What does the upcoming at-large council race have in common with slasher movies?
Answer: A monster that simply simply refuses to stay dead:
At the Election Commission door before the 8 a. m. opening today: Dan Irving, incumbent George Jacob (who sent a representative), Patti Polk, Chuck Schierer, Ryan Spain, and Gale Thetford.
That’s right. Gale Thetford. She got her ass handed to her in a big way by Bob Manning, who defeated Thetford 64-36 percent, or 2,738 to 1,528 votes. That’s a 1,310 victory margin. You think she would take the hint. She is sorta like the movie monster that won’t die. They burned Michael Meyers to a crisp in Halloween II, but he was back for more.
What is her platform going to be? That because she doesn’t return constituent phone calls, it leaves her with more time to ponder solutions to the city’s problems? That by eagerly embracing eminent domain on the behalf of millionaire developers, the city can do away with all those pesky urban problems? Perhaps she’ll endorse doubling or even tripling the “garbage tax” or closing another fire station or two.
All that’s missing now is Marcella Teplitz in the race. If the monsters from the Alien and Predator movies can do a movie together …
And there is no doubt in my mind that the nameless gnomes of the Journal Star’s award winning (snicker) editorial board are already planning their smear campaign against Thetford’s opponents.
As the city’s failed response to the snow storm demonstrated clearly, the city doesn’t need “progressives” like Gale Thetford on the council. The city needs more people like Bob Manning and Barbara Van Auken, who did everything they could during budget negotiations to do away with the both the garbage fee and re-open station 11.
C.J. is really looking forward to voting against her for the second time. I may have to move back to Peoria simply for the pleasure of voting against her once.
Related Amazon Ad:
Billy Dennis is a former reporter and editor at small daily and weekly newspapers in Illinois and Missouri. He comments on media, news and politics. He also owns and operates 
Next thing you know the Ghost of Ransburg past will be visiting.(shudder, shudder)
What was the “eagerly embracing eminent domain on the behalf of millionaire developers” issue?
That would be Mid-Town Plaza. That project was to clean out the East Bluff of slums and get rid of the riff-raff. The riff-raff moved a block or two to the east.
When the council finally approved the project, Thetford walked out of the council chambers and gave David Joseph a huge hug.
Joseph told me himself he needed eminent domain to seize the homes because it’s just too hard to do a big project like this having to actually deal with the homeowners on a one on one basis.
I know the people who lost their homes. I know one woman — I went to school with her daughter — who ended up forced to take less money for her home than she needed to buy a decent home. She living in a small house in north Peoria.
The irony is that her home stood on what is now an empty lot. Joseph has not been able to convince anyone to build there.
David Joseph is a robber baron.
Gale Thetford is his … well, I’m enough of a gentleman to not finish that sentence.
i can not believe the water you carry for manning and van auken. you know what they have in common with thetford? they have done ABSOLUTRELY F***ING NOTHING to restore basic city services. we still are down a fire engine and still paying six bucks a month for garbage. and we are still hadning out money for businesses.
MANNING AND VAN AUKEN VOTED FOR TWO BUDGETS THAT KEEP THIS SYSTEM IN PLACE!!!!!!!!!
i have not, and will not vote for gale thetford. but to try to prop up van auken and manning as anything other than more status quo is just plain worng.
i’m looking forward to learning more aobut the candidates this spring, to see if any of them have the balls to do what is right, and get us more firefighters, more cops, more snow plows, and less handouts to big business.
Apparently, BSS can’t manage their own domain, eh Bill?
I would give Van Auken ??? for performance, she talks a good line, but for action I am still waiting to see. Given time I remain hopefull! As for Bob Manning he has clearly jumped into the fray with both fist swinging. If we could only figure out how to get a few more Bob Manning types to fill the at large seats.
As for Thetford she lost for a reason.
what has manning actually done? yes he talksa g ood game, and seems to be pushing the right things. but what has he done? i want results, not more speeches and first shaking.
Basic City Services: Is BSS.com really your site?
Bill sez: “That would be Mid-Town Plaza.”
I sez: I see. I was still livng in the neighborhood at the time and remember a bit of the rukus. We had just got approval for the Kroger expansion on Wisconsin – which most people supported.
The mid-town plaza deal seemed a bit less popular. It seemed odd that we were advocating for yet another grocery store in the E.B. I was made aware, however, that one of the most vocal opponents kept fighing it, even though she had already sold out to the developer…which I always thought was wierd.
As for Thetford, I remember her very well. I can recall her attempt to hijack our neighborhood meeting during the early Kroger discussions.
Bill-
Wasn’t surprised to see your response to the Thetford filing but the way you put the spin in FOR Manning and Van Auken was amazing! But I do recall at least one of them being on your list of supporters. I agree with some of the other commenters that neither has done much of what they promised to do when elected. However, if reviewing what they have actually accomplished, I give Manning a passing grade and VanAuken – unfortunately, a failing grade.
You say: “Bob Manning and Barbara Van Auken, who did everything they could during budget negotiations to do away with the both the garbage fee and re-open station 11.” What did they do besides talk about it? They both have had two opportunties to make a difference during budget sessions. The first year, they got a pass because “they were new”….this year, another pass, but I’m not sure the rationale. The earlier start was supposed to generate discussion and resolution of some issues – neither occurred.
I think it’s great that Thetford is running again. Whether she can win or not remains to be seen, but it’s nice that we’ll at least have some choices in the spring election. It’s not easy to vote for something that isn’t supported by your constituents but sometimes that’s what has to occur. At least Thetford had the balls to do it because in many ways it was the best for the City as a whole.
Mouse: The Kroger expansion was paid for by Kroger. No eminent domain involved at all.
The Mid-Town Plaza was done with the city acting as the muscle for robber-baron David Joseph.
Peo Proud: My friendship and suppose for council members Van Auken and Manning is a matter of record. The first budget they passed came a few months after their election. The second budget … well, as someone attended a few of these sessions, you should have seen the oppostion to any discussion of changing the taxing structure from city staff. There just aren’t enough votes on the council yet to make real change. There needs to be more essential services first people on the council, not less.
And the idea that Thetford would be great for the council because the council is insufficiently supportive of “essential services first” is well, both laughable and vomit inducing.
The Kroger expansion was supported by most of the neighbors. There was an older German lady who really was against it because of the trash issue and the litter associated with the patrons. (She wasn’t wrong about that). There was also a Dentist that asked, begged, and beseached the city council not to allow it because his patients would have to drive an extra block.
Kroger came down to the fact that they wanted to expand the current store and not do whatthey had been doing, which is build new altogether and leave the old place vacant. The shame of it was that CVS couldn’t see the writing on the wall and sell out when they had a chance – they eventually closed, anyway.
The main issue was traffice – Wisconsin and McClure is not a fun corner.
My issue was that Thetford came in to our neighborhood meeting, where we were generally supportive of Kroger, and tried to turn it into HER meeting.
Mouse: I heard this again and again back in 2005 — the “progressives” attitude was they they knew best and anyone who didn’t think so just wasn’t sufficiently appreciative of their efforts on behalf of the masses.
robber baron-your right- all ‘em
Billy sez: “I heard this again and again back in 2005 — the “progressives†attitude was they they knew best and anyone who didn’t think so just wasn’t sufficiently appreciative of their efforts on behalf of the masses.”
This is exactly why I am disappointed in Van Auken and Manning and for that matter Gulley. They seem to think that “they” know better, never mind that they promised to remove the garbage fee and that they voted for the budget. They shouldn’t have voted for the budget based on the garbage fee being still in place, no staff in Station 11 and understaffed police. The budget may still have well passed anyway but at least they could have stood their ground. They have done nothing and I hope they get voted out.
Bill, I have to say I think you overstated your case with the “did all they could” line regarding Van Auken and Manning. I partially agree with Emtronics — they should have voted against this budget on principle if they were unable to garner the votes to axe the garbage fee and fully staff FS11.
Nevertheless, they are better than their predecessors, and there are a lot of policy things with which I agree with them. New Urbanism, TIFs, Glen Oak School siting, etc. You can’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. No representative is going to do everything exactly like you would do it. Overall, I feel they still represent me well.
I think the mistake here is assuming that a vote on the budget can be described as primarily a vote on whether or not the city should or should not have a garbage fee or should or should not keep fire station 11 closed.
A budget is just a frame work. It tells what the city administration should spend money on in the absence of any other vote to the contrary.
No 2 of the 11 council members have the exact same list of priorities. Yet the council MUST approve a budget. The end result is that there MUST be compromise.
Some of the proposals that would let the city do away with the hated garbage tax without sacrificing police officers simply could NOT be tried without changes in state law. The city administration — at Van Auken’s direction, I remind you — will begin the process of seeking those changes from out area legislators.
All they will be seeking is another way to tax us. In fact, they will also seek to level the field a bit by spreading the new tax to include business and non profits. I doubt that will fly. When I left the council meeting early last week, I was met in the foyer by a council person and when I asked whyn we still had the garbage fee, I was told that I simply didn’t understand the many facets of city finances. In other words…”We know what’s best.” True, I don’t understand all the things in that budget but what I do understand is that we still have an unfair garbage fee.
I say throw em out with the bath water!
Bill says:
“The second budget … well, as someone attended a few of these sessions, you should have seen the oppostion to any discussion of changing the taxing structure from city staff. There just aren’t enough votes on the council yet to make real change. ”
I thought the role of the City Councilmember was to MAKE policy not make sure that staff was happy?!?!? Lame reason not to make a change.
How many “essential services” members does it take for a majority? Last time I counted, 6 out of eleven was a majority. Based upon their own proclamations, I would think that the following qualified as essential services:
1) Gary Sandberg
2) Bill Spears
3) Jim Ardis
4) Pat Nichting (though he waffles back and forth)
5) Chuck Grayeb
6) Barbara Van Auken
7) Bob Manning
Sure seems like the potential for a majority there. Perhaps some of them found (and came to realize) that the actions taken by the prior council were done under very tough circumstances. Over 100 employees laid off, several restrictions on programs, etc. Their vote for the budget that was implemented was as much a realization that severe action needed to be taken rather than a gleeful vote to increase fees. Hell, even Gary Sandberg was the proponent of increasing the property tax (or at least discussing that option) to eliminate the garbabe fee.
I just don’t buy the excuses for why things didn’t happen. Not only did the Council start budget discussions in APRIL of this year, they essentially made no changes to the budgt presented to them. This either says staff did an excellent job in developing the budget, or the Council wasn’t willing to make the difficult decisions to implement their campaign promises.
Here here Peo Proud. Well said.