Monthly Archives: September 2009

State of Illinois

Illinois Senate redistricting hearing at noon today

3 Comments

From a press release:

PEORIA, IL— The Senate’s Redistricting Committee will meet Tuesday [Sept. 22] in Peoria to continue a series of subject-matter hearings regarding how Illinois should best approach its redistricting process. The hearing will include proposals for changing the current redistricting process in Illinois.

State Senator Kwame Raoul (D – Chicago) currently chairs the Senate’s Redistricting Committee. Amidst a fury of reform ideas on various subjects in the closing weeks of the legislative session, Raoul made it clear that the process – which only happens every 10 years – needed to be addressed free of distractions in a comprehensive manner. Since that time, Raoul has convened a series of subject matter hearings, with his fellow committee members, to take on this unique subject.

“Thus far committee members have learned new information about how redistricting processes across the country are conducted,” Raoul said. “This further proves the need for a comprehensive review.”

With all of the myths and spin regarding the upcoming redistricting process, Raoul aimed the first meeting of the committee at informing legislators and the public on the basics of the redistricting process. The hearing included an overview of the history of Illinois redistricting, census data and the legal requirements for redistricting.

The second hearing of the committee included an overview of redistricting legal principles and requirements. The hearing also included testimony on a review of the redistricting process in other states.

“We need to approach this in a workman-like manner. We need to be intellectually honest and try to do the best thing for the state,” Don Harmon, a member of the Senate’s leadership said.

Despite an ongoing push for a constitutional amendment to be voted on hastily, Raoul and Harmon remain steady to their commitment for a comprehensive review.

“We need to remember that some of today’s critics were yesterday’s cheerleaders, when they were in the majority and controlled the redistricting process. We need to be mindful that we don’t rush into a reform that’s not really reform but instead simply rearranges partisan advantages,” Harmon added.

During the last redistricting process, Senate Republicans were responsible for legislative maps which have drawn criticism from those familiar with the process. These districts include the obscure 17th Congressional District map which was sponsored by Senator Kirk Dillard, a Republican from Hindsdale.

Dillard now joins his fellow Republican colleagues Dale Righter, J. Bradley Burzynski and Dan Rutherford as they attempt to fix the gerrymandered maps they created during the last redistricting process.

An agenda was included with the press release, but it was in the form of an encrypted PDF file that doesn’t allow you to copy the text and paste it into another document or post. Also, did you notice that the press release doesn’t say where or what time the meeting will be held? All we know is that it’s today in Peoria. Helpful. If that’s any indication of the competence of these people to execute redistricting in Illinois, heaven help us.

The meeting is at noon in the Hartmann Center Theatre, Bradley University, 1453 St. James.

Peoria Public Schools

D150: Woodruff to be closed

61 Comments

The Peoria Public Schools Board of Education voted tonight 4-3 to close Woodruff High School at the end of this school year. Voting in favor of closing Woodruff were Board President Debbie Wolfmeyer, Linda Butler, David Gorenz, and Laura Petelle. Voting against were Rachael Parker, Martha Ross, and Jim Stowell.

What started in 1903 as Averyville High School was later renamed Kingman High School, then E. N. Woodruff High School. Averyville was annexed into Peoria in 1928, and a new building was erected at 1800 NE Perry in 1937. That was the year it was named after Edward Nelson Woodruff, who served as Peoria’s mayor for eleven terms. (Sources: Reading, Writing, and Religion by Monica Vest Wheeler; Woodruff High School website; Wikipedia)

Peoria Public Schools

Monday is the day of decision for District 150

37 Comments

Monday night, school board members will vote to close a high school. Two possibilities are on the agenda:

13. CLOSING OF WOODRUFF HIGH SCHOOL – Hinton
Proposed Action: That the Board of Education approve the closure of Woodruff High School effective at the end of the 2009 – 2010 school year.

14. CLOSING OF PEORIA HIGH SCHOOL –
Proposed Action: That the Board of Education approve the closure of Peoria High School effective at the end of the 2009 – 2010 school year.

There’s no telling what will ultimately be decided. Closing Woodruff is the administration’s recommendation, and the one that has been on the table the longest. It lacks an implementation plan. Closing Peoria High is an idea that was formally suggested for the first time last Monday night by board member Jim Stowell. It also lacks an implementation plan.

Adding more intrigue is the fact that the two closings are listed separately on the agenda, meaning that, theoretically, both schools or neither school could end up being closed. The odds of both schools being closed is practically zero, but there is a real possibility that neither school could get the necessary four votes in favor of closing. That outcome would leave everyone in limbo, since there is no Plan B for plugging the budget deficit.

For those who are placing bets, everyone tells me that the most likely outcome is that Woodruff will be closed.

Peoria County

Alas, poor Urich

6 Comments

I’ve been waiting for an excuse to use that headline. Today, I have one.

Journal Star county beat and occasional society reporter Karen McDonald writes in Monday’s “Word on the Street” column that County Administrator Patrick Urich is under scrutiny by some County Board members, “amid growing concerns of lagging communication and issues related to the museum, Bel-Wood Nursing Home and the deficit budget.”

“I think we need better communication. We need to tackle these problems. We need to build better policy,” said board member Mike Phelan…. “It seems like the board isn’t fully informed at all times about what’s going on,” board member Pat Hidden said. “It was my understanding that the County Board made the rules and we were his boss. Maybe I was wrong. It’s like the County Board is just puppets now.”

Board members now want to do a formal performance evaluation of Mr. Urich. My guess is that he’ll come through it with flying colors. In fact, board members might just discover a new-found appreciation for the job he does. It will also give disgruntled board members a chance to explain the reason for their displeasure with Urich’s performance, and give him the opportunity to mend those relationships.

I don’t always agree on policy with Patrick, who also happens to be my neighbor, but I’ve always found him to be candid, professional, affable, and accessible. We’ve sparred quite a bit over issues involving the proposed downtown museum (which is still underfunded, by the way), but our disagreements have never gotten personal. My guess this is just a misunderstanding among some board members and it will all get worked out once they get a chance to sit down and discuss it with Patrick.

Peoria Public Schools

D150: Failing students get scores artificially boosted

30 Comments

Part of the new grading scale at District 150 this year includes this directive:

If a student puts forth the effort and completes an assignment but receives less than 50%, the grade shall be recorded as 50%.

This means that when a student earns a low score, he receives a higher score. It means that if a student takes a quiz with ten questions on it, and he only gets two questions right, he’ll essentially be credited with getting five questions right. He didn’t really get five questions right, but we’re going to put it on the books that he did. We’re going to lie about his achievement. Call it what you want, justify it as you will, the bottom line is the district has now made it a policy that teachers must lie about their students’ achievement if that student earns a grade less than 50%.

It’s hard to fathom how a group of educational experts could come up with such a system — a system that gives credit where credit isn’t due — and defend it. The justifications I’ve heard for this policy seem to indicate that the most important thing in education is not actually learning (or, God-forbid, mastering) the material. Instead, the most important thing is to maintain a child’s self-esteem and motivation to learn. Getting low scores reduces the child’s self-esteem and lessens their motivation to learn. Hence, the solution is to artificially eliminate the lowest scores.

Did you see that? The blame is placed on the scoring, not on the performance. If we can just fix the scores, then we’ve solved the problem! That’s like seeing the check engine light go on in your car, taking the bulb out so it doesn’t light up anymore, and thinking you’ve fixed your engine.

One of the things that lowers a student’s motivation, they say, is if he somehow misses a big assignment (earning a “0”) or really blows it on a test (earning a very low score), and discovers that it will be mathematically challenging to bring his semester average up as a result. Now, back in the educational dark ages when I was a child, that student could dig himself out of that hole by doing extra-credit assignments to bring up his overall grade. That is, he could do extra work to earn that higher grade. But in our more enlightened era, educational experts have determined that it’s better to just give the student credit he didn’t earn instead — and you’re just an old fuddy-duddy who probably favors nuns rapping students’ knuckles with a ruler if you believe in those old, hackneyed values of earning the grade.

I’m surprised the district didn’t just decide that 60% would be the lowest grade attainable — 60 being the new passing-grade cutoff. After all, under the new grading system, it’s still possible (albeit difficult) for a child to fail. Why not remove the possibility completely? Instead of giving out failing grades for failing work (and risk demotivating the students), why not just declare that all work (or even no work) is passable? Imagine how happy (and presumably motivated) our school kids will be then!

I probably shouldn’t have suggested it. The district just might do it.

Peoria Public Schools

D150: That’s one way to improve scores

42 Comments

Get ready for student achievement to improve this year — not because the kids are actually performing any better, but because District 150 has decided to lower the grading standards. For decades, the school has employed the traditional scale:

A = 93 – 100
B = 86 – 92
C = 77 – 85
D = 70 – 76
F = 0 – 69

Starting this fall, they switched to this scale:

A = 90 – 100
B = 80 – 89
C = 70 – 79
D = 60 – 69
F = 50* – 59

*Note: The student handbook says an “F” is 40-59, but a handout I recently received from the teachers said 50-59. Either way, it’s unclear to me why it wouldn’t be 0-59. What grade is it if the student earns something less than 40 or 50? Is it not still an “F”?

Obviously, this new scale makes it significantly easier to get higher letter grades, which are the only ones that go on the student’s permanent record and make up his or her grade-point average. It means that students who do work in the 60-69 range will now receive passing grades instead of failing grades. And it also means that District 150 scores will look inflated when compared to other area school districts. Here are elementary school grading scales for some surrounding communities (based on grading scales published on their school websites):

Grade Dunlap Morton G’town Hills
A 92-100 93-100 94-100
B 84-91 85-92 86-93
C 74-83 77-84 76-85
D 66-73 70-76 70-75
F 0-65 0-69 0-69

I’ve searched the school board minutes for some mention of this change to the grading scale and have yet to find it. I’m not the only one who was surprised. The teachers I talked to said they found out about it the first day of school via memo. Furthermore, the teachers I spoke with said they are not in favor of the easier grading scale, nor were they consulted.

So, the question is, when was this decision made, and why?

City of Peoria, Peoria Mayor

Mayor Ardis asks for feedback on budget

5 Comments

I received this yesterday but haven’t had a chance to post it until today:

September 15, 2009

As many of you know, the City Council has been wrestling with our 2010 budget for several months now. We have been working to balance the City’s budget like you have to balance yours……. Identifying needs vs. wants and being more efficient with the income you have available. During this challenging economic situation, the process has not been easy.

To this point, the City Council has already trimmed over $8.5 million dollars from next years budget. If sales tax revenue continues to come in below our expectations, it may be necessary to trim another $4 to $5 million to balance our budget. We’ve made significant reductions in our operating budget next year and identified over 40 positions that will not be filled throughout all city departments, including police and fire. In the coming weeks, we may find it necessary to lay off 20-30 more employees. This all equates to a drastic cut in service to our constituent taxpayers.

During this process we have focused on being open and transparent. With this in mind I’d like to solicit your input as we move towards making final decisions on next years budget. This will not be a scientific poll by any stretch, but an opportunity to provide me with your thoughts on a few budget related questions. I will share your responses with the rest of the City Council and the City Manager.

These are tough times but I am confident the City Council will make the right decisions to get us through this with the least amount of additional cost to you. And we hope to get this done with the least amount of job losses possible. Thank you for taking the time to respond. Feel free to pass this on to other concerned citizens.

Please click here to take this short, 3-question survey

Jim Ardis

Peoria Public Schools

D150: Petelle demonstrates governmental transparency

32 Comments

In stark contrast to another elected official, rookie school board member Laura Petelle demonstrates the kind of transparency and accessibility the public expects from their representatives in the 21st century. She invites dialog with her constituents, she shares pertinent information in a timely manner, and she explains her votes (proving that she has thought them through and is not making knee-jerk decisions). And she does it on the internet where the info is easily accessible to all.

That’s the way it ought to be. Even if you don’t agree with her vote, at least you understand her argument and appreciate the effort she’s gone through to make a good, conscientious decision she believes is in the best interests of her constituents and the district at large.

In today’s post, she’s talking about the closing of a high school. She’s probably going to vote to close Woodruff. Fellow board member Jim Stowell has indicated his desire to see Peoria High close instead. No doubt it will be a split vote, and who knows which way it will go? Billy Dennis is predicting Woodruff will be closed on a 4-3 vote. We’ll all find out on Monday, September 21.

In the meantime, hop over to Laura’s blog and read her reasoning. It’s a perfectly logical decision, and I applaud her for her transparency. However, I do have a couple of questions. (Don’t I always?)

  1. PBC Funds: Petelle states that one of the reasons they must close a high school is that “there are issues relating to the PBC bonds that will provide a further $25 to $30 million in bonding authority for our District.” Basically, if they don’t close a high school, they don’t get that additional funding. However, there’s another requirement in order to utilize those bonds: the supporting document Petelle provides states, “Final planning, however, is dependent upon the need for the District to identify the projects.” Yes, I too would like to know on what they plan to spend that additional funding, if they were to get it. First, I’d like to know why they need to spend it at all. If they need to cut the number of facilities, and if our building capacity exceeds our enrollment, and if the school district is in a structural deficit, I don’t see the justification for taking on more debt. Is it just so they can max out the PBC funding limit and keep our taxes high? If there is no clear project needing funds, then it looks like they’re just spending the money for the sake of spending it, and that doesn’t sound like it’s in the best interests of the taxpayers.
  2. Torts: One of Petelle’s commenters (“Jon” — who might be the same “Jon” who comments on the Chronicle) made a shocking observation. He looked at the 2009-2010 Tentative Budget that Petelle put up on her site and asked, “What is the TORT category? …It has an expected deficit of nearly $4.1MM compared to only $900k the prior year. Its expenditures increased from $6.1MM to $8.6MM while at the same time its revenue fell from $5.2MM to $4.5MM.” Laura responded that it is the “tort lawsuit fund.” I just happen to have received recently (courtesy of the Freedom of Information Act) a list of pending lawsuits against District 150. By my count, there are 83 total. I haven’t surveyed other school districts to see how this compares, but at first blush this number sounds very high to me. Given the impact this is having on the district’s bottom line, this issue really should be investigated. What is causing all these lawsuits? Is there a common thread? Can anything be done to reduce their occurrence?
City of Peoria

Quote of the Day

2 Comments

Think about that next time there’s a burglary in your neighborhood, or when you hit a huge pothole this winter. Maybe you can call council member Ryan Spain and ask him to send over an economic development specialist to help.

—Billy Dennis, in response to the City’s decision, upon Spain’s motion, to spare an Economic Development Specialist while simultaneously cutting police and public works personnel.
Museum Block, Peoria County

County takes charge of museum project

14 Comments

PRM LogoI received a copy of the following letter in the mail from an anonymous source. The letter is on State’s Attorney letterhead and is signed by Kevin Lyons. It’s not addressed to anyone in particular — in fact, it looks more like a memo than a letter:

RE: Persons and organizations vested in the Peoria Riverfront Museum project

On Thursday, August 13, 2009, the Peoria County Board certified a necessary resolution that will inform the Illinois Department of Revenue that, commencing January 1, 2010, a special sales tax shall be collected throughout the County of Peoria (County) to carry out the objectives of the March, 2009, referendum. The County is pleased to partner with your efforts, and with the fine men and women of Caterpillar, to organize and shape a superior project that, when complemented by The Caterpillar Experience, will serve well the many interests of this enterprise and all of Central Illinois.

To that end, the County of Peoria will provide the appropriate guidance for creating the organization(s) necessary to develop and to carry out the objectives of the project. As this is no time to learn as we go, I have engaged well experienced counsel at the law firm of McDermott Will & Emery to help provide for this important detail and direction. I have, in part, carefully selected this reputable firm because of their long history of experience with issues relative to museums, including those public and private and blended, and their appreciation for the broad collaboration of interests that birthed and brought this project to its place today.

Because it will be largely funded by public money, through sale of non-general obligation revenue bonds, it is important that the project commence and operate in compliance with public policy and statutes. A gathering of all interested parties will be planned for September so that the County may provide detailed framework that can be followed in order to formally organize, commence, develop, construct, and carry through the project.

This will involve, but certainly not be limited to, the following items:

  1. The organization and eventual tax exempt qualification of a museum authority. The museum authority would serve as lead coordinator for the project’s space, programming, and development.
  2. A description of roles and responsibilities of a museum authority and the steps required to form a board of directors and all other necessary project components.
  3. An explanation of how funding will be delivered and how the County and the museum authority will develop and refine the project, and how entities (licensees) will occupy and operate within the project.
  4. As with any County capital development project, construction of the project would be bid, let and overseen/administered by the County.
  5. The County would engage the museum authority to operate the project pursuant to the terms of an operating agreement and, upon completion of construction of the project, and pursuant to the operating agreement, the county would deliver the project to the museum authority for operation.
  6. The museum authority would annually account to the County regarding financial performance and community benefit.
  7. A clear and partnered coordination with Caterpillar, Inc., to insure that the project and The Caterpillar Experience, and the many shared goals and responsibilities attendant thereto, are smoothly addressed and accomplished.
  8. Although licensees and entities may be otherwise self-identified, it is understood that the project will be named exclusively Peoria Riverfront Museum.

    9. Your overwhelming efforts, along with ballot box support and the work of others, can permit you and your communities to now step closer to the realization of a magnificent facility along the Peoria riverfront. A September gathering will further assist everyone in understanding, in greater detail, how this significant project can now launch and grow.

    Thank you for your meaningful contributions on behalf of the citizens of Peoria County and all of the greater Peoria area.

    Very truly yours,
    KEVIN W. LYONS
    State’s Attorney

There are a few notable things here:

  • Transfer of Power: First of all, the letter states that in order for “the project [to] commence and operate in compliance with public policy and statutes,” a tax-exempt “museum authority” would need to be organized. This is interesting because there’s already a tax-exempt umbrella organization called the Museum Collaboration Group (MCG). The MCG has, to this point, been calling the shots on everything regarding the proposed museum. But now, it appears that will be coming to an end.

    The new “museum authority,” under the guidance of a newly-established board of directors, will “serve as lead coordinator for the project’s space, programming, and development.” It will be a separate entity from the County, and will also be in charge of museum operations.

    This can be characterized as nothing less than a transfer of power. I suppose it could just be a renaming/reorganization of the MCG, but why that would be necessary (other than providing some additional billing for lawyers) is mysterious to me. It will be most interesting to see who gets a seat on the new museum authority’s board of directors . . . and who doesn’t get a seat.

  • Bidding/letting overseen by County: Museum representatives have long touted their “unprecedented agreement among Caterpillar, the Museum Collaboration Group and the Greater Peoria Area Contractors and Suppliers Association,” promising that “both the Peoria Riverfront Museum and the Caterpillar Experience would be built with 100 percent local union labor.” However, that may be a promise they can’t keep, given that Peoria County Code 6.5-21(9) requires:

    All bids and contracts for the purposes of public works, as defined and provided for by the Illinois Prevailing Wage Act (Act), 820 ILCS 130/1 et seq., prohibit the prime contractor and all participating subcontractors from discriminating in employment practices. This act requires that the prevailing wage shall apply to these projects. [820 ILCS 130/2 specifies: “‘Public works’ means all fixed works constructed by any public body, other than work done directly by any public utility company, whether or not done under public supervision or direction, or paid for wholly or in part out of public funds.”]

    Clearly, under this statute, a non-local and non-union shop could very well have the winning bid, and the County would have to award it. This isn’t a new revelation. The question came up during the County’s public forums on the referendum, but the local unions continued to support the referendum anyway, and museum supporters continued to promise that local union labor would definitely be used. It will be interesting to see what bids come in, and who wins.

  • Don’t change the name: It looks they want to avoid this fiasco from happening again. Apparently the name of the Peoria Riverfront Museum is now non-negotiable.