Manning and Spears were both absent. The meeting started with a couple of annexation agreements, both of which were approved by everyone except Sandberg, as usual. Sandberg continues to warn that annexing land with low density requirements is only going to exacerbate Peoria’s problems, but the council is undaunted. They believe Peoria can annex itself into prosperity, even though it’s been trying to do that for 40 years unsuccessfully.

The consent agenda passed unanimously, with one notable exception (more on that later). Some of the interesting parts of the consent agenda that passed:

• The city extended its franchise agreement with Insight/Comcast for up to 180 days. The franchise agreement expired in April 2006 and has been temporarily extended numerous times since. Comcast’s takeover of Insight will be complete in January; after the downsizing, rightsizing, rebranding, and general mayhem has subsided, no doubt they’ll finally decide whether to get a city or state franchise license.
• A sidewalk cafe on State Street was approved for a new business called Water Street Wine Cafe & Coffee. I’m sure that won’t be successful, because it’s right next to railroad tracks, and I have it on good authority from frequent commentators on my blog that creative-class-outdoor-wine-drinker-types hate railroad tracks.
• The Mayor filled the two vacancies on the Zoning Commission. One of the appointees is Mark Misselhorn, who is also a Heart of Peoria Commissioner. The other appointee, Timothy Shea, isn’t a Heart of Peoria Commissioner. So, given the opportunity to put two HOPC members on the Zoning Commission, the Mayor appointed one. I applied to be a Zoning commissioner, and was recommended by Gary Sandberg and Pat Landes. I know Beth Akeson was also willing to serve and was recommended by Sandberg. Neither of us were appointed. I’m not personally offended by the snub because everyone knows that zoning meetings are about as much fun as recovering from a tonsillectomy, but I do think it says something about the city’s commitment to New Urbanism that so little effort is being made to infuse those principles into the commission that has arguably the most impact on how the city looks and works.

Perhaps the weirdest vote of the night was on the lone item pulled off the consent agenda: item L. “L” as in “light up.” It’s a seemingly mundane item calling for the City of Peoria to conform one of its ordinances to a state ordinance. The reason it’s controversial is because that state ordinance is the Smoke Free Illinois Act.

Van Auken pulled this off the consent agenda. She moved that the council not pass it. Sandberg seconded it and said the reason to reject the ordinance is because (a) the state law is poorly written and could lead to downtown businesses getting tickets for non-patrons who happen to be smoking within fifteen feet of their entrance, and (b) the city’s police department is too busy working on more important issues to be called away to give citations for smoking violations; since the state issued this unfunded mandate, the state should enforce it. Councilman Gulley joined in by stating that if the city passes this ordinance, then they will have to pay for adjudicating the tickets, whereas if they don’t pass the ordinance, the tickets would be adjudicated by the state’s attorney. Randy Oliver countered that, while that is true, the city would get 100% of the fine if it prosecutes under a local ordinance, and only 50% if under a state ordinance violation. Turner tried to counter that since the violation is complaint-driven and is not high-priority, it wouldn’t pull any officers off their beat or cause any hardship.

Then it came time for the vote. Remember, it was a motion to deny, so a “yes” vote means they don’t change the ordinance. Initially the vote was 4-5. Van Auken, Sandberg, Gulley, and Jacob voted for the motion to deny (meaning, they voted against passing the ordinance). Then Jacob changed his vote. Why he changed his vote, no one knows — the motion was defeated either way. But the final vote tally was officially 3-6.

Then a motion was made to approve the ordinance. That vote was 5-4. You’d think that would mean it passed, but it didn’t. To change an ordinance, it’s not enough to have a majority of a quorum. You have to have a majority of the council, and that means it needs six votes to pass. So the motion failed.

The weird part is Jacob’s switched vote. Had he voted to approve the ordinance, he would have been the sixth vote, and it would have passed. As it is, he voted against denying it, then voted against approving it. The only thing I can think of is that when he changed his vote on the first motion, it was so he could later ask for that motion to be reconsidered. Speaking of reconsideration, the motion to approve will probably be reconsidered at the next meeting when Manning and Spears return.

The item on changing city code relating to strip clubs and liquor licenses was deferred until the January 8 meeting.

Before that deferral, however, the council dispensed with Item No. 7. To really do this one justice, I should write a separate post about it, but I don’t have time. Perhaps another enterprising blogger could take up that task. Essentially, it’s another bite in transforming Growth Cell 2 from industrial to commercial zoning. This appears to be the latest plan.

The existing Comprehensive Plan says that Growth Cell 2 will be industrial, and has that area zoned accordingly. That’s why there are warehouses and rail spurs and stuff like that out there. Developers, however, want that land out there to be commercial, which is why Wal-Mart, Menards, and a litany of other stores are drifting there, many of them leaving empty buildings in their wake. Toward that end, another parcel on Allen Road was rezoned tonight from industrial to commercial.

Gary questioned why this didn’t go to the Planning Commission to be vetted. Nichting said the market should decide what goes out there, not the Comp Plan. And by “market,” he means “developers.” And by “Comp Plan,” he means “the city.” In other words, the city shouldn’t plan the city, developers should plan the city. Because we’ve been letting developers plan the city for the past 40 years, and that’s why we’re awash in revenue, able to provide ample public works and public safety services, and have myriad people moving into Peoria from all the surrounding towns and villages.

It was a typical council meeting.