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.
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.
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).
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?
There’s a new blogger out there, but you all know who he is. He used to write for the Journal Star… He was the religion editor… Remember yet?
That’s right — it’s Michael Miller! He’s got his own blog now called Rancho Miller. Check it out!
Here’s the official press release:
After months of research, focus groups and committee meetings, the City is asking for your input on a potential logo, designed by Converse Marketing for the City of Peoria. Log on to www.logopeoria.com and review eight logo choices. When you have decided on your favorite, simply click on it. Then choose two more in the same fashion. After selecting three, you will be asked to submit your choices.
A number of logos were presented to the City’s marketing committee for discussion before the final selections were made to City Council Members. Public input is an integral part of the selection process and we encourage everyone to vote.
The voting deadline is October 31, 2008. Please limit your vote to one per person.
And here are the eight choices you have to choose from:
Several people have asked (rhetorically, no doubt) how the City can still be considering building a museum given the current economic climate. So I posed a few questions about that to the Museum Collaboration Group, and they graciously responded:
Q: In light of the current economic conditions, especially the so-called credit crunch, how would this museum be built even in your current fundraising goals were met?
A: “We have always said we would not begin building until we had met our fund-raising goals. We won’t start with a partially funded building. So, if our funding goals are met, we’ll build the museum.”
Q: Would you have access to the funds you would need to borrow to make this project a reality?
A: “We have never planned to take out long-term loans to build the museum. Some short-term bridge loans have always been factored into the plans, and we do not expect that these loans will be unavailable.”
Q: How is the current economic climate affecting your efforts?
A: “We are concerned about the current economic climate, but to date we are still on plan with our fundraising efforts.”
District 150 is mystified — mystified! — as to why they can’t get more parents to give the school board their input. After only 13 parents showed up to a recent public meeting, board president David Gorenz was quoted by the Journal Star as saying, “It’s one of the most difficult issues districts face, how to get input.”
It’s no mystery to me. I think people see these meetings (rightly so) as a complete and total waste of their time. Why? Because the school board has already decided what they are going to do, and the only reasons they have public meetings are (1) to satisfy legal requirements in some cases, and (2) to gain public support for their inevitable decision.
There is no shortage of examples to choose from:
Eventually, people get the hint. The school board isn’t really interested in hearing their opinions or input — unless it agrees with what they’ve already decided. They’ve already made up their minds what they’re going to do, and “public input” meetings are, at best, an attempt to convince the ignorant masses why the board’s ideas are best.
The school board should be happy that fewer people are coming to the meetings — it makes their jobs so much easier when there’s no one around to disagree with their predetermined plans.
Note: Merle Widmer has a different take on Gorenz’s comment.
It used to be that you could count on WCBU to cover any city council meeting held on a Tuesday night, including important budget discussions like the one happening tonight. But since former news director Jonathan Ahl left the station, coverage has fallen off. It appears now that only regular city council meetings (twice a month) are carried.
That’s unfortunate, because the council meeting tonight covers important budget issues facing the City of Peoria. What’s being discussed tonight is at least as important, if not more important, than the business taking place at the regular council meetings. Why have they stopped being covered?
Fortunately, there’s still one media outlet that’s covering the event live — Billy Dennis’ Peoria Pundit blog. All Billy needs to do is figure out a way to provide a live audio stream through his blog in addition to his running summary.
Sorry I haven’t been posting for a couple of days. Other things have kept me busy, plus I didn’t feel particularly well yesterday. Hopefully I’ll get back into the swing of things this evening.
In the meantime, here’s an open thread for you to hop up on your soapbox and comment on whatever is on your mind.