Staff Reports
The town‑hall in Chatham wasn’t a gentle appeal to corporate charity. It was a receipts party. Walgreens officials laid out cold numbers and hard facts: one store lost more than $1 million last year, theft ran at about 16%, and the company spent roughly $400,000 a year on security. Then the company told the neighborhood the store will close. Instead of fixing crime, local politicians are threatening to charge Walgreens with a crime for leaving. That tells you everything you need to know about priorities in Chicago.
What Walgreens revealed at the town‑hall
Walgreens executives said the Chatham location at 86th and Cottage Grove lost over $1 million last year. Reginald Johnson, a Walgreens regional vice president, said closing stores “is the last resort.” He also said theft at that store hit about 16% — roughly four times the company average. Managers described lock boxes smashed, employees jumped over counters, and regular attacks on staff. Walgreens announced the store will close and that prescriptions will be transferred to nearby locations with limited free delivery to ease the pain.
The real culprit: lawlessness, not corporate greed
Alderman William Hall urged criminal charges, calling the closure “first‑degree corporate abandonment.” That’s theatrical, but it’s not the way to keep a pharmacy open. You don’t arrest a business for protecting itself from losses that come from violent theft and declining prescription volume. You arrest the criminals. You hold repeat offenders and the policies that let them roam free accountable. When politicians prioritize feel‑good legal theories over public safety, businesses leave and residents lose access to basic services.
Who pays when crime chases out pharmacies?
Seniors and families pay the highest price. A closed Walgreens becomes a pharmacy desert for people who cannot drive or afford delivery. That’s real harm. But pretending the solution is to force a company to stay while tolerating smash‑and‑grab theft is not a solution. If city leaders want pharmacies to stay, they need to enforce the law, back local policing, and stop handcuffing prosecutors with soft‑on‑crime policies that invite repeat offenders.
Fixes, not finger‑pointing
Chicago can choose to protect businesses or it can choose to punish them for responding to obvious threats. The practical steps are plain: prosecute habitual thieves, fund targeted public safety in high‑crime corridors, and create real incentives for companies that serve vulnerable neighborhoods. Blaming corporations makes for good headlines. Cleaning up the streets actually keeps pharmacies, jobs, and services where people need them. If leaders want to stop more closures, they should stop treating crime like an abstract policy talking point and start treating it like the destroyer of neighborhoods that it is.
