Council says no to TIF for Civic Center hotel

The City Council tonight decided (4-6) not to add the Civic Center property to the proposed Warehouse District TIF, despite heavy lobbying from the Civic Center Authority.

I think this was the right decision. The Civic Center property has no business being in a TIF at all, let alone the Warehouse District. Despite their protestations to the contrary, I’ll bet the Civic Center Authority is back before the council soon with another plan to lure a hotel to their site — this time without requiring a TIF.

The starry-eyed dreamers are trail advocates, not rail proponents

So the predictable Journal Star editorial on the Kellar Branch today says this:

From where we sit, reports on the viability and cost of dual use of the corridor are too unreliable for that choice to be on the table now.

This was the most shocking quote in the whole editorial because the editors, for the first time in recent memory, did not just repeat the Park District’s numbers as though Moses carried them down from the mountain. No, they’re now “unreliable.”

Then, another shocking statement: “We generally acknowledge the economic development potential of railroads and other transportation infrastructure.” Good, good. They’re recognizing the obvious now. Any hope that they were coming to their senses was soon dashed, however:

But with regard to the Kellar branch specifically, two decades of trying with little success make us dubious. Whatever the excuses – and rail proponents cite several – the line has not delivered.

You gotta love self-fulfilling prophecies. For about 13 years of the last two decades the city has been trying to shut down the line, and the western spur was only completed less than a year ago. These are just “excuses”? Why, I could just as easily say that after two decades, the Park District has failed to make good on their promise to convert this to a hiking path and raise property values. Whatever their excuses — and trail advocates cite several — the Park District hasn’t delivered.

Here’s another little gem:

If the Kellar is such a can’t-miss economic development asset, why unload it at a loss?

Au contraire, if the Kellar Branch is worth $1.2 million dollars, why should the city lease it to the Park District for $1/year just so they can tear it up and build a trail on the corridor with at least six million more taxpayer dollars, not including on-going maintenance? Is that good stewardship of taxpayer money? What’s the return on that investment for the taxpayers? When will that investment break even? How? Most of the track in question is located in the Village Peoria Heights, not the City of Peoria. How does this benefit Peoria taxpayers?

It’s a wonder Councilman Gary Sandberg, City Hall’s most vocal skeptic of public subsidies for private businesses, has never complained about the significant subsidy for past users of this rail line; they got something for nothing courtesy of local taxpayers.

Suppose for a moment that we accept the Journal Star’s logic here. What do you think would be the reasonable solution to this?

  • (a) Start charging more to lease the line to rail carriers
  • (b) Reinstate the $175-per-car fee the city levied in the 1980s that made the line uncompetitive
  • (c) Sell the line so that a private owner can pay taxes on the line, thus removing the supposed “subsidy”
  • (d) A and B combined
  • (e) Lease it to the Park District for $1/year so it remains off the tax rolls, remove the $1.2 million (their figures) rail line, and instead of subsidizing tax-paying, job-creating businesses (like we do everywhere else in Peoria, including Junction City where they were just given enterprise zone status), start subsidizing bikers and joggers who already have nearly 9,000 acres of park land and miles of sidewalks and residential streets on which to exercise.

Naturally, the Journal Star picks the most nonsensical option: (e). Add to that the $100,000+ in legal fees the city has been paying to secure this $1.2 million corridor for the benefit of the Park District and, to paraphrase the illustrious editorial board, some folks, I dare say, are just caught up in the romance of trails. But there’s a price to that passion, and Peoria has been paying it too long for too little return.

Pioneer Railcorp ups Kellar Branch offer to $750,000

Below is the text of the latest letter from Pioneer Railcorp to the Mayor and council members regarding the Kellar Branch. They’ve raised their $565,000 offer to $750,000. Tomorrow night, the city will decide if they want to pursue this three-quarters-of-a-million-dollars offer or continue paying legal fees out the nose for the benefit of the park district. It’s not like the city needs the money or anything.

February 16, 2007

Dear Council Member ——-:

Thank you for allowing me to speak at your meeting Tuesday night. I am writing to encourage you to support the selection of our Company to provide competitive rail service to the Peoria area, via the Keller Branch, and to reaffirm our commitment to share the railroad right of way with a trail, and work to develop a trolley/commuter service on the line to help local business and tourism.

Our sister Company Keokuk Junction Railway Co. is willing to purchase the Kellar Branch/”western connection” for $750,000. This is our last, best and final offer. I am confident that this offer is more than generous, especially since it is likely the City has already received a significant payback of its original investment from previous surcharges that were collected. Putting the Kellar Branch back in private hands will put it back on the tax rolls, allow us to make necessary investments in the track, and obviate the worsening weed/brush situation, which CIRY refuses to address.

Selling the railroad to our Company would facilitate the quickest and easiest means to build a trail, and will once and for all put an end to a problem that has festered for over 10 years. Please consider the fact that it is an unanswered question as to how much of the underlying real estate is actually owned by the City, if any. Aside from the rail issues, construction of a trail could be significantly delayed if it turns out that the property reverts to the adjoining landowners, if the Keller Branch were to be removed. This would not be an issue if the railroad remains intact. I am confident that a way to fund the construction of the trail will be found, once the decision has been made to keep the Keller Branch intact, just as it was for the trail between East Peoria and Morton along Highway 150. As I mentioned Tuesday, shared right of ways are being used all over the country and I would like to point out that the City already has a trail on railroad right of way along the downtown riverfront! Resolving this issue once and for all would allow the City to turn its attention to more pressing issues, such as reducing crime and increasing economic development. To date the City has wasted in excess of $100,000 of taxpayer money on legal fees alone on this issue, not to mention untold hundreds of thousands of dollars in staff and council time. Without immediate closure, this problem will be ongoing for many more years.

In regard to comments made concerning the importance of a rail carrier having a good relationship with the Union Pacific, please be assured that Pioneer Railcorp subsidiaries perform millions of dollars of business with the Union Pacific Railroad, all over the country, including handling 10,000 cars a year for the Union Pacific in Fort Smith, Arkansas and delivering 1 million tons of coal from the Union Pacific in Central Illinois. Of course, none of this would be possible if we were not able to work with the Union Pacific, as some have falsely claimed.

We have been the only company able to operate the Keller Branch at a profit, and anticipate significant growth in usage of the Keller Branch in the coming years. In addition, both current users of the line, including O’Brien Steel, have told the Council our Company provides excellent service. CRY has never provided reliable or dependable service to Carver Lumber, and I have concerns that CRY employees are not actually performing railroad services for O’Brien Steel, and instead believe the handling of O’Brien Steel rail traffic is being performed by O’Brien employees directly. If this is accurate, it is a potential liability exposure the City cannot afford to have. Mr. O’Brien’s company, contrary to the information he presented the Council, has historically been a moderate user of the Keller Branch. Please see the table below:

O’Brien Steel Rail Usage

Year Railcars
1998 95
1999 30
2000 76
2001 66
2002 74
2003 81
2004 116
2005 82
Total 620

In addition, it is my understanding that O’Brien received at least 45 cars in 2006. I think it is a safe assumption to make that O’Brien Steel would not have used rail it was not the most cost effective way to receive its product.

Thank you for your consideration of my request. Please be assured we want to be part of the solution, not part of the problem. If you have any questions you would like answered please contact me anytime at […].

Respectfully,

J. Michael Carr
CEO and President

By the way, do you think rail and trail can’t coexist? Well, it does in South Elgin, Illinois. I guess they’re just more creative than we are here in Peoria:

Fox River Trail with Rail

(Disclaimer: No one is paying me to criticize Elaine Hopkins)

Former Journal Star reporter Elaine Hopkins has a new blog (disclaimer: no one is paying me to advertise her new blog) in which she makes sweeping assertions about how wonderful Peoria will be if only the Kellar Branch is converted to a recreational trail (disclaimer: no one is paying me to make sarcastic comments about Hopkins’ blog).

That’s not news (disclaimer: no one paid me to write that last sentence). What is interesting about her article (disclaimer: no one paid me to be interested in anything Hopkins has written) is this paragraph (disclaimer: no one paid me to reproduce or comment on this paragraph) in which she talks about nameless blogs that oppose the Kellar Branch conversion:

The blogs drone on endlessly, but never proclaim their independence from Pioneer Rail Co., the company behind the litigation and other stall tactics. Are these bloggers getting financial support from Pioneer? They should declare their independence, if they can do so.

Think about the implications of that statement (disclaimer: no one is paying me to ask you to think). Normally, if there’s a conflict of interest, you state it up front; if you don’t state it, it’s assumed that you have no conflict of interest unless there is some evidence that will prove otherwise — you know, the whole “innocent until proven guilty” thing (disclaimer: no one is paying me to point out the obvious). But Hopkins turns that on its head. Apparently, she believes that you have an obligation to “declare [your] independence” in order to be free of suspicion about a possible conflict of interest (disclaimer: no one is paying me to demonstrate the logical conclusion of such an argument).

Can you imagine all the ink that would need to be spilled if every story had to include independence disclaimers? (Disclaimer: no one is paying me to put these irritating disclaimers all over the place to make a point.)

It’s also worth noting that she doesn’t declare her independence from the Park District or other trail supporters (disclaimer: no one is paying me to turn Hopkins’ cynicism back on herself). Are we to assume, by her standards, that she’s getting a check for her support? (Disclaimer: no one is paying me to scoff at Hopkins.)

Just for the record, four days before Ms. Hopkins’ post, I said right here on my blog, “The first thing [Khazzam] asked me was if I was being paid by Pioneer Rail in any way, shape, or form. He could hardly believe me when I said I wasn’t.” And three days before her post, I added in a follow-up comment, “No, my opinion on this issue hasn’t been bought. I’ve come to my conclusions honestly and after thoughtful independent research. I’ve never received any money from Pioneer, and that’s a fact.” (Disclaimer: no is paying me to say Pioneer isn’t paying me.)

So, put up or shut up, Ms. Hopkins. Do you have any evidence that bloggers are being paid off by Pioneer Railcorp? Let’s see it. The onus is on you. (Disclaimer: no one is paying me to challenge Hopkins.) Feel free to leave your evidence in the comments section of my blog; I’m not afraid to let people comment on my posts (disclaimer: no one is paying me to take a jab at Hopkins’ not allowing comments on her post).

Back in the saddle again

Hello everyone. Did you miss me? I enjoyed my mini-vacation. It was refreshing and so nice to be “unplugged” for a few days. Of course, that meant I had roughly 30 billion e-mail messages when I returned. I’m sorting through them now.

I haven’t read through the papers or checked any other blogs for the past four days, so I feel a bit out of the loop at the moment. I did happen to see the “Another View” letter to the editor in Sunday’s paper (the heading was the misnomer of the year since it’s not “another view” but exactly the same view as the paper’s) and today’s “Word on the Street” (which was right on point).

While I’m catching up, feel free to use this as another open thread to talk about whatever you wish.

Snow removal shows marked improvement

Snow PlowThe city did a very good job of plowing the snow the last couple of days. Everything seemed very organized. My alley was plowed before noon yesterday, and plowed again last night. The residential streets have had at least one pass, and I expect will be cleared curb-to-curb by tomorrow. The main roads are in excellent condition.

Perhaps the most impressive thing I saw was all the Cat end loaders and city trucks downtown last night actually removing the snow from the streets. I also saw little Bobcat-size tractors clearing the sidewalks. It was a sight to behold.

Congratulations to the Public Works Department on a job well done.

Is your bicycle registered?

In the category of “little-known and never-enforced Peoria ordinances,” did you know that your bicycle is supposed to be registered and licensed?

Yup. I didn’t believe it either, but Gary Sandberg told me it was in the municipal code. Sure enough, here’s the chapter and verse (emphasis mine):

Sec. 28-489. Registration, etc., required; exemptions.
(a) No person shall ride or propel a bicycle upon any street or public way in the city, or upon any part thereof, unless such bicycle has been registered and provided with the proper license tags as provided for in this article.
(b) Sidewalk bikes, scooter bikes, junior bikes or any other type of bicycle with a tire of 20 inches or less shall be exempt from license or registration.
(Code 1957, § 19-147)

Sec. 28-490. Application for license; fee.
Application for a license to own and operate a bicycle shall be made to the superintendent of police, upon a form to be provided by the superintendent of police. The application shall be accompanied by a fee of $0.50 to be paid in advance at the time of issuance of the license.
(Code 1957, § 19-148)

Sec. 28-491. License tag.
(a) Upon submission of the application referred to in section 28-490 in proper form, the superintendent of police shall provide duplicate tags, one to be permanently attached to the frame of the bicycle, the duplicate to be attached in such a manner as to permit the removal of the same by the owner while the bicycle is not in operation. The removal of any permanent tag, except by proper authority, shall be a violation of this article. It shall be a violation of this article for any person to operate any bicycle upon any street of the city, unless such bicycle is equipped with and displays thereon the proper license tags.
(b) Duplicate license tags for bicycles will be issued by the superintendent of police to the owner of a bicycle, when such tags are lost or stolen, only upon written application, which shall state what disposition was made of the original tag, whether the same was lost or stolen.
(Code 1957, § 19-149)

There’s actually more, but I don’t want to bore you further. There’s a provision for transferring ownership (fee: 10¢) and for violating the ordinance (fee: $10).

On that last point, I think we’ve found a great way to raise some money for the city: this spring and summer, station an officer at the beginning of the Rock Island Trail and start handing out citations to bicyclists with unregistered bicycles. Trail proponents say there are 82,000 users of the Rock Island Trail. If just a quarter of those (20,500) are bicyclists (and I bet they’re all unregistered), that would bring in over $200,000!

My first address to the City Council

Tonight, I addressed the Peoria City Council regarding the Kellar Branch issue. It was my first time addressing the council on any topic, and while I didn’t mentally feel nervous, physically I got cotton mouth and ended up speaking too fast. I guess that just goes to show I don’t have a future in public speaking. You can read my prepared remarks below by clicking the “Show More” link. I stuck pretty close to them, but I did ad lib a couple of times.

I got to meet Alexis Khazzam. We had a nice talk about the Kellar Branch issue. He’s often described to me as “energetic,” and after having met him in person, that’s a very accurate description. The first thing he asked me was if I was being paid by Pioneer Rail in any way, shape, or form. He could hardly believe me when I said I wasn’t. He was very nice and, even though we disagree on the Kellar Branch thing, he didn’t hold it against me personally.

In contrast, I also got to meet David Maloof who said exactly nothing to me. Barbara Van Auken introduced me to him and he somewhat reluctantly shook my hand. I’m not sure what to think of that. Maybe he’s just shy.

Former Mayor Dick Carver was actually a lot fairer than I thought he would be in discussing the issue. That was a pleasant surprise. I still think he’s overly optimistic about service via the western spur. He stressed the importance of having a carrier who has a good working relationship with the Union Pacific railroad in order for service from the west to work. That’s a perfect example of why service via the Kellar Branch is superior — competitive rail service is not dependent upon the benevolence of Union Pacific.

There were surprisingly few people who spoke. My guess is that there will be a lot of people speaking next week. I decided to speak tonight because I felt, while it’s unlikely my speech will change anyone’s mind, it would be more likely to change their minds this week when they’re not under pressure to vote right away.

|inline