City of Peoria, Peoria County, Peoria County Sheriff, Peoria Mayor, Peoria Police

Chief, Sheriff say two departments are not comparable

58 Comments

At Tuesday’s State of the City address, Mayor Ardis announced a new initiative to see what it would take to combine the City and County police departments. This prompted the Journal Star to gather a few basic facts about the two forces:

The city’s Police Department has 214 employees and operates on a $21 million budget; the Sheriff’s Department has roughly 200 employees and operates on a $13 million budget.

A difference of 14 employees and $8 million seemed surprisingly large to me. So I asked Peoria Police Chief Steve Settingsgaard and Peoria County Sheriff Mike McCoy why there is such a disparity.

The first thing Settingsgaard wanted to clear up was that he actually has 248 total employees — the 214 number was the total of “sworn officers.” Even with that said, though, he still felt that a comparison of the two forces is “more apples to oranges than it is apples to apples.”

“[W]ithout a close comparison of both of our agencies, to include operations, budgets, staff, contracts, etc., it is impossible to tell you all the reasons there is a legitimate difference in budget numbers beyond just salaries,” Settingsgaard explained.

I would argue that the Sheriff’s Office and the Peoria Police Department are more dissimilar then they are similar. Yes we both have traditional patrol and traditional law enforcement functions but there are many more facets of what we do that is very different from one another. I don’t speak for the Sheriff and I would be interested to hear his take on it, but I believe the jail and the Court house account for the majority of his staff and his Office’s workload. I would guess that the “policing” part of law enforcement is a smaller part of his overall operation. In my Department, traditional “policing” is the vast majority of what we do and 217 of my 248 people are sworn officers as a result. I would not be surprised if a much higher percentage of my people are sworn versus civilian than what you would find on the County side and sworn staff are more costly.

There are other vast differences in areas of responsibility from crime rates, to total population, to calls for service, to poverty/income levels, etc.

It is critical to understand that I don’t point out these differences to say that one entity is better than the other. For everything I could tell you that I have to do more of, the Sheriff could probably list just as many that his staff is responsible for that I am not. I can’t tell you how many thousands of prisoners I didn’t have to house or feed that the Sheriff did. My point is that the two organizations are very different and a simple comparison of cost per employee borders on meaningless without an understanding of how different an urban municipal police department is from a sheriff’s office, and without drilling down into the level of great detail needed to understand those differences, drawing meaningful conclusions is risky at best.

Sheriff McCoy agreed. “Trying to compare agencies, on a wide level, does not work out. Comparing period …does not work out. We each have some similar functions and we have some unique functions.”

In addition to basic patrol services for 648 square miles and having contracts with nine different communities for police and dispatch services, the Peoria County Sheriff’s Office operates the ONLY Jail in Peoria County, booking in 17,000 people each year. We also serve all the civil papers for the courts as well as provide security for the Peoria Airport.

Nevertheless, McCoy did allow this observation: “In my opinion, cost differences primarily relate to individual pay and benefit packages. Peoria City Officers are paid at a higher rate than Peoria County Deputies, all thru the pay grades. Compounded, these costs become staggering for both agencies.”

And this is why the Peoria police union is not too excited about the prospect of combining forces. The given reason for combining forces is to save money, and clearly no money is going to be saved by bringing both forces up to the same salary level as city officers.

According to another Journal Star report, “A starting police officer who completes a probationary period earns $51,994 annually; a sheriff’s deputy’s starting salary is $43,227.” And there are also different pension programs: “the city’s police pension program is governed through contribution limits set by the General Assembly; sheriff’s deputies are part of the Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund (IMRF).”

Undoubtedly, there can be some savings by eliminating redundancies and finding new efficiencies by working together, but that’s not going to save enough money to get the City out of its structural deficit. When talks turn to salaries, the police union has already made it clear that they will fight to keep the salaries and benefits they’ve won. I don’t envy the Chief or the Sheriff as they take on this consolidation initiative.

General News

Obviously a major malfunction

10 Comments

I was a sophomore in high school when the Space Shuttle Challenger exploded 25 years ago on January 28, 1986. In the morning, the news spread throughout my school like a rumor that most people didn’t believe. By lunch time, it was confirmed, and TVs were set up where we could watch the news during lunch period. I remember everyone talking about how this was the “where-were-you-when-JFK-was-shot” moment of our generation. And it was, up until 9/11.

Making the event even more sad was the fact that a civilian teacher, Christa McAuliffe, was on board. Watching her parents react to seeing the Challenger disintegrate was heart-wrenching. Joy and pride turns to horror and disbelief in just a few seconds. While McAuliffe got the lion’s share of media coverage, the following crew members also lost their lives: Francis “Dick” Scobee, Michael J. Smith, Ellison Onizuka, Judith Resnik, Ronald McNair, and Gregory Jarvis. May they all rest in peace.

Where were you when you heard about the Challenger disaster?

City of Peoria, General News

Guest Editorial: Brown Bag Video needs a Tavern License?

19 Comments

Frederick E. Smith, an East Bluff resident, has submitted the following editorial regarding plans to turn the Brown Bag Video store into a 4 a.m. tavern with live entertainment. Smith spoke at the council meeting Tuesday night opposing the liquor license request.

I am very concerned about the two stories in the January 28th edition of the Peoria Journal Star concerning the issuing of a Tavern license to the current owner of the Brown Bag video on the corner of SW Adams and Oak streets and Mayor Ardis’s comments that he would rather see the owner apply for a 2 a.m. operating license instead of a 4 a.m. license. In neither of these stories by John Sharp was there mention of the second part of the request, that of a license for "Live Entertainment" at the same location.

The actual application, which is available on the City of Peoria website under the Council Agenda items, is for a Class A Tavern License with a Subclass 1 (4 a.m. closing) and a Subclass 2 (Live Entertainment). In the minutes of the application, Mr. Laud states that the business would be a "bar with a very limited menu, such as microwave stuff and no kitchen." Since the proposed location is only 2,350 square feet, there are no plans to provide any additional parking spaces, which means the patrons would be forced to park on the street.

Now here is the elephant in the room that Mr. Sharp seems to be ignoring. 2,350 square feet is not enough room for most bars to have booths and tables for patrons, the bar itself, and a band with a dance floor. As a matter of fact, having been the lead singer and rhythm guitarist for a local band in the 1990’s, I can tell you at least 80 to 100 square feet is required for a band to set up. And even if you are talking about a DJ for the Live Entertainment, you still have to factor in a dance floor. So exactly what kind of Live Entertainment do they have in mind?

With the location directly adjacent to the infamous 307 Swingers club, which I grant you is a private club, the potential for a less than wholesome family entertainment is obvious. It would seem that both 307 and Brown Bag Video are in direct opposition to the goal of creating a safe, family-friendly environment that would provide the setting for a Wrigleyville to form around the area. Granting a Tavern license with a 4 a.m. closing and a "Live Entertainment" permit to a person who already caters to the "adult" industry would seem to be a contradiction to the intent of the builders of O’Brien Field.

Perhaps we should check to make sure we have all the facts before we print the story.

Frederick E. Smith
Peoria

2011 Election, Peoria Public Schools

Rick Cloyd to run as write-in for D150 seat

24 Comments

From my inbox:

RICK CLOYD SEEKS DISTRICT 150 SCHOOL BOARD 3rd DIST. SEAT
AS WRITE-IN CANDIDATE

Rick Cloyd
Rick Cloyd
Peoria – Citing a long record of community involvement, Rick Cloyd announced today he is a write-in candidate for the Peoria Public School District 150 Board of Education from the 3rd district.

Because no one filed nominating petitions for the expiring Board term of Jim Stowell, anyone seeking the office will have to run as a write-in candidate in the April 5 general election.

“I’m a lifelong resident of Peoria, and as a graduate of Hines Primary and Richwoods High School, I’m a product of District 150,” Cloyd said in announcing his candidacy.

“This community must have a healthy and accountable public school system, because all of us – students, parents and taxpayers — have a big stake in the effectiveness of our local schools,” he said.

For three years, he and his wife Sally have volunteered with Carl Cannon’s ELITE youth outreach. “Our experience with ELITE really opened my eyes to the potential of Peoria’s youth. District 150 can, and must, provide a safe and respectful environment of educational excellence to help students realize that potential,” Cloyd said. He also taught a Junior Achievement economics classroom course for Richwoods High School seniors.

“In my career with Caterpillar, and as a former vice president of Keystone Steel & Wire Company, I’ve gained the business analysis, personnel management, organizational strategy and marketing experience the School Board needs,” he said.

“District 150 spends approximately $1 million per school day. Many business leaders seriously question what stakeholders are getting for that investment. This may be the most critical public body in our community, and it needs people with business experience to provide fact-based and accountable governance,” Cloyd said.

Cloyd, 62, graduated cum laude from Bradley University with a degree in journalism, and earned an MBA with emphasis in finance from the University of Illinois Executive program. He is employed by Caterpillar Inc. in Strategy & Business Development. Prior to joining Caterpillar, Cloyd was vice president of sales and marketing for Keystone in Bartonville, where he worked for 25 years.

Cloyd has served the community in a number of capacities, including as a member of the Greater Peoria YMCA board, and a volunteer with several other civic and charitable organizations.

According to Dave Haney’s blog, Cloyd lives at 9172 N. Picture Ridge Road. Also running as a write-in candidate: Jody Pitcher, 6109 N. Heather Oak Drive. Pitcher is a Republican Precinct Committee Person and the organizer of the Peoria 9-12 Project.

City Council, City of Peoria, History

Further chilling of historic preservation ordinance on tap (Updated)

20 Comments

The City Council is poised to raise the historic landmark application fee 1000% Tuesday night. While the Historic Preservation Commission approved doubling the fee (from $50 to $100), City Staff wants to raise it to $500. They will also increase fees for a Certificate of Appropriateness from $25 to $120 for administrative certificates, and $250 for non-administrative certificates.

The given reason is to increase revenue to the City, but let’s not fool ourselves. This will bring little additional money into city coffers. The real effect (and I believe the intended effect) will be to reduce historic landmark applications and increase the number of unapproved modifications to historic properties. The council has been undermining the historic preservation ordinance more and more blatantly as of late — not designating buildings that are clearly historic, and delisting structures that are already “protected,” meaning nothing is really protected anymore if the political forces are strong enough.

Meanwhile, still waiting in the wings is a rewriting of the ordinance itself, which is slated to be deferred once again on Tuesday.

UPDATE: I have been informed by a reliable source that “the matter of the fee increases for Historic Preservation will be deferred tomorrow night until April.”

City Council, City of Peoria

Council to pursue Urich for City Manager

20 Comments

The City has issued the following press release:

After last night’s interview, Mayor Ardis, City Council Members, and Mr. Urich, agreed that both sides would like to continue discussions towards a possible contract offer. A meeting between Mr. Urich, the Mayor and two Council Members, will be arranged soon to establish a framework to develop contract specifics. The council is expected to discuss a proposal in executive session after Tuesday’s City Council meeting.

It appears the skids are greased for Patrick Urich to be the next City Manager, well before council elections take place in April.

Caterpillar

Cat: How can we not do business with countries that abuse human rights?

52 Comments

Doug Oberhelman, Chairman and CEO of Caterpillar, met with Chinese President Hu Jintao on Thursday in Chicago:

In an interview with the Journal Star just before a luncheon in Washington, D.C., featuring Chinese President Hu Jintao, […] Oberhelman didn’t argue that the concerns about human rights issues in China are valid. […] Hu, Oberhelman said, has helped companies like Caterpillar because he has been welcoming to foreign investment in China.

“We’re big in China, of course, and it is really hard to imagine how we could continue to be a leader in world markets without investing in China,” he said. If you want a legal insight Read more

“I am often asked why we invest as much as we do in China. My question is, how can we not?”

I’ve juxtaposed these quotes in the hopes that it will be jarring to my readers. If it’s not jarring to you, read them again and realize that “human rights issues” in China include things like torture, illegal detention (imagine being arrested simply for expressing unpopular views or for no stated reason whatsoever and denied contact with anyone for an indefinite period of time), and being put before a judicial system that is explicitly instructed by the very same Hu Jintao “to rank ‘the constitution and laws’ of China behind the ‘Party’s cause [and] the people’s interest.'” (See the Human Rights Watch report.)

Think of that and read it again. Torture, illegal detention, unfair courts — concern over that is “valid,” Mr. Oberhelman says. And then he asks “how can we not” invest in China? It’s helped Cat continue to be “a leader in world markets.”

The key here is that Caterpillar wants to put human rights issues and U.S.-China trade in separate compartments, and convince policy-makers that one should not have anything to do with the other. That’s the gist of the memorandum of understanding (MOU) that Cat signed:

The MOU outlines the importance of maintaining a positive trade environment between the Unites States and China, emphasizes how Caterpillar’s exports to China support jobs in the United States and stresses that mutually beneficial trade policies will support greater U.S. exports from Caterpillar in the years to come.

“We realize there are important and substantive issues that exist between the United States and China, from currency valuations to the protection of intellectual property, and that these need to be resolved with a sense of urgency,” said Rich Lavin, Caterpillar group president with responsibility for growth markets, including China. “But we also know the way we resolve disagreements is important. Caterpillar will continue to urge policymakers in both the United States and China to resolve differences in an atmosphere of mutual respect— not by threatening a trade war. We continue to believe that quiet diplomacy and multilateral forums offer a preferred path for resolving differences,” Lavin added.

In other words, address torture and illegal detentions if you must, but don’t let it get in the way of our company making lots of money by doing business with this oppressive regime. Nothing is more important than making money. We should be able to resolve disagreements over torture and illegal detention without threatening the profits we’re getting from the people who torture and illegally detain Chinese citizens. Do we have an understanding?

Is there no one who questions the morality of this? How does Caterpillar defend this kind of compartmentalization ethically? Why does no one hold Caterpillar to a higher standard than this?

City of Peoria, East Bluff, TIF

Joint Review Board decision invalid; revote scheduled

4 Comments

On December 27, 2010, the Joint Review Board approved the East Village Growth Cell TIF unanimously. However, the legality of that decision is now in question because the makeup of the Board is not compliant with state statute.

The Joint Review Board is composed of one representative from each taxing body and includes at least one member of the general public. State law requires (65 ILCS 5/11-74.4-5[b]) that “If, as determined by the housing impact study [or] … based on other reasonable data, the majority of residential units [in the proposed TIF area] are occupied by very low, low, or moderate income households […] the public member shall be a person who resides in very low, low, or moderate income housing within the redevelopment project area.”

The public member of the Joint Review Board is Debbie Ritschel, who resides at 401 Water, which is not “very low, low, or moderate income housing” nor “within the redevelopment project area.” Therefore, City attorney Randy Ray says the Joint Review Board will have another meeting scheduled for January 31, and “the agenda will call for them to declare a vacancy based on current public member being ineligible. An eligible person will then be nominated and elected. They will then consider ratifying their earlier action re TIF eligibility.”

I wonder how they will go about finding an eligible person. If you live in “very low, low, or moderate income housing” within the proposed East Village TIF, I would encourage you to submit your name for nomination. The public member is selected by a majority of the board members present at the meeting. The members of the Joint Review Board (not including Ritschel) are:

  • Dave Wheeler (Peoria Park District)
  • Dave Kinney (Peoria Public School District 150)
  • Joe Merkle (Sanitary District)
  • Stan Browning (Sanitary District)
  • Jim Scroggins (City of Peoria, Finance Director)
  • Patrick Nichting (City of Peoria, Treasurer)
  • Scott Sorrel (County of Peoria)
  • John Stokowski (Greater Peoria Mass Transit)
  • Glen Olson (Airport Authority)
  • Edward Szynaka (Peoria Public Library)
City of Peoria, Heartland Partnership

Temporary is a long time in Peoria

1 Comment

Since April 9, 2008, the Heartland Partnership has been conducting business in the former Damon’s restaurant at Riverfront Village with only a “temporary” Certificate of Occupancy. Councilman Gary Sandberg was tipped off that the building may be occupied without a Certificate, so he sent a FOIA inquiry to the Inspections department and discovered there was no Certificate on file.

Heartland Partnership is the employer of Councilman Ryan Spain, so I contacted him about it. He did some research and informed me via e-mail that “[t]he City has located a temporary certificate of occupancy dated April 9, 2008. Evidently, the employee that conducted the inspection has retired and there is incomplete information in the file.” Later, he added that “the final certificate of occupancy was awaiting signature from the fire department. The contractor and tenant requested a final inspection, which lead to the temporary certificate of occupancy on April 9, 2008. The inspections department coordinates this final step with the fire inspector.”

Inspections Director John Kunski said he couldn’t piece together exactly what happened because it was too long ago. It could be that the building inspector (now retired) didn’t notify the fire department, or that the fire department was notified but an inspection was never conducted for some reason. No one really knows (or will admit) who dropped the ball. Kunski says his department is the “gatekeeper” of the certificate-issuing process, but each department (e.g., fire department, planning/zoning department) is responsible for conducting its own inspection. If a department doesn’t follow through, Inspections “[doesn’t] have a system to flag it.”

The practice of issuing temporary Certificates of Occupancy was instituted under former City Manager Michael McKnight as a way to make the City more “business-friendly,” according to Kunski. But he said that it’s difficult to get compliance once a building is occupied. He would like to see the City require a deposit — $500, for example — that would be put in escrow and refunded once the permanent Certificate of Occupancy is issued.

According to the City of Peoria’s website, “a temporary or partial Certificate of Occupancy good for period up to eight (8) months for any building or structure” may be issued under certain conditions. However, the City Code, section 5-77, doesn’t specify a time-frame; it only says, “Upon written request, the code official may issue a temporary certificate of occupancy for the use of any building or structure prior to the completion and occupancy of the entire building or structure, provided that such portion or portions shall be occupied safely prior to full completion of the structure without endangering life or public welfare.” Kunski was also unaware of there being any time limit set for a temporary Certificate of Occupancy.

Kunski said that there were “no life/safety issues” at the Heartland Partnership building, or else a temporary Certificate would not have been issued.