This deal was secured by something other than Chicago's taxing power, so it should have less effect on Chicago's creditworthiness and ability to issue other bonds.
In any case, if it was 3% it's economically very comparable to issuing a regular bond and not the "fleecing" that's talked about. If the city regrets the deal, it should be able to issue a regular bond and use it to buy out the investors, or issue regular bonds annually and use them to pay the penalties, all at roughly a wash economically.
I'm not sure 3% is correct, though. I'd like to see another source on that. It reads like it has some protection against inflation. If it's 3% + inflation, that's a really enormous return.
In any case, if it was 3% it's economically very comparable to issuing a regular bond and not the "fleecing" that's talked about. If the city regrets the deal, it should be able to issue a regular bond and use it to buy out the investors, or issue regular bonds annually and use them to pay the penalties, all at roughly a wash economically.
I'm not sure 3% is correct, though. I'd like to see another source on that. It reads like it has some protection against inflation. If it's 3% + inflation, that's a really enormous return.