Wow, I just realized after I published my last post that it has been over a week since I last posted to the blog. Did you miss me? Things have been busy at work, but my project is finished now, so I should be able to start posting again.
Did I miss anything this past week? Anything interesting in the news? 🙂
I was reading over the agenda for the City Council meeting tonight, and this caught my eye: “2010 Legislative Agenda Items.” It’s described as “a list of items [that] are submitted to our local legislators with the expectation that the items will be reviewed with possible action taken in Springfield.”
One of the items on that list is a request that Peoria be able to use red-light cameras:
9. Automated Traffic Law Enforcement Technology/Red Light Running Expansion.
Current law allows for a governmental agency in a municipality or county located in Cook, DuPage, Kane, Lake, McHenry, Madison, St. Clair, and Will Counties to establish an automated traffic law enforcement system, in cooperation with a law enforcement agency that produces a recorded image of a motor vehicle’s response to a traffic control signal. The technology is designed to create a clear recorded image of the vehicle and the vehicle’s license plate. It further provides that the owner of the vehicle used in the violation is liable for the violation if the violation was recorded by the system, with exceptions. This legislation would give Peoria the authority to operate automated traffic enforcement technology for red light running.
On the one hand, I can understand the reason for the request. Since the City Council has cut dozens of police officers, the police department is having to look to alternative methods of law enforcement, including automation. These red-light cameras would allow intersections to be monitored without any officer present at all. If a vehicle runs a red light, the camera snaps a picture and the driver automatically get a traffic ticket in the mail.
On the other hand, however, photo enforcement is a bad idea. Consider this Chicago Tribune report that came out just over the weekend:
If improved safety is the goal of red-light cameras, then it is a mission largely unaccomplished for the first crop of area suburbs that raced to install the devices after they became legal in 2006, according to state data.
Accidents rose — in some cases, significantly — at half the 14 suburban intersections outfitted with traffic cameras by the end of 2007, the data show. The number of crashes fell at just five of those intersections after cameras went in, while two showed little change.
These findings aren’t unique to Chicago. In fact, numerous independent studies have shown an increase in traffic collisions due to red-light photo enforcement. Peoria (Arizona) saw the number of accidents double this past year at intersections where red-light cameras were installed.
Of course, these statistics are routinely ignored by municipalities because of another, more compelling statistic: increased revenues. Photo enforcement can be a cash cow for municipalities. A physical police officer at an intersection can only catch so many people in a day running red lights, whereas cameras catch every person, every time. That means a tremendous increase in the number of traffic citations, and hence, a windfall of revenue. A report by the Tennessee Center for Policy Research, for example, found fine collections in Kingsport (TN) quadrupled after cameras were installed.
It’s because of this conflict of interest (revenues vs. safety) that many people are opposed to photo-enforcement.
The Bible says that the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil, and some municipalities with red-light cameras have allowed themselves to be corrupted by the love of money. The National Motorists Association reported in 2008 that six cities were caught shortening the length of yellow lights at photo-enforced intersections in order to increase revenue. In some cases, the yellow lights were so short that they were actually unsafe — i.e., drivers got caught in a situation where they were too close to the intersection to stop safely, but too far away to make it through before the light turned red. Thus, these municipalities were blatantly trading safety for revenue. In other cases, the municipalities simply tried to trick motorists by making the yellow light durations shorter at photo-enforced intersections and longer at non-enforced intersections.
Yellow light duration turned out to be an interesting topic when looking up information on red-light cameras. Several sources cite studies that show longer yellow light durations are more effective than photo-enforcement at increasing safety and reducing red-light running. So if safety is really the motivating factor here, perhaps instead of asking legislators to approve photo-enforcement in Peoria, the police department should ask the Traffic Engineering division to increase yellow phase duration at intersections.
The New York Times recently published an article about big museum building projects that’s a must-read for all Peoria residents, leaders, and voters. The good news is, we haven’t actually built anything yet here in Peoria, so we still have time to correct our mistakes.
Within months of its opening in 1997, Frank Gehry’s Guggenheim Museum Bilbao had given the language a new term and the world a new way of looking at culture. The “Bilbao effect,” many came to believe, was the answer to what ailed cities everywhere — it was a way to lure tourists and economic development — and a potential boon to cultural institutions.
Municipal governments and arts groups were soon pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into larger, flashier exhibition spaces and performance halls.
Now the economic downturn has reined in a lot of these big dreams and has also led to questions about whether ambitious building projects from Buffalo to Berkeley ever made sense to begin with. Some are arguing that arts administrators and their patrons succumbed to an irrational exuberance that rivaled the stock market’s in the boom years. […]
“Museums, when they saw how much money other museums were raising, said, ‘Oh, we can’t miss out on this,’ ” said Terry Riley, a former head of the Museum of Modern Art’s department of architecture and design, who helped oversee that museum’s renovation by Yoshio Taniguchi. In many cases, he added, “it’s almost as though money drove the decision.”
Later in the article, this observation is made by Adrian Ellis, introduced as “executive director of Jazz at Lincoln Center and the founder of AEA Consulting”:
“Cultural buildings became the way in which cities articulate their identity and vitality — they were driven not by the artistic community but by a civic agenda,” he said. Now the economy is pushing organizations into “deep reflection about what their purpose is and how best to realize it,” he said — reflection that can lead back to an arts-focused agenda, and to a renewed concern about “protecting their capacity to take artistic risks.”
“When you overexpand, you limit your ability to take those risks,” Mr. Ellis said. “Although expansion is usually seen as a sign of health, it is not always a sign of vitality.”
It’s time for the city, county, and arts community to wake up, abandon their “irrational exuberance,” and start working on a realistic, sustainable plan either to expand their current operation at Lakeview, or to build/renovate a smaller space downtown that is within their means. It’s painfully obvious that the stalled project they’ve been trying to build for the past five years is decided unrealistic.
I wrote to Peoria Public Library Director Ed Szynaka and asked him for his response to anonymous reports I’ve been getting about books being indiscriminately discarded, as reported earlier on my blog. He sent me this explanation:
First of all let me assure you that our weeding guidelines, created and adopted from best library practices, are still in force. I do understand that it is human nature to see an action and believe you know what is happening and to spread that tale with your own interpretation. My explanation for why people are reporting such things to you are that they do not understand what they are seeing. They are responding to the end of the process and not seeing what happens ahead of that.
They see recycling bins of books and do not or may not realize the steps leading up to that point. Also, they don’t see how much we are keeping or realize where books are going. For examples, truckloads of books are being taken to Lakeview Branch to bolster their collection during construction. Other books are boxed to be moved within the building.
Yes, people are seeing large amounts of materials leave our building. Some are being recycled. Other materials are being donated to other libraries and in some cases sold so that we have further funding to purchase the materials Peorians want on our shelves. For example, we did not throw away bound copies of Railway Age. That title and other periodicals have gone to a service that makes them available to other types of libraries, such as academic libraries, that want to complete their collections. Periodicals were weeded and then double-checked by our local history authority who did have the final say on retaining some titles and in fact, pulled bound periodicals to be retained for the local history collection.
For many of the items that are weeded, we know we can obtain this information either online or through inter-library loan for the few patrons who may want to access it. It would be irresponsible to continue to use large amounts of space for items in poor condition or items that only one or two people want to use. Other items have gone to other academic libraries where students of various topics want, need and will use the information on a regular basis
You mentioned that it was reported to you weeding was being sped up. In reality weeding is not being sped up, but the staff is very focused. More people are working on the project for longer hours, but they do not proceed any more quickly. For instance, a team of professional, Master-degreed librarians are involved with checking materials before anything is discarded as part of the weeding process.
The decisions are made carefully, and then the last step occurs when librarians at computers are quickly scanning and discarding books. As this last task has become familiar our staff have become very practiced at the physical motion required and yes, they have “sped up” their ability to scan, but the weeding process itself is not done any more quickly.
Another visual effect that is contributing to the sense that the Main Library is being emptied is that we are in the process of clearing three floors – second, first and IB – and moving all books to the basement so we continue to retrieve them for the public during construction. That moving is going on at this moment and lends to the sense of materials disappearing when they are actually being relocated.
You mentioned that perhaps we should be using our expansion to house books and weed more carefully. The extra square footage you may be hearing about is only our new stair tower and entrance, not space for library materials. We will have the same square footage within the library itself, although IB will now be a public floor with a dedicated Local History and Genealogy room as well as an expanded gallery and more public meeting space.
I do hope this has answered your questions and as always I appreciate your continued support for Peoria Public Library.
I would only add for clarification purposes that when I mentioned that the library was gaining square footage, I was not referring to the main branch in isolation, but to the entire Peoria Public Library (all branches). They are building a new north branch and dramatically expanding the Lincoln branch. Those add a significant amount of square footage.
My thanks to Mr. Szynaka for taking the time to respond.
From the Journal Star:
With the allocation of $140,000 in engineering fees for the Peoria Riverfront Museum, the Peoria County Board is moving forward with the $77 million project even as issues of just who will run the place, and how, remain unresolved.
That’s right, they’re going to do an environmental assessment and engineering review of the proposed parking lot design. This is a parking lot that all studies have shown isn’t necessary in the first place. But here they are, getting ready to build it, despite a lack of funds for the museum building itself.
On the bright side, several county board members are getting frustrated with the museum group. Whereas Merle Widmer used to be the only dissenting vote on museum matters, these latest actions have seen five board members vote nay. All we need are four more to switch sides and we can finally put a stake through this ill-conceived plan.
I haven’t been able to get a copy of the press release yet, but I have it on good authority that District 150 has declared an impasse in their negotiations with the Peoria Federation of Teachers and plans to implement changes to the teachers’ contract beginning December 18. More details to follow.
UPDATE: The Journal Star has their article up now. Of note, the union is not threatening to strike yet, but it remains a possibility. Also, this:
Both sides also possess dissenting views on several core items, including salary, class size, tuition reimbursement and a longer school day, according to a statement issued Thursday by the school district. […]
On Dec. 18, the last day of school before the holiday break, the district plans to implement its proposal that includes no pay cuts but salary freezes, would limit reimbursement to teachers for taking additional college courses as well as which courses they could take, and essentially gives the district the ability to determine how many teachers they would employ.
I see the school district is back on the “longer school day is better” bandwagon. Huh. It was only last year that the district argued for shorter school days. Does that mean they’re admitting they were wrong to reduce the school day last year? It looks that way to me.
It was a year ago this month that the Heart of Peoria Commission voted 5-2 to disband, and the City Council obliged. Commissioners who voted in favor of disbanding were chairman Bill Washkuhn (who has since passed away, sadly), Henry Lawrence, Mark Misselhorn, Julie Waldschmidt, and Geoff Smith. Beth Akeson and I were the only dissenting votes.
The primary argument was this, from my December 1, 2008, post:
The theory goes that commissioners could have more of an impact if we weren’t a city commission. We could instead organize ourselves as a public advocacy group, similar to Peoria City Beautiful. This would free us from the restrictions of the City Council and the Open Meetings Act, allowing us to meet as often as we want and have a coordinated lobbying effort of council members.
So, I think it’s only fair on this anniversary of our commission’s demise to ask, where is this vaunted public advocacy group that the those favoring disbandment feigned interest in starting? Mark? Geoff? Henry? Julie? Funny, I haven’t heard a thing — not a peep — about this idea since our last meeting on December 5, 2008. We’re all free from the dreaded Open Meetings Act now. When’s the first meeting? What lobbying have you done in favor of the Heart of Peoria Plan this past year?
*chirp* *chirp* *chirp*
So much for having more impact.
From today’s Journal Star editorial:
You don’t need hindsight to appreciate that the locals are starting to get fed up with the city’s economic development practices, which include doling out substantial subsidies at the same time cops are being fired. In fact budgets say volumes about a community’s priorities. In fact the city’s debt service on its TIF districts has increased at double the rate of inflation during this decade, with potentially more to come through a hotel development Downtown. In fact City Hall’s history is rather checkered in picking subsidized winners and losers. In fact the council had ample forewarning that the MidTown Plaza TIF – which included the now-closed Cub Foods and a $450,000 bill for next year – was a dud; their own consultant told them so.
That’s just a taste — you really should read the whole editorial. Companion article: Main Street merchants struggle while waiting for action on revitalization plans.
It’s all about priorities. The city council didn’t bat an eye at raising taxes downtown to give a $39.5 million grant to a local developer to build a downtown hotel. But there are big cuts to police, road improvements, code enforcement, and snow removal, just to name a few things. In other words, risky economic development schemes that benefit a few people are a higher priority than basic services that benefit all. That’s not right, and it needs to change.
It seems everyone gets that except the Peoria City Council.
More reporters have been axed from the Journal Star:
Publisher Ken Mauser said, “The layoffs were made in an effort to adapt to the changing nature of the newspaper business.” […]
“Like many companies operating in today’s business environment, change will be inevitable and necessary to position our business for the future,” Mauser said.
Oops, that was Mauser’s quote from January 22, 2009. I meant to say:
We are equally sure that you recognize the value of the news and information, entertainment and many saving values found in the Journal Star everyday.
Oh, no. That’s not right either. That’s from the letter where they raised their rates in August 2008. They raised them again in October 2009.
The Journal Star on Friday announced the reduction of its staffing level by 11 positions. […] The reductions were necessitated to keep the Journal Star’s cost structure in line with the current economic environment of the newspaper industry which is affected by the general economic conditions across the nation, according to Publisher Ken Mauser.
Billy Dennis provides us with the names of three of the employees who got pink slips: Sports editor Bill Liesse, Statehouse bureau reporter Adriana Colindres, and State editor Lisa Coon.
Right before Christmas. Right after they raised the subscription rates twice in a little over a year. Just eleven months after the last round of layoffs.
The value of the Journal Star keeps going down, down, down. What a shame for readers. Worse, what a shame for those laid off and their families.
Earlier this year, one of my readers informed me that the dumpsters outside the Peoria Public Library downtown were full of books being thrown away. I contacted library officials who explained that they were “weeding” books — a perfectly legitimate process based on established guidelines for libraries.
But now a new anonymous source tells me the library staff is concerned that those weeding guidelines are being thrown out with the books in the basement:
I have attached a couple of photos of bins of books ready to be taken away and destroyed. PPL has stepped up efforts to get rid of the books being stored in its basement levels. They will all be gone soon if this process is not stopped. All the bins in the attached photo are being filled at a rate of a couple of times a day. Shelves of books are being indiscriminately emptied of books regardless of condition or value. Staff here at the library believes that this process is a violation of the responsibility of the library to the citizens. Yes, some of these books are in poor shape and really have no future, but many others could be sold, donated or otherwise reused.
That’s a lot of books. This makes me wonder, why the need to “step up” their weeding efforts? Aren’t we expanding the size of the library buildings overall? It seems there would be plenty of space to continue storing these until a proper weeding could be done. Why the rush?