Inconsistent enforcement of non-discrimination ordinance raises questions

EmergePeoria thinks the City of Peoria is a little inconsistent when it comes to not discriminating against “protected classes” of citizens.

At issue is the City’s recent smackdown of the Elbo Room bar. In case you’ve been out of town for several weeks and missed the story, here’s the scoop: the owner of the bar posted a sign outside stating, “We are not a gay bar. We are a karaoke bar. […] Diesel is down the street.” (“Diesel” is, in fact, a gay bar.) There were protests, allegations of “homophobia” and other histrionics in response to this perceived discrimination. Then the City’s deputy liquor commissioner (Councilman Eric Turner) stepped in and sent the owner a letter threatening to revoke his liquor license and take other legal action if he were observed to be discriminating against gays in the future.

The thing is, the City didn’t take similar action against other bars that had been turning away black patrons on the pretense of dress code violations. EmergePeoria observes:

In 2007 the Downtown Peoria bars were unaccepting of Black citizens supposedly because of their dress and demeanor which was considered to be “intimidating”. Instead of making downtown bars comply in the acceptance of Black patrons, the City Council, under the leadership of Mayor Ardis, undertook the notion of liquor expansion to have alternate places for “Blacks to go”…. In other words, the rights of Blacks are not protected, were minimized and only compartmentalized by this city and it’s council, whereas the rights of gays have been expressed to have somehow been protected.

In April 2003, the City added “sexual orientation” to its list of individuals or groups against which you cannot discriminate relating to employment and public accommodations. Already on that list: race. Yet that group is not being as stridently defended by the Deputy Liquor Commissioner as the newest addition. Why? Is separate-but-equal okay for some groups but not others in the eyes of the City?

EmergePeoria is right — there is definitely some inconsistency going on here.

Peoria Chronicle turns four

I almost forgot to mention, my blog just passed another milestone. I started this little blog as “Summers in Peoria” on Blogspot way back on April 15, 2005. I later changed the name to “Peoria Chronicle” and set up my own WordPress site. I somehow lost all of my May 2005 posts in the transfer from Blogspot to WordPress, but all the rest of my posts are archived.

My perception — and I hope I’m accurate — is that my blog has become a place where we can have civil discourse about the issues facing Peoria. Even though we can all get pretty riled up about certain topics, for the most part I think we’ve all kept our arguments on topic and not let them devolve into personal attacks. When we’ve faltered on that count, I believe we’ve always climbed back up to the high road and continued on.

My first post started, “It’s been said that everyone’s talking these days, but no one is listening. The blogosphere is like being one voice in a roaring crowd.” As it turns out, there are people who are listening here at the Chronicle. Thank you to all my readers and commenters for listening and participating. This blog would be nothing without you.

Update on Campaign for a Walkable West Bluff

Campaign for a Walkable West Bluff logoI recently received this update in my inbox and wanted to share it with my readers:

It’s been awhile since our last update. The Campaign took some time after the Main Street traffic study results were released last Fall (and the subsequent city budget cuts were announced) to re-think and re-examine priorities. There are a few important announcements to communicate and some momentum to reclaim!

Please respond to the Main Street Retail Study Survey at http://vovici.com/wsb.dll/s/13a32g3c8be. It will take only a few minutes and will provide valuable information as the West Bluff continues to discuss redevelopment along the Main Street Corridor. Results MUST be completed by Tuesday, April 21, 2009.

Read the CWWB article in the April issue of IBI – InterBusiness Issues at http://www.peoriamagazines.com/ibi/2009/apr/walkable-urban-areas. We were pleased to be asked to submit for this issue.

Visit our website at http://www.walkablewestbluff.org for more updates, opportunities to volunteer, and some interesting blogging!

We hope you will continue to support the Campaign’s efforts as we move forward.

Campaign for a Walkable West Bluff

Many thanks to this grassroots organization for keeping up the effort to improve the West Bluff.

President Obama, Vice President Biden, Secretary LaHood Call for U.S. High Speed Passenger Trains

It looks like the United States is finally going to get serious about modernizing its train system. Here’s a press release I received yesterday:

Vision for a New Era in Rail Entails Clean, Energy-Efficient Option for Travelers

Thursday, April 16, 2009 (Washington, DC) — President Barack Obama, along with Vice President Biden and Secretary LaHood, announced a new U.S. push today to transform travel in America, creating high-speed rail lines from city to city, reducing dependence on cars and planes and spurring economic development.

The President released a strategic plan outlining his vision for high speed rail in America. The plan identifies $8 billion provided in the ARRA and $1 billion a year for five years requested in the federal budget as a down payment to jump-start a potential world-class passenger rail system and sets the direction of transportation policy for the future. The strategic plan will be followed by detailed guidance for state and local applicants. By late summer, the Federal Railroad Administration will begin awarding the first round of grants.

Additional funding for long-term planning and development is expected from legislation authorizing federal surface transportation programs.

The report formalizes the identification of ten high-speed rail corridors as potential recipients of federal funding. Those lines are: California, Pacific Northwest, South Central, Gulf Coast, Chicago Hub Network, Florida, Southeast, Keystone, Empire and Northern New England. Also, opportunities exist for the Northeast Corridor from Washington to Boston to compete for funds to improve the nation’s only existing high-speed rail service.

Continue reading President Obama, Vice President Biden, Secretary LaHood Call for U.S. High Speed Passenger Trains

City to defend Van Auken

The City of Peoria will be defending Council Member Barbara Van Auken against the lawsuit that was filed by the Sigma Nu fraternity against her, District 4 County Board Representative Andrew Rand, and City Historic Preservation Commissioner Sid Ruckriegel. City attorney Randy Ray confirmed late today, “We will be filing a pleading on her [Van Auken’s] behalf and defending her.”

I’m so glad my tax dollars are going toward this. I assume this means our budget crisis is over and the City is operating in the black again.

Incidentally, it looks like Rand and Ruckriegel aren’t so lucky as to have their respective municipalities pick up their legal expenses. They have reportedly retained Tim Bertschy with Heyl, Royster, Voelker & Allen, P.C.

Attention Tea Party participants: Change happens at ballot box

From the Journal Star:

A crowd estimated at more than 500 gathered outside the Peoria County Courthouse during the noon hour Wednesday to protest what they believe to be out-of-control government spending during a tax day “TEA (taxed enough already) party,” designed to echo the rebellion of the Boston Tea Party.

I don’t disagree with these wandering fiscal conservatives in principle. And I certainly don’t deny their freedom to assemble and petition the government in this way. But there’s a big difference between the colonists in Boston and the American population today. The colonists couldn’t vote. They were taxed without representation. We, on the other hand, can vote, but most of us don’t. Not only do our representatives raise our taxes, we raise our own taxes when given the ability to decide directly.

Consider this little pie chart I whipped up based on the last election:

April 7 Sales Tax Referendum Chart

It doesn’t look like many people (in Peoria, anyway) are interested in reining in “out-of-control government spending,” does it? And if anyone feels taxed without representation, there’s a greater than 75% chance it’s their own fault.

The TEA Party participants would see greater results if they could just convince more people to participate at the ballot box rather than downtown marches.

Park District looking to buy Prospect properties from School District

Remember back in 2006 when District 150 purchased several properties adjacent to Glen Oak Park in hopes of locating a new school there? Well, now the Peoria Park District wants to buy them, and they’re asking for some help from Congressman Schock.

Included in Schock’s appropriations requests is one for “land appraisal, platting, demolition and acquisition to provide open public access to [Glen Oak] park.” I asked for some more information on this request from the Park District, and David Wheeler kindly sent me this text from their application for Federal assistance:

Glen Oak Park is bordered on the southwest corner with 12 residences owned by the local school district. Originally purchased for the purpose of constructing a school adjacent to Glen Oak Park, their plans have changed and the 2 acres of land is now available for the purpose of adding invaluable open space and stability to a social and economically challenged east bluff neighborhood. It will provide open public access to the park from the neighborhoods to the west, open up visibility and provide a higher degree of safety in one of Illinois’ oldest and most historic 19th century parks. Glen Oak Park is well known for its ancient oak trees, looped “carriage” drives, views of the Illinois River and was designed by the renowned landscape architect, Oscar Dubois. The opportunity to purchase land for expanding open space in an older established neighborhood is a rare occurrence and the opportunity is now.

To the best of my knowledge, the school district actually owns eight properties on the southwest corner of Glen Oak Park, not twelve. I double-checked the county’s website just to see if D150 picked up any additional land there, and it doesn’t appear they have. So either this was a minor error on the application, or else the school district has recently purchased additional properties.

In any case, I have to take issue with this proposed transaction for a few reasons:

  1. It’s odd that the park district, which just finished shrinking the size of the park in order to expand the zoo, would now be concerned about expanding the size of the park. It’s also strange that they would cite the “ancient oak trees,” many of which were uprooted to make way for the zoo expansion.
  2. If this transaction goes through, it will be the second time the taxpayers have paid for these properties. The school district bought these eight properties with $877,500 of tax money (and overpaid for them at that; fair-market value of the properties in 2005 was $609,540). Now the park district wants to use $1.2 million of tax money to purchase the same properties again (and demolish the structures). How many times do we taxpayers have to buy the same land? And why does the cost keep going up each time?
  3. If the properties are sold to the Park District, they will remain off the property tax rolls. That hurts not only those who receive property tax revenue (like the School District and the Park District, just to name a couple), but everyone who pays property taxes as well. Whenever tax-paying property is taken off the tax rolls, the remaining property owners pick up the slack. The School Board should be trying to get more property on the tax rolls where it can produce annual revenue for the district.

Also, if the school district does indeed only own the eight properties they purchased in 2006, here are their locations:

You’ll notice they’re not contiguous; how long before the park district tries to acquire the remaining properties?

School board to hire superintendent search firm Tuesday (Updated)

A special meeting of the District 150 Board of Education is planned for Tuesday night. There’s only one item of public business on the agenda:

APPROVAL OF CONTRACT WITH HAZARD, YOUNG, ATTEA & ASSOCIATES
Proposed Action: That the Contract with Hazard, Young, Attea & Associates covering the Superintendent search and the Controller/Treasurer search be approved. Further, that the Community Superintendent Search Committee’s proposed total budget of $45,000 be approved and that the timeline for commencing the candidate search be changed to August/September, 2009.

The district’s search committee recommended the firm to the board last month. A March 25 Journal Star article reported, “Cost to hire the firm is about $21,000, not including travel costs and office fees.” Apparently travel costs and office fees are no small expense, based on the $45,000 to be budgeted for the search committee.

Current superintendent Ken Hinton plans to retire June 30, 2010.

UPDATE: I received this additional information from School Board member Jim Stowell:

The first story didn’t anticipate them doing a search for Controller/Treasurer as well. Dr. Durflinger and Dr. Butts highly recommended a search firm who might “draw out” better applicants than what applied to our posting on several sources, including all of the “free” postings offered through the state. I had suggested the same firm recommended by the supt. search committee, if they were willing to do it for a reduced fee (and possibly seize on some economies of scale or interest from a duo who might like to work together). The Board saw a list of applicants and will discuss whether to go the search route.

Easter marred by racist literature

While my parents were attending church in Peoria on Easter, someone was putting racist literature on cars in the parking lot. The 5.5″ x 8.5″ multi-page paper booklets expressed opposition to interracial marriage and gave a number of Bible passages taken out of context to support this view. White supremacy was assumed throughout the booklet, which indicates it was published by an out-of-state organization.

Sickening.