Council members may be able to phone in their participation

teleconferencing phoneAnother big change that’s on the council agenda for Tuesday night is an amendment that would allow council members to attend meetings electronically (e.g., via telephone or internet connection) and vote electronically as well. So, for instance, if Eric Turner is going to be out of town on business for Caterpillar, he wouldn’t have to miss an important vote. He could call in, attend the meeting via telephone, and cast his vote with the rest of the council.

Under the proposed plan, electronic attendance would only be allowed if the council person can’t attend in person due to (1) personal illness/disability, (2) employment purposes or city business, or (3) because of a family or other emergency. Also, a quorum will have to be physically present, so you couldn’t have the whole council meeting electronically.

My guess is we won’t see this utilized a whole lot, but it will be entertaining when we do.

Council agenda misleading regarding HOPC request

Here’s the item as it was presented to the council on the agenda for June 5:

ITEM NO. 2 REQUESTS for CONSIDERATION of the Following:

A. Communication from Mayor Jim Ardis with Request to Provide More Focus and Maximize Resources for the Implementation of the Heart of Peoria Plan Concepts by Adopting the Following:

  1. ORDINANCE Amending Ordinance No. 15,571 Pertaining to the HEART OF PEORIA COMMISSION Changing the STATUS of the HEART OF PEORIA COMMISSION;
  2. ORDINANCE Amending CHAPTER 23 of the Code of the City of Peoria Pertaining to EXPANSION of the PLANNING COMMISSION by FOUR POSITIONS; and
  3. TRANSFER and APPOINTMENT of HEART OF PEORIA COMMISIONERS to EXISTING PLANNING and/or REGULATORY COMMISSIONS, with Recommendation to Concur:
    • Beth Akeson (Voting): Planning Commission – Term 6/6/2007 – 6/30/2008
    • Joe Richey (Voting): Planning Commission – Term 6/6/2007 – 6/30/2009
    • Dick Schwebel (Voting): Planning Commission – Term 6/6/2007 – 6/30/2008
    • Christopher Summers (Voting): Planning Commission – Term 6/6/07 – 6/30/2009
    • Nancy Biggins (Voting): Zoning Board of Appeals – Term 6/6/2007 – 6/30/2009
    • Patrick Sullivan (Voting): Traffic Commission – Term 6/6/2007 – 6/30/2009
    • Bill Washkuhn: Commission Assignment to be Determined.
OR

B. Communication from Director of Planning and Growth Management with Recommendation from the Heart of Peoria Commission to MAINTAIN the COMMISSION’S STATUS Based on the HEART OF PEORIA COMMISSION’S MISSION STATEMENT, VISION, and CORE VALUES and the CONDITION that the Commission Develop a Work Plan by July 30, 2007, to Complete the Work with the Planning and Growth Management Department to Achieve those Goals.

The way this has been communicated to the council is, unfortunately, misleading. This makes it look like the choice is between the mayor’s proposal (all changes) or the Heart of Peoria Commission’s proposal (no changes). That’s simply not true.

What the Heart of Peoria Commission (HOPC) clearly voted on at their last meeting was their preference for option A above, but without subsection 1. In other words, we strongly agreed with the expansion of the planning commission and the appointment of Heart of Peoria commissioners to various commissions as outlined, but we do not want the status of the Heart of Peoria Commission changed (i.e., we don’t want HOPC decommissioned).

We looked at the pros and cons of continuing as a city-appointed commission versus as a private advocacy group, and we decided we could be more effective as a city-appointed commission. However, we also decided that, in order for the principles of new urbanism to have the most impact, we needed the dual appointments of HOPC commissioners on other commissions — especially the planning commission, since they oversee the city’s comprehensive planning process.

So it was a little surprising to read the council agenda and see the options set so starkly opposed, all-or-nothing. Hopefully, the council can get things sorted out on the council floor Tuesday night.

Council reverses course, votes to eliminate fees

I’m really confused. The city needs revenue. There are fees on the books to bring in revenue. The council voted to increase those fees last year. Yet, inexplicably, the council reversed that decision and is now eliminating those fees. What happened?

You may recall that last August a large property management company bought the old Commercial National Bank building (now used by National City), and they wanted the city to eliminate their annual fees for encroachments of their underground vaults on the public way. It came to light that the city had not been collecting the fee for something like 30 years, but no accounting was ever given for this gross oversight.

Well, last October, the council decided by a vote of 8-2 (Nichting and Ardis were the only nays) “to keep the existing ordinance and modify and update the fee structure regarding underground vaults.” Case closed, right?

Nope. City staff sent letters to the affected property owners and, lo and behold, they complained about the fee. They said it wasn’t fair. They said it would increase the cost of doing business downtown. City staff complained (again) that they’d have to go out to the businesses and inspect them in order to verify the proper fee. So the issue came up to the council again on May 22, 2007. This time, the council voted 9-1 (Manning was the only nay) “to eliminate the current annual fee as provided in the existing Ordinance.”

So, the multi-million-dollar company that owns the Commercial Bank building downtown won’t have to pay that extra $500 annual fee that was apparently of grave concern to them. City staff will get to save a couple of days of looking at building vaults. And the rest of Peoria’s citizens will continue to pay the regressive garbage fee.

Hey, as long as we’re eliminating fees and work, why not get rid of parking fees? After all, since the city is so spread out and there isn’t adequate public transportation, citizens are forced to drive to do business downtown, and thus forced to find someplace to park their car. Hence, using the city’s logic, it’s unfair to charge them for something that’s out of their control. All parking violations have to be verified and ticketed by city employees (meter maids). It raises the cost of doing business downtown. And it’s unpopular with citizens and businesses alike. So who will argue for the elimination of this fee? Anyone? Anyone?

*chirp* *chirp*

Let me guess: the $60,000 the underground-vault fees would bring in to city coffers isn’t worth the trouble, right? I’ll keep that in mind as the city works on the budget again this year.

Changes coming to Council meetings

The city council may only meet half as often if an ordinance amendment is adopted at Tuesday’s council meeting. The amendment would cut back council meetings to twice a month — the second and fourth Tuesdays. Currently, the council meets the first four Tuesdays of every month.

Another part of the amendment requires citizens wishing to address the council to sign a card and restrict their comments to City of Peoria issues. It’s not clear whether the card would have to be signed before the meeting, as is the County Board’s policy, or just before the person speaks.

Hundreds of new manufacturing jobs coming to Peoria

Globe EnergyWhile Firefly Energy’s six-million-dollar loan guarantee from the city and county is getting all the press lately, there’s actually bigger news that has gone unreported.

On May 15, the City quietly approved as part of its consent agenda a business development fund loan of $150,000 to Globe Energy “for renovations, equipment, and operating expenses for their project located at 1610 W. Altorfer” in Pioneer Park.

Why is that big news? Because they’re going to be bringing 105 jobs paying an average salary of $50,000 to Peoria in the next 12-18 months, and plans to increase the number of employees to 600 within five years. For comparison, Firefly is planning to employ 65 people.

Here’s some details on Globe Energy from the council communication:

The owners/founders of Globe Energy, a female owned business, have spent 32 years developing a unique, world-patented technology that not only reduces the costs of heating large industrial buildings by 75%-91%, but also can reduce the environmentally harmful emissions caused by burning fossil fuels. The related company in England has a 25-year successful track record of installing high efficiency energy-saving systems across Europe for many large industrial customers including BMW, Dublin Airport, Renault, British Airways and Caterpillar. The U.S. Company has been granted full global rights to the technology by the founders and their U.K. entity and has recently successfully installed new heating systems in two Caterpillar facilities in the U.S.

Globe Energy has invested $3 million in the Peoria location thus far and owns intellectual property valued at $3.5 million. During Phase I of their project, which will be over the next 12-18 months, Globe Energy will renovate its building, purchase additional equipment, set up the manufacturing plant and add approximately 105 new positions with an average salary of $50,000. Phase I will require investment of $7.85 million.

Globe Energy plans to base its global business center and world manufacturing plant in Peoria to service the North American Market and then the rest of the world markets.

Within five years the Peoria operation plans to increase to 600 employees, adding positions in manufacturing, training, sales and marketing with a projected annual payroll of $32.75 million. This phase (Phase II) will involve additional investment of approximately $17 million which will be used to purchase property adjacent to their current location and to construct and build-out additional manufacturing space.

Pretty impressive track record, don’t you think? Here’s a world-class company locating here in Peoria, and yet there’s almost no coverage. Here we have a manufacturer bringing 100-600 jobs to the area, and still people talk as if manufacturing is dead and we should just put all our focus on med-tech jobs. (I’m not saying we shouldn’t go after med-tech jobs, mind you; I just think we need to have a diversity of jobs in Peoria, and manufacturing is an important part of that mix.)

Interestingly, Globe Energy may be needing rail service in the future, and since they’re located in Pioneer Park, that brings them into the whole Kellar Branch debate. For more on that, see David Jordan’s blog. Also, a big hat tip to Mr. Jordan for bringing public attention to this development through his blog.

Prospect properties used for fire training

Two properties on Prospect avenue owned by Peoria Public School District 150 are being used for training by the Peoria Fire Department (PFD). The graphic below shows all the properties purchased by the district:

Of those properties, two are being used by the Peoria Fire Department: 2144 and 2208. In addition, 2126 was approved for fire department use, but was razed by the school district before the PFD got a chance to use it.

Fire Prevention Chief Greg Walters said he contacted District 150 when he heard the District was planning to raze three of the houses. He asked if the Fire Department could use them to conduct training, educate people on fire damaged property insurance tips and soon after such a positive request the District approved his request. “We have an excellent working relationship with District 150,” Walters said.

In a letter sent to District 150 Director Dave Ryon (Buildings, Grounds, and Maintenance) dated April 13, Chief Walters explained that the PFD would be using the houses for hands-on training:

We will simulate fire scenes and the activities involved without setting fire to the building or buildings. We will use theatrical smoke periodically to simulate real conditions inside the structures. This theatrical smoke is not harmful to the environment nor to any individuals who may breathe it. In addition, we will be breaching walls and performing ventilation operations on the roofs of these structures as needed.

Walters didn’t comment on the condition of the houses before the training started except to say that a stairwell was missing in one of the houses and that they were “safe structures” for conducting firefighter training. Buildings the City of Peoria has slated for demolition due to code violations are often in such bad shape that they’re not safe enough for indoor firefighter training. So the District’s houses, which are in good shape structurally, “were a godsend” for training purposes, Walters explained.

In addition to breaching walls, the training included cutting holes in the floors and simulating fire suppression and rapid intervention scenarios. However, no fire was set to the structures, and the PFD was not allowed to damage the exterior of the houses, “for aesthetic reasons.”

District 150 purchased the homes in April and May of 2006 as part of their ill-fated plan to build a school adjacent to Glen Oak Park. The Park Board declined to enter into a land-sharing agreement at the end of last year, effectively killing the project. The property at 2144 Prospect was purchased for $89,000 and 2208 Prospect was purchased for $133,500. The assessed value of each property at the time was $63,750 and $89,190, respectively.

While I am deeply concerned that the school board has squandered thousands of dollars by purchasing this property over market value and now razing some of it, I think the Fire Department is doing the right thing by taking the opportunity to use these properties for training purposes. It’s sort of like making lemonade when life gives you lemons. It’s a travesty that the school board has allowed the properties to come to this, but if the opportunity can be seized to allow our firefighters to practice their skills, at least some good can come out of a bad situation.

2144 Prospect Ave. 2208 Prospect Ave.
The two houses being used for firefighter training are pictured above. 2144 is on the left and 2208 is on the right, obscured by large trees in the front yard.

Is a life sentence more cruel than capital punishment?

Electric ChairOver 300 prisoners in Italy think so, the BBC reports today.

Convicted mobster, Carmelo Musumeci, 52, who has served 17 years of his life sentence so far, wrote a letter to Italy’s President Napolitano signed by over 300 other lifers asking that their life sentences be changed to death sentences.

Musumeci said he was tired of dying a little bit every day. […]

He has passed his high school exams and now has a degree in law. But his sentence, he says, has transformed the light into shadows.

He told the president his future was the same as his past, killing the present and removing every hope.

Of course, one communist senator wants to go the other direction and abolish life sentences, replacing them with 30-year maximum sentences. I wonder how the inmates’ victims feel about that. And how long will it be before a 30-year sentence is considered too cruel? Talk about your slippery slope! Pretty soon, the whole system of law enforcement will be dismantled.

Thud!

Fender BenderWhen you watch a movie and there’s a car crash, there’s always a giant crashing sound that accompanies it. Now, we all know that movies are not reality and that sound effects are often exaggerated, but since you don’t see or hear real car crashes every day, you sort of come to expect them to sound the way they sound in the movies. You know: “Khkhkhkhkhkhkhkkh!”

In reality, car crashes are not nearly so spectacular. In fact, if it’s a fender-bender, it sounds like this: “Thud!” That’s it, just “thud.”

How do I know? Well, because someone ran into the back of me today. I was going north on Knoxville when the flow of traffic stopped (presumably because someone was turning left up ahead). The person coming up behind me didn’t realize that the flow of traffic had stopped. Despite his attempt to swerve at the last minute, he still hit me on the right rear bumper.

What made the biggest impression on me was the sound: “Thud!” Not at all what I expected. I expected “khkhkhkhkhkhkhkhkh!”

That reminds me of what a firefighter friend of mine told me — that cars don’t explode. Cars are always exploding in the movies, but that almost never happens in real life, he said. Of course, if someone puts a bomb in a car, then it explodes. But if the car is just on fire, it will burn, but not blow up.

Our view of reality is so skewed by Hollywood, isn’t it?

NY Times: Rethinking the kids menu

The New York Times has an interesting article today that questions whether children’s menus are good for kids. David Kamp writes, “the standard children’s menu is regressive, encouraging children (and their misguided parents) to believe that there is a rigidly delineated ‘kids’ cuisine’ that exists entirely apart from grown-up cuisine.”

Especially irritating to the author is the ubiquitous chicken finger. I have to admit, it is on every kids menu I’ve ever seen, even at Avanti’s where chicken fingers wouldn’t seem to fit an Italian menu. Says Kamp, “It pains me that many children now grow up eating little besides golden-brown logs of kid food, especially in a time when the quality, variety and availability of good ingredients is better than ever.”

The NY Times offered a place for readers to posit their opinions here. But I wonder, locally, what do you all think of children’s menus? Are you concerned that the food offered isn’t the healthiest? Or are you most concerned with the limited number and homogeneous nature of the offerings? Or do you think they’re great and wish you could order off of it yourself?

The Children’s ISA is the best financial option for parents. More and more parents are impressed by child ISA allowance. Visit their website for more info.