FeedWill new city council look like the old city council? If so, why bother?
February 28, 2007 in Local
C.J. doesn’t think much of anything has changed after Tuesday’s at-large elections:
If the top five vote-getters end up being the five at-large council members in the general election, it’s not really going to change the makeup of the council. Spain is pretty much an even swap for John Morris. There is no one quite like Chuck Grayeb, but voting-wise, I’ll bet Jim Montelongo will be closer to him than, say, Sandberg.Good news: Gale Thetford finished in sixth, about 1200 votes behind the fifth-place finisher. Let’s hope that holds up. Bad news: Dan Irving didn’t have a stronger showing and, while anything is possible, it’s realistically not likely that he’ll be able to make up the 6% difference to overtake the three candidates in front of him.
My two cents: I met Gale Thetford for the first time two weeks ago when we shared an elevator at City Hall. She seems like a nice lady. She didn’t seem to like my idea to hold council meetings at locations other than city hall, such as at high school gymnasiums, where there might be more parking and adequate seating for the audience.
If there’s one thing I’ve learned doing this blog, especially during the past two years, is how utterly worthless it is to ascribe evil motives* to politicians who simply come to the table with different ideas about what government should be about. I’ve learned to like a lot of the people with whom I disagree on issues. I consider George Jacob a friend. But on votes that matter, he’s usually voting the opposite of what I wish. I honestly find John Morris to be an amicable chap. But he is almost always WRONG on the floor of the council. And I like Chuck, although we’ve spoken very little. My beef with him is that he seems to think his constituents are city employees and the commissions on which he serves as liaison to the council. Actually, the voters are Chuck’s constituents, not city employees or the Peoria Civic Center Commission.
But I digress.
I am taking no particular joy in the fact that Gale Thetford finished a substantial 1,200 votes — four percentage point — out of the the top five. But from the standpoint of replacing so-called progressives with those who favor essential services first, I’m glad that her chances for returning to the council do not look very good. I just can’t forget the image of her giving millionaire developer David Joseph a warm hug right after the council start the Mid Town Plaza Project, which resulted in little old ladies literally being forced from their homes for pennies on the dollar to make room for a failed shopping center.
But I absolutely loathe the idea, presented by C.J., that it looks like the at-large election just might be a wash, with the end result being the same ratio of progressives to essential-services-firsters.
This city has got to get out of the rut that it’s in. We need a serious infusion of essential services first kinda thinking. We’ve got to stop chasing good money after bad trying to create this mythical “critical mass” at which all the spending on economic development projects pays off and all the young professionals buy condos on the riverfront and a dozen startups flock to Ren Park. It just isn’t going to happen because no government has ever taxed its citizens out of poverty.
So what am I going to do about it? Well, it’s not set in stone that these top five vote getters will be the winners. It’s a good month and a half, and this blogger will be doing as much as possible to discern which voters back essential services over make-work economic development spending, and spreading the word. I punked out on endorsements in the primaries. I won’t next time.
UPDATE: The Journal Star’s article on the results is out:
“It would be good if the turnout was much better. It’s sad to see elections like this. People are just so down; they’re disconnected from local government,” Sandberg said afterward.
Still, the number two candidate was Ryan Spain, a 24-year-old unknown running for his first public office. He got 4,575 votes, or 14 percent.
“I’m just thrilled. Finishing number two for a new candidate, a young candidate, is just great,” said Spain, a public policy manager for The Heartland Partnership. “We were out knocking on doors. I’m sure we knocked on more doors than anyone else.”
Feh. Spain’s campaign was too well financed, judging from the size and number of Ryan Spain signs I saw out there, for him to claim his good showing JUST due to hard work. Sandberg doesn’t have to spend money because he’s a special case.
And Sandberg is right: There are going to be huge, dramatic shifts come April. And my advice to Sandberg is this: If he wants to stop being on the losing side of votes, he ought to pick which of the remaining nine candidates is the best fit with the essential services first philosophy and make an endorsement.
Yes, I still ascribe evil motives to David Ransburg. The man is a proven liar who has no business serving in government at any level.
February 28th, 2007 at 7:43 am
I just think it’s wonderful news that we have an Aaron Schock clone, ready to step into Aaron’s spot when Aaron surplants Uncle Ray. It’s so comforting to know that everything is already in place, and nothing can be done to stop it, because…. only a fraction of the registered voters even bother to show up to vote.
February 28th, 2007 at 7:59 am
“wh bother”?
February 28th, 2007 at 8:15 am
wht’s wrong with that, Vonster?
February 28th, 2007 at 8:45 am
Billy,
I think that if the top five vote getters are eventually elected as the at large councilmembers, Peoria will have a good mix of individuals representing them. There is a good mix of backgrounds, beliefs, and ideas within these five and they would serve us well.
I’m not sure any candidate can be “basic services” enough for you without negatively impacting the future of Peoria. It takes a mix of “good service” and “planning for the future” in order for Peoria to grow - truly grow - not the fake inflated numbers we get from the special censuses.
We need candidates and council members that will tackle the tough issues and make the tough decisions even when they are not politically popular decisions.
February 28th, 2007 at 8:53 am
February 28th, 2007 at 8:55 am
“I am taking no particular joy in the fact that Gale Thetford finished a substantial 1,200 votes — four percentage point — out of the the top five.”
Me neither. I will, however, be joyful if she finishes a substantial number of votes out of the top five in the general election.
Seriously, I don’t know her personally, so for all I know she may be a wonderful person — but, I saw what she did on the council as the third district representative, and that’s not the kind of candidate we want on the council again. Every day, as I pass MidTown Plaza on my way to and from work, I’m reminded of why she shouldn’t be reelected.
February 28th, 2007 at 9:12 am
As my neighbors and I were discussing last night and this morning, it is a shame that money decided the election. If Ryan Spain had not been Ray Lahood’s intern and just been some 24 year old living with Mom and Dad we all would be saying Ryan who? There were better candidates that did not have the financial backing of the Peoria elite who would have made a difference in Peoria. People think cash equals character and it definately does not.
I also feel there should be a study done so we can find the coralation between Peoria citizens who smoke crack and citizens who voted for Gale Thetford. I bet the numbers would be revealing!
For all the candidates that had to work for every contribution and did not do as well as expected, I appreciate your efforts. Hopefully someday character and ideals will count for something in this city.
February 28th, 2007 at 9:14 am
Prego: rest easy, neither of your predictions will come about; Rays’ job will not be vacant for some time, and by then Aaron and Ryan will be in the past.
February 28th, 2007 at 9:48 am
Money decided this election? How much did Gary Sandburg spend? Could it possibly be a benefit that Ryan Spain worked for Cong. LaHood? Would you be happier if he had interned for Cong. Evan’s? Isn’t that kind of experience valuable and relevant, likewise with George Jacob’s business experience, et al? What “character and ideals” does a 24-yr-old living at home bring to elected office? What wins races (and thus makes a better elected official) is a meaningful resume, integrity and character, hard-work, thoughtful ideas, and intimate face time with constituents…not signs, not two-color mailers, not commercials, not money.
Now, I’m not so naive to think money doesn’t matter. It makes things considerably easier. But blaming the loss of your candidates on lack of funding is a tired cop out.
February 28th, 2007 at 9:51 am
It’s my understanding that Ryan doesn’t live at home, but is out on his own, although he has a roommate.
Come to think of it, I lived in the same in house as my parents until several years aog, and I also know have a roommate.
February 28th, 2007 at 9:58 am
Roman II, you know that Uncle Ray will hang it up, at the latest, 10 years from now. Ten years goes by like a flash, honest engine (my politically correct way of dealing with that saying)… Aaron will, without a DOUBT, step right into that job, no question about it. Aaron is unbeatable where he is at now, and he will be unbeatable in Uncle Ray’s spot. Ryan Spain got about 2 times the votes I would have expected, so it’s clear that he has enamored the Politically Busy in Peoria. Plus, he’s like, 11 years old, so he will be ready to step right into Aaron’s spot. It’s a sure thing. Peoria seems to love baby faced, cutesy pie politicians.
I know that doesn’t apply to Uncle Ray… but, Peoria also seems to love guys who look like they would love to break your knuckles with a claw hammer.
February 28th, 2007 at 10:04 am
I am not blaming not blaming my candidates primary placement on lack of funding. There were excellent messages that should have been heard by more people. That is where lack of funding comes in.
I am not anti Ray Lahood, I am against the fact that Ryan Spain is a complete and total tool.
February 28th, 2007 at 11:26 am
Amazing that so many people who think they speak for the people, can’t understand when “the people” choose the candidates that they like best. While there’s a little dichotomy in the choices made, Peorians appear to like what the top vote getters are offerring and they love to have one, but apparrently not more than that, candidate of the likes of Sandberg.
Sandberg cashes in, no pun intended, on his personality, name recognition and his unique style of approaching council business. All benefits, to some extent, to have on the Council. But Peorians also like candidates that are more mainstream — as evidenced by their other four choices for top vote getters.
Many of the other four top finishers spent considerable money on their campaigns and the fact that two newcomers cracked into that level says alot about their efforts and their message.
February 28th, 2007 at 11:46 am
Come on, if you’re going to make a statement like that at least make it based on some issues. Is it that you think he’s too young to understand how the world works or some crap like that, or is that you just don’t like a young person running for office. Why is it when a 20-something runs for office he/she is an oppurtunist waiting for the next big thing but when its a 40 year old they’re just doing their part for the community? Seems like some peeople are frustrated they weren’t socially-minded enough to try to make a difference when they were young and want to rip on someone who is trying to make a difference at a young age.
February 28th, 2007 at 11:50 am
So maybe you should have put yourself out there and run for office — you already have all the answers and could be an additional “essential services” first candidate. Oh, that’s right, you don’t live in Peoria. ooops.
February 28th, 2007 at 12:34 pm
a few points in response:
First, Dan Irving and Charles Schierer spent more money on signs than all but Jacob and Spain. It didn’t get them far. So it’s not fair to say all the winners were big money while those who finished way behind were not. This is nothing against Irving and Schierer, I’m just stating the facts. Actually I think Turner, in addition to Sandberg, didn’t spend anything at all. Jacob has kind of gone overboard with his macho big expensive signs EVERYWHERE, but Spain didn’t really run an expensive big money campaign. I think I received one mailer from him and he had a fair number of signs out. That’s not big money.
Second, Ryan Spain is a worthy and promising young Republican and a second Aaron Schock, but he won’t be able to succeed Aaron in that seat becuase he lives in the Leitch district and state law says you have to live in a state house district a full two years before you run for that seat, except in the first election after redistricting. Ryan lives on the north side of Peoria, not even close to the 92nd. He could however join the crowd of those who want to succeed Leitch when he retires.
Schock surely did blaze a nice trail for Spain tho. Spain really needs (especially once elected) to demonstrate that he makes decisions on his own and is not a tool of his employer or the Mayor or LaHood or any powers that be. He can do that by using his intelligence instead of being subtley led into group think and being part of the “club.”
As for the comment: Schock and Spain “will be in the past”???? by the time uncle Ray retires. Hey Roman II, are you expecting Schock and Spain to be old and dead by then or what? Sounds personal to me. You really know what is in Ray’s mind?
I had my favorites in the election but overall it was a good group of earnest candidates and they all brought something to the table. I think barring some scandal, the top 5 will end up the top 5. Tho Thetford does have a slim chance of breaking in. Polk’s worst nightmare was Cassel-Fitzgerald not being eliminated. Schierer and Irving seem to draw from the same pool.
More people should follow the candidates and vote but it’s not bad that people who don’t take the time to follow what the candidates stand for don’t vote. We need a higher quantity of informed voters, not voters who just vote and cast random selections.
February 28th, 2007 at 1:22 pm
I wouldn’t be relieved regarding Thetford. It is well within the realm of possibilty that she could pick up enough votes from candidates that did not make the cut. It wouldn’t take many votes to push her into the top five. The face that launched a thousand taxes still has a chance. God Help Us, PLEASE!
February 28th, 2007 at 1:30 pm
Be nice, Polly. Ms. Thetford is NOT an unattractive woman.
February 28th, 2007 at 1:48 pm
I am not sure what the beef is with Schock. He does his job and does it well. Don’t we want that from officials? Ryan has connections and is willing to work hard, Folks, you need more than just the city’s tax dollars to get things accomplished. You know this if ever have to get things done in your neighborhood and don’t live out north.
I am dissapointed by Schierer’s standing. He also has a hard work ethic, good things to say, experience in a city council and budgetary experience. We need these skills on the council. I was impressed because he has walked all over the city…All five districts. Some candidates only walked in one. This is distrubing that if elected the other four will be ignored. Spain and Jacob have been throughout the city. Most I simply don’t know where they walked. These are at large seats. They should be out seeking input city wide. Start speaking in depth with all these candidates, rumor and speculation (we’ll let’s just call it gossip) is not helpful.
With the lower voter turnout, who knows what the picture is going to be in April. More will come out due to the school district and the park board elections Despite any leads no one’s seat is safe, it’s going to be important for everyone to become better educated and attend forums. Or just do what I do, call em up and ask questions, meet for lunch. If you don’t get responses now, you’re not going to when they are elected. It would be really intersting to break down the voting stats to one vote person and see where the true numbers fall. I am guessing it would be a slightly different horserace. The money issue is distrubing. If the candidate has money and has been working hard and meeting contintuents and out discussing needs then it’s not a factor. If the candidate spends much and does little watch out, doing little now, will be less later.
February 28th, 2007 at 1:48 pm
I don’t think Polly was calling her unattractive. I think she was making a statement about Thetford’s stance on
taxesuser fees.February 28th, 2007 at 1:52 pm
“It would be really intersting to break down the voting stats to one vote person and see where the true numbers fall.”
Yes, it would.
“I am guessing it would be a slightly different horserace.”
I don’t think so. I would predict that it would be more or less the same outcome. Spain and Jacob might switch places in the lineup because their vote count was so close, but overall I would be surprised if there was a candidate who was really propped up by bullet voting.
February 28th, 2007 at 1:54 pm
Let’s remember that many others also voted for these fees and that if they weren’t implemented an additional $2 Million in budget cuts would have had to be implemented. So instead of hearing about ST. 11 we might also have been hearing about another fire station in addition and the loss of police officers to boot.
No one voted for the fees because they liked them, but rather it was the best of the worst alternatives. I still note that despite the passage of two years, the “NEW” City Council still has not found a better alternative than the one that was implemented (or if they have, they haven’t made the change yet!).
February 28th, 2007 at 1:56 pm
Is the raw data about the number of bullet votes cast available to the general public?
February 28th, 2007 at 2:00 pm
I am not against young people running for office. I was a supporter of Aaron Schock. I have seen him pull things out of the air that were other candidates ideas and try to use them for his advantage. Don Cummings had the horrible gun buy back idea and a bit later Ryan paraded it out to see what it could get him. That is what makes him a complete and total tool.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:01 pm
I was a bit disappointed by last night’s results as well. I cast all 5 for Schierer thinking he had the most experience of the newcomers and the most realistic view on budgetary constraints. This Spain kid might turn out to be a fine councilman, but it sure looks like a young opportunist that should be running for president of the College Republicans, not City Council. I thought I had all the answers at age 24 too, but then you grow up and realize the world is a little more complex. Economic growth alone won’t solve all of the city’s ills, it’s not a black and white issue.
I’m looking forward to the next couple of months. I hope the candidate debates are well publicized and well attended so we have more to go on than just yard signs and the Journal Star.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:10 pm
Also, is the Heartland Partnership comprised exclusively of private enterprises/interests? If there is any public funding, Spain would appear to have a major conflict of interest. Even if it’s all private, he’ll never vote against anything that benefits the Heartland companies.
Does anyone else have insight into this potential issue?
February 28th, 2007 at 2:14 pm
Yes, once the votes are certified and an audit is done and all that. Bradley is going to be analyzing the votes again this election.
February 28th, 2007 at 2:16 pm
If there’s a conflict of interest on a particular vote, he’d just have to abstain. Jacob does it all the time.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:33 pm
One issue, wow thats certainly justification for labeling someone a tool.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:44 pm
I only gave one example. He consistancely changes message depending on who is sitting in front of him. But then again I guess that makes him a politician.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:52 pm
I agree with Mr Wilkinson, Schock is doing his job and if he decides to move up, so be it. What I don’t agree with is the person who called Ryan a tool. Everyone is so damned sure Spain is out for himself, another LaHood or Schock. I wonder how many here voted or even could vote because they didn’t live in Peoria but they comment anyway. The election is in April, get out and get to know these guys. I know Spain, he lives with my son, they share a house and no they aren’t gay. (felt that had to be said in this day and age) Spain is truly concerned about Peoria’s future because he wants to make Peoria his home, as it has been all his life, and he wants his future career here to raise a family, The city council is not a job one can live on. It is an added responsibilty that hard working concerned citizens take upon themselves to serve. Some abuse this and we get rid of them. (read Thetford, Ransburg) Get out, go to the public forums and meet these people. Ask them the tough questions, weigh their answers and opinions. Then decide and vote. 10% turnout is just plain shitty. Ryan Spain is no Schock and he is not in LaHood’s pocket. After the last dozen or so years with what we have had on the council and the crap and fees, which if the city hadn’t gave the baseball field $3 million, maybe we wouldn’t need a garbage fee, maybe this group of candidates can make some changes. I for one am willing to give Ryan that chance and I really beleive I won’t be disappointed.
February 28th, 2007 at 3:59 pm
To remind everyone, Thetford never return calls in her own district, can you imagine what she would do as at large, please, please do not cast your votes for her. She would not be an asset to Peoria, unless she moves out of town. That would be a very good thing.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:06 pm
Well said Emtronics. Each individual should be judged based upon their own strengths and skill-sets and not based upon those that people attribute to them based upon who they have associated with in the past.
I think he’s shown that he’s not only a formidable candidate but one of substance that will make a good addition to our City Council. I love how many discount him based upon his age. But I think that we need MORE diversity (of all types) on the council and not just the same old 40 to 60 age group. In my mind, it’s a plus.
He’s definately one of the few “new faces” that ran that I feel has the potential to make a significant impact on the group. Here’s to him keeping his strong showing in April.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:08 pm
It is your right to vote. You have no reason not to. As an Election Judge it was embarassing and rather boring working on Tuesday as only 5% of voters came in. To put that in perspective, there were 5 judges present from 5am to 7:15pm. Polls opened at 6:00am and we had approximately 1.75 people voting per hour. I registered to vote when I turned 18 and I have never missed an election of any kind. I do have a right to complain or praise the leadership of my city, state and country. Those that don’t vote, do not have that right.
February 28th, 2007 at 4:39 pm
Ah Hula…**deep sigh**
It takes a person of great integrity, class and maturity in the professional political world to call someone a “tool.” **Insert sarcastic laugh here**
It all sounds like “sour grapes” to me my friends. Hula, if you are truly formulating your opinion on issues, then all the power to you, but my sophomores use that word. And in the professional world, it is TRULY a sophomoric term and portrays a horrible attitude. So, in short, the validity of your comments should be deemed irrelevant to this conversation and shouldn’t clutter the public forums.
Just an opinion from an educated person who will probably NOW and for ALL eternity, in the eyes of Hula, be deemed the most honorable title of “tool!”
Jazzbass
February 28th, 2007 at 5:06 pm
C.J. got my drift. Thetford is unattractive because of her acts/votes not her genetic make up, per se. However, I am a bit surprised that a devoted Scarlet or Drew fan would come to her defense in this arena. Thetford not only voted for the garbage fee, cutting station 11 (and lets not forget, she was the turncoat/traitor vote on Station 11) she also voted for fluff at the same time, such as funding for PACE and the muni band.
February 28th, 2007 at 8:02 pm
If I remember my Aesop’s tales correctly “sour grapes” is when you don’t get what you want but you want everyone to think you don’t care. All the candidates I supported made it through the primary with the exception of one.
So different opinions “clutter the public forums”? Well for the sake of Peoria I hope you turn out to be the Messiah you are protrayed as and if not I hope the fall from your pedestal doesn’t hurt too bad.
February 28th, 2007 at 9:09 pm
Well well…
I hate to think that I have been “suckered” into an argument about the meaning of Aesop’s Fables but let me enlighten you my friend that your interpretation is not entirely accurate based on the context of my last post.
First off, I must commend you for doing your homework because I know you have pondered it.
The story goes as following:
A hungry fox passed below a fine bunch of grapes hanging high from a vine. After trying in vain to jump and reach them he gave up, saying to himself as he walked off, “the grapes looked ripe, but I see now they are quite sour.”
The idea is that the fox is trying to get the grapes but when he (assuming the fox is male) finds they are out of the cusps of his grasp he thinks, “I bet they were sour anyway!” This leads us to believe that the fox is jealous that he couldn’t obtain his objective of the delicious grapes by pretending that they were indeed quite sour.
The phrase in the English language comes directly from this interpretation. When someone refers to a person’s attitude as “sour grapes” in modern English, they are eluding to the idea that that person is making shallow accusations because they are jealous.
Therefore, when I said your comments reeked of sour grapes, I meant that you were using a sophomoric idiom (tool, remember?) because you were, lack for a better term, jealous of Mr. Spain. Savvy?
If you don’t believe me, I have found a nice “bon bon” of a web site called Learn-English-Today.com for you to savor. This web site has a wonderful list of food idioms to help one master ever aspect of the English language.
Opinions do not “clutter the public forums!” But, uneducated, immature, idiosyncrasies, such as a person who labels a candidate a “tool,” DO NOT!
I am no Messiah, but I feel still very comfortable on my cushy pedestal my friend.
Yours Truly,
Jazzbass
February 28th, 2007 at 9:12 pm
BAM!
February 28th, 2007 at 9:13 pm
Again, I advise people to meet the candidates. I have some I support wholeheartedly, some I have very serious concerns about. Some are qualified more than other via experience and knowledge, some have excellent skills and an ability to pull people together which can be better than experience and knowledge. You can study to gain knowledged, you can work to gain experience, to bring people together tends to take innate skills.
Much of what I have decided has been based on conversations lasting hours, questioning them, talking about issues in my area. With my involvement in the Alliance I inquire about all five districts as best as I can to represent their concerns and needs based from my discussions with other neighborhood leaders. Others I have watched on the council, talked with at events and some have known for years.
I have read everything written by them that I can find. Forums only give you a very small slice. I stand amazed that the largest issue is the rail/trail issue. It doesn’t effect my area, but to be more global, I have had to learn some items about it and have discussed concerns with those whom it impacts. I admit I have much to learn and don’t lean either way at this point on the issue.
I am concerned that a 13 year old girl was brutally attacked and it’s not an issue. I am concerned that children are walking on dangerous sidewalks, I am concerned that crime is entrenched in some areas and headed north on the first bus, I am concerned that the dollar made per square foot in our downtown is abismal when compared to other communities hence funding issues with basic services.
I am concerned about the apathy in this community and racial disharmony. I could go on. Where do the candidates stand, I could tell you where most of them do because I have taken the time to ask these and similar questions.
I don’t see how having connections makes you a “tool” I must be the biggest “tool” of all then because I have city, state, and federal connenctions, I have business and non-profit connections. The best way to get things done is through fostered relationships and including your target population.
Regarding changing your speech for each group you see. Umm Why wouldn’t you chose to target the issues and interests of a particular group when speaking to them. If you have a good plan, you should be able to adapt it to a variety of needs. That is the mark of excellence. In order to represent the diverse population of this community, one needs to be flexible. An adaptable strategy can be implement in different ways across the community to meet the most needs in one swoop.
Do your homework, share your research with those who don’t have the time or ability to get to the forums or meet each candidate. Choose very wisely and look beyond the surface. As a disclaimer I am not employed or officially part of any candidacy. I offer support to those who I think will be good representatives.
February 28th, 2007 at 9:49 pm
At least I have the courage to speak my opinion and if you knocked on my door like you claim you’ve knocked on everyone elses I’d let you know exactly how I feel and why.
Jealous, I am not. Uneducated, I am not. So you are better than I am because you insult me more eloquently?
February 28th, 2007 at 10:02 pm
We need a predictions thread.
February 28th, 2007 at 10:55 pm
Well Hula,
I never claimed to have knocked on doors. You must have me mistaken for somebody else my friend.
I admire your courage to speak your opinion but I must confess that calling candidate Spain a “tool” was, in my opinion, an immature move. If you do not beat to his drum, that is your God given right as a member of a free society to claim so and NOT vote for him.
I once again never claimed to be better than you in anyway. You have your own eloquent way with words through the means of putting them in my mouth.
I feel passionately that “mudslinging” in politics overshadows the real issues at hand. Calling Spain a tool not only seemed like mudslinging towards a candidate you don’t agree with but also it did seemed like you were angry that Spain did as well as he did.
I obviously have fallen into this trap by wasting the time that I have on these past few threads. Keep your opinions coming because that is the foundation upon which our democracy is built. I just felt there is no place for careless “mudslinging” because it overshadows and takes away from the real issues at hand. In short, I felt that calling Spain “tool” is a part of the disease in politics and not the cure.
Have a good evening,
Jazzbass
February 28th, 2007 at 11:02 pm
Quote about you knocking on doors came from the Journal Star. It is noted toward the top of the article.
Good night to you too.
March 1st, 2007 at 12:15 am
He’s not Ryan Spain if thats what youre trying to get at. Spain is too busy meeting Peorians and knocking on doors to waste time arguing on a blog with someone whos got an agenda.
March 1st, 2007 at 12:17 am
Have you taken the time to find that Schierer was elected to a council district in a St Louis suburb that only had a couple hundred votes and then two years later his district decided to overwhelmingly vote him out (and I use the word overwhelmingly is a relative sense because we’re only talking about a small district). His experience is questionable. If you don’t believe me look it up its called Brentwood, MO I believe. Serving for two years on a city council thats less than half the size of ONE of Peoria’s districts does not eqaute to city council experience for a city like Peoria. And then of course there’s being an ambulance chaser… I won’t even discuss the negative impact that has on the issue of economic development that he praises so much.
March 1st, 2007 at 12:23 am
“Does anyone else have insight into this potential issue?”
Yes, like C.J. pointed out, its not an issue. Every member of the council has got some issue that would constitute a conflict of interest. It’s no different for Spain than it would be if Schierer voted to approve land for another OSF expansion to increase the number of potential malpractice clients who can dig up.
March 1st, 2007 at 12:27 am
Hula,
Can you give some examples of how he changes his story depending on what group he is in front of? I think if you took the time to actually listen to him you’d realize thats not the case. If you mean he discusses different issues in front of different groups thats a given. Community groups want to hear how a candidate will deal with issues related to them. Thats a no-brainer.
March 1st, 2007 at 5:00 am
“Spain is pretty much an even swap for John Morris. There is no one quite like Chuck Grayeb”
I think Spain has a little more in common with Chuck Grayeb.
nudge nudge wink wink
March 1st, 2007 at 5:54 am
PeoriaGuy: I think you are wrong. Spain is not an even swap for Morris. And if you are hinting at something about Spain being like Grayeb, why don’t you come out and say it? You are wrong in that regards. So, wink wink at someone else. Hey here’s an idea, go meet the guy tonight at that public forum. Ask him for yourself. nudge nudge.
March 1st, 2007 at 7:46 am
Hula,
11Bravo is correct! I am not Ryan Spain!
I have never heard Mr. Spain “flip-flop,” if you will, on any topics either. I would be interested to hear your example, also.
I also think it is smart to talk different issues in front of different groups if you WANT to get elected. I have heard George Jacob do it!
I am a little miffed on why Ryan takes so much heat on these blogs. Are you people scared of people in their twenties? Maybe it is a phobia? Some of you think he is in Lahood and Schock’s pocket. Jacob raises “mucho bucks” for Lahood. And the boy wonder’s (Schock) professional campaign manager didn’t come blowing Ryan’s door down. Schock’s campaign manager works for Montelongo! Why are they not ridiculed for being Republicans looking out for themselves like people accuse Ryan of? Why should we be even having party politic conversations considering this as ALL NON-PARTISAN ANYWAY!?!?!?! Could someone answer me these questions? My gut feeling is that most of the smart educator voter saw that and the polls proved it.
Jazzbass
March 1st, 2007 at 8:11 am
Wow,
It’s very interesting that Spain and Thetford are the only two that seem to gather much attention on the local blogs…and with quite a lot of vitiol and negativity from individuals that have readily admitted they have never met either of them. I have to wonder why that is. Perhaps, because they have the potential to be elected and aren’t dogmatic individuals who fit into the narrow mind-think that unless you only say “essential services” you can’t have worthwhile ideas to share. While I think both of them will do their part to ensure basic services are delivered as effectively as possible, they both also have a sense of what is needed in the future in order to continue to make Peoria better (leading to true population growth) rather than continuing our current slow decline.
March 1st, 2007 at 8:40 am
Speaking of “young oppurtunist who should be running for College Republicans, you forgot to mention Schierer IS the president of the Peoria Young Republicans.
March 1st, 2007 at 9:18 am
BRAVO “11Bravo”!!
Don’t forget that after he got elected to office (and he only needed 250 votes for that keeping in mind they do not use the cumulative voting system) his biggest mistake was trying to run AGAIN for office! He was SMOKED like a Christmas ham in his re-election bid. I think the people of Brentwood, MO sent a CLEAR message. I could be wrong but I believe he got 50 whole votes! Assuming that the voters of Brentwood, MO are educated on their issues, I would say Chuck’s experience isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.
Jazzbass
March 1st, 2007 at 9:40 am
PeoriaGuy…
Here we go again with what I call the “sour grapes” attitude. People disagree with Spain and instead of giving intelligent evidence for their decision, they “mudsling”
Example: Calling Spain a “tool” — Hula Monkey (See above threads)
Now we are accusing Spain of being like Grayeb. Are we saying that Spain is a well spoken educated man like Grayeb is? I think not. We are alluding that Spain is a homosexual with a “negative” spin and think the homosexual community should be OUTRAGED!
Spain IS very well spoken and highly intelligent. Sorry to break your heart though PeoriaGuy, he isn’t a homosexual…he isn’t available for you.
As for the Morris comparison, I do agree they agree on issues. Morris is a nice guy who served the community for 8 years but I do believe Ryan will take some different approaches. Ryan is educated, open-minded and not scared to re-formulate his ideas and listen to their constituents. Anybody who cares enough to walk streets and have meaningful conversations with our citizens in sub-zero temperatures AT LEAST shows that the kid has drive. I can’t say that for a lot of others that sit the horseshoe on Tuesday nights.
Now Sandburg is going to MOP up on April 17th and I can say there are times where Gary has some great points. I think every well thought-out decision needs a “devil’s advocate” and that is Sandburg. Who do you think Sandburg would be scared of if he actually had to campaign for his seat? My thoughts NOW would be Spain. This should get all the Sandburg supporters going.
Jazzbass
March 1st, 2007 at 9:41 am
Peo Proud, I have met Thetford. Furthermore, I have seen Thetford’s record. I lived in the third district when she was the council rep, and I’ve seen her work on the council. She did not represent me and my concerns then, and I don’t believe she will now.
As for Spain, I didn’t get a chance to meet him at the candidates forum I attended because he arrived late–after the forum had started–and left before I could get to him. I have read his responses to all the surveys I could get my hands on (Journal Star, Chamber of Commerce, etc.), listened to him answer questions at the candidates forum in the second district and on channel 22. Is that not enough? Do I need to track the guy down and actually meet him before I can form an opinion? Will meeting him change his answers to the questionnaires?
I don’t believe Thetford or Spain are evil. I think they believe their approach to city government is what’s best for Peoria. I disagree. I think we’ve had plenty of that approach, and all it’s gotten us is millions for developers who promise to revitalize older neighborhoods with strip malls (MidTown Plaza), regressive user fees for the citizenry (garbage fee), and less fire protection to boot! I’ve had enough of that kind of government, and I won’t support candidates who lean that direction no matter how nice of a person they might be.
Also, the reason they’re getting so much attention is because they’re in the top six. If either had finished ninth or tenth, no one would be talking about them.
March 1st, 2007 at 9:46 am
Bravo C.J.!
Not because I totally agree with you but because you at least make your point with issues and not this “mudslinging” that some of the other people on this forum are posting!
Jazzbass
March 1st, 2007 at 10:26 am
Cj,
I would also challenge that we still don’t have fire protection, we still don’t have basic services, and the garbage tax is still on our bill every month so perhaps your supports aren’t working either. There really isn’t a viable plan on the table to address these issues despite all the rhetoric. There are some new ideas which may make some changes. Maybe not, can’t predict the future. I have some projects that are highly successful and some ideas that totally flop myself.
We also are spending enormous resources out north and am fairly certain we still will continue to do so. An interesting discussion took place at my last association meeting with Spain, Carter, and Beth Akeson who’s running for school board. We talked about how the city simply hands developers money and then let them tell us what they are going to do. We are going to have development. We need to harnass, control and be the designers of the city’s development rather than just handing over funding. There is not good planning going on. An example was Big Hollow by Sams. One can’t shop in one plaza and get to the CVS without getting into your car and manuvaring around lights etc when it’s a short walk. The walk is completely unsafe and almost unobtainable. This is poor planning and haphazard growth.
We have empty building where new businesses can be put into rather than allowing developers to build even more into the corn fields. This increases monies to city through sales taxes coming from those empty buildings. We need to develop a concrete plan to funnel these growth funds into fixing the streets and sidewalks, lighting, etc in the older neighbrorhood which in turn increases home value and increases the city coffers to fund more of such items.
If staff time were allocated to even 1/4 of their week working on older sections of town vs. the Growth Cells, there would most likely be major improvements in the first three districts. Development planning and improvements appear to be reserved for up north. We could have both and experience booms throughtout the city.
This didn’t come from a forum where 14 people spoke for 5 minutes each and took a few questions, but from an opportunity involvingk indepth discussion. But for the East Bluff forum tonight, there would be similiar discussions in this type of format. Our meetings are open, candidate and the public can come and go. I am hoping other candidates can come to the April meeting. It’s not formal, it’s more relaxed and much more informative.
My point is we need both to work together, the struggle between the North and South is going to continue until we actively work to meet the needs of both sections of town. I still need sidewalks, some dont’ exist, some are so dangerous the cops won’t even use them. Other sections of town are gettting new sidewalks, when I would love to have their current ones transplanted to my area. The system is still broken. In the first district there are sidewalks being replaced but no curbs. Curbs are optional. One homeowner put in a curb. Now there is a 30 ft. section of curb banked on either side by dirt sliding off the slope into the street. I need to take a picture of this because this would not happen north of even Forrest Hill.
I digress…A couple of candidates did not impress me with either their first impression or with a forum performance. I chose to speak at length. One now has my full support, one I have grave concerns, but I gave them a chance outside of a short forum to get to know viewpoints, styles, etc.
just thougths,
March 1st, 2007 at 11:22 am
Paul - completely agree with your first paragraph.
I’ve made this same arguement many times. Everyone complains about the garbage fee, need for more basic services, etc. but there is no plan to address this. Those candidates elected in the last district election campaigned mainly on how these were wrong decisions and that something needed to be done to change them and the direction of the City. Two years later - as you noted - and we’re still in the same position. I don’t actually fault the new district members too much - I think they realized once taking office and reviewing information that the decisions made were the best that could be made at the time and that there is NO EASY answer for changing them.
But I can’t support a candidate who tells me “the garbage tax is bad” and we “need for basic services - police and fire” without hearing from them how they will make the change. Got burned last time on that approach and don’t plan to allow it too happen again.
I’m not giving them my vote if it means that other taxes will be increased to shift money around to eliminate the garbage tax. Maybe I’m in the elite minority, but my taxes would go up more than I pay in the garbage fee if the change were made to place it on the property tax. Yes, police and fire are needed, but where will the funds come from to increase these services and how will they be used. Throwing more staff at the problem won’t work unless we change some of the rules regarding how we staff certain functions and which functions are worthy of additional staff. And eliminating other city services to free up the funds is great, but let me know which ones so I can make a decision on whether I agree with the approach.
While I’m not in favor of the bullet voting, I have to admit that I regularly vote for less than 5 candidates because there are usually fewer than 5 that provide real specifics to their platforms and campaigns so that I can feel comfortable that I’m supporting someone that I agree with.
March 1st, 2007 at 11:33 am
Peoria Proud: “I’ve made this same arguement many times. Everyone complains about the garbage fee, need for more basic services, etc. but there is no plan to address this. Those candidates elected in the last district election campaigned mainly on how these were wrong decisions and that something needed to be done to change them and the direction of the City.”
At the risk of AGAIN being called an apologist for Barara Van Auken, I’ll just point out here that BVA has indeed presented a proposal for addressing the garbage tax. The still in development proposal would tax all water users based on the amount of water the use, regardless of whether they are homeowners, a corporation or a non-profit entity. This would replace at least part of the garbage tax that now appears on city water bills.
What is NOT going to happen is a vote to simply eliminate the garbage tax. Since it would essentially force the city to stop paying for an handfull of police officers.
March 1st, 2007 at 11:43 am
I hear your criticisms, and I’m disappointed things haven’t changed faster myself. But you have to remember that it’s not like time stood still after the new council took over. They’ve had big budget items come up like GASB45 and the sewer issue that hadn’t hit the old council yet. The fact that they’ve been able to pay for those without raising the garbage fee or property tax rates is something to consider.
Also, it was “progressive” spending that put us in the earlier budget fix. That’s not going to be rolled back in one or two years — money has already been spent or is committed to certain projects that can’t just be cancelled.
Furthermore, the new council has rebuffed not one, but two attempts to expand the proposed TIF districts in Eagle View and the Warehouse District, which will save taxpayer money. Van Auken has been working to replace the garbage fee with a franchise fee that would be a percentage based on use instead of a flat, regressive fee. Not ideal, but arguably fairer.
So, contrary to your assessment that nothing has changed, I think there’s a decisive shift in how this council operates. We need more people like Manning and Van Auken and especially Sandberg to keep the council on that trajectory.
March 1st, 2007 at 1:03 pm
In essence it would be a lot more than a few police officers - but I’m glad that you at least acknowledge that the funds were needed to maintain certain city services. There is over $2 million annually generated by the fee/tax/whatever you want to call it.
This funds alot of City services that would either have to be cut to make up the difference (something the council at the time didn’t think was a good idea) or a new tax. That’s a lot of police officers, snow plows, and firestations that wouldn’t otherwise be in service to the citizens.
I’m lukewarm to the water tax — while I like that all users will pay it (whether non-profit or not), there is also something a little inherently unfair about asking water users to pay for garbage collection when many of these being taxed already pay for the garbage collection out of their own pockets. Although I like this proposal better than placing it on property taxes. But it is still replacing one tax with another. Overall, people are still paying more than they would have otherwise.
Won’t call you an apologist for BVA at all…you made your view regarding her quite clear in a post some time ago on PollyPeoria’s blog when you said:
“Barbara is a friend of mine, an advisor who helped me through a very difficult situation. So she wold have to be personally manning the construction equipment tearing down Woodruff High School to make room for a taxpayer financed raquetball court for the exclusive use of members of the Peoria Civic Federation for me to turn on her.”
Since she hasn’t proposed tearing down Woodruff for the Civic Federation’s racquetball court yet, we wouldn’t expect you to be critical of her.
March 1st, 2007 at 3:56 pm
Bill - I don;t want to be mean but she is too.
March 1st, 2007 at 8:31 pm
When all the rhetoric is boiled down, all the things Ardis, Manning, Van Auken et all criticized in the 2005 election have not only not been fixed, they have gotten worse. Crime is much worse. Fire Sta 11 is still not open and there still is the garbage tax etc. Ok, two years isn’t enough to completely turn things around. But something should have been accomplished in two years. It would be nice if they would tell us just exactly when they will be able to understand the budget and when exactly they will solve the problems they campaigned on. Another year, another year, another year is all we’ve heard. I think they are just hoping to wear everyone down and get the masses to forget what they ran on.
Some new blood on the council would be healthy. Spain will be helpful with a fresh perspective. Van Auken and Sandberg despise him. That’s healthy then that he get elected. One narrow minded group should not be running the whole show.
Sandberg is too erratic and willing to use spurious facts to be a good watchdog. His childish antics also make him a poor role model for the city’s children. With her experience and being disconnected from those in the majority now, Thetford for all her faults would be the best check and balance or watchdog the council could have. Like her or not, she is the best position to seriously question the budget and proposals put forward by the majority.
For all those ragging on Thetford for not returning phone calls, I know people upset with Manning and others for not returning phone calls. Being a councilperson is not a full time job and when you get 30 phone calls a day and come home from your job, especially when you have kids, there isn’t enough time in the day to return all those calls, particularly when some citizens want to speak for 30 minutes. If a poll of the citizens was done, all the incumbents could be faulted for not returning phone calls. My point is all coucilpersons should be held to the same standard.
March 1st, 2007 at 9:26 pm
Ryan Spain, hmmmm. I’ve heard him speak at forums and he points to himself in a cocky manner when he says “I built the business incubator (or whatever they call it now) on Main Street.”
First of all if Heartland let a 24 year old call the shots on a project like that they are idiots.
But here is where INEXPERIENCE GOUGES the daylights out of taxpayers. This incubator is a 20 or 22 MILLION DOLLAR construction project. It certainly would qualify for non-profit status. They only problem is the project coordinators NEEDED TO APPLY FOR NON-PROFIT STATUS which involves some bureaucratic paperwork with the state. RYAN SPAIN DIDN’T THINK TO APPLY FOR NON=PROFIT STATUS SO AS A RESULT, THE PROJECT IS PAYING 8% SALES TAX ON THE 20 PLUS MILLION DOLLAR PROJECT. That my friends is a world class costly mistake. All the city budget needs now is Ryan Spain’s input!
The Spain campaign surely did opposition research on Charles Schierer with his service as a city councilman in Brentwood, MO. Jazzbass is certainly Ryan himself or at a minimum his campaign manager or top supporter. They relished putting out the damaging info on Schierer, so Spain supporters don’t be crying foul now. Ryan made a costly mistake and the taypayers of Peoria will pay. That is relevant info for the voters.
Ryan Spain…a proven track record of expensive incompetence.
March 1st, 2007 at 9:47 pm
Charles Scheirer dropped out according to pjstar.com
http://www.pjstar.com/php/inde.....drops_out/
March 1st, 2007 at 11:15 pm
Clarion,
Facts? I talked to Spain and Schierer today and you? sounds like you are doing the opposition research wonder which candidate you are……..
March 2nd, 2007 at 5:29 am
Clarion: You got it all wrong. Who’s campaign manager are you? Jazzbass is not Ryan nor is he Ryan’s manager. You got that wrong.
As for the incubator project on Main street. You are wrong again. As for Ryan spearheading that project, yes he did. I think that is amazing for a 24 yr old. The taxpayers will not pay because that is a TIF. At least not in the prespective you present.
What exactly is a “cocky manner”? It’s like me saying your post is from a moron. Also you called everyone at the Heartland Project an idiot. Amazing. Usually the person calling everyone an idiot is the biggest idiot. Ah, just from my point of view…..
March 5th, 2007 at 8:58 am
“Sorry to break your heart though PeoriaGuy, he isn’t a homosexual…he isn’t available for you.”
Sorry, he is not my type. Plus he is already taken….
March 5th, 2007 at 10:49 am
Well, Clarion and Emtronics, who is correct in your opposite statements about the non-profit status (or non-status) of the incubator? You both can’t be right and it seems to be a very important point. Give us the facts please.
March 5th, 2007 at 7:26 pm
Actually, you are both wrong. The Innovation is not in a TIF, it is in an Enterprise Zone. Whether the building is run by a nonprofit or not is immaterial — they can get that exemption on sales tax no matter what. And Clarion, it is a $14M project, according to their website. But you seem to be full of it, so we’ll just let you run with whatever you care to run with.