Daily Archives: July 20, 2007

City Council, City of Peoria, Peoria Housing Authority, Peoria Public Schools

City to consider intergovernmental agreement with D150

3 Comments

Peoria Housing Authority LogoDistrict 150 — the district that recently spent $877,500 to acquire properties it can’t use on Prospect, let them be stripped and then subsequently had to start razing a few of them for thousands more dollars; the district that has hired four highly-paid superintendents to do the job of one; the district that owns the Meyer building in the Warehouse district but allows it to fall further into disrepair, lowering property values in that area; the district that refused to cooperate with the city’s good-faith effort to work with them on placing a replacement school on the site of the current Glen Oak Primary School — that district is unhappy that the city is trying to raise property values in the older part of town through the use of a TIF. They want an intergovernmental agreement that gives them some of the money if property values go up.

So, city staff has worked with them to hammer out a proposed agreement — which, interestingly only affects the Eagle View TIF, not the Warehouse District TIF. In the agreement, the city would reimburse District 150 $1.5 million to be used toward the cost of infrastructure improvements around their new Harrison Primary School they want to build, only if/when the fair-market value of improvements within the TIF equals or exceeds $95 million. The city would also agree that if/when $250 million in new construction is completed, the city will stop incentivizing with TIF funds and instead pay off any debts/bonds and retire the TIF.

It would also include the new Harrison Homes Primary School in the TIF. At least, that’s what I believe the language is stating. But I’m a little concerned about the wording. According to item 3 of the proposed agreement, it says that the two governments would agree that “the Harrison Homes site shall be included in the Eagle View TIF redevelopment project area.” Not the Harrison School site, notice, but the Harrison Homes site.

Now, it’s possible that “Harrison Homes Site” could have been defined earlier where it says, “WHEREAS, District 150 plans to construct a community school in the Eagle View TIF redevelopment project area at the Harrison Homes Site, bounded by Krause, Griswold, Folkers and Grinnell Streets;” but it’s vague at best.

You see, back in December, the Peoria Housing Authority asked for all of Harrison Homes to be included in the Eagle View TIF. But in January, the city council said “no.” In fact, they said “no” to a lot of requested additions. I wouldn’t put it past someone over at the PHA to come knocking on Peoria’s door if this agreement is approved and say that they should be included in the TIF because of it. Perhaps the wording should be clarified.

It’s sporting of the city to play nice with the school district, but honestly, I hope the council rejects this agreement. You’ll notice that it benefits the district, but not the city, as usual. The city should require the school district to agree to put an East Bluff replacement school on the site of the current Glen Oak Primary School as part of the bargain. There shouldn’t be any more of this one-directional, so-called “cooperation.” The school district needs to start giving back to the city. Right now they’re doing nothing but driving people away.

City Council, City of Peoria, HOPC

New Heart of Peoria Commission proposal submitted

3 Comments

Mayor Ardis had proposed decommissioning the Heart of Peoria Commission back in May. His proposal then was to take the HOPC members and place them on other commissions. Most notably, he wanted to increase the size of the Planning Commission by four members and put four HOPC members in those newly-created seats.

However, the HOPC discussed the Mayor’s plan at their next scheduled meeting and communicated to the council that the commission believed it could be more effective continuing as a city commission rather than as an independent advocacy group, but that it fully supported the proposed dual appointments. When the issue came up for a vote in June, it was deferred a couple of times, most recently until July 24. So it’s on Tuesday’s agenda.

In June and July, the HOPC met a couple of times and hammered out a work plan to aid the council in considering whether to keep us or not. On the agenda, the Mayor has submitted a new recommendation. This one would have the Heart of Peoria Commission remain a commission, provided that capital funding in the work plan go through the normal process for all commissions (fair enough).

However, now the Mayor is suggesting only two seats be added to the Planning Commission instead of four. The two HOPC members who would be appointed to Planning would be Joe Richey and Dick Schwebel. Beth Akeson and I would not receive dual appointments until there’s an opening on an applicable commission (e.g., zoning, planning, ZBA, etc.). There’s no explanation given in the council communication as to why this change was made, but it’s the Mayor’s prerogative to appoint or not appoint people to commissions, so I don’t have any beef with it. After all, two is better than none, and I’m pleased that the Mayor has agreed to allow HOPC to remain (if it’s approved by the council, of course).

I’m a little concerned about whether HOPC will be able to complete its work with only six meeting per year, but we’ll see how it goes.

City Council, City of Peoria

City trying to keep Northmoor widening to three lanes

5 Comments

The July 24 Peoria City Council Agenda has been posted on the city’s website. There are a few items of interest on the docket next week.

One of them is a funding switcheroo from the Northmoor Road project to the Sheridan Road project. The city wants to widen Northmoor Road between Allen and Knoxville to three lanes. But since they would be using IDOT funds, they have to get IDOT approval. Well, IDOT insists that if we’re going to use their funds, we have to make it a minimum of four lanes. So the city staff is requesting that we delay that project for the time being while we keep trying to persuade IDOT to change their mind and let us make the road three lanes and pedestrian-friendly.

In the meantime, in order not to lose state money, they would like to use those dollars to fund another project: widening Sheridan from Notre Dame (near Glen Ave.) to Giles/Knoxville. They don’t believe they’ll have any trouble getting IDOT to agree to three lanes there. I’m glad to see the city staff proposing this action, and I hope the council concurs.

Peoria Journal Star, Peoria Public Schools

This is why we have the press and FOIA

1 Comment

Kudos to Clare Jellick for her investigative report on the Roosevelt Magnet School field-trip scam. Her persistence in getting information through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) has brought to light a very disturbing situation — shaking down district parents for money that they don’t owe:

The requested information shows that the district considers there to be a “total outstanding balance” of $17,391 to cover the cost of the trip – even though the figures provided show Roosevelt families actually owe only about $8,800. […]

With all the contributions from kids, families and community members added together, $40,491 has been raised to cover the trip. This is about $8,800 short of the total cost.

So the district is saying the parents owe $17,391, but the numbers reveal the families only owe $8,800 — a difference of $8,591. That’s a huge chunk of change. Who is going to be held accountable for this? Where is Mr. Hinton’s public statement on this issue?

The school board members should be demanding an explanation from the school administration. Will anyone have the cajones to confront Hinton at the next board meeting?

Blogosphere

A request for my pseudonymous commenters

11 Comments

To my pseudonymous commenters: I value your comments on my blog — I really do — and I want you to keep commenting. Please don’t stop! However, I do have one request:

Please pick one pseudonym and stick with it, or else use “anonymous.” When you change pseudonyms all the time, it kinda defeats the purpose of having a pseudonym. And it’s deceptive. It gives the illusion that several different people are sharing opinions, even though you’re really the same person. I know at least one of you has even responded to your own pseudonymous comment under another pseudonym. Now come on — that’s a little excessive, isn’t it? Unless you have a dissociative identity disorder, I would prefer that you either pick one pseudonym to identify yourself, or else use “anonymous” if you don’t want to have an identity.

Thanks for understanding. And please keep commenting.