You can say “Bye Bye Bye” to the 90s as our weather gets back “N’Sync” this weekend.

In the mid-1960s the city of Peoria proposed to annex Richwoods Township, which consisted of roughly 10 square miles of and, much of it already developed. Opposition was bitter and was fueled by fears of school integration that might result if and when the Peoria school district expanded to encompass the new territory. The vote by township residents on the annexation referendum was close, but the referendum was approved.

 

The annexation nearly doubled the size of Peoria, providing room for future expansion. During the four-year period, 1970-73, when Springfield approved 237 annexations, Peoria approved only four, amounting to only a tenth of a square mile. Most of Peoria’s development occurred within its newly enlarged boundaries. The population of “old” Peoria slipped from 106,000 in 1960 to less than 100,000 in 1970, but the addition of Richwoods added some 25,000 new residents to its population. Present city officials believe that the tax revenues collected from the Richwoods section have been vital to the city in maintaining its services in the older parts of Peoria.

 

The annexation has not been without cost to the city. Because Richwoods, like so many fringe areas around Illinois cities, had been developed according to the relatively lax zoning, construction and planning standards of county government, resulting deficiencies became Peoria’s responsibility to remedy. Fortunately, a preannexation agreement with Peoria County spared the city from having to remedy all the problems at once. As Peoria’s Mayor Richard E. Carver complained recently: “Our city is, even today, spending millions of dollars developing the basic road network which would normally have been constructed as the area developed had there been an adequate degree of planning and control present at that time.”

 

Peoria suffers as well from the presence of an unincorporated urbanized enclave situated well inside its boundaries. But because it is larger than 60 acres, may not be annexed unilaterally by the city even though, in the mayor’s words, it is “receiving indirectly many of our services, yet [is] contributing nothing to the revenues of our city.”

 

The need to control the urbanization of land (especially unincorporated land) within and immediately outside their borders is a common topic of conversation among mayors across the country. Peoria’s Carver, who is an officer of the U.S. Conference of Mayors and a director of the National League of Cities, shares their concerns. “A direct correlation can, in fact, be drawn between the health of American cities,” he wrote recently, “and their ability to move their boundaries in conjunction with urban expansion.”

As I reported a couple months ago, Famous Barr will be renamed Macy’s as a result of the merger between Federated Department Stores and May Department Stores. You can read all about it here.

Maybe they can start sponsoring the Santa Claus Parade and bring in some floats from New York. I want to see a gigantic, helium-filled Snoopy going down Main Street this November!

Channel position is not a significant issue with regard to station identification on DTV. Currently, though broadcasting on digital channel 57, WEEK is able to send out a signal so that on a digital tuner we appear as Ch. 25. Eventually when the cable retrans deals are done, all local channels will be located in approximately the mid-700 channel positions.

The FCC has assigned a digital or RF channel number to all digital stations. In addition, some local affiliates are using Program and System Information Protocol (PSIP) to remap to their analog channel numbers. PSIP is data that is transmitted along with a station’s DTV signal that tells DTV receivers important information about the station and what is being broadcast (what channel to tune to for reception of the station, helps maintain current (analog) channel number branding, tells receiver whether multiple programs are being broadcast, etc.).

The Journal Star reported today that Gov. Blagojevich deceived the legislature in order to get a budget item passed that would allow him to use the money for embryonic stem cell research:

The governor on Tuesday said a $10 million line item in the state budget for “scientific research” was actually tucked away for grants to study stem cells, including those from human embryos. Both Shadid and Demuzio last year opposed legislation for Illinois to promote embryonic stem cell research, which some liken to abortion because human embryos are destroyed.

Gov. Rod Blagojevich should be impeached. He has wantonly abused the power of his office and deliberately deceived the legislature — the people’s representatives — to push through legislation he knew would never pass on its own merits.

Further, he unabashedly defends his ends-justify-the-means methods. Here’s an actual quote from the governor reported on The Illinois Leader webpage: “[using $10 million for stem cell research was] the right thing to do, and however you get there is immaterial.” Oh, really? Try having your district attorney tell that to the court the next time the police obtain evidence without a warrant. Try telling that to the cop that pulls you over when you were speeding so you wouldn’t be late for work. Try telling that to the voters when you come up for reelection.

And that assumes that the end is indeed “the right thing to do.” Clearly, there is no consensus on that point. Basically what the governor is saying is that it doesn’t matter how he gets what he wants as long as he believes it’s the right thing to do. How arrogant. What else does the good gov’nuh believe is “the right thing to do”? Obviously integrity and honesty aren’t on his list.

His deception and moral equivocacy are bad for government regardless of the issue. That said, though, I’m especially upset because I’m opposed to embryonic stem-cell research, as I’ve stated in a previous post. Here’s another apt quote from the Illinois Leader:

“Though it’s commendable to want to help those who are suffering debilitating diseases and injuries, it is unconscionable to do so at the expense of other human lives,” said Dr. John Kilner, president of the Center for Bioethics and Human Dignity (CBHD) said Wednesday.

“This is an imposition of morally problematic research on the citizens of Illinois. The people have already spoken through the democratic process- legislation to promote this research failed in the General Assembly. Stem cell research can be pursued ethically by focusing research on adult stem cells, including cord blood cells.”

Imposition. Morally problematic. Ethical ways to pursue the same ends. These things mean nothing to our governor. Because of his deception, every Illinoisan’s tax dollars are directly funding human experimentation and destruction. That is outrageous.

Impeach Blagojevich.

There was a meeting scheduled last night from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. at Jameison School to talk about the upcoming cable franchise agreement. I admit I was late because my softball game didn’t finish until 6:30. So I got there at 6:50, and…

The meeting was over.

The news crew for channel 31 informed me that there was only one person there who came to give his/her input, besides councilmen and staff. So they adjourned. I didn’t note everyone who was there, but I did see councilmen Morris and Turner, city attorney Randy Ray, and city manager Randy Oliver. I’m sure others were there, but I can’t confirm or deny who they were. There were reporters there from all the major news outlets.

I’m a little miffed that I missed the supposedly two-hour meeting after being only 20 minutes late. But more than that, I’m disappointed that only one person showed up. I suppose it’s possible that everyone had a softball game tonight and were all going to come late like me, but that’s unlikely. So, I can only guess that everyone in Peoria is really, really happy with their cable TV service. Who could’ve guessed?

Of course, I’m being facetious. But why didn’t anyone show up?

One problem may be just communicating to Peorians at large when and where the meetings are. For instance, I didn’t see anything in the Journal Star yesterday about it (I could’ve missed it).

But a more likely culprit, I believe, is that people just don’t know what city leaders are looking for. What kind of information is the council hoping to get from residents? Are they just wanting people to come and complain about their cable service?

It would be helpful if city staff would give everyone some guidelines before the meetings. For instance, they could tell everyone what can and cannot be done with a cable franchise agreement — perhaps a shorter, simpler version (e.g., one page bulleted list) of this document from the Baller Herbst Law Group. Some of the things I learned were:

• Cities can only regulate the rates of basic cable (channels 2 through 22 in Peoria)
• Cable companies can “pass through” the cost of city demands to the consumer directly (not just with higher rates, but with a specific fee)
• Cities don’t have to demand PEG (public, education, government) access, and in fact, if no one is interested in this kind of access, the city could drop it in the franchise renewal. I know they’ll still want the government access (for council meetings), and ICC will want the educational access, but does anyone care about public access? If so, they should attend these meetings.
• Cities cannot regulate specific cable programming — however, they can “specify broad categories of programs and services and require that some programs be provided on designated channels.” That sounds to me like they can’t say “CNN needs to be on channel 2, and ESPN needs to be on channel 3,” but they could say, “there needs to be 24-news and sports programming in the 2-22 channel range.”
• It’s unclear at this time whether cities can legally make any demands of a cable company’s broadband services. Also, while the city can’t require “open access” to cable lines to provide cable TV content (like they do with phone lines to provide phone service), it appears they may be able to require “open access” to their cable modem system by non-affiliated internet service providers.
• Cities can make demands regarding customer service, including installation timing and arrangements, maintenance dealing with system outages, and billing (e.g., how pass-through fees and are identified on the bill).

Along with this document to give things context, they could ask the community for more specific input, such as:

• Do you watch or use public access television? Is that something you want to see preserved or enhanced?
• Are you satisfied with the categories of programming you receive on basic cable, classic cable, etc.?
• How satisfied are you with Insight’s customer service? Do you understand your bill or should it be reworded?
• Have you had any trouble with system outages? If so, were they fixed within a reasonable time?

And whatever else they want to know. But spelling this stuff out would be helpful for residents when seeking input.

One other note. According to Baller Herbst, the going term for franchise agreements is 7-10 years, but on the news last night Randy Ray said he was trying for a five-year franchise agreement. I can understand wanting to lower it from twenty (that’s too long). But five years seems a bit short to me, especially if the city wants the cable company to make any upgrades to the system. With such a short agreement, there wouldn’t be much incentive to put a whole lot of money into the system when the possibility exists that they won’t get a return on their investment.

I hope there is better turnout at the next two meetings: July 28 at Peoria High School, and August 18 at Woodruff High School. Both dates are Thursdays, and the meetings start at 6:30. Don’t be late.

Who was the marketing genius who came up with Walgreens’ new slogan? In case you haven’t heard it, it goes something like this: “The world isn’t perfect. That’s why there’s Walgreens.” I think the indended meaning is that Walgreens is there to help fix the imperfections of the world (like saying, “The world isn’t perfect; that’s why there are doctors who can perform open-heart surgery”).

But, of course, there’s another way you can take it. I wonder if anyone in the marketing department thought about it for a second and said, “hey, that could also mean that Walgreens is a deleterious result of the world’s imperfections” (like saying, “The world isn’t perfect; that’s why there’s disease and death”).

I guess you have to ask, which is the more reasonable interpretation?

According to an AP article that ran in the Journal Star and the Chicago Sun-Times today, “The National Pharmacists Association said nearly one in five pharmacies owned by Walgreen Co. in the area, or 58 in all, this year have exceeded what it considers to be the safe average workload of 20 prescriptions filled per hour per pharmacist.” And the union’s executive director Chuck Sauer said, “This is the direct result of Walgreens’ systematic implementation of its assembly line philosophy, under which pharmacists are made to work at ever-increasing speeds, compromising patient safety.”

If that’s true, then it looks like the latter interpretation is the correct one. The world isn’t perfect; that’s why Walgreens puts profits over safety.