Stimulus money should be used for infrastructure

I have to agree with Billy Dennis. The stimulus money Peoria received should be used to improve infrastructure, not put a new roof on a private organization — even a private organization as laudable as the Center for Prevention of Abuse.

The Center does wonderful work here in Peoria, and I don’t begrudge them asking for stimulus funds as it’s not easy to raise money, especially in the current economic climate. But they simply don’t take priority over improving infrastructure in South Peoria. The Center already has numerous benefits by virtue of its not-for-profit status. It doesn’t pay property taxes or sales taxes, and yet it wants tax money to help buy a new roof. Meanwhile, taxpayers in South Peoria continue to live with substandard basic services and have their needs put at the bottom of the list.

“After 23 years, it’s time to say, ‘let’s get this done,'” Martha Herm, executive director of The Center for Prevention of Abuse, was quoted as saying in the Journal Star. There are a couple problems with this statement. First, it assumes that the Center is somehow entitled to public funds; it’s not. Second, South Peoria has been ignored far longer than 23 years. If we’re going to base this merely on time spent waiting for public investment, South Peoria has everyone beat.

Reasons for spiking school referendum weak

By now, you’ve probably heard or read about how museum supporters successfully discouraged efforts by county school superintendents to put a referendum on the April 7 ballot. That referendum would have been very similar to the museum referendum, only instead of money going toward a museum and big-screen theater, the money would have gone toward school facilities in Peoria County. Each school district would get a portion of the sales tax proceeds based on enrollment. Museum supporters decided county residents shouldn’t have that choice because it would threaten passage of the museum tax. You can read the letters here.

The Journal Star got reaction from some museum supporters.

“We met with school superintendents and in very cordial conversations decided it seemed to be a matter of timing,” [Michael] Bryant [head of the CEO roundtable and the CEO of Methodist Medical Center] said. “The superintendents didn’t have a plan or projects ready, when on the other hand, the museum’s time is now. After April 7, if the referendum doesn’t pass, the museum goes away.”

First of all, this is simply false. The superintendents did and still do have projects ready. IVC is ready to build additions. Brimfield needs a new high school. Peoria Heights wants to pay off bond debt which will lower property taxes in the village. And I think we all know that District 150, which would receive the lion’s share of any sales tax proceeds, has just a few building projects underway or commencing soon. I frankly don’t know how anyone could claim with a straight face that school superintendents in Peoria County “didn’t have a plan or projects ready.” Why would they even be pursuing this option if they didn’t have a plan for how the money would be used?

But secondly, and more importantly, there’s no requirement under the statute that the superintendents have a plan before asking for a referendum to be placed on the ballot. So the argument is a red herring anyway.

“The county made the museum a top priority in February of 2008 and started working toward the goal of finding a funding mechanism,” [County Administrator Patrick] Urich said. “We met with school officials last summer and talked about the path the museum was on and that it was first in line with the sales tax referendum. The fact that the museum group definitely had a plan in place and the schools had no definitive plan on how it intended to spend the money kept us on this path.”

What is this imaginary “line” to which Urich refers? The statute states that if school districts representing 51% or more of the county’s total school enrollment votes to put a referendum on the ballot, the county is obligated to put it on the ballot. The county is not the gatekeeper as Urich implies — there is no statutory limit on the number of referenda that can be placed on the ballot, and referenda are not placed on a first-come-first-served basis. There is simply no “line” in which to wait.

Anything the county had to say to the superintendents would have been advisory at best. And that begs the question: Why was the county meeting with the school superintendents? Was the county also trying to dissuade them from putting the school funding referendum on the ballot?

Bryant said school districts will have future opportunities to see if voters are willing to raise sales taxes to pay help schools. The museum won’t.

With all due respect, that’s the museum’s problem, not the school districts’. Schools should not have to take a back seat because the museum group has been incapable of raising the funds they need over the last seven years.

Columbia Terrace to get historic streetlights, wider sidewalks

It’s been more than two years in the making, but if approved Tuesday night by the City Council, Columbia Terrace from University to North street will finally get its promised facelift. Specifically, it will be improved by:

. . . removing existing curb, sidewalks, and driveway approaches, and constructing combination curb/sidewalk up to 6′ in width, new driveway pavement, an ornamental street lighting system consisting of acorn fixtures on a fluted aluminum pole, and a bituminous concrete overlay, along with all necessary adjustments, incidentals, and appurtenances as shown on the plans or as directed by the Engineer.

The project, which covers just under 3/4 of a mile, is expected to cost $1,906,465.11, or $42.31 per foot. According to the request for council action, the city will pay for approximately 89% of the project, with the remaining 11% being assessed against property owners along the corridor.

columbia-terrace-project-032409

Efforts to improve Columbia Terrace began in earnest in September 2006 when petitions were circulated getting a majority of homeowners to agree to help pay for the improvements. The second district project is cited by incumbent councilwoman Barbara Van Auken as one of her accomplishments in improving the West Bluff.

Grant money sought for Main Street improvements

main-street-improvement-grant-032409On Tuesday night’s City Council agenda is a grant application to the Federal Highway Administration’s “Highway Safety Improvement Program” to improve Main Street from Sheridan Road to Glendale Avenue (see map to the right). This corridor would be eligible for funding because it is a “high accident location” and because it has a “high cost benefit ratio,” according to the request for council action.

The request goes on to explain the types of strategies that could be used to improve safety along the corridor. They include:

…narrowing this section of Main Street from 5 lanes to 3 lanes with paint striping, installing speed feedback signage, installing additional speed limit signs, installing flashing crosswalk signs, and installing improved curve signage near Crescent Avenue. Additionally, parking and/or loading zones could be considered where applicable and needed, and would help narrow the roadway. Main Street from Sheridan Road to Glendale Avenue, as part of the larger Main Street Corridor, has recently been studied with the idea of incorporating New Urban concepts, which would make it more attractive and pedestrian friendly. All these proposed safety strategies fit into the larger picture for the roadway and would not prohibit any future improvements.

If the request is approved, the city will seek a $48,500 grant. The application has to be in by April 10, and awards will be announced in July. All grant money awarded will be for use in 2010.

D150 gets A+ bond rating from S&P

School board members received this happy news in their inbox recently:

Mr. Hinton wanted to let you know that he just found out that once more, we were able to get an A+ rating from Standard and Poors for our bond rating. This is GREAT news!

Debbie Sullivan CPS
Superintendent’s Office
Peoria Public Schools

According to Wikipedia, Standard and Poor’s A+ rating is considered “upper medium grade” and described as a “safe investment, unless unforeseen events should occur in the economy at large or in that particular field of business.”

District 150 looking to cell towers for supplemental income

cell_tower_ibs91District 150 has found a new way to get revenue: allow private companies to erect cell phone towers on school property.

In November 2008, the City Council approved a request for U.S. Cellular to erect a cell phone tower at Loucks Edison School (now Thomas Jefferson), 2503 N. University St. Sources tell me the the school district will receive $2000 per month from this lease arrangement, and that more cell towers are planned on other properties, including Whittier School. Putting cell towers on school and church property is common — but controversial — all over the country.

The controversy is over safety. The Federal Communications Commission has several documents regarding cell tower (or “cell site”) radiation levels, and they’ve basically determined that they are very safe. “Measurements made near typical cellular and PCS installations, especially those with tower-mounted antennas, have shown that ground-level power densities are well below limits recommended by RF/microwave safety standards,” says OET [Office of Engineering and Technology] Bulletin 56 (p. 21). Well enough below limits that such cell sites “are considered ‘categorically excluded’ from the requirement for routine environmental processing for RF exposure” by the FCC, according to “A Local Government Official’s Guide to Transmitting Antenna RF Emission Safety.”

Not everyone is convinced. People Against Cell Towers at Schools (PACTS) is an organization started by citizens in Tampa, Florida, that believes cell phone towers should not be placed on or near school playgrounds. They cite a litany of research, including a 2004 article from the American Academy of Pediatrics which stated children are more susceptible to extremely low frequency (ELF) magnetic fields and recommended “additional research and the development of precautionary policies in the face of scientific uncertainty.” In fact, most of the research cited takes a similar approach. For example, the American Cancer Society is quoted as saying, “we do not have full information on health effects… in particular, not enough time has elapsed to permit epidemiological studies.” In other words, exposure to ELF magnetic fields may or may not be dangerous, and until we know for sure, we should limit exposure to children. Furthermore, in response to appeals to the FCC’s report of cell site safety, they say “government agencies have a bad track record in protecting us against long term threats. Think about some of the major oversights in health threats such as tobacco, lead paint, DDT, PCBs and asbestos.”

So far in Peoria, there appears to be little or no concern. The cell tower at the University St. school building had no public opposition. However, that might be because the request went through after the school was closed and before Thomas Jefferson school was relocated there due to the fire at their Florence Avenue facility. The forthcoming request for a cell tower at Whittier will likely be the bellwether of public reaction to the idea.

One other concern that is expressed about cell towers is that they are not exactly aesthetically pleasing. Some communities try to hide them by making them look like trees — seriously. When I was in California last year, I saw a number of cell towers disguised as palm trees. Pictures on Google show towers camouflaged as pine trees, too. Clever, eh?

Press release: “Koehler Thinks Quinn’s Budget Is a Good Start”

From a press release:

State Senator David Koehler (D-Peoria) believes that Governor Quinn’s budget proposal will provide a good base for negotiations.

“Governor Quinn has included some things in this budget that the state has desperately needed for a long time,” said Koehler. “I’m particularly happy to see a capital plan that includes road repair for Peoria, Tazewell, and Fulton Counties. We need to repair Illinois’ aging infrastructure.”

According to the Governor’s office, the capital construction plan will cost approximately $26 billion and create as many as 340,000 jobs. The proposed plan includes both new construction and repairs, targeted at roads and bridges, schools, and mass transit. It also includes investments in green technology, Illinois-based energy sources, and economic development.

“Another area I’m pleased about is education,” said Senator Koehler. “The budget proposal contains an increase in money for K-12 education. We need to do all we can to ensure Illinois students can compete with their peers nationwide, even in these tough economic times. This increase may not be as high as we’ve provided in the past, but given the state’s financial woes, it’s still a positive step.”

The Governor’s proposal also includes a number of initiatives to enhance revenue. One initiative is an income tax increase of 1.5%, accompanied by higher exemptions to protect low-income families. The Governor also suggests increasing a number of fees.

“I think Governor Quinn’s tax proposal is a good starting point,” said Koehler. “It’s clear that we are going to have to do something to increase revenue. It’s hard to say exactly what form tax and fee increases will take, but knowing that the Governor is committed to protecting low and middle income Illinoisans is reassuring.”

Senator Koehler lauded several of the Governor’s other commitments.

“The Governor has promised to make sure the state pays its bills on time,” said Koehler. “Our failure to provide timely reimbursements to doctors, hospitals, and other vital service providers has been a huge disappointment. A prompt payment schedule will help ensure Illinois citizens receive quality services and keep businesses and facilities open. I also like Governor Quinn’s idea of a 10-day sales tax holiday to help families afford back-to-school shopping. When we vote on a final budget, I hope it includes measures that help struggling families.”

Museum looks to meet private shortfall with public funds

The latest town hall meeting on the county sales tax referendum took place tonight at Dunlap Valley Middle School. The presenters were Brad McMillan for the museum, Erik Bush for the county, and Karrie Alms for Citizens for Responsible Spending. I was pleased to see that tonight’s meeting was a balanced presentation, pro and con. Kudos to the county for now allowing both sides a seat at the table.

While most of the evening was filled with no new information, there was one significant development. As you may know, the museum has set separate goals for private and public funding. The sales tax is supposed to plug the gap in public funding, but there is still an $11 million shortfall on the private funding side. At just about every meeting, the question is raised as to how the museum group plans to close that $11 million private funding gap. And the answer has always been that they’ve gotten a commitment from the CEO Roundtable to raise $8 million of it, and that they’re confident that people will come out of the wings to support the project once they know the public funding is in place. Sounds far-fetched to me for various reasons, but I don’t want to digress on that right now.

What we learned tonight is that they are also trying to plug that gap with (perhaps not surprisingly) more public money from state and federal sources. Mr. McMillan said the group is working with state senators Risinger and Koehler, as well as Congressman Schock to get grants, stimulus money, and any other funds the government might have lying around that could go toward the museum.

This indicates a bit of a shift in strategy on the museum’s part. It would appear that they are now changing their public/private funding goals. Why might they be doing this? Could it be because they don’t really believe they can make up that $11 million shortfall with private donations after all?

(P.S. On a side note, do you remember a comment on another post from “kcdad” where he said today’s schools are set up to teach children consumerism? Well, after seeing the brand new, state-of-the-art Dunlap Valley Middle School tonight, I’m inclined to agree with him. The building looks like a shopping mall inside and out, not an educational institution. Architecture and environment teach you something about what a community values; clearly the value here is consumerism.)

Noise ordinance violation dismissed

City attorney Randy Ray recently sent this update to the City Council regarding the noise ordinance violation against Caleb Matheny, president of the Sigma Nu fraternity on Bradley’s campus:

Sonni Williams has looked into this ticket which was issued at the Sigma Nu house. She has spoken with the officers who were present and has determined that we cannot prove a case against Mr. Matheny. There is a report that loud voices could be hear 500 feet away, but we cannot prove whose voices were heard. Accordingly, this ordinance ticket is being dismissed.

Matheny is suing Second District Council Representative Barbara Van Auken over the incident that led to the noise ordinance ticket being issued.