I see the light at the end of the tunnel — I should be done editing by tomorrow afternoon. In the meantime, please feel free to comment on the news of the day, or whatever else you’d like to talk about.
If you can’t think of anything, might I suggest commenting on the Journal Star’s insulting editorial on the East Bluff school issue today? Oh, how I wish I had time to comment on that….
Yes, hum, the peasants were united and successful. Go Peoria! 🙂
Their sarcastic editorial about the construction of a trail in East Peoria is further proof the JSEB still has no understanding why their precious extension of the Rock Island Trail hasn’t been built.
PJ Star editorial: “Peoria is just in a dysfunctional place right now. The community needs a breather.”
What the community needs is a breather from editorials like this one.
The part that got me was this:
Don’t you just love how they complete ignore the fact that the New Urbanists, neighborhood associations, City Hall, and now even the park district are all in agreement, and it’s only the school district that has a “competing agenda”?
And even after all they’ve been through, the school board continues to ignore the residents and proceed as if the “silent majority” is still on their side. Keep dreaming the impossible dream, District 150….
Clearly, the PJS editorials are the opinion of the writers, and should not be construed as the factual reporting of news. But this week the editorials took a new, condescending turn – that of a stern parent admonishing a recalcitrant child when the child did not do what the parent wanted.
Earlier in the week, a PJS editorial suggested that people should be still and just go along with the PPS/PPD Glen Oak School project; in other words, join the flock of lemmings as they are being led over the cliff. My perception of that piece was that dissent was dangerous and the public should acquiesce to the wishes of the PPS/PPD administrations and boards without question. In case the editors forgot, this country was founded in dissent and the founding fathers codified this freedom in the Bill of Rights and the Constitution. They couldn’t possibly be suggesting that the voice of the “loyal opposition” be suppressed for the benefit of the majority (whether silent or apathetic). Isn’t that reminiscent of the policy of every totalitarian regime that rose and fell during the 20th century?
To state that “opponents of this project will never believe they were listened to if the end result isn’t what they wanted” (12/20/06 editorial) is a patronizing generality unworthy of a professional journalist. People wish for their concerns to be heard, to be able to join in an open dialogue about the issue, and to not be marginalized and treated with disdain when they express their opinions – that is what causes people to believe they weren’t listened to.
To state that “it’s laughable now to hear opponents who have suddenly discovered the children, those same students whose interests have been on precious few lips most of the last year” (12/22/06 editorial) as a criticism of the vocal minority is ludicrous. When was the last time any of us heard the District #150 BOE and Administration engage in a meaningful dialogue about the students? Can they honestly sit there and state that their actions support student achievement? No, they can’t. How can they justify the enormous 15%-40% administrative pay increases as supporting student achievement? And that is but one example.
To state that “as for Peoria, it has . . . a bunch of tribes that couldn’t agree on where to plant a tree, much less mutually address anything of significance” (12/22/06 editorial) is an insult to every citizen of Peoria.
To describe Peoria as a “dysfunctional place” is outrageous. Why is it dysfunctional – because there are people here who believe in the merits of a system of checks and balances, and have not only the authority, but the responsibility, as citizens to exercise the rights granted them under the Constitution to apply that system of checks and balances to local governmental entities?
That the PJS editors consider the exercise of our democratic principles as symptomatic of dysfunction is too frightening to contemplate.
Peoria IS a dysfunctional city with attempted management by a number of small tribes. (First editorial in years that the poorly managed and written Urinal Star has gotten close to nailing.) Why do you think so many are trying to move out? Peoria acts like a 1000 person village rather than a possible leader in the area, which they should be.
What appears to some as dysfunctional is really just democracy at work. Many ideas, facts, discussion, advice, disagreement, dissent, are all part of a well-functioning democracy. Sure it gets messy, but that is how it is supposed to be. Decisions are best made after putting the issue out there for everyone to shoot at. In the end, more people will buy in as they were part of the process – they were heard. The decisionmakers will feel better about it, and they will engender credibility, trust and respect. Leaders who do not practice this are the ones responsible for the more chaotic, seemingly dysfunctional situations that develop, as interested constituents are left out or ignored and rise up in protest. Rather than making Peoria look like a laughing stock, and while there is still a ways to go, I think the G.O. Park/School saga is shaping up as a shining example of how good government and stewardship of resources is supposed to work. Let’s all be proud of what has happened, what the people have accomplished, and move forward with confidence and resolve.
“It’s fair to have doubts about whether any park board commitment means anything; what sliver of a relationship the city had with its schools has been damaged, as well.”
Hmmm … isn’t the commitment of the Park Board and the City to the citizens of the East Bluff more important than its commitment to another governmental body, especially one that seems to be ignoring the will of the people?
Prairie Celt, the condescending tone in PJS editorials is not new. The editorials on the Kellar Branch were quite similar in tone. I’ll continue to read it online free of charge until they demonstrate they can express their opinion without showing contempt toward those who disagree.
Perhaps the PJS Editorial Board’s stance and view of this whole matter reflects the internal work environment and culture of the paper. Maybe they espouse what they know from their own experience.
Or maybe they’re just short of talent.
One positive development for Peoria would be if the Propaganda Star’s editorial writers and editors all left town, forever. Their insulting, inane, and holier-than-thou editorials and slanted “news” stories are big part of the problem. It is a positive development that some Peorians are starting to stand up and say “ENOUGH!”
Or maybe PJSEB just cannot suffer talking /listening / believing that the little people will just eat cake anymore (think paying taxes and taking it without resistance) and are working together to make Peoria great?
I think it’s funny that the PJS often lists — on the editorial page — the names and addresses of our representatives, and encourages people to write to them and be involved in the political process. Yet when people get involved in the process, they criticize those same people and call the process dysfunctional. Apparently they’re expecting us all to write to our representatives nothing but love letters…. or maybe they’re expecting us to write and say, “whatever the Journal Star says, that’s what you should do….”
I have had my share of professional run-ins with the PJS editorial and news staffs over the past 30 years. I have yet to see them fail to moderate or reverse their position on an issue I have been involved with when provided thoughtful, detailed, unimpeachable information. I also have never see them change a position when I assailed them either in writing or on the phone. A face to face discussion utilizing facts and rational thought is the only way to make an impact. It can be done. I have seen it first-hand many, many times.
It’s heartening to realize I am not the only one troubled by the PJSEB’s tactics. This blog is a good thing – rather like an updated 21st Century version of the old town meetings. And the contributors to this blog are definitely capable of logical, independent thought and action!
Merry Christmas everyone!!
One more thought and then I really have to finish our holiday preparations.
For those of you old enough to remember Spiro Agnew, he coined a phrase that really applies to the PJSEB – “effete snobs.” I can’t think of a more deserving group than the PJSEB – they appear to believe they are members of a privileged class comprised of themselves and some of our community leaders. And, of course, only their opinions matter.
The City of Peoria has proved how dysfunctional they are by all of the things they have lost to progressive East Peoria. Just look at the recent development just across the river from downtown Peoria. (I won’t even bring up the riverboat and the revenue loss from that mistake)
Can you imagine the revenue D150 would have had if the city wasn’t dysfunctional? Anything new in Peoria goes into areas within the boundaries of Dunlap School District who offers lower property taxes.
Even lowly little Pekin has landed a number of good manufacturing and ethanol plants over Peoria due to their not being sissies about needing a trail more than a working rail line.
Whoa there MDD – while I agree with your first paragraph I take exception to your second one. In principle I agree with the shame that 150 has not benefited from the valuable growth in the North and West which has enriched Dunlap and others, but obviously you don’t know the reason. When Richwoods was forced into 150 and it withstood the test in the courts the outcry from powers to be at that time same as said “screw you 150 – you won this one, but you are forever damned for further expansion”. That powerful resentment went all the way to Springfield and became the law of the land to this very day! The only meager benefit to huge developments like the Grand Prairie are mere bones thrown out of embarrassment to 150. Rest in peace certain beloved Peorians, who won their battle, but placed the noose on 150’s neck over 40 years ago! ^oo^~
One Feral Kat: Interesting point — I had heard this recently while working on the GOP issue. Someone mentioned that there was also a lump sum payment of a moderate size involved…. any truth to that part of this person’s story?
New, commercial developments are going into Dunlap’s area for two reasons, one of them being lower property taxes. The other is that due to the city’s dysfunctional and anti-business attitudes, commercial developers do not want to put anything new within the older boundaries. It is simply too much of a hassle and costs too much. Asking to be annexed into the city after construction is complete is done for other reasons and makes sense to the developers.
MDD
I do not disagree with you regarding the poor reputation the city has re-enforced year after year; however, you apparently missed my point. You are implying from your earlier post that 150 would have been so much better off had the city prospered by being friendly with the commercial and residential developers. That is where I’m taking exception! The District 150 boundaries are not contigious with the city limits of Peoria – by a long shot! Haven’t you ever wondered why you see Dunlap school buses traveling streets in Peoria? Instead 150’s boundaries are forevermore defined geographically by state law as mandated by John Parkhurst’s legislation over 40 years ago. It was a retaliatory slap against 150 for annexing Richwoods. You know the same retaliatory mentality just as Hinton has pouted that since he isn’t getting his 15 acre legacy temple to himself then a new school is going in some where else in Peoria so “na na na”. ^oo^~
PS to Karrie: I am not aware of any material financial support thrown as a bone to starving 150.
Yes, D150 could have prospered had the city been friendly to developers – within the older city limits. Look at all of the areas of the city with abandoned homes, buildings, vacant land… Why are those areas not being developed? Other cities around the country are having the opposite problem. They call it “tear-downs” when developers buy worthless houses , raze them and build new ones (bigger and better). You get just a few tear-downs and subsequent new builds on a street and suddenly, the property values go up as the other residents begin to actually take care of and improve their homes. It also happens for commercial areas, except Peoria scares them away with the myriad of rules, regulations and fees. So, they build outside the city limits and later ask to be annexed. Maybe Peoria should stop allowing any new developments to be annexed?
I am well aware of what D150 tried to do to Dunalp school district. What you are implying is that D150 has every right to expand their boundaries and other districts around Peoria are obliged to shrink theirs? That is quite different than consolidation as what happened with Richwoods. Dunlap, Brimfield, etc. school districts do not just encompass their respective villages. Based upon your reasoning, the Village of Dunlap should annex all land not in the current village that Dunlap School District encompasses, including current City of Peoria land. If the village of Dunlap was bigger, physically, in size than Peoria, would the arguemnet you make go the other way?
I do not live in, nor do my kids go to school in Dunlap.
MDD,
I can correctly state that all the development occuring on the north and northwest sides of Peoria are being developed under Peoria’s “strict, onerous” regulations. They are annexed as vacant land and then developed.
If commercial and residential development was so bad in Peoria, nothing new at all would be developed here. It would ALL be in EP, Washington, etc.
Maybe so, but it sure isn’t in D150’s present territory, is it? The higher taxes are just a part of it.