After the Tuesday night City Council meeting, I caught up with Troy Skaggs, president of the Peoria Police Benevolent, and asked him why the police union had not agreed to any wage concessions. He said there were basically three reasons.
He told me that the union met Monday night, and that City Manager Scott Moore gave a presentation. During that presentation, Moore said this wasn’t going to be a one-year concession. It was likely that the city would be back next year asking for concessions again. And probably the year after that. This was the first time the city had come out and said these requests for concessions would be ongoing and not a one-time deal. That’s the first reason the union was uneasy with agreeing to wage concessions.
Secondly, Skaggs pointed out that the police department is already down 16 positions. Seven positions are vacancies from the beginning of the year that they simply haven’t filled, and an additional nine positions are officers who took advantage of the Voluntary Separation Initiative (VSI) recently offered by the city. They’re not going to fill any of those positions, yet the council wants to cut the department by an additional 17 positions. At the same time, according to Skaggs, the fire department is “back-filling” ten positions, eight of which were vacated due to VSI. So the police union doesn’t see the equity in these two situations.
Finally, the city wouldn’t guarantee that they wouldn’t lay off more officers anyway, even if the union did agree to wage concessions. That really made the union uncomfortable, since they could give up wage increases and lose a bunch of additional officers anyway, meaning they’d be doing more work for no additional pay. Before I talked to Skaggs, I had asked Mayor Ardis about negotiations with the police union, and while he directed me to talk to the union president, he did mention that the police department had wanted some guarantees but the city didn’t feel comfortable with the offer having strings attached.
My take: I can understand, on the one hand, the city not wanting its hands tied in case the forecasted (or actual) deficit gets worse. On the other hand, it doesn’t seem unreasonable to me for the police union to expect some sort of commitment from the city in return for wage concessions.
Bottom line, though, we need police protection. We can’t balance the budget at the expense of public safety. If we “punish” the police union for not taking wage concessions by laying off more police officers, we’re only hurting ourselves.
The council needs to face the music and raise revenue somehow. They simply can’t balance the budget by reducing expenses because the cuts are too deep. Even the City Manager recognizes this — he identified 22 positions that have been cut so far that he’d like to see restored because they’re critical for the city. Those positions include restoring six police officers and several support personnel in the police department.
The real mystery is why the council is so reticent to raise taxes for public safety when they’re so quick to raise taxes for private development schemes like the proposed downtown Marriott hotel deal. Nobody wants higher taxes, but if we’re going to be paying higher taxes anyway, the proceeds should go toward the highest public benefit. As it stands now, we’re paying higher taxes and getting less police protection in return.
Not only is that bad public policy on its face, it only exacerbates the city’s predicament because it drives residents and business out of Peoria. Nobody wants to live where it’s unsafe — whether perceived or actual — and nobody is going to want to shop and dine in Peoria when they can get the same goods and services at a much cheaper tax rate just over the river, or in Peoria Heights, or in any of the other surrounding communities. The city is cutting its own throat.
Maybe instead of raising taxes, citizen should purchase their own security.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1931750,00.html
Frustrated:
Thank you for the link. The picture gallery is illuminating too!
http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1882089,00.html
Hey, I voted for Parker
And if Parker had won that election…. Ardis would still be mayor.
For Cri sakes, forget the new hotel (which is a Matthews dream anyway), and raise property taxes-who can legitimately complain about that in order to get police and fire protection. You know tht someone is going to die because of lack of services, and when that happens, every citizen will raise hell and ask why did they not just raise taxes a little.
Karrie, I just cked out the picture gallery…. it looks like they have been through a WWlll – Very sad.
“The city is cutting its own throat” No kidding? They’ve been doing it for years. I would go so far as to say the City is a serial slasher. Eventually the city will bleed out.
So you say. Even if what you say is true, which it isn’t, you would have sent a message that we weren’t accepting what they have doing and continue to do. You voted for him, you endorsed him, he pushed the museum and the hotel taxes from the beginning. Quit your bitching.
General-
You ran for office. You were not elected! Quit your whining and give it up!
I don’t believe I’m the one whining “Give it up”. You guys seem to be the dissatisfied ones. This budget, the museum, hotel and other issues came up during the campaign. It didn’t seem important to you guys then because you chose to support the individual instead of what they stood for. Ardis didn’t fool any of you. He told exactly where he stood on these issues. The budget and economy was a problem since early last year. If you choose to support a person who would rather see us pay for a hotel and museum with public funds knowing we couldn’t support those projects and basic services, then you deserve what you get. Be careful what you ask for.
General-
I don’t agree with all of the decisions the mayor and council have made. For instance, I think I would have cut a position or two in the city’s Economic Development Department in order to save one or two of the police officer’s positions. It is unlikely that anyone agrees with all decisons that elected officials make.
I am sure that if you had been elected and allowed to take office everything would be great 🙂
Next time you choose to take a swipe at my family, at least have the courage to use your own name.
General is correct. The Mayor stands for the same thing now as he did before he was re-elected. He didn’t make any promises.
As I recall, wasn’t the garbage fee enacted to pay for additional police officers? Now that the City is cutting 39 officers out of the budget, will they quit collecting the garbage fee?
General — Thanks for your input.
If Mayor Ardis would have lost the election I don’t think he wouldn’t have been eligible to be appointed Mayor. The appointee has to be a current member of the city council.
CJ, you might look at what the city tax payer is paying for retired police and firemen vs. ones that are still working. Sandberg knows the answer. It was pointed out to me years ago and I was quite surprised at the answer.
“citizens should purchase their own security” from poster Frustrated.
Some places are doing that. In Los Angles, North of LAX, Manchester and West of Sepulveda, I visited an Aunt in 2002. A quite, small neighborhood. I noticed private company security cars driving frequently down the streets. I believe there is a bit of that done in Peoria as well.
In spite of my diligence, I lost a cell phone, some tools, left beside my car in the apartment parking lot behind the building for about 45 minutes, when going to a hardware store. Did not realize they were missing until a few weeks later when I got back home.
Parker made valid points about people voting for a person and their positions. Peoria voters aren’t being given up front, understandable choices about the dynamics of city spending and revenue. That is true at state and national levels as well.
It’s good to see acknowledgement of General’s knowledge–he is underestimated; but, General, you don’t have to be mayor to be influential. Even when we don’t agree–and I’m sure that we don’t always–we know how to disagree.
Mr. Dentino: I posted the Detroit article in part to show the sad state of affairs some communities are in. I believe Peoria is not far off if it does not get its priorities straight.
Sharon,
I agree with and appreciate what you say. I know that I don’t have to be mayor to be influential. I prayed that someone else would run so that I nor my family would have to face the scrutiny that was in store for us. Being a man of faith as I am though, God convinced me that the punishment I would receive was pale compared to mission that was before me. My purpose was greater than my pain.
I waited until the very last minute in hopes that someone else would step up and challenge this administration to do better and no one did. I couldn’t stand by and allow them to continue believing that what they have been doing to the citizens over the years was alright and that we were just going to stand by and accept it. I felt that enough was enough. I’m just sorry that more people didn’t feel that way to send a message.
Hang in there, General. All who speak up eventually make an impact. I challenged the staus quo in 2000, Zan Ransburg, remember?, and won. And yes, I have made an impact in bringing forward the real facts.
Few people are talking about a new county tax supported nursing home that started out as a $5,200,000 renovation in 2000. Then moved to a renovation of $12,500,000 in 2007, then to $26-27 million by 2008 and now a $51,000,000 new building somewhere.
Supported by property taxes and subsidies or it would lose around $3 million a year. With a majority of the residents on Medicade, financially stressed central governments could cause subsidies to Bel-Wood of one type of another to rise at the expense of property taxpayers.
A so-called safety net for the poor costing at least $80 million by the time the bonds of $34 million or more, are paid off. Few of the citizenry are concerned but I think they should be if they knew the facts or are concerned about rising taxes.
It appears some board members are listening now that the new buiklding figure has escalated to $51 million. They may also be questioning a new location.
But then maybe not. Only 3 of the incumbents have opponents. Frequent contributor to just causes is Karrie Alms, running for the County Board seat held by Lynn Pearson for the past 18 years or more.
Tazewell does not have a “safety net” nursing home yet only a handful of residents at Bel-Wood come from Tazewell County.
Where do they go? Good question.
I am listening Merle and I was interested back many months (year ago?) when the idea of a NEW nursing home was being discussed. I do not understand why the County is in the nursing home business. Can’t funds be otherwise provided to those requiring assistance in paying for nursing home care?
Merle – don’t remember – but were you a strong advocate of “General” when he ran for mayor? Thought you said you were moving out of the area…. what happened? Running for school board?