RALLY Peoria

Dr. Suess

2007-05-29T12:53:00.000-04:00

"Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.” -- Dr. Suess

Happy Tuesday! :)

Bill Rutherford - Advice to Live By

2006-12-10T01:00:00.000-05:00

Bill Rutherford leaves a lengthy legacy as recounted today at the memorial service held for him. Bill was your friend, even if you had known him for a minute. His charismatic manner and his deep concern for his fellow men (women, children, flora and fauna .... ) was always evident.

I remember having met him through our mutual concern about conservation of open space along the Illinois River --- the Riverplex formerly known as the RecPlex. Several weeks later, while discussing this community issue, we talked about other topics and I mentioned that my car was in the shop and I was going to rent a car. Absolutely not, Bill would not hear of it. He had just gotten his second car back from someone else who had needed to use it and Bill would be at my home at 7 pm that night to deliver the car. He would hear of no refusal. That was Bill generous and caring and using his position in life to ease the cares and burdens of others. I admit, I loved driving his white Diesel Jetta --- almost wished my car would have been in the shop --- forever! :)

Alice St. Clair, his relative through the Rutherford family line --- shared a quote from Bill who was taught by his father, Leslie ---

"Good things happen when people get involved".

This is oh so true and Peoria would be great, actually everywhere would be great if people got involved. That is what is missing, civic engagement at multiple levels ..... here's hoping that Bill's legacy is further fulfilled by Central Illinoians and the many people whose lives he touched
throughout the entire world.

How to be Happy

The time to be happy is now,

The place to be happy is here

The way to be happy is to make others so.

(Also quoted today!)

Snow Plowing --- Completed in what time period?

2006-12-06T23:07:00.000-05:00

All citizens:

What is your opinion of:

(A) when the first pass and
(B) curb to curb should be completed (i.e. number of hours after the end of the event) based on this recent snow fall - November 20 - December 1, 2006?

What are your recommendations? SOLUTIONS?

Thank you for your help.

Russell Would Sponsor Line Item Legislation

2006-10-18T00:52:00.000-04:00

An inquiry was sent to all incumbent and challengers for the the 46th Senate District and the 92nd Legislative District regarding the sponsorship of legislation.....

Senator Shadid and Representative Schock and Candidates Koehler, Russell and Spears:

If you are elected in this fall election, would you be willing to sponsor a state law to have the PBC portion --- the tax rate and amount to be listed as a separate line item on taxpayers' property tax bills in the state of Illinois?

Yes or No and why.

ONLY one response received to date from the 13 October 2006 inquiry. Perhaps it was too scary for any other candidate to answer due to the date sent. Thanks Ernie!

Karrie,Thank you for your email. I appreciate that you are taking the time to check out where my opponent and I stand on the issues, not just what you read in the paper. To answer your question, I would be happy to sponsor a bill to list the PBC tax rate and amount as a separate line item on tax bills. I believe that this is important because the people of Peoria deserve to know where their tax money is going. A responsible government must be accountable to the people, and transparency is the first step to responsibility.Karrie, if you have any other questions, please feel free to email me again.Thanks,Ernie

More information for consideration when you take your voting privilege to the polls on November 7th.

Back Home

2006-10-18T00:45:00.000-04:00

Sorry to have not kept up with the Blog and the entire school issue over the summer. When one's mom dies unexpectedly, a daughter is just at a loss (probably a son too).

Sadly, the administrators and elected officials for both D150 and the PPD just don't get it. Their mantra is like the Borg -- 'Resistance is futile' as they continue on their misguided path to build a school in the park or perhaps more schools in/near additional PPD park land, especially if SB2477 is overridden during the Fall Veto session by the efforts of Sen. Shadid, Rep. Leitch and Schock-- the money will be more than $60 million to bond for school construction.

An update to the Alms/Partridge lawsuit against the PPD for alledged Open Meeting Action Violations is that Judge Barra has set a trial date of December 7, 2006.

SB2477 --- Tick Tock Goes the Clock

2006-06-14T13:56:00.000-04:00

Yes, that all around lovable piece of legislation that was passed on May 10, 2006 by both houses of the Illinois Legislature is due to automatically (no signature needed by the Governor) become law in sixty days ---- July 9, 2006 being the due date, unless vetoed by the Governor.

So, perhaps you will find it important enough to call Sen. Shadid at 673-8404 and Rep. Schock 672-9292 and Rep. Leitch 685-3900 and ask that they convince Governor Blagojevich to veto this bill.

You can also write or call the Governor:

Dear Governor...Send correspondence for Governor Blagojevich, to contact the governor or to the Office of the Governor, 207 State House, Springfield, IL 62706; (217) 782-0244 or (312) 814-2121 [TTY (888) 261-3336]. (NOTE: Should a response be required it will be mailed to you via the United States Postal Service, so it is important that you include your name and complete mailing address.)

We are still trying to figure out what was the basis for our state representatives (as heard on audio recordings from the Illinois Legislature) telling their Springfield colleagues that they 'had the full support of the city council' on this piece of legislation (documents sited in subsequent telephone conversations with state reps and city council members, as well as checking for any type of resolution of endorsement from City Clerk Haynes, DO NOT support the state reps assertion.) Please stay tuned for a report back.

So, please call or sit back and wait for the black hole (SB2477) to suck your $$$$ from your pocket.

***********************************

Meanwhile, tick tock goes the clock and tick tock grows the crock of manure that surrounds the entire school siting issue.

Rep. LaHood has stepped aside so that the City Council and D150 can work out some type of agreement to pursue the idea of a joint venture around an undecided site near the current Glen Oak School. Again the 15 acre idea surfaces but you might ask, what about the only 5 acres D150 was to purchase and the 5 acres that the Peoria Park Distrcit was to add to site --- that only equals 10 acres ---- if D150 plays the 15 acres sonata then they can cry no $$$ crocodile tears to move back to Glen Oak Park. Remember D150 already purchased properties and they just must be wise stewards with taxpayer $$$$$ unless the intention is to take advantage of the unintended consequence of using the PBC funds to build the school in the park and not to use health life safety bonds.

Anyway, another special use is required to take the R-3 park land and use it for a school site, shouldn't be too difficult as the Park District just gained approval for ALL of Glen Oak Park to potentially become a zoo overtime with only each new site plan at each new phase of the proposed multi-phase zoo expansion to get another seemingly rubber stamp of approval from the city council,

or will it be more difficult because the City Council would have to sign off on that zoning change for a school in a park that's morphing into a zoo ..... time will tell

especially in view of the fact that Director Noble sent a letter(dated April 27, 2006) to Pat Landes on regarding ZC 06-35B (Zoo Expansion):

Dear Pat:

This document is being filed as a courtesy to the City of Peoria. However, by agreement with City of Peoria Corporation Counsel, Randall Ray, please know that the Pleasure Driveway and Park District of Peoria, by submitting this document should not be seen as setting a precedent to allow the City of Peoria municipal zoning ordinance to thwart the broad statutory authority of the Peoria Park District to plan, build and operate parks and park facilities included within its 60 square mile district. ... The District does not believe it is subject to the City's municipal zoning ordinance nor does it believe it needs a special use permit for the Zoo or for any other park purpose in Glen Oak Park.

Corporation Counsel Randy Ray and Park District Attorney James Konsky will review the 'Wilmette" case as that case has been considered a "very narrow legal ruling."

Hum, where have we heard a similar phrase before "a very narrow legal ruling" --- you guessed it --- President Tim Cassidy (narrow interpretation) when asked about the alleged open meeting act violations about the Peoria Park Board talking about the 'sharing of park land without setting a price' for the proposed school in the park. At least they get an A+ for consistency.

Also, makes us think of the "Unofficial PPD Position" landfill expansion support letter that Director Noble sent and was later recanted by the Park Board 2-22-06 Park Board Minutes, page 7 , any similarity?

We'll have to ask Randy Ray what type of agreement he has entered into with the Park District on behalf of the City of Peoria, which would preclude him from following the decision of the Illinois Supreme Court as quoted below. Stay tuned for another report back.

By the way, the "Wilmette" case; 112 Ill.2d 6, 490 N.E.2d 1282; Wilmette Park District, Appellant, v. The Village of Wilmette, Appellee; No. 62258, Supreme Court of Illinois, March 19, 1986.

Neither the Illinois Municipal Code nor the Park District Code provides park districts with immunity from the zoning ordinances of their host municipality. Nevertheless, the park district takes the position that because the General Assembly has granted park districts authority to operate parks, it impliedly follows that the legislature intended to confer zoning immunity to park districts in instances where zoning may affect park operations.

We find no merit in this argument. The General Assembly has not granted park districts the exclusive authority to operate parks. Indeed, all municipalities, home rule or otherwise, are authorized to establish and operate parks (Ill.Rev.Stat.1983,ch. 24, pars. 11-98-1 through 11-100-1.) Absent an explicit statutory grant of immunity, the mere fact that the park district, a local unit of government, has a statutory duty to operate its parks cannot be extended to support the inference that it can exercise its authority without regard to the zoning ordinances of its host municipality.

That's the decision of the Illinois Supreme Court. We're not lawyers, nor are we giving legal advice .... just siting publically available information for you to make informed decisions (even if you disagree with our views).

So, please prove us wrong, that should Sb2477 become law, that all communciations by D150 would immmediately terminate as they take their $60 -75 million taxpayer $$$$ ball and go play on whatever playground they decide to build.

Please stay tuned for another episode of "As the Kingdom Turns"!

PCF - Top 10 Reasons to Love the Zoo Expansion

2006-06-10T17:52:00.000-04:00

In today's PJ Star Forum (10 June 2006), citizens aka taxpayers can read that the Peoria Civic Federation (PCF) loves the zoo.

It would be ever so sweet if the PCF members actually talked with the taxpayers who live in the older neighborhoods to find out what the taxpayer on the street thinks of these 'new fangled' ideas to make Peoria's older neighborhoods great.

Please don't count me among the turnips who just fell of the truck . . . exactly what OBJECTIVE data would support the following PCF's Top 10 'Pie in the Sky' claims regarding the proposed zoo expansion:

enhancing our community's quality of life;
will provide better educational programming;
serve as a source of collaboration with local, state, federal and international conservation efforts;
will offer amazing recreational opportunities for all families;
will help strengthen our economy;
will attract and retain employees;
will serve as a tourist attraction;
will provide an exciting venue for corporate events and convention activities;
can even offer stabilization to the surrounding neighborhoods, serving as an important anchor for the community;
... the second stage of expansion, including an iconic grand entrance and welcoming area, can be built and opened along with Africa! Reaching this goal of $6 million will require the support of our entire regional community.

Taxpayer on the Street Response:

(a) Ask the East Bluff Residents if they want the zoo expansion (guess what the answer is ---- NO!) and (b) Ask any neighborhood leader what will enhance our community's quality of life ... think reduction in crime, noise, litter, increase in responsible social behavior, well maintained properties .... ---- zoo expansion won't even make the top fifty list;
Remains to be seen;
Think Wildlife Prairie Park. Think Bill Rutherford. Bill tried for years to coordinate and collaborate on a joint venture to relocate the zoo to Wildlife (and then to build a hotel as an tourist, economy boosting, end destination attraction) 'but for' the Peoria Park District ...) and yes, Wildlife to "serve as a source of collaboration with local, state, federal and international conservation efforts" would be perfect;
Walking in the park, flying a kite, walking your dog, playing baseball, family picnics et al --- those are amazing recreational opportunities for all families and please remember that the St. Louis Zoo is free!;
How??? New construction jobs??? part time zoo jobs with no benefits???
The Glen Oak Zoo ala Africa! is going to attract and retain employees???? Perhaps a St. Louis, or Brookfield or a full scale zoo .... perhaps ..... but the Glen Oak Zoo??? which already loses $400,000 plus per year and now the expansion is already costing the taxpayers more --- the taxpayers are paying the interest on the Peoria Zoological Society's $10 million loan for which the interest rate is not to exceed 3.5% for a period of ten (10) years (during which time certain pledges are exempt from counting toward the loan principal) aka $350,000 per year in interest. (Please remember that the taxpayers have not been told the truth again by the Peoria Park Board, as no zoo construction was to have started until 90% of the money was raised ($20 million is 62.5% of $32 million);
Remains to be seen, the size of the current Glen Oak Zoo is 8% and 24% if expanded compared to the FREE St. Louis Zoo;
Perhaps ---- but not if you have to walk through the older section of the zoo which on a hot and humid day is a world class olfactory event;
Exactly how does an expanded zoo offer stabilization to the surrounding neighborhoods, serving as an important anchor for the community??? --- would that be letting the animals run in the streets to scare the criminals, or locking the criminals up with the animals, or having more trafffic on an already heavily used street, or having more traffic accidents which have in the past prevented emergency services to be provided within the park to injured park goers, or would that be that the current zoo expansion design does not provide for fire services deep within the park or just how would the zoo stabilize the East Bluff??? And actually how does a zoo act as an anchor for our community????;
Second stage of expansion (according to ZC-06-35B this is actually all part of the first expansion) but now that you mention it .... it does bring to mind that with the Special Use Application to rezone the entire park as a zoo (being site plan specific for each new expansion) then our East Bluff Neighbors have years, even decades and several generations in the future to be oohed and aahed by the future expansion plans to further destabilize their neighborhood.

Expand the zoo if you want --- just don't expand at Glen Oak Park. This idea is like putting a gorilla in a poodle's cage. Again, Think Wildlife.

Donors and PZS members, please ask yourselves these questions???

As a surrounding property owner, would you want to live next to a facility that has to meet the Industrial performance standards of the zoning ordinance for lighting, sounds, and smells?
As a surrounding property owner, would you be concerned about the proposed increased traffic from not 100,000 but a projected 160,000 zoo patrons combined with other specialized events and the untallied additional traffic from the Children's museum, along Prospect Avenue and Gift Avenue (secondary entrance to the zoo)?
Would you be concerned that Fire Department apparatus access would be maintained where possible?
Would you be concerned that where Fire Department apparatus access is not possible, 'sprinkle buildings where water is not adequate' is the standard that will be applied?
Would you be concerned that the outer and inner loops of the park will be reconfigured so that the public access will be lost and significantly decreased?
Would you be concerned that there are documents which show that emergency vehicles were blocked from providing emergency service because of major traffic congestion problems and a serious traffic accident on Sunday, March 28, 1998? (and perhaps there are other incidents)?

The public's safety, quality of life in the surrounding neighborhood due to traffic and congestion. lighting, sounds, smells and so on ... will be dramatically and negatively impacted. As in all real estate --- location, location, location, is the key and this proposed location is the wrong location.

For these reasons the Peoria City Council should deny the requested special use.

How about all stakeholders working together to build a new zoo at Wildlife?

Ah Grasshopper - Follow the $$$$$

2006-05-26T21:59:00.000-04:00

At the Peoria Chronicle, in reference to the Glen Oak Park site, Gary Sandberg made the comment,

"Follow the money, Grasshopper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "

Rally Peoria's very own --

Gra$$hopper Dateline

Volume 1 - Issue 1

(We know a little technical, ho hum... via the FOIA trail!)

April 4 -- Legal Notice to be published..... "Pursuant to Article 17-1 of the School Cole (should be Code) of Illinois, a legal notice announcing the required Public Hearing was published in at least one newspaper of general circulation on April 4, 2006. That notice set the time and date for the public hearing as May 8, 2006. It is necessary that at least one such Public Hearing be held prior to the adoption of the Amended 2005-2006 budget. Given that the Budget Hearing has concluded, the Amended Budget may now be adopted. " (PPS-Action Item, May 22, 2006, Background Information, Signed by Guy M. Cahill, Approved by Ken Hinton)

April 24 -- INFORMATION ITEMS - DISCUSSION OF SENATOR SHADID'S REQUEST -- Mr. Hinton made the following statement.......

"The Master Facility Plan, which was formally adopted by the Board of Education on November 21, 2005, set forth a commitment to build and revitalize our community with new state-of-the-art schools. The proposed school on the Glen Oak Park site would be an example of that commitment."
"However, due to recent events and out of respect for the Glen Oak community and in a sign of good faith, I am instructing my administrative staff to suspend the acquisition of property for the Glen Oak Park site effective 9:00 a.m. Wednesday, April 26th and ask the Board to delay their formal approval for the construction of a new school in the Woodruff Attendance area until a forum can be held."
"To those 6 property owners with whom we have already entered into contract, we will honor our obligations." (PPS-BOE Minutes, 04/24/06, pp. 264-265)

April 26 -- Suspended acquisition of property for the Glen Oak Park site effective 9:00 a.m. (PPS-BOE Minutes, 04/24/06, pp.264-265)

April 28 -- $140,000 - 2102 N. Prospect

April 28 -- $89,000 - 2144 N. Prospect

April 28 -- $125,000 - 2212 N. Prospect

May 2 -- $100 - 2102 N. Prospect

May 8 -- "7:00 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE BUDGET - Ms. Butler called the public hearing on the amendments to the budget to order at 7:00 p.m. There were no speakers. Mrs. Butler declared the hearing closed at 7:03 p.m. The amended budget will be voted on at the May 22, 2006 meeting." (PPS-BOE Minutes, 05/08/06, p. 268)

Again from the Peoria Chronicle, Mahkno's comments on May 25th, 2006 hit the mark,

"The problems this town has does not rise high enough for them to interrupt their daily lives for something messy like politics."
"If 500 people showed up at a council meeting demanding change… you bet they would notice. If 1000 people showed up at a council meeting demanding change… the council would get restless. If 10,000 people showed up downtown for the council meeting, demanding change… we would have a revolution in local politics. But… that would interrupt their baseball or basketball game. It might interrupt American Idol. We know American Idol is more important anyways"

Please wake up "Rip Van Winkle" and to the ramparts!!!!!

May 9 -- $98,000 - 2126 N. Prospect

May 9 -- $120,000 - 2206 N. Prospect

May 10 -- $133,500 - 2208 N. Prospect

May 11 -- $90,000 - 2142 N. Prospect

May 12 -- $82,000 - 2138 N. Prospect

Peoria County Government - Property Tax Information (please click link, then search by address or Property ID)

May 22 -- Budget amendment transferred $1.6 MILLION from (20) Operations & Maintenance to (60) Site & Construction/Capital Improvement.

Asked (on 05/22/06) for the statute covering this transfer --- Mr. Cahill's response was that he would have to conduct research to find the statute reference.

(Please note, a follow-up email was sent and still no response has been received from Mr. Cahill to date - 05/26/06.)
(PPS-BOE Agenda, 05/22/06, Action Item No. 8; Amended 2005-2006 Budget, p. 3 dated 5/5/2006, approved by BOE)

(105 ILCS 5/10‑22.33) (from Ch. 122, par. 10‑22.33) Sec. 10‑22.33. Interfund loans. To authorize the treasurer to make interfund loans from (1) the operations and maintenance fund to the educational fund or fire prevention and safety fund, or (2) from the educational fund to the operations and maintenance fund or fire prevention and safety fund, or (3) from the operations and maintenance or educational fund to the transportation fund, or (4) from the transportation fund to the operations and maintenance, educational, or fire prevention and safety fund and to make the necessary transfers on his books, but such loans shall be repaid and retransferred to the proper fund within 3 years. In case such repayment is not made within 3 years the regional superintendent shall withhold further payments on claims authorized by Article 18 of this Act until repayment is made. (Source: P.A. 89‑3, eff. 2‑27‑95.)

105 ILCS 5 / School Code, ARTICLE 10. SCHOOL BOARDS

Any attorneys, any school attorneys out there???? Is this the correct statute? Is there another statute(s) to cover this type of transfer?

May 22 -- "Prior to the moratorium on real estate purchases for the Glen Oak Park School Site, Purchase Contracts for listed property purchases were executed."

(Please note, that it would appear --- from April 24, 2006 at the BOE Meeting (sometime after 6 p.m.) until Wednesday, April 26th effective 9:00 a.m., D150's property acquisition went from 6 to 8 properties.)

(Also, asked (on 05/22/06) who was the signatory on the D150 real estate purchase contracts? --- No identification was provided.
(PPS-BOE Agenda, 05/22/06, Action Item No. 9; PPS-Action Item, May 22, 2006, Background Information, Signed by Guy M. Cahill, Approved by Ken Hinton)

Taxpayers are looking for equal treatment --- they are hoping that the BOE will employ the same "raise the bar, increase the rigor and relevance" standard which Superintendent Ken Hinton announced for increasing Lincoln School Academic Performance for civic engagement and open government for the taxpayer.

Does it seem curious ....

to reference the School Code section for a legal notice ---- yet need to do research to identify the section allowing for the transfer of $1.6 MILLION ?

that D150 seemingly COULD ONLY purchase these properties once D150 made an offer, especially when no intergovernmental agreement has been signed between D150 and the Peoria Park District to develop this proposed site? What happened to the concept of a purchase option?

that D150 is able to expend funds prior to the Public Hearing AND prior to the BOE vote to make a budget amendment to transfer the funds, $1.6 MILLION from (20) Operations & Maintenance to (60) Site & Construction/Capital Improvement?

that any expenditure over $10,000 has to be put out for bid AND the accepted bid has to be approved in a regular (open) D150 meeting by D150 BOE Members PRIOR to the receipt of services .......

YET THE SAME PRINCIPLE DOES NOT APPLY TO THE ACQUISITION OF $877,500 WORTH OF REAL ESTATE PURCHASES?

and so on . . .

Peoria Park District Trustees Champion Public Invitation

2006-05-24T23:03:00.000-04:00

Peoria Park District Trustees Jackie Petty and Jim Cummings are to be commended for their support that the public should be invited to the May 31st meeting where Rep. LaHood is to be the broker to work out the large creases in the proposed D150/PPD school in Glen Oak Park.

Trustee Petty shared that they (PPD) have nothing to hide, so let the public attend.

Trustee Cummings shared that from Day 1 there had been a sequence of follies, that public input is essential and to not invite the public is a big mistake.

A motion was made, seconded and passed to that effect --- that the PPD would encourage those who had organized the meeting to invite the public.

PPD Board Attorney, Jim Konsky, felt that the Trustees action was within their scope of office as the trustees were not taking a final action on anything, no expenditure of funds was occurring, and it was only a motion to encourage that the public be invited.

Thank you to Trustees Allen and Ryan for voting for this motion. (Trustees Johnson and Budzinski were not present and President Cassidy had to leave for another appointment.)

Actually this is such a great idea, that the meeting should probably be rescheduled so that more of the public can attend!

And saddly, the PJStar did not have a reporter at the meeting to cover this late-breaking news item.

Additionally, Karrie Alms presented signed petitions in opposition of park land at Glen Oak Park or any PPD land being used for schools or any park land being transferred to the school district ---- which were accepted as part of the public record by President Cassidy and given to Board Secretary Joyce McLemore.

There is a second petition which supports the current Glen Oak School site to be utilized for a new school.

If you are interested in helping to pass petitions, please contact us at:

pinkthinksmarttalk@yahoo.com or snail mail at RALLY Peoria, P.O. Box 44, Peoria, IL 61650-0044. Completed petitions, including the name and address of the petition gatherer should be returned to the same address and we will present completed petitions at each Park District Meeting.

Glen Oak Park's Identity Crisis

2006-05-16T19:52:00.000-04:00

A Park, a School or a Zoo?

Which century and which day of the century just might be the questions to ask.

19th Century

Glen Oak Park was dedicated on September 7, 1896, as the People's Park.
Dedicated for the people of the City of Peoria and the people of Peoria County.
A lovely and beautiful park designed by Oscar DeBuis (he also designed Lincoln Park and West Park in Chicago) and included many amenities.
Glen Oak Park was designed as a classical, European late-Victorian Park.

20th Century

Fast forward about three score years and what do we find ..... the beginning of the end of the People's Park.

Glen Oak Park has experienced serious demantling and neglect, with the process starting around 1959, continuing to the present, one amenity after another fell into disrepair by neglect, lack of funding and/or as residents feel by design ---- no one seems to know the territory, the history or what a neighborhood, city and county park should actually contain.

Gone ----

The Sunken Gardens, the Palm House, the Rose Arbor & Gardens, the Old Settler's Cabin, the Lincoln Cabin, the Fountains, the Train, the Wading Pool, . . . .

and most recently the Parapet (definition: an earthen or stone embankment protecting soldiers from enemy fire) soon to be dismantled and the Cannon removed because the Peoria Park District lacks funding to renovate this park feature which has been enjoyed by thousands of children during the last hundred years.

Sadly, Glen Oak Park is not able to protect itself!

21st Century
March 29, 2006 - Plans announced by the Peoria Park District (to share approximately 5 acres) and District 150 Schools (to acquire approximately 5 acres) to build a new school at the corner of Prospect and Frye and acquiring approximately 21 well maintained parcels with many owner occupied properties in the group.

May 1, 2006 - District 150 is compelled by Senator Shadid to hold a public forum. PJ Star reports 250 people attend, 30 people speak (more than a 10% sampling) and not one, no not one person speaks in support of this project. You read that correctly, 30 people spoke in opposition to the project at the proposed site, with support for a new school at the current site.

May 10, 2006 - Glen Oak Parent's Forum --- several parents attended as well as many concerned neighbors and community members, you guessed it ---- support for a new school to be built at the current Glen Oak site.

May 16, 2006 --- PJ Star --- Legal Notice - Section 182

The Peoria Park District is applying for a SPECIAL USE permit to expand the zoo into Glen Oak Park, four parcel ids are indicated with Parcel 14-34-332-015 being of great interest..... that is the parcel which is adjacent to the parcels that D150 is acquiring to build the joint venture school.

Please note that Parcel 14-34-332-015 extends from along Prospect, on Republic and Frye too and is behind and adjacent to the 21 parcels that D150 is acquiring, that entire section of Glen Oak Park is to be rezoned for the zoo expanion. YIKES!

There would seem to go dear old Glen Oak Park as we know it ---- for a ZOO!

An expansion or a conversion?????????

Where will you have a pincic with your family, walk your dog, play baseball, fly your kite, ....

Hum ---- how can the Peoria Park District use the same land for a joint venture as a school site and at the same time for a zoo expansion?

The City of Peoria Zoning Commission Public Hearing regarding Case No. ZC 06-35B will be held in Room 400 of the City Hall Building beginning at 1:00 pm on Thursday, June 1, 2006.

Should prove to be an interesting public hearing!

D150 -- Site '"Cost' Analysis - Apples & Oranges

2006-05-10T13:36:00.000-04:00

Apples & Oranges and perhaps other fruit come to mind when we toss the salad for D150's site cost analysis --- Pondering the Potential at PJStar's website.

http://www.pjstar.com/news/ssection/district150/glenoak.shtml

Sites - Please note only the current site is being compared to the 'recommended' size of 15 acres.

1 - District 150 Central Office (Von Steuben) - 12 acres
2 - Adjacent to Glen Oak Primary School - 17 acres (Current site is approx. 3 acres)
3 - Adjacent to Glen Oak Park - 10 acres plus access to the park
4 - Adjacent to Morton Square Park - 5 acres plus access to the park
5 - Adjacent to Constitution Gardens - 1.7 acres plus access to park land

Estimated cost of acquisition (calculated per acre) / demolition costs

1 - Zero / Unknown.

2 - $3.5 - $5.5 million / $590,000 and $935,000 - approximately 14 acres to be acquired [$250,000 to $392,857 per acre].

3 - $1.6 million / $232,000 --- however, no mention that taxpayers are only purchasing 5 acres [$320,000 per acre] and the other 5 acres is to be potentially 'shared' with the Peoria Park District from Glen Oak Park.

4 - $1.2 million / $132,000 - approximately 5 acres [$240,000 per acre].

5 - $400,000 / $40,000 - approximately 1.7 acres [$235,294 per acre].

(All figures are estimates and actual costs would be subject to change)

Positives & Negatives - Range of reasons ---

Student Concentration ---- THIS IS THE QUESTION TO BE ASKED and ANSWERED!

1 - Site is outside the attendance area for Glen Oak and White students.

2 - No comment.

3 - No comment.

4 - Site is removed from the heaviest student concentration.

5 - Site is removed from the heaviest student concentration.

And your vote is .... , Site 2 (Current Glen Oak School) or Site 3 (Proposed Glen Oak Park Site) for the heaviest student concentration?

Let's just use a T-chart and compare all the APPLES and ORANGES for each site and about the whole process --- and the analysis reveals:

Taxpayers do not ....

(1) like the process which has been utilized by D150 and the PPD to 'announce' this done deal;

(2) like the idea of the PPD entering into any type of agreement with D150 to use any part of Glen Oak Park as the new site for the Glen Oak School;

(3) like the idea that D150 will use Health Life Safety Bonds, or State School Construction Grant Money (if it ever gets approved) or Public Building Funds if Senate Bill 2477 (SB2477) becomes law or any other combination of funding sources to fund schools for which the taxpayer has no say in the site selection et al;

(4) want a Birth to 8 school; ........

******************************

Taxpayers do want ...

(1) open government for the planning and collaboration of a healthy and vibrant Peoria --- schools, neighborhoods, et al;

(2) D150 to utilize the current Glen Oak Site;

(3) to have a clear accepted model for the future with a well designed plan of implementation;
http://www.civic-strategies.com/library/change.pdf (A Good, Simple Theory for Change)

(4) to decide by referendum the funding of any new school construction; ......

Other additions to the T-chart?

Dr. Comer --- Plans For Inside the "NEW" School

2006-05-08T08:13:00.000-04:00

Received an email from an interested, engaged, solution minded Peorian (aka taxpayer):

The Dr. Comer Method:

"The program is derived from the idea that when students feel supported and nurtured in school, their outlook, life skills and academic performance will improve. Since 1968 when the model was created by Dr. James Comer, a Yale University child psychiatrist, it has been utilized in more than 1150 schools nationwide. Approximately 300 schools are currently at different phases of implementing the model."

The local PBS program has a Chicago school for an example, more info here:http://www.pbs.org/makingschoolswork/sbs/csp/il.html

"Now attendance is at 95%, and approximately half the students are performing at or above grade level in reading and math, up from 12% in reading and 19% in math. The kids feel safe, and cared for, with much improved behavior and a warm climate at the school. Even parents have felt the impact. "Note: the kids were from poverty areas of Chicago.

The Comer method used as a solution involves concepts that unfortunately have not even been followed for the new school siting issue, so would D150 be interested in trying such an approach to really change the situation at any D150 school? Let's hope that the D150 Board would be willing to try such a method.

The Comer Process puts the responsibility for the schools on their principals, administrators, teachers and parents to come together to agree on an action plan for the school, with both social and academic components.

Teachers, principals and parents make decisions collaboratively, in the best interests of the students. The Comer Process guides schools to set up a network of teams to manage the school and to deal with various facets of the social and academic needs of the school.

A part of a series: "Making Schools Work"http://www.pbs.org/makingschoolswork/index.html

A collaborative, community, inclusive decision making process.

No money you say????? Perhaps the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, education section, would be able to be utilized for a grant... http://www.gatesfoundation.org/ForGrantSeekers/

Sounds like a viable solution to some of the challenges facing D150.

D150 - From There to Here - Community Engagement

2006-05-04T21:36:00.000-04:00

So, what did happen from there (10/05) to here (05/06)?

The Master Facility Plan - Final Recommendations (MFP) were published (10/05) and then approved by the D150 Board (11/05).

Also in the MFP, Community Forums and Civic Gatherings ---
11. Exact locations of the new schools (as well as possible high school boundary changes) should be further discussed by the committee at this time, with an eye to providing the community with more details about these.

How/Where Addressed in Report

See Recommendation "1.0" generally, and "3.2" and "3.3", specifically ---

"1.0" --- By Fiscal 2009, dependent on subsequent Board adoption of a funding source (see Recommendations 4.0 -4.4), fully implement the "full" planing, including, .....

"3.2 and 3.3" --- respectively the Manual and Woodruff Attendance area plans.

The min/max plan is not clear, too many variables and an undefined funding source. Most stakeholders are unclear about what the end product will actually be and how it will be financed.

Next time the public hears about the site is at a Special and Joint (D150 & PPD) March 29th meeting, at 10 am, held at Valeska Hinton Early Childhood Education Center, located at 800 W. 5th Avenue, 61605.

So, a special joint meeting, at 10 am not in the East Bluff, not at the Park District's administration building, nor at D150 administrative offices -- but on the other side of town?

What happened to a convenient time for the public to attend as well as walkability?

Approximately four (4) months and then Voila, the perfect site.

Upon reviewing 10 Principles of Authentic Community Engagement - KnowledgeWorks Foundation
http://www.kwfdn.org/resource_library/_resources/10principles.pdf

* Involve all stakeholders
* Solicit community input
* Involve community early in the process
* Offer opportunities for people to gather at convenient times and comfortable locations at a variety of convenient times
*Consists of more than one meeting and allows time in the process to make informed judgements
*Is driven by aspirations that communities hold for their future
* Has a learning component that helps build community awareness and knowledge about the subject at hand
* Allows for sustained involvement by community stakeholders
* Utilizes community partnerships and expertise
* Employs clear, open and consistent communication

Please take a minute to grade your experience in this process.

(PJStar (03 May 2006)) "If the parents and staff don't care (what we do), then maybe we have to listen to the very concerned voices of neighbors," Matheson said.

Our community needs to listen to all the community stakeholders, as well as the parents and staff.

Because someone does not say anything verbally does not necessarily indicate that the parents don't care as well as the fact that listening to the neighbors (who also have ideas, creativity, and pay taxes et al) is an activity to be possibly considered as beneath one's station in life. Please remember the fear of public speaking ranks up there with the fear of death.

Which leaves us with some of the same questions which remained unanswered:

(1) The MFP states that the Woodruff Attendance will see implementation from fiscal year 2007-2009. Why and how can D150 begin implementation in fiscal year 2006?

(2) When did D150, in open session, vote as a Board to purchase properties for the proposed Glen Oak Site?

(3) What happens to the proposed site if PPD and D150 do not enter into an intergovenmental agreement?

(4) What happens to any properties that D150 would purchase prior to and if no intergovernmental agreement is signed between PPD and D150?

(5) The statement on the last page of the MFP, Exhibit 7 - ISBE / CDB Program Statement, .... D150 is proposing K-8 schools.

Why does the Letter of Intent (attached to the PPD minutes of March 29, 2006 meeting) state --- ' ... the School District shall have the right, for the term of 99 years, to construct and maintain a Birth through Eighth Grade Community School building, at the School District's expense, on a joint Park-School site?

(6) In what public meeting has there been discussion about the change from K-8 to B-8?
******************************************
So, does anyone have any answers?

D150 - New Information, Citizens & Civic Engagement

2006-05-03T23:02:00.000-04:00

D150 Board Members and Administrators wanted new information and a lot of people to attend the public forum. Citizens delivered on both counts using best practices!

New Information --- Community Schools are located within the neighorhood to be served and civic engagement process information:

Schools as Centers of Communities - A Citizen's Guide For Planning - National Clearinghouse for Education Facilities (NCEF)

http://www.edfacilities.org/pubs/scc_Cover_page_Table_of_Contents.pdf

Historic Neighborhood Schools Deliver 21st Century Educations (NCEF)http://www.edfacilities.org/pubs/historic.pdf

Please take the time to click on the NCEF index link --- best practices in the 21st century for schools with the following categories ---Preplanning, Planning, Design, School Spaces, School Grounds, Case Studies, Safe Schools, Healthy Schools, High Performance Schools, Technology, Materials and Equipment, School Construction, Financing, Buliding & Operating Costs, Maintenance and Operations with several indepth articles in each category and subcategory.

http://www.edfacilities.org/rl/index.cfm

Historic Schools: Renovation vs. Replacement & The Role of a Feasbility Study - National Trust for Historic Preservation (NTHP)

http://www.nationaltrust.org/issues/schools/downloads/school_feasibility_study.pdf

Why Johnny Can't Walk to School (NTHP)

http://www.nationaltrust.org/issues/downloads/schools_why_johnny.pdf

10 Principles of Authentic Community Engagement - KnowledgeWorks Foundation

http://www.kwfdn.org/resource_library/_resources/10principles.pdf

http://www.kwfdn.org/schools_communities/schools_centers/community_engagement/

Communities are more likely to financially support improvements that involve them .... and so on .....

Standards of Excellence in Civic Engagement - The Harvard Institute

http://theharwoodinstitute.org/file_uploads/Standards_of_Excellence_1441.pdf

And 250 -275 citizens attended the public forum and presented all this information and alternatives to the proposed site in a respectful manner. Solution minded citizens who have Grand Canyon-sized hearts.

Today's PJ Star (o3 May 2006), Time to table school plan? has a couple of quotes ---

"No one's trying to force something on a neighborhood that doesn't want it. They'll say 'We do want it, but we want it with all our qualifiers and all our stipulations,' but the problem with that is that it may not fit in with the plan of our district," Morris said Tuesday, the day after about 30 people voiced opposition to a proposed school site at Glen Oak Park.

"It may not fit in with the plan of our district" --- whatever does that mean? Our district is actually 'owned' and financed by the property owners of the district (whether they live in the district and/or have children in D150 schools) and all stakeholders would like to involved in the process.

Remember the tea party in Boston Harbor?

'Our district' involves all stakeholders working together from the onset and throughout the entire process to opening day and beyond to develop a 'best practices' plan for 'our district' and thereby the City of Peoria and for this region and this the state of Illinois and for the U.S.A.

Board member Mary Spangler also mentioned this possibility, saying that it may be better to hold off on a school in the Woodruff area if the district can't find a solution that pleases the public and is financially and educationally sound.

"We're just talking about more time to get everyone on board and make it a win-win situation for everyone," Spangler said.

That's the spirit --- let's get everyone on board this train --- whether it is in the Woodruff area or elsewhere within the district, the citizens are asking to be involved, to be a part of the Peoria's destiny.

No matter the school site, the information presented at the public forum is applicable to both sites and civic engagement. Hats off for a job well done.

D150 Public Forum & Written Comments until 5/8/06

2006-05-02T22:49:00.000-04:00

WOW! 'Democracy in action' was the name of the tune at D150's first public forum. Martha Ross had already noted that she would be out of town because of previous long-term plans (she informed the public on 24 April 2006 (D150 School Board Meeting)). Thumbs up for great communication!

D150 Board Members as well as Superintendent Ken Hinton and Treasurer/Comptroller Guy Cahill received a NO support vote of the proposed Glen Oak School site by each and every speaker (as well as various comments heard from other audience members.) Previously mentioned concerns were all noted, as well a few here and more to follow:

*A representative from the ACLU shared, that the ACLU is deeply interested in helping the community and is encouraged by the forum and strongly suggests that D150 and the public continuing talking until both sides feel that the issue has been resolved.

*At least two business owners requested that compensenation for the potential relocation be addressed.

* One mother shared that she had removed her daughter from D150 due to the lack of appropriate behavior of the other students at her daughter's school.

* The Master Facility Plan calls for implementation of the Woodruff Attendance Area to being in fiscal years 2007-2009. Fiscal year 2007 begins July 1, 2006. By what legal authority can D150 begin implementation before that date? (Can D150 legally enter into any land contract at this point? Has the D150 Board ever voted in a public meeting to enter into land contracts for this project?)

*Handouts to improve the community input process and renovation of older schools for 21st century educations were submitted for consideration (Stay tuned).

Members of the Peoria Park District (PPD) were also present, President Tim Cassidy, Jim Cummings and Jackie Petty. They received an earful or two or more regarding the unacceptable use of park land for any other purpose than being a park, including the discontent of the removal of tennis courts, ball diamonds et al for the zoo expansion. Question was asked: As there is no signed and executed intergovernmental between the D150 and PPD now, what happens if PPD does not 'share' the five acres of Glen Oak Park, what is the impact on the proposed location if D150 only has their five acres?

The citizens of the East Bluff et al and Councilman Bob Manning asked for the new school to utilize the current site in some reconfigured manner with some additional land acquisition to assist in the revitalization of the East Bluff.

All information received will be reviewed by the D150 Board Members and 'synthesized' by Superintendent Hinton and given to the board for their next decision.

Written comments can be sent and will be received through Monday, May 8th --- via email: facilities@psd150.org or via snail mail to Peoria School District 150, 3202 N. Wisconsin Avenue, Peoria, IL 61603.

D150 School Siting Decisions

2006-05-01T11:53:00.000-04:00

Since March 29th's announcement of the proposed Glen Oak School site as a collaboration of Peoria School District 150 (D150) and Peoria Park District (PPD), our community has expressed concern, even outrage in some cases that a portion of Glen Oak Park would be 'shared' (if and an intergovernmental agreement is signed by D150 and PPD) for a new school site.

Many reasons have been communicated that this proposed site is not the correct site ----

* Lack of community/stakeholder input on the specific site selection --- Glen Oak Park or Von Stueben site on 11/21/05 D150 adoption with the recommendation in the Master Facilities Plan to the March 29th announcement by the D150 & PPD that the Glen Oak Park site was the final decision. How did we get to this point?

* Not a central location of the neighborhood, not a community school for East Bluff neighborhoods. How does the proposed site at the eastern edge of the East Bluff add to the 'community' value of a school that is not centrally located in the neighborhood that it is supposed to serve?

* Current Glen Oak site would work with the model as promoted by the National Trust for Historic Preservation(this report) --- review Public Planning and Community Participation.

* Lack of walkability for the students (K-8) from the western edge of the East Bluff to this proposed location.

* Lack of walkability for the families and seniors to be served at the proposed site.

* Potential additional costs for bus transportion of students. How will higher fuel bills cut down on D150's fuel bills with the announcement that gas prices should continue to rise for up to three years?

* Not a prudent or community accepted idea for the PPD to share any more land from Glen Oak Park (or any PPD park land) with D150, suggested violations of the Open Meetings Act (OMA).

* Traffic concerns at the Corner of Prospect and Frye of young (K-8) students having to negotiate a busy intersection to arrive or depart from the proposed campus.

* Concerns about a new school being located across the street from a convenience store selling alcohol

Additional concerns?