Kind of a focused Open Thread, but there are lots of things floating around locally:
- Urbana rejects rooftop bar - no big shock
- Urbana wants to raise their sales tax (to be equal to Champaign and make up for lost utility tax revenue from U of I) - so much for being a new retail mecca
- Champaign transportation plan - we have had some discussion about changes to Spfld Ave and the bridges over I-57 (neither in the plan)
- Smoking ban proposal at the Champaign council tonight - sounds like Ennan could be the swing vote.
- Provena and Personalcare are duking it out, in public.
Sound off.
I must admit I hope they don't pass that ban. Buncha Puritans.
Mark it down, Interloper - we agree on something. :-)
Caller to Penny just said Provena/Coventry and Personalcare have apparently come to an agreement.
Caller to Penny just said Provena/Coventry and Personalcare have apparently come to an agreement.
i figured it was all just a PR stunt by provena to get personalcare to change something. otherwise, they'd be shooting themselves in the foot to drop personalcare.
Let's kill smoking so that when the inlaws are visiting and we eat out, I don't seem rude going to the 'non-smoking place' or have to deal with the smoking while eating..
Let's end smoking so that when the inlaws are visiting and we eat out, I don't seem rude going to the 'non-smoking place' or have to deal with the smoking while eating..
"Urbana wants to raise their sales tax (to be equal to Champaign and make up for lost utility tax revenue from U of I) - so much for being a new retail mecca"
I wonder how O'Brien Auto Park feels about this, after spending all that money on the new complex and preparing to move out of Champaign, partly to take advantage of lower sales tax rates in Urbana?
Gordy,
Didn't O'Brien get a host of concessions from Urbana - perhaps including a sales tax or property tax rebate for X years?
What time does the City Council meeting begin?
The meeting will begin a little late hopefully, adding to minutes that all the non-smoking freaks will have to wait through in order to stand up and regurgitate their tired talking points once again.
Reason #4,231 I wish I had a lot of money: I'd hand out a box of cigars for everyone that attends the meeting tonight.
"... all the non-smoking freaks..."
Freaks? Hmmm, well, this is what I call reasoned, civil discourse. Glad to know it's not dead on IlliniPundit.
From dictionary.com:
"Freak: (n) 2: someone who is so ardently devoted to something that it resembles an addiction;"
Yea, I'd say the "CU -NonSmoking Alliance" could be called freaks... but in a civil, reasoned manner of course.
from The Oxford Dictionary:
"Freak" - monstrosity; abnormally developed individual or thing.
I guess it depends on what your definition of "is" is.
Spoken like a true Clinton-Dem.
The rooftop bar wasn't so much rejected by Urbana, as rejected by the laws of physics: the engineering study determined that the "live load" rating of the parking structure doesn't meet code for a bar or concert space. Apparently it's okay to park there as long as you don't jump up and down on the way to your car.
I wonder how O'Brien Auto Park feels about this, after spending all that money on the new complex and preparing to move out of Champaign, partly to take advantage of lower sales tax rates in Urbana?
Either the O'Brien management team is psychic, or you're making that up. The plan for the O'Brien auto mall was first announced in 2000, and Champaign didn't raise their sales tax until last year.
"The rooftop bar wasn't so much rejected by Urbana, as rejected by the laws of physics"
It just seems so weird to us plebes that people could be more stressful to a structure than cars. And it also just seems like a foregone conclusion that such a neat idea would be somehow killed in Urbana.
Has anyone been able to get an adeqaute explanation of why the parking dec/bar idea fell through on the load limit? Why was the comparison used about the stairwell in Danville that apparently rusted through, and a non standard deck built in Chicago that killed those people several years ago? I'm not clear as to why that had much bearing on the actual support weight issue that was the deciding factor. If I understand it then you can park several tons of cars on the deck, but you can't have less than that in human weight for bouncing around?
Urbana is going to keep raising sales taxes as long as the UI keeps encroaching in Urbana's direction, and more power gets diverted from Abbot to the campus and not Ameren. They need to come up with a beter plan for something they know will keep happening. They managed to come to some arrangement with the UI about the power/sales tax issue, but not the other.
Come on Matthew, let's not be hypocritical. I've seen far worse on your blog when conservatives give their opinions.
Because of physics, not because of what you believe.
Or to put it another way, the world is round, not flat, like many people believe.
Or, we descended from non-humans, and were not born in the Garden of Eden.
It's called "science", as opposed to "faith".
Lazlo is correct on both counts. He is becoming a favorite poster.
That's basically it, VVL. A structure designed to hold a lot of weight can't necessarily tolerate a lot of live load. That's why weak bridges have speed restrictions--the bridge can handle the weight of a truck just fine, but if the truck hits a bump and starts bouncing, it can do some serious damage. It's also why troops marching over a long bridge are told to break step. If I remember right the N-G said the engineering study showed the parking structure was rated for 70 lbs/sf of live load but for a bar occupancy the building code requires 100, and the costs to reinforce it to the higher standard were in the high six-figure range.
Of course to get into trouble you'd probably have to pack the place with bodies all jumping up and down in unison, which realistically wouldn't happen, but the code has to assume the worst case. Since there have been plenty of building collapses under similar circumstances, I can understand why the city wouldn't waive the rules. Personally I think it was a really cool idea and I'm disappointed to see it fall through. My impression is that a majority of the City Council supported it, so trying to parley this into gratuitous Urbana-bashing is a stretch.
"Come on Matthew, let's not be hypocritical. I've seen far worse on your blog when conservatives give their opinions."
On the contrary, conservatives are always welcome to give their opinions on my blog. Many of them have, and many times it has resulted in a very civil and enlightening discourse.
I think you may be referring to the occasions when a conservative - or anyone, for that matter - has come onto the blog full-steam-ahead lacking their own civility and been insulting and/or rude.
Nice try, though.
I thought they would embrace it and go full stop for it, and I am quite disappointed that they aren't even going to set aside any potential money as the entire deck can be used not only for private business, but they could use other parts for city use as well. They salted away millions for the library, and they could salt away a few 100K. I simply found it odd they were comparing what happened in Danville and Chicago and using those examples to put the final kibosh on it.
"My impression is that a majority of the City Council supported it, so trying to parley this into gratuitous Urbana-bashing is a stretch."
But Urbana bashing is so fun, and so easy usually.
I wonder how O'Brien Auto Park feels about this, after spending all that money on the new complex and preparing to move out of Champaign, partly to take advantage of lower sales tax rates in Urbana?
The tax increase doesn't apply to a few things, including food, medicine, and personally-licensed property (i.e. cars).
re: Champaign transportation plan - we have had some discussion about changes to Spfld Ave and the bridges over I-57 (neither in the plan)
I hope no one has to die on one of the I-57 overpasses to convince Springfield to (or is it Chicago) to make them pedestrian and bicycle friendly.
Tonight's city council meeting discourse on the smoking ban is just a hoot. What a bunch of characters! Especially enjoyed the young man (Seth someone) who spoke to both sides of the issue, confessed to drinking a lot of beers in bars and smoking, then had to run off to write his column. Can't wait to hear what the council members have to say.
If the city wants to replace lost utility taxes, how about getting the utilities to charge the same amount for electricity, regardless of how much you use? If they're feeling generous, they might even offer discounts on small amounts that support basic living.
Currently, the biggest energy consumers get bigger discounts, encouraging more wasteful consumption and making our businesses less competitive in the long run.
For example, CA uses 40% less electricity per capita than the rest of the US, so they're very efficient and saving a lot of money long-term because they don't have to pay huge amounts to build extra power plants to support wasteful consumption.
For us, that's means we might not need to replace an old coal plant. At a minimum, we could save millions of energy dollars sent out west to import extra coal to burn for electricity. Reducing our local imports by millions would be a huge boost to our economy!
Even better, most individual voters wouldn't get stuck with replacing the lost utility revenues, just wasteful consumers. Any businesses should ask the IL WMRC on campus for help reducing their waste to save money.
Does our water company also encourage waste by offering discounts for consuming more water? How many millions of local income are exported out of the county/country due to wasted water?
Big E speaks of Seth Fein - one of Urbana's finer characters. Read his column in the Buzz, if you have nothing better to do.
His diatribe about a year ago about apartment living, parties, noise ordinances and the number of residents per rental home at the Urbana City Council meeting was priceless.
Any word on the smoking referendum? Did it pass?
smoking ban passes in Champaign 5-4!
rosales for mayor
impeach jerry for throwing deb feinen under the bus so he would get gina's vote, a vote he didn't get.
jerry made the city council dem, jerry did it, i'm pissed, it's his fault, ONLY HIM, that Marci is on the council
Jerry is the WORST thing to happen to the republican party since Piland, and before that, there's no one as downright evilly bad for republicans locally
DUMP JERRY, GET A REAL Republican in office
I'm glad the city knows what's best for me. I was worried sick with all of that damn personal freedom. Oh, and those pesky property rights. While we're at it, are there any other individual rights the "majority" would care to take away?
It was humorous to watch Ennen and Jerry throw tantrums when the vote was counted. You will get a chance to see this over and over during the coming week. Tape it for your viewing pleasure.
Ennen heaves a big "Nurse Ratchet" sigh of disgust and Jerry throws his pen. I was taping the meeting for my husband and I have watched it three times now. Hilarious.
Then to demonstrate their disgust with the old "majority rules" thing, they make a motion to adjourn before dealing with the remaining items on the agenda, like "public comment".
When it is pointed out to them that they have moved to adjourn too soon, they insist on a roll call vote on the premature adjournment, which loses 3 to 6, and the meeting continues to allow that long-haired prairie weed guy to say his weekly incoherent ramble.
Urbana will now follow suit presumably and the ordinances could go into effect by 4th of July.
The world as we know it will then end, charter buses will take dinner trips to Danville and Mattoon, and campus merchants will be seen selling pencils and apples on the street, as all former bar owners now do in California, Florida and New York.
Yes! First the Chief, now this. The status quo defenders with nonsensical, tired, empty arguments lose again.
Who says things can't change for the better?
Now maybe I can wear my coat inside a bar during the winter.
Well here's the thing, as I'm wearing my polo-shirt in a bar, I am continually assaulted with smoke. I mean, come on, I go to bars for the purpose of drinking enough beer or hard alcohol to get so drunk I don't remember the night. I praise the Champaign City for their keen forsight on outlawing smoking. Honestly, I just want to go to the bars and get wasted, and forget about things like 2.1 million students between the ages of 18 and 24 driving under the influence of alcohol last year; Those people that drank and drove, all 2.1 MILLION of them, didn't smoke around me and endanger my life.
CHOOSE LIFE
CHOOSE NOT SMOKING
-Stephen Menagarie
I'm glad that Wenalway's and my North Face Fleece will be protected. I have been worried about the rising costs of dry cleaning in this country. I mean, I could have drank two less Scotch on the rocks at Guidos and dry cleaned my North Face with the change, but now the City Council has saved me from this horrific burden. I only hope that now they will take my personal property away so that I don't have to pay the taxes. While they're at it, outlaw those toothpicks in my island drinks...I always seem to poke myself in the mouth when I'm drunk...not drunk I mean so overwhelmed with other people's smoke. But then those drinks are served in glasses which can easily be broken over my head when a smoker decides to become irate over this glorious ban or a drunken student becomes beligerent. My only solution. The City Council allow the serving of only non-alcoholic drinks in plastic sippy cups to patrons wearing bibs so that workers aren't exposed to slippery surfaces. Viva las chaquetas!
http://www.forces.org/evidence/epafraud/files/osteen.htm
Consider probibition "Save The Coats." In the year 1919 prohibition was inacted. It was later repealled. The (conservative) American people decided almost 100 years ago that drinking was unacceptable. However, the tobacco issue has never has consistantly been disputed. Through out history, starting with historian Betty Freiden, tobacco has been related to all sorts of social issues. While I won't get into those, I can tell you from personal experience how annoying it is to me, and countless bar patrons, when drunken and smoking (two things that go hand in hand) have interupted my bar experience. The argument that people go to the bar to get 'Wasted' is a false one. Consider this Stephen, many of my grad-student friends and I wish to go to a (albeit ANY) bar to drink a glass of wine or a glass of beer, and are assaulted with a barage of smoke. Anyone can conceed that smoking is not a part of a healthy bar scene. Please remember this when you object to the wishes of the status quo.
I feel that I must post additional. This is just an allegory of my personal beliefs. However I believe that I have supplimented these beliefs with facts. In many studies, second hand smoke has been attributed with cancer. Deny these facts: On June 16th 1999, the World Health Organization (WHO) released a report estimating that 700 million children around the world were exposed to second hand smoke. WHO confirmed that second-hand smoke is associated with lower respiratory tract infections, middle ear disease, chronic respiratory symptoms, asthma, decreased lung function and SIDS. Consider this when you're on your 5th beer. That fifth beer won't kill people where as your fifth cigarette will.
MAKE OUR BARS SAFE FOR CHILDREN!!!!
If 75% of people in Champaign want smoke-free establishments and aren't getting them, I'd like to know why capitalism has suddenly failed in C-U.
Supply meets demand, why isn't that happening? Why aren't consumers taking the fight to their favorite establishments instead of asking their momma (the government) to fix all their problems for them?
Marcus wrote that "Anyone can conceed that smoking is not a part of a healthy bar scene."
Please tell me, where can I find this..."healthy bar"?
John: Same argument yet again.
How do you know people haven't been doing what you suggest?
The next thing you know, they will be making a rule that the bar has to have fire exits. Why can't that be left to a bar owner's free choice?
Are the customers demanding them?
So can you still smoke in a smoke shop?
Where do we find a real Republican, a Republican who won't sell out his party, instead of Jerry S., to run for mayor?
Schweghart is either a democrat, or he is too stupid to figure out basic politics, counting on Gina's vote, getting Marci Dodds on the council instead of a Republican, turning the Champaign City council solidly dem.
If the dems can do this, they can do anything.
All hail Jerry the Democrat, the Laurel Prussing of West Urbana!
Wenalway-
Same question, then why does capitalism completely fail in Champaign? We are dealing with a large segment of the population that wants something, why are companies simply ignoring consumer wants and not paying the price?
We're in a University town, you'd think some econominsts would be studying how it seems that all the laws of economics break down here.
Roll Call:
FOR mom, apple pie, the Stars and Stripes, and 3-meter diving boards: Schweighart, Ennen, LaDue, McIntosh
FOR sandals, bleeding hearts, Big Brother, sensitivity training, using-a-meat-cleaver-when-a-scalpel-would-do, and nuclear-free zones: Dodds, Bruno, Pirok, Rosales, Jackson
The big question is, what will Savoy do? Old Orchard is already the best bowling alley in town, and now it is the only one where you can smoke. Will we see a boom of new bars in Savoy?
Pirok?
Unfortunate.
New smoke ban thread opened - for your pleasure.
Now that the politicos have saved us from the dreadful smoke..how about some action on fast food! Many bars are serving FRENCH FRIES and they are fried!!!! This represents a serious health hazard....call your representative to initiate a BAN ON ALL HIGH CHOLESTEROL FOODS!!! SAVE US!!
They are already considering a ban on unhealthy foods in pubs in Scotland, and while I don't believe we'd consider Scotland the leader in these kinds of issues, I wouldn't be surprised if the next attack comes on fast food via a tax or something else. I believe that our do-nothing governor has already addressed the killer issue of soda in schoosl.
Campaigner--while I don't disagree with most of what you said, what makes you think that Deb Feinen would have voted against a smoking ban? While she's a Republican in name, she's hardly conservative.
sorry for shooting off my mouth, but I am so depressed about:
the loss of the county board, the loss of the state's attorney, the loss of the city council, the loss on the section 8 issue, and now this loss on the smoking issue
Where IS the leadership? What, as Rs, can we expect in the future?
Hartman got blind-sided by Piland when Piland made Dick Steigmann resign from the County Board (and as an incumbent candidate), costing a safe county board seat, and the loss of the board to the Dems prior to redistricting; Piland got blindsided by the dem Reitz; Schweighart got blindsided by Gina; then Schweighart got blindsided by Pirok, and didn't see the Rosales proposal passing.
What is going wrong? I am very unhappy with how the Republicans keep shooting themselves in the foot. I'm not going to turn Dem, but I'm about to stop contributing, stop walking for candidates, maybe even stop voting.
Sorry about the tirade, but I am pretty angry about how the left has so easily taken over, especially taking over the center.
Someone tell me why, and what can be done about it.
Campaigner--what is going on here at the local level is mirrored at the national level in the GOP. We too often assume that candidates with an R after their name are conservative, and that isn't always the case. If conservatives want to take back the party, then we're going to have to find conservatives to run for these offices and work to get them elected.
Recently, Herndon, Va. threw out their mayor and city council who voted to build and fund a day center for illegal laborers. Recently, in Penn. a group there worked to defeat an official who was the President of the state senate, I believe, and had been in office for 32 years because they were upset that the legislature had voted themselves yet another pay increase. If these things can happen in these places, with proper work, organization, and support, they can happen here too. We just need to energize our local party.
i disagree. it is the hopeless hanging on to the conservative hard right side, failing to compromise, failing to court the great undecideds, that is leaving the middle to the dems.
didn't anyone around here learn anything from Reagan?
Stay hard right, and lose even more, until it's the dems vs the greens, and Rs will be remembered as that party that self destructed, rather than learn anything about survival.
Can you name a present day Federalist, a Whig, a Tory? Nope.
21st century, 2075, "remember them, what were they, Republicans?"
I think we have seen at every level of gov't the complacency and arrogance that comes from long terms in power - the old Dem Congress, the new GOP Congress, the old GOP Ill, the new Dem Ill, the old GOP Champaign county.
Hang in there - the worm will turn. Supporting private property and private enterprise is not hard right.
Campaigner--moving to the center got us things like SEction 8 and the smoking ban--a hard turn to the right might not be such a bad thing, or at least pulling back from the left, where the City Council appears to be going. STicking to conservative principals got us a Republican Congress, although the way it's been acting, you wouldn't know that Congress was Republican.
Hartman got blind-sided by Piland when Piland made Dick Steigmann resign from the County Board (and as an incumbent candidate), costing a safe county board seat, and the loss of the board to the Dems prior to redistricting; Piland got blindsided by the dem Reitz; Schweighart got blindsided by Gina; then Schweighart got blindsided by Pirok, and didn't see the Rosales proposal passing.
Be that as it may, this was possible only because Jim Green vacated his seat right after re-election.
And don't get me started about Tom Bruno.
Why don't we create a referendum to ban the smoking ban? If it passes or doesn't pass, at least represents the desire of the people and not lobbyists. I suspect the number of backyard parties I attend this summer are going to increase significantly - I can bring the petitions.
Good question.
Since this thing lost last time, why can't there be a third time?
A referendum to create smoking licenses for bars would be much more effective.
Check out the residence address listed for Rosales on the City Council web site:
http://www.ci.champaign.il.us/government/page.php?pn=contact_us_mayorcouncil
I thought you had to *live* in the City of Champaign?
How can we, as voters, know where he lives?
HandySmurf (May 18 5:01): Interesting comment about Bruno. But didn't he vote against the loan to Lone Star Lodge when McIntosh, Schweighart and Pirtle all voted to give them another $150,000 in 2002?
And where was Bruno on Section 8? Remember this NG Article:
To Champaign City Council members Marci Dodds and Kathy Ennen, approving a city policy that landlords can't discriminate against holders of federal Section 8 rent vouchers was a matter of fairness.
"It's a governmental program that helps people," said Dodds... ...Dodds was joined by Ennen, Giraldo Rosales, Mike La Due and Gina Jackson in supporting the policy change in a straw poll Tuesday night.
"I think we did the right thing," Ennen said....
...Voting against adding the Section 8 protections were Champaign Mayor Jerry Schweighart and council members Ken Pirok, Vic McIntosh and Tom Bruno.
Its that old adage: Be careful what you wish for!
Bruno also voted for the anti-war referendum.
So is Bruno a moderate swing vote? Did he go for anti-war to disarm future opponents over a meaningless gesture? Did he go for the smoking ban to create a backlash?