All posts by C. J. Summers

I am a fourth-generation Peorian, married with three children.
Healthcare

Autism linked to vaccine

9 Comments

I understand why there has been such a concerted effort to convince people that autism is not connected to vaccinations. Vaccinations save lives. Just Google “polio” sometime and consider how much life has been improved through vaccines. And if parents think that getting their children vaccinated is going to give them autism, they might forego vaccines because they fear they’re too risky. Yet not getting vaccinated would actually open them up to greater risk.

So I get it. But there’s just one problem. There is a link between autism and vaccines. And the sooner the medical community comes clean about it and reduces that risk, the better off everyone will be. The Department of Health and Human Services has conceded the link in a document filed in a Federal Claims Court. You can read a verbatim copy here. The concession comes under the “Analysis” section and states:

In sum, DVIC [Division of Vaccine Injury Compensation, Department of Health and Human Services] has concluded that the facts of this case meet the statutory criteria for demonstrating that the vaccinations CHILD [name redacted for privacy] received on July 19, 2000, significantly aggravated an underlying mitochondrial disorder, which predisposed her to deficits in cellular energy metabolism, and manifested as a regressive encephalopathy with features of autism spectrum disorder. Therefore, respondent recommends that compensation be awarded to petitioners in accordance with 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-11(c)(1)(C)(ii).

There must be a way to be honest about these findings without scaring everyone into eschewing vaccinations. And there must be a way to reduce the risks — for example, maybe there’s a test that can be done to check for conditions that could be aggravated by the vaccination before the shot is administered. One thing that’s definitely not going help is pretending there is no link and stonewalling the public.

Hat tip: “The Mouse”

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.