Here’s how to fix older neighborhoods – I was driven through the Averyville neighborhood this month. It’s what I call a “classic” neighborhood. Lots of older, yet well-maintained homes. And there were homes that are less well-maintained, but still livable. And then there are the abandoned homes, boarded up (if we’re lucky) and essentially left to rot.

Here’s what ought to happen.  If a home is unoccupied for more than a year, the city ought to use eminent domain and seize the property. Then, the city ought to pay for repairs (fresh paint, new windows, new furnace, etc) then the city ought to sell the home to whoever is willing to pay for the cost of these very basic repairs.

You would see houses on the market for $5,000 to $10,000. I would have one rule: No selling them to landlords.

I could see how this would piss off real estate agents (and landlord). Who’s gonna buy some cookie-cutter mini-mansion in lower-Dunlap for $160,000 when you can buy a classic home for $10,000.

It won’t happen of course. The city has millions of dollars to spend on museums, ballparks, shopping centers, strip malls and recreation centers. Poor neighborhoods can just deal with it on their own, as far as the city council is concerned.

Sidewalks (or the lack thereof) are a rich vs. poor issue – If you think about it for a second, sidewalks (or the lack thereof) are very much a rich vs. poor issue.

Take suburban subdivisions. They are little pockets of habitation, each one standing alone. They might be connected by roads, but they often aren’t connected by sidewalks on those roads. But the lack of sidewalks doesn’t matter. If you have the cash to buy one of these overpriced mini mansions, you have the scratch to buy a car. You wanna visit a fellow Country Club member in the next subdivision over, you get in your car and drive on over.

The Peoria City Council, as a matter of practicality , rarely makes developers build sidewalks. Oh sure, they  make noises about how developers are supposed to set money aside to build them when circumstances allow. Sure. And developers are such honest and trustworthy folks, that money is never used to fund OTHER projects. Nope.

And then there are older neighborhoods, in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd districts. You see streets where the lawns just end where the streets begin. West Nebraska east of University is like that. Pedestrians just have to walk in the street to get anywhere.

Some of these neighborhoods are more than 100 years old. And no city council has ever, ever, ever found the lack of sidewalks an important enough issue to install them.

Many residents of older neighborhoods do NOT have the option of getting in their cars and driving to the corner store. The lack of walking distance grocery stores in older, poorer neighborhoods is ANOTHER story. People in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd district HAVE to walk, or use public transportation. You see them every day waiting on street corners, many of them elderly or disabled, often sitting on wet grass because of the lack of bus benches.

And if these pedestrians are school kids, they can look forward to being harassed by city cops to get off the road while they attempt to walk home on sidewalk-less streets.

But by all means, Peoria City Council, look for newer and better goodies to bestow on rich developers come budget time.