City Council, City of Peoria, Elections

Quiz Show: Council candidates participate in Warehouse District test

2 Comments

Last night (3/22), the ten candidates for five city council at-large seats stood by easels with flipcharts on them, marker in hand, and answered questions compiled by the Warehouse District Association. It was fun, but it really was a test — a test to see how much the candidates know about the Heart of Peoria Plan, the proposed Land Development Code, and the Warehouse District. Their answers will be graded and, while the answers won’t be published, their scores will. It’s just one more tool in evaluating the candidates.

Only part of the time was spent writing answers on paper, however. Interspersed were three or four rounds of questioning that required the candidates to answer verbally. Here are some of the questions and answers (remember, these are going to be specific to the Warehouse District because that’s the audience for this forum):

Q: Where should the next major development be in the city?

  • Turner: Museum and CAT visitors center, Warehouse District and Eagle View area
  • Thetford: Downtown, older neighborhoods,
  • Spain: Downtown, riverfront, warehouse district, Renaissance Park
  • Sandberg: Within the 8,000-acre Heart of Peoria area

Q: Would you vote for the Warehouse District TIF if elected to the council?

  • Polk: Only if it’s not detrimental to District 150
  • Montelongo: “I would want some strings attached to that as well.” (didn’t specify what strings)
  • Jacob: Wants to complete the TIF study before making a final decision

Q: If elected, what value would you place on the Warehouse District?

  • Irving: Extremely high; development needed in this area, especially retail
  • Gillette: Important; outdoor malls, restaurants, night clubs, etc., needed to bring people to the area
  • Cassel-Fitzgerald: Very high; supports Warehouse District

Q: How would you fix the streets in the Warehouse District and Downtown?

  • Cassel-Fitzgerald: Procedures in place for owners to do something about the sidewalks; some streets need to be two-way; to some extent it depends on who moves there
  • Gillette: Return some streets to natural character (e.g., many downtown streets still have brick underlayment); change one-way streets to two-way; change Washington Street to three lanes
  • Irving: Change one-way streets to two-way; put in more ornamental landscaping; imperative that traffic be slowed down in order for Warehouse District to be successfully implemented
  • Jacob: Make one-way streets two-way; slow traffic down; create diagonal parking; realize that this effort will require significant investments in infrastructure

Q: What is the city council’s role in economic development in the Warehouse District?

  • Montelongo: “Set the tone” for business growth
  • Polk: Find as many venues to make the city as progressive as it can; use Warehouse District to bring tourism in; provide whatever the need to make this a thriving area
  • Sandberg: Adopt regulations that would promote investment; stand against development not in keeping with the vision for the Heart of Peoria Plan and Warehouse District

Q: (1) Have you ever walked the Warehouse District? (2) If so, do you think the city’s efforts to keep the streets/sidewalks clean and repaired is adequate?

  • Spain: (1) Yes; (2) No, a better job needs to be done in this area for the Warehouse District to be successful; consider the “hidden costs” of doing this (e.g., added costs to clear the sidewalks of snow in addition to the street)
  • Thetford: (1) Yes, portions of it; (2) Not as good as it should be, but better than some older neighborhoods; the city needs to work on the streets all over Peoria, not just in the Warehouse District
  • Turner: (1) Yes; (2) Visited warehouse districts in other cities, so he knows the vision; here, “we have a long way to go.”

Q: Will you encourage establishment of the arts as a vital part of the Warehouse District?

  • Turner: Yes; committed to Arts Partners
  • Thetford: “Without question”; has a minor in theater and has acted at Cornstock, so is committed to the arts; our arts community distinguishes Peoria from among other cities in Illinois
  • Spain: “Absolutely yes”; it is a critical part of our community; offered to have his jazz band come down and play a gig in the Warehouse District

Q: What do you think the [now-defunct] Riverfront Commission in the past accomplished?

  • Sandberg: It was a waste of money that destroyed our riverfront; the scale is wrong, the architecture is wrong; it is a barricade to our river [after Sandberg’s comments, the audience applauded unprompted — the only time this happened]
  • Polk: Disappointed in how our riverfront turned out; expected something different
  • Montelongo: Got things started, but outcome was misguided; didn’t meet expectations
  • Jacob: It’s easy to sit back and bash the Riverfront Commission’s work after the fact; yes, mistakes were made, but the opportunity now is to work with what we’ve got and come up with solutions; focus on the future

Q: What has the Heart of Peoria Commission (1) accomplished so far, and (2) what can they do in the future?

  • Irving: (1) They have brought forth the form-based code; (2) communicate, publicize, and come up with more ideas for drawing people into the older parts of town
  • Gillette: (1) They’ve completed basic studies on what can be done; (2) need to communicate and listen to the neighborhoods
  • Cassell-Fitzgerald: (1) Commission has not done what it could have done; there are no resolutions to their recommendations; (2) Work closer with neighborhood associations; network with other organizations

Keep in mind that these questions and answers are just pulled from my notes. Some of the candidates talk very fast, and I just tried to get the basic gist of what they were saying, with a quote here and there when I could get it. In fairness, they had to talk fast, because the pace of the Q&A time was pretty peppy.

I thought these questions and answers gave some insight into the candidates’ knowledge of the issues that are important to the Warehouse District, and also some idea of how they view the council’s role in development. Jennifer Davis of the Journal Star covered the event, as did Kim Carollo of HOI News.

City of Peoria, Insight Communications, State Legislation, Television

Almost a year later, and still no cable franchise agreement

8 Comments

Cable TVOn April 15, 2006, Peoria’s 20-year cable franchise agreement with Insight Communications expired. As of today, we still have no cable franchise agreement, but City Attorney Randy Ray is hopeful that we will soon. In an e-mail I received in response to my question on how negotiations were going, he said this:

Our attorney is working on what I hope is a final version [of the proposed new franchise agreement]. We are subject to being affected by pending legislation in Springfield.

That is one, long, drawn-out negotiation. No doubt the legislation to which Ray obliquely refers is H.B. 1500, the so-called “Cable and Video Competition Law of 2007.” It’s backed by telcom behemoth AT&T which wants to get into the cable TV business without having to negotiate franchise agreements with each municipality the way cable companies have done for the past 40 years.

Under H.B. 1500, a cable provider such as AT&T would apply not to the City of Peoria or the Village of Morton or any other local municipality for a cable franchise agreement to serve those communities, but rather to the Illinois Commerce Commission (ICC) to get franchise authorization. Furthermore, it would preempt home rule, meaning that it would strip municipalities of any authority to regulate use of their rights-of-way by cable operators (e.g., use of utility poles, underground easements, etc.), as they do through local franchise agreements now.

Opponents of the bill, such as the not-for-profit organization SaveAccess.org, say that it does a number of harmful things, including:

  • Shuts down Public, Educational and Government (PEG) stations around the state
  • Drops requirements that companies serve everyone
  • Weakens customer service protections
  • Harms fair competitions

Granted, those are all sound-bite sized talking points, but I think they’re true. Consider:

The first point is a reference to a provision in the bill that states, “Any public, education, or government channel provided under this Section that is not used by the franchising authority or local unit of government for at least 8 hours per day of non-repeat programming for 3 consecutive months may no longer be made available to the local franchising authority….” That’s a lot of public access programming to sustain. Insight provides channel 17 (Illinois Central College) and channel 22 (public/government access), and I don’t believe the two of them combined provide 8 hours/day of non-repeat programming. So I believe it’s fair to say the effect of the bill would indeed shut down PEG stations.

As far as it dropping requirements to serve everyone, local franchise agreements were always concerned with equity — with the same service being available throughout the city (see, for example, §5.1 of Peoria’s 1986 Cable Franchise Agreement). The bill as written would not require total coverage, and in fact would only require that by five years after rollout, 30% of households accessible to the cable operator’s service be low-income.

Since complaints about service would no longer be made locally, but to the state, I think there’s no question that it weakens customer service. Who do you think is going to be more responsive to your cable TV complaint: your city staffer/council rep or a state bureaucrat?

But the last point is the kicker. As a recent article in Multichannel News points out, “As currently written, the bill [H.B. 1500] would hold only incumbent cable operators to current franchises until their statutory end dates.” Indeed, §21-301(2) of the bill states, “Upon expiration of its current agreement, an incumbent cable operator […] shall obtain State authorization from the Commission pursuant to this Article and shall be subject to the provisions of this Article.”

And this may be one reason it’s taking so long to get a new franchise agreement between Insight and Peoria. Insight will want to protect themselves against signing a 10- or 20-year franchise agreement that is going to put them at a competitive disadvantage to AT&T, which will be deploying cable services under a state-granted franchise if this legislation is passed.

The bill has been assigned to the Telecommunications Committee, and there was a hearing on it today (3/22) in Springfield. There is a website set up specifically to oppose this bill called KeepUsConnected.org.

Ray LaHood

LaHood doesn’t want to make it too easy to form a union

8 Comments

Ray LaHoodEarlier this month, Ray LaHood voted against the Employee Free Choice Act (which passed the House anyway, 241-185), H.R. 1696 H.R. 800, which would make it easier to form a union. Here’s a good explanation from a blog called The Chicagoist:

In a nutshell, the current process of administrative rules and labor laws require at least 30% of workers to sign union cards indicating that they want to have a union, petition the government for an election, and then go through a campaign before getting to vote to have a union or not. […]

The Employee Free Choice Act changes the rules regarding union representation, granting union recognition by signing up a simple majority of workers on union cards, eliminating the petition process. Furthermore, this bill creates meaningful consequences when employers violate employee rights to organize and provides for mediation and arbitration in first contract negotiations.

LaHood voted against it, telling the Pekin Times he felt it would “take away the opportunity of the worker to participate and have their voice heard through the ballot.” Wikipedia further explains why he may feel that way:

Critics contend union administered elections, with a lack of Federal oversight, will lead to coercion on the part of union organizers. Opponents of the EFCA also assert that the measure would not protect employee privacy [i.e., there is nothing requiring a secret ballot].

Thank goodness we have Ray LaHood in Congress to protect workers from those horrible unions! I mean, the current system is so much better, isn’t it, with all its protective red tape and long delays? I suppose that’s one way to fix the trade deficit — if we can get rid of the unions, then American workers can start competing for the low wages corporations are paying to workers oversees.

Meanwhile, staunch defender of the democratic process LaHood continues to defend the decidedly un-democratic federal earmark process.

Public Services - General, Radio

Pledge now… you filthy freeloader!

8 Comments

Money BagsWCBU is in their pledge drive this week (you can pledge on-line). Generally speaking, I hate pledge drives. Still, even with all the interruptions, I still think there is less time spent asking for money during a pledge drive than commercial stations spend in ad time every day, so I’m not complaining.

I do have one complaint about the method used to raise money, and that is when they stop simply asking for money and start acting like you’re obligated to give; that you somehow owe them money because they’ve chosen to provide their content for free over the airwaves. To me, this makes them sound like a “squeegee guy” — the guy who approaches cars stopped in traffic and cleans their windows without asking, then demands payment.

I guess I’m not sure what the guilt-trip tactic accomplishes. One could just as easily assuage one’s guilt by not listening to their station anymore, and what good would that do? Their costs of delivery stay the same whether people listen or not. You can draw more flies with honey than vinegar, so why not stay positive?

Nevertheless, I think it’s a good cause because they do provide good content. I’m not a big classical music fan, but I do appreciate their stellar local news coverage. So, I’m pledging this year.

And besides, this gives me an idea: Maybe I’ll conduct my own pledge drive here and try to raise some money to cover my time and expenses. Hey, I think I may be onto something…. No ads, just annual pledge drives and underwriters…. Hmmm, this could work for the Chronicle…. Thanks, WCBU!

City of Peoria, St. Louis Cardinals

World Champion St. Louis Cardinals to display their trophy in Peoria Thursday

19 Comments

World Series TrophyI just read pjstar.com that the 2006 World Series trophy will be on display in Peoria Thursday (3/22):

From 4 to 7 p.m., the trophy will be at the U.S. Cellular store at 7714 N. Grand Prairie Drive, adjacent to The Shoppes at Grand Prairie.

For those Cubs fans who read my blog, I should probably explain: The World Series is a best-of-seven contest that’s played after the Cubs go home at the end of each season. The winner gets this handsome trophy pictured to the right, and gets to wear the title “World Champion” for a year.

The 2006 World Champions were the St. Louis Cardinals, and this is the 10th trophy they’ve collected over their magnificent and storied history.

Peoria Public Schools

Why replicate Edison?

19 Comments

District 150’s school board is trying to decide what to do about Edison Schools. Lots of parents like it, apparently, and so the district is considering replicating the program in-house to save money. But according to estimates recently released by the administration and reported in the Journal Star, it would cost almost a million dollars more than their current Edison Schools contract to replicate the program in-house. Now some parents are saying we should keep Edison because it’s cheaper.

My question is, why would we want to replicate it, let alone keep it? Take a look at the rankings below (click the “Show More” button if you’re not reading the permalink) and tell me what you notice about Edison schools compared to the rest of District 150’s schools. What I see is not much difference in student performance — certainly not $1.57 million worth of difference (the cost of the contract plus implementation). Is this the “world class education for every child” Edison promises in their promotional literature?

That there is little difference in performance should come as no surprise. The Rand Corporation recently released a study on Edison and other private for-profit companies that manage schools in Philadelphia. They found the same thing: “Within Philadelphia, the schools managed by private providers were doing neither better nor worse than districtwide achievement trends.” There is no reason to believe that these results would be unique to Philadelphia.

Instead of haggling over replication costs, the school board should simply fire Edison altogether and put together a restructuring plan of their own, based on what’s been proven to work in Peoria. District 150 has several successful schools from which to get ideas, such as Lindbergh Middle School and Kellar Primary School. Charter Oak, Von Steuben, and Whittier also did better than three out of four Edison schools.

Why not replicate success?

|inline

Peoria Public Schools, State Legislation

District 150 testing of disabled children, Part II

4 Comments

Peoria Public Schools logoIn my last blog entry on testing of special education students, I asked at the end, “is it fair to say that children being tested at their grade level are not being tested at their ‘learning level’ when the IAA [Illinois Alternative Assessment] takes into account the students’ Individualized Education Program (IEP)? Wouldn’t the IEP be tied to the child’s ‘learning level’?”

Well, I posed this question to Bryan Chumbley, the director of research, testing, and assessment for District 150, and here’s how he responded:

It is true that federal legislation does not allow students with disabilities to be tested off grade level except in the case of IAA students (specific to Illinois). If we keep in mind that the IAA is intended for those students with significant cognitive delays, then it is more clear how these students are assessed. The portfolio that is created for IAA students identifies specific learning standards that classroom teachers are working on with these students. Given the severity of the disability for these students, the types of activities provided these students look much different than any regular classroom assignment or test. Thus, the evidence of student progress for the IAA is, in most cases, not in alignment with the work we would see of regular education students of the same age. This assessment is an “alternate” to other state testing because this 1% of the population cannot be assessed by more traditional assessment methods. In essence, the IAA does provide an assessment opportunity that does not measure this small segment of our school population at the grade level at which their chronological age would indicate.

The issue of “fairness” is of great concern to educators. For those students for whom the IAA is not determined to be appropriate, these students must participate in the regular state testing program. However, during the IEP process teachers, coordinators, and parents can identify specific accommodations that can be provided to account for needs of students. Some of the accommodations that can be provided include:

  • extended time
  • small group setting
  • test read to student (does not include the reading test)
  • scribe (for students for whom the physical act of writing presents difficulties).

However, there is certainly widespread concern that for those students who do not currently function at grade level in reading or math, asking those students to participate in testing at their chronological grade just does not seem fair. The concern is centered around the fact that, even with accommodations, some students are at a disadvantage when it comes to testing. There has been legislative action taken (I believe Aaron Schock coauthored the legislation) in Illinois to allow students to be tested at their “functional level”, but these changes have not been approved by the US Dept. of Education. Until the federal legislation changes we have no choice but to comply. The District would be interested in reviewing any future legislation and provide support if the legislation would result in a benefit for our students.

I found this to be a very thorough and thoughtful response, and it makes me wish more administrators and school board members were as helpful and communicative as Mr. Chumbley. The News-Gazette (Champaign) explains the same issue this way:

Districts are allowed to test up to 1 percent of the IEP students – most of whom have more severe levels of mental retardation – using an alternative assessment. The other 99 percent, which includes students with IQs of 55 to 70, must take the general test for their grade level – not ability level – the same test that’s given to students without disabilities.

Here’s where I was confused: I thought the 1% rule was 1% of the total student body, but it turns out it’s only 1% of the special needs children (those with Inidividualized education programs, or IEPs). That leaves a lot of special needs children in the position of having to perform as well their non-disabled peers on the same states tests, which does seem to be unfair.

Mr. Chumbley mentioned legislation. The only legislation on this issue I could find sponsored by Rep. Schock was HB3678 , which was signed into law August 23, 2005. It “[p]rovides that the indicators to determine adequate yearly progress for children with disabilities shall be based on their individualized education plans” and sundry other provisions, but is “contingent upon the federal government not formally disapproving through the submission and review process for the Illinois Accountability Workbook.” I got the impression from Mr. Chumbley’s e-mail that even though this legislation was approved by the state, it was still in limbo pending federal approval, but perhaps he was referring to different legislation. If anyone has any further info, let me know.

City Council, City of Peoria

Thoughts about last night’s candidates forum

25 Comments

The Journal Star reports on a candidates forum that took place last night, sponsored by the Glen Oak Neighborhood Association, that I was unable to attend, unfortunately. As I was reading about it this morning, here are some random thoughts I had about it:

“It’s not (a decision) I was happy about [to downsize Fire Station 11], and I think everyone on the council would like to see the City Council come up with the money,” Thetford told the crowd. “But, I also challenge you, that happened in 2004. This is 2007. If that was a major priority of the council, there has been time to find the funding.”

Great diversion, shifting focus onto the current council. But forgive me for not following the logic. Thetford got us into the mess, the current council hasn’t been able to fix her mess yet, so we should reelect Thetford because…?

Only a few candidates voiced caution over the cost…. “We have to facilitate growth in the community so we’re able to pay for the services our citizens are clamoring for,” Spain said.

Thank you, Mr. Spain. You have provided in that short sentence the very reason I will not be voting for you. You see, it’s that kind of thinking that has gotten us to this place where we’re shoveling money into developers’ bank accounts, but not enough money for fire protection.

No, that statement is completely backwards. We should be providing basic city services in order to facilitate growth in the community. That’s the crux of the difference between what has been termed “progressive” candidates and “basic services first” candidates.

“In my brochure, I say that properly placed fire stations are key to a proper foundation,” said Dan Irving. “We need to start having those discussions right now. When it comes down to finding the money for it, it’s all about prioritization.”

Dan has it right. It is indeed all about prioritization. When the city provides first-class police protection to keep crime down, fully-staffed fire stations to protect citizens’ lives and property, and well-maintained infrastructure such as transportation corridors and sewers, that will be attractive to residents and businesses alike. And if further incentives are necessary to attract some businesses, that can be discussed — but those incentives should never come at the expense of basic city services.

The Peoria Chronicle

Chronicle back in business

Yesterday, I received my new Dell Inspiron 1501 laptop, and it’s a big step up from my old Inspiron 1100. My favorite feature is the built-in wireless card. My old laptop had wireless via a PCMCIA card which was prone to getting bent. The new laptop also has a bit wider screen, which is nice for certain applications, like Photoshop. I was able to migrate all my important files from my old hard drive to my new computer, so it looks like we’re back in business.

Of course, I was up until the wee hours last night uninstalling the software I didn’t want (AOL, Google Desktop, etc.) and installing the software I do want (Adobe Creative Suite, Microsoft Access), getting my e-mail back up and running, configuring the wireless card to communicate with my router, copying files, and just exploring the new Windows Vista operating system. I’ll tell ya, if imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, then Macintosh should be deluged in flattery. Windows looks more and more like a Mac with each successive operating system.