When Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson faced a significant budget deficit in the fall, his administration implemented a targeted hiring freeze as a cost-saving measure. However, city records indicate that hundreds of employees were added to the payroll after the policy began in August.
This pattern is consistent with previous hiring freezes under Johnson and earlier mayors. Alderman Matt O’Shea criticized the approach during budget negotiations, stating, “Everything with this budget, it’s about trust. I don’t believe the math that they’ve come up with … and now to find out that they’ve hired (hundreds of) non-public-safety positions while we were in a hiring freeze? This is nothing but a shell game with them.”
Financial experts note that it is difficult for local governments to maintain service levels without some new hires, even when police and fire roles are excluded. Ralph Martire, executive director of the Center for Tax and Budget Accountability, said, “Even the symbol of it is important, simply because when you have a difficult fiscal situation, you want to make sure that the public sector that’s facing it isn’t just running up costs for no apparent reason, right? That’s just part of the deal, to make it clear to taxpayers you’re taking every step to solve your problem.”
Data obtained by the Tribune through a Freedom of Information Act request shows that from August 1 through November 18—after Johnson’s hiring freeze began—the city approved 494 new employees paid from its Corporate Fund. Of these hires, 223 were not for police or fire department positions. The highest salary among these was awarded to Angela Green as Commissioner of Family and Support Services at approximately $213,000.
Cassio Mendoza, spokesperson for Mayor Johnson, explained that hiring processes typically take three to five months and offers made before the freeze would still be honored: “So looking at hire dates is not a good way to measure the impact of a hiring freeze.”
The July announcement from Budget Director Annette Guzmán outlined exemptions for critical public safety roles and other essential functions. The freeze applied only to jobs funded by the Corporate Fund or Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), with no CDBG-funded hires recorded during this period.
Mendoza reported savings of $53 million as of mid-November due to the hiring freeze and projected total savings could reach $75 million by late 2025. An earlier freeze in 2024 reportedly saved $65 million.
Since August’s freeze began, sixteen new positions have been filled within the mayor’s office—mostly senior leadership roles—including Sheila Bedi as chief operating officer at $198,000 annually. Sabeeha Quereshi was also hired as deputy mayor for Health and Human Services but does not currently appear on official employee dashboards.
The largest number of new hires went to Chicago police (256) and Office of Emergency Management and Communications (44). The Fire Department added fifteen new employees.
Ahead of his October budget speech introducing a $16.6 billion plan without structural layoffs, Johnson’s team clarified exemptions included positions related to public safety and other specified areas.
On December 20th aldermen passed an alternative proposal over Johnson’s objections; some criticized what they saw as reluctance by his administration to maximize efficiency measures including workforce reductions.
In response, Johnson’s team stated: “A targeted hiring freeze … gives the Administration the opportunity to evaluate organizational structures, examine spans and layers, and assess where administrative functions can be centralized or shared across departments while still realizing the financial savings in 2026 that a deeper cut to vacancies would achieve.”
City data shows last year’s hiring freeze resulted in 483 Corporate Fund additions—including 156 outside police/fire departments—suggesting more non-first responder roles have been added during this current period than previously seen.
A similar approach under former Mayor Lori Lightfoot in late 2019 led to 583 new hires after her own citywide hiring freeze began; more than half were outside first responder agencies.
Martire noted differences between private sector profit motives versus public sector obligations: “Your private sector entity is accountable to do one thing…generate a profit. Your public sector entity is accountable…to deliver core public services…cost-free.”
David Merriman from University of Illinois Chicago commented on broader implications: “In general, hiring freezes are a blunt tool to reduce spending,” he wrote. “A much better approach is to prioritize city services and curtail those that are least essential and most readily able to be cut.”
