42 thoughts on “Open Soapbox”

  1. Ah, just give it a few days CJ – the council, 150, etc. will do something less than responsible to get those fingers flying…..

  2. Yeah, if a few policemen hadn’t been laid off, one of them would have been in that parking deck to stop the assault. Wow.

  3. Well I’m glad you surfaced. I was beginning to think you’d gotten buried in one of those meetings and they hadn’t found you yet. Could be the wishy washy weather that has swept your enthusiasm for writing away. Give you a few days of sunshine and you’ll be back good as new.

  4. 150 Observer no however the Police Officer may have caught them in a traffic violation, drug bust or other act prior to this. You just never know.

  5. Listen, being against the hotel is fine, but the city hasn’t funded 1¢ of the hotel yet. It hurts your case to make such silly statements. The future hotel has zero to do with current police lay-offs.

    A great many posters here really hurt their credibility by taking their arguments to absurd lengths. There are plenty of perfectly valid arguments against the hotel, but to pull the proposed hotel/police lay-offs connection out of nowhere is pretty weird, to be honest.

  6. While I am against the hotel because I believe that it should be built with private dollars, I would agree that not the City of Peoria financial issues are not related to this development at all. The money for this project is coming from a bond that will be issued (and hopefully) be repaid with tax dollars generated from the project. If this project is successful, it will create extra revenue that could be used to provide for basic public services (if it is not then it will need funding from some other source for debt service repayment). I did not attend the meeting but wondered if anyone asked if either all of the private investors or bank financing has been secured?

  7. anp, Mr. Matthews has said he has the financing secured. Time will tell if that is the truth.

  8. I’m aware that the hotel “upgrade” and police layoffs are two separate issues. Sorry I didn’t make my point more clear. The city of Peoria needs to focus its energy on providing its residents and visitors with a SAFE enviroment in which to live or visit. Until it does that, a shiny (or not so shiny) new hotel is just lipstick on a pig.

  9. I agree with you, Anne. I would have no issue with a hotel complex built with 100% private dollars. I would rather see the zeal some council members have for giving developers hand-outs for shopping centers and hotels re-directed towards making sure the “basics” are being taken care of. Right now, there are too many pigs with lipstick in Peoria.

  10. how is it that the city officials are responsible for some crazy person that decides to attack someone? How could they have stopped that? Now if that person had been arrested before and sent to jail and is now back on the streets then whose fault is that? Not the City of Peoria. Maybe the county prosecutor or the State of Illinois or the Federal Government but I fail to see how our city officials could have stopped this person from committing this attack?
    What did our elected officials do to allow this person to attack and rob someone? How is building this hotel related to that person getting attacked?

  11. Billy Dennis: With all that kiss a$$ing, Do you need some lip balm?

    District 150: I am against the hotel and I do understand the dynamics of the spending. The reason I am against it because 1)The city has a hell of a track record with failed and costly (to taxpayers) ventures. Gateway, Ballpark TIF, Mid-Town Plaza, Campustown, Renascence Park (Mech-Tech District or whatever) , Globe Energy, Firefly….. and 2)If it was so great of an opportunity, why can’t PRIVATE funds work this deal? I don’t think the city should be in the hotel business. If it fails and Lord knows I hope not, but if it fails, we are all screwed and even more layoffs of police and fire are in our future.

  12. Nobody, including the developer, has said the “hotel is such a great deal” without city participation. It needs that to succeed, that is clear. Whether municipalities should be involved in public-private ventures is a matter of opinion. Both “sides” make valid points.

  13. For crying out loud the city can’t even police an illegally run nightclub 2 blocks from the police station. What makes anyone think they really care about providing safety for our community? If they did they would put money into the basic necessities and forget the fluff.

    The mayor and city council are not much different than the central administration of District 150. Champagne lifestyles on Keystone light pocket books.

  14. Dist 150, time will tell if he has the financing that he says he has. I just wonder if the City could have asked him to produce proof (that did not contain private information) such as a bank approval letter for bank financing or verification of private $’s before spending time and effort on a bond issue.

    We know that he does not have all of the financing because the $8 million from the Illinois Finance Authority has not been voted on yet.

  15. I didn’t realize that the ballpark, Gateway, Campustown, Renascence Park were failures? What is your definition?

  16. New Voice: I like Billy’s answer, but “C. J.” really stands for “Christopher James.” Not a secret. The real mystery is, what does the “H” stand for in “H Wayne Wilson”?

  17. I remember the post about the cameras coming to Peoria, but I didn’t realize they were already in service. I saw one at Sheridan and Forrest Hill tonight. Where else did the city place them?

  18. CJ I just saw your church is moving out near Grand Prarie. What are your thoughts on moving? It looked like you guys had outgrown the current location. But it seems like it goes against what you advocate with urbanism.

  19. Thanks. Have to admit, I was looking forward to a bit more ‘secrecy’ on your part. I was reminded of the great M*A*S*H episode where Hawk goes crazy trying to find out what B.J. stood for…………

    There goes my weekend…….

    Now I have to go back to arguing with 150 Observer and Peoriafan…….

  20. Ballpark, spent $3 million moving street and millions more in law suit

    Gateway Building, cost city thousands each year in upkeep. No secret some council members want to dump this expensive ill designed building.

    Ren-Park, Spent millions on sidewalks, moving utilities, and installing fancy lighting, nothing built there yet as promised except for the building that was supposed to be an incubator for business now appears to have Bradley all over it.

    Campustown, is a joke and crime ridden. If it wasn’t for Bradley reanting space there, nothing would be in it. This was built as a TIF was it not?

    You didn’t mention Mid-Town Plaza?? How come? Because that is the poster child of failures and a developer who skewed the figures to get his money.

    Firefly and Globe Energy? Where is our loan money for those??

    Yes I do have 3 case of lip balm. And I thought CJ meant Cecil Jesus

  21. I know Dr. Lathan hasn’t been in town very long, but I must say the almost overnight changes at Glen Oak have certainly made me feel quite encouraged about her arrival. Now, I’m hearing and reading about changes at Manual and Trewyn. It seems as though Dr. Lathan has a pretty good idea of where the problems lie in this district and is working quickly to correct them. It is my highest hope she is able to find the problems, work with people on the solutions, and get things in place to straighten out our district. We all know there are massive problems and the ones most suffering are the students. Peoria owes its youth much better than it is currently giving.

  22. I hope she is well aware of the PROBLEMS with Mary O’Brian and sticks to the previous decision to GET RID OF HER.

  23. R.I.P., Coach Wooden.

    For how many students is the only missing element such a role model?

  24. “traffic cameras” — There are no red-light cameras in Peoria; it’s not currently allowed under state law.

    “Bob” — I’m on staff at the church and thus it would be inappropriate for me to comment on the church’s actions in a public forum.

    “New Voice” — Sorry to disappoint, but it would’ve been ridiculously easy to figure out since my name’s right in the phone book. 🙂

  25. Everything is on the 3rd floor at the Gateway. I have had to haul risers in a little elevator to the third floor ballroom. It’s a mother. Caters have had to make many trips to get food and warmers up there also. If it had a bigger freight elevator, then no problem but the risers had to be squeezed in sideways and man handled out. That kind of makes it had to sell for weddings and functions which is why it loses money every year.

  26. If no cameras ? Then what are fibre optic wired ” appear to be Cameras ” that INSIGHT installed at certain major intersections several years ago ,covering all four ways ?

  27. Pop,

    Those are cameras, but they are not the sort that snaps a pic and mails you a ticket. Ticket generating cameras are still not allowed around here. They are just there for surveillance.

  28. Those cameras you see on top of traffic light poles around Peoria are state of the art sensors. They record the sensors in the street. loops of wire under the pavement sense cars with some intersections have and additional loop about 50 ft back of the intersection to sense traffic back up at the light. They then are suppose to adjust the traffic light to move traffic. They are monitored out on Dries Ln. They are black and white real time video and look down. When a loop is inactive it appears green on the screen. When a car activates the loop, it turns red telling the person monitoring the video that the loops are working and sensing. These cameras do not record nor do they take pictures. They are there soley to tell a computer how to adjust the timing of a light to better flow traffic. It is mt opinion no one at the street department has either read nor understands the instructions on How to Set Up a Traffic Light as it seems the traffic lights do what they want, like the light at south bound University I74 ramp which changes for no reason, no traffic. Now, while Insight did install fiber optic cable it was for cable TV not for the cameras on the traffic light poles.

  29. On a general level, I believe a public museum is an appropriate project for a public body to fund with public dollars. Such is not new and it is arguable that public museums would not exist save public dollars. Expectations for such should be that public museums are self-sustaining but need not be hugely profitable. Simply be able to pay bills and keep a rainy day fund. Public funds thru taxes and also thru admissions, as the museum must be appealing to the public, who hopefully have supported the project.
    As to this specific museum, I feel problems abound. Slightly better than half those who bothered to vote, even after large private sums were spent selling the notion, hardly makes me believe the public (whose regular admission fees are required) will back the idea with their dollars. The most troublesome aspect in the initial run-up to the vote was the spending of public monies to actually influence the vote. When our own tax dollars are used to convince us of an idea, we are in deep trouble. (On an aside, the brujah-ha over Schock’s flyers and his defense that he spends less than others, is sickening. The numbers spent by legislators to ‘inform’ constituents is outrageous. More than twice the yearly salary of some legislators. Someone should take that issue up and push for limits to these advertisements which do nothing but favor incumbents in a political system already ginned up for incumbents. Again, our own tax dollars used to convince us…but I digress.)
    Secondly, and then I must move to another task, is the likely falsification of grant applications by the county. Stating they owned the property in applying for State money is outrageous. That is fraud. Individual homeowners, taxpayers, business owners, etc would be indicted. Professionals who deal with such grant applications cannot claim ignorance. Ownership is a pretty clear legal standard. The county did not have ANY property rights in the block when the grant application was filed. The signatories LIED, under penalty of perjury, in order to secure State money.
    God save us all.

  30. If the county had or does now claim ‘ownership’ of the property, why is the matter even up for debate? Why the current wrangling between city council and county board? Why all the need for Ransburg, Beaty and Co. to start acting more like ‘pitchmen’ than the promoters of a worthwhile project?

    Wish the Journal Star would look into this…’issue’. Some REAL hard hitting reporting would be…..refreshing?

  31. the county has no rights to the property. thus the lobbying and small (not subject to Open Meetings Act) meetings. Ooops! We screwed up and probably no one will notice or if they do, it will go away. No one will have the juice to get the AG on it. It’s part of the process.

    Probably. But that big f@#$ing monkey on their backs will drive them to more political favors.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.