WAOE adds new sub-channel

There’s a new TV channel in Peoria. Antenna TV, a new network owned and operated by Tribune Broadcasting in Chicago, is now being broadcast over-the-air on channel 59.2, a sub-channel of WAOE. “The network features classic television programs and favorite movies,” and just debuted the beginning of this year according to the network’s website. I just discovered it over the weekend as it was showing “The Partridge Family,” “The Monkees,” and other classic shows.

WAOE (“my59”) is an affiliate of MyNetworkTV, owned by Four Seasons Broadcasting, and operated by Granite Broadcasting. Granite Broadcasting is reportedly going to impose its “last, best, and final” contract on union employees at its Peoria stations this Saturday, July 16.

See also: Steve Tarter’s blog entry.

Peoria’s peculiar priorities

The City has set its “top” and “high” strategic priorities at its latest planning session, reports the Journal Star:

Of 27 possibilities, the council labeled only six policy priorities as “top” priorities for 2011-12. Those included focusing on code enforcement performance and direction, developing a school strategy and action plan, focusing on short-term shared services with Peoria County, prioritizing city services, framing the city’s economic development strategy, and the redevelopment of the Hotel Pere Marquette into the $102 million Marriott Hotel project.

What do you think, Peoria? Are these your top priorities?

I agree with the focus on code enforcement, shared services with Peoria County, and prioritizing city services. I don’t know what “framing” our economic development strategy entails, but if it’s a discussion about what we will and won’t do to attract business, I think it would be a worthy discussion.

I question the value of spending city resources to develop a “school strategy and action plan.” We have separate public bodies that administer the public schools in this area. It seems redundant to me that the City would now be spending its time discussing schools, too. What’s next? Will area school districts start spending their time on a city strategy and action plan?

And then there’s the Wonderful Development. Despite the developer’s inability to meet any deadlines in either of the redevelopment agreements he’s inked with the City, and despite the fact that he’s having trouble paying his bills across the river, the City Council is apparently still just itching to give him $37 million of taxpayer money. Regardless of who is developing it, this is not a top priority in this city right now. The redevelopment of the Pere Marquette should be done by the private sector, just like the former Holiday Inn City Centre was recently transformed into a Four Points by Sheraton without any City assistance. The City has no business getting into the hotel business; they should let it go and focus on improving their core services instead.

The council also prioritized a management agenda for the coming year. Of the 14 items, the council selected “top” priorities for engaging the community on appropriate behavior, developing a neighborhood crime reduction strategy, containing health care costs, a community investment plan for capital and equipment, study fees, and reorganize the city.

That’s all well and good, but the real test of whether it’s a “top” priority will come at budget time. Will these priorities really be reflected in the budget? Or will the increased debt service created by non-essential items like the Wonderful Development crowd out the community’s top needs?

Developing a strategy for a four-year state university leaped to a “high priority” status for the City Council to address…. [City Manager Patrick Urich] said in the next six months, the council will have discussions with state lawmakers and other state officials about whether there is an opportunity for Peoria to land a four-year public school…. Other “high priority” polices included directing an early retirement program for city employees, updating financial policies, providing more assistance for businesses, developing a strategy for landlord and tenant accountability, and advocating for a rail link between Peoria and Normal.

I’m befuddled by this attempt to attract a new four-year public university. Where did this idea come from? How long has the council been talking about it? How did this rise to the top of the list?

I like the idea of working on a strategy for landlord and tenant accountability; hopefully something positive will come from that. Updating financial policies is certainly a good idea, assuming they strengthen fiscally-conservative policies.

I think we currently provide more than enough “assistance for businesses.” We regularly waive our zoning regulations to the detriment of surrounding homeowners. We use the Enterprise Zone to benefit businesses all over the city instead of the depressed areas it was intended to help. We loan taxpayer money to businesses that doesn’t always get repaid, and we give away no small amount of tax money as a direct subsidy/grant (e.g., $37 million for the Wonderful Development). We can’t afford the “assistance for businesses” we’re providing now; how can we afford to do more? Oh, that’s right, we’ll cut police, fire, road maintenance, and other basic services.

And finally, they’re now advocating for a rail link with Normal. I applaud the priority to reestablish rail service to Peoria, but the rail link needs to be with Chicago, not Normal. Nobody wants to take a train to Normal. Such a link would not attract enough ridership to be feasible. I’ve written on this topic at length before; you can read more here and here.

Quiz: What did the desk clerk know of Peoria? (UPDATED)

I was recently on vacation with my family when we stopped at a hotel in Atlanta, Georgia. The front desk clerk asked me where I was from, and I told him Peoria. What question do you think the desk clerk asked me next?

A. “Peoria? Isn’t that Richard’s home town?”
B. “Peoria? Isn’t that the place people like to make fun of?”
C. “Peoria? Do you work for Caterpillar?”
D. “Peoria? Home of Big Al’s?”
E. “Peoria? Is that where they’re building that new Global Immersion Theater?”

UPDATE: The answer is A. The conversation went like this:

“Where are y’all from?”

“Peoria, Illinois.”

“Peoria? Isn’t that Richard’s home town?”

“Yes, yes it is. He wasn’t too proud of his home town, though.”

“Yeah, born in a whorehouse he said, but was that true or just part of his act?” he asked rhetorically. “He was a very multi-talented man.”

Public education ain’t what it used to be

Readin’, writin’, and ‘rithmetic. Two out of three ain’t bad for us Illinoisans:

Illinois high school juniors no longer will be tested on writing skills during the state’s standardized tests every spring, eliminating the last Illinois writing exam and shaving about $2.4 million amid budgetary shortfalls…. “Good teachers, good schools, good principals don’t need a test,” said Barbara Kato, director of the Chicago Area Writing Project. “But the problem is, without the test, the focus on writing as a whole ends up taking a back seat.” [Source: Chicago Tribune]

R U thinking wht Im thinking?

Redistricting committee forwards Map #12 to full Council

The City Council’s redistricting committee voted to recommend Map #12 to the full Council for discussion:

(Click on map for larger image)

I was out of town and unable to attend the meeting. But the Journal Star reports the map was approved by a 3-1 vote. Voting in favor were Barbara Van Auken (2nd Dist.), Tim Riggenbach (3rd Dist.), and Bill Spears (4th Dist.). Dan Irving (5th Dist.) voted against the map, and Clyde Gulley (1st Dist.) “was absent from the vote.”

As mentioned in a previous post, this map would move the West Bluff into the first district (from the second), and move downtown Peoria — including the Warehouse District — to the third district (from the first). The second district boundary has moved to the north. And north Peoria is more evenly divided between the fourth and fifth districts.

Spears, the chairman of the redistricting committee, reportedly said that the map, “if it’s approved by the council or not, will return to the committee for further public discussion,” after it’s discussed by the full Council.

What are your thoughts on the proposed new boundaries?

Butler new D150 Board president

From the Journal Star:

District 150 School Board Vice President Linda Butler was elected Friday as president of the board, which again passed over longtime member Martha Ross.

Ross has been on the School Board for nine years, longer than any other member. After Friday’s 4-2 vote, she said the practice of selecting a board president was “unfair” and “biased.”

“We as a board are supposed to model how we want our children to perform. We want our children to treat each other fairly … but yet I really feel that is not what is happening with this board and it is a personal feeling that I have not been treated fairly for whatever reason,” Ross said during the meeting, adding that “it has the appearance in this community as being discriminatory and biased.” […]

“I’m not upset because I know who I am as a person and I know what I’ve contributed to this community in the last 30 years,” she said, later adding “but If there was a spirit of fairness, I would’ve had my turn.”

I think it’s painfully clear that the other board members simply do not have confidence in Martha Ross as a leader. There may have been some question over whether this was race-based in the past, but given that the last two superintendents the board has hired have been black, and now the new school board president is black, I really don’t see how that argument holds water.

I don’t see anything in the school code that says the board is obligated to elect as president the member with the most seniority. I don’t see anything in the school code that says every board member is guaranteed a turn as president. All the school code says is, “The president of the board of education shall be elected by the members thereof from among their number and serve for 2 years…” (105 ILCS 5/10-13).

If fairness is defined as “conformity with rules or standards,” then this election was fair. If Ross believes that every board member should have a “turn,” then she should take her beef to the state legislature and lobby for a change in the school code. But calling your fellow board members biased, unfair, and discriminatory every time you lose an election is probably not the best way to secure their confidence and votes in the future.

More kids being kids (UPDATED 2x)

Remember when we were kids, and how much fun it was to point fireworks at police officers and firefighters and shoot them off?

What, you didn’t do that? Well, that’s just the latest incident of kids being kids here in Peoria:

A “major incident” involving a large group of people shooting fireworks at police and firefighters occurred near the Taft Homes just before 10 p.m. Sunday, about the same time the fireworks show on the riverfront was ending.

Police had to briefly shut down Adams and Eaton streets, near Taft, as they dispersed the large crowds.

No officers or firefighters were injured, dispatchers said on the radio.

At one point, police were ordered to tell those in the crowd to go into their apartments, leave or be arrested for unlawful assembly.

I’m sure it was just a party that was letting out, and this large group was on its way home, having a little fun. There was no property damage or injuries, so there’s no reason for concern. In fact, I wonder if the fireworks were really being shot at police and fire personnel at all, given that there are no interviews with neighbors who corroborate that story.

[/sarcasm]

UPDATE: Another news source in town — 1470 WMBD — is now reporting that there were injuries. “One police officer was treated for minor burns and hearing loss, while police say a fire fighter was treated for hearing loss,” according to their report. They also say that police described the event as a “riot.” I question whether these reports are true, however, since the Journal Star said there weren’t any injuries. After all, the Journal Star has editors that vet these stories before printing them to make sure they’re accurate. They wouldn’t just print something they heard on police radio without verifying it with two other sources. Right?

UPDATE 2: The Journal Star has updated their story. They are now confirming that there were injuries to police officers and firefighters. And they have some video of the incident. I was most interested in the City’s plans to deal with this situation in the future:

The fire engine never made it to the burning trash bin. [Division Chief Gary] Van Voorhis said the fire was not threatening residents or property and was allowed to burn as officers assisted the engine in turning around and exiting Taft. […] Van Voorhis added that firefighters have been targeted by fireworks before, but that the magnitude of the incident Monday was unprecedented. In response, the department will review its policy of how to respond to crowded areas with fires that don’t appear to threaten anyone’s physical well-being or nearby property.

Peoria police, too, will devise enhanced security measures for Taft Homes next year, Burgess said. Revelers there have traditionally held private firework displays on the Fourth and previously made targets of police and passersby, though not to the same extent as Monday.

If I were on the City Council, I would also want to know why this “tradition” of illegal fireworks displays on PHA property and targeting of police and passersby has not been addressed before it escalated to this level. I would also want to know what effect recent cuts to police staffing levels have had in the police department’s ability to respond to this riot.

I thought real journalists got both sides of the story

I was recently taken to task by none other than Journal Star columnist Phil Luciano for a recent blog post of mine that was picked up by The Drudge Report. My blog posts are “unvetted,” unedited, and of questionable reliability. Furthermore, bloggers are scurvy individuals you’re better off not knowing. He asks, “can you call it journalism when much of it consists of unedited copy shared without any attempt to seek other sides?”

So imagine my surprise when I came across this article about Main Street Commons. In it, the journalist reports all the positives of the new project and what a boon it is to the area without ever interviewing a single resident of University East or other surrounding neighborhoods, despite their expressions of concern over some aspects of the project, including the pool that is mentioned in the article.

On the other hand, there are numerous quotes from the project developer, as well as a representative from Bradley University. But there is no mention of the fact that Bradley is an investor in the project, which would of course bias its opinion just a little. There is no mention of the slow sales of units that the developer has experienced, which was covered by the Bradley Scout over the past several months, or how that likely contributed to Bradley’s decision to turn part of the development into a freshman dorm — the first time Bradley will be allowing underclassmen to live off campus.

Indeed, the whole piece reads like a reworked press release and advertisement for the new development. I guess that’s what an edited, vetted, reliable news article looks like. It’s apparently okay to be one-sided, as long as you’re on the approved side. Or if you’re so short-staffed you can’t spare a reporter to go out and get the other side.

New maps move downtown, Warehouse District to District 3

The latest proposed maps from Peoria’s Planning and Growth Department show downtown and the Warehouse District being moved from the first to the third district, and the West Bluff moving from the second to the first district. You can see the maps and population information on the city’s website, or here:

07052011-Redistricting-Maps

The City’s Redistricting Committee had asked staff to put more emphasis on keeping established neighborhoods together, and also to take into consideration the future growth predictions for the city. Each district needs to have relatively equal population, but can have up to a 5% deviation. Based on the deviations on these new maps, the City evidently expects to see the most growth in the first and second districts, and the least growth in the fourth and fifth districts. In 2000, the City accurately predicted the most growth would be in the fifth district.

The next redistricting committee meeting is Tuesday, July 5, at 4:30 p.m. in City Council chambers. Also, the West Bluff Council will host an open forum for West Bluff neighbors to discuss the importance of redistricting at 7 p.m. Monday, July 18, at the Bradley University Student Center.

Blog interrupted

I’ve closed the comments on my previous post because it looks like any constructive discussion that might have taken place there has been exhausted, and now I’m getting a number of racist comments. I’ve tried to delete the worst of them; if I missed any, I apologize.

As you all know by now, the previous post was picked up by The Drudge Report, and the increased traffic to my site led to my blog being shut down. Just so you know, there was no government conspiracy or censorship going on. My blog is hosted on a shared server, meaning other websites and blogs are hosted on the same computer, and when I got over 300,000 hits that first day I was on Drudge, it used up all the network connections to that server. That meant that I was hogging the whole server and not allowing any traffic to the other sites, which is technically a violation of the terms of service. Thus, my hosting company shut down my site.

I could have gotten the site back up sooner if I had moved the site to a virtual private server or took some other action to increase my bandwidth. But let’s face it, my blog is a local blog, not a blog of national interest. So I just waited it out, and within a couple of days my traffic counts were pretty much back to normal. My hosting company was very understanding and got the site back up as soon as traffic died down. It took a few days; thanks for your patience.

I’ve been taken to task somewhat for publishing the previous post. All I can tell you is that I consider Paul a reliable source. He was an eye-witness to the event; police radio traffic confirmed that there were calls about a disturbance on Thrush that evening, and so I went with the story. Despite subsequent attempts to discredit Paul, his description of the events that night have been corroborated. True, not all neighbors heard racial threats being yelled, but some did.

There is no dispute from anyone that there was indeed a large group of kids going down Thrush, stopping traffic, running on lawns and porches, and making a lot of noise at 11:00 at night. I would submit that this is unacceptable behavior regardless of what they were yelling. It is not “kids being kids,” and I don’t believe we should condone it, even tacitly. If you had a family with small children, this would be very disturbing. It certainly does not make anyone want to move into the area and raise their family there. This issue needs to be addressed, not swept under the rug or brushed off with unsubstantiated accusations of exaggeration.

As far as the national exposure, I did not seek it out, and I didn’t find it particularly helpful. It appears that there are some who are claiming that there are race riots going on throughout the country, and my post was supposed to be proof that it’s happening here, too. Nobody locally has said or intimated such a thing. My interest in the story was purely local. My regular readers know that I’ve expressed concern over the City Council’s cutting of police protection and other basic services while raising taxes for expensive, needless capital projects. This story was relevant to those concerns.