Just a quick comment.  Most of the Departments where 100% live within the City (such as City Manager, EEO, Legal, etc.) consist of primarily management employees who have no option but to live within the City.  It would be interesting to see the change over time since the Unions have negotiated the right for employees to live outside the City limits - the trend is an increasing number of unionized employees moving outside.

Left by Peo Proud on October 10th, 2008

Police Departments have traditionally worked best when they have been precinct or neighborhood departments… when you know the cop on the beat, when he knows who is supposed to be where , when. Not only are the people more accountable because the cops know that trouble maker’s mother and father, but so are the cops, because they can not hide behind their dark sunglasses and badges… they have names and families and everyone in the neighborhood knows it.

Being anonymous only gives you more power and we all know what power does to people.

Left by kcdad on October 10th, 2008

I agree with kcdad.  A cop who lives on his beat is a better cop, and more trusted in his community.  I think, though, rather than change residency requirements, cops should be given incentives to live in their district–either through tax rebates on property tax (when I asked Jacob about cops living in Peoria he said the #1 reason they give is Dist150) or through higher pay.

Left by James Lansberry on October 10th, 2008

Kcdad,

Talk to any local cop and they will tell you the same thing - the largest number of them, when they had to live in the city, moved to where their dollar could take them.  So what is the difference if a cop lives in the ritzy parts of town or Dunlap? 

It all comes down to the quality of the employee.  Who cares where an employee lives as long as he or she does his or her job well?  I mean, I could not care less where my primary care physician lives, so long as he provides the best health care. The same with the teachers to our children. 

Left by sctobrien on October 10th, 2008

I repeat what I have said before, it is none of the council’s business where city employees (not elected officeholders) live.  This is America.  We get to decide where we live, not the govt.  And, while I generally agree with kcedad about “beat” cops, and I think we would have less crime if we had more police presence “on the ground” as opposed to driving around burning gas,  there are numerous reasons people live where they live.  Spouses may work in other towns; they may have parents who need help; there are any number of reasons.  Nobody on the council has a right to decide which reasons are good and which are not.  The council’s only concern should be whether they do their job honestly and competently.

Left by The Mouse on October 10th, 2008

“Not only are the people more accountable because the cops know that trouble maker’s mother and father…”  Don’t you think that’s pretty antiquated?  I think the last time a parent in South Peoria made a difference in their trouble maker’s behavior b/c the cop knew them was the ’50s!

Left by ep blondie on October 10th, 2008

Agree with ep blonde.  Some of the time it’s the cop’s kid that is the trouble maker.

Left by Emtronics on October 10th, 2008

I think your perspective changes significantly if you have a stake in the quality of work that is done.  If an officer doesn’t live in the city where he/she works, he his outlook changes.  What that means exactly depends on the officer. 

I used to have a state trooper that lived a little ways down the block with his family.  He patrolled my neighborhood very vigilantly on his own time.  His interest was ensuring the neighborhood was the utmost safe for his kids.   It made a difference.  Too bad he moved away.  

Another officer that I lived near… was of the mind that when he clocked out, he wanted to be a normal person.  He never did much around the neighborhood.   Just tried to live a normal life.   He too moved away.

Left by mahkno on October 10th, 2008

Given today’s climate of so many trouble makers getting their hands on guns so easily, I wouldn’t want to live in the local neighborhood with my family if I were law enforcement. I am, as a matter of fact,  former law enforcement from another state. If I was still on the job and had a family I would not live in the local neighborhood. I would fear for my family. And as previously mentioned the government does not have a right to tell me where to live as long as I do my job and do it right.

Left by SD on October 10th, 2008

Sometimes, if you have a Peoria address, it may not actually be within the technical city limits. So, sometimes it could actually be unintentional.

Left by Angie on October 10th, 2008

Interesting, but take it a step further…
How many live withing the D150 school district?
Show me how many live in each city district.
That be interesting to know.

Left by Anon E. Mouse on October 10th, 2008

Mentioning District 150 brings up another topic.  In the 1980s (I think) Harry Whitaker wanted all 150 teachers to live in the district. Then such a restriction was even a possibility.  If you look at the addresses of today’s teachers, many live outside the district.  While I  believe their employment should not limit their choice of residence, their leaving (police, teachers, etc.) certainly has changed Peoria.  Of course, they took a considerable number of people with them.

Left by Sharon Crews on October 10th, 2008

epblondie, you are absolutely correct. Those parents in the south end are terrible people. They are less than human, less than animals. They don’t care about their children like the suburban parents do. All they care about is hitting that next crack pipe. How come we don’t invade the south end and liberate all those poor parentless children?

Left by kcdad on October 10th, 2008

As a city employee who chooses to live in Peoria, I can tell you that the number one reason people move out is District 150. Plain and simple. We have had plenty of discussions and heated arguments about living in the city and the number 1 reason by a long shot is D150.

Left by A City Employee on October 10th, 2008

I don’t think that feeling is unique to city employees.  At the two places I’ve worked in Peoria, those who don’t live in Peoria have said it is because of D150.  The couple of people who do live in Peoria do not have children.

Left by BeanCounter on October 10th, 2008

I left a comment above that I’m currently regretting, and want to publicly apologize to Councilman Jacobs for how that came across.  The conversation was at a neighborhood association meeting and my memory of it may be incorrect, and even my memory is that George said “schools” not district 150, though I associate those two. 

I forgot that CJs blog actually has readers (contrary to my blog) and that it may have looked like Councilman Jacobs was defaming the school system here, and he was not.  Even assuming my memory of the conversation is accurate, he was only reporting what police officers had said, not making an assessment of the school system.

I have a great deal of respect for George and even when I disagree with his decisions, he is an honorable man and I am glad that he sits on the council.  George, please forgive me for not considering how this may have harmed your reputation in making the glib comment above.  It was complete carelessness on my part.

To reiterate, I have never heard George make a statement, public or private, that was in any way negative about the local schools or that expressed a negative opinion about the schools or the district.

Left by James Lansberry on October 10th, 2008

I think it is unfair to lump all Dist. 150 schools together.  Some schools produce much different results than others.  Whittier, Kellar, Charter Oak, remain strong primary schools.  Lindbergh, Washington, Mark Bills seem to be getting the job done as well, and Richwoods is still  turning out impressive grads that go on to top universities.  Oh, wait, no — a correlation between higher income neighborhoods, parenting, and the higher performing schools, how astonishing!

Left by Frustrated on October 10th, 2008

Frustrated, that’s the heated arguments we have had. As I said, my wife and I choose to live in the city and one reason is we love the school our kids go too. That being said, there are some schools in town I wouldn’t send my kids too. My wife and I were just talking a couple weeks ago how D150 is one entity but it seems EVERY school is different and should it not all be the same.  Either way, it’s the number one reason people move out.

Left by A City Employee on October 11th, 2008

Frustrated is right.  All school are different but that has little to do with teachers or administrators.  It has to do with parents (and it would seem from all statistics with economic levels).  Does anybody really believe that if the Dunlap (or Peoria Christian or Notre Dame) teachers and the Manual teachers switched places, that the academic status of both schools would reverse?   District 150 (actually NCLB) is right now operating under the premise that switching faculty at Manual will make the difference. I sincerely doubt it–but there will be proof within the next five years.  As I’ve said before–and I will keep saying it–I believe that if 150 concentrated only on ways to reduce the discipline problems there would be a marked change in academic status.  Then the teachers could do their jobs and, also, parents would not be leaving the district.  As Jeff Adkins-Dutro suggested at the last board meeting, the district should build a quality alternative high school for the worst of the discipline problems–not a place of punishment but a place where those students can get the help they need.  Most of them make trouble in the classroom because they are so behind academically that they cannot even read the texts.  
Also, please understand that I’m not at all saying that all the parents of children in the failing schools do not care about their children and are not cooperative with the school, etc.  I do believe that the district does need to find ways to make parents accountable for their children’s behaviors–and the contracts that parents (teachers and students) are asked to sign at Manual won’t do the job because no one–I mean no one–has figured out what to do if the parents and students do not live up to the contract.  They will find ways to make the teachers accountable, however.

Left by Sharon Crews on October 11th, 2008

Those kids from Kellar (like me!) and the others you mentioned would do just as well in college or work if they never took one step into a public school. The school is not the deciding factor, it is the culture they are raised in. There is no argument there. But if schools are going to do something, they need to do it for ALL the students. (You could transform these schools into dry cleaners and get the same result we are spending billions on now.)
The only thing good that ever came out of a public school was some awfully terrific teachers… not all of them, mind you, but those like Mary Greener and Joe Diaz, Joyce VanDeVoorde and Kathy Knezovich… AND some long lasting friendshipps and associations.

Left by kcdad on October 11th, 2008

City Employee - I am glad you have chosen to stay.  I am afraid, that fewer and fewer families do, even in those neighborhoods that feed into successful schools.  Focusing always on the students that are not making the grade is no enticement for families that are looking for a strong academic program for their children to remain in the community.

Left by Frustrated on October 11th, 2008

[...] has already posted about a report 1 in 4 city employees don’t live in the city. There’s already been a ton of [...]

Left by Local: Cops want good schools just like everyone else | Peoria Pundit on October 11th, 2008

CJ, I wonder how many city employees are aware that downpayment assistance is available from the city of Peoria to qualified full-time city employee’s that are also first time home-buyers? The city of Peoria will provide from $3 - 5K in grant money for qualified purchases within the city of Peoria. I just learned of this at a COP sponsored seminar last week. How timely!

Left by diane vespa on October 11th, 2008

Fulltime city employee AND a first time homebuyer….  I bet that is a rarity.

Left by kcdad on October 12th, 2008

Actually kcdad, I was rather curious about that myself. I wonder how many of these grants are available and how many are actually used. If the COP opened this up to all city employees on a “first come first serve” basis it could bring some of our city personnel back in to the fold. I might mention that to the grant coordinator.

Left by diane vespa on October 12th, 2008

@diane @ kcdad — Usually these types of grants are from Federal grants which require the downpayment assistance only goes to first time homebuyers.  The City can’t open it up wider unless you want them to spend a portion of their own capital/operation budget on homebuyer grants for their employees.

Left by bbbb on October 13th, 2008

bbbb- I think the employer program is city funded, not a federal grant. There is Federal grant money as well, but this is something different. I’ll be blogging soon about the Federal grants.

Left by diane vespa on October 13th, 2008

Diane Vespa please contact me. 687-3513

Left by SD on October 13th, 2008