Diocese takes the name of HOP/C in vain

If you watched or attended the City Council meeting tonight, you may have heard a representative of the Catholic Diocese of Peoria give a presentation on their plans to build a new pastoral center downtown. In her presentation, she claimed that the plans were approved by the Heart of Peoria Commission.

That’s actually not true. The plans were shown to the Heart of Peoria Commission (HOP/C), and revised plans were shown to a few members of the HOP/C, but at no point did the commission take an official vote to approve or disapprove of the plans. I, as a recent appointee to the HOP/C, have never seen their plans at all, so I have no idea whether they conform with the Heart of Peoria Plan or with the proposed Land Development Code.

You may think I’m making a big deal out of nothing, and I won’t argue that, but it’s a pet peeve of mine to have the HOP/C’s name taken in vain — a pet peeve that started before I was even on the commission. This isn’t the first time it’s happened. The HOP/C’s “blessing” was invoked for Museum Square as well, even though the commission never approved that project either. The Heart of Peoria Plan has been used to justify all kinds of projects, from Museum Square to District 150’s park-siting plans, even though those projects are antithetical to the Plan.

The HOP/C has no regulatory authority, but since the City Council adopted the HOP Plan “in principle,” getting the HOP/C’s input on big projects downtown and making token changes is undertaken as an inconvenient, but politically-correct thing to do. Once they make minor tweaks based on HOP/C recommendations, they check the commission off their list and claim to have its full support.

The HOP/C is going to have to be taken more seriously if the City Council ever expects the Heart of Peoria Plan to be adopted in earnest, not just in principle.

Council to consider Kellar Branch options

The City Council has decided to explore their options regarding the Kellar Branch.

You may remember that the Surface Transportation Board (STB) recently ruled, in effect, that the Kellar Branch is to remain an operational rail line and reopened the question of whether Pioneer Industrial Railway or Central Illinois Railroad (CIRY) should be the carrier. Councilman Sandberg recognizes that if the STB, a federal agency, decides who the carrier should be on the Kellar Branch, then the city’s hands will be tied. Thus, he would like to see the city be proactive and come up with a strategy on how to proceed. After making a motion to that effect, the council passed it unanimously.

The city does not have many options, as I see it. Here’s what they can do:

  1. Keep trying to discontinue service on the line. This is what the Sierra Club and the Recreational Trails Advocates would like, if Joyce Blumenshine’s remarks to the council are any guage of their thinking. It would require the city to hire another carrier (besides Pioneer or CIRY), get STB approval of that carrier, then have that carrier file for discontinuance on the line and go through the same fight with Carver Lumber again. Estimated time: 1-2 years at least. Probability of success: Nil.
  2. Make a deal with Pioneer. Pioneer has offered to buy the line or accept a long-term lease to provide service. In return, they have also offered to do a number of other positive things, including an offer to help build a trail concurrent with the rail right-of-way with up to $100,000 of in-kind service. Estimated time: immediate. Probability of success: Excellent.
  3. Wait for STB to act. This would mean just leaving everything status quo until the STB rules on who should be allowed to service the line, at which point the council will lose all bargaining power and will get neither the carrier of their choice nor a recreational trail. Estimated time: 3-6 months. Probability of success: Non-existent.

I can’t see any other possibilities, but there may be some other permutations of the ones I’ve listed.

It’s interesting to note the rhetoric put forth in discussion on this item. Fifth district councilman Patrick Nichting mentioned that council members recently took a ride on the Kellar Branch line (within the past few weeks) and derailed along the way. From the conversation, it sounded like CIRY was providing the ride. Nichting also noted the thick vegetation overgrowth and asked CIRY how long it had been this way; they answered, “long before we got here.” The clear implication was that Pioneer had not adequately cared for the line when they were operating it.

Yet Pioneer was able to successfully run trains up the Kellar Branch without incident the entire time they were servicing Carver Lumber and other shippers along the line. It was CIRY who had a runaway train that endangered the lives of Peorians and never provided service. It was CIRY who stopped maintaining the tracks. And it’s CIRY who withdrew their petition to discontinue service because they wanted to start operating the line themselves. If the track were really in such irreparable condition, why would they take such an action? If the western spur were sufficient, why did they withdraw their petition?

Nichting also brought up the tired old excuse that there are portions of the right-of-way that aren’t wide enough for the rail and trail to run concurrently “without adding bridges.” This is the Park District’s logic that Nichting is parroting. There are ways to hurdle these types of obstacles if anyone would be willing to compromise. One obvious idea is to simply work around those areas by running the trail out to the side of the street. It wouldn’t have to be an on-street bike route; the trail could run along the city’s easement parallel to the street, thus still allowing the park district to meet the requirements for their grant money. It would be no different than what East Peoria did with their trail to avoid the trailer park along route 150.

Councilman Morris brought up the council’s history of supporting a recreational trail through town. Yes, historically that has been true. But times have changed. The STB has ruled. They’re not going to allow the line to be turned into a recreational trail. It’s time to compromise.

City Manager Randy Oliver offered to bring back options to the council at the February 13 council meeting. It will be interesting to see what transpires between now and then.

Update: The Journal Star has filed its report. Elaine Hopkins was a little confused when she wrote this statement:

Pioneer’s successor, Central Illinois Railroad Company, has withdrawn its petition to discontinue service over the line, with the board granting the withdrawal. That withdrawal is another necessary step in trail development.

No, the petition was a necessary step in trail development. The withdrawal of that petition was a death knell for trail development.

There’s a lot of hopeful talk and disinformation coming from trail enthusiasts. On WMBD-AM 1470 this morning, they just wrote off Pioneer’s quote to repair the rail line, claiming that it would cost $10-20 million to fix it up and saying the city can’t afford it. The truth is, far from having to spend millions of dollars, the city could gain over a half-million dollars by selling the line to Pioneer; their offer to purchase the line and grant a 999-year lease to the Park District to share the right-of-way for a trail still stands. The city can have both and make money in the process if they stop listening to the uninformed, tunnel-vision trail enthusiasts.

Hinton: I listen to no one but myself

Clare Jellick has a very telling quote on her blog from District 150 Superintendent Ken Hinton. The article is about Hinton changing his mind regarding Edison schools, and Clare asked him if he changed his mind because of “the outcry from parents last year.” His answer?

“That wasn’t a factor at all,” Hinton said. “I don’t want to offend anyone, but I come to a position based on my own observation excluding outside influence.”

Isn’t that obvious? Kind of makes you wonder why he spent all that time last year asking for public input on the school siting issue. As we suspected, it was evidently just for show.

Obama throws his hat in the ring… almost

Senator Barack ObamaAs if we didn’t see this one coming, Barack Obama officially announced on his website that he’s taking the first step toward a presidential run in 2008. The first step is to create a “presidential exploratory committee.” He says he’s not making this decision based on “media hype or personal ambition alone,” but rather because he thinks we need “a change in our politics.”

And so it begins. The usual rhetoric is there — Washington leaders “seem incapable of working together,” politics has become “bitter and partisan, [all] gummed up by money and influence.” And, of course, Obama can change all that… with your help. It’s a Pollyanna press release.

Right now, he’s going to see how much support he has, then “share his plans” on February 10. The New York Times reports that “aides said the announcement speech next month would outline more specifics.” That’s when the rubber meets the road. When you start taking stands on controversial issues, it’s hard to transcend “bitter and partisan” Washington politics.

Technically, his hat isn’t really in the ring until he declares himself a candidate; but let’s face it, that’s pretty likely to happen on February 10. Already, the media are having a field day. BBC News practically has him elected. CNN is surprisingly more circumspect. Let the circus begin!

Click on “Show More” for the full press release (or read it on Obama’s website):

|inline

Long time, no hear from museum group

It was November 17 when we last heard from the museum collaboration group. Jim Richerson announced a $1 million gift toward the IHSA Hall of Fame portion of the museum from Country Insurance. The Journal Star also had this quote:

“We’re still in the silent portion of our fund drive,” Richerson said. “What we’re hoping for is that gifts like the one from Country Insurance will now inspire others to come aboard.”

Hmmm, the “silent portion” of the fund drive? Readers may remember last fall Kathleen Woith of Lakeview Museum was answering some of our questions about the museum(“Museum Partners answer readers’ questions (Pt. 1)”). Did anyone notice there was never a “Part 2” to that post? That’s because I never received any further information from Ms. Woith, unfortunately. She said she was waiting to hear back from some other people on some of the questions, but then I never heard from her again.

In fairness, from reading the comments, it didn’t look like she was changing anyone’s mind about the museum, so perhaps she felt it wasn’t worth the time. As one commenter said, “some answers just beg more questions.” Still, I will try to follow up on the original unanswered questions and try to bring that series of posts to a resolution.

Museum Square