Daily Archives: June 18, 2009

Peoria County, Taxes

Unhappy taxpayers should follow appeals process

63 Comments

The Peoria Times-Observer is reporting that a bunch of North Peoria residents are “upset with the practices of the Peoria County Board of Review” and may file a lawsuit. Among those upset are realtors Michael Maloof and Brian Monge and county board member Bob Baietto.

One member of the group, who requested to be anonymous, said it appears the only way to affect change is a lawsuit.

“What it comes down to is politics,” he said. “I was incredibly naive. I thought we could win this by going through channels and giving them proof. I was wrong. We need to make noise. We need to find more people who are mad.”

The remaining members of the group agreed. A consensus was reached that efforts now need to concentrate on finding an attorney who can advise the group on what grounds they can use to sue.

Of course, the politics runs both ways. Some members of the county board attempted to resolve the situation by removing two Board of Review members: Gary Shadid and Nancy Horton. Having failed in that attempt, they’re now looking at a possible lawsuit.

But here’s my question: Have they indeed gone through all the channels, as was implied? Or have they only gone as far as the local Board of Review? According to a state publication called “The Illinois Property Tax System,” there are a couple of ways to appeal the decision of the local Board of Review:

  • The decision may be appealed (in writing) to the Property Tax Appeal Board, a five-member board appointed by the governor. The Property Tax Appeal Board will determine the correct assessment based on equity and the weight of the evidence. Taxes must be paid pending the outcome of the appeal.
  • The taxes can be paid under protest and the county board of review’s decision can be appealed directly to the circuit court by filing a tax objection complaint. Taxes and levies are presumed to be correct and legal, but this presumption can be rebutted. The taxpayer must provide clear and convincing evidence.

If the Board of Review’s actions are so unfair, then it should be a cinch to get them overturned on appeal. A large number of successful appeals could then be used as evidence of the local Board of Review’s alleged poor decisions and presented to the full County Board for appropriate action. On the other hand, if the decisions are upheld on appeal, then the local Board of Review will be exonerated.

Bottom line, the complainants should follow the appeals process, not resort to political and/or legal strong-arm tactics to force the Board of Review to render decisions in their favor.

Peoria Public Schools

D150: Spending money for advice on how to spend money

60 Comments

If this isn’t an example of bureaucratic inefficiency, I don’t know what is:

Over two years in both special education and Title I, District 150 is set to receive some $8.5 million, more than most of the area school districts’ funds combined.

District officials are still studying what it will be used for, but Mary O’Brian, the district’s special education director, said they are looking to upgrade a number of areas – not surprising given nearly one in four students at District 150 has been identified as having some special education need.

The district is looking at “assistive technologies,” which could range from special keyboards or listening devices for students with disabilities to software and training to run the new equipment. In fact, the district has hired an outside consulting firm to help direct the best use of the money. [emphasis added] There’s also talk about being able to use some of the money to pay for teacher’s aides.

So, we pay Mary O’Brian $93,840 a year as special education director, and she doesn’t know how best to spend the money earmarked for special education? They have to hire an outside consultant (at additional expense) to tell them how to spend the money? Are they just out there looking for ways to waste money? I suppose the next thing they’ll do is hire a consultant to help them choose the consultant that will tell them how to spend their money.

Hopeless.

General News

“America’s first step in a lasting return to the moon”

1 Comment

From NASA:

On the moon we will develop technologies to survive in the infinite frontier of space, because the moon presents the same challenges we will encounter throughout the universe: harmful radiation, electrified dust, and extreme temperatures.

Just as a scout finds the safest way for expeditions on Earth, NASA will first send a robotic scout, called the Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter (LRO), to gather crucial data on the lunar environment that will help astronauts prepare for long-duration lunar expeditions.

LRO’s launch date is scheduled for no earlier than June 17, 2009. The spacecraft will spend at least a year in a low polar orbit approximately 50 kilometers (31 miles) above the lunar surface, while its seven instruments find safe landing sites, locate potential resources, characterize the radiation environment, and test new technology.

The LRO blasted off on an Atlas V rocket on Thursday, June 18, at 4:32 p.m. CDT:

It will reach the moon on Tuesday, June 23, at 4:43 a.m. CDT.

Annexation, City of Peoria, Comprehensive Plan

City must pursue higher density for new development

26 Comments

I’ve been reading through the City of Peoria’s new draft Comprehensive Plan and started despairing when I hit page 51:

The density of the population of Peoria in the mid Twentieth Century will not return. The current demand by the majority of the population is for larger residential lots, more space between neighbors, and more open space. Current zoning requirements cause large parking areas to accompany commercial development, further reducing the overall density of the city.

If that statement is true, then we might as well put a sign on every entrance to the city that says, “Abandon hope, all ye who enter here.”

Studies have shown that densities less than 4 to 5 dwelling units per acre are unsustainable — in other words, the expense of providing services exceeds the revenues generated. (E.g., Cost of Sprawl [2005]; Figure 4, “Residential Service Costs,” p. 5) Peoria’s growth cells currently have 2.6 dwelling units per acre according to the city’s recent Growth Cell Strategy Report. If land mass is going to continue to increase faster than population growth, and if density is thus going to continue to decrease, then we’ve barely scratched the surface of our financial difficulties. Having land that costs more to maintain than it produces in revenue is a recipe for structural deficits that will be impossible to eliminate.

Reading on in the proposed Comp Plan:

If the attempt to re-populate many of the least dense areas of the city, some of the oldest neighborhoods in Peoria, is successful, the overall density may increase, or at least offset the increase in land area. Without the successful repopulation of older neighborhoods, the projected trend is for the overall population density to continue to decline in future years.

First of all, the “least dense areas of the city” are not the oldest neighborhoods, but the growth cells and far-flung annexations to the north and west. Secondly, what “attempt to re-populate . . . the oldest neighborhoods in Peoria”? I’m not aware of any serious attempt, although one would be welcomed. Thirdly, why not attempt to also increase density in the newer areas of town? No, not to the same level of density as the West Bluff. But isn’t it reasonable to require at least 4 or 5 dwelling units per acre for new subdivisions — or enough that they can pay for the services they consume?