First, take a look at this map:
The question is: Why are there 11 inspectors for the area of Peoria south of Forrest Hill, and one inspector for all of Peoria north of Forrest Hill?
Libraries stand on principle… unless money is involved
There’s a bill wending its way through the state legislature. It’s called the Internet Screening in Public Libraries Act (HB1727), and it “[p]rovides that each public library must have a technology protection measure to prevent the display on a public computer of any visual depictions that are obscene, child pornography, or harmful to minors.”
The bill is supported by the Illinois Family Institute (IFI) and SafeLibraries.org. IFI points out that “[f]or public libraries, the Internet is perhaps the best research tool ever available. The Internet, however, is also responsible for the proliferation of adult and child pornography…. Pornography is now readily accessible to anyone using unfiltered Internet computers, even children in many neighborhood libraries.”
But libraries are against this measure. The Illinois Library Association (ILA) says in an “Action Alert” from March that it “supports local control. Local officials — library trustees, librarians, and other professional library staff — are the most qualified to decide how Internet access should be provided to their patrons.” They then go on to list “talking points,” under the headings: “Filters Hurt Libraries,” “Filters Don’t Work,” “Filters Are Expensive,” “Filters Are Biased,” “Filters Hurt the Poor,” etc. The Journal Star reports today that some libraries are staging a protest against filtering requirements.
But ask a member of the ILA (like, for instance, the Peoria Public Library) if they currently have filtering on their computers, and you may be surprised to find out the answer is “yes.”
Why? Money, of course.
The library can get telecommunications discounts of 20-90% through the state’s E-Rate program. One of the stipulations for receiving the money, though, is Internet filtering:
E-rate applicants must follow the Children’s Internet Protection Act [CIPA] if the application covers Internet access and/or internal connections.
CIPA is a federal law that was enacted in 2000. It states (emphasis added): “In order to receive discounts for Internet Access and Internal Connections services under the universal services support mechanism, school and library authorities must certify that they are enforcing a policy of Internet safety that includes measures to block or filter Internet access for both minors and adults to certain visual depictions.”
So, if you ask librarians to filter Internet content to protect children from harmful pornographic images, the answer is a litany of reasons filters are evil and fraught with complications. But if you ask librarians to filter Internet content so they can get a discount on their telecommunication costs, the answer is, “you bet!”
Behold the power of money.
The Peoria Chronicle is on TV tonight
I’ll be a guest on WHOI’s 5 p.m. newscast tonight. That’s channel 19 for those of you with rabbit ears, and channel 8 for those of you with Insight cable. I have no idea what we’ll be discussing, so it should be candid. I also hear it will be “interactive,” so maybe they’ll have some way of including viewers in the discussion. Tune in to find out.
The Heart of Peoria Plan: 5 years later
If you didn’t get a chance to read it yesterday, check out Jennifer Davis’s article on the Heart of Peoria Plan in Sunday’s Journal Star. She interviewed several members of the Heart of Peoria Commission to assess how implementation of the plan has progressed and where we will be focusing in the future.
Is Central Illinois Railroad storing hazardous material on Kellar Branch?
The city hired Central Illinois Railroad to provide rail service to Pioneer Park over the new $2-million western connection. But prices were so high over that connection that it was actually cheaper to truck materials than bring them in by rail, which is probably why the western spur (the portion of the rail line that has been there for decades before it was recently connected to the Kellar Branch) was never successful, but the Kellar Branch was.
However, the western connection has started being used again. Central Illinois Railroad (CIRY) recently lost a contract up in Elk Grove Village to operate trackage in Centex Industrial Park. So the speculation is that the tank cars CIRY had been storing up there are the ones they recently moved down here. David Jordan reported on this on his transportation blog here and here.
That prompted a most interesting discussion at the May 8 city council meeting. Here’s how it was recorded in the official minutes (emphasis added), interspersed with my comments:
Council Member Sandberg referred to the storage of rail cars on the Keller Branch Railroad and he questioned if Central Illinois Rail had an agreement with the City to store any rail cars on the Keller Branch.
Sandberg is referring to these cars, parked on the Kellar Branch by Chanute Road:
Corporation Counsel Randy Ray said the City did not have an agreement with Central Illinois Rail on the Keller Branch south of Pioneer Parkway. He said the City had an agreement from the west with D.O.T. that would give them trackage rights to serve from the west and from the west would include that area in Pioneer Park. He explained the agreement did not specifically allow for the storage of cars, but it did not prohibit the practice either. He said, it was his understanding, as long as the storage of cars did not interfere with service, the practice would be allowed.
It’s interesting that he mentioned the agreement the city has is with “D.O.T.” — actually it’s called “DOT Rail Services,” and that company no longer owns Central Illinois Railroad. They sold off CIRY to a newly formed entity called “Central Illinois Railroad Holdings, LLC.” So, there is some question over whether that agreement is still in effect, since Article 12 states that DOT cannot “transfer, assign or convey the rights granted hereunder without the written consent of the CITY and only upon the condition that the assignee shall abide by all terms, conditions and agreements hereof.”
But assuming the contract is still valid, Article 5.5 states clearly that, “The movement of engines, cars and trains of the DOT on said tracks shall be performed pursuant to federal, state and local government laws and regulations.” The City’s municipal code requires that hazardous materials be reported to the Fire Marshal, and depending on what materials are in the tank cars and how much material is in them, there may be permits or licenses that need to be purchased. None of that was done.
Corporation Counsel Ray said, much like the agreement with D.O.T.’s predecessor, the agreement was silent to specific storage. He said there were other regulations that prohibited storing large amounts of hazardous waste or materials, for example. In response to a question from Council Member Sandberg, he added Central Illinois Rail did not request permission from the City to store cars on the rail, nor did they provide advance notice.
Isn’t the Sierra Club and Peoria Families Against Toxic Waste strangely silent on this issue? I mean, the tank cars are right next to the trail. Why aren’t there any complaints about this hazard to public health and safety? I would think they’d be all over it.
City Manager Randy Oliver said an opinion from the rail attorney was received and he advised, if a car was passing through the City of Peoria, the City would not have the right to make an inspection. He stated if a rail car was stored on the track, the City would have the right to inspect the rail car. He said he would request Fire Chief Kent Tomblin and his team to make an inspection of the cars to determine what was being stored, if anything. He added a fee would be charged for the inspection, if it was provided for under an Ordinance and if the rail attorney determined a fee was chargeable.
In discussion with Council Member Nichting regarding if the City would be able to recover a viable amount based on the City’s investment in the rail due to the allowance of real estate law’s 12% rate of return, Corporation Counsel Randy Ray agreed and he said he would work on reaching an agreement that would provide such a return.
Following further discussion, Council Member Sandberg discussed safety issues and he said he agreed with Council Member Nichting’s comments.
Now we’re talking. Inspect the cars and charge any and all applicable fees. I wonder if there will be a report back on this item at tomorrow’s council meeting. I can’t wait to hear.
It’s a little galling that CIRY won’t provide service over the Kellar Branch (which is still active until the Surface Transportation Board says otherwise) and can’t provide competitive service over the western connection for our local Peoria business, but it can use the trackage for some out-of-town company’s hazardous materials storage. We, the taxpayers, did not build that $2-million western connection for this purpose.
Old Big Hollow Dump
Here’s one for the Journal Star’s occasional “Oink Oink” editorial feature. When the city connected Charter Oak Road to Allen Road a few years back, they rerouted a portion of Big Hollow Road to create a T-intersection with Charter Oak. But they left a portion of the old Big Hollow Road intact, complete with a little driveway to access it. Here’s a map of the location (click to enlarge):
This lonely, abandoned roadway has become a new dumping ground in Peoria. Here’s a sample of some of the other debris you can find (click on the pictures to enlarge):
That’s right: a bathtub, a mattress, and a desk that looks like it was dropped off the back of a large truck, files and all. Is this what the city had in mind for this section of roadway? Is that why they built a curb cut and access driveway for it?
If you ask me, allowing easy access to this deserted slab does nothing but provide incentive for illegal dumping. If the city isn’t going to remove this part of the old road, they should at least clean it up and block it off so that no further polluting can take place. Who knows what might get dumped there next?
Yes, I agree, build the trail now!
While I was at the park district offices recently, I noticed they had green signs there that stated “Build the Trail NOW” and gave a web address for more information. I asked if the Park District made up the signs, and they said no, someone else did. Then they asked me if I wanted one, which gave me the biggest laugh of my day.
Today, I’ve been told by a couple of people that these signs are all up and down University street between Glen and Northmoor, along the Race for the Cure route.
The funny thing is, I agree with the simple message, “Build the Trail Now.” In fact, I believe that the trail could have been built years ago. The people who made the signs no doubt think that Pioneer Railcorp, Carver Lumber, and/or the Surface Transportation Board are holding things up. But the truth is the only organization holding things up is the Park District.
The Park District can build that trail any time they want by putting it next to the rail line or next to the streets that parallel the rail line. Nothing is stopping them except their own stubborn desire to see the Kellar Branch rail line removed.
The Park District has proven that money is not an issue: they’ve been able to get Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) grants to build portions of the trail that they had originally planned to build with federal funds that carry more restrictions.
The Park District has proven that a Class I trail is not absolutely necessary: they’ve built a Class III trail south of War Memorial Drive with those IDNR grants I referred to earlier. Apparently they just want the Class I trail north of War Memorial — seems a bit arbitrary, don’t you think?
The Park District has proven that even a Class I trail can be nothing more than a glorified sidewalk: the portion of the trail they’ve built at Pioneer Park and Sommer is nothing more than a sidewalk that parallels the roadway, while still being separate. Their plans call for the same thing in Peoria Heights. If they can do that there, why couldn’t they do it along, say, Harvard Ave.? Why do they have-to have-to have-to replace the Kellar Branch rail line?
So, I’ll jump on that bandwagon. I say to the Peoria Park District: Build the Trail, NOW! And stop wasting taxpayer money trying to eliminate rails from the city.
Park Board told SA last night’s action was done months ago
I erroneously stated yesterday, “Part of the remedy handed down [for the Park Board’s Open Meetings Act violation] by the state’s attorney’s office was that the [park] board have a policy/procedure on the proper creation, storage, and destruction of closed session recordings.” After rereading a copy of the state’s attorney’s letter to the Park Board, it turns out that’s not accurate.
What the letter actually stated was that the park board previously told the state’s attorney’s office that it already had a policy in place for destroying closed session tapes, and that was the basis upon which the state’s attorney’s office declined to take punitive action. So now the question is, if the park board already had a policy in place, why are they just now adopting a resolution?
On September 13, 2006, William W. P. Atkins of the State’s Attorney’s office wrote a letter to Tim Bertschy, who is representing the Park Board in the lawsuit over violations to the Open Meetings Act. The letter states that Atkins met with board president Tim Cassidy and park district attorney Jim Konsky to discuss the matter. In the letter, Atkins makes it clear that the Board cannot simply blame their secretary Joyce McLemore for destroying the tapes:
Ms. McLemore is not the only one to blame in this matter. The Park District failed to promulgate a policy regarding destruction of closed meeting verbatim records. Further, the Board failed to supervise the Secretary closely enough to discover the ongoing destruction of records until nearly three years of some of the recordings had been destroyed.
So the Board itself is culpable in the Open Meetings Act violation because, in part, they didn’t have a policy. So, why was no punitive action taken against the board? Read on (emphasis mine):
In this particular case, you have informed me that the Park District now has a policy only allowing destruction of verbatim recordings in compliance with the portion of the Open Meetings Act cited above. Further, the Secretary has been instructed concerning this policy to insure her obedience to the Board and the law….
Because you have reported these violations to the State’s Attorney’s Office and taken measures to prevent such violations from occurring again, no purpose would be served by any punitive action at this time.
That was September 2006. Now, in May 2007, eight months later, the board is adopting a policy that they told the State’s Attorney they already had. What kind of games are being played here? Did they already have the policy or not? If they didn’t, then they lied to the State’s Attorney in September. If they did, then why do they need to re-adopt the policy eight months later?
Between the school board and the park board, the principle of “open government” is getting a black eye.
Park Board to take action on audio recordings
On the agenda for the Peoria Park Board meeting is this little item under New Business:
7) RESOLUTION: Adopt Procedures for Audio Recordings—Closed Session Meetings
Here’s a copy of the resolution in PDF format. The procedure is just a reiteration of the Illinois Open Meetings Act’s requirements concerning the audio and/or video recording of closed session meetings.
The Park District is taking this action because they violated the Open Meetings Act when they unlawfully destroyed audio recordings of closed-session meetings, including one that is the subject of a lawsuit. Part of the remedy handed down by the state’s attorney’s office was that the board have a policy/procedure on the proper creation, storage, and destruction of closed session recordings.
What does the HOP Plan say about liquor stores in South Peoria?
The short answer is nothing. But since newly-elected-but-not-yet-seated school board member Linda Butler (who is a chaplain at South Side Mission) brought it up at Tuesday’s city council meeting, it’s worth looking into a little more.
Linda had lunch recently with my friend and Vice Chair of the Heart of Peoria Commission (HOPC) Beth Akeson. Beth recently wrote a guest editorial for the Chronicle expressing concern about the proposed grocery store and (especially) truck stop on the city’s south side. What Beth told Linda, and Linda repeated at the council meeting, is that the planned development is not consistent with the Heart of Peoria Plan.
I think we need to parse that out a little bit, because there are several facets to the development. There’s a grocery store, a liquor license, a laundromat, and a truck stop.
What the Heart of Peoria Plan advocates is the reestablishment of neighborhood centers. By looking at the street grid and later doing a visual inspection of the older part of town, the design team was able to identify where little commercial centers used to be to support the surrounding neighborhoods. Here they are (click to enlarge):
The plan recommends:
Adjust[ing] zoning code to support and encourage development (or re-development) of neighborhood-oriented mixed-use centers, each located at the center of an appropriate pedestrian shed [an area that is within easy walking distance, generally a ¼-½ mile radius, or a 5-10 minute walk; the circles on the graphic represent the pedestrian sheds].
So the argument is that this development is not consistent with the Heart of Peoria Plan because it’s not in an ideal location for a neighborhood center.
In response, I would just say that, while the Plan does indeed advocate neighborhood centers within an appropriate pedestrian shed, none of the depicted neighborhood center locations (see graphic above) cover the area where Mr. Abud is wanting to locate his grocery store. The closest ones are Adams & Western and Laramie & Krause (numbers 3 & 6 respectively on the graphic). However, neither of these cover Harrison Homes or the neighborhood that Abud would be serving.
Furthermore, considering that several of the depicted “appropriate” pedestrian sheds (Adams & Western, Adams & Garden, Water & Main, Jefferson & Camblin, Adams & Sloan — numbers 3, 9, 1, 18, and 19 on the graphic, respectively) are on the edge of neighborhoods so that nearly half of the shed is unused or otherwise non-residential, I don’t think a case can be made that having a neighborhood center at Adams & Ligonier is somehow inconsistent because it isn’t in the middle of a neighborhood.
Also, in a supplementary part of the Plan, it explicitly recommends that a public-private partnership establish community anchors in these neighborhood centers that would include a laundromat and “a neighboring cafe or bar” (emphasis added). When Duany was here explaining the Plan, he said himself that we shouldn’t be “moralistic” and should recognize that adults do drink and that a neighborhood bar is an appropriate place for adults to socialize. While the Plan is silent on whether a grocery store should sell liquor, the implication from the proposed community anchor is that liquor is not a concern of the Plan.
The truck-stop part of the plan is a different issue, however. I think a strong case can be made that the Plan does not conceive of a truck stop along this corridor, especially not abutting a residential neighborhood. Although there is nothing explicit about this topic, certainly the Plan is concerned with things being at a pedestrian scale and meeting the needs of people (not cars), lowering dependence on the automobile, having inspiring form/architecture, etc., and a truck stop is the antithesis of all those things and would be totally inappropriate for this location.
I think it would be a fair statement to say that the truck stop is not consistent with the Heart of Peoria Plan. But I think the laundromat and grocery store intrinsically are consistent with the Plan, even with the grocery store having a liquor license and being located at Adams & Ligonier.
Something I haven’t talked about is the form of the development. In a part of the HOP Plan that discusses interventions for the Southern Gateway Area, it states in part:
Both the buildings and the parking in the existing [Southern Gateway] plan are consistently suburban in character, where they should reflect an increasingly urban character as one approaches the downtown core. Although this approach might make it easier to attract certain kinds of development in the short run, it will ultimately limit development capabilities of the surrounding landowners, as well as giving an inappropriate character to the city’s “gateway.†The current pattern of land use along the corridor reflects the common result of the erosion of an older urban fabric by the introduction of uses that are oriented to the automobile traffic generated along this route. The result is not only visually unappealing, but detrimental to the redevelopment potential of the nearby neighborhood.
The old Miracle Mart building, which Abud is remodeling, is essentially suburban in character, with the building set back quite a ways on the property and all the parking in a front lot. One could make the case that Abud’s development should look more urban in order to better conform to the HOP Plan. However, since the building already exists and was a Miracle Mart and reportedly a Sav-A-Lot already, I don’t see how we could require someone (under our current zoning regulations) to raze the current structure and rebuild it, especially since it appears to be perfectly suited to being a neighborhood grocery as it is currently configured.
What this part of town really needs is a Form District, just like they have at Sheridan/Loucks, Prospect, West Main, and the Warehouse District. A form-based code for the Southern Gateway would give Peoria the regulatory authority to make sure development is consistent with the city’s vision for that area. Furthermore, the process of developing a form-based code requires that charrettes be held with the neighborhoods along that corridor, so they would be fully represented. I would encourage First District Councilman Clyde Gulley to work toward that goal by making sure he secures funds for this project in the next budget cycle.
This issue is now on the Heart of Peoria Commission’s agenda for a special meeting that will be held this Friday, May 11, 8:00 – 10:30 a.m. in Room 404 at Peoria City Hall. As with all HOPC meetings, this is open to the public if anyone would like to attend.