Would it be best to dump the expression 'do better'?

& readers debate granny flats, immigration policy and more

To read this issue in your browser, click on the headline above.

Tuesdays at 11:30 a.m. I talk with WGN-AM 720 host John Williams about what’s making news and likely to be grist for the PS mill. The WGN listen-live link is here.

Notes and comments from readers — lightly edited — along with my responses. I anticipated a lot of response to my bold prediction/suggestion that disgraced former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich will/should enter the Democratic crowded Democratic primary field of potential successors to retiring 9th U.S. Congressional District Rep. Jan Schakowsky. But aside from a little scoffing I didn’t hear much. Instead the most vigorous conversation centered on my support for loosening to eliminating zoning restrictions on accessory dwelling units (ADUs), also called “granny flats.”

Are ADUs an important part of the solution to housing shortages and high housing costs?

Jake H. — Last summer’s Evanston Now article,“Increasing density: Lessons from ADUs” notes that fewer than 36 ADUs were built in Evanston in a nearly five-year period (out of roughly 13,000 single family homes.)

The Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning notes major issues here:

Within communities that permit ADUs, there must be property owners willing to make a financial investment and potentially serve as a landlord. They also must have property that can accommodate an additional dwelling unit that meets zoning bulk and setback requirements.

Because of the various conditions required to construct an ADU, they are generally built at a modest rate. As of May 2021, Oak Park has issued 10 ADU building permits since it adopted its ADU ordinance in 2018. Evanston has issued 10 permits since 2019.

The slow uptake is unsurprising. They cost a lot to build, they likely rob you of a parking spot (or yard space for additional parking), they're small, they force you to be a landlord if you want the income from it and they often involve inviting a stranger to share your property.

It seems ADUs are likely to forever be dwarfed by the far more efficient way to house lots of people in limited space, a radical concept we might be familiar with: apartment buildings. The key to affordable housing in the metro area is to better incentivize and streamline the construction of modest, multi-family buildings near transit and business districts.

I'm not sure which way this cuts when it comes to the ordinance. On the one hand, you could argue that if hardly anyone does it, why not allow it? On the other hand, you could argue that if it won't make much difference and provide a vanishingly small social benefit, it doesn't seem worth risking potential neighborhood downsides that a majority of local residents want to avoid. I lean toward the latter view — let the alders decide with community input, just as municipalities currently decide outside Chicago. In any case, the issue strikes me as involving a lot more performative posturing than serious policy debate.

It’s not fair to brand opponents as NIMBYs (Not In My Back Yard). Say you're a homeowner and your neighbor, in accordance with the new ordinance, is one of the few who builds an ADU over their garage. It's tall, imposing, and ugly. It blocks light, and makes your backyard a bit of a bummer. It represents a sort of aesthetic imposition, one that affects your enjoyment of your property, in which you have invested a lot of time, money, and sentiment.

Your perspective might be that this new law imposes in-your-face burdens that you didn't sign up for. You bought under the old rules, expecting and hoping to live in a neighborhood of single family homes. The inconveniences you’re facing, ones that make you contemplate moving and might reduce the value of your single largest asset, doesn't meaningfully address an important social problem. In short, I'm facing these problems for no good reason.

Skeptic — Jake writes about "Shadows from new buildings, blocking views and changing the character of the neighborhood." I have heard this argument many times applied to new building projects. Typically, there is existing zoning which imposes height limits to address this concern. It has happened in some neighborhoods where old detached single-family dwellings (SFD's) have been torn down and replaced by larger SFD's, or multi-family buildings within the existing building code. If you buy a property you have that risk. So why single out ADU's? Also, it is important that land use changes in a city to accommodate economic changes. A lot of neighborhoods have built up. Imagine if lower Manhattan were not allowed to change its land use from 1900? Changes happen for a reason and our own SFD's are not exempt (like you, I own a detached SFD). In the time we are in now, many people want to have more density to allow for more efficient use of public transit and walkability.

Jake H. replies — I'm not quick to just accept the new conventional wisdom, among both market fundamentalists on the right and "abundance" liberals on the left, that zoning is the root of all evil. I'm simply unconvinced that we can't have it all — suburban neighborhoods that retain the character for which they're valued and plenty more affordable housing besides.

On tipping customs

Eric — For counter service, where the flip-around screen suggests a tip before you get the food or beverage, I'm invoking this simple rule: If I'm standing, I'm not tipping.

Neal Parker — One of the problems with tipping is that it is very non-uniform. In June 2024, the business section of the Washington Post published a table of nine occupations that involve tipping. For servers at a sit-down restaurant, the percentage of customers who leave a tip declined from 75% in 2021 to 67% in 2024. For hotel housekeepers the decline was from 28% in 2021 to 22% in 2024. Everyone receives the same service. Everyone should pay the same.

Zorn — I’m stunned that 33% of customers at sit-down restaurants don’t tip. I would have guessed 3% at most, so ingrained is that custom. I always leave $5 a night for a hotel housekeeper and, following a suggestion from a PS reader, I’m starting to slip a dollar bill to drive-through service employees. They work really hard and don’t earn much. A buck isn’t much, I know, but the symbolism feels right.

Are click polls useless?

Michael Rosenbaum — Why does anyone quote an “unscientific poll?” I appreciate the disclaimer, somewhat, but an unscientific poll has no information anyone can rely on for anything.

Zorn — I have found over the years that the lighter the topic, the more reliable the click poll results tend to be. If I ask “soft serve or scoops?” for example, the result will likely track with serious market research. But if I ask about gun rights gay rights or other divisive political issues, my readership — which skews left — will give me a result that reflects a far more liberal position than a scientific pollster would find. It would be interesting to see academic research that might uncover algorithms that could adjust for the readership of various sites that conduct them.

When it comes down to it, though, click polls are fun and engaging and, while not precise or reliable, also not totally useless. My guess is that the fireworks poll results — seen here below — probably track pretty closely with what a rigorous polling company would find.

Should we be doing better about using the expression ‘do better’?

Edward M. Cook — Will you lead the charge against the phrase "do better"? If the person in question didn't "do better" it's because they either can't or didn't want to. They know what "better" is. It's the equivalent of yelling "Throw strikes!" at a baseball game to a pitcher struggling with control. Do you think he doesn't know this?

Zorn — I will not lead that charge because I see a third option — that the person being lightly chastised didn’t realize that they were messing up and that others were noticing. It also suggests that the person doing the chastising believes that the person whom they are urging to “do better” can, in fact, do better and is not irredeemable.

Take the example of a person who continually fails to respect the preferred pronouns of a person of their acquaintance. That person might not be aware of how important pronouns are to others, and “do better” is a short way of saying, “I’m sure you don’t mean to cause offense because you are a decent person, but you really should work harder at respecting pronoun preferences.”

I would not use it on a first time offender or a churl who, by God, is going to ignore such preferences, but in some situations, “do better” feels like the proper reproach.

Premium advice

I received numerous letters in the past week thanking me for passing along the intelligence that those who have the Sunday Tribune home delivered can opt out of paying $15.99 for up to 15 “premium issue” inserts a year by sending an email to cswork_level1@tribune.cust-serv.com. Be sure to include the underscore between the k and the l. It’s a lot easier and faster than calling the customer service line —312-546-7900 — and navigating the phone tree.

More than one person replied “it works!” I’m now wondering how long it will work, as businesses really hate making it easy to cancel. See last week’s Associated Press article, “A ‘click-to-cancel’ rule, intended to make canceling subscriptions easier, is blocked.” Why? “An administrative law judge decided that the economic impact (of the rule) would be more than … $100 million” and thus meant the rule was created without the necessary preliminary regulatory analysis.

The conservative reassurance that our crops will get picked even once the undocumented immigrants are rounded up and shipped out

David Leitschuh — You present the argument that deportation of undocumented migrant farm workers will imperil our crop harvest. In 1860, cotton represented fully 60% of exports from the U.S., and pro-slavery Democrats warned that, without slave labor to manually gather cotton, our economy would suffer.

That empty argument for continuing the immorality of slavery underestimated society's ability to adapt. Just as slavery immorally appropriated people's lives and labors, many employers today exploit the lives and labors of undocumented workers who fear to go to authorities when they are grossly underpaid at endure unsafe conditions. Further, undocumented workers depress wages for Americans. If deportation of people who came here illegally materially impairs our agricultural output, we will see immense pressure on both parties for legislation to expedite vetting and admission of guest workers on an as needed basis.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement claims that, to date, 75% of apprehended illegal immigrants have criminal convictions or pending criminal charges. But the fact remains that everyone who entered our country illegally or has overstayed their visa is subject to deportation under our laws.

It's apparent that many on the left do not want illegal immigrants deported. ICE agents are simply enforcing our current immigration laws. People who don't like that should attempt to elect representatives to change those laws. Disparaging ICE for doing this is wrong.

Melinda A K. — Liberated slaves were still available to do the work. Deported immigrants don't get the choice — they'll just be gone. Crops not amenable to mechanical harvesting won't be grown in the U.S. anymore. Say goodbye to domestic strawberries, asparagus, raspberries, cucumbers, and many lettuces, just to name a few.

Mark K. — The mainstream left position is to adjust the laws to allow this significant and productive portion of our society to stay, earn a livable wage, and have a path to citizenship. The bipartisan legislative package that was meant to improve immigration enforcement and vetting was famously scuttled by Trump, because the problem was and is more useful to him politically than a solution. Notice how no new legislation has been proposed so far, even though Republicans control all branches of government.

John Houck —I'm not sure where David gets the idea that ICE is primarily focused on criminals instead of farm workers. (And no, I am not inclined to call someone here without valid authorization a criminal.) There are plenty of videos of ICE raids on workers picking crops, working in meatpacking plants, etc., and anyone with so much as an unpaid parking ticket or pulled over for speeding. If they were focused solely on those committing serious crimes I might be more sympathetic, but they're not.

When even Joe Rogan thinks ICE actions are "insane," maybe it's time to rethink support of these policies.

Zorn — I see that ICE is making this 75% claim on social media. But even if I could trust the goons who run that agency these days, I would like to see an actual news release with specifics about what “criminal” means when they single out those with “criminal convictions or pending criminal charges.” And I would also like to point out that if one in four of the people scooped up and detained for deportation have committed no crimes, then the claim that these mass deportations are aimed at ridding the country of violent criminals is fairly weak.

The AP tells a different story:

The latest ICE statistics show that as of June 29, there were 57,861 people detained by ICE, 41,495 — 71.7% — of whom had no criminal convictions. That includes 14,318 people with pending criminal charges and 27,177 who are subject to immigration enforcement, but have no known criminal convictions or pending criminal charges.

Each detainee is assigned a threat level by ICE on a scale of 1 to 3, with one being the highest. Those without a criminal record are classified as having “no ICE threat level.” As of June 23, the latest data available, 84% of people detained at 201 facilities nationwide were not given a threat level. Another 7% had been graded as a level 1 threat, 4% were level 2 and 5% were level 3. …

Nonpublic data obtained by the Cato Institute shows that as of June 14, 65% of the more than 204,000 people processed into the system by ICE since the start of fiscal year 2025, which began Oct. 1, 2024, had no criminal convictions. Of those with convictions, only 6.9% had committed a violent crime, while 53% had committed nonviolent crimes that fell into three main categories — immigration, traffic, or vice crimes. …

Research has consistently found … that immigrants are not driving violent crime in the U.S. and that they actually commit fewer crimes than native-born Americans.

But even if ICE’s claim is correct, how has that 25% harmed you? What inspires this frenzy to eject them from a country that is benefiting greatly from their labor. You think Americans are clamoring to pick crops for low wages? That hiking wages to levels that would attract American workers wouldn’t be vastly inflationary?

The comparison to slavery is thin in that enslaved people were compelled to work and denied agency, whereas undocumented workers are under no compulsion and have significant agency. The fact that the undocumented don’t have recourse to complain is an artifact of the laws that make it difficult for them to find conventional employment and leave them vulnerable to deportation. Many on the right consider this a feature, not a bug.

Mark K. above aptly summarizes the mainstream left’s view, which is that undocumented people with histories of violent crime or of repeatedly committing non-violent crimes should be deported, that our border and asylum policies should be strong but that those who are here contributing to our society should be afforded a path to citizenship or some other form of legal status.

Unpopular opinions?

The winner of last week’s visual jokes poll was a photo of a beaming grocery story employee labeled, “James Gleason, Non-Perishable Manager” to which UncleDuke1969 added, '“You’d be smiling too if you were immortal.” This touched off a long discussion/debate in the comment threads about whether immortality would really be desirable:

Steven K — Immortality is no smiling matter. See the 1983 film “The Hunger” or the 1960 Twilight Zone episode “Long Live Walter Jameson” to understand why living forever, or even for an unnaturally long time, is a kind of damnation. He’s depressed and hates that his permanent youth has enabled him to outlive everyone that he’s ever loved or been close to, but he just can’t bring himself to pull that revolver out of the drawer and end his misery.

Rick Weiland — I am also reminded of the Greek myth of Tithonus, who was granted eternal life but not eternal youth, so he just kept aging and withering.

John Houck— Now that I'm in my 50s I find the idea of living another thirty years or more rather daunting. Not that I want to die anytime soon, but without some way to actually reverse the aging process, it does seem weird to want to keep going while knowing I'm surely on the downslope, physically and mentally.

Michael M. — I would like to have a form of immortality where you oscillate between ages. So, say, you age until you are 55 and then age backwards to 25, where you start again, over and over.

Zorn — I agree that it would be terribly sad to lose everyone, even your children and grandchildren, to the ravages of age while you yourself remained forever young. I’ve never understood the cryogenics enthusiasts who want to be defrosted hundreds of years from now when, presumably, medical science will have conquered all human frailties. Sure, but everyone and everything they loved and cared about would be gone.

Last week’s results

John Houck — I voted yes to selling fireworks in Illinois, but no on liking the neighborhood displays. Illinois could use the revenue (although they might also get a boost out of busting all those Krazy Kaplans customers as they cross back into the state.) I don’t *hate* local fireworks, but I can live without them. I’m not a particular fan of neighbors who think it’s okay to keep setting them off well past midnight.

Paul — Accessibility of fireworks increases the number of fireworks injuries. It's true that some Illinoisans drive to Indiana. However, fireworks are less convenient and accessible than they would be if they were legal here. More restrictions equal fewer injuries, while easy accessibility equals more use and injuries.

Zorn — Paul’s contention appears to be true region by region, but the American Pyrotechnics Association points out that, as liberalization of consumer fireworks restrictions has grown across the country, fireworks related injuries have dropped dramatically.

Janet Swenson — Not only is there a significant risk of injury or death with consumer fireworks, but also the risk affects children and innocent bystanders, not just those who choose to play with explosives for a momentary thrill. In addition to the pets and those with PTSD, there are many others who find the noise disturbing, not to mention sleep-depriving. There is also the risk of damage to lives and property due to house fires and brush fires. On top of that, the air quality is affected for many hours, lasting through the following day, with particulate reading in the Poor range, according to my AccuWeather app. Between Canadian or Western wildfires and our own city pollution, there are few enough days with good air quality in the summer.

A toy or appliance with even a fraction of the risk of fireworks would never make it to market. A personal amusement that infringes on the general population and the environment should remain illegal. After all, there are ordinances against noise disturbances like loud parties, and they do much less harm than fireworks.

This occasional Tuesday feature is intended to highlight opinions that are defensible but may well be unpopular. If you have one to add, leave it in comments or send me an email, but be sure to offer at least a paragraph in defense of your view.

NewsWheel

Inspired by the WordWheel puzzle in the Monday-Friday Chicago Tribune and other papers, this puzzle asks you to identify the missing letter that will make a word or words — possibly proper nouns; reading either clockwise or counterclockwise — related to a story in the news or other current event. The answer is at the bottom of the newsletter.

The week’s best visual jokes

Here are some funny visual images I've come across recently on social media. Enjoy, ignore any typos, then evaluate:

The image on the left is from a White House social media post last week

There’s still time to vote in the conventional Quip of the Week poll!

Thanks to paid subscribers for supporting the Picayune Sentinel. To help this publication grow, please consider spreading the word to friends, family, associates, neighbors and agreeable strangers.

Info

Eric Zorn is a former opinion columnist for the Chicago Tribune. Find a longer bio and contact information here. This issue exceeds in size the maximum length for a standard email. To read the entire issue in your browser, click on the headline link above. Paid subscribers receive each Picayune Plus in their email inbox each Tuesday, are part of our civil and productive commenting community and enjoy the sublime satisfaction of supporting this enterprise.

Contact

You can email me at ericzorn@gmail.com or by clicking here:

I read all the messages that come in, but I do most of my interacting with readers in the comments section beneath each issue.

Some of those letters I reprint and respond to in the Z-mail section of Tuesday’s Picayune Plus, which is delivered to paid subscribers and available to all readers later Tuesday. Check there for responses.

If you don’t want me to use the full name on your email or your comments, let me know how you’d like to be identified.

Social media

• Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ejzorn

• Twitter: https://x.com/EricZorn

• Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/ericzorn.bsky.social

• Threads: https://www.threads.net/@ejzorn

• Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ejzorn/

• TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@ericzorn5

Help?

If you’re having troubles with Substack — delivery, billing and so forth — first try “Picayune Sentinel Substack help, Frequently Asked Questions.” If that doesn’t work check out the Substack help page. And if that doesn’t work, shoot me an email and I’ll be happy to help.

Answer to the NewsWheel puzzle

MALAYSIA