laws in force in the city of Chicago gov- 
 erning elections for municipal offices or applicable thereto 
 and not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act shall 
 apply to and govern all quadrennial elections, special 
 elections, and supplementary elections held hereunder. 
 
 Part Five. 
 
 concerning the recall and removal of aldermen. 
 
 Section 1. Aldermen subject to recall,] Every al- 
 derman elected at or subsequent to the first quadrennial 
 election for aldeiTnen under the provisions of this Act 
 shall be subject to removal from office by the legal voters 
 qualified to vote for a successor to such alderman; Pro-
 
 City Manager Plan for Chicago 37 
 
 vided, that no alderman shall bo subject to removal within 
 one year after he takes office or in case of an alderman 
 re-elected in a recall election within one year after that 
 election. 
 
 §2. Procedure to effect removal — form of petition.] 
 The procedure to effect such removal shall be as follows : 
 A petition, demanding that the question of removing such 
 alderman be submitted to the legal voters qualified to 
 vote for his successor, shall be filed with the city clerk. 
 Such petition shall contain a general statement in not 
 more than 200 words of the ground upon which the re- 
 moval is sought, and shall be signed by such qualified 
 voters equal in number to not less than 25 per cent of the 
 voters of the ward voting at the last general election for 
 alderman. In all other respects such petition shall con- 
 form to the requirements of the election and ballot laws in 
 force in the city of Chicago relating to petitions for the 
 nomination of independent candidates for public office 
 except in so far as such requirements are inconsistent 
 with the provisions hereof, 
 
 ^3. Petition — proceedings on filing of — election or- 
 dered BY council — election AUTHORITIES NOTIFIED.] UpOU 
 
 the filing of such a petition with the city clerk, he shall 
 at once transmit the same to the city council. Thereupon 
 the city council shall promptly by ordinance order and 
 fix the date for holding a recall election in the ward 
 represented by the alderman sought to be recalled. Such 
 election shall be not less than 30 days nor more than 45 
 days from and after the passage of such ordinance. The 
 city clerk, upon the passage of such ordinance, shall 
 transmit a certified copy thereof to the board of election 
 commissioners of the city of Chicago and said election 
 commissioners shall proceed to hold an election at the 
 time fixed in such ordinance.
 
 38 Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency 
 
 §4. Nominations of candidates for alderman at re- 
 call ELECTION,] Nominations of candidates for alder- 
 man at any such recall election shall be made in the man- 
 ner provided for in this Act for nominating candidates 
 at general or special elections for aldermen; Provided, 
 that petitions for nomination may be filed not less than 
 15 days prior to the date of holding such recall election. 
 The alderman sought to be removed shall not be required 
 to file any petition but shall be a candidate unless he 
 resigns as hereinafter provided, 
 
 §5. Ballots — proposition submitted — names of can- 
 didates.] At the top of the official ballot prepared for 
 any such recall election shall be placed a proposition in 
 substantially the following form: 
 
 Shall be 
 
 YES 
 
 
 removed from the office of Alderman 
 from the Ward? 
 
 NO 
 
 
 Below said proposition shall be printed the caption and 
 direction to voters as follows: 
 
 ** Candidates for alderman to succeed Alderman " 
 
 ''(Vote for one.)" 
 
 Immediately under this caption shall be placed the 
 name of the alderman sought to be removed. Below such 
 name the names of the candidates nominated as afore- 
 said shall be arranged in a vertical column in the manner 
 provided for by this Act for the arrangement of the 
 names of candidates for aldermen on the ballots pre- 
 pared for general elections for aldermen. The name of 
 the alderman sought to be removed shall be separated 
 from the second name in the list of candidates in each 
 series of ballots by twice the amount of space that sep-
 
 City Manager Plan for Chicago 39 
 
 arates any other two successive names in such list. If the 
 alderman sought to be removed resigns within five days 
 after the passage of the ordinance ordering and fixing 
 the date for a recall election as aforesaid, then neither 
 the proposition aforesaid nor the name of such alderman 
 shall be placed on the ballot at such recall election. 
 
 ^6. Ballots — manner of counting — supplementary 
 ELECTION.] Each voter shall be entitled to vote on the 
 proposition submitted on such ballot and for one candi- 
 date for alderman. If a majority of the votes cast on 
 the proposition submitted on such ballot are against the 
 removal of the alderman he shall not be removed. If a 
 majority thereof are for the removal of such alderman, 
 the office shall thereupon be and become vacant unless 
 the alderman sought to be removed shall have received a 
 majority of the votes cast for candidates for alderman, 
 in which case he shall be declared re-elected. If any 
 other candidate receives a majority of the votes cast for 
 alderman, such candidate shall be declared elected to suc- 
 ceed the alderman removed for the unexpired terra of the 
 alderman so removed. If no candidate receives a ma- 
 jority of the votes cast for alderman, a supplementary re- 
 call election shall be held three weeks after the date of 
 such recall election. At such supplementary recall elec- 
 tion, the names of the candidates receiving the highest 
 and second highest numbers of votes for alderman at such 
 recall election, and no others, shall be placed on the ballot, 
 and the ballots shall be arranged in the manner provided 
 by this Act for the arrangement of names on ballots pre- 
 pared for general elections for aldermen. The candidate 
 receiving the highest number of votes cast for alderman 
 at such supplementary recall election shall be declared 
 elected to succeed the alderman removed at the recall elec-
 
 40 Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency 
 
 tion and to serve during the unexpired term of the alder- 
 man so removed. 
 
 §7. Eeimbursement of alderman retained in office 
 AT RECALL ELECTION.] If any alderman is retained in ofifice 
 as a result of any recall election, he shall be entitled to 
 receive $500 out of the city treasury to reimburse him 
 for his expenses in and about such recall election. 
 
 "§8. Recall and supplementary recall elections 
 DEEMED SPECIAL ELECTIONS.] Evcry such recall election 
 and supplementary recall election shall be deemed a spe- 
 cial election under the election and ballot laws applicable 
 to the city of Chicago, and shall be governed thereby 
 except in so far as such laws are inconsistent with the 
 provisions of this Act. 
 
 Part Six. 
 
 concerning the redistricting of the city into wards. 
 
 Section 1. City to have thirty-five wards.] The 
 city of Chicago shall be divided into thirty-five wards. 
 In the formation of wards the population of each shall 
 be as nearly equal as practicable and each shall be 
 composed of contiguous and compact territory. 
 
 <§ 2. Additional territory to be annexed to existing 
 wards.] Whenever territorj^ is annexed to the city, the 
 city council shall by ordinance declare it a part of the 
 ward or wards which it adjoins; Provided, that at any 
 time after such territory is annexed the city council may 
 provide for the redistricting of the city in accordance 
 with the provisions of this Act. 
 
 §3. City to be redistricted after adoption of this 
 act.] Within three months after the adoption of this 
 Act by the voters it shall be the duty of the city council
 
 City Manager Plan for Chicago 41 
 
 to pass an ordinance redistricting the city into thirty-five 
 wards in accordance with the provisions of this Act. 
 Such redistricting of the city shall apply to the election 
 of aldermen at the first quadrennial election provided 
 for in this Act and thereafter, but shall not apply to any 
 election of aldermen prior to such first quadrennial elec- 
 tion. 
 
 %4i. When bedistbictino obdinance takes effect — 
 
 SUBSTITUTE OBDINANCE MAY BE SUBMITTED.] No SUCh rC- 
 
 districting ordinance shall take effect until the expiration 
 of 15 days after its passage. If within such 15 days one- 
 fifth or more of the aldermen elected, who did not vote to 
 pass such redistricting ordinance, file with the city clerk a 
 proposed substitute ordinance redistricting the city in ac- 
 cordance with the provisions of this Act together with a 
 petition signed by them demanding that the (luestion of the 
 adoption of the redistricting ordinance passed by the city 
 council, together with the question of the adoption of such 
 substitute ordinance, be submitted to the voters, then such 
 redistricting ordinance passed by the city council shall 
 not go into effect until the question of its adoption shall 
 have been submitted to a popular vote; Provided, that 
 no alderman shall have the right to sign more than one 
 such petition. Upon the expiration of such 15 days the 
 city clerk shall promptly certify to the board of election 
 commissioners of the city of Chicago the ordinance 
 passed by the city council and such substitute ordinance 
 or ordinances and petition or petitions, and it shall there- 
 upon be the duty of said board of election commissioners 
 to submit the ordinances so certified to a popular vote at 
 the next general, municipal, or special election in and for 
 the entire city to be held not less than 40 days after the 
 passage of such redistricting ordinance by the city 
 council.
 
 42 Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency 
 
 ^5. FaILUEE of council, to act ONE-FIFTH OF THE 
 
 ALDERMEN MAY SUBMIT REDISTRICTING ORDINANCE.] If the 
 
 city council shall fail at any time to pass a redistricting 
 ordinance as required herein, one-fifth or more of the 
 aldermen elected shall have the right to file with the 
 city clerk, not less than 40 days before the date of hold- 
 ing any general, municipal, or special election in and 
 for the entire city, an ordinance redistricting the city 
 in accordance with the provisions of this Act, together 
 with a petition signed by them demanding that such 
 ordinance be submitted to the legal voters at the next 
 general, municipal, or special election in and for the en- 
 tire city to be held not less than 40 days after the 
 filing of such ordinance and petition; Provided, that 
 no alderman shall have the right to sign more than one 
 such petition. Upon the expiration of the time for filing 
 any such ordinance the city clerk shall promptly certify 
 to the board of election commissioners of the city of Chi- 
 cago any ordinance or ordinances, together with any pe- 
 tition or petitions, so filed and thereupon it shall be the 
 duty of said board of election commissioners to submit 
 such ordinance or ordinances to a popular vote at the 
 election specified in such petition or petitions; Provided, 
 that if, after the filing of any such ordinance and peti- 
 tion and not less than 40 days prior to such election, the 
 city council shall pass an ordinance redistricting the city, 
 then the question of the adoption of any ordinance or or- 
 dinances filed with the city clerk in accordance with the 
 provisions of this section shall not be submitted to a 
 popular vote. 
 
 ^6. Redistricting ordinance submitted — form op 
 BALLOT.] If the question of the adoption of one of two 
 or more redistricting ordinances is submitted to the vot- 
 ers at any election, the ballots used for the submission
 
 City Manager Plan for Chicago 
 
 43 
 
 of such propositions shall, in addition to the other re- 
 quirements of law, conform substantially to the follow- 
 ing requirements : 
 
 (1) Above the propositions submitted the following 
 words shall be printed in capital letters : 
 
 "propositions for the redistricting of the city of 
 chicago into 35 wards." 
 
 (2) Immediately below said words shall be printed in 
 small letters the direction to voters — 
 
 "Vote for One." 
 
 (3) Following thereupon shall be printed each propo- 
 sition to be voted upon in substantially the following 
 form: 
 
 For the adoption of an ordinance for the 
 redistricting of the city of Chicago (here 
 insert "passed by the city council" or 
 "proposed by Aldermen [here insert 
 names of the Aldermen signing peti- 
 tion]" as the case may require.) 
 
 For the adoption of an ordinance for the 
 redistricting of the city of Chicago pro- 
 posed by Aldermen (here insert names 
 of the Aldermen signing the petition.) 
 
 Whenever the question of the adoption of but one re- 
 districting ordinance shall be submitted to the voters, the 
 form of the ballot shall be substantially as follows : 
 
 Shall the ordinance proposed by Aldermen 
 (here insert the names of the Aldermen 
 signing the petition) be adopted? 
 
 YES 
 
 NO 
 
 (4) 
 type. 
 
 All the propositions shall be printed in uniform
 
 44 Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency 
 
 § 7. ReDISTRICTING ordinance submitted WHEN AP- 
 PROVED AND IN EFFECT.] If the quGstion of the adoption 
 of one of two or more redistricting ordinances is sub- 
 mitted to the voters at any election, the ordinance for 
 which the highest number of votes is cast shall be deemed 
 approved and shall thereupon be in force and effect. If 
 the question of the adoption of but one such ordinance is 
 submitted at any election and a majority of the votes 
 cast thereon are for the adoption of such ordinance, it 
 shall thereupon be in force and effect; otherwise such 
 ordinance shall not go into effect. 
 
 <§.8. Election and ballot laws to apply where con- 
 sistent HEREWITH.] All election and ballot laws in force 
 in the city of Chicago governing the submission of propo- 
 sitions to a popular vote or applicable thereto and not 
 inconsistent with the provisions of this Act shall apply 
 to and govern the submission of any propositions herein 
 provided for. 
 
 §9. Redistricting in 1931 and decennially there- 
 after.] On or before the first day of December, 1931, 
 and every ten years thereafter, the city council shall by 
 ordinance redistrict the city on the basis of the national 
 census of the preceding year. All provisions of this Act, 
 relating to redistricting of the city immediately follow- 
 ing the adoption of this Act, including the provisions for 
 the filing and submission of substitute or other redis- 
 tricting ordinances, shall apply with equal force and 
 effect to the redistricting of the city in 1931 and decen- 
 nially thereafter.
 
 City Manager Plan for Chicago 45 
 
 Part Seven. 
 
 concerning the adoption of this act. 
 
 Section 1. Act to be submitted to popular vote.] 
 This Act shall not be in force in the city of Chicago until 
 the question of its adoption shall first have been submit- 
 ted to the legal voters of the city of Chicago and ap- 
 proved by a majority of those voting thereon. 
 
 The question of the adoption of this Act by the city of 
 Chicago shall be submitted to such legal voters at the 
 first general, municipal, or special election in and for the 
 entire city to be held not less than 60 days next after 
 the passage of this Act. 
 
 If this Act shall fail to be adopted at the election 
 aforesaid by a majority of the legal voters of the city 
 of Chicago voting thereon, the city council of the city 
 of Chicago may by ordinance direct that the question of 
 the adoption of this Act again be submitted to such legal 
 voters at any general, municipal, or special election in 
 and for the entire city to be held not less than thirty days 
 from and after the passage of such ordinance, and not 
 less than fifteen months prior to the expiration of the 
 term of the mayor in office at the time of the passage of 
 such ordinance. The city clerk of the city of Chicago 
 shall promptly certify the passage of such ordinance to 
 the board of election commissioners of the city of Chi- 
 cago and it shall thereupon be the duty of said board of 
 election commissioners to submit the question of the adop- 
 tion of this Act to such legal voters at such election. 
 
 If this Act shall fail to be adopted at the election 
 aforesaid by a majority of the legal voters voting there- 
 on, the question of the adoption of this Act may also 
 again be submitted to the legal voters of the city of
 
 46 Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency 
 
 Chicago, at any general, municipal, or special election in 
 and for the entire city to be held not less than forty days 
 from and after the filing of the petition hereinafter pro- 
 vided for and not less than fifteen months prior to the 
 expiration of the term of the mayor in ofl&ce at the time 
 of filing such petition, in the following manner: A peti- 
 tion signed by legal voters of the city equal in number to 
 at least five per cent of the legal voters of the city voting 
 at the last preceding election for mayor, demanding the 
 submission of the question of the adoption of this Act, 
 may be filed with said board of election commissioners 
 and it shall thereupon be the duty of said board of elec- 
 tion commissioners to submit the question of the adoption 
 of this Act to such legal voters at the election specified 
 in said petition. 
 
 If this Act shall fail to be adopted, at any time at 
 which it is submitted under the requirements of this 
 section, by a majority of the legal voters of the city of 
 Chicago voting thereon, then it may be resubmitted from 
 time to time by ordinance or petition as above pro- 
 vided. 
 
 The said board of election commissioners shall give 
 notice of any election provided for in this section by pub- 
 lishing a notice thereof, not less than twenty days prior 
 to such election, in at least one newspaper of general cir- 
 culation published in the city of Chicago. 
 
 § 2. Form of ballot — adoption.] The ballot to be used 
 at such election shall be in substantially the following 
 form:
 
 City Manager Playi for Chicago 
 
 47 
 
 For the adoption of an Act to amend an 
 Act entitled, "An Act to provide for the 
 incorporation of cities and villages," so as 
 to reorganize the municipal government 
 of Chicago by providing, among other 
 things, for the election of the mayor 
 by the city council, and for the non- 
 partisan election of aldermen; by fix- 
 ing the number of aldermen at 35, one 
 from each ward; and by extending the 
 term of aldermen to four years subject 
 to popular recall. 
 
 YES 
 
 NO 
 
 If a majority of siicli legal voters of the city of Chi- 
 cago, voting thereon at any such election, shall vote for 
 the adoption of this Act, it shall thereby and thereupon be 
 adopted and sections numbered 1 and from 8 to 22, both 
 inclusive, of Part Two hereof shall be in force and effect 
 and become operative in the city of Chicago at and after 
 the expiration of the term of the mayor in oflBce when this 
 Act is adopted by the voters ; the sections numbered from 
 9 to 17, both inclusive, of Part Three hereof shall be in 
 force and effect and become operative in the city of Chi- 
 cago at and after the first quadrennial election of alder- 
 men herein provided for in Part Four; and the remain- 
 ing sections of this Act shall be in force and effect and 
 become operative in the city of Chicago from and after 
 the time or times therein respectively indicated.
 
 APPENDIX A. 
 
 EXTRACTS FROM REPORT OF THE CHICAGO BUREAU OF PUB- 
 LIC EFFICIENCY ON UNIFICATION OF LOCAL GOVERN- 
 MENTS IN CHICAGO, PUBLISHED IN JANUARY, 1917, SET- 
 TING FORTH THE DESIRABILITY OF THE CITY MANAGER 
 PLAN OF GOVERNMENT FOR CHICAGO. 
 
 Mounting taxes, without corresponding increase in the volume and 
 quality of public service, continually embarrassed public finances, 
 widespread dissatisfaction with local administration, and frequent 
 clashes of the different authorities with one another, force this com- 
 munity to serious consideration of the question of the fundamental 
 reorganization of local government. 
 
 The program for the promotion of eflflclency and economy should 
 be three-fold in nature: 
 
 1. The effecting of such improvements in service and such econo- 
 mies as are possible under existing laws and constitutional provisions. 
 
 2. The passage by the Illinois Legislature of laws for such reor- 
 ganization in the interest of efficiency and economy as is possible under 
 the present Constitution. 
 
 3. Complete unification of all the local governments in Chicago, 
 which will be possible only after extensive modifications of the Con- 
 stitution of the State. 
 
 The second and third features of this three-fold program are the 
 ones to which this report is primarily devoted. 
 
 City Government In the United States. 
 
 Before considering the specific problem which confronts Chicago, 
 it is necessary, in order better to understand that problem, to take a 
 preliminary broad survey of the history of the organization of govern- 
 ment in this country — national, state, and local. 
 
 City government in the United States is a reflection in large meas- 
 ure of the form of the national government. In the copying process, 
 however, the features of the national government that make for 
 IneflSciency have been magnified in state laws and charters applicable 
 to municipalities. 
 
 In the view of the founders of the American republic, government 
 was something to be restrained and checked. Such interference with
 
 50 Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency 
 
 liberty as they had experienced had been at the hands of agencies of 
 government. The idea that government might become too weak to 
 protect the liberties of the people against individuals or combinations 
 of powerful private interests, or to function efficiently in the perform- 
 ance of public duties, did not disturb the framers of the American 
 Constitution. Their deliberate aim was to tie the hands of government 
 through division of powers and a system of checks and balances, so 
 that it could not easily become tyrannical. The framers of the Consti- 
 tution were powerfully influenced in their thought and work by the 
 writings of 18th century political philosophers, like Montesquieu — 
 theorists and doctrinaires with little practical experience in affairs of 
 state. The plan of government as thus devised and developed in 
 practice is in many respects unique in the world's history and has 
 few counterparts, except as it has been more or less directly copied 
 by other republics of the western hemisphere, which naturally looked 
 to the United States as the model of republican institutions. 
 
 States and cities, which had had quite different forms of govern- 
 ment before, soon imitated the national model with its divided powers 
 and checks and balances. The diffusion of authority was carried much 
 further, however, so that today the government of the United States 
 stands — in comparison with most state and city governments — as an 
 example of simplicity and centralization of authority. In form the 
 government of the United States is today substantially what it was a 
 hundred years ago. It has grown in size and in volume of activities. 
 The divisions remain, however, as they were at the beginning — legisla- 
 tive, executive, and judicial — the legislature sub-divided into the two 
 houses of Congress, with the veto power In the President. 
 
 The executive power has not been weakened by the creation of a 
 large number of separately elected administrative officials, as is the 
 case with the states and the cities. Not only have local communities 
 the divided powers and the checks and balances of the national gov- 
 ernment, but they have many other features that make for friction 
 and inefficiency. There are overlapping governments, independent of 
 one another. There are boards and commissions of various sorts 
 exercising a variety of powers, usually with no single correlating 
 agency to bring about harmonious action among the various bodies 
 for the promotion of the public welfare. In addition there is the mul- 
 tiplicity of independent elective officials — legislative, administrative, 
 and judicial. There is also an enormous amount of judicial interference 
 with local administration. 
 
 Originally American cities had simple forms of government, which 
 were modified after the adoption of the Federal Constitution to con- 
 form to the national model. New York affords an extreme illustration 
 of the changes that have taken place. From the time of the Dongan 
 charter of 1686 down to 1830, New York had a form of municipal 
 government much like that of a British city of today. Practically all 
 the power was centered In the city council, which organized and con-
 
 City Manager Plan for Chicago 51 
 
 trolled all the executive departments and chose the oflScers to fill them. 
 For a long time, it is true, the mayor was appointed by the governor 
 of the state, but his duties were mainly honorary, like those of the 
 mayor of a British city. In the course of time, however, the selection 
 of the mayor was left to the council. 
 
 It was in 1830 that the movement then In evidence throughout the 
 country to make city government conform to the national model 
 came to a head in New York City. A charter convention assembled in 
 1829 had formulated charter changes that were enacted into law by the 
 Legislature of 1830. The plan provided for a two-chamber council, an 
 elective mayor with a veto power and other checks and balances. 
 
 The interpretative comments on this plan by E. Dana Durand, in 
 his History of the Finances of New York City, are full of significance. 
 Mr. Durand said: 
 
 "The principles expressed by the Convention of 1829 are of 
 great interest. Most stress was perhaps laid upon the separation 
 of the council into two boards, 'for the same reason which has 
 dictated a similar division of power into two branches, each check- 
 ing and controlling the other, in our general government." Most 
 of the delegates favored also a longer term for the upper house, 
 aiming to make it approximate in nature to the United States 
 Senate. A provision excluding the mayor henceforth from the 
 council and giving him the veto power was designed to furnish an 
 additional check. The convention proposed also that the mayor 
 should thereafter be elected by the people instead of by the 
 council, but as this required a constitutional amendment, the 
 change was not effected until 1834. These changes were intended 
 also to aid in the second great reform that was advocated, — the 
 division of executive from legislative power. 
 
 • * • 
 
 "From all this it is perfectly clear that the ideas of the worthy 
 delegates to the Convention of 1829 were all moulded on the 
 conventional example of the federal and state governments. The 
 two mutually restraining houses, the veto by the mayor, the sep- 
 aration of executive and legislative functions, the appropriation 
 system, — all were copied closely. The question whether the dif- 
 ferent character of municipal affairs might not justify considerable 
 differences in the form of government was not raised. It was 
 apparently not even because specially grievous fault was found in 
 the actual working of the existing system, — for the charges against 
 it, after all, are neither bitter nor specific, but far more on 
 theoretical grounds, that these changes were urged. Be this as it 
 may, it is certain that the objects sought by the charter of 1830 
 were almost entirely frustrated In practice. The utterances of 
 the convention are chiefiy interesting as showing how early and 
 how strong was the movement towards following national prece- 
 dent." 
 
 Thus was inaugurated in New York City the movement away from 
 the simple council form of government which has gone on until now the 
 council of that city is a body of small importance. The council is 
 retained in name as a concession to democratic tradition, but the 
 real powers of local government are scattered among other agencies — 
 the mayor, the board of estimate and apportionment, and other boards.
 
 52 Chicago Bureau of Public Eficiency 
 
 both state and local. The state legislature interferes directly with 
 many matters of local administration. 
 
 Taking account only of the City government proper, Chicago has 
 drifted less far away from the original simple council form of gov- 
 ernment than have most other American cities. Disregarding the 
 Municipal Court and its attaches, the only elective City officials are 
 the Mayor and Aldermen and the City Clerk and City Treasurer. The 
 Mayor has the veto power and makes the appointments — very impor- 
 tant powers. But the Council has larger powers than have the legis- 
 lative bodies of most American cities. An important advantage of 
 New York over Chicago is that the election laws applicable to the 
 former city afford much better opportunities for successful fusion 
 movements along non-partisan lines than are open here. 
 
 One great difficulty with the Chicago situation is that there are 
 many local governing bodies aside from the City, as was shown by 
 the report of the Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency entitled "The 
 Nineteen Local Governments in Chicago" — now twenty-two. 
 
 Somewhat later than 1830 there developed in American states and 
 local communities the tendency to elect nearly all administrative and 
 judicial officers, with the result of making confusion worse confounded. 
 Later still came a movement to vest important powers of government 
 in detached boards or commissions, subject to no supervision and 
 therefore essentially irresponsible. Park boards constitute a con- 
 spicuous example. 
 
 This tendency to multiply governmental agencies continued un- 
 abated until about 1900, when there set in a movement toward the 
 simplification of municipal government. This movement, at first rep- 
 resented by the commission form and later by the city manager form 
 of city charter, has since made considerable progress, especially in 
 the smaller cities of the country. 
 
 The partisan spoils system of appointments to the public service 
 early found its way into national, state, and local politics. The effort 
 to combat the spoils system with civil service enactments has had its 
 beneficial results. But in so far as civil service regulations are arbi- 
 trary and inelastic, they operate to intensify rigidity and irresponsi- 
 bility in government. 
 
 The fact is that governmental machinery in the United States — 
 more especially state and local — is clumsy in the extreme, and not 
 calculated to produce efficiency. Cities having the commission or the 
 city manager forms of government constitute the principal exceptions, 
 and even in such cities there is likely to be confusion due to the fact 
 that all the local activities of the community are not centered in the 
 commission. American citizens show their capacity for efficient self 
 government in the way in which they function in crises, and in the 
 manner in which they execute particular projects of importance. But 
 in ordinary every-day affairs the machinery of government creaks and
 
 City Manager Plan for Chicago 53 
 
 produces the minimum of results in return for the maximum expendi- 
 ture of energy and money. 
 
 The best of citizens cannot secure proper results in government 
 working with clumsy machinery. The point of view which has pre- 
 vailed for over a century, but which of late has become subject to 
 modification, must be reversed. Instead of framing constitutions and 
 laws to tie the hands of government, we must devise machinery under 
 which things can be done. The weakness of government in the United 
 States is most manifest in the cities because there the need for 
 affirmative action is greatest, and the restrictions and checks and 
 balances are the most numerous. 
 
 The best results in local government are not to be had from a 
 system constructed on the plan of division of powers and checks and 
 balances. Efficiency calls for the mingling, not the separation, of 
 legislative and administrative powers. The executive should be the 
 agent of the legislative body and subject to its direction and control. 
 Checks and balances give rise to inaction and irresponsibility. There 
 should be provisions to insure reasonable deliberation, but some single 
 authority should possess the power to bring things to pass, and should 
 be held responsible for inaction as well as for action. Division of 
 power and diffusion of responsibility too often mean stagnation and 
 blocking of needed public improvements, as the experience of Ameri- 
 can cities demonstrates. 
 
 In efficient organizations — whether governmental or business In 
 nature — the delegated power, administrative as well as legislative, is 
 lodged in a legislative body or board of directors, which body or board 
 administers through executive agents selected and controlled by It. 
 The executive authority In Great Britain, for example, is the cabinet, 
 headed by the prime minister, which holds power at the will of the 
 majority in the House of Commons. In British, FYench, German, 
 Australian and most other well governed cities of the world, the 
 people choose by vote only the members of the city council and that 
 body selects and controls the executive agents. American business 
 corporations follow the same practice. The stockholders choose boards 
 of directors, and those boards take charge of all matters of adminis- 
 tration, including the selection of the executive officers. The usual 
 practice is for the directors to designate the executive head and to 
 hold him responsible for the selection of subordinates. Thus the 
 method of American business corporations Is almost precisely that of 
 the city manager form of government. How would a business corpora- 
 tion get on if obliged to work under the division of power and check- 
 and-balance methods to which most of our governments are subject? 
 
 Reference is made to national and state governments for the pur- 
 pose of helping to understand the city government problem, and not 
 with the view of offering suggestions for changes in those fields. The 
 national government Is not likely soon to be altered radically In form. 
 
 Change In state governments will come slowly also. It is slgnifl-
 
 54 Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency 
 
 cant, however, that commission government for states has been pro- 
 posed in some instances. But city government in the United States 
 might almost be said to be in a fluid state, so great and so numerous 
 are the changes constantly under way. 
 
 In fact, far too much of the energy of American cities is consumed 
 in mere charter changes which avail little. For example, a city choos- 
 ing its councilmen by wards will change to the system of election at 
 large, and vice versa. But still the root of the trouble is untouched. 
 There is more variety in city government in the United States than 
 in all the rest of the world. British and French and German cities are 
 not continually tinkering with their charters. They have for the most 
 part simple forms of government, and they use those governments 
 to accomplish things, instead of wasting time in the modification of 
 structural organization. 
 
 With the exception of London and Paris, the forms of government 
 of which are affected for the worse from the fact that they are the 
 capital cities of their countries, there is fundamental similarity 
 throughout Europe and Australia in plans of municipal organization. 
 Canada was the same until cities like Toronto and Montreal yielded to 
 the subversive influence of their neighbor, New York City, and sub- 
 stituted for their simple model an imitation of one of the clumsiest 
 pieces of governmental mechanism in the world. 
 
 The most hopeful sign today in the field of American city charter 
 reform Is the growth in popularity of the city manager idea, as typified 
 by the charter of Dayton, Ohio. That charter conforms in the main 
 to the plan of municipal government prevailing as a rule throughout 
 the world, outside the United States. It is in accord with the plan of 
 organization of American business corporations, noted for their effi- 
 ciency. The National Municipal League, at its annual meeting in 1915, 
 held at Dayton, approved the city manager plan for American cities 
 generally, regardless of size. For larger cities, however, it was pro- 
 posed that the members of the council or commission be more than 
 five in number, and that they be chosen from districts, rather than at 
 large. 
 
 The City Manager Plan for Chicago. 
 
 If it be agreed that the multitude of taxing bodies In Chicago 
 should be consolidated, what shall be the form of the reorganized gov- 
 ernment? 
 
 The Bureau believes that consolidation of the existing governments 
 of Chicago into one headed by a city manager type of executive would 
 give much better results than any other plan. 
 
 The application of the city manager plan to Chicago would be 
 easy, provided the people could be made to see the desirability of the 
 change. Make the Mayor elective by the City Council Instead of by 
 popular vote, and substitute an indefinite tenure for the present fixed 
 term, and Chicago will have the city manager plan in essence.
 
 City Manager Plan for Chicago 55 
 
 Consolidation might be effected, to be sure, under a form of gov- 
 ernment with an elective Mayor and City Council, such as now exists 
 In Chicago. But It would be much better, when the reorganization Is 
 attempted, to adopt the system calculated to produce the best results. 
 For a generation or more political mayors have been the rule in 
 Chicago. The present system naturally tends to produce political 
 executives. Whereas, under Council selection, it might be possible to 
 secure an executive who would be a capable administrator. At any 
 rate, the control would be centralized in one responsible body, instead 
 of being divided between the Mayor and the Council as it Is now. The 
 present system gives rise to too much wrangling and friction. Con- 
 stant bickerings between the Mayor on the one side and the Council 
 on the other interfere with efBciency. The practical way out of the 
 embarrassment is to do away with the elective Mayor and make the 
 executive the agent of the Council. In that way popular control over 
 government would really be strengthened. The power of the people is 
 dissipated and weakened when delegated power is divided among 
 different independent elective authorities instead of being centralized 
 in one responsible body. 
 
 Of course, there should be provision for nonpartisan elections, 
 whatever the plan of the consolidated government might be. Non- 
 partisanship is necessary to make any plan of city government work 
 satisfactorily. Partisan methods of nominating and electing local 
 oflaclals — forced upon Chicago by the Illinois Legislature — are respon- 
 sible for much of the existing dissatisfaction with local government in 
 this community. 
 
 • • • 
 
 First Steps In the Unification Program. 
 
 The first step* in the program of complete uniflcafion of local gov- 
 ernments in Chicago, which should be taken by the Legislature of 
 Illinois at its present session, is to prepare for the necessary modifica- 
 tions of the Constitution, broad enough to accomplish the purpose in 
 view. The community also should undertake the thorough study of 
 the difficult problems of reorganization involved, to which this report 
 seeks to direct attention, to the end that legislative changes needed to 
 promote efficiency and economy may be instituted speedily and intelli- 
 gently, when the constitutional barriers shall have been removed. 
 
 Next, the Legislature should give Chicago, at once, a modified form 
 of the city manager plan of government. The change should be made 
 operative before the municipal election of 1919. ♦ • • The adoption 
 of this plan should do much to improve administration and to develop 
 that confidence in the City government which is so essential to the 
 progress of the movement for complete unification. 
 
 This step has been taken. The Legislature at its last session adopted the reso- 
 lution for a constitutional convention and the proposition will be submitted to the 
 people of Illinois at the election of November, 1918.
 
 APPENDIX B. 
 
 Editorial from The Economist of February 3, 1917. 
 
 SiMPLE GOVERNMENT. 
 
 "Governmental tendencies in this country are In the direction of 
 simplicity, which means concentration of power and responsibility In 
 few hands. This is illustrated by the many towns that have adopted 
 the commission form of government. An interesting development in 
 the same line was that brought about by Lloyd George In becoming 
 premier and placing the United Kingdom in the hands of five Indi- 
 viduals. 'That Is the Des Moines idea' was the remark of one who was 
 pleased to see something In the line of recent American fashions 
 adopted by the mother country. We have had too little of this however. 
 The government of this country was started out as a protest against 
 tyranny and accordingly the impulse was to lodge power in everybody 
 all at once, thus weakening It and creating a general condition of Irre- 
 sponsibility. We are beginning to find out that this will not do. 
 
 "Several efforts have been made to simplify government in this 
 city, and some success has been achieved, notably In getting rid of 
 certain features of the old town units, but we are still loosely organized. 
 The Chicago Bureau of Public Efficiency, of which nine highly qualified 
 citizens are trustees, has just prepared a report on this subject. The 
 thing that this board wishes to have cured is 'twenty-two local gov- 
 ernments, no central control, no central responsibility.' It is estimated 
 that the changes proposed would immediately save $700,000 and ulti- 
 mately $3,000,000. The city limits would be extended so as to include 
 the Sanitary District, the Drainage Board thus being abolished. The 
 City Council would be the governing body and would elect the mayor. 
 The City Council however would be reduced In membership from 
 seventy to thirty-five aldermen, who would have a term of four years 
 with a salary of $4,000. These aldermen would be subject to recall. It 
 Is proposed too that all the courts shall be consolidated into one sys- 
 tem. Also certain officials now elected would be appointed, such as city 
 treasurer and city clerk. 
 
 "The dominating idea of the report is excellent and it will unques- 
 tionably have to be adopted some time if Chicago is really to come to 
 its own. The present lack of system and unity is costing us dearly. 
 The task laid out by these trustees, Julius Rosenwald, Alfred L. Baker, 
 Onward Bates, George G. Tunell, Walter L. Fisher, Victor Elting, Allen 
 B. Pond and Frank I. Moulton — with Harris S. Keeler as director of the 
 Bureau, is a huge one Inasmuch as it calls for city limits extending 
 from the Indiana line to the Cook County boundary line on the north
 
 58 Chicago Bureau of Public Efflciency 
 
 and the west, taking In several towns which might not wish to be taken 
 in. 
 
 "The report of the Bureau Is educational. One must say with regret 
 that that is about all any of these reports and Investigations have been 
 these many years past. A great deal of excellent work has been done 
 by commissions and private individuals In investigating abuses and 
 recommending remedies, and nothing has come of it all except a little 
 disturbance of the sleep of our people. We have had elaborate reports 
 on smoke prevention, on taxation, on various social evils, and here we 
 are still. The connecting link between this report and actuality should 
 be some strong and highly intelligent lobbying In the Legislature to 
 assure the passage of acts which will enable Chicago to undertake 
 some of these reforms. Unless strong work is done on those lines this 
 excellent report will have the same fate as all the rest."
 
 APPENDIX C 
 
 POPULATION AND NUMBER OF REGISTERED VOTERS OF THE 
 CITY OF CHICAGO. BY WARDS 
 
 POPULATION BY WARDS IN 1916 AND 1910- 
 ALSO INCREASE OR DECREASE 
 
 , 1 1 
 
 REGISTERED VOTERS 
 MARCH. 1917 
 
 
 WMd 
 
 Number 
 
 PopuUtioo 
 by Ward* 
 for 1916 
 (based od 
 School 
 Ceniui) 
 
 PopuUtioD 
 bv Wwd. 
 for lUlO 
 (Federml 
 Cenaus) 
 
 Increase 
 1910-1016 
 
 Decrease 
 1910-1916 
 
 Men 
 
 WoiDen 
 
 Total 
 
 Number of 
 
 PrectoeU 
 
 in Each 
 
 Ward 
 
 Ward 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
 7 
 
 8 
 
 9 
 
 10 
 
 11 
 
 12 
 
 13 
 
 14 
 
 15 
 
 16 
 
 17 
 
 18 
 
 19 
 
 20 
 
 21 
 
 22 
 
 23 
 
 24 
 
 25 
 
 26 
 
 27 
 
 28 
 
 29 
 
 30 
 
 31 
 
 32 
 
 33 
 
 34 
 
 35 
 
 45,935 
 69,217 
 69,2-29 
 66,030 
 69,430 
 81,626 
 79,524 
 69,248 
 74,181 
 66,953 
 67,148 
 65,419 
 72,023 
 67,724 
 83,755 
 64,234 
 68,342 
 67,804 
 56,103 
 68,870 
 62,823 
 69,962 
 69,359 
 66,884 
 96,541 
 82,428 
 
 110,650 
 69,272 
 
 100,986 
 63,439 
 71,116 
 93,780 
 90,615 
 88,323 
 86,276 
 
 60,014 
 62,072 
 62,716 
 61,297 
 61,966 
 61,860 
 64,983 
 64,038 
 62,629 
 62,348 
 63,440 
 60,157 
 60,988 
 61,856 
 66,647 
 65,223 
 70,099 
 61,114 
 63,756 
 65,847 
 64,070 
 63,556 
 64,477 
 61,036 
 59,440 
 69,455 
 62,153 
 63,230 
 60,853 
 60,178 
 63,228 
 64,981 
 64,948 
 57.142 
 60,451 
 
 ' '6,513 
 
 4,733 
 
 7,402 
 
 19,766 
 
 14.541 
 
 5,210 
 
 11,552 
 
 ' 3,708 
 5,262 
 
 11,035 
 5,868 
 
 17,108 
 
 ' 4,882 
 
 5,848 
 
 36,101 
 
 22.973 
 
 48.497 
 
 6,012 
 
 40,133 
 
 3.261 
 
 7,888 
 
 28,799 
 
 25,667 
 
 31,181 
 
 25,825 
 
 14,079 
 
 2,855 
 
 ' '6,395 
 
 " " " 989 
 1,757 
 3,310 
 7,653 
 6,977 
 1,247 
 3.594 
 
 1 11,116 
 
 1 15,016 
 
 ! 15,585 
 
 i 8,703 
 
 1 10,620 
 
 19,272 
 
 21,329 
 
 i 11,796 
 
 1 12,515 
 
 1 6,216 
 
 i 7,641 
 
 10,437 
 
 17,156 
 
 12,336 
 
 14,611 
 
 7,327 
 
 6,465 
 
 i 13,657 
 
 1 6,458 
 
 i 4,949 
 
 13,442 
 
 7,352 
 
 15,420 
 
 11,782 
 
 25,348 
 
 20,152 
 
 25,338 
 
 12,650 
 
 15,418 
 
 10,807 
 
 15,545 
 
 23,473 
 
 1 22,710 
 
 18,009 
 
 21,053 
 
 3,258 
 
 9,425 
 
 12,348 
 
 4,859 
 
 5,403 
 
 14,911 
 
 16,545 
 
 6,966 
 
 7,315 
 
 3,198 
 
 3,947 
 
 5,837 
 
 12,187 
 
 7,532 
 
 7,220 
 
 3,600 
 
 2,346 
 
 6,438 
 
 2,690 
 
 2,304 
 
 7,108 
 
 3,168 
 
 9,963 
 
 5,800 
 
 20,772 
 
 12,175 
 
 13,487 
 
 6,925 
 
 8,244 
 
 6.291 
 
 10,949 
 
 17,065 
 
 14,519 
 
 9.232 
 
 13,904 
 
 14.374 
 24.441 
 27,933 
 13,562 
 16,023 
 34,183 
 37,874 
 18,762 
 19,830 
 
 9,414 
 11,588 
 16,274 
 29,343 
 19,868 
 21,731 
 10,927 
 
 7,811 
 20,095 
 
 9,148 
 
 7,233 
 20,550 
 10,520 
 25,383 
 17,582 
 46,120 
 32,327 
 38,825 
 19,575 
 23.662 
 17.098 
 26.494 
 40.538 
 37.229 
 27.241 
 34,957 
 
 44 
 74 
 77 
 41 
 47 
 88 
 96 
 56 
 57 
 27 
 37 
 47 
 84 
 60 
 60 
 33 
 24 
 62 
 29 
 23 
 60 
 34 
 71 
 61 
 
 111 
 86 
 
 107 
 69 
 63 
 49 
 73 
 
 113 
 93 
 77 
 90 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 
 7 
 
 8 
 
 9 
 
 10 
 
 11 
 
 12 
 
 13 
 
 14 
 
 16 
 
 16 
 
 17 
 
 18 
 
 19 
 
 20 
 
 21 
 
 22 
 
 23 
 
 24 
 
 26 
 
 26 
 
 27 
 
 28 
 
 29 
 
 30 
 
 31 
 
 32 
 
 33 
 
 34 
 
 35 
 
 Total. . . 
 
 2,544,249 
 2,192,350 
 
 2,192,350 
 
 62,639 
 21 
 14 
 
 399,755 
 47,856 
 
 47,856 
 
 1490,604 
 
 297,931 
 
 788,636 
 
 2.203 
 
 
 Increase 
 
 Average 
 Popula- 
 tion pel 
 ward. .. 
 Wards 
 b e 1 n 
 average 
 Ward! 
 above 
 average 
 
 ' 351,899 
 
 72,693 
 23 
 12 
 
 351.899 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 60 
 
 Chicago Bureau of Puhlic Efficiency 
 
 UNEQUAL REPRESENTATION 
 
 Tables Showing Inequality of Wards in Population and Registered Voters— Five Wards 
 with Ten Aldermen Have About the Same Population and a Much Larger Regis- 
 tered Vote than Eight Other Wards with Sixteen Aldermen. 
 
 Ward 
 
 Population 
 
 Registered Voters 
 
 
 Number 
 
 1916 
 
 1917 
 
 Aldermen 
 
 6 
 
 81,626 
 
 34,183 
 
 2 
 
 25 
 
 95,541 
 
 46,120 
 
 2 
 
 26 
 
 82,428 
 
 32,327 
 
 2 
 
 27 
 
 110,650 
 
 38,825 
 
 2 
 
 32 
 
 93,780 
 
 40,538 
 
 2 
 
 Total, 5 wards 
 
 464,025 
 
 191,993 
 
 10 
 
 Average per ward. . . . 
 
 92,805 
 
 38,398 
 
 
 Average per alderman. 
 
 46,402 
 
 19,199 
 
 
 Ward 
 
 Population 
 
 Registered Voters 
 
 
 Number 
 
 1916 
 
 1917 
 
 Aldermen 
 
 1 
 
 45,935 
 
 14,374 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 59,217 
 
 24,441 
 
 2 
 
 10 
 
 56,953 
 
 9,414 
 
 2 
 
 11 
 
 67,148 
 
 11,588 
 
 2 
 
 16 
 
 64,234 
 
 10,927 
 
 2 
 
 19 
 
 56,103 
 
 9,148 
 
 2 
 
 20 
 
 58,870 
 
 7,233 
 
 2 
 
 22 
 
 59,962 
 
 10,520 
 
 2 
 
 Total, 8 wardfl 
 
 468,422 
 
 97,645 
 
 16 
 
 Average per ward. . . . 
 
 58,553 
 
 12,206 
 
 
 Average per alderman 
 
 29,276 
 
 6,103 
 
 
 137
 
 UNivERsrry of illinois-urbana 
 
 3 0112 062414153