Daily Archives: June 19, 2007

City Council, City of Peoria, Heart of Peoria Plan, HOPC

Heart of Peoria Commission given another month to live

The City Council tonight deferred action on the fate of the Heart of Peoria Commission (HOPC) until July 24. There was a meeting tonight at 4:30 that included Councilwoman Barbara Van Auken (2nd Dist.), HOPC Chairman Bill Washkuhn, Councilman Patrick Nichting (5th Dist.), and Mayor Jim Ardis. Although an effort was made to resolve the issue in time for tonight’s meeting, they did not reach a consensus, hence the item was deferred.

Van Auken said that several ideas were discussed, but didn’t elaborate on them. I imagine the HOPC will hear about them at our next meeting which is currently scheduled for this Friday, June 22, at 8 a.m., City Hall, fourth floor.

Councilman Gary Sandberg was the lone vote against the deferral. He wants to see the Heart of Peoria Commissioners appointed to other commissions — especially the Planning Commission, which is working on the Comprehensive Plan right now — regardless of whether HOPC is retained. This deferral delays that possible action another month.

In other Heart of Peoria Plan news, I had the opportunity to talk to Nichting briefly after the council meeting tonight. I asked him what he thought of the HOP Plan. He mentioned that he had voted for it and thought it had some good ideas. But he feels that ultimately the market decides which ideas will and won’t work — that there are certain market realities we have to acknowledge. He didn’t elaborate on that idea much further.

Of course one has to take the market into consideration. Just because a city comes up with good ideas does not guarantee that entrepreneurs will flock to fulfill them. However, on the flip side, it should be pointed out that Euclidean zoning did not come about by free market forces. It was imposed by cities upon developers to give us the kind of cities we see today. So, if anyone were to argue that segregated land use and automobile-dependent city planning were the result of popular demand by developers, they’re sorely mistaken. Zoning is all about cities deciding what they want their cities to look like rather than developers having free rein. New Urbanism is, among other things, a new and improved zoning plan that’s rooted in the tried and true principles of strong city planning.

Peoria Journal Star

Journal Star says homicides total 10 now

8 Comments

A while back I criticized the paper for labeling a police action a “homicide.” Today, it appears they have seen the light:

Lewis’ slaying is the city’s tenth. Not included in the list of deaths is the fatal shooting by police of 26-year-old James E. Lee. Lee was killed after he reportedly refused to drop a handgun when police responded to his Peoria home on a domestic disturbance call on April 26.

That’s more like it. Thanks to alert reader PeoriaIllinoisan for bringing this to my attention.

Nation/World

UMC social principles confusing

13 Comments

UMC LogoThe United Methodist Church is concerned about Caterpillar selling bulldozers to Israel because they’re “used in an immoral way, such as bulldozing the homes of suspected terrorists, to help Israel maintain control over the West Bank and Gaza,” according to the Journal Star. The denomination’s General Board of Pension and Health Benefits owns 60,189 shares of Cat stock with a market value of just over $4 million according to this March 31, 2007, report on their website.

However, also on that report I see that they own 767,746 shares of Wal-Mart stock with a market value of over $36 million. What do the denomination’s “social principles” say about that? Unlike Caterpillar, which has no control over how its products are used once it sells them, Wal-Mart is directly responsible for this (courtesy of WakeUpWalmart.com):

Despite $10 billion in profit last year, more than 600,000 Wal-Mart workers and their families struggle with no company-provided health care. Even more troubling, nearly 1 out of every 2 children of Wal-Mart workers lives without health care or relies on a public program. Wal-Mart has repeatedly broken child labor laws. Wal-Mart is being sued by 1.5 million female employees for discrimination. And, Wal-Mart continues to pay poverty-level wages, forcing many of its workers to make the impossible choice between rent and health care.

And this (courtesy of WalmartWatch.com; also see this PDF from ChinaLaborWatch.org):

A China Labor Watch report detailed the mistreatment of workers in a factory making small toys for Wal-Mart. As of early December 2005, violations against workers at the Lungcheong factory were as follows: the systematic denial of maternity leave, work-related injuries leading to termination, illegally denying health insurance, mandatory overtime work, insane quotas and employing underage workers.

This Cat divestment threat looks like a political statement masquerading as social concern.

Peoria Public Schools

Royster lawsuit evaporates

3 Comments

Kay RoysterI think everyone knows by now that former District 150 superintendent Kay Royster dropped her racial discrimination suit against the district. According to the Journal Star:

…a one-paragraph stipulation was filed Monday afternoon, stating both sides agree to dismiss the case. No mention was made to the merits of the case or any of the allegations.

I can’t help but wonder if this has any connection to the Alicia Butler scandal. Butler was going to testify as a witness for Royster’s claim, but she would have been a pretty easy witness to discredit due to the highly-publicized allegations that she did not receive the degrees from Bradley that she claimed on her resumé. Without her as an “inside” witness, could that have doomed Royster’s case? And could that be why an anonymous tipster told the Journal Star about the questionable resumé in the first place? Yes, I know it’s a conspiracy theory, but it is plausible.

I’m also wondering who’s paying the legal bills for District 150. According to the Journal Star, “Each party would bear its own cost. For District 150, that’s about $75,000 in legal fees.” But according to WEEK.com, “Attorney Dave Walvoord says no taxpayer dollars were spent in the matter.” So, who’s paying the $75,000?