District 150 continues to improvise plans for Lincoln, Central

From the Journal Star:

Questions about eliminating four classrooms from an estimated $14 million to $17 million addition at Lincoln Middle School have led District 150 officials to step back and ask whether they should take up the project at all.

The plan was to build an addition onto Lincoln Middle School in order to transform it into a “birth through eighth” school, absorbing the students from the shuttered Kingman and Irving primary schools. Now the District 150 board wants to change or possibly eliminate that addition and use the funds to make more improvements to Peoria High School, which will be absorbing most of the students from Woodruff High School, which closes this Spring. There’s just one problem:

About $30 million in bonds have been sold, contracts signed and property deeded from District 150 to the Public Building Commission two months ago for about $24 million worth of work at Lincoln and Peoria High School. Both projects are expected to get under way this year.

So, this discussion is being held at the 11th hour — after the PBC approved the original plan, sold the bonds, and acquired the land. In other words, it may be too late to do anything about it.

This is what happens when you don’t have a clear plan and you’re working under a deadline to spend millions of dollars. The District 150 Board and former Superintendent Hinton had a five-year window of opportunity to use Public Building Commission money, and during that time they had trouble deciding on a plan. They vacillated on closing a high school for most of that time, finally voting to close it because the PBC supposedly required it in order to get the remaining $30 million available. That caused them to scramble to cobble together a plan to use that $30 million at the last minute. Now they’re having second thoughts about that plan.

Millions in taxpayer money about to be spent, primary school children wondering where they’re going to go to school next year, and the District is still trying to improvise a plan.

What do Peoria, Denver, and Miami have in common?

They’ve all won the 2010 Driehaus Award:

You are invited to join Mayor Jim Ardis for a news conference on April 20, 2010, at 10:00 a.m. to announce that the City of Peoria is one of three winners of the prestigious 2010 Driehaus Award for excellence in form-based coding from the Form-Based Code Institute. The other two winning cities are Miami, Florida, and Denver, Colorado. The news conference will be held at 601 SW Water Street at the corner of Water and Walnut Streets, adjacent to Kelleher’s Pub, which is the site currently being renovated for the corporate offices for Water Street Solutions. The award will be presented on May 20, 2010, in Atlanta, Georgia, at the Congress for the New Urbanism (CNU)-18 Conference.

I received this invitation because I’m a former Heart of Peoria Commission member.

Cancellations frustrate Traffic Commissioner

Curphy Smith, a member of Peoria’s Traffic Commission and a candidate for City Council in the last election, wants to know why the Commission’s meetings keep getting cancelled. “Why was the meeting cancelled for the 3rd time in a row?” he asked in a recent e-mail that went to several members of the City Council and staff.

At the City Council meeting Tuesday night, during a discussion on the Riverfront Entertainment District, Councilman Sandberg asked why the Traffic Commission wasn’t consulted, considering the district involved closing Water Street. Public Works Director Dave Barber said he didn’t see it as a big traffic issue because there isn’t much traffic on Water Street.

Smith sees things differently. “I disagree with Mr. Barber’s response,” he said in his e-mail. “Any traffic (car, train, foot, bike, etc) at any given levels should be addressed. I think if more items were brought before the traffic commission we could spend our money more wisely and have better designs that promote safer and more pedestrian friendly roads.”

One of the items on the Traffic Commission’s work plan is to develop a city-wide neighborhood traffic calming plan. That effort remains stalled, even as private companies such as Methodist Hospital are implementing traffic calming for their own businesses. Smith applauds Methodist’s changes to Hamilton Boulevard and wonders why the City continues to drag its feet on rolling out these options to all neighborhoods: “[Methodist] did a wonderful job of taking the opportunity to introduce a very pedestrian friendly street level which includes bump outs, bike paths, colored crosswalks and other traffic calming measures. Are measure[s] such as these that are so obvious to other communities and companies, not that important to us? Why is that?”

Public Works Director Dave Barber had this response to Smith’s e-mail:

As to the cancellation of the Traffic Commission there are two basic reasons they were cancelled.

The first is that the Commission has two vacancies and gathering a quorum has been difficult. When scheduling the meeting we want to make sure that a quorum will be present so any action items can be addressed. It’s not fair to those who can make to be present and then not be able to address business matters.

The leads to the second reason for the cancellations. There have [not] been any actionable items for the Commission to address. Many items relating to traffic in [Peoria] are handled through administrative procedures and do not need to have Traffic Commission approvals nor Council approvals for many items. This reduces the potential matters for the Commission to address. This enables a more rapid response relative to addressing customer issues and provides for quicker response time. As I have addressed with the Commission in the past it does not seem appropriate to have meetings to just present updates. We can do this via email without the need for staff dedicated to taking and printing minutes and preparing and delivering packets to Commission members. I have asked the Commission to address their future plans and present a proposed list of what the Commission should be doing but I strongly believe meeting just to meet is not in the best interests on the Commission members nor is it a wise allocation of limited staff time and expense.

I will have Nick Stoffer meet with the acting Chair of the Traffic Commission to establish an agenda for the next meeting and will ask that the Commission address the matter of what they should and should not be addressing. I would suggest the Commission continue to meet as needed and not every month when not required.

The Traffic Commission has been without a chairman since Pat Sullivan resigned last October. A new chairman has not yet been appointed by the Mayor. Furthermore, the two vacancies on the Commission have gone unfilled for months. There were vacancies when the Heart of Peoria Commission was disbanded and its members were to be appointed to other commissions. All but two HOPC members were appointed to other commissions, but none were appointed to the Traffic Commission.

“As far as the second reason for the meetings being cancelled,” Smith responded to Barber, “I will disagree. I think I laid it out in my last email that I believe there have been many items for us to address. I have given my input on the Jefferson Street project and the Glen Oak project as well as others. I would suggest we start asking for our input in the beginning stages and not near the end.”

This is the same problem HOPC faced. Instead of seeing the commission as an asset — a part of the process that could help improve the built environment for all citizens — presentations to and recommendations from the commission are viewed as a nuisance or impediment to getting the project done. Thus, we continue to see regrettable development patterns and wonder why things never improve.

Smith concludes, “My belief and you can correct me if I am wrong is that you [Director Barber] would just like to do away with the commission. You have made it clear in your response that ‘[many] items’ ‘do not need to have Traffic Commission approvals.’ I am not looking for us to approve anything, but I do believe we can be a major asset in making sure the city staff is addressing appropriate measures through input and recommendations.”

Given the number of meeting cancellations, the lack of action on the Mayor’s part to appoint a chairman or fill vacancies on the commission, and Director Barber’s easy dismissal of the Traffic Commission’s role in traffic-related projects, it’s obvious that there is little support for the Traffic Commission at City Hall. Maybe it will be the next commission to be disbanded, leaving one less opportunity for citizen input and involvement. That would be a shame.

STB approves discontinuance of Kellar Branch rail line

On Friday, April 16, the Surface Transportation Board approved discontinuing rail service on the Kellar Branch line that runs through the heart of Peoria. The Board also agreed to railbank the corridor, meaning it technically could be reactivated in the future for rail use, although reactivation of railbanked corridors rarely ever happens. Railbanking preserves the corridor and assures that no part of it can revert back to the ownership of adjacent property owners.

The City of Peoria, Village of Peoria Heights, and the Peoria Park District now have 180 days to approve an agreement converting this corridor to a recreational trail. According to the STB decision, the Park District will have to “assume financial responsibility for the management of [and] any legal liability arising out of the transfer or use of [the right-of-way].”

You may recall that the inscrutable “Kellar Branch Corridor Corporation” made this possible by buying out the interests of rail carriers Pioneer Industrial Railway and Central Illinois Railroad, as well as shipper Carver Lumber. It’s been my contention that the price for buying out those interests will eventually be paid by the taxpayers, either through the City or the Park District. I expect we’ll find out what the cost was in the next few months as the Park District prepares to convert the line to a trail.

Besides the big hit taxpayers will get for buying out those interests, we’ll also be paying for the conversion itself, which is estimated to cost $6 million as of October 2008, and is partially funded by grants (which are themselves federal and state tax dollars). The Chronicle will be watching to see if the Park District’s actual costs of conversion deviate significantly from their estimates.

Ravitch: “Race to the Top” worse than “No Child Left Behind”

At Tuesday’s City Council meeting, Terry Knapp spoke to the council and encouraged them all to read a new book by Diane Ravitch called “The Death and Life of the Great American School System: How Testing and Choice are Undermining Education.” He wanted them (especially the Mayor) to read it before next week’s education symposium with Education Secretary Arne Duncan and school reformer Paul Vallas.

The book is available from Amazon.com here, but you can get a pretty good synopsis of her thesis by watching this lecture (two parts, approx. 15 minutes total, from the Radical Film and Lecture Series at NYU, via YouTube):

“Diane Ravitch is a historian of education. She is Research Professor of Education at New York University. She is a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C.,” and “From 1991 to 1993, she was Assistant Secretary of Education and Counselor to Secretary of Education Lamar Alexander in the administration of President George H.W. Bush,” according to Politico.

While listening to her speech, I couldn’t help but think about Peoria’s charter school, which is heavily promoted by business interests, not the least of which being the Peoria Area Chamber of Commerce. I also thought about how the school board was not even invited to next week’s education symposium — a telling omission. And finally, I thought about this article I recently read from the New York Times: “A charter school created and overseen by Stanford University’s School of Education was denied an extension of its charter on Wednesday night after several members of the school board labeled it a failure. Last month the state placed the charter school, Stanford New School, on its list of persistently lowest-achieving schools.” Ravitch is quoted in that article as saying:

“Maybe this demonstrates that schools alone cannot solve the very deep problems kids bring to school,” said Diane Ravitch, the education scholar and historian. “You cannot assume that schools alone can raise achievement scores without addressing the issues of poverty, of homelessness and shattered families.”

It’s too bad Ms. Ravitch won’t be at next week’s symposium. It would be interesting to hear her spar with Duncan and Vallas.

D150 discontinuing live broadcast of board meetings

Via the Journal Star:

Beginning next month, the school district is no longer televising its board meetings live on public television. Instead, the sometimes three-hour engagement will be taped and played a week later…. [Board president Debbie] Wolfmeyer said the district would eliminate about $4,200 in annual hourly wages for the technology staff members needed during the meetings as well as $8,000 for a new video board and some $10,000 for two new video cameras, which she said would be needed to continue live broadcasts.

What’s more, only the business portion of the meeting will be shown. Public comments would not be part of the recorded broadcast, Wolfmeyer said Monday.

This hardly needs any comment. The video board and cameras are capital expenditures, and small ones at that compared to the district’s budget. Furthermore, if they need new cameras, it makes no difference whether they’re broadcasting live or tape-delayed; that expense will need to be made anyway. The only operating cost appears to be the $4,200 annually for technology staff members (and wouldn’t they still need them, too, if they’re continuing to tape the meetings?). In other words, this move has little to do with cost savings. It’s simply a further manifestation of the district’s desire to minimize, if not eliminate, public input and public access to the school board meetings.

What cost savings come from editing out the public comment period? What cost savings come from broadcasting a tape of the meeting a week later instead of the next day — i.e., as soon after the meeting as possible? Why is this tiny expense being eliminated while the school continues to ignore significant opportunities for savings, such as eliminating the $800,000 paid to for-profit Edison Schools?

On WCBU news (89.9 FM) this morning, interim superintendent Norm Durflinger was saying that District 150 will defend itself against any suggestions that the City take over the school district at next week’s education symposium with Education Secretary Arne Duncan and Mayor Jim Ardis, et. al. I wonder what his defense will be. More transparency? Nope. More accountability to the voters? Hardly. Successful policies leading to higher student achievement? Don’t make me laugh. The way the school board acts, I sometimes wonder if they’re not trying to get taken over by the City or State.

It never ceases to amaze me how the District can do something that ever so slightly gives hope that they’re turning a corner and rebuilding trust with the public (e.g., investigating allegations against the technology department), then turn around and do something to completely destroy any and all trust they’ve built up. It’s no surprise that this plan was outlined by Ms. Wolfmeyer, who doesn’t believe it’s her job to meet with her constituents.

County moves ahead with parking deck plans

I attended the Peoria County Board meeting last Thursday night. Among other business, they decided to approve a contract between the County and PSA Dewberry to prepare bid documents for the proposed Peoria Riverfront Museum parking deck.

I spoke to the board during their citizen comment period at the beginning of the meeting. I had two concerns: (1) The City of Peoria should be part of the contract since they are the owners of the land on which the County wants to build the parking deck and, eventually, the museum itself. The contract calls for the County to provide site access, for instance. How does a body that doesn’t own the land provide site access? And there were liability insurance questions as well. (2) I reiterated the argument given in this post as to why the County shouldn’t start building until they count the cost and verify they have all the funds necessary to finish it.

When the item came up for discussion, one board member commented as to how our legislators “really came through” for us by getting so much federal funding for the parking deck. There were lots of accolades all around for that. Then board member Prather said we should just “get on with it” [i.e., building the museum]. Board member Widmer started to express his concerns over Lakeview’s most recent financial statement, which he said shows even more pledges have been cancelled, raising more questions about the level of private funding. Several board members laughed at him and cut him off. Then they voted to move ahead with the contract.

City decides to do market study of Wonderful Development after all

On the Peoria City Council agenda for Tuesday night is this item:

ACTION REQUESTED: AUTHORIZE THE CITY MANAGER TO CONTRACT WITH HVS FOR UP TO $15,000 TO PROVIDE ANALYSIS AND CONSULTATION REGARDING DOWNTOWN HOTEL PROJECTS.

BACKGROUND: Since 2006, the City has worked with HVS to analyze potential hotel projects involving the Peoria Civic Center. This work included conducting a 2006 market study for a Hilton adjacent to the Civic Center at Kumpf and Jefferson and professional advice on the redevelopment agreement reached with EM Properties in December 2008. Currently, the City has contracted with HVS to conduct a market study of the most recent version of the Marriott Pere Marquette project at a cost of $7,500 [emphasis added]. (The City was able to work with HVS to reduce the cost of a full market study by agreeing to complete some of the local staff work.) That specific task will be concluded by April 30, 2010, but HVS’ expertise may also be required to analyze particular facets of the redevelopment agreement. The proposal from HVS to provide these services is attached.

HVS’ 2006 market study is available here. The most recent version of the downtown hotel project has a different design and fewer rooms, but at the same overall cost of $102 million. The developer is asking for $37 million in public assistance for the project.