Daily Archives: May 6, 2006

City of Peoria, East Bluff, Kellar Branch, Peoria County, Peoria Disposal Company, Peoria Park District, Peoria Public Schools, Peoria Regional Airport

A taxing weekend

4 Comments

Yesterday I got my property tax bill.

Looking it over, I see that over half my taxes go to Peoria Public School District 150. They’re going to have another forum on the future plans for Glen Oak and White schools, this time just for parents of kids who attend those schools. Superintendent Ken Hinton said, “It’s important to me to hear the voice of the parents.” Okay, I’ll take him at his word, but he’d be a whole lot more convincing if he had listened to their voice before deciding the site of a new school.

I have the same concerns about the format as other people, so I won’t repeat that here. But I would like to make another point: I think it’s important to listen to the parents of kids who attend there, but this decision doesn’t just affect them. Alterations to Glen Oak Park affects all of Peoria. Replacing the Glen Oak School site with a park, public housing, or a vacant building affects all of the East Bluff. Let’s just suppose, for the sake of argument, that the parents of kids at Glen Oak and White right now are indifferent to the location of a new school. That should be taken into consideration, but shouldn’t trump overall neighborhood and city concerns.

Also on my bill, I see I’m paying a good amount to the “Pleasure Driveway PKD,” aka the Peoria Park District. The park board was just slapped with a lawsuit this weekend by neighborhood activists Karrie Alms and Sara Partridge. According to the Journal Star, the suit “alleges closed meetings held by the board on March 8 and 22 violated the state’s Open Meetings Act by discussing plans to replace Glen Oak School when that wasn’t appropriate.” If the court finds that the board met illegally, and if the decision to enter into an intergovernmental agreement with District 150 was made in one of those meetings, one possible remedy would be to nullify the agreement that was made in secret.

I’m glad somebody cares enough to act on this. People complain about back-room deals and shady politics, but more often than not nobody does anything about it. Here are a couple of people who are willing to hold the Park Board accountable for their actions. Kudos to Karrie and Sara!

Let’s see, what else is on my tax bill? There’s Illinois Central College and the Peoria Library. Don’t have much to say about those except that I think the library here in Peoria is under-utilized. There’s a wealth of information and expertise down there — I’ve learned more about Peoria from the library than one could ever learn online.

The Greater Peoria Mass Transit District, aka CityLink, makes an appearance on my bill. They do a pretty good job of moving people around the city — a tough job when the city is as spread out as it is. On the Peoria Rails Yahoo group, several people have been throwing around the idea of using the Kellar Branch for a light passenger rail system instead of a walking/biking trail:

The expansion of Peoria population into the far northwest part of the city, the growth of shopping in that area, and greatly increased fuel costs might make light rail service feasible. The Kellar branch could up upgraded and extended over Rt 6 to a parking and depot area behind or near the Grand Prairie. Interconnecting bus service there, downtown, and perhaps at a stop or two along the way would make public transportation quicker and more user friendly. The light rail service could terminate at the old Rock Island Depot and the light rail unit could be run in the push/pull – Chicago METRA style. A shuttle bus could take passengers to and from the CITYLINK terminal on Adams St.

Not a bad idea, especially given the cost of gas these days. However, there are two things not mentioned that would have to happen for it to be successful: (1) the speed limit for this light rail system would have to be faster than the 10 mph city code dictates for trains, and (2) part of the upgrade of the Kellar Branch would have to be better signals at grade crossings and fences along the tracks where the tracks pass through neighborhoods.

CityLink isn’t the only transportation entity on my tax bill. There’s also the Greater Peoria Regional Airport Authority. They have a new skipper (Ken Spirito from Gulfport, Mississippi), and part of his mission is to “redevelop and redo this terminal building. […] I want it to be a ‘wow’ impression. I want to ‘wow’ them,” according to the Journal Star‘s May 1 article. At least one person doesn’t like that idea. Polly Peoria, usually an advocate of tearing down old buildings, likes this one, so it can stay. I haven’t flown since before 9/11/01, so I honestly have no idea what kind of condition Peoria’s airport is in. If remodeling can bring in more business though, I say go for it. It’s not like that terminal was built to be a hallmark civic building.

What’s left? Let’s see, Peoria County, which recently voted down an expansion to the hazardous waste landfill. Now there’s a public board that listened to the public. District 150 and the Park Board could learn a few things from them. I’ve already blogged about this issue at length, so I’ll move on.

Finally, there’s the City of Peoria and Peoria Township. Why we need both I don’t quite understand, and yes, I have read the Journal Star’s special series on this issue. It’s an interesting read, but given what services the township now provides, it seems like they could just as easily provide it as part of city services and eliminate redundant government bodies.

As usual, my wife and I will pick a day to go down to the courthouse, eat at the pushcarts, listen to the Arts in Education bands play, enjoy the beautiful weather (hopefully), and pay our property taxes. Doing it that way lessens the pain of all the money we’re paying.

City of Peoria, Kellar Branch

Response to George Burrier and the RTA

1 Comment

“This issue has dragged on long enough,” said George Burrier, president of both Recreational Trail Advocates and Friends of the Rock Island Trail.

He wonders why Carver Lumber Co. doesn’t withdraw its complaint and cooperate with the city, which has constructed a $2 million rail line to the company’s site from the west.

Customers of the Kellar line enjoyed city-subsidized service for years, Burrier said, because the city leased the line for $1 a year.

“And what is the definition of ‘adequate’?” asked Burrier, a retired lawyer.

That quote is from today’s Journal Star. I’d like to answer Mr. Burrier’s questions.  First of all, Carver won’t withdraw its complaint and “cooperate with the city,” because it tried that route once already and it cost them $60,000.  The city promised in writing that service would continue over the Kellar Branch until the western spur was completed. That service did not continue, and Carver had to truck its lumber for several months at great expense.  That’s what they got for their “cooperation.”  They’re not complaining out of spite, but to protect their business and the jobs of their employees.

Burrier’s claim of city-subsidized service shows a profound ignorance of the history of the city’s involvement in the rail line.  The city paid $856,000 for the rail line in 1984.  To recoup that investment, the city charged user fees of $175 per car, plus every business on the line had to pay a special assessment, whether they used the line or not.  The city eventually dropped the per-car user fee when one of the companies on the line went out of business.  Businesses along the line have not had a free ride, as Mr. Burrier implies.

As for the definition of “adequate,” we need only read the city’s very own contract with DOT Rail (parent company of the Central Illinois Railway which replaced Pioneer Industrial Railway).  This contract was signed June 26, 2000, and says in Article 2 (emphasis mine):

DOT shall use all commercially reasonable efforts to [secure] an interchange agreement with UP [Union Pacific] under terms that will not materially increase the rates charged the Rail Line’s customers or significantly alter the service level presently provided over the Kellar Branch.  Commercially reasonable efforts shall include, if necessary, the duty to pursue all available remedies through the Surface Transportation Board (“STB”) (or other regulatory agency or body having jurisdiction) to obtain such interchange agreement.

It’s only reasonable that the new service over the western spur be tested to make sure it meets these requirements before the Kellar Branch is removed. Remember, Carver has access to eight major rail lines via the Kellar Branch, but only one (UP) via the western spur.  If UP charges them an exorbitant tariff to provide service to the spur, they will have little or no recourse.

Burrier’s statements indicate he is either ignorant of the complexities surrounding this issue, or that he is apathetic to the plight of Carver Lumber.