Monthly Archives: February 2008

Museum Block

Do we need to organize?

22 Comments

The museum supporters are pulling out all the stops to ram their proposed museum plans down our throats — at taxpayer expense, no less. So the question I have is, should we organize to oppose it? In a recent survey of 1,000 people, 300 of them didn’t want the museum at all, and nearly 300 who wanted the museum didn’t support any of the taxing options presented to them. The question is likely to be put on the ballot as a referendum next year.

My thought is that we should start a coordinated effort to oppose a tax increase of any kind (property, sales, local, regional, etc.) to fund the museum. It would not be an organization opposed to the museum, per se — just opposed to taxpayer funding of it. In fact, if the question does go on the ballot, the organization could be dedicated specifically to urging people to vote “no” on the referendum.

What do you think? And what would be a catchy name for our resistance effort?

Healthcare, Peoria Hospitals

Plaintiff: Proctor fired me so they wouldn’t have to cover my husband’s cancer treatment

10 Comments

Proctor Hospital fired one of its employees for “insubordination.” But the employee claims the real reason is because her husband was undergoing expensive cancer treatment and the hospital didn’t want to cover the costs anymore. So she sued the hospital. Judge Joe Billy McDade found in favor of Proctor (summary judgment), but the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals reversed that ruling and remanded the case to the district court.

You can read the whole ruling here. An edited version appears below. Usually legal texts are quite boring, but I actually found this one to be rather engaging, which is why I’m quoting extensively from it instead of summarizing.

In September 2001, Proctor, a hospital in Peoria, Illinois, hired Dewitt to work as a nurse on an “as-needed” basis. Proctor apparently liked how Dewitt did her job because the following month she was promoted to the permanent position of second-shift clinical manager. In that role, Dewitt supervised nurses and other Proctor staff members.

Three years into the job, Dewitt switched to the first-shift clinical manager slot. In the summer of 2005, she switched to a part-time schedule, sharing the responsibilities of second-shift clinical manager with a coworker.

Dewitt, it appears (for we must assume the facts to be as she presents them at this stage of the proceedings), was a valuable employee. In her last evaluation, her supervisor, Mary Jane Davis, described her as an “outstanding clinical manager [who] consistently goes the extra mile.” But things were not quite as rosy as they appeared.

Continue reading Plaintiff: Proctor fired me so they wouldn’t have to cover my husband’s cancer treatment →

City of Peoria

Confidential info returned to city

2 Comments

From a news release:

The information provided in error as a result of a Freedom of Information request, has been voluntarily returned to the City intact. The information has been shredded. We have been assured that the information was not compromised, copied, or distributed.

All of the employees affected by the release of information have been notified by mail that the personal information has been returned.

The City of Peoria regrets the error and has taken steps to ensure that this type of situation does not occur in the future.

Television

WTVP comes out smelling like a rose

8 Comments

WTVP has announced that the station is saved.

You’ve done it! You’ve saved your public television station from extinction, and we will be forever grateful!! Thanks to the generosity of families and individuals in over 6,400 households in Central Illinois, we received over $2 million in pledges that allowed us to avoid going dark and to settle the long term debt crisis that was facing the station. […] Thanks to National City Bank and the Illinois Facilities Fund for their confidence in the future of WTVP.

The Journal Star adds this information:

Ultimately, the $7.2 million in debt was settled for $5.25 million. National City Bank and the Illinois Facilities Fund Bank teamed up to provide a $2 million mortgage, which cuts the station’s annual debt service from $1.3 million to $192,000.

Wow, what a sweet deal! Let this be a lesson to all you who overextend yourselves in debt: It pays. It pays big.

It looks like I won’t be able to pick up any of their bargain-priced equipment at auction. But the good news is that John Morris has a job to go back to after all.

On a serious note, I’m glad to have them remain on the air, but I worry about the management of the station after this debacle. It’s nice that viewers bailed them out, but maybe now that the crisis is over some changes in management should be made.

Museum Block, Peoria County

Museum survey results yield questionable conclusion

22 Comments

The results are in. I received the following press release from the county with supporting documentation. My comments follow:

Description

On February 25, 2008, the County of Peoria conducted a phone survey of approximately 1000 registered voters living in Peoria County: 500 within the City of Peoria, 500 outside city limits. The survey’s intent is to gauge voter support of a tax increase to fund the $24 million requested of the County for the Museum Project.

Survey respondents were selected randomly from a pool of registered voters who voted three times since 2004, including voting in at least one local election. The survey was conducted both during the day and in the evening to poll a broader range of voters. Survey administrators called as many residents as necessary to garner results from approximately 500 households in both the city and in the county; 1009 total surveys were completed.

The survey is attached to this report.

Results

Survey results indicate 31% (30% in the day, 32% in the evening) of residents in the City of Peoria receiving the phone survey did participate in the survey. The survey administrator felt 30% participation is a good response. Compare this to only 17.5% of people in the County: 18% during the day, 17% in the evening. The survey administrator believes the lower percentage of response in the county indicates people in the county are either less aware of the museum or do not care as much about the museum as those living in the City.

Of the total respondents (City and County), 69.4% or 700 felt the museum is beneficial to the region. These respondents then proceeded to the second survey question: “which of three funding sources would you support to aid the Riverfront Museum?” Of the 700, 691 responded to this question. Their responses are as follows:

  • Support property tax increase for Peoria County property owners: 4.6% [32]
  • Support multi-county property tax increase for region: 21.1% [146]
  • Support temporary sales tax increase of .025% in Peoria County: 31.8% [220]
  • Undecided or does not support tax increase: 42.4% [293]

The survey administrator felt very positive that less than 50% of the respondents were either undecided or do not support a tax increase. In other words, more than 50% of the polled voters would support a tax increase to help fund the Museum Project.

Survey results are attached to this report.

My take: With all due respect, the survey administrator has made a terrible error. I encourage you to click on the Survey Results link above (last sentence of the press release) and look at the raw numbers; they’re easier to understand and compare than percentages.

I quote Peoria County Director of Strategic Communications Jenny Zinkel from a response she sent to my previous post on this survey: “We believe if a citizen does not feel the museum is beneficial, he or she would not support a tax increase to fund the museum.” So, a “no” response to question 1 means they do not support a tax. Thus, here are the results the way I figure them:

Those who do not support a tax: 602 respondents (309 who answered “no” to question 1, plus 293 who answered “yes” to question 1 and “undecided or no tax” on question 2).

Those who support a tax: 398 respondents (those who answered “yes” to question 1 and chose a tax option in question 2).

For those of you who like percentages, that’s 60.2% against a tax increase, and only 39.8% for a tax increase. I frankly don’t see how the survey administrator could have come to any other conclusion. If they don’t consider “no” votes on question 1 as “no” votes against a tax, then in my opinion, they’ve invalidated the survey because they’ve screened people who, by the County’s own admission, would have most likely voted against a tax increase in question 2.

Kudos to the County for releasing the raw survey data so that the survey administrator’s conclusion could be either verified or challenged. In this case, I think it has to be seriously challenged. It’s clear that there is less than 50% support for a tax increase.

UPDATE: I corrected my numbers from earlier. I failed to take out the 9 people who answered question one positively, but then declined to answer question 2 (presumably by hanging up).

UPDATE 2: Merle Widmer has more information on the continuing efforts of museum officials to force this project down our throats.

Kellar Branch

Pioneer denies “clean up” request from RTA

13 Comments

Recreational Trail Advocates requested permission for access to the Kellar Branch right of way so they could “clean up trash” along a portion of the line. They were denied:

Dear David:

I am writing to respond to your request for our permission to allow the RTA [Recreational Trail Advocates] to clean up trash along a two mile section of the Kellar Branch, on Saturday, April 26, from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. While I appreciate and support the RTA’s desire to take care of the environment in this manner, it is my opinion that this activity is only being scheduled as a publicity campaign to bring more attention to your group’s failed efforts to convert the Kellar Branch into a recreational trail. I am certain you would not support my Company operating a locomotive down a local bike trail. That being said, my primary concern is safety, and I do not think it is safe for people to be on an active railroad right of way, that is operated by two railroads. Depending upon business demands, either PIRY [Pioneer Industrial Railway] or CIRY [Central Illinois Railroad] may be operating a train that day, and it is my understanding that CIRY has storage cars on the line. Further, your people may or may not be properly trained or equipped to perform such work, nor have you shown any insurance coverage. Finally, you are advised that, as an operating Class III railroad, Federal Railroad Administration regulations require that people working on the right of way undergo Roadway Worker Safety training and pass an approved test. As an operating rail line, we maintain the track and roadbed in a manner that is safe for rail operations and trained personnel, but not for untrained individuals performing weekend publicity stunts. Therefore, I do not give my approval for your group to occupy the railroad right of way for this purpose. We believe that unauthorized entry onto the right of way would be unlawful, and we will have no alternative but to hold RTA responsible should any damage result from such entry. I would like to suggest to your group that there are many other areas in the community that would benefit from a clean up activity by your group and I hope you consider cleaning these areas.

Regards,
Mike Carr
[President/CEO, Pioneer Railcorp]

It’s worth noting that Pioneer is still willing to cooperate with efforts to build a safe recreational trail on the right-of-way adjacent to the tracks (there’s a committee working on that possibility now). They’ve also done improvements to the tracks to make operation of trains safe along the line. After Nichting’s infamous “Meigs Field” comment, I don’t blame Pioneer for being a little worried about letting trail advocates onto the line.

City of Peoria, Form-Based Code

Sheridan Triangle streetscape improvement meeting March 5

6 Comments

News release from the City of Peoria:

Peoria LogoThe City of Peoria will host a public open house at Columbia Middle School, 2612 North Bootz Avenue on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 from 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. The purpose of this open house is for the public to review the scope of a study and master plan to implement a streetscape improvement project for the Form District known as the Sheridan Triangle Business District, and to provide input to the public master plan process. The intent of the project is to revitalize the character of the streets in the study area to create urban, pedestrian-friendly streets through narrower travel lanes, wider sidewalks and a tree canopy, as well as other improvements to be determined through this public master plan process.

For further information, please contact Scott Reeise, Civil Engineer, at 494-8801 or sreeise@ci.peoria.il.us.

Museum Block, Peoria County

Museum survey being done by Peoria County (UPDATED)

11 Comments

If you get a call from an automated poll asking your opinion on the Peoria Riverfront Museum, it’s not a call from museum officials, but rather Peoria County. Several readers reported they were getting calls about this, so I put up a post about it. I received this comment explaining the whole thing, which I’m reprinting here so no one misses it:

Hello CJ. I appreciate you and your readers taking an interest in the recent Riverfront Museum Survey. This survey was not conducted by “Museum folks,” but rather by Peoria County Government. Peoria County was approached last year to spend $24 million tax payer dollars to fund the museum project. The only way Peoria County may raise these proceeds is by creating a museum district funded by property taxes or to get legislative authorization for a sales tax. For either, we would need to ask the voters by including a referendum on the ballot.

We decided to take a proactive approach by asking voters before placing the referendum on the ballot. We are very much interested in the results because the results provide guidance for how we should proceed. By conducting this poll, our intention is not to generate more interest in the museum but rather to gauge how much interest our citizens currently have in spending $24 million of their collective dollars to support the museum.

In response to two of your readers’ comments regarding the abrupt conclusion to the survey should a respondent select “no” (or number 2) as to whether he or she feels the museum would be beneficial to the region, both the County Administrator and I approved the survey by taking it via phone several times ourselves. When a respondent selects “no,” the recording says “Thank you for your time. I appreciate your participation.” We believe if a citizen does not feel the museum is beneficial, he or she would not support a tax increase to fund the museum; therefore, by eliciting a negative reply, we had the information we needed from the respondent and did not want to unnecessarily take more of the individual’s time.

It was also respondents’ time that became the deciding factor as to whether we included “undecided” and “none of the above” in the same response. We did debate whether to offer these two replies together or separately, but when you take into consideration our citizens’ busy lifestyles and our appreciation for them taking time out of those schedules to reply to a phone survey, we did not desire to lengthen the survey unnecessarily.

Peoria County’s three possible options as far as tax increases to fund the museum are those we included in the survey: property tax increase for Peoria County property owners, regional property tax increase, or sales tax increase for Peoria County. On the advice of the survey administrator, the County Administrator and I agreed that if someone was “undecided” he or she would be more likely to vote against a tax increase (in any form) than for a tax increase were the question to appear on a ballot. Hence, more often than not, “undecided” would prove to be the same response as “none of the above” and would only serve to unnecessarily lengthen the survey if offered as a separate option. We also felt limiting the options to four rather than five was prudent considering the complexity of each option.

Again CJ, Peoria County Government does appreciate your interest in the Riverfront Museum survey. We value your input and that of your readers. Once we get and share the results with the County Board we will be more than happy to share those results with you. Please feel free to contact me regarding the survey: Jenny Zinkel, Director of Strategic Communications, jzinkel@peoriacounty.org. Thank you.

Many thanks to Jenny Zinkel for setting the record straight.

UPDATE: I received some additional information about the poll:

County Administration decided to conduct a phone survey, but a similar question regarding a tax increase to support museum funding was also included on a mail survey randomly sent to 3000 households in Peoria County. Residents have until March 3 to remit the mail survey. We expect to have results of that survey April 7; the results will then be made public.

Communication Express conducted the phone survey. It was completed yesterday [Monday] and we received results today [Tuesday]. Once we make the results known to the County Board, we will release those results to the public. By week’s end, the whole board will have been notified of the results; I anticipate sending a press release on Monday. The results will be used as guidance for the board when deciding whether to put a referendum on the ballot.

The survey cost was $1367.47. 1009 households participated in the survey: 504 within the City of Peoria, 505 in Peoria County, outside Peoria City limits.

Museum Block

Is museum taking a poll or telemarketing?

4 Comments

I’ve received several reports from readers that the Peoria Riverfront Museum folks are conducting a poll:

It was automated about how I felt about the new museum. As soon as I answered “no” (by pressing 2) on if this project was worthy of Peoria, it hung up on me. –Emtronics

I just got the same phone call from “Susan Anderson” with the same result- hung up after pressing 2 for no. I had debated pressing 1, just to see if they asked any further questions TikTok for business. –Septboy

After listening to all the great things this museum will bring to Peoria my wife graciously pressed 1, which was ‘in support.’ We then were given three different taxing options. I waited to see if “press 4?” would be for none of the above. “Press 4” turned out to be “undecided OR none of the above.” Not, press 4 for undecided and press 5 for none of the above… We hung up. –PeoriaIllinoisan

One reader called it a “push poll.” According to Wikipedia, “In a push poll, large numbers of respondents are contacted, and little or no effort is made to collect and analyze response data. Instead, the push poll is a form of telemarketing-based propaganda … masquerading as a poll.”

Anyone else have an encounter with the museum poll that they’d like to add? Do you think it’s a legitimate attempt to gauge public opinion, or do you think it’s a push poll? I haven’t gotten the call. I’m sure my number has been specifically blacklisted. 😛

CityLink

Another dissatisfied CityLink customer

2 Comments

Another dissatisfied CityLink customer wrote a letter to the editor today:

The Peoria bus system needs an overhaul. […] We need more cross-town busing, buses that run more often, on time, and Sunday buses.

Citizens young and old should not have to wait long periods in the snow, rain, sleet and cold in order to get to work and/or appointments.

This letter-writer is right on target. I have experienced similar dissatisfaction with the city’s bus service; perhaps you remember this post:

I decided to try taking the bus. It was scheduled to arrive about five minutes to nine, so I started to the bus stop at a quarter till. It doesn’t take but maybe four minutes to walk to the bus stop, and I can see the intersection while I’m walking to it. Before I’ve walked for even two minutes, I see the bus go by. It came early — almost ten minutes early. Since it was a Saturday, the buses only run once an hour.

Or this one from last June:

First, bus travel is very slow. Part of the reason is that buses are pretty infrequent. They come only once every half hour during peak times, and once an hour during non-peak times. Plus, nine times out of ten you have to ride to the bus station first and transfer buses. Although the bus lines intersect elsewhere in town, there’s no easy way to transfer buses at these intersections. So unless you live on the same route as your destination, you have to ride to the transfer center first, which can add considerable time to your trip.

Second, many of the bus stops have no bench or shelter. If buses are going to be as infrequent as they are, every bus stop should at least have a bench. I doubt there are many elderly who would or could stand for half an hour to an hour waiting for a bus. Maybe that’s why I’ve never seen any elderly riding the bus. Ideally, each bus stop would also offer a shelter and a map of the various routes so the uninitiated can figure out what route they’re on and how to get to where they’re going.

I’m glad I’m not the only one who’s noticing. CityLink recently got a new general manager, Tom Lucek, who has over 25 years experience in mass transit. Here’s hoping he brings some much-needed reform to the city’s bus system.