« Mission Accomplished: $98,000 squandered
On the other hand, there’s a reason for cynicism… »

Historic preservation vote deferred

Park District LogoTwo citizens petitioned the City’s Historic Preservation Commission to designate all of Glen Oak Park an historic landmark. The commission wasn’t ready to take on the whole park, but they did recommend landmarking several specific structures within the park. The City Council has the final decision on whether to landmark the nine items, so it was on the agenda Tuesday.

The Council decided to defer action on it until June 5. The stated reason was to allow the Park District time to get their own historic preservation policy and process in place over the next three Park Board meetings (they meet every other week). The next Park Board meeting is tonight, and historic preservation is on the agenda.

I have to side with the Park District on the historic-preservation issue. It would be one thing if citizens had been going to park board meetings, contacting their park board representatives, or otherwise engaging the elected park board officials to preserve Glen Oak Park — all to no avail. But according to Park Board President Tim Cassidy, no one has contacted the board about their concerns with Glen Oak Park.

It’s easy to take the cynic’s defense (”they wouldn’t have listened to us anyway”), but that really doesn’t fly with me. You may suspect they wouldn’t have listened or taken action, but you can never really know until you try. That should have been the first avenue of advocacy for Glen Oak Park. Instead, the park board was bypassed completely. I don’t think that’s fair.

Another thing that bothers me about the historic-preservation option is something Cassidy did not mention at the council meeting, but did mention at the Uplands candidates forum a couple weeks ago. He pointed out that once the structures in the park are designated as landmarks, future decisions about changes to those landmarks never go before the council again, but before the Historic Preservation Commission. That commission has the final administrative authority to approve or deny improvement and alteration requests. So then you would have a sovereign, elected body (the park board) subject to an unelected, appointed body (the city’s Historic Preservation Commission) for structures under the Park District’s stewardship. That arrangement is untenable to me.

The situation now has the City holding the Park District’s feet to the fire to follow through on their stated historic preservation plans in a timely manner. Hopefully that will be all that’s necessary, and on June 5 the council request can be voted down.

Posted by C. J. Summers on Wednesday, April 25th, 2007.

15 Responses to “Historic preservation vote deferred”

“But according to Park Board President Tim Cassidy, no one has contacted the board about their concerns with Glen Oak Park….Instead, the park board was bypassed completely. I don’t think that’s fair.”

I don’t know, why should anyone have to say anything? Isn’t it their JOB and PURPOSE to ensure that the park is maintained? Or is their job to just let GOP erode and just keep putting up “KEEP OUT, NO ADMITTANCE” signs? Is that good stewardship? I’m sure if Scott Janz let his properties deteriotate as bad as some sections of GOP, he’d be getting a kick in the pants from the city.

Left by Chef Kevin on April 25th, 2007

[...] I just want the Park District to do the right thing.  I agree wholeheartedly with CJ Summers who says this: “The situation now has the City holding the Park District’s feet to the fire to follow [...]

Left by Peoria Illinoisan » Too busy to blog on April 25th, 2007

Park board members seem to be rarely engaged by citizens, too bad since they seem much more accessable than many other elected officials. The park district flies under the radar so to speak, which is surprising given the amount of money they control. It is about time to do some changing of the guard over there, too many people have been there too long and there needs to be a shake up. It may all be too little too late.

Left by raoul duke on April 25th, 2007

I beg to differ that no one has contacted the park district. People have come forward to many park board meetings and voiced concern over the Glen oak park assets. It just fell on deaf ears. Now that a few people took it to another board, the park district is listning now. if the citzens would not brought to everyones attention the bridge would be allowed to fall down, cannon would be lost, and whow knows what would be next to be lost to neglect. As to the zoo, it marches forward. The public had the chance to voice concerns at hearings. Just know that the courts by the entrance will go away along with 1 ball dimond. Remember that ALL of Glen Oak Park now is zoned as a zoo.

Left by Martin Palmer on April 25th, 2007

Chef, I agree. This isn’t something that citizens should have to tell them. It’s the fundamental purpose of their existence. It would be like your boss having to come to you and say, “hey, you know you’re supposed to be cooking.” Gee, ya think? Nevertheless, they are an elected body, and they should be approached first to rectify the situation.

Martin, if Cassidy was mistaken in his statements and residents have indeed been complaining to no avail, then the Park Board is doubly at fault.

Ultimately, what is needed is the Park Board to come under greater scrutiny. One thing that would help is if the meetings were televised like the school board and city council meetings. We should begin pressuring them to be more transparent. The other thing would be to have candidates run against board members who don’t vote consistently with community values. This last election, the trustees ran completely unopposed.

Left by C. J. Summers on April 25th, 2007

I was thinking about how the school board and park district meetings need to be televised as I was watching the city council last night. I like being able to watch in my lounge clothes and change the channel when they keep beating a dead horse. Is there a possibility that someone could record them and post them on YouTube? If someone has the knowledge/equipment, I have the time to go to the meetings.

Left by BeanCounter on April 25th, 2007

The regular school board meetings are televised on Insight on Monday nights, but I believe they’re on channel 17, not 22 like the city council.

Left by C. J. Summers on April 25th, 2007

Thanks for the heads up; I’ve only checked out 22.

Left by BeanCounter on April 25th, 2007

Perhaps broadcast over the air on digital, i.e. 25.2 or 47.3 ect.

Left by raoul duke on April 25th, 2007

Raoul — funny you should mention that! I was just looking at this site which suggests the same idea for all government meetings. Not a bad idea at all!

Left by C. J. Summers on April 25th, 2007

CJ: Citizens have gone to the PPD, also expressed their opinions via Trustees about various topics — myself — Riverplex, Ingersoll Statue, parapet, zoo expansion, Morton Square Park … it never seems to be the right combination to get the Trustees to notice enough to take action unless a bigger force is behind the citizen, this time it was the HPC and City of Peoria.

Went to hearings about the zoo expansion — talked about the parapet (I had even posted it at Rally Peoria) last year and still no turn around for funding — only continuing along the demolition by neglect path.

PPD Budget is close to $50 million now and usually the meetings last 30-60 minutes unless it is a ‘contested’ issue.

It is very sad that Peoria continues along the path of — out with the old — loss of our history — and in with the new.

Left by Karrie E. Alms on April 25th, 2007

Why does the PPD have to listen to anyone? They have a solid block of four votes and that is all they need to do anything they want. The addition of a new face in a chair changes nothing if what I reade and heard is true. It’s too late anyway. Everthing is underway and will not stop, donations or not, because they have along way to go before they reach thier limits to sell bonds. Has all the upgrades they promised for Sommer Park; they received a large state grant $225,000.00 I believe last year (I’ve temporarily misplaced my file)started yet or will the grant money be used elsewhere?

Left by merle widmer on April 25th, 2007

Why is it that Peoria always runs on a crisis mode? The Park District and the City Council and other bodies are charged with certain ideals and rules and when they don’t carry them out we have to wait until everything is in crisis before anything is done about it. Evidently we are not doing a good job of electing our representatives. The citizens should never have had to mention the poor condition of Glen Oak Park or any other park in our area. The only mention we should ever have to make is how beautiful things are, how well preserved they are and what a good job the Park District is doing for our benefit. I think their recreation projects are wonderful and outstanding for the state, but that doesn’t excuse them for not preserving our past. The basis of which Peoria was founded. We should not have to ever “complain” to either the Park District, or the City Council or the historic preservation commission or any one else. These bodies should be doing the job we elected them or appointed them for in the first place. Wake up Peoria, we are being ruled by a few. They are not representing us, they are ruling us.

Left by Sharon Deckard on April 25th, 2007

Really though Sharon,has anyone done ANYTHING about preserving Peoria’s past…? I mean REALLY! The PPD is not the only official body who has dropped the ball.

Left by Big Mountain on April 26th, 2007

Sharon - I think we have elected the best officials we could based upon the candidate slate. Isn’t the real problem more about finding and convincing good people to run? Even on a national level, we don’t get the candidates we really want, so why should the local and state levels be any different?

I can think of a couple of really good people to challenge Mary Spangler (BOE) in two years, and there are others who would make excellent park board or city council members. But, they won’t run. How do we change their minds?

Left by PrairieCelt on April 26th, 2007