Archive for September, 2008
September 30th, 2008
Last night the Editorial Board did something a bit different in its endorsement interview process. We hosted a debate between Winnebago County Board Chairman Scott Christiansen and his challenger, Paul Gorski. An edited video of the debate is available on rrstar.com. Follow this link. Videos are about half way down on the right side of the page.
We have interviewed Christiansen and Gorski a few times over the past year. We thought we could learn more about the candidates if we saw them interact with each other. Members of our Community Viewpoints Board and a member of our Voters Panel also were on hand.
After the debate members of the Editorial Board (Chuck Sweeny, Mary Kaull, Excell Lewis and I) discussed the debate with the community members.
The debate and the reaction from community members will be a part of the endorsement process. The Edit Board will have a full discussion of this race and others later this week.
We’re hosting another debate tomorrow. State’s attorney candidates Chuck Prorok and Joe Bruscato will be here.
We’re trying to set up a few more of these type of forums. Other endorsements will be based on one-on-one interviews, community forums like the one at 6 tonight at Emmanuel Episcopal Church and other information, including news stories about the candidates.
September 29th, 2008
As you might have guessed by the lack of posts, I’ve been gone for a few days. If you sent me an e-mail last week and haven’t received a response yet, I’m sorry. I’ll get to it as soon as humanly and electronically possible.
I was in Texas visiting my 1-month-old grandson. It didn’t sink in that I was gramps until I held him for the first time. It’s awesome to see the next generation come in to this world.
My electronic mailbox has almost twice the allotted stuff in it. It will take me most of the day to whittle it down. My snail mail is not as bad.
Lots of catching up to do. What’s the most important local news that I missed last week?
September 22nd, 2008
Just about every day I cross paths with someone who is riding his/her bicycle the wrong way, i.e., against traffic instead of with traffic.
Perhaps they don’t know that under the Illinois Rules of the Road, a bicycle has the same rights and responsibilities as a motor vehicle. Or perhaps they think it’s safer to see what’s in front of them rather than worrying about what comes from behind. There are many safety reasons to ride with traffic. I looked up a couple of online sources for info.
Here’s what http://bicyclesafe.com/ says:
# Cars which pull out of driveways, parking lots, and cross streets (ahead of you and to the left), which are making a right onto your street, aren’t expecting traffic to be coming at them from the wrong way. They won’t see you, and they’ll plow right into you.
# How the heck are you going to make a right turn?
# Cars will approach you at a much higher relative speed. If you’re going 15mph, then a car passing you from behind doing 35 approaches you at a speed of only 20 (35-15). But if you’re on the wrong side of the road, then the car approaches you at 50 (35+15), which is 250% faster! Since they’re approaching you faster, both you and the driver have lots less time to react. And if a collision does occur, it’s going to be ten times worse.
# Riding the wrong way is illegal and you can get ticketed for it. Bruce Mackey says that 25% of cycling collisions are the result of the cyclist riding the wrong way
From KenKifer./com bike pages
So, when cycling on the wrong side, the chances of not being seen by motorists who are turning or pulling out increases, the number of passing vehicles increases, the time needed to avoid an on-coming vehicle decreases, the chance of finding a safe place to pull off the road decreases, the speed of impact increases, the braking distance decreases, and the liability lies with the cyclist.
If riding with the traffic is like playing Russian roulette (quite an exaggeration), then riding against traffic is like playing Russian roulette with five bullets in the chambers.
Why bicycle riders should not ride on the wrong side of the road:
# Hazardous encounters with other vehicles entering the legal counterflow: Another traveller turning right from a side street or driveway onto the road might not look for traffic on the wrong side of the road. The legal traveller may meet the unnoticed oncoming wrong-side rider where there is not enough lane width or reaction time to avoid a head-on collision.
# Hazardous encounters with other vehicles legally turning left from the parallel flow: Other travellers turning left at an intersection or into a driveway do not look for traffic overtaking them on their left. The wrong-side cyclist, fearfully watching for oncoming traffic, may never notice the intersecting left turner.
# Hazardous encounters with pedestrians at crossings: As they step from the curb, pedestrians may not look for traffic approaching from the wrong direction.
# Narrow road problems and head-ons with right-side cyclists. Wrong-way cyclists cause unexpected flow constrictions that move against the flow of traffic and may require evasive maneuvers. Right-side cycling only requires overtaking traffic to slow to the cyclist speed when there is no room to pass. When a wrong-way cyclist encounters a right-way cyclist, one of them may be forced into passing traffic.
# Ambiguity of intentions and right-of-way: When noticed by right-way travellers, the wrong-way cyclist cannot be expected to interact with the rest of traffic according to any mutually recognized rules of the road. To retain any safety against the hazards listed above, the wrong-way cyclist must yield to all other traffic at every intersection rather than taking the right-of-way when entitled to it on the right side of the road.
# Legal consequences:
Travelling on the wrong side of the road is illegal for cyclists as well as for motorists. The wrong-way traveller has diminished legal claim in case of damage or injury when an accident is attributed to wrong-side travelling. (I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice; but the interpretation of a cycling citizen.)
September 18th, 2008
This is the real-time Dec. 18 1996 story about the library situation reprinted Sunday in the Mat Su Valley Frontiersman, Wasilla’s daily paper.
FROM THE ARCHIVE: Palin: Library censorship inquiries ‘Rhetorical’
By PAUL STUART
Published on Sunday, September 14, 2008 4:17 PM AKDT Editor’s note: This story first ran in the Mat-Su Valley Frontiersman Dec. 18, 1996. It has been typeset and posted here to accommodate numerous requests for the story from media worldwide and curious individuals. Please note that not at any time were any books ever banned from the Wasilla city library.
WASILLA — In the wake of strong reactions from the city’s library director to inquiries about censorship, Wasilla Mayor Sarah Palin on Monday was taking pains to explain her questions about censoring library material were “rhetorical.”
Library Director Mary Ellen Emmons last week said Palin broached the subject with her on two occasions in October - once Palin was elected mayor Oct. 1 but before she took office on Oct. 14, and again in more detail on Monday, Oct. 28. Besides heading the Wasilla City Library, Emmons is also president of the Alaska Library Association.
The issue became public last Wednesday, when Palin brought it up during an interview about the now-defunct Liquor Task Force. Palin used the library topic as an example of discussions with her department heads about understanding and following administration agendas. Palin said she asked Emmons how she would respond to censorship.
Emmons drew a clear distinction Saturday between the nature of Palin’s inquiries and an established book-challenge policy in place in Wasilla, and in most public libraries.
“I’m not trying to suppress anyone’s views,” Emmons said. “But I told her (Palin) clearly, I will fight anyone who tries to dictate what books can go on the library shelves.”
Palin said Monday she had no particular books or other material in mind when she posed the questions to Emmons.
Emmons said in the first conversation, before being sworn in as mayor, Palin briefly touched on the subject of censorship.
But on Monday, Oct. 28, Emmons said Palin asked her outright if she could live with censorship of library books. This was during a week when Palin was requesting resignations from all the city’s department heads as a way of expressing loyalty.
“This is different than a normal book-selection procedure or a book-challenge policy,” Emmons stressed Saturday. “She was asking me how I would deal with her saying a book can’t be in the library.”
Monday Palin said in a written statement she was only trying to get aquatinted with her staff at the time. “Many issues were discussed, both rhetorical and realistic in nature,” Palin added.
Emmons recalled that the Oct. 28 conversation she pulled no punches with her response to the mayor.
“She asked me if I would object to censorship, and I replied ‘Yup’,” Emmons recounted Saturday. “And I told her it would not be just me. This was a constitutional question, and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) would get involved, too.”
Emmons said Palin asked her on Oct. 28 if she would object to censorship, even if people were circling the library in protest about a book. “I told her it would definitely be a problem the ACLU would take on then,” Emmons said.
Asked who she thought might picket the library, Palin said Monday, “Had no one in mind … again, the issue was discussed in the context of a professional question being asked in regards to library policy.”
“All questions posed to Wasilla’s library director were asked in the context of professionalism regarding the library policy that is in place in our city. Obviously the issue of censorship is a library question… you ask a library director that type of question,” Palin said
Palin also said Monday censorship issues would not involve any departments other than the library.
Emmons said she has been offered help if it is ever needed on censorship issues from the state library association’s Intellectual Freedom Committee and the National Freedom to Read Foundation.
Palin called Emmons into her office Monday to discuss the censorship questions again.
Palin also attended Friday’s staff meeting at the library, but without mentioning censorship , Emmons said.
“I’m hoping it was just a trial balloon,” Emmons said, “because the free exchange of information is my main job, and I’ll fight anyone who tries to interfere with that.”
The timing of the issue comes at a time when Emmons is trying to get the book-challenge policies of the Wasilla Library and of the Palmer City Library in line with the Mat-Su Borough policy, revised in December of last year.
Emmons described the new borough policy as “a very good one.”
It is a step-by-step blueprint of procedures for anyone wanting to challenge the selection and availability of library material, Emmons explained. “it is a good process, and almost all public libraries have one.”
The borough’s policy was revised mainly to replace the borough manager as the final decision maker with a formal Reconsideration Committee. Mat-Su Borough Manager Don Moore said Saturday that changes were made, with the blessings, after a dispute that was resolved about two years ago involving a challenged book at the Big Lake Library.
Emmons said the current Wasilla policy, which she described as written in more general terms than the borough’s, also worked procedurally in a book-challenge case last year. Emmons said then-council-woman Palin was distressed about the issue when it came up, indicating she was aware of the city’s book-challenge policy.
Emmons said in the conversations with now-Mayor Palin in October, she reminded her again that the city has a policy in place. “But it seamed clear to me that wasn’t really what she was talking about anyhow,” Emmons added. “I just hope it doesn’t come up again.”
Meanwhile, Emmons said she is working with borough libraries boss Bruce Urban and Palmer Library Director Janice Sanford, in the hope of getting the cities to adopt a book-challenge policy identical to the borough’s.
September 18th, 2008
I may have jumped to a conclusion in the previous post about the governor and state parks. As Paul rightly pointed out, the article said the governor has not visited the parks slated to be closed. It doesn’t mean he hasn’t visited ANY state parks.
I sent an e-mail to Lucio Guerrero asking him whether the gov had been to any. Here’s his response:
That may be a tough one since there are hundreds. He’s a runner, so he’s visited many of them - especially around springfield, chicago and duquoin.
He’s also had official events at some.
Let me see what I can do. It might take awhile.
September 18th, 2008
I had been told the governor had never visited a state park, but it was never confirmed. The Associated Press got it on the record from one of Rod Blagojevich’s spokesmen. Here’s the story, which AP labeled as an exclusive.
By Deanna Bellandi
The Associated Press
CHICAGO — Gov. Rod Blagojevich won’t know what he missed when two dozen state parks and historic sites shut down because of budget cuts.
That’s because he’s never visited them, according to Blagojevich spokesman Lucio Guerrero.
“A lot of people haven’t been, I mean the decision to close them are based on attendance figures not on whether the governor likes them or not,” Guerrero said.
The Democratic governor has made no personal visits or held official events at the 11 state parks and 13 historic sites slated to close over the next two months to help close a $2 billion budget hole, Guerrero said.
Being a no-show isn’t likely to do much for the image of a governor already chided for being too Chicago-centric, starting with his refusal to live in the executive mansion in Springfield.
Some of the historic sites slated for closure have ties to Abraham Lincoln, including his father’s reconstructed log cabin near Charleston and the Vandalia statehouse where Lincoln was a state lawmaker before Springfield was the capital.
More popular Lincoln sites, including the 16th president’s tomb and the Old State Capitol where he delivered his “House Divided” speech, both in Springfield, won’t close. Illinois is gearing up to celebrate Lincoln’s 200th birthday next year. The tomb had about 339,000 visitors last year and about 109,250 people visited the Old State Capitol.
“I’d love to see the governor visit all the historic sites,” said Jim Peters, president of Landmarks Illinois, a preservation advocacy group.
The closures send the wrong message, Peters said.
“It sends the message that tourism is not as important,” he said.
Other sites to be closed include the Lincoln Log Cabin near Charleston, which had about 82,700 visitors last year, the Vandalia Statehouse, which nearly 31,700 people visited, and the birthplace of Pulitzer Prize-winning poet Carl Sandburg in Galesburg, which had nearly 8,600 visitors last year, according to state figures.
The state’s largest union, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, said the governor’s absence from the places he wants to shutter shows he’s out of touch with what goes on there.
“I think the governor needs a better understanding and appreciation of the essential services that state employees provide and of the tremendous effort and sacrifices they make to provide those services,” union spokesman Anders Lindall said.
The administration had to make “tough decisions” on budget cuts, Guerrero said. State agency budgets were slashed, hundreds of workers are being laid off and others are being forced to take unpaid leave.
The Illinois House has voted to reverse some of Blagojevich’s budget cuts, but the Senate isn’t expected back in session until November to take up the matter.
Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn has launched an online petition drive to stop the closure of the 11 state parks.
“I think it’s important to visit state parks,” Quinn said. “Anybody in statewide office should spend time there.”
Rachel Pfaff of Morris has started her own online petition to oppose closing the parks and has collected nearly 29,000 signatures. Since Blagojevich hasn’t visited the parks he doesn’t understand what they mean to people, she said.
“It makes me very angry,” Pfaff said. “This is a place where my children go to fish and play.”
Just because Blagojevich hasn’t visited the targeted historic sites or parks, including the Channahon Parkway State Park and Illini State Park in Marseilles, doesn’t mean he doesn’t appreciate them, Guerrero said.
“He’s a student of history so … he obviously realizes the significance of all the sites,” Guerrero said. He added: “But it was just a matter of being fiscally responsible and having to do what was right for the whole state.”
Blagojevich not visiting adds weight to the argument that the administration’s decisions on what sites to close are not subjective, Guerrero said.
Personnel issues, including union concerns, have delayed the closings of the parks and historic sites. The historic sites, initially set to close Oct. 1, will now close Oct. 15, although some will be open on a limited basis for special events. The state parks, originally scheduled to close Nov. 1, will instead close Nov. 30.
That gives Blagojevich more time to get in a few visits.
———
Associated Press Writer Christopher Wills in Springfield contributed to this report.
September 17th, 2008
I could post this on the Talkin’ Cubs blog, but I think it’s more politics than pitching. Sports columnist Mike Nadel is right on with his assessment of the governor’s proclamation of “Carlos Zambrano Day.”
September 16th, 2008
Maybe it was never gone. I can’t remember the last time I heard anyone refer to anything as “cuckoo.” Then there goes Mayor Daley dismissing allegations by Gov. Rod Blagojevich that CTA and city mismanagement had more to do with the CTA’s woes than the governor’s decision to allow seniors to ride free.
Not only did Daley say “cuckoo,” he said it in a way that would make that little bird in the Cocoa Puffs commercials proud. (Does that bird have a name?)
I don’t know whether the CTA stuff is cuckoo or not, but I think the governor’s decisions to close state parks and historic sites and rewrite the ethics bill are more than a bit off.
September 15th, 2008
Library Director Frank Novak and a couple others will be here today to tell members of the Editorial Board about the progress of the east-branch library at the old Barnes & Noble site. Seems like we’ve been waiting for that forever, but that might just be because I’m eager to use a library much closer to home.
Tomorrow, I hear from the other side of the con-con debate. Bruno Behrand will be here.
September 12th, 2008
Lena Parsons and other folks involved in the Alliance to protect the Illinois Constitution will be here to talk to members of the Editorial Board today. Here’s her summary of what they will tell us:
The Alliance is united in a couple of major points: Con con is costly and unnecessary, based on the last con con, costs could be upwards of $80 million (revised from our initial tally of $100m based on more research.)
Con con gives our elected officials a pass on real reform while we wait for the convention to me held - the best way to fix Springfield is to pick new elected officials.
The Illinois Constitution works - it is a very progressive citizen-friendly document for its time, and remains so even today. It provides for very important provisions we wouldn’t want to loose such as limits on income taxation, prohibits employment and housing discrimination, prohibits redlining (discriminatory business practices), safeguards against hate crime, and provides for religious freedom.
Here’s a link to our web site, where you can find more details on our position.
Previous Posts
