John Jackson of the Paul Simon Institute has a piece up on the unintended consequences (aren't there always) of the state law allowing the skipping of a primary election if less than a certain number of candidates filed and the likelihood that the most popular one won't get elected.
Since we have 5 candidates for mayor, Carbondale has to have a run-off to pare it down, by state law to 4. With 4 candidates, one will be able to win with a plurality rather than a majority vote. One candidate could even do it with three candidates in the race. Plus as Jackson points out Arrow's Paradox says that each additional candidate in the race decreases the likelihood that the most popular candidate will win.
Monday, January 31, 2011
Friday, January 28, 2011
Liquor Advisory Board
The LAB is scheduled to meet next Thursday, Feb. 3 at 5:30 in room 103 of the Civic Center. Just because you want to know, the two things on the agenda are approval of a couple of Class F1 liquor licences so myriad people may consume large quantities of wine during Carbondale Main Street's two Art and Wine Festivals later this year. Also scheduled is a review of 2nd quarter reports from the police and fire departments, as well as Building and Neighborhood Services. You know you want to attend, don't you?
Thursday, January 27, 2011
Yard Signs
Since I has a free half hour or so this morning, I took a drive through the western side of C'dale looking for yard signs for the various candidates in the upcoming primary. While I didn't take any counts (the whole driving the car made that impractical), here are the general impressions:
Jane Adams and Don Monty are the only city council candidates with any yard signs out in the areas I drove through (Arbor District, southwest and northwest areas). Most appears alone in a yard, though about 15-20% of homes had both signs there.
All the mayoral candidates had signs out, though I did not spot a Brent Ritzel sign until late this afternoon, while driving down a side street off N. Oakland. George Maroney and Joel Fritzler had about the same number of signs out, with Fritzler more common in the Arbor District and just west of there, while more Maroney signs appeared out by Tower Road and to the west. Sam Goldman signs are common near the hospital and are the only signs in yards in the retirement community area north of Old Rt 13, but pretty space otherwise.
I only spotted 3 Steven Haynes signs, one in front of Hundley House and the other two scattered in the area around S. Oakland and Emerald Lane.
Though it is still about a month until the primary, signage gives an indication of the depth of current support for the candidates as only more dedicated supporters will have signs out in their yards now. This is also only support on the western side of town. I will check out levels of visible support on the east side next week.
Update: I see several Ritzel signs have popped up along W. Sycamore since yesterday.
Jane Adams and Don Monty are the only city council candidates with any yard signs out in the areas I drove through (Arbor District, southwest and northwest areas). Most appears alone in a yard, though about 15-20% of homes had both signs there.
All the mayoral candidates had signs out, though I did not spot a Brent Ritzel sign until late this afternoon, while driving down a side street off N. Oakland. George Maroney and Joel Fritzler had about the same number of signs out, with Fritzler more common in the Arbor District and just west of there, while more Maroney signs appeared out by Tower Road and to the west. Sam Goldman signs are common near the hospital and are the only signs in yards in the retirement community area north of Old Rt 13, but pretty space otherwise.
I only spotted 3 Steven Haynes signs, one in front of Hundley House and the other two scattered in the area around S. Oakland and Emerald Lane.
Though it is still about a month until the primary, signage gives an indication of the depth of current support for the candidates as only more dedicated supporters will have signs out in their yards now. This is also only support on the western side of town. I will check out levels of visible support on the east side next week.
Update: I see several Ritzel signs have popped up along W. Sycamore since yesterday.
Wednesday, January 26, 2011
Property Transfer Ordinance
This ordinance, passed at last week's city council meeting, has disturbed some community members because it takes the responsibility of disposing of city property, specifically land, from the city council as a whole and vests it in the office of the Mayor. The ordinance allows the Mayor to transfer title of properties in residential the city has taken ownership of for delinquent tax liabilities. The Mayor may, as I read the ordinance, donate these properties to builders for the construction of one and two family homes without council approval. If no homes are built within 18 months, ownership of the property reverts to the city.
University College Model
I am thinking calling the proposed administrative restructuring at SIUC moving to a university college model a bad bit of marketing. The term does not describe the desired results and give the indication the entire university will get restructured rather than just administrative offices. At least, that is my impression of the final result from the illustration accompanying the above article. Why not just call it "administrative restructuring" and leave it at that?
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
Post Office
Given the financial strain the Us Postal Service is under and the pressure Congress is placing on the organization to cut its budget, I have to wonder how much longer Carbondale will have the luxury of two post office locations. The location on the west side appears to exist mainly for the convenience of the residence of southwest Carbondale with most of the work of mail arrival and sorting handled at the east side location. With talk of another rate increase and eliminating Saturday delivery, I expect the west side office to closed down within the next couple of years.
Sunday, January 23, 2011
Sustainability Commission
Sat in on the sustainability commission's meeting last Thursday evening. Pretty good attendance with 7 committee members there and 4 onlookers. The two major topics were a report on the Koppers wood treating plan cleanup from Kevin Beatty and a discussion of the proposed ordinance allowing city residents to keep chickens.
The cleanup continues to move along slowly. Apparently part of the reason for the slowdown is continual changes in rules and requirements from the EPA. Although the entire area covers about 10 acres in northeast Carbondale, the actual area requiring cleanup only covers about an acre, it is just spread in several locations over the property.
The proposed chicken ordinance would allow a maximum of six chickens per household for egg production only (no roosters and no raising chickens to slaughter for Sunday dinner). The committee based much of the ordinance on the current C'dale dog ordinance. Chickens have to have a license ($5 per chicken) and must stay on a leash when taken outside the back yard. Whoops, scratch that last part. They will probably have a leg band to identify licensed chickens. Chickens must stay confined to the back yard and the ordinance has specifics regarding location and construction of their coop, based on ordinances passed by other chicken friendly cities (Napierville IL and Columbia MO).
One point inserted into the ordinance after listening to community input is a provision that a dog that kills a loose chicken shall not be considered, for that reason alone, a dangerous or vicious dog. Still under discussion are regulations regarding the disposal of dead chickens, which, since people don't eat dogs, is not an issue covered under the dog ordinance.
The cleanup continues to move along slowly. Apparently part of the reason for the slowdown is continual changes in rules and requirements from the EPA. Although the entire area covers about 10 acres in northeast Carbondale, the actual area requiring cleanup only covers about an acre, it is just spread in several locations over the property.
The proposed chicken ordinance would allow a maximum of six chickens per household for egg production only (no roosters and no raising chickens to slaughter for Sunday dinner). The committee based much of the ordinance on the current C'dale dog ordinance. Chickens have to have a license ($5 per chicken) and must stay on a leash when taken outside the back yard. Whoops, scratch that last part. They will probably have a leg band to identify licensed chickens. Chickens must stay confined to the back yard and the ordinance has specifics regarding location and construction of their coop, based on ordinances passed by other chicken friendly cities (Napierville IL and Columbia MO).
One point inserted into the ordinance after listening to community input is a provision that a dog that kills a loose chicken shall not be considered, for that reason alone, a dangerous or vicious dog. Still under discussion are regulations regarding the disposal of dead chickens, which, since people don't eat dogs, is not an issue covered under the dog ordinance.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)