Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Income tax hike murmurs
Next Post: Question of the Day
Posted in:
[Posted by Kevin Fanning]
* The Commission on Government Forecasting and Accountability met last night for a hearing at the Capitol in front of a large crowd of which many a future hangs in the balance.
The commission has until September 11th to make a recommendation, and most on the panel seemed apprehensive about the move:
“All we’re doing is shuffling the cards,” said Rep. Rich Brauer, R-Petersburg, of relocating the jobs to Harrisburg. “That’s not right.”
[…]
“It wasn’t an economic decision then. It was a political decision,” Syverson said as onlookers in the Capitol rotunda exploded into cheers and applause.
* Tracy Wyatt, the Southeastern Illinois College Foundation Director, tried to downplay the notion that the building in Harrisburg is sitting in a floodplain.
Wyatt claimed that after a day the flood, the water subsided enough at the front of the building so that people could get in and out.
We posted the picture a couple of weeks ago and as the saying goes it’s worth a thousand words…
* Bethany Jaegar has it right:
They’re both victims, one set to lose either way. The motivation behind the move is the most contentious point, particularly whether the idea is rooted in economics or in politics.
GOP legislators representing the Springfield area allege the governor’s proposal was retribution for supporting a measure that would allow voters to recall elected officials, a measure perceived to be directed at the governor.
They list various state-owned facilities that have space and could house the division. “We can move them a block or two and not 200 miles,” said Rep. Raymond Poe, a Springfield Republican, during the hearing.
The administration refutes the allegation and says the move is intended to give a boost to an economically depressed area of the state.
* Truly sad. The SJ-R has pictures from the hearing up on it’s website as well as a video of it too.
posted by Kevin Fanning
Friday, Aug 1, 08 @ 10:52 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Income tax hike murmurs
Next Post: Question of the Day
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
One of the important parts of the story is that the IDOT Secretary more than implied that there was a directive from the Governor to identify free-standing divisions that could be moved out of Springfield.
When asked if this directive was still in place, he ducked the question by responding that IDOT was only able to identify one free-standing division that could be relocated, so this was the only move IDOT was contemplating.
Is there such a directive? Is it still in place?
Comment by Cogito Friday, Aug 1, 08 @ 11:01 am
yeah that’s interesting. I missed that.
Comment by Kevin Fanning Friday, Aug 1, 08 @ 11:04 am
Sees’ statement didn’t make clear whether this “directive” applies only to IDOT or if it’s a general directive to ALL state agencies. I suspect the latter.
Comment by Secret Square Friday, Aug 1, 08 @ 11:19 am
Blagoof is very easy to read. This was a “bush league” swipe taken at a community that he does not like and in NO WAY supports him.
Comment by Dan S, a voter and Cubs Fan Friday, Aug 1, 08 @ 11:26 am
The question of whether the building is legally in a “floodplain” would be relatively easy to answer (no, don’t look at the picture). A 12 inch rain in 24 hours is a very rare event and could happen to a building not inside a floodplain. FEMA publishes floodplain maps for insurance purposes in all IL communities, and the building is either inside or outside the FEMA floodplain. If the building is in the 100 year floodplain (meaning it is expected to flood at least once in 100 years according to probability) any prospective buyer of the building would be required by a lender to obtain flood insurance (if they paid cash, there is no law “requiring” a buyer to have the insurance, but the risk is all theirs). If it is outside the 100 year floodplain but inside the 500 year floodplain, a buyer would not be required to buy the insurance by a lender, but FEMA would recommend they consider buying it “just in case”.
Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Friday, Aug 1, 08 @ 11:30 am
Actually there are other free-standing sections at IDOT, including the Division of Aeronautics and Bureau of Railroads. It should also be noted that the Mass-Transit Division is already located in Chicago. I was at the hearing, and the Secretary did say there was such a Directive from the Governor, so this nightmare may not be over yet. Among the more obvious conclusions to be drawn from the hearing is how horribly divisive these relocations are, pitting one region and its elected people against another region and their elected people. This move by the Governor, to help Harrisburg and his friends, is only going to cause his friends in other far corners of the state to want their little piece of state government too. I can just see this litle shop of horrors now.
Comment by InquiringMind Friday, Aug 1, 08 @ 11:31 am
If the move is for economic enhancemet free-standing divisions in IDOT also include the District 6 IDOT headquarters (Ash Street/ State owned detriorating building) and D-6 annex office (Stevenson Dr/ Leased)…were rumored to be on the list to leave Springfield… for Jacksonville.
Also the Bureau of Matererial-Physical Research (Ash St/State owned deteriorating building) is another IDOT freestanding facility that could be relocated to a depressed economic area.
Wonder how many IDOT engineeers would like to relocate out of Springfield if these facilites moved?
Comment by curious george Friday, Aug 1, 08 @ 11:47 am
To Six, actually if the structure is in the 100 year floodplain it would have a 1% chance of flooding EVERY year.
Comment by anon Friday, Aug 1, 08 @ 11:51 am
Lost in the story, the original comments that they are moving the workers but not management.
because we all know productivity increase by removing management….
Comment by Ghost Friday, Aug 1, 08 @ 11:56 am
Or is it because so many of the management have “second” jobs in Springfield that would hurt their pocketbook if they had to move to Harrisburg? Just wondering. Check it out.
Comment by Joe Schmoe Friday, Aug 1, 08 @ 12:04 pm
anon 11:51- same odds, a different way of loooking at it. 100% probability of flooding once within 100 years = 1% probability of flooding in any one of the given 100 years.
Ghost- Sometimes the less management, the better. Not recommended for infants or state employees.
Comment by Six Degrees of Separation Friday, Aug 1, 08 @ 12:05 pm
Does anyone know how many jobs have been lost in Springfield since Blagojevich came into office? Or how many state jobs were gained in Chicago?
Now he wants to take more jobs out of Springfield and relocate them in Southern Illinois. His record doesn’t reflect an interest in Central or Southern Illinois regarding this issue. If he had been locating jobs from Springfield to other non-Chicagoland locations, perhaps we could see a pattern here. We don’t though, do we?
I have always believed that Democrats are more concerned over redividing a shrinking economic pie than implementing programs to grow them. They recognize that our economy isn’t robust enough to add jobs, so they play political games with existing ones.
Blagojevich is proving this once again.
Comment by VanillaMan Friday, Aug 1, 08 @ 12:39 pm
Actually Sec Milt Sees told the commission that “no one will have to move” and everyone who does not wish to move to Harrisburg will given a job with like responsibilities, pay and benefits. Sees stated he has the governor’s word on that! (We all kind of know what the governor’s word is currently worth)
That said; just think of the problems which would occur if the CORE KNOWLEDGE of the traffic safety division was gone having decided to not move to Harrisburg. These employees perform highly specialized tasks, some requiring months of specialized technical training and certification by USDOT, to do their job ensuring you are safe while moving over the IL highways and city streets. Just to name a few:
• analysis of crash data for high accident locations;
• seat belt/child safety seat programs;
• managing multimillion $ federal highway safety grants for local and state agencies;
• motorcycle safety training;
• school bus, truck and commercial vehicle safety inspections;
• hazardous material transportation safety;
• inspection/regulation of commercial vehicles, drivers and employers
Imagine going any business/state agency only to find out that NONE of the employees have any knowledge or experience with the products or services they are providing. Just think about going into your bank and trying to make a withdrawal from you account when no one in the bank even has a clue how to open the cash drawer or operate the computer to look up your account.
Sure they may eventually get it figured out but what do you do in the mean time about your money and what degree of confidence would you have about leaving your assets with that provider?
This CORE KNOWLEDGE, my friends, something IDOT cannot afford to lose. Yes, employees can be replaced to carry on the mission but someone still needs to know what the mission is all about…
Comment by curious george Friday, Aug 1, 08 @ 1:00 pm
The hypocrisy is so apparent on this one. Previously, when it did not suit the Governor’s purpose, the administration argued that the local economic impact should not be a factor in deciding whether to close a prison. They argued that the decision should be based soley upon the needs of the state agency. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, the administration argues that the local positive economic impact for southern Illinois is a factor that should be considered when a state agency decides to move. You can’t have it both ways.
Comment by One of the 35 Friday, Aug 1, 08 @ 2:12 pm
I think the “mold beagle” needs to go through that building and see what his nose thinks.
Comment by Shelbyville Friday, Aug 1, 08 @ 2:39 pm
Curious - You are right on the money. Even after 5 years, the Governor’s people don’t know - or care - that our agency’s mission requires full-time career employees with very specialized knowledge, training, experience and judgment. They believe any Tom, Dick or Harry can be hired off the street and plugged into any of these jobs. Or, better yet, a consultant can be hired, (after the obligatory $25K contribution) to do the work without any agency staffers with the aforementioned specialized qualifications in the agency to supervise them. And, we understand that many hacks in Democratic areas are furious that the Governor has not been able to follow through on his promises of patronage plums. Unfortunately, we have already lost many of the type of people we as an agency really cannot do without, and many of us left here think the situation may be beyond the point of salvation.
Comment by IDOT Engineer Friday, Aug 1, 08 @ 6:09 pm