Peoria County is looking for one. Jonathan Ahl is reporting on his blog that the new $300,000 Peoria County morgue was supposed to open a year ago, but has been held up by the county’s inability to find a forensic pathologist who would work for the salary the county is offering.
It’s a shame. Here they have a huge empty building that people are just dying to get into…. Sorry, I couldn’t resist….
(If you’d like to comment on this story, please go to Jonathan’s blog.)
Since Peoria überblogger Billy Dennis won’t stoop to being interviewed by WHOI news, Laura Petelle (aka Eyebrows McGee) will be the guest blogger instead. Be sure to check out the live segment during the 5:00 news on channel 19 (channel 8 on Insight Cable). Discussions with Laura are always interesting.
Also, I’ve been rather impressed with WHOI’s news coverage lately (not just because of the Big Hollow story, either). They’ve been reporting on stories I don’t see in any other media. For example, not too long ago, they did investigative reporting on sex offenders living too close to District 150 schools, and just recently they investigated crime in Peoria’s parks.
Jennifer Davis reports today on Gary Sandberg’s disputes with the city over property he owns. He had to pay fines before he was sworn in as an at-large councilman or else face the possibility of being removed for being in violation of state law 65 ILCS 5/3.1‑10‑5(b). That statute states you can’t hold municipal office if you’re “in arrears in the payment of a tax or other indebtedness.” Sandberg owed a couple of fines ($110 for the city to clean up what he claims were properly-stored construction materials on his property, and $500 for not registering another property he owns as rental property; he claims it’s owner occupied) which he paid off just before being sworn in a couple weeks ago.
Having heard both sides of the story on the the city clean-up item, I feel that Gary should have paid those fines a long time ago (the incident happened in 2004). He still could have fought against any due-process violations he felt were made without withholding payment.
The housing issue is interesting, though. Sandberg claims he occupies the house at 1723 N. Bigelow at least part-time, but the city says otherwise. Because the property doesn’t have water or electric service, it was determined by the city that it is not occupied and therefore has to be registered. I think that sounds logical and reasonable. While a case could be made that you don’t have to have electricity to occupy a house, I think you definitely need to have water, if for no other reason than to flush the toilet.
But here’s the issue. I can find no definition of “occupied” or “occupancy” in the municipal code that requires electric or water service. Can anyone find it for me? And is electric and water service the only things necessary for a house to be considered “occupied”?
I ask only because 616 Phelps isn’t registered with the city. That’s the supposed city residence of Streets Department manager David Haste. That home apparently has water and electricity, but no stove. No stove means no cooking. Unlike the absence of a clear definition of “occupied,” the code is pretty clear on what constitutes a “dwelling.”
The definition of “dwelling” in Sec. 5-520 states (emphasis mine), “Dwelling shall mean any enclosed space which is wholly or partially habitable by human occupants, and is used or intended to be used for living, sleeping, cooking and eating….” So, why is it that Haste can be considered in compliance with registration requirements even though his house isn’t even a “dwelling” by definition?
My point here is not that Sandberg should get off the hook because others got off the hook. My point is that enforcement of these ordinances should be evenhanded, and they’re not. There are different rules for different people.
When Haste is found to not meet city residency requirements, it’s overlooked. But when Sandberg is found in violation of property registration requirements, he’s threatened with being unseated if he doesn’t pay.
I guess it all depends on who’s got your back.
The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) recently released a report titled, “America’s Freight Challenge,” that claims freight transportation is going to grow significantly and the nation’s surface transportation system is ill-prepared to handle it. They say this increased congestion of roads, rails, and ports amounts to a tariff on trade:
This congestion increases travel times, it disrupts tightly planned supply chains, and it raises the costs of doing business with America and in America.
The effect of rising congestion is like a tax—only it escalates every year without a vote of the people. This congestion tax can be repealed only if the United States adopts a new vision and new strategy for a global, 21st Century American transportation system.
The report goes on to document the limitations of America’s highways, rail network, and water ports and especially the connections between them (intermodal transportation), show trends in the growth of freight transportation, and make recommendations to take a multi-modal approach to improving the nation’s surface transportation system.
There are many interesting points in the report, but I want to pick out those dealing with freight and passenger rail because there seems to be some anti-rail sentiment around Peoria. I don’t think this sentiment is pervasive, but you do see it occasionally, such as when the Kellar Branch debate comes up or when LaHood says we don’t need passenger rail here in Peoria.
In particular, I found these recommendations interesting (emphasis mine):
Recommendation 1. Meeting America’s surface transportation needs for the future will require a strategy which goes well beyond just “more of the same.†It will require a multi-modal approach, which preserves what has been built to date, improves system performance, and adds substantial capacity in highways, transit, freight rail, intercity passenger rail, and better connections to ports, airports, and border crossings.
Recommendation 6. Establish a National Rail Transportation Policy. Intercity passenger and freight rail are critical components of the nation’s surface transportation system. Current rail capacity is not sufficient to meet passenger or freight needs. It is imperative that a national rail policy be developed which addresses institutional roles, passenger and freight capacity, and new non-Highway Trust Fund funding and financing options.
Better intercity rail means fewer cars on the streets, and more freight rail means fewer trucks on the streets — that all adds up to cost savings on road repairs. The report states, “The expanded rail capacity analyzed by AASHTO would remove 450 million tons of freight and 15 billion truck vehicle miles. That service would save shippers $162 billion and save highway users $238 billion over 20 years and avoid $10 billion in highway repair costs.”
This is why I think rail service needs to be beefed up in this country, not remain status quo. It’s cheaper, cleaner, and more efficient than highways. We’ll always need highways, but we can significantly reduce the size requirements and maintenance costs of them by utilizing rail as much as possible.