All posts by C. J. Summers

I am a fourth-generation Peorian, married with three children.
Nation/World

Biggest underreported news story: China’s anti-satellite weapons

19 Comments

China Satellite graphicThink about how much we in the United States use, if not depend on, satellite technology.

I’m not just talking about Dish Network. There are civilian and and military applications for satellites: communication, navigation, reconnaissance, etc. Think about GPS, smart bombs, satellite phones, weather maps, etc. It’s probably safe to say that satellite technology impacts us every day.

Now read this from the latest issue of The New Atlantis:

On January 11, 2007, a missile was launched from Chinese territory. It arced upwards into space to an altitude of about 537 miles, where it slammed directly into its target, an obsolete Chinese weather satellite. The target was destroyed, reportedly producing some 900 trackable pieces of space debris in orbits from 125 miles to about 2,300 miles and resulting in an increase of 10 percent in the total amount of manmade debris in orbit.

This demonstration of an anti-satellite weapon (ASAT) was just the latest in a series of tests of China’s space weapons program, and was a warning sign the United States should take very seriously. […]

“Far more than any other country, the U.S. depends on space for national and tactical intelligence, military operations, and civil and commercial benefits,” as Robert L. Butterworth, president of the space consultancy Aries Analytics, recently put it. This “provides a clear incentive for attacking American spacecraft.” Such an attack on American satellites would not have to be very extensive to be devastating—as long as it were well-planned. “Even a small-scale anti-satellite attack in a crisis against fifty U.S. satellites (assuming a mix of targeted military reconnaissance, navigation satellites, and communication satellites) could have a catastrophic effect not only on U.S. military forces, but [on] the U.S. civilian economy,” according to a recent report by China analyst Michael Pillsbury.

Chilling, isn’t it? The U.S. is, in fact, taking the threat seriously. Just today DefenseNews.com reports:

Five months after the Chinese proved they could destroy a satellite in orbit, U.S. lawmakers are responding with a surge in spending on Pentagon space programs aimed at protecting U.S. satellites. […]

“The Chinese anti-satellite test in early 2007 highlighted the vulnerability of our space assets,” House members said in a report on the 2008 Defense Authorization Act they passed in May.

News of China’s weaponization of space gets worse. The missile that was launched in January isn’t the only anti-satellite weapon at China’s disposal. They also have ground-based lasers that can jam or blind U.S. reconnaissance satellites, and there’s evidence they may be investing in space-based anti-satellite weapons.

No one is suggesting the Chinese are planning to take over the U.S. (yet, at least), but China’s neighbors are worried. There is speculation that jamming reconnaissance satellites could be a tactic China could use in an effort to take over Taiwan (to keep other countries, notably the U.S., in the dark until the takeover is well underway or even completed), and India is a bit wary of what these new weapons tests portend for the region, too. Such technology could act as a deterrent to any international action against China should they decide to, shall we say, annex some land.

Of course, the Chinese are outspoken opponents of the weaponization of space. That’s not surprising. What was it Sun Tzu said? “All warfare is based on deception.” Aviation Week reported on May 24:

Gen. Kevin Chilton, the head of U.S. Air Force Space Command […] said Chinese calls for a new space treaty even after their ASAT test were the definition of chutzpah. “The contradictions between China’s statements and its actions raise legitimate questions about the credibility of their declaratory policies, statements and security commitments,” said Air Force Maj. Gen. James Armor Jr., director of the National Security Space Office.

Don’t kid yourself — this is no small incident. It’s surprising to me that it hasn’t been more widely reported. I found one or two references to it in the Chicago Tribune, but none in the Journal Star’s archives. This could be the start of a significant arms race, although U.S. officials would be quick to pooh-pooh that idea.

Well, I don’t know a whole lot about the military, but I do know there is a strategic advantage to holding the high ground, and there’s no higher “high ground” than space. We can’t afford to let China hold it. So, maybe some don’t want to call it an emotionally-charged term like “arms race,” but I say we call a spade a spade. We might want to start rethinking that $76 billion trade deficit with China, too, while we’re at it.

美夢. (Sweet dreams.)

City of Peoria, Peoria Township

Any township law experts out there?

7 Comments

Here’s an arcane legal question for you. In my last post, I mentioned that George Jacob resides in Medina Township, not Peoria Township. That got me thinking. How can Jacob be a Peoria Township trustee if he lives in Medina Township?

It’s kind of confusing, because the state law is unclear to me. The Town of the City of Peoria falls under the “Township within a city” section of the state’s Township Code (60 ILCS):

(60 ILCS 1/15‑50)
Sec. 15‑50. Powers exercised by city council. All the powers vested in the township described in Section 15‑45, including all the powers now vested by law in the highway commissioners of the township and in the township board of the township, shall be exercised by the city council.

And it says something similar under the “Township board” section:

(60 ILCS 1/80‑5)
Sec. 80‑5. Township board membership; officers.
(b) In towns organized under Article 15, all the powers vested by law in the township board shall be exercised by the city council.

So that’s pretty straightforward. However, elsewhere in the code there is a section called “Qualification and tenure of township officers,” and it says:

(60 ILCS 1/55‑5)
Sec. 55‑5. Legal voter and resident. No person is eligible to hold any office unless he or she is a legal voter and has been a resident of the township for one year.

So, do the first two sections I quoted trump the last one? Or does the qualification section apply to members of the city council in a “Township within a city”? The issue is this: If there’s no residency requirement, then you could potentially have a situation where six members of the council and the mayor could end up living in the City, but not the Town, of Peoria. That would mean a majority of the Peoria Township trustees wouldn’t even be Peoria Township residents. That would be a strange form of representative government, wouldn’t it?

Someone may well ask, so what? What’s the big deal? Well, it’s not really a big deal, I guess, in terms of money. The township collects only 0.13659% of property tax bills, which comes out to about $38.70 for the owner of a $100,000 home. But then, if you were to have a majority of trustees someday with no personal stake in the township, that cost could go up. Basically, it’s a question of compliance with state law and, ultimately, the principle of appropriate representation of taxpayers.

One more thing: I have nothing against George Jacob. I supported him in the at-large election and I still support him for city council. I think he’s doing good work. This isn’t a personal attack, just a question about how the law works and whether this practice is in the best interests of the citizens or not.

City of Peoria, Dunlap School District 323, Peoria Public Schools, Taxes

Cheaper taxes another perk of living in North Peoria

49 Comments

House GraphicIf you live in the older part of Peoria like I do (Uplands neighborhood, near Bradley), your total property tax rate is 8.35885%. If you live where fifth-district councilman Patrick Nichting lives (Sleepy Hollow Rd., north of Route 6, near the corner of Knoxville and Mossville Rd.), your total property tax rate is only 7.69782%. And if you live where at-large councilman George Jacob lives (Dana Dr., north of Route 6, off Wilhelm Rd.), your total property tax is 8.02308%. (Note: I picked Nichting and Jacob merely for descriptive purposes and because, as public figures, their addresses are already widely published.)

Why the differences? It’s because different taxing bodies have different borders. Both Nichting and Jacob live outside the Greater Peoria Airport Authority’s taxing district, saving them 0.24087% on their tax bills. They also both live in Dunlap’s school district (4.0644%) instead of District 150 (4.48456%), saving them another 0.42016%.

Jacob’s rate is a little higher than Nichting’s because Jacob lives in Medina Township instead of Peoria Township. Medina assesses 0.13019% for township government expenses plus 0.33166% for road and bridge maintenance. That totals 0.46185% for living in Medina Township versus only 0.13659% for Peoria Township.

So how does that translate into dollars and cents? Well, a $200,000 owner-occupied home in the Uplands will cost you $407.64 a year more in taxes than a $200,000 home in Nichting’s neighborhood, and $207.06 more than a $200,000 home in Jacob’s neighborhood. That’s not chump change.

On May 29, the Illinois legislature passed Senate Bill 263 which makes the airport authority’s boundaries coterminous with Peoria County. Once the governor signs that into law, those in northern Peoria will have to begin paying their share of the airport’s expenses. Since the levy will stay the same, but be spread among more taxpayers, those currently paying the airport authority’s tax will actually see their rates go down a little.

That will leave the 200-pound gorilla — school taxes — as the biggest difference between living out north or closer to the center of the city, tax-wise. In the older part of the city, you can find a wide range of housing prices, but the farther you go north, the more homogeneous the housing prices become. Pretty soon, you’re in an area where the lowest-priced housing is out of many people’s price range.

Those who can afford $200,000+ houses out north are rewarded with lower taxes and better schools. Meanwhile, those who can only afford a home costing less than $180,000 have few if any options out north. In Peoria, their choices are all within District 150, which means they get relatively poorer schools (based on Illinois Report Card info) and proportionately higher taxes.

I’ve suggested before that school districts 150 and 323 be combined. I still think that’s a good idea. But there’s something else that needs to be done: new neighborhood developments in northern Peoria need to have a broader range of housing prices. Instead of building homogeneous neighborhoods where every house is $280,000, new neighborhoods should include a diversity of housing prices. I’m not talking about low-income housing (that’s a different topic); I’m just talking about a range of, say, $120,000 to $250,000 homes being built within the same neighborhood.

All of these issues intertwine. Tax disparity, school disparity, and housing disparity all converge to make Peoria a tale of two cities. Things need to change, because our current trajectory is unsustainable. Some people actually believe that it’s desirable for the city to consider South Peoria the place for the violent and criminal element to live, the East Bluff to be a buffer, and the northern part of the city to be the “safe” part of Peoria. Folks, this is not healthy thinking. “A house divided against itself cannot stand.”

We can dream more inspiring dreams for Peoria. Let’s set higher goals for our city. Let’s not abandon our friends and neighbors on the south side out of fear and ignorance. Let’s not build neighborhoods that keep people out, but rather invite people in. Let’s make all of Peoria a great place to live.

Museum Block

Museum not getting smaller… well, maybe

13 Comments

With respect to the size of the museum, this has changed over time. It’s gotten bigger; it’s gotten slightly smaller as we’ve continued to look at many different options.
-Jim Vergon, Lakeview Museum Board Chairman

So, the Peoria Riverfront Museum might be bigger or it might be smaller, but for sure there will be some “minor changes” because of “rising construction costs,” according to the Journal Star. Considering I’ve never seen a project ever get bigger due to rising construction costs, I’m going to guess Vergon’s quote is code for “it’s going to be smaller, just not as small as has been rumored.” I appreciate the museum partners’ positive outlook, but do they really expect us to believe this:

Vergon said that new program is “going well,” and [Lakeview Spokeswoman Kathleen] Woith adds fundraising has nothing to do with design changes.

Really? You don’t think delays in fundraising had anything to do with construction cost estimates going up, prompting “minor changes” in the design? They’re completely unrelated?

Woith also states that the public fundraising campaign doesn’t start until next year. If the “Circle the Square” campaign is any indication, I wouldn’t get my hopes up if I were Lakeview.

Last June, Jim Ardis and seven other mayors committed to raise $16 million in a year and raise grassroots support for the museum. At that time (6/27/06), the Journal Star reported that “the museum group has raised […] about $16 million in private funds and more than $5 million in a combination of state, federal and local dollars.”

Today, almost a year later, the Journal Star says that, as of February, public dollars total “only $6 million in commitments” and “[p]rivate donations total $18 million, or a little more than half the $35 million being sought.” That means the mayors’ efforts to raise $16 million in a year has so far fallen about $14 million short of the goal.

I hope someone with the museum partners at some point is brave enough to take an honest assessment of why there’s not more excitement about this project. The stalled fundraising should be a big hint that something’s not resonating with the public, or at least that the cost and scope of the project is just too big.

City Council, City of Peoria, Peoria Fire Department

Fire Station 11 compromise in the works

21 Comments

Fire Truck GraphicMy sources tell me that a compromise is in the works for Fire Station 11. You may remember that a previous council cut an engine company from the station as a cost-savings move three years ago. Ever since then, every election has included the question of how/when the council will fully staff Fire Station 11.

Well, the fire department has recently been utilizing the city’s GIS system to plot response times from each of the fire stations. Basically, they map out where each fire station is and then draw a circle around it representing a four-minute response time for water coverage. When they analyzed the results of that exercise and looked at where the circles overlapped and intersected, they determined that Fire Station 11’s area of service was adequately covered by the other fire stations.

Although water coverage is good, there is another issue, and that’s Basic Life Support (BLS) calls. In that area, Fire Station 11’s coverage is not so good. Since they don’t have an engine, they have to run a ladder truck for BLS calls. Well, there are many problems with that, not the least of which is speed. People in need of basic life support need help fast, and ladder trucks are not the speediest vehicles.

But another problem is wear and tear on the vehicle. Ladder trucks cost about three quarters of a million dollars and should last 15 to 20 years, according to Fire Prevention Chief Greg Walters (I found this out while researching another story; Walters is not the source for this post). However, by sending the ladder truck out on BLS calls, that’s beating the heck out of the truck and if something doesn’t change they’ll probably have to replace that truck sooner. That kind of blows the cost savings the council was hoping to get by removing the engine company.

So, the compromise that’s being talked about is this: Instead of putting an engine company back in at Fire Station 11 (which is, I believe, 11 firefighters), they would put in, for lack of a better term, a BLS company (which would only be 5 firefighters, if I understand correctly). The BLS company would have their own vehicle, but it wouldn’t be a fire engine or the ladder truck. That would be cheaper than reinstating an engine company (5 more firefighters instead of 11), would save wear and tear on an expensive ladder truck allowing it to stay in service longer, and would adequately serve the Fire Station 11 area.

That’s all the information I have. I couldn’t find anyone willing to talk on the record about it. And I still have some questions, like why couldn’t they just add a vehicle instead of a vehicle and five more guys. If I had to speculate, I’d guess that it has something to do with the firefighters union. But I imagine those details will come out eventually. In fact, I understand it will be coming before the council sometime relatively soon. Said one person I asked for comment, “I don’t want to jinx it.”

City Council, City of Peoria

Council Roundup: June 5, 2007

5 Comments

It was a looong meeting Tuesday. Here are the highlights:

  • The council surprisingly reversed course — again — on the issue of whether to charge fees for vaults and walkways that encroach on the public right-of-way. Last October they voted 8-2 to keep the fees, then last month they voted 9-1 to eliminate the fees. And tonight they voted 6-5 to keep the fees again. Well, I’m not going to complain about their fickleness too much because they made the right decision tonight. There’s no reason for the city to eliminate those fees. As Councilman Manning said, it’s not an unreasonable fee; it’s just a normal cost of doing business. And the city needs the revenue.
  • The Heart of Peoria Commission received a stay of execution for two weeks, but not a pardon. Second-district Councilwoman Barbara Van Auken made the motion to defer to allow time for the members of the various commissions and the council to come to some sort of compromise. The Heart of Peoria Commission may call a special meeting to discuss whatever compromise is brought forward.
  • A minor change was made to Mr. Abud’s liquor license conditions so he can open his grocery store on the south side of Peoria. The original agreement called for Abud to hire off-duty Peoria police officers to patrol the business during all hours of operation. The revised agreement only requires officers to provide security from 2:30 p.m. until the store closes (10:00 p.m.). This is a reasonable request, in my opinion. The goal is to provide a secure environment, and I think this accomplishes that end.
  • The council approved reducing their meetings to twice a month. It wasn’t mentioned last night, but I heard on the news today that the new schedule will start in July. Under the new schedule, the council will meet on the second and fourth Tuesdays of the month. I predict that schedule will last one year or less.
  • The council deferred a request from Councilman Gulley to appropriate funds for the improvement of Griswold Street on the south side. This is a budget amendment right before the council is getting ready to negotiate next year’s budget, so some think the timing is wrong. Others want to know what projects are going to be delayed by allocating money to this project instead. There will be a report back next week.
  • It wasn’t mentioned in the meeting, but I heard afterwards that a new website was launched for the Peoria Promise. Check it out.
City of Peoria, Museum Block

The incredible shrinking museum

19 Comments

Reading Polly Peoria’s latest post reminded me of a rumor I heard about the Peoria Riverfront Museum: it’s getting smaller.

You know they’ve been having a little trouble raising the money for this monstrosity, the plans for which are antithetical to the Heart of Peoria Plan. Rather than taking that as a hint that maybe people aren’t really as excited about this project as they thought they were, they’ve now (I’ve been told) begun cutting construction costs by making it smaller. Specifically, I hear they’ve cut it down to a one-story building except for the generic-IMAX part. Won’t that look inspiring? Maybe they can put up a weather vane and plant some prairie grass next to it to complete the anatopism.

So let’s think about this for a minute. First, the idea was to use just a portion of the old Sears block for a Peoria history museum sponsored by the Peoria Historical Society. Then Lakeview got involved and it mushroomed into a mega-museum that would include art, history, science, nature, a digital big-screen theater ala IMAX (but not actually IMAX), the African American Hall of Fame, the IHSA Peak Performance Center, and a partridge in a pear tree. All this in only 70,000 square feet. And now they want to make all that fit in an even smaller space?

Why don’t they just admit they bit off more than they could chew and go back to the drawing board? If they root around the drawing board long enough they may even happen upon this:

HOPC, Radio, The Peoria Chronicle

Peoria Chronicle is on the air

Vintage MicCouncilman Bob Manning and I are Jonathan Ahl’s guests on Outside the Horseshoe tonight on WCBU (89.9 FM). I won’t actually be wearing my “blogger” hat for this interview, but rather my “Heart of Peoria Commission” hat, since that will be the main topic of discussion. Depending on how the council votes tonight, this may be my last day as a Heart of Peoria commissioner.

The Journal Star editorial board today came out in favor of keeping the Heart of Peoria Commission. My thanks to them for their support.