A petition drive was launched today by Citizens for Responsible Spending, County Board members Brad Harding and Merle Widmer, and At-Large City Councilman Gary Sandberg. It’s an effort to allow Peoria County residents the opportunity to vote on whether or not to issue $41 million in general obligation bonds to construct the proposed Peoria Riverfront Museum.
Why? Because things have changed since April 2009 when the revenue to pay for the bonds was approved by the voters. Back then, we were promised they would issue revenue bonds, so as to limit the exposure of Peoria County taxpayers and protect our general sales tax receipts. Now they’re trying to issue general obligation bonds. Back then, they made it very clear there was going to be an IMAX Theater — the contract was just sitting on their desk waiting to be signed as soon as the referendum passed! Now they say IMAX isn’t compatible with their mission. Back then, the County assured us that they would insist that all the private financing be raised and in hand before construction would begin. Now they’re planning to start construction before the private money is raised, before vital grant money is awarded, before they own the land, before the bonds are issued, before the bond hearing is held, and even before Caterpillar has voted on the redevelopment agreement.
In short, the County has betrayed the trust of the Peoria County taxpayers. They’ve reneged on their promises. They’ve broken their word. Peoria County residents deserve better.
The last available option to residents is to gather signatures to put the museum funding on the ballot so we can vote on their real plan, not the bill of goods we were sold in the Spring of 2009.
For more information, or to get involved, please go to BlocktheBonds.com.
“Just wondering”
I am sure dtaggert was honestly concerned about C.J.’s welfare, and the welfare of his employers. I think it was awful nice of him to publicly express his concerns so that we could all share in the concern and love he expressed towards C.J.
and jackie, your sweet “just out of curiosity”, is so Glenn Beckish, I just have to smile. It reminds me of every Fox News talking head announcing that “some people are saying”.
Is this the passive aggressive way all of the neo-cons? (That is when you aren’t blowing up buildings)
DTaggart — Thanks for asking. I think it would have been more appropriate for you to have asked that question of me privately, but since you brought it up on a public forum and called my integrity into question, I’m happy to answer it publicly since I have nothing to hide.
I am doing the job my employer is paying me to do and adhering to all work policies. My supervisors are all aware of my blogging and political efforts and I have done more than was asked of me to keep my work and leisure pursuits separate. The members of the church can rest assured that they are getting a full-time assistant director. The Block the Bonds efforts, blogging, and any other leisure activities are done on my own time, and frankly, I’m entitled to pursue them on my own time whether you agree with my political views or not. Furthermore, because of the move, I don’t even have internet access at work presently and couldn’t blog from work even if I were so inclined.
Now, just out of curiosity, why did you post your question from your work computer at Multi-Ad? Is your employer paying you to read and comment on my blog?
CJ: When I go to the Block the Bonds website, the entire left side is cut off of my screen. I don’t have that problem with anything else so I’m wondering what’s wrong. I have printed some petitions and will work this weekend to get some Chillicothe signatures. I know this town didn’t want the museum in the first place so getting people to sign it shouldn’t be too difficult.
I am always amazed by those with logs in their eyes that look for the specks in the eyes of others. (Therefore, I am even amazed by myself for I’m sure I am often guilty, also). I am sorry to find this situation so amusing and amazing but I do–that someone would blog from a work computer to accuse someone else of doing the same without any proof whatsoever. I believe that’s called hypocrisy. Sorry, but I have had my laugh for the day.
I don’t think I see enough people in a day or days to fill a petition, but I certainly will make every effort to sign one–is there anybody in the West Peoria area with a petition?
“Now, just out of curiosity, why did you post your question from your work computer at Multi-Ad? Is your employer paying you to read and comment on my blog?”
Interesting- I have always wondered if CJ can view your email address that you sign in with. Since he knows this commenter used a MultiAd email address that means if any of you are using work address it will be pretty easy for him to figure out where you work and maybe even who you are if your name is part of your email address. Your anonymous comments on here aren’t really…
Lets just hope it does not get used against you if you say something he does not like….just saying.
“jackie” — You live by the sword, you die by the sword. You don’t publish my personal information, and I don’t publish yours. It’s as simple as that.
An eye for an eye.
That we agree on! Even though I was asking what you did for a living I accepted your response that basically said “none of my business” which you had a right to say.
It was wrong of that MultiAd employee to post that information. That’s crossing the line. You know what would really cross the line is printing their whole email address……: )
Jackie, if you believed that “DTaggart” crossed the line, why did you thank him/her for the providing you with C.J.’s place of employment? I am still curious as to why his place of employment has anything whatsoever to do with his views about the museum or any other issues. C.J. is not exactly a phantom figure in Peoria–he doesn’t hide in the shadows. Personally, I believe that C.J., while giving his personal opinions on issues, certainly provides a fair and balanced “journalistic style” view on all subjects about which he writes. He certainly offers all of us the opportunity to air on views and to disagree with him. His blog serves this community well–and even his employer. His job is much the same as that of a teacher–many extra hours at odd times off the clock are required and the added similarity that all taxpayers believe that they are a teacher’s boss just as all those who tithe (or just give an occasional offering) may feel the same way.
“I have always wondered if CJ can view your email address that you sign in with.”
Jackie, you might want to be careful playing on the computer. That Nigerian prince who needs your help? It’s a scam 🙂
Kind of figured he could but that was the first time I had seen proof of it. It was just sort of a reminder that even though you think your anonymous your never really.
I suspect alot of people won’t even blog because of that reason. Yea, you can use a fake name but you leave a trail regardless.
Jackie, I would assume that the only thing available to C.J. is our e-mail address since we blog from our computers (and even then we might be protected if our e-mail addresses don’t include our real names). I gather that e-mails from business computers always leave that trail (I believe there is always an identifying statement at the bottom of all e-mails sent from business computers). In this particular case, DTaggart just had it coming–maybe he/she didn’t realize the computer from his/her place of business left a trail–of course, what he/she blogs from a business computer isn’t exactly protected. A business can fire people for what they do on company computers.
Here is a link to the Multiad Corporate Exec. page. http://www.multiad.com/corp.shtml
Shall we speculate who tried to bully CJ out of a job? Could it have been James, John, Jim, Shelby, Jill, Mike or Ryan? Let’s just say if I was one of them, and I didn’t post the comment, I’d be really ticked! Does anyone know if Multiad did any of the ads for the museum? I wonder if DTaggert really wants the museum or just wants additional job security or a lucrative ad contract. DTaggert, care to comment?
So are we assuming that DTaggart is using a phony name? What I really find offensive about all of this is that DTaggart saw fit to tie this “political” issue to his/her own church. C.J. doesn’t do that–he doesn’t make any connection between the two (and there shouldn’t be a connection). The museum has nothing whatsoever to do with any church’s mission
You should never post anything that you wouldn’t want everyone to know YOU posted.
Anonymity is not license to be a jerk. I may be a jerk sometime, but I am not anonymous.
What Charlie means (as with many who comment here)is that many of us know the identities of those who appear to be anonymous on this blog. I am one of the few who has no employer or any other ties to worry about, so I can post in my own name. I have met several very good people through this blog–including C.J. Some with whom I spar often, like Jon, seem like real people. 🙂 Even those who are anonymous regular bloggers would seem like long time acquaintances if we would ever meet. Certainly, people who read this blog know more about my opinions than the people with whom I associate on a regular basis. Ha! This blog just doesn’t draw very many unkind, thoughtless people (and that’s a credit to C.J.), so we are surprised when one pops up.
Jackie, didn’t you notice that when you sign in your e-mail address shows up (why were surprised that C.J. has that information.
You seem real, too, Sharon. Kind of like my mother-in-law.
You must be one of the lucky ones–to have such a wonderful mother-in-law.
Not all roads lead to Rome.
At least we have been warned about the possible jerkiness from Charlie and his many alter screen names.
Multi-Ad corporate page is on the Board of Directors of Lakeview Museum and has a newspaper background.
For my part there has been enough of this tick tock back and forth about who is who. We are supposed to be discussing the museum bonds not badgering each other. Lets put our energies to something more useful than picking at each other. BTW my name is Sharon Deckard, hence the SD. We already have one Sharon on this blog so I just stick to my initials. But a great many of you already know me. Have a great day.
SD, a representative from the Museum Group who has threatened a taxpayers job security because they dare disagree goes beyond badgering. According to their profiles, more than one of the Multiad executivess has more than a little to do with the Museum, and of course, they all stand to profit financially as origninally suggested. It seems likely that “jackie” and “dtaggert” had more than a few giggles at the water cooler yesterday. Wonder if they are giggling today.