Monthly Archives: January 2007

Amtrak, City of Galesburg, City of Peoria

How about a Peoria-Quad Cities Amtrak route?

10 Comments

Amtrak LogoWhile I was on hiatus, there was an interesting editorial in the Galesburg Register-Mail suggesting a Galesburg-Peoria commuter train. John Pulliam is their business writer at the Galesburg paper (the equivalent of the Journal Star’s Paul Gordon), and he makes some good points:

Ever since Maytag and Butler abandoned the Burg, many people have been paying big bucks to commute to Alcoa and John Deere in the Quad Cities and Caterpillar in Peoria. Driving that far every day is expensive, tiring and causes you to need a new car about twice a month. Why not take the train? (Because there isn’t one.) […]

Not only could a commuter line take Galesburg workers to Peoria, but Peoria’s nearest Amtrak service is Galesburg and Normal. Not good for a metro area of about 350,000 people. I know Peorians would rather have a direct route to Chicago, but the commuter train could bring them to Galesburg, where they could catch Amtrak to Chicago and many other destinations.

I agree. But why stop there? Let’s extend it on to Normal, or even Champaign. We need a good east-west train route in Illinois.

Pulliam suggests using the BNSF rail line between Galesburg and Peoria. I wonder how amenable BNSF would be to letting Amtrak use their line and how much it would cost to upgrade it to passenger rail standards. Maybe one of my rail-enthusiast friends can give me the low-down on whether any of this wishful thinking would really be feasible.

Blogosphere, City of Peoria

There’s a new portal in town: Peoria.com

2 Comments

Screenshot of Peoria.com

If you’re looking for a good Peoria portal, check out the new Peoria.com. Their site has a good, clean look and no broken links that I can find. The pages load quickly and have attractive graphics. The whole thing looks very professional.

They link to news stories equally from traditional media outlets and blogs, and they are actively seeking bloggers to provide original news and opinion for their site. There’s a forum (more like a traditional computer bulletin board than a blog), a listing of upcoming Peoria events, classified ads and job listings and a community guide. It’s pretty well-rounded.

The key is going to be keeping everything fresh and updated. How many portals have you visited that have information woefully out of date or missing completely? If they’re vigilant in keeping things relentlessly updated and complete, I think they’ll be very successful. And I wish them the best of luck.

Ray LaHood

Quick poll: Who thinks LaHood has “influence”?

5 Comments

Ray LaHoodThis news happened while I was on hiatus: WHOI reported last December on a group of people who were outside Congressman Ray LaHood’s Peoria office “holding signs stating he is spending too much on local issues.” Wow! I’ve only heard about this event from WHOI — was it covered by any other media outlets?

Anyway, the news reporters decided to try to find out why LaHood was getting so local all of a sudden. One political science professor thought it was LaHood’s way of trying to “stay in touch” with his constituents. But the most interesting quote was from LaHood himself:

“People look at me as somebody that has influence and if my office and my position can influence things in a positive way in the community, I want to be a part of that.” LaHood said.

LaHood has influence? Let’s recap his success in influencing things in a positive way: He tried to play mediator in the rails-to-trails issue to no avail; he tried to play mediator in the Glen Oak School siting issue to no avail; he’s trying to get two election commissioners thrown off the commission — the results of this latest one are yet to be determined. So far, he’s batting .000.

Is this an indication of the kind of “influence” he has in Washington?

General News

Somebody call America’s Funniest Videos

5 Comments

Michael Smothers reports reports on the very progressive [/sarcasm] East Peoria hiking/biking trail in today’s Journal Star:

If the weather cooperates next New Year’s Eve, revelers from Morton who choose to celebrate the occasion at a tavern here won’t need a designated driver: They can bicycle home.

At least there will be a hiking/biking trail providing that option….

All I can say is, bring out the camera crews. Watching a bunch of drunken, bicycling bar patrons would be funny enough, but watching them try to ride uphill all the way to Morton in the dark at 2 a.m. on New Year’s Day should be a real hoot!

Peoria Park District

Glen Oak Park languishes even as Zoo construction begins

13 Comments

Take a drive by the Luthy Botanical Gardens by Glen Oak Zoo and you’ll see a lot of activity. You may feel a bit disoriented by the sight of uprooted trees piled across the street and the plethora of earthmoving equipment. The serenity of nearby Glen Oak Park and Springdale Cemetery is broken by metronomic beats of steel being pounded into the ground to form an erosion-control wall. The land has the familiar graded look of being cleared for a new commercial business or housing project.

But this isn’t commercial or residential — it’s all the beginning of a $32.1 million addition to the Zoo called “Africa!” While the new zoo project is the site of new construction, the park next door shows disturbing signs of neglect.

Glen Oak Park, established in 1894, has a lot of things going for it: it’s in the middle of town, so it’s easily accessible by city dwellers wishing to enjoy its open fields and dense woods; it has a relatively new playground that children enjoy; its amphitheater is home to public dances, movies, Municipal Band concerts, Independence Day fireworks celebrations, and many other community events; it has a rich diversity of attractions, including tennis courts, the aforementioned zoo, baseball/softball diamonds, picnic areas, running track, lagoon, etc. The park has witnessed the best dresses for homecoming over the years.

But then there’s the other side of Glen Oak Park:

No Pedestrians

Foot Bridge

Glen Oak Cannon

Besides the footbridge being closed, the fact that no one can walk or drive under it effectively closes off a significant area of the park. Based on satellite photos, it appears the road behind the chain-link fence eventually meets up with the driveway that ascends from the lower entrance. Why should such a large area of the park be inaccessible due to poor maintenance of the suspension bridge once known as “Lover’s Bridge”?

The parapet is the most visible sign of what PeoriaIllinoisan rightly calls “demolition by neglect.” Is there any reason why this structure could not be repaired and maintained so as to be enjoyed by many families to come? What is gained by removing it? What will be put in its place?

Over the years, the Park District has poured money into projects of questionable value, such as the money-losing RiverPlex. There’s a certain excitement that comes from doing new things and being “progressive.” And no one wants the Park District to stagnate or never try anything new. But whatever new projects they fund should not come at the expense of maintaining the nearly 9,000 acres of land and other assets for which they’re currently responsible.

Now that the Park District has done the right thing by not allowing further encroachment into Glen Oak Park in the form of a school district land-sharing arrangement, they should focus on fixing up the park so that all the land can be enjoyed by those who go there. Tuckpoint the parapet. Fix or, if necessary, remove the foot bridge — but by all means, reduce the hazard so it doesn’t obstruct access. Maybe the bridge could be dismantled and moved to another part of the park if it doesn’t fit into the zoo plans in its current location.

Let’s polish up this jewel in the middle of our city and really make it shine once again.

[Cannon photo courtesy of PeoriaIllinoisan]

State Legislation

Note to Park Board: New OMA law takes effect

3 Comments

OMA EyeEffective in 2007, there’s a new wrinkle in the Open Meetings Act (OMA). Senate Bill 585 was signed into law on July 31 last year, and it took effect yesterday. Here’s what it does:

Redefines a “meeting” to include gatherings, whether in person or by telephone call, video or audio conference, electronic means (such as e-mail, chat, and instant messaging), or other means of contemporaneous interactive communication, of a majority of a quorum of the members of a public body held for the purpose of discussing public business.

So, for instance, if a quorum of Park Board members were to all be chatting on IM or via e-mail about public business, that would be a violation of the OMA. Why? Because that would constitute a “meeting,” and another revision to the OMA outlaws this type of meeting:

[SB 585] requires that the number of public body members necessary to constitute a quorum must be physically present at an open meeting and permits participation and voting by other members by audio and video conference.

In other words, you can’t have a meeting over e-mail or IM. And audio or video conferencing is acceptable only under strict conditions:

If a quorum of the members of the public body is physically present as required by Section 2.01, a majority of the public body may allow a member of that body to attend the meeting by other means if the member is prevented from physically attending because of: (i) personal illness or disability; (ii) employment purposes or the business of the public body; or (iii) a family or other emergency. “Other means” is by video or audio conference.

These revisions will help to keep public business performed in public (assuming public bodies don’t go into closed session illegally and then destroy the evidence when caught). There’s no reasonable way for the public to monitor IM or e-mail deliberations, so requiring public bodies to be physically present in one place at one time so the public can attend and hear their discussions is responsible governance.

Kudos to the state legislature for ensuring this level of transparency.

Peoria Public Schools

District 150 determined to not even consider Glen Oak School site

12 Comments

On WCBU radio this morning, the local news broadcast included a story on District 150 and their search for a Glen Oak/White replacement school site. School Board President David Gorenz was interviewed; he said that using the current Glen Oak School site would be “cost-prohibitive” even if they scaled back the size of the parcel they needed.

One wonders on what facts he bases that statement. Is that based on a complete teardown and rebuilding without first doing a “final review” of whether the current building could be renovated? Is that based on 10 acres? 5 acres? What configuration? Does it include selling the properties on Prospect (almost certainly at a loss) that the District bought prematurely? Does that include the $500,000 in City support that Bob Manning is still willing to ask the Council for if the District would come back to the negotiating table? Is it cost-prohibitive because they’re still trying to build a more-expensive “birth-through-eighth” school instead of a K-8 school?

The public is wearying of assumption-based School Board actions.

City of Peoria, Crime, Peoria Police

First day of the new year yields first murder

This isn’t a good omen. DeAndre Allen of Peoria was shot to death at 9:10 p.m. on New Year’s Day at 3229 N. Gale Ave. And Peoria’s homicide rate continues unabated.

But Police Chief Steve Settingsgaard is looking on the bright side. Noting that another person standing near Allen was also grazed by a bullet, the Journal Star quotes the Chief as saying:

“It’s very difficult,” Settingsgaard said of the new year’s first homicide. “We’re lucky we don’t have two people dead.”

With every dark cloud, there’s a silver lining, eh? It’s good to be positive, but something has to be done to curb the homicide rate in this city before we get a reputation like Gary, Indiana.

Peoria Journal Star

“Save the Journal Star” campaign begins

2 Comments

As rumored, a campaign to “save the Journal Star” started today. A full-page ad was taken out by the Newspaper Guild, and a website has been set up (www.savethejournalstar.com), saying:

As newspapers across the country change hands, greedy buyers are cutting staff, coverage and service and raising advertising rates. It all amounts to much less newspaper. […]

We will not tolerate an owner who insults our region with mediocre and half-hearted news coverage in the name of short-term profit. We will not tolerate an owner who refuses to recognize a responsibility for civic engagement.

To current Journal Star owner David Copley, we say: Continue to be a steward of first-rate journalism and civic responsibility. Sell only to a buyer who recognizes the common good that journalistic excellence represents.

To anyone who is in the market for the Journal Star, we say: Buyer beware! Regardless of who owns this newspaper, it belongs to this community.

I have to admit — and I said so in the comments section of their website — the Journal Star has the most comprehensive local coverage of any media in the greater Peoria area. Does the Journal Star have its shortcomings? Yes. But is there anyone in Peoria that covers more local news, crime, arts, neighborhood issues, civic events, sports, and other local fare? No. And seriously, overall they do a very good job. That doesn’t mean they’re above reproach, and I stand by my past criticism of them. But compared to the volume of news they cover every day, that’s really not bad.

In order to cover so many local events, it takes a lot of reporters. And to cover them well, it takes experienced reporters — not just experienced as in “been a reporter for x number of years,” but experienced in Peoria. To lose a large number of experienced reporters would be a huge blow to the quality of news coverage we’ve come to expect from the paper.

Still, I’m not — and I’m sure the Guild is not — so naive as to think there will be no job cuts regardless of who the new buyer is. Nor is every position indispensable. There will undoubtedly be some cost cutting, but my hope is that it will be, as the Guild states, “responsible.”

Peoria Pundit

Peoria Pundit changing hosting companies

2 Comments

I got this e-mail from Billy Dennis this morning:

Please leave a message on your blog saying that I am alive, but my hosting company has taken a dump on customer service. They have a known issue with a program they use that it essentially preventing my site from loading in [Firefox] and also preventing it from working well in Internet Explorer.

They’ve informed me that there is nothing they can do. I’m spending all day on NEW YEARS DAY trying to get presale questions answered so I can move my site, which will take at least another two days once I find a place that won’t quit on me when I have issues.

I’ve experienced trouble with Billy’s site lately myself. I can’t get to any of his permalinks using Firefox (my browser of choice), and when I tried to leave a comment using Internet Explorer, it never went through. If these are the “known issues” that his current hosting company (A Small Orange) is unwilling to fix, then obviously it’s time for the Pundit to head to another hosting company.

The comment I tried to leave Billy said that my hosting company is BlueHost, and I recommend them. I’ve been with them for a year and will be renewing for another year this month. They’ve always been responsive to any service issues I’ve had. In fact, one of the things I like is that I always get a human voice when I call, not dreaded voice-recognition menus. I’ve only had two outages in the past year, and both times my site was back up within two hours.

Good luck, Billy. And I hope you get some time away from your hosting problems to enjoy New Year’s Day. Happy new year!