Tag Archives: Barbara Van Auken

Van Auken video clip released

This hit my inbox at lunchtime:

Members of the Peoria news media:

The law firm of Hall, Owens & Wickenhauser, LLC recently filed suit on behalf of the Bradley chapter of Sigma Nu Fraternity against Barbara Van Auken, Andrew Rand and Sid Ruckriegel [Peoria County Case 09 LM 329]. Soon after the suit was filed, members of the media and concerned Peoria residents inquired about video shot during the incident that gave rise to the suit. In response to these inquiries, we are today releasing a portion of video and two stills from that video.

Attached please find an approximately nine second segment of video shot during the incident September 20, 2008 at Sigma Nu fraternity involving City Councilperson Barbara Van Auken, then County Board electee Andrew Rand and Sid Ruckriegel. Also attached are two stills from that video.

From left to right in the video are Mr. Ruckriegel (standing behind and to the right of Ms. Van Auken), Ms. Van Auken (foreground), and Mr. Rand. On the far right is a member of Sigma Nu.

In the distant background is the Fiji, or Phi Gamma Delta, fraternity house. The lettering is illuminated. Please note that the sound of crickets is audible.

Aaron T. Wickenhauser, for the Firm
Hall, Owens & Wickenhauser, L. L. C.

[flashvideo filename=https://peoriachronicle.com/wp-content/uploads/Video/BVA1_F6_512K.flv /]

vanaukentrespass

vanaukentrespass2

Second district race heats up

These anonymous flyers started appearing on porches in neighborhoods surrounding Bradley University today.

The flyer implies that Second District City Council candidate Curphy Smith and his campaign chairman Paul Wilkinson are in cahoots with attorney Jeff Hall who represents the Sigma Nu Fraternity in their lawsuit against Second District incumbent Barbara Van Auken. The unsigned flyer says the lawsuit has “become a driving catalyst for for Curphy Smith’s campaign waging Bradley students against regular citizens of the Second District.”

The flyer goes on to quote an e-mail from Jeff Hall to Bradley students encouraging them to vote for Smith and alleging that Van Auken will “exact revenge on the Greek system at Bradley” if reelected. Finally, it states that the Smith campaign is providing free rides to the Election Commission for early voting and alleges “impermissible electioneering may be occurring . . . within 100 feet of the Election Commission.”

When asked for his response to the flyer, Smith stated via e-mail, “While Councilwoman Van Auken’s decision to run a negative campaign is unfortunate, by no means was it unexpected. I fully expected these types of tactics and expect she will continue them. I have committed to an issue-based campaign against Barbara VanAuken as a city council representative. Instead of distracting the residents the 2nd district with negative attacks and muddying the waters with lies, I would like to discuss how we can make the 2nd district and the city of Peoria a better place for all of us.”

Van Auken, however, said via e-mail that she had not seen the flyer before I e-mailed a copy of it to her. She went on to say, “It was not authorized by my campaign or it would have so indicated. I have no idea who may have sent it. The only message I agree with or endorse is the one stating my desire to continue the progress that’s been made in the Second District as outlined in my authorized campaign literature.”

I talked to Wilkinson on the phone, and he stated in response to the charges on the flyer that the Smith campaign is “not involved in the lawsuit.” They are not trying to pit Bradley against other Second District residents, he continued. “We’re trying to bring people together.” He also said that Jeff Hall is not a member of the campaign staff, and that Hall acted on his own when writing the e-mail asking Bradley students to support Smith.

Hall did not return a request for comment.

I checked with Peoria’s Election Administrator Tom Bride, and he said there was nothing illegal about giving people a ride to a polling place. He also wasn’t sure that a car could get within 100 feet of the entrance to the room where early voting takes place.

My take: I take Barbara at her word that she didn’t authorize this flyer. But it’s obviously a Van Auken supporter that created and is distributing it. Van Auken should condemn the flyer as dirty politics and make it clear that she does not approve this kind of “help” from her supporters. I’m sure she would expect the same of Smith if the tables were turned.

Likewise, Hall’s e-mail, assuming it is quoted accurately, is objectionable. I would also like to see Smith condemn the personal attacks on Van Auken as dirty politics as well.

It’s unfortunate that the person who created this flyer has decided to make the Bradley issue even more polarizing than it already is. Note the choice of language: “Bradley students” versus “regular citizens of the Second District” (emphasis added). I guess Bradley residents are irregular citizens, eh? Or second-class citizens, perhaps? That’s not the way to win friends and influence people. I know it can be challenging living near college students, but I don’t believe antagonizing them, marginalizing them, or being condescending toward them is going to improve things.

And, this probably goes without saying, but I’ll say it anyway: the person who created and distributed this unsigned, anonymous flyer is a coward. It’s easy to sound tough when you hide behind anonymity.

Columbia Terrace to get historic streetlights, wider sidewalks

It’s been more than two years in the making, but if approved Tuesday night by the City Council, Columbia Terrace from University to North street will finally get its promised facelift. Specifically, it will be improved by:

. . . removing existing curb, sidewalks, and driveway approaches, and constructing combination curb/sidewalk up to 6′ in width, new driveway pavement, an ornamental street lighting system consisting of acorn fixtures on a fluted aluminum pole, and a bituminous concrete overlay, along with all necessary adjustments, incidentals, and appurtenances as shown on the plans or as directed by the Engineer.

The project, which covers just under 3/4 of a mile, is expected to cost $1,906,465.11, or $42.31 per foot. According to the request for council action, the city will pay for approximately 89% of the project, with the remaining 11% being assessed against property owners along the corridor.

columbia-terrace-project-032409

Efforts to improve Columbia Terrace began in earnest in September 2006 when petitions were circulated getting a majority of homeowners to agree to help pay for the improvements. The second district project is cited by incumbent councilwoman Barbara Van Auken as one of her accomplishments in improving the West Bluff.

Noise ordinance violation dismissed

City attorney Randy Ray recently sent this update to the City Council regarding the noise ordinance violation against Caleb Matheny, president of the Sigma Nu fraternity on Bradley’s campus:

Sonni Williams has looked into this ticket which was issued at the Sigma Nu house. She has spoken with the officers who were present and has determined that we cannot prove a case against Mr. Matheny. There is a report that loud voices could be hear 500 feet away, but we cannot prove whose voices were heard. Accordingly, this ordinance ticket is being dismissed.

Matheny is suing Second District Council Representative Barbara Van Auken over the incident that led to the noise ordinance ticket being issued.

Van Auken, Rand, and Ruckriegel sued by Sigma Nu

Sigma Nu Fraternity and Caleb Matheny are suing Second District City Council Member Barbara Van Auken, District 4 County Board Representative Andrew Rand, and City Historic Preservation Commissioner Sid Ruckriegel over an incident that happened last fall. Matheny and his lawyers (with the firm of Hall, Owens & Wickenhauser, LLC) held a press conference at 10:30 this morning in front of the fraternity, 1300 W. Fredonia.

The attorneys stated that this isn’t a political issue, but “a justice issue.” They allege that Van Auken abused her power as a City Council member, and that justice must be served to protect their client and other Peoria citizens from such abuse. They said they were taking the case pro bono and that Sigma Nu will donate any monetary damages they receive to their charity, Children’s Hospital of Illinois. They called on Van Auken not to use city legal resources in her defense, but to retain a lawyer at her own expense.

You can read the suit here (PDF file). Attorneys also stated that the City of Peoria has been uncooperative in providing information requested through the Freedom of Information Act, which is why there has been such a delay in filing this suit. However, they did get a copy of the surveillance video of the incident — with audio — which they will be releasing to the press; no timetable was given for its release.

Van Auken, Rand, and Ruckriegel declined to comment on the suit. Van Auken is currently in the middle of a reelection campaign against challenger Curphy Smith. Smith also declined to comment on the suit, saying he wants to “stay focused on the issues that are important to the people of the 2nd district and the city of Peoria.” At-large City Councilman Gary Sandberg didn’t have any comment on the suit itself, but did say that he had also had trouble getting information from the City and police department regarding the incident.

My take: Had this happened anywhere besides a fraternity house, I believe there would have been universal outrage at Van Auken and the others involved. But because Second District residents have had so much difficulty with unruly Bradley students through the years, many residents automatically prejudge the situation and assume that the fraternity must have been in the wrong, and that Bradley police were not doing an adequate job of keeping students quiet. In fact, Van Auken is actually seen by many in a favorable light because of this incident — like a Charles-Bronsonish vigilante hero, who finally gave those Bradley kids what they had coming. This lawsuit will only add to her “martyr” status with those supporters.

Further muddying the waters is the timing. This incident happened over five months ago, yet it’s resurfacing right now — during an election campaign — just a few weeks before residents will choose whether to give Van Auken a second term. That makes the suit look fishy to many observers, despite the plaintiffs’ protestations that it’s “not a political issue.”

And then we have the facts. Police reports and eye-witness accounts agree that Van Auken was acting intoxicated, that she did poke a Bradley police officer and show contempt to all Bradley police officers by saying they weren’t the “real” police, that she did try to intimidate the fraternity and the Bradley police by calling Peoria police to the scene and calling Bradley Vice President Gary Anna to complain about the fraternity, and that she did trespass on private property and refuse to leave when asked. Nevertheless, Van Auken and her friends were not the ones ticketed. The only ticket issued was to Matheny for violating a noise ordinance, even though the officer writing the ticket did so because he was ordered to do so by his superior officer, not because he actually witnessed any violation.

Despite the fishiness of the timing of this suit, I do not think it’s frivolous. In fact, I think it’s a win/win for the citizens of Peoria. If there was indeed an abuse of power, it needs to be dealt with for the protection of all citizens. And if Van Auken, et. al., are found innocent, then it will restore the public’s trust in these officials.

However, it doesn’t look like this is going to see a courtroom until at least August of this year, and in the meantime, things are going to get ugly. Just tonight, I got an anonymous e-mail from an address called “Anti Van Aucken” [sic] pointing me to this website. It has all the police reports and says it will have audio and video soon.

Schock to stump for Smith in 2nd District

All politics is local, they say, and you don’t get much more local than a City Council race. That race in the second district is heating up. Incumbent Barbara Van Auken’s challenger Curphy Smith has recently announced a fundraiser for his campaign that will feature “special guest” Aaron Schock:

smith-shock-fundraiser

Not a bad move politically. Schock is popular and has shown an ability to get support even in Democrat-leaning districts (Van Auken, incidentally, is a Democrat). It won’t hurt Smith to hitch his wagon to a rising star. Until now, conventional wisdom has been that Smith is pulling in what I like to call the “NVA” (“Not Van Auken”) vote. Getting Schock’s endorsement may give voters pause to consider Smith on his own merits. If nothing else, it raises public awareness of his campaign, which hasn’t gotten much press since there was no primary in the second district.

LDC continues to go unenforced by Council

Tuesday night, the Peoria City Council decided twice not to enforce the Land Development Code (LDC). They made decisions that weren’t just minor variations to the LDC, but decisions that were a fundamental affront to the very intent of the LDC. In fact, they showed an ignorance of and contempt for the intent of the LDC. They have evidently never read the LDC nor the Heart of Peoria Plan on which it was based.

The two items on the Council’s agenda were:

  • New Taco Bell. The Taco Bell restaurant at 1811 N. Knoxville is going to be rebuilt. The developer is going to tear down the building and put up a new one. This would be the perfect opportunity to bring the property into compliance with the code. Yet Second District Council Member Barbara Van Auken moved to approve the developer’s request to comply with none of the LDC — to be completely non-conforming. Why? Because he’s reportedly spending $1.8 million and because she thinks there are “problems” with the LDC. That latter reason is the latest rage, don’t you know. Just declare something “broken” or “a problem” (like the Historic Preservation Ordinance, for instance) and then you can completely disregard it until it’s “fixed.” What does Van Auken think is wrong with the code? Wait till you hear.

    The code calls for buildings to be built close to the street — preferably right up to the sidewalk — so that they’re more pedestrian friendly and so that they’re pushed further away from the residential neighborhoods that are behind the businesses, among other reasons. When the code was enacted, buildings that didn’t conform to the code (like Taco Bell) were grandfathered in. They could even make minor additions and renovations without having to bring the building into compliance in an attempt to be “business friendly.” But if they were to make major renovations — like tearing down and reconstructing the building — then they would have to bring it into compliance. Makes sense, right? They’re rebuilding the thing anyway, why not build it in compliance with the code? No doubt the code would have been roundly criticized if it required a building to be torn down and rebuilt (i.e., brought into compliance) whenever the owner wanted to make any minor change.

    Yet Barbara Van Auken turned that reasoning on its head Tuesday night. She said the code was unfair to require major renovations to trigger full compliance, but not minor renovations. It rewards those who slap up shoddy additions, but penalizes those who want to invest $1.8 million to put up a “state-of-the-art Taco Bell,” she explained. That wasn’t her intent when she voted to enact the LDC, she said.

    Thus, she voted to approve a brand new building construction that completely defies the LDC, not just in siting, but also the buffering from the neighborhood. Under the LDC, a masonry garden wall would have been required as a buffer. The Council said a repaired wooden fence was sufficient.

  • Expanded pet clinic. Demanes Animal Hospital at the corner of Wisconsin and Forrest Hill has bought up four properties around it and wants to expand. They’re not tearing down their building, but instead adding on to it. However, they want to site the addition in such a way that it doesn’t conform with its current zoning, called CN (neighborhood commercial). The CN district requires that the building addition come right up to the sidewalk and that parking be put in the rear of the building. Where the existing building does not front the sidewalk, a street wall that can be as short as 3 feet tall would need to be built to establish the street edge and provide buffering.

    Instead of asking for a variance from these requirements, the decision was made to do a complete end-run around the requirements by asking for the property to be rezoned CG (general commercial). There is no legal justification for rezoning this property CG, as I outlined in my letter to the Zoning Commission, which I forwarded to Third District Councilman Bob Manning as well.

    You see, when you ask for a zoning change, the Zoning Commission and Council need to consider that request apart from the current use or current plans. Why? Because once the zoning is changed, it applies not just to the current owner, but any future owners. If Mr. Demanes were to decide to move his practice, or if (God-forbid) he got hit by a bus and the clinic needed to close, the next property owner could use that property for any permitted use under CG zoning, which includes such neighborhood-friendly uses as a pawn shop, oil and lube shop, and car wash. The zoning designation requested is the most intense land use designation available under the LDC. This is clearly inappropriate in a densely-populated residential neighborhood. It’s also completely contrary to the City’s Comprehensive Plan.

    But the appropriateness of the zoning proper was never discussed. Instead, Mr. Manning tore a page form Ms. Van Auken’s playbook and criticized the CN requirements, saying they weren’t appropriate for this part of his district. They may be okay for Main Street (in the second district), but they’re not “one size fits all,” he said. So the Council decided to continue a pattern of development that has proven over the past 50 years to deteriorate the third district. The Council decided to continue a pattern of development that the citizens found so undesirable that they wanted to change the zoning code. The Council decided to continue a pattern of development that has been proven to destabilize neighborhoods, not revitalize them.

The Council decided to repudiate the Land Development Code. They apparently think change will come by doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results. These aren’t isolated incidents, nor are they minor variances. Beginning with St. Ann’s right after the LDC was adopted, right up to the actions Tuesday night, the Council has consistently undercut the Land Development Code at every turn.

The Heart of Peoria Plan was adopted “in principle” in 2002, but it has yet to be adopted in practice, despite having been codified in the LDC.

The Main Street circle game

The Journal Star has article today on why Councilmember Van Auken is abandoning plans to improve Main Street:

“We don’t have anything in the budget this year because it’s a ‘maintenance budget,’ ” 2nd District City Councilwoman Barbara Van Auken said Tuesday.

Van Auken said she anticipates in 2009 for more discussions to occur among city officials and neighborhood leaders within the West Bluff Council on how to handle improvements along Main. She said it could be several years before any physical changes along the busy street occur.

That should be “several more years.” This has been pursued ever since the Heart of Peoria Plan was completed in 2002, so we’re at six years, four consultants/studies and counting. But by all means, let’s spend another year discussing it. Maybe someone will say something different.

“I think our goal would be to have each of the neighborhoods in the West Bluff come forward with their ideas on what they would like to see in terms of traffic flow and patterns,” Van Auken said.

Again? How many times will we be going through this exercise? I would submit that the city has gotten more public/neighborhood input on this project than any other road project in the history of Peoria. We’ve had charrettes, we’ve had public meetings, we’ve talked as neighborhood associations and submitted the results of our discussions to the West Bluff Council, and on and on and on. How many more times (years?) are we going to rehash this thing?

The council on Dec. 9 will simply be asked to vote on whether to receive and file the Hanson study, which was completed several months ago.

By 2010 when this is reconsidered, we’ll of course need to do another study with another consultant, which will then get received and filed, and we’ll go round and round and round in the circle game….

Math, Science and Technology Academy Update

I received this communication today from our neighborhood association about the planned Math, Science and Technology Academy. The note at the beginning is from Second District Council Member Barbara Van Auken:

Attached is an update on the Math Science and Technology Academy project. Mike Dugard, Rod Lorenz, Michael Keck and I (along with a number of other academic, business, medical, research and civic representatives) serve on the Advisory Committee to District 150 for this wonderful venture.

Best regards,
Barbara

— Attachment follows–

Coming to Peoria: a Math, Science and Technology (MSTA) Academy

Providing educational choice and meeting forecasted workforce demands, Peoria Public Schools leads the development of a Math, Science and Technology Academy, with a hopeful opening in 2010. Projected voids of skilled workers in health care, engineering, manufacturing and construction, all requiring beyond 12th grade skills in math, science and technology, has directed the MSTA focus. The Board of Education has designated a site located in the heart of technology development, Renaissance Park, and has earmarked funding for renovations to the facility.

Working together as a team, representatives from health care, higher education, parents, manufacturing and technology companies, city government, neighborhood associations, educators, and city leaders, have come together to research and gather input from the community. The team is committed to opening a world class Math, Science and Technology Academy to serve as a model educational program as well as contribute to the economic growth of our community. Members from the Advisory Team have visited schools as far away as California and as close as Chicago, Indianapolis and St. Louis, with more visits planned soon.

What might the MSTA look like?

  • Students throughout the city in grades 4th – 12th grade interested in math, science and technology could apply with 450 students being selected using a lottery process
  • Cutting edge best practices in teaching and learning with the infusion of technology and project based learning will drive the development of the model
  • The cultural environment will foster collaborative learning to encourage student inquiry, problem solving, accountability, and the development of ethical leaders
  • The environment will energize students and teachers to rise to higher levels of achievement
  • Student learning would go beyond the classroom and extend to world-class mentorship and internship experiences with scientists, scholars, entrepreneurs at laboratories, universities, hospitals, and companies throughout the Peoria area
  • Longer school day , school year and opportunities for Saturday instruction will allow for differentiated instruction to build skill development both for remediation and acceleration
  • The school could serve as a professional development center for other schools to bring outstanding practices in math, science and technology

Why look at the MSTA being a Charter School?

  • Components of charter schools directly align with components identified by the Advisory Committee for the components of the MSTA
  • Charter Schools bring choice to parents, provide autonomy and flexibility at the school level to support innovation, support partnerships with parents and the community, and operate on a multi-tiered accountability system
  • The ultimate goal of charter schools is to lead public education to unprecedented levels of high academic achievement for all students

Stay tuned for more information on the development of this incredible opportunity for our students … for our community!

Xcoins has diligently offered their help with your investments in our children’s future. The site they describe as “located in the heart of technology development, Renaissance Park,” is the Adult Education Center on the corner of Moss and Garfield avenues (fka Washington School):

Secrecy the order of the day at City Hall

The City of Peoria’s liquor commission can’t even get information on what’s happening with Big Al’s plans to move, resulting in a “no decision” Monday on whether to grant them a liquor license. Via 1470 WMBD radio:

[A] NO recommendation was forwarded to the City Council concerning a change in liquor class for the former EuroJacks and an application for a liquor license at 414 Hamilton Boulevard by the owner’s of Big Al’s. The Commission cited the owners could not produce enough information at this time on specific plans for the properties.

But apparently some city officials know what’s going on, as evidenced by these quotes from a recent Journal Star article:

“They are basically moving to make way for what could be a wonderful development,” city attorney Randy Ray said, declining to discuss specifics. “At this point, it’s just a tremendous opportunity to develop the Downtown.”

Added 1st District City Councilman Clyde Gulley Jr., who represents the Downtown, “we need to move (Big Al’s) because of another project.”

Others involved at City Hall and Zuccarini remained tight-lipped about what they have planned.

The city attorney, first district councilman, and unspecified “others involved at City Hall” all know what this “tremendous opportunity” and “wonderful development” is all about. The rest of us, however, will just have to wait to find out — probably until after it’s a done deal.

Secrecy fever has found its way into the budget process as well. At a special City Council meeting Monday night, it was announced that staff had cut the budget deficit from $2.2 million to half a million dollars. When Councilman Gary Sandberg asked how they accomplished that, he was told he’d have to come in tomorrow and talk to interim City Manager Holling in private to find out. In other words, they weren’t going to divulge that information on the council floor where citizens might hear.

Of course, the sad truth is that most citizens wouldn’t have heard since the meeting was on a Monday when there’s no radio or television coverage like on Tuesday nights. Interestingly, some council members (Van Auken, Manning, Nichting, Mayor Ardis) seemed to know what was going on, while the rest of the council was in the dark about this budgeting miracle.

And it was only a few months ago that the Journal Star reported, “City officials decided in June that this year, the budget process would be more open to the public, transparent, and easily communicated between city staff members and the council.” So much for that plan.