City of Peoria

City take your signs? Switch to handbills

5 Comments

As I mentioned earlier, the city is cracking down on signs in the public right-of-way. (For those of you who are wondering, the citation in the municipal code is 17.10.a.(8), “Private signs are prohibited in the public right-of-way.”) I believe this is to cut down on visual clutter and, arguably, litter.

So it’s ironic that on Tuesday’s council agenda, there’s this little item:

ITEM NO. 3, H. Communication from the Interim City Manager and Corporation Counsel Requesting Adoption of an ORDINANCE Amending CHAPTER 13 of the Code of the City of Peoria Pertaining to HANDBILLS.

What is the amendment, you ask? It’s to repeal a law against distributing handbills under windshield wipers. Why? Because the laws on the books against distributing handbills have been found unconstitutional:

In August, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals held ordinances exactly like Sections 13-50 and 13-51 to be unconstitutional because the City of Granite City, Illinois had not done a study to determine that the ordinances actually reduced litter.

Section 13-50 makes it illegal to put handbills on vehicles, primarily being directed at the placement of handbills on windshield wipers. Section 13-51 prohibits depositing handbills on unoccupied premises. Repeal of these ordinances places the City in compliance with the constitutional requirements. Should repeal of these ordinances lead to an increase in litter, then a study can be done and the ordinances can be re-enacted based upon findings by the City Council.

So now, instead of driving by signs for this or that cause or candidate, we’ll come back from a couple hours’ worth of shopping to find those same messages under our windshield wipers instead.

And do you know what we should do with those handbills when we receive them? If I’m reading this court ruling correctly, it appears the proper thing to do is throw them on the ground.* That way, the city will find that distribution of handbills increases litter, and thus make a prohibition against them constitutional.

Don’t worry about the littering.* City Crews can pick that up while they’re out gathering signs.

*Note: For those of you who are sarcasm-challenged, I’m not literally advocating littering. I’m just demonstrating the absurdity of the situation.

City of Peoria

More signs collected

6 Comments

From a press release:

City Crews continue to collect signs that have been placed in the right of way.

Today, crews removed 80 signs from locations throughout the City. The locations included University, Knoxville, MacArthur Highway, McClure, Forrest Hill and Madison.

Crews will continue to collect signs. Citizens can assist the City by calling our PeoriaCares line at 494-2273, and letting us know about signs that may be in the public right of way.

Since we now know that “City Crews” (an interesting title given its capitalization yet lack of specificity) have the time for this effort to purge our right-of-ways of the scourge of illegal signage, might they also be available for other, perhaps more important, city-improvement initiatives? Like code enforcement, for instance?

City of Peoria, History

More historic landmark applications a good thing… mostly

16 Comments

According to this week’s “Issues Update” from the City, historic landmark applications in Peoria are up.

“In the past two years, 2007 and 2006,” the report states, “a total of two landmark applications were filed for Irving School and Glen Oak Park.” In 2008, however, there have been four: Amvets Post #64 (237 NE Monroe), Hamilton Boulevard, 401 NE Monroe, and Family House Peoria (1509 N. Knoxville).

For those of you who can’t picture these buildings, here they are — respectively, the Amvets building, Family House, and 401 NE Monroe:

Generally, I see this as a good thing. Too much of Peoria’s history has already been razed. What’s left really should be preserved — presuming, of course, that it meets reasonable standards for preservation. Most of these properties do.

The one exception would be Hamilton Boulevard. This is on the council’s agenda for Tuesday night. What they are actually proposing be given landmark status is “the built median component of the right-of-way, located within Hamilton Boulevard, from Monroe Street to Glendale Avenue, and Randolph Avenue to North Street.” To which I ask, The median? Really?

The justification for this appears to be the fact that the street was laid out by William S. Hamilton, son of Alexander Hamilton (you remember Alexander Hamilton — the guy on the $10 bill, first Secretary of the Treasury, died after famous duel with Aaron Burr). Okay, sure, William Hamilton is a prominent historical figure in Peoria. But he also laid out Water, Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, Liberty, Main, and Fayette. Should we also landmark all of those streets?

Besides, they kind of undercut their whole preservation argument when they removed the portion of Hamilton that is slated to be changed for the Methodist Hospital expansion. Les Kenyon of the Central Illinois Landmark Foundation (CILF) is quoted in the Historic Preservation minutes as saying:

…they [CILF] are satisfied that Methodist Hospital will provide a beautiful environment for patients, medical staff and visitors as they travel on the Hamilton corridor. He went on to say that for this reason, they have amended their original position with regard to Methodist Hospital’s plans and withdraw any objection to the Methodist Plan regarding landmarking Hamilton Boulevard through the Methodist campus and want to remove the Methodist campus from their landmark request.

But Methodist Hospital is removing the built median that CILF wants to see landmarked on the rest of the boulevard. So, is it historic or not? And Methodist is narrowing Hamilton where it passes their institutional zone. So, is the width of the street worth preserving or isn’t it? If Methodist’s plans for Hamilton don’t destroy the historic nature of the boulevard, then nothing does, and thus it needn’t be landmarked.

But don’t get me wrong. Even though I question this one landmark request, overall I think preserving Peoria’s built history is important. I was recently reading some newspaper clippings about the razing of the Rialto Theater to make way for the Civic Center, and it made me sad. It was one of Peoria’s original vaudeville houses. Originally called the Hippodrome, it housed many famous acts, as did the Palace Theater which was also razed about the same time. Whereas other cities, like Chicago, preserve their historic theaters, Peoria tore theirs down and felt the Civic Center theater was an adequate replacement. What a shame.

I’ve often joked (morbidly) that any history museum in Peoria should include an interactive exhibit where visitors can sit in a little crane and swing a wrecking ball into models of Peoria’s historical landmarks. It would be an object lesson in how little we value our history.

City Council, City of Peoria

Updated budget information now online

Leave a comment

Want to know what’s happening with the City’s budget? You’re in luck (the following is from a press release):

The City’s budget website – www.peoriabudget.com – has been updated to include the entire preliminary budget documents. The Mayor and City Council charged staff with creating a budget process that was more transparent, more open to public involvement and built more alignment with Council goals and priorities. For the first time in the City’s history, the preliminary is available for download by citizens, businesses and other interested parties.

The updated website includes the following information:

  • Budget message (the transmittal the accompanies the presentation of the preliminary budget)
  • Overview Presentation to Council (given 10/7 by Henry Holling)
  • Revenue Presentation to Council (given 10/7 by Jim Scroggins)
  • Budget tables for the operating, debt service and Community Investment Plan portions of the budget
  • Budget calendar

In addition, the entire preliminary budget packet for each department has been placed on-line. This is normally a document of over 400 pages, but has been broken into individual files by department.

The Peoria City Council is committed to gathering citizen input on the upcoming budget. In addition to the recently released “Report on Citizen Budget Input” (also available on the website), citizens are invited to address Council at any budget meeting. Upcoming meetings include:

  • October14—Regular Council Meeting (City Hall, 6:15 pm): Community Investment Plan (CIP) budget
  • October 21—Special Council Meeting (City Hall, 5 6:15 pm): CIP budget, operating budget
  • October 28—Regular Council Meeting (City Hall, 6:15 pm): Operating budget
City of Peoria

What’s your sign?

10 Comments

Whatever it is, if it was placed in the public right-of-way, chances are it’s now at the City’s Public Works facility:

City crews have picked up a total of 69 signs that were placed in the public right of way. The signs are being stored at the City’s Public Works facility on Dries Lane. Signs can be retrieved from Public Works over the next 10 days. After that time, the signs will be discarded.

Pride is picking up in Peoria.

City of Peoria, Education

Peoria Promise Foundation hires executive director

54 Comments

From a press release:

PEORIA PROMISE FOUNDATION HIRES NEW EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

Peoria Promise Foundation is pleased to announce the selection of Tara Gerstner as the organization’s first Executive Director effective October 1st.

Tara brings a strong marketing and leadership background in both corporate and nonprofit management to this position. She has led the revitalization of established programs and has experience in the creation and implementation of both marketing and development programs. She has a number of honors from past assignments and is consistently recognized for her intelligence, passion, and energy.

Tara is a native of Chester, IL and comes to Peoria with her husband, Dr. Greg Gerstner, and their two young children. She graduated from Illinois Wesleyan University in 2001 and obtained an MBA in marketing from University of Texas at San Antonio in 2004.

“We are very excited and fortunate to have Tara as our new Executive Director. She will significantly increase awareness about Peoria Promise in the community and increase the much needed community investment and support we need to grow and be successful”, says Mayor Jim Ardis, President of the Peoria Promise Foundation Board of Directors.

Ken Zika, Treasurer of the Peoria Promise Foundation Board of Directors, states, “The hiring of Tara demonstrates the Peoria Promise Foundation’s commitment to the future opportunities of this remarkable program which provides stimulating economic growth potential to Peoria and its residents.”

For more information on the Peoria Promise Foundation please visit www.peoriapromise.com.

City Council, City of Peoria

1 out of 4 City employees don’t live in the City

28 Comments

Tucked away in the agenda for next week’s City Council meeting is a report on city employee residency. Overall, 73% (580 out of 795) of the city’s permanent, full-time staff lives inside the city, which means that over a quarter of the staff chooses not to live in the city.

The report breaks the data down by department. Several departments have all their employees living in the city: Council, City Clerk, City Manager, EEO, Legal, HR, Treasurer, Economic Development, and Workforce, and there are many employees in here or independent contractors so the use of an online 1099-misc maker can be helpful to manage the payments of these workers.

The lowest percentage of City residents comes from the police department. Statistics from Labor Law Compliance websites say only 58% (168 out of 288) of police officers live within the City limits. Second lowest is “ECC,” which I assume is the Emergency Communications Center: 65% (24 out of 37). And third lowest is the fire department: 77% (163 out of 213).

By now, you’re probably thinking, “so what?” I don’t know. Councilman Jacob requested the report, but I’m not sure why. Perhaps we’ll find out Tuesday night.

At first blush, it’s easy to think that, if our own employees don’t want to live in the city, why would anyone else want to move here? But take a look at those numbers again. Most of those employees who live outside of the city are public safety employees, and there are reasonable arguments for why police and other public safety officers would want to live outside of the city they protect (e.g., for their family’s and their own protection and privacy while off-duty). It doesn’t appear from this report that any residency requirements are being violated. Learn about labor poster requirements here to check your Labor law compliance.

The important thing is that all our elected officials, of course, live within the city and have a personal stake in the outcome of any policy directives (e.g., new taxes, fees, land use issues).

Nation/World

Is the Fed too powerful?

8 Comments

Is the Fed too powerful? I’m not smart enough to know the answer to that question. But it does seem to be concerning others, as this AP article reports:

Dusting off Depression-era emergency powers, the Federal Reserve is extending its reach over the economy as never before, pushing the limits of its authority, if not exceeding them.

Now the nation’s central bank is even becoming a source of loans for companies other than banks.

Radical steps by the Fed under chairman Ben Bernanke — all in the name of seeking to halt the panic sweeping financial markets — are turning it into a financial colossus. They’re also putting the government deeper in debt and taxpayers further at risk if the various moves fail.

And it’s being done with little direct interaction with Capitol Hill. The Fed does not depend on Congress for its budget, including its payroll, and is as much a creature of the nation’s banking system as part of the federal government.

[…] The Bernanke Fed has its critics. Former Chairman Paul Volcker has said its been acting “at the limits” of it’s legal authority. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, made abolishing it a central part of his GOP presidential candidacy. And Sen. Jim Bunning, R-Ky., an opponent of Fed and Treasury bailouts, said recently, “The greed on Wall Street is only exceeded by the stupidity of the Treasury secretary and the chairman of the Federal Reserve.”

And the Populist Party website says the Fed isn’t even constitutional:

[The Fed] is illegal according to Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution which happens to be the inviolable law of the land. The article states that Congress shall have the power to coin (create) money and regulate the value thereof. In 1935, the US Supreme Court ruled the Congress cannot constitutionally delegate its power to another group or body. The Congress thus acted in violation of the Constitution it’s sworn to uphold and in so doing created the Federal Reserve System that…is a private for-profit corporation operating at the expense of the public welfare.

Maybe that sounds too much like a conspiracy theory. But in light of the $700 billion bailout rescue package that was recently approved by Congress, and the additional steps being taken by the Fed as the Dow continues to plummet, it does make one wonder. Any financial wizards or constitutional/history scholars out there have some insight into this issue?