Category Archives: City of Peoria

City Council, City of Peoria, Kellar Branch

Pioneer’s offer to buy Kellar Branch and help build trail next to it still stands

19 Comments

After reading the details of Pioneer Railcorp’s offer to purchase the Kellar Branch rail line from the city and help the Park District construct a trail next to it, one has to wonder why in the world the city wouldn’t jump at the opportunity. There’s no reasonable explanation for this offer to be rejected.

The offer, detailed in a letter to the city council dated September 24, 2004, can be read in its entirety by clicking here. I’d just like to bullet out a summary of applicable parts of the offer here. Pioneer is offering to:

  • Purchase the Kellar Branch and western spur from the City of Peoria for $565,000, or accept a long-term lease on the lines;
  • Grant the Park District a 999-year lease on a portion of the right-of-way for the use of a trail;
  • Donate up to $100,000 in in-kind services (railcar usage, train service, equipment use, flagging and other labor services) to the Park District to assist in the construction of said trail;
  • Work with the Park District to provide for joint use of the right-of-way, including the joint use of existing bridges;
  • Provide the labor, materials and equipment to construct a trestle for the trail to traverse the section behind Versailles Garden where the track elevation has caused the Park District the most concern;
  • Upgrade the Kellar Branch track to Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) “Class I” standards;
  • Aggressively seek new business in Pioneer Park and Growth Cell Two;
  • Develop a “dinner train” as a tourist attraction for the city (similar to a successful dinner train Pioneer runs on their Gettysburg & Northern Railroad);
  • Develop, in cooperation with the city, tourist/commuter service from downtown;
  • Pursue the establishment of a “railroad academy” in partnership with Illinois Central College and/or other appropriate partners, to train students in train operation and maintenance, using Pioneer’s equipment and facilities; and
  • Give the city right of first refusal to repurchase the line if another entity wants to buy it from Pioneer.

According to Pioneer Railcorp, this offer still stands. Look at those items above again. The city gets $565,000. The rail line gets upgraded to Class I standards at no expense to the city. The trail is built beside the rail line, so the Rock Island and Pimiteoui Trails will be connected. And Pioneer will agressively seek new business along the line, which could bring in more higher-paying manufacturing jobs to Peoria.

Why isn’t the City taking this offer?

City of Peoria, Kellar Branch, Peoria Journal Star

Journal Star: Trail at any cost

11 Comments

The Journal Star has another editorial on the Kellar Branch today. I’m surprised it took them this long to write it, considering all their editorials on this issue follow the same boilerplate. Once again, it’s time to set the record straight:

Recall that Carver was the Kellar branch’s only customer, and that the city of Peoria built the company a $2 million extension so it could continue getting deliveries.

This is revisionist history. Peoria did not “buil[d] the company a $2 million extension.” The resolution which passed on May 15, 2001 stated explicitly the reason for extending the spur was “to retain long-term cost effective, direct rail service to Pioneer Industrial Park and future rail service to Growth Cell #2….” It was not just to benefit Carver Lumber, unless the council was lying about their reason for building it. (Insert cynicism here.)

It’s also worth noting that there were several other businesses on the Kellar Branch before the city started their attempt to de-rail it. So the fact that Carver is the “only” customer now is to the city’s shame. Is the Journal Star happy they’ve run these businesses out of town for the sake of a trail?

And the $2 million cost did not come out of Peoria’s coffers. Most of that was a grant, just like the $4 million in grants that the Park District wants to use to build the trail. The Journal Star likes to think of grants as free money when it comes to building a trail, but for rail service it’s seen as a liability. More hypocrisy. The city only spent $175,000 out of the capital improvement fund for the spur.

Carver’s number-crunching ought not interfere with the trail conversion. At this point, they are two separate issues. There must be a way to walk and chew gum – to help Carver and build the trail – at the same time.

They are not two separate issues. Getting Surface Transportation Board (STB) approval is part of the process precisely so that rail line owners can’t do what Peoria is trying to do: take a line out of service without any regard for the businesses using that line. The process is working the way it was intended.

If the city and Park District were really willing to “walk and chew gum,” they could have had this trail completed years ago — by putting it side-by-side with the Kellar Branch.

Does the STB think the Kellar branch would magically reopen overnight and, poof, Carver’s problem would be solved? Parts of the line are in disrepair. It cost $350,000 for the city of Peoria to rehab a just small swatch of track in Pioneer Park. Multiply that by 8 1/2 miles and you get an idea of the prohibitive price tag.

This is a red herring. First of all, the tracks should not be in disrepair, and if they are, then it was due to a breach in contract with DOT Rail (d/b/a Central Illinois Railway), and Peoria should take legal action against them to pay for the repairs.

According to the city’s April 27, 2004, contract with DOT Rail, the city is only responsible for “maintenance of roadways and street crossings (excluding rails, ties and signal devices on roadways and streets) under the jurisdiction of the city.”

DOT Rail, on the other hand, “shall assume the responsibility for all maintenance of tracks, crossing protection, and roadbed including weed, brush, snow and ice control thereon, all drainage control maintenance, and all weed and brush control on the remainder of the right-of-way, following the guidelines set forth by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA).”

Granted, this particular contract expired 60 days after the western spur was completed, but the spur was completed in February, which means the contract expired in April, just last month. If there are tracks in need of repair, that means DOT Rail was in breach of contract. Of course, since they never made a single delivery over the Kellar Branch, they were in breach of contract the entire time that Carver Lumber had to haul their lumber via truck at tremendous expense.

The decision to close Kellar has been made.

No, Journal Star Editorial Board, the decision hasn’t been made. It’s up to the STB, and they’ve said it can’t be closed yet. The Journal Star’s statement is a bald-faced lie.

Serious money has been spent on an alternative. It would be crazy to tap local taxpayers for even more millions to have two competing branches – one of which is old and rickety and interrupts traffic at several major intersections. Service to Carver would probably be faster by rickshaw, on a bike path.

Again, taxpayers would not be tapped for anything if the Kellar Branch were reopened. In fact, Pioneer would probably still be interested in buying it, in which case, rather than costing the taxpayers, the City of Peoria could rake in over a half-million dollars instead!

Also, the branches wouldn’t be “competing” with each other. The UP has access to both ends of the Kellar Branch (sole access at the western spur and neutral access downtown via the TZPR). So this is another nonsense statement.

There’s talk of getting a short-haul operator to run cars over UP’s line. But these are logistical matters that can be sorted out without derailing the trail.

Sure. And there are just a few logistical matters with getting pigs to fly, too. By all accounts from every railroad worker and enthusiast I know or have read, there’s not a snowball’s chance in hell that UP is going to let a short-haul operator run cars over its mainline.

The level of Carver’s rail service is not a little “logistical matter.” It’s the difference between them staying in business in Peoria or either moving out of Peoria or going out of business. This is a business that has been in this area over 60 years. But it’s apparently just collateral damage to the Journal Star, the City of Peoria, and the Peoria Park District, who continue to fight for a hiking trail at any cost.

City Council, City of Peoria

Ideas abound at special council meeting

16 Comments

The Journal Star has an excellent report (it was written by Jennifer Davis, so I expected nothing less) on the special council meeting last night. Last year, new council members Bob Manning and Barbara Van Auken were just learning the ropes of city budget planning. This year, they’re ready to make good on their campaign promises of increased fire protection and elimination of the regressive garbage tax.

Mayor Ardis is helping that cause by starting early to establish budget priorities and communicate them proactively to city staff (in the past, the city manager would write up a proposed budget and the council would react to it). But the big question is, how do you pay for more fire protection and eliminate a $2.4 million revenue source (garbage tax)?

In 2007, Mayor Jim Ardis wants the city to fully restore Fire Station 11 and find a “dedicated total public safety revenue stream.” Exactly what that is, Ardis admits he doesn’t know yet….

One idea is to take public safety funding off the property tax bills and replace it with a separate public safety tax. The difference is that the public safety tax could be applied to everyone who benefits from public safety services. Right now, non-profit organizations like hospitals, churches, and charities don’t pay property taxes, yet they benefit from police and fire protection.

If the protection we all share were paid for through a public safety tax instead of property taxes, the cost of that protection would be shared by all as well. Spreading out the cost would be more equitable, and may actually lower the amount homeowners pay for public safety services while increasing overall revenue at the same time.

Council members Van Auken and Manning also are throwing around ways to help strengthen Peoria’s older neighborhoods:

Van Auken also supports helping stabilize the older neighborhoods by freezing their property taxes so any additional increase in property tax revenue can be reinvested in those areas, somewhat of a pseudo TIF district. […] Third District Councilman Bob Manning suggested a similar “urban renewal” plan to Van Auken’s – freezing property taxes in certain areas to entice people to move back into the city’s core and reinvest.

It should be mentioned that these are just ideas and nobody has run the numbers yet to see how much such a plan would cost. This meeting was more of a brainstorming session. If the cost estimates come back too large, then the whole idea may be scrapped. But I’m glad to see them (forgive me for using this cliche) “thinking outside the box.”

That said, I doubt this plan is going to get off the ground. Whenever you freeze property taxes, you’re taking money out of district 150’s pocket, and they can’t afford any more revenue loss. And the state of the schools is one of the prime reasons people aren’t moving to the older neighborhoods (crime being the other reason) in the first place — not high property taxes. So this plan would seem to be self-defeating.

John Morris had several ideas, including one to make Peoria “a walkable city”:

He suggests $2 million each year from capital for sidewalks connecting Peoria’s neighborhoods to its assets, like the library and parks. “I can’t walk my two children from my home in the heart of the city to the library without feeling I’m taking our lives in my hands,” he said.

Well, there’s a difference between making the “heart of the city” more walkable and making the whole city more walkable.

In the heart of the city, sidewalks will help, but only if it’s coupled with slower traffic and a buffer between the sidewalk and the street. For instance, not long ago I walked from my house in the Uplands to the Blockbuster video store in Campustown. Walking on my street with its on-street parking and 25 mph speed limit was very pleasant. Walking on Main Street was a nightmare. Main Street is five lanes, which means traffic moves much faster than the posted 30 mph speed limit, and the narrow sidewalks abut the street, making you feel very unsafe as cars go whipping past you.

In the newer parts of the city, as you go north, these areas were not created to be “walkable,” but to be accessible only by automobile. Adding sidewalks (other than for recreational walking around the neighborhood) is not going to allow you to walk to the park or the library, unless you’re willing to walk several miles along an arterial road. My dad and I have walked down the shoulder of Route 150 from Charter Oak Road to Glen Hollow and let me tell you, it’s not a pleasant walk on which you’d want to take your family. And when you get to the end, you still haven’t seen a park or library. It would take some radical changes to make these newer neighborhoods “walkable” in the way Morris describes.

There were more ideas that I may discuss in future posts, but this one is long enough!

City of Peoria, Heart of Peoria Plan

Urban design forum planned for May 19-20

4 Comments

From the Department of Planning and Growth Management:

Much has happened since 2002 when the Heart of Peoria (H.O.P.) Plan was developed using a charette process directed by the firm of Duany Plater-Zyberk. Learn of the progress we have made in implementing this plan and join us for the exciting second phase of the project. Voice your opinions and add your ideas to those of City Council members, commissioners, city staff, neighborhood and business leaders, and your fellow citizens.

The weeklong urban design forum of Studio H.O.P., directed by the experts at Ferrell Madden, will result in specific concepts and designs for the Sheridan-Loucks Corridor, the Warehouse District and the Prospect Road Corridor. Other New Urbanism strategies will also be created for other Heart of Peoria neighborhoods.

The opening session will be held at the Civic Center on Friday night, May 19, at 6:30 p.m. The hands-on design session for neighborhoods will be held on Saturday, May 20 from 8:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. at the Iron Front Building (424 SW Washington). You can find out more information by going to www.heartofpeoria.com or calling the Planning and Growth Management Department at 494-8600.

It’s very encouraging to see the city actively working on implementing the Heart of Peoria Plan. It’s also refreshing to see public input proactively welcomed and seen as valuable (in contrast to the school district’s actions of late).

The website is very informative, although its graphics are so large that it takes a long time to load each page, even with a broadband connection. They should look into reducing the file size of the pictures to make the site more user-friendly and so it doesn’t detract from the excellent content.

At this point, I’m planning to attend the charette. I never got a chance to attend the original charettes back in 2002 because of my work schedule, but I think I will be able to attend one of the dates this time.

City of Peoria, East Bluff, Kellar Branch, Peoria County, Peoria Disposal Company, Peoria Park District, Peoria Public Schools, Peoria Regional Airport

A taxing weekend

4 Comments

Yesterday I got my property tax bill.

Looking it over, I see that over half my taxes go to Peoria Public School District 150. They’re going to have another forum on the future plans for Glen Oak and White schools, this time just for parents of kids who attend those schools. Superintendent Ken Hinton said, “It’s important to me to hear the voice of the parents.” Okay, I’ll take him at his word, but he’d be a whole lot more convincing if he had listened to their voice before deciding the site of a new school.

I have the same concerns about the format as other people, so I won’t repeat that here. But I would like to make another point: I think it’s important to listen to the parents of kids who attend there, but this decision doesn’t just affect them. Alterations to Glen Oak Park affects all of Peoria. Replacing the Glen Oak School site with a park, public housing, or a vacant building affects all of the East Bluff. Let’s just suppose, for the sake of argument, that the parents of kids at Glen Oak and White right now are indifferent to the location of a new school. That should be taken into consideration, but shouldn’t trump overall neighborhood and city concerns.

Also on my bill, I see I’m paying a good amount to the “Pleasure Driveway PKD,” aka the Peoria Park District. The park board was just slapped with a lawsuit this weekend by neighborhood activists Karrie Alms and Sara Partridge. According to the Journal Star, the suit “alleges closed meetings held by the board on March 8 and 22 violated the state’s Open Meetings Act by discussing plans to replace Glen Oak School when that wasn’t appropriate.” If the court finds that the board met illegally, and if the decision to enter into an intergovernmental agreement with District 150 was made in one of those meetings, one possible remedy would be to nullify the agreement that was made in secret.

I’m glad somebody cares enough to act on this. People complain about back-room deals and shady politics, but more often than not nobody does anything about it. Here are a couple of people who are willing to hold the Park Board accountable for their actions. Kudos to Karrie and Sara!

Let’s see, what else is on my tax bill? There’s Illinois Central College and the Peoria Library. Don’t have much to say about those except that I think the library here in Peoria is under-utilized. There’s a wealth of information and expertise down there — I’ve learned more about Peoria from the library than one could ever learn online.

The Greater Peoria Mass Transit District, aka CityLink, makes an appearance on my bill. They do a pretty good job of moving people around the city — a tough job when the city is as spread out as it is. On the Peoria Rails Yahoo group, several people have been throwing around the idea of using the Kellar Branch for a light passenger rail system instead of a walking/biking trail:

The expansion of Peoria population into the far northwest part of the city, the growth of shopping in that area, and greatly increased fuel costs might make light rail service feasible. The Kellar branch could up upgraded and extended over Rt 6 to a parking and depot area behind or near the Grand Prairie. Interconnecting bus service there, downtown, and perhaps at a stop or two along the way would make public transportation quicker and more user friendly. The light rail service could terminate at the old Rock Island Depot and the light rail unit could be run in the push/pull – Chicago METRA style. A shuttle bus could take passengers to and from the CITYLINK terminal on Adams St.

Not a bad idea, especially given the cost of gas these days. However, there are two things not mentioned that would have to happen for it to be successful: (1) the speed limit for this light rail system would have to be faster than the 10 mph city code dictates for trains, and (2) part of the upgrade of the Kellar Branch would have to be better signals at grade crossings and fences along the tracks where the tracks pass through neighborhoods.

CityLink isn’t the only transportation entity on my tax bill. There’s also the Greater Peoria Regional Airport Authority. They have a new skipper (Ken Spirito from Gulfport, Mississippi), and part of his mission is to “redevelop and redo this terminal building. […] I want it to be a ‘wow’ impression. I want to ‘wow’ them,” according to the Journal Star‘s May 1 article. At least one person doesn’t like that idea. Polly Peoria, usually an advocate of tearing down old buildings, likes this one, so it can stay. I haven’t flown since before 9/11/01, so I honestly have no idea what kind of condition Peoria’s airport is in. If remodeling can bring in more business though, I say go for it. It’s not like that terminal was built to be a hallmark civic building.

What’s left? Let’s see, Peoria County, which recently voted down an expansion to the hazardous waste landfill. Now there’s a public board that listened to the public. District 150 and the Park Board could learn a few things from them. I’ve already blogged about this issue at length, so I’ll move on.

Finally, there’s the City of Peoria and Peoria Township. Why we need both I don’t quite understand, and yes, I have read the Journal Star’s special series on this issue. It’s an interesting read, but given what services the township now provides, it seems like they could just as easily provide it as part of city services and eliminate redundant government bodies.

As usual, my wife and I will pick a day to go down to the courthouse, eat at the pushcarts, listen to the Arts in Education bands play, enjoy the beautiful weather (hopefully), and pay our property taxes. Doing it that way lessens the pain of all the money we’re paying.

City of Peoria, Kellar Branch

Response to George Burrier and the RTA

1 Comment

“This issue has dragged on long enough,” said George Burrier, president of both Recreational Trail Advocates and Friends of the Rock Island Trail.

He wonders why Carver Lumber Co. doesn’t withdraw its complaint and cooperate with the city, which has constructed a $2 million rail line to the company’s site from the west.

Customers of the Kellar line enjoyed city-subsidized service for years, Burrier said, because the city leased the line for $1 a year.

“And what is the definition of ‘adequate’?” asked Burrier, a retired lawyer.

That quote is from today’s Journal Star. I’d like to answer Mr. Burrier’s questions.  First of all, Carver won’t withdraw its complaint and “cooperate with the city,” because it tried that route once already and it cost them $60,000.  The city promised in writing that service would continue over the Kellar Branch until the western spur was completed. That service did not continue, and Carver had to truck its lumber for several months at great expense.  That’s what they got for their “cooperation.”  They’re not complaining out of spite, but to protect their business and the jobs of their employees.

Burrier’s claim of city-subsidized service shows a profound ignorance of the history of the city’s involvement in the rail line.  The city paid $856,000 for the rail line in 1984.  To recoup that investment, the city charged user fees of $175 per car, plus every business on the line had to pay a special assessment, whether they used the line or not.  The city eventually dropped the per-car user fee when one of the companies on the line went out of business.  Businesses along the line have not had a free ride, as Mr. Burrier implies.

As for the definition of “adequate,” we need only read the city’s very own contract with DOT Rail (parent company of the Central Illinois Railway which replaced Pioneer Industrial Railway).  This contract was signed June 26, 2000, and says in Article 2 (emphasis mine):

DOT shall use all commercially reasonable efforts to [secure] an interchange agreement with UP [Union Pacific] under terms that will not materially increase the rates charged the Rail Line’s customers or significantly alter the service level presently provided over the Kellar Branch.  Commercially reasonable efforts shall include, if necessary, the duty to pursue all available remedies through the Surface Transportation Board (“STB”) (or other regulatory agency or body having jurisdiction) to obtain such interchange agreement.

It’s only reasonable that the new service over the western spur be tested to make sure it meets these requirements before the Kellar Branch is removed. Remember, Carver has access to eight major rail lines via the Kellar Branch, but only one (UP) via the western spur.  If UP charges them an exorbitant tariff to provide service to the spur, they will have little or no recourse.

Burrier’s statements indicate he is either ignorant of the complexities surrounding this issue, or that he is apathetic to the plight of Carver Lumber.

City of Peoria, Kellar Branch

You be the judge: is this a news report or an editorial?

1 Comment

The Journal Star has posted a midday report on the Surface Transportation Board decision from two weeks ago (reported here on April 25).

The headline says “Rails staying on trail for at least 90 days.” I know reporters don’t write headlines. I’m sure the person who wrote it was looking for a clever turn of phrase. However, it reveals the newspaper’s bias — notice they already consider the Kellar Branch a trail. The rails, which have been there for over 100 years, are made to sound like an evicted tenant who refuses to leave his apartment.

If you read the whole story, you’ll notice a couple of other little biases. While they interview George Burrier, president of both the Recreational Trail Advocates (RTA) and Friends of the Rock Island Trail, and Bonnie Noble, executive director of the Peoria Park District, they don’t interview Carver Lumber Company. Isn’t that interesting?

They talk about the grants the Park District has had on hold for twelve years waiting to build the trail, but don’t mention the $55,000 Carver Lumber had to spend on additional transportation costs when the city broke their promise to provide uninterrupted rail service via Central Illinois Railway.

They talk about trail advocates (like the RTA) being unhappy, but don’t mention rail advocates (like the Illinois Prairie Railroad Foundation) being thrilled.

In short, it’s an editorial masquerading (poorly) as an unbiased news report.

UPDATE 5/6/06: They’ve run a lengthier article in today’s paper that does interview Carver Lumber and has a different headline (“Trail delays drag on“). This article is much better than the original one in the “midday report.”

City of Peoria, East Bluff, Peoria Public Schools

District 150’s missteps not uncommon

3 Comments

One of the most surprising things I learned from reading the resources available at the National Trust for Historic Preservation website is how common District 150’s missteps are from a national perspective.  Reading the NTHP publication “Why Johnny Can’t Walk to School” (PDF file), published in 2002, is like reading our morning paper lately.

The whole report is fascinating and a highly-recommended read, but I just want to point out a few highlights from the section titled “How Shortsighted Policies Undermine Historic Neighborhood Schools”:

  • “Many state education departments either mandate or recommend a minimum number of acres for schools. […] Sites as large as those recommended today are hard to find in older cities and towns, where older schools typically occupy only two to eight acres, are surrounded by densely developed neighborhoods, and have no room to expand. […]  In Massachusetts, older communities have had to give up precious parkland and farmland so schools could meet acreage standards.”
  • “In some cases, state acreage standards are actually more flexible than they are represented to be. However, some school districts treat recommendations as if they were regulations, particularly when they want an excuse to tear down and build new. When citizens working to save older neighborhood schools try to distinguish between what’s required and what’s merely recommended, they sometimes run into a brick wall, buck-passing between state and local officials, or both.” Peoria is suffering from this: Ken Hinton went on WMBD radio and left the impression the state mandated 15 acres for a new school, when in fact Illinois has no minimum acreage requirement. And even at the meeting Monday night, school officials were applying the erroneous 15-acre standard to the current Glen Oak School site, protesting they’d have to demolish 60 houses to get that much space at the corner of Wisconsin and Frye and conlcuding, “the district simply doesn’t have the money to build there.” Yet the 15-acre standard is completely arbitrary and impractical for an inner-city school.
  • When comparing the costs of renovation vs. new construction, “certain new construction costs — items such as land acquisition, water and sewer line extensions, transportation and road work, for example — may not be factored into the comparison. […] The rules also trivialize other values, such as a community’s desire to maintain a school as a neighborhood anchor or to have a school to which children can walk.”
  • The costs of busing children longer distances as a result of building schools in remote locations are sometimes ignored, even though these costs can be substantial.
  • “Because of insufficient operating funds, many school districts […] have to defer needed building maintenance.  In other cases, school boards have been criticized for allowing older schools to deteriorate, knowing it will then be easier to garner voter approval for new buildings.”
  • And finally, this is my favorite: “Although many school boards are models of inclusiveness and openness, other boards act in secrecy and make citizens feel shut of the planning process.”

Regarding that last point, the Journal Star correctly pointed out in a recent editorial that the board’s actions weren’t technically secret.  They did disclose that Glen Oak Park and Morton Square Park were potential sites back in October 2005, even saying explicitly that the Glen Oak Park site was “preferred.” However, the final decision-making process was not what one would call “inclusive.”

According to the master facilities planning document, the committee held forums September 5-16, 2005, before the document disclosing specific sites was released.  After the document was released, no further input from neighbors, parents, the city, or other concern citizens was solicited until this past Monday night’s meeting.  But I think everyone’s pleased they provided Monday’s forum, belated as it was — let’s just hope it results in some positive changes from the school board.

City of Peoria, East Bluff, Peoria Public Schools

Quiet school board members not a bad thing

1 Comment

There’s been a lot on the news about the format of the District 150 public forum last night at Woodruff High School.  There was no real dialogue — the board gave their presentation and the residents gave their presentations.  The board chose not to respond to questions or comments from the audience, but instead post responses on their website at a later date, after they’ve had a chance to discuss them.

I don’t think that’s a bad thing.  The natural tendency would be for the school board members to be defensive in the face of questions and comments from the audience, and want to explain themselves.  Had they responded directly in the forum last night, a lot of time would have been spent with the school board talking, and talking, and talking.  The format they chose allowed the maximum amount of time for East Bluff residents and other concerned citizens to voice their concerns and for the board to do the best thing they could do:  listen.

Of more concern to me was the fact that not all the school board members were there.  According to the Journal Star, the board members who attended were Alicia Butler, Sean Matheson, Steve Morris, David Gorenz and Mary Spangler.  That means Garrie Allen and Martha Ross didn’t show up.  Why not?  Where were they?  Did they have a good excuse to miss such an important meeting?  Or did they not feel listening to residents was important?