Monthly Archives: November 2008

City Council, City of Peoria

Hotel plans still shrouded in mystery

5 Comments

It’s the worst-kept secret in Peoria. Despite not getting anyone to speak on the record, information about the proposed hotel on the Pere Marquette block has been leaking like a sieve to the Journal Star and bloggers. Unfortunately, since we don’t have any official word, we don’t know how much of that information is accurate.

There’s something else we don’t know: what public incentives will be requested for this project. According to Billy Dennis’s source, “Public financing accounted for roughly 40 percent of the cost of building [East Peoria’s] Embassy Suites,” and “Project investors are hoping to secure a similar percentage of public financing for this project through a tax increment financing project agreement.” An ancillary issue is the request to move Big Al’s, with their “grandfathered” status and adult use and liquor licenses, presumably to 414 Hamilton Blvd.

And, of course, there is a sense of urgency for this project. According to the Journal Star, this whole project “could go before the City Council for consideration on Nov. 25.” That’s in two weeks. And, according to Billy Dennis’s source, any delays “would kill the $100 million project.”

Oh yes, the project has been estimated to be $100 million. So, going back to the earlier rumor that approximately forty percent of that would be “public financing…through a tax increment financing project agreement,” we’re talking about $40 million in public incentives. I’m not sure how a TIF is going to provide that amount of financing (consider that the proposed museum is in a TIF, is a similarly-sized development, and would arguably be built by now if they could get $40 million out of their TIF). I also don’t know how the city could afford to give $40 million to a private developer when the budget is already in a deficit.

I’m not sure about a lot of things, because when you get down to brass tacks, the citizens don’t really know anything about this project. We’re being told by many bloggers that this is the greatest project for downtown since the civic center (how do they know that?) and that the city should move heaven and earth to make it happen or else. Or else? Or else no small number of detrimental things will happen: the civic center will fail, downtown hotels will lose occupancy, Caterpillar won’t use Peoria’s hotels anymore, tax revenues will go down, downtown will deteriorate, no one will want to develop in downtown Peoria ever again because it’s so hard to do business here, etc., ad nauseum, ad infinitum.

Peoria is evidently on the precipice of oblivion and this hotel deal is its only savior. And that deal itself is tenuously held together — either the developers get everything for which they ask when they ask for it, or the deal’s off. No negotiation, no public input. They make the decisions and take your tax money, and you better thank them for it.

The Journal Star got it right:

We appreciate that negotiations like these can be sensitive and there’s a lot of financial risk involved and not all of that can or should be played out in a public hearing. Nonetheless, there is one overriding principle at work here: If you want the public’s support and especially the public’s money, the public needs to know a little something about the business government is doing on its behalf.

Right now, the public is in the dark. And this huge project might come before the council by Thanksgiving? Sorry, but that can’t be.

City Council, City of Peoria, Heart of Peoria Plan

Journal Star reveals “wonderful development”

38 Comments

Kudos to the Journal Star for ferreting out information on the “wonderful development” we keep hearing about from the city:

The proposed project would include a new hotel bearing a nationally known flag on the same block with the Hotel Pere Marquette, which would be renovated, sources said.

Sources said the project is spearheaded by local developer Gary Matthews, whose work includes multiple commercial projects in East Peoria, including the Riverside Center and GEM Terrace….

Sources said a feasibility study has been completed for the proposed project and that it was positive. They did not say, however, who did the study.

Matthews and his partners reportedly met with Peoria City Council members two at a time – to avoid having a majority of a quorum and violating the Illinois Open Meetings Act – in recent months to explain the proposal’s basics.

The project, sources said, calls for renovation of the Hotel Pere Marquette, which Matthews and his partners would acquire from current owners Innco Hospitality of Kansas City, Kan., a parking deck, a new pool and spa area.

The two hotels would be connected to the Peoria Civic Center via an elevated skywalk crossing Fulton Street, a document the newspaper obtained shows. Sacred Heart Church would be left untouched.

The hotel construction would require demolition of Big Al’s and adjoining businesses.

A new hotel in Peoria will be good for the economy and certainly good for convention business at the Civic Center. But as with anything, the devil is in the details. Some of those details that concern me are:

  • Design — What will the new hotel look like? Will it conform to the Land Development Code? Take a look at GEM Terrace in East Peoria and tell me there isn’t reason for concern here.
  • Big Al’s — Why the need to bend over backward for this business? In the past when a “wonderful opportunity” came along, the city simply took the property via eminent domain. Think Eagle’s Cleaners, or Midtown Plaza. Here, the city is helping facilitate a move to Hamilton Blvd. apparently in violation of the adult use ordinance, necessitating a change in that ordinance to make it legal. Why not take the property and let Al’s find new digs someplace that conforms to existing ordinances, like any every other business?
  • The skyway — The skyway will take pedestrians off the street. That’s what skyways are designed to do. Unfortunately, this is in direct contradiction to downtown revitalization plans (e.g., the Heart of Peoria Plan) which are designed to put more pedestrians on the street. And then there are the aesthetic issues of putting a skyway across Fulton.
  • The City’s role — What is the city’s role in all of this? What taxpayer funds, if any, will be expended? Surely there will be some — if nothing else, the connection to the Civic Center will require some modification of the Civic Center to receive the skyway traffic. Did the city pay for or help pay for the feasibility study? Since this is part of the City’s Hospitality Improvement Zone (HIZ), what incentives will this project be getting? These are things that should be discussed openly because they are public issues.
City Council, City of Peoria

Council greasing the skids for Big Al’s move

37 Comments

On the agenda for Monday’s City Council meeting is a change to the city’s adult business ordinance that would allow Big Al’s to move to a new location while keeping their “grandfathered in” status. The council communication explains:

Since approximately 1978, the City has had an adult business ordinance that restricted the locations of adult businesses by limiting their distances from other adult businesses, from churches and schools, and from residentially zoned properties. There has always been at least one adult business that has not been in compliance with the ordinance but has been grandfathered and, therefore, allowed to continue at its present location. The attached ordinance would allow such a business to relocate, obtain an adult use license for a property which brings the location more into compliance. The relocation may provide an opportunity for the City to take advantage of a significant development opportunity.

In other words, Big Al’s adult use license would follow them to a new location. They wouldn’t have to reapply. And they continue to be “grandfathered in.” Couple this with the liquor license that was requested for 414 NE Hamilton (which the Liquor Commission didn’t approve or deny), and I think you see where this is going.

Once again, oblique reference is made to “a significant development opportunity,” which is rumored to be either an expansion to the Pere Marquette or a new hotel that will be connected to the Civic Center somehow (pedestrian bridge?). In any case, the deal apparently hinges on allowing Big Al’s to move without giving up their adult use license, so the city is doing everything in its power to facilitate that.

I’m concerned that by doing this, the council will be invalidating their adult use ordinance. What I mean is, they’re changing the ordinance to benefit one business. If they do this for one adult business and not another, with no consistent or reasonable justification for such discrimination, the ordinance becomes arbitrary and capricious, and ultimately unconstitutional.

For example, in 2002, the owner of 617 W. Main St., Frank Genusa, also had a grandfathered-in business called Playmate Video. When he changed tenants to a business called The Dungeon Music and Apparel that sold the same kind of adult material, the city revoked his adult use license, saying the grandfathering no longer applies — even though it was the same landlord, the same type of business, and the same location. Don’t get me wrong, I’m glad that place is gone, but you see my point: the rules seem to be rigidly applied to one owner, but easily changed for another.

The next year, the strip club now known as Elliott’s started its effort to get an adult use license at its North University Street location. The city fought that by denying a Class A liquor license for the establishment (a requirement for selling liquor if the establishment also holds an adult-use license). That resulted in a lawsuit that eventually cost the taxpayers several thousand dollars, and they got their liquor license after all. Again, the rules are applied aggressively to one business, but bent and rewritten for another.

Why the double standard? This “significant development opportunity” must be a real doozy. I wonder when the public will be let in on the council’s little secret.

City Council, City of Peoria, Peoria Public Schools

Circumvention of voters nearly complete

22 Comments

One of the final steps toward issuing bonds through the Public Building Commission (PBC) for new public school construction will take place Monday night as the Council approves the siting of the new schools. District 150’s ability to access PBC funds was made possible by the efforts of local state representatives George Shadid (now retired) and Aaron Schock. And the reason it was made possible was blatantly to circumvent the voters.

The school board could have put a binding referendum on the ballot asking voters to approve funding for their building plans. Ask anyone at the district or your state representatives why they didn’t do that, and they’ll tell you that they believe a school bond referendum would never pass. Hence, the “need” to go around the voters and get the money through the PBC.

I have a fundamental problem with that process. You have to ask yourself why they think a referendum wouldn’t pass. Consider, for instance, that voters in communities near Peoria have recently approved similar referenda, and voters in Peoria recently approved by a large margin capital funding for library improvements. So you can’t honestly argue that a referendum would never pass.

If a referendum were to fail, it would not be because voters don’t want to make needed upgrades to schools, but because they don’t like the district’s method of “upgrading” them. In other words, voters would use the power of the purse to approve or disapprove of the district’s building plans. For instance, consolidating Irving and Kingman schools into a new primary school building next to Lincoln Middle School and Woodruff High School probably wouldn’t have garnered enough votes because the residents didn’t want to see those neighborhood schools close. Attempts to build a new Glen Oak School at Glen Oak Park would certainly not have gained enough votes because residents very loudly and clearly stated they didn’t want the school sited there.

By circumventing the voters, it not only took away the residents’ decision regarding funding, but also its influence in the design and siting of the new buildings. So when the council communication on the agenda for Monday night says, “The concerns of neighbors have been addressed in the siting process,” that’s really not true. There were public meetings, after which the school board did exactly what they said they were going to do in the first place (with the notable exception of changing the site for Glen Oak School due to a lawsuit that effectively blocked an intergovernmental agreement between the park district and school district). There were public hearings about the design of the schools after all the decisions had been made and there was no intention of changing them.

Public input was a sham because the school board didn’t have to listen to the public or win their approval. They had their construction money regardless, thanks to their being granted access to PBC funding. So they did what they wanted regardless of public opinion. And that’s why you don’t see many people attending D150 public hearings or board meetings these days. Doing so is like a broken pencil: pointless.

City Council, City of Peoria, Crime

National Night Out moving back to August

Leave a comment

They gave it the old college try, but holding the National Night Out Against Crime in September this year apparently didn’t go over too well. In an online survey, over half the respondents requested that the event go back to its original date of the first Tuesday in August:

Those in favor of the traditional August date most often wrote that the September date conflicted with after school events, sports, and student homework assignments. Several of those respondents added that the September date brought an early nightfall which caused a premature end to their events. Those in favor of the September date cited favorable weather and more participation by elderly citizens. (NOTE: The National Association of Town Watch (NATW), which sponsors this event, also conducted a pilot date change in Texas this year. NATW has announced that NNO will continue to be held on the first Tuesday in August.) As a result of the majority date preference, City staff is recommending the NNO for the City of Peoria be set for the first Tuesday in August.

There were 94 respondents to the survey, and 53 of them voted for the August date. Since this is a national event, as the name implies, it makes sense to me to hold it on the same date as everyone else. The council will make the final decision at its next meeting on Monday, Nov. 10, at 6:15 p.m.

2008 Campaign

Anti-con-con forces win

15 Comments

Illinois voters don’t want a Constitutional Convention, 68 to 32 percent. Apparently, they’re all happy with excessive executive power, gerrymandering that allows politicians to choose their voters instead of vice-versa, and the ability for about four people to put a stranglehold on the Illinois House and Senate. Good show!

Of course the real answer, as former Governor Edgar, et. al., explained on the radio countless times, is to simply vote these bad representatives out of office. So, let’s see who got voted out of office. Hmmm…. Ah yes, here it is: No one.

Well, I don’t want to hear any complaints about state government from anyone who voted against the Con Con. You had your chance to improve things, and you blew it.

2008 Campaign

Losing faith

81 Comments

I have lost all faith in the voters of Central Illinois. No, not because Obama won. Not because Dick Durbin got reelected. Not even because Kevin Lyons got reelected, although that did push me to the brink. But the thing that pushed me right over the edge was this election result:

Jehan Gordon (D) 18,829 53%
Joan Krupa (R) 16,390 47%

I consider myself pretty open-minded. I can totally understand why people would vote for Obama, Durbin, Schock, Lyons, etc. I may disagree with many of those choices (and I do), but there are logically defensible reasons to vote for them nonetheless.

But Jehan Gordon? Seriously? I can’t think of one single solitary reason to vote for her. Not one qualification. In fact, she’s easily the most unqualified candidate I’ve ever seen in my life. I have a number of Democrat friends who voted for every other Democrat on the ballot, but couldn’t bring themselves to vote for her. Yet 53% of voters cast their ballot for her.

For the love of Mike, why? Have you people completely lost your minds? Did you do even the most rudimentary research on the candidates before casting your vote? Like reading their bios, for instance? Or are you so partisan that you would vote for any name with a “D” behind it, no matter how unqualified they are?

I honestly cannot believe she was elected. IT BLOWS MY MIND!!! What is wrong with 53% of you voters?

2008 Campaign

Election Results ’08 (Last Update for this post)

3 Comments

UPDATED 9:30

Okay, I’m tired of typing this stuff out. If you want more updates, you can click on these links for the latest:

County results
City results

Happy election night!

— 76 of 93 precincts counted in CITY of Peoria —

(Totals include early voting numbers)

President of the United States
Barack Obama (D) 23,996 (59.59%)
John McCain (R) 15,765 (39.15%)

U.S. Senate
Dick Durbin* (D) 25,601 (65.75%)
Steve Sauerberg (R) 12,097 (31.07%)

18th Congressional District
Aaron Schock (R) 21,018 (52.82%)
Colleen Callahan (D) 16,875 (42.41%)
Sheldon Schafer (G) 1,898 (4.77%)

92nd District
Jehan Gordon (D) 12,215 (57.28%)
Joan Gore Krupa (R) 9,110 (42.72%)

Peoria County State’s Attorney
Kevin Lyons (D) 21,725 (55.41%)
Darin LaHood (R) 17,483 (44.59%)

Constitutional Convention
No 25,247 (66.31%)
Yes 12,828 (33.69%)

City of Peoria Non-Partisan Election
Yes 20,064 (55.03%)
No 16,394 (44.97%)

— 45 of 53 precincts counted in Peoria COUNTY —

President of the United States
Barack Obama (D) 15,324 (50.85%)
John McCain (R) 14,281 (47.39%)

U.S. Senate
Dick Durbin* (D) 17,437 (59.73%)
Steve Sauerberg (R) 10,551 (36.14%)

18th Congressional District
Aaron Schock (R) 17,502 (58.37%)
Colleen Callahan (D) 11,126 (37.10%)
Sheldon Schafer (G) 1,359 (4.53%)

92nd District
Joan Gore Krupa (R) 5,538 (55.89%)
Jehan Gordon (D) 4,370 (44.11%)

Peoria County State’s Attorney
Kevin Lyons (D) 16,254 (52.61%)
Darin LaHood (R) 14,640 (47.39%)

Constitutional Convention
No 21,117 (69.48%)
Yes 9,275 (30.52%)

–ORIGINAL POST FOLLOWS–

Peoria County early voting results:

President of the United States
Barack Obama (D) 6,139 (54.4%)
John McCain (R) 4,997 (44.28%)
Ralph Nader (G) 61 (0.54%)
Bob Barr (L) 40 (0.35%)

U.S. Senate
Dick Durbin* (D) 6,563 (60.35%)
Steve Sauerberg (R) 3,908 (35.94%)

18th Congresional District
Aaron Schock (R) 6,031 (53.82%)
Colleen Callahan (D) 4,701 (41.95%)
Sheldon Schafer (G) 474 (4.23%)

City of Peoria early voting results:

President of the United States
Barack Obama (D) 9,218 (67.94%)
John McCain (R) 4,222 (31.12%)
Ralph Nader (G) 42 (0.31%)
Bob Barr (L) 40 (0.29%)

U.S. Senate
Dick Durbin* (D) 9,334 (71.09%)
Steve Sauerberg (R) 3,441 (26.21%)

18th Congressional District
Colleen Callahan (D) 6,999 (52.28%)
Aaron Schock (R) 5,836 (43.59%)
Sheldon Schafer (G) 552 (4.12%)

92nd District
Jehan Gordon (D) 4,737 (64.59%)
Joan Gore Krupa (R) 2,597 (35.41%)

Peoria County State’s Attorney
Kevin Lyons (D) 8,412 (63.81%)
Darin LaHood (R) 4,770 (36.19%)

City of Peoria Non-Partisan Election
Yes 6,857 (56.03%)
No 5,381 (43.97%)

Constitutional Convention
No 8,310 (65.33%)
Yes 4,411 (34.67%)

*Incumbent

Full election results are available from PeoriaVotes.com.

2008 Campaign

Election Day 2008

29 Comments

The campaign is finally over, and all the citizens who haven’t already voted early go to the polls today. By tonight at 9 p.m. or so, we should know who our next elected representatives will be.

While we’re waiting, anyone want to venture a prediction on any of the races? If you really want to show off your prognosticating skills, tell us what the percentage spread will be, too.