Monthly Archives: June 2010

Amtrak, Peoria MSA

Help bring passenger rail back to Peoria

57 Comments

As you may have read in today’s Journal Star, I’ve started a grassroots organization for the purpose of advocating for passenger rail service between Peoria and Chicago. It’s called the Peoria Passenger Rail Coalition, and it’s free to join.

I talk to a lot of people who would like to have train service in Peoria, but there doesn’t seem to be any kind of organized effort to quantify the demand. That’s a problem, because if our elected officials think there isn’t much demand, they won’t appropriate the money for renewed rail service. So, the purpose of the organization is to raise public awareness of the benefits of passenger rail service to the Peoria region, gain public support for passenger rail service, and successfully persuade state and federal lawmakers to appropriate the necessary funds to make passenger rail service to Peoria a reality.

Here’s some more information from an article I wrote last year for InterBusiness Issues:

Why Bring Amtrak to Peoria?
Amtrak ridership is up nationwide, and Illinois is no exception to that trend. Amtrak reports that ridership on trains between Chicago and St. Louis “was up 16.5 percent in Fiscal 2008 over 2007. Ridership increased 18.5 percent on the Chicago-Carbondale route, was up 19.8 percent on the Chicago-Quincy route, and grew 25.9 percent on the Hiawathas.” This trend continues in 2009. In January, ridership between Chicago and St. Louis was up 12 percent over the same period in 2008, according to figures released by IDOT. [Update: The trend continues even in 2010, with monthly ridership levels 11 to 20 percent higher than 2009.]

More people are choosing to travel by train, and more communities are requesting passenger rail access. Amtrak recently completed studies on adding train service to Rockford and the Quad Cities. Peoria, with the third-largest metropolitan statistical area in the state—over 370,000 residents—would be a natural addition as well.

Restoring passenger rail service to Peoria would connect our population to the national rail transportation system. Travelers from Peoria could go anywhere in the U.S. that Amtrak serves—and just as importantly, travelers from all over the U.S. could come to Peoria. Peorians traveling to Chicago by train would benefit from low fares (significantly cheaper than the cost of driving to and parking in Chicago) and no traffic congestion. By leaving the “driving” to Amtrak, transit time can be used for work or leisure. Likewise, college students, businessmen and women, and tourists will find Amtrak to be a convenient way to travel to Peoria and enjoy our community. Bringing Amtrak and its ridership into the community will have a positive economic impact on the region.

There are also environmental benefits to passenger rail service. The U.S. Department of Energy found that Amtrak is more energy-efficient than either automobile or commercial air travel. “Amtrak energy intensity was 2,935 British Thermal Units (BTUs) per passenger-mile and commercial airlines were 3,587. Commuter rail was 2,751 and automobiles were 3,549 BTUs,” according to the DOE’s Transportation Energy Data Book. By taking the train, we can lower the carbon footprint of our trips. It is simply more energy-efficient to take the train directly from Peoria than to drive to Chicago, or even Normal or Galesburg, to catch the train there.

Nationally, a greater emphasis is being placed on sustainable transportation networks—with less dependence on the automobile, and thus, less oil consumption and dependence on imported oil—and passenger rail is part of that national strategy. Last October, Congress passed and the president signed the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, which authorized $13.1 billion for Amtrak over the next five years. The recent stimulus bill included $1.3 billion in additional Amtrak funding, as well as $8 billion for high-speed rail. Locally, Senator Durbin has been supportive of adding new service to Illinois cities and improving existing service, and the Tri-County Regional Planning Commission’s long-range transportation plan lists as a top priority: “connect with Amtrak.”

Finally, consider that transportation is an essential service, imperative for the safety and mobility of Illinois citizens. Improving our transportation options improves our overall infrastructure, and our economy benefits from the jobs brought by infrastructure improvement. The economy is also helped by making our city more attractive to potential employers and employees, who are increasingly looking for greener cities in which to live and work.

I’m hopeful that we can convince community leaders to settle for nothing less than reestablishing direct rail service between Peoria and Chicago. Unfortunately, the trend lately has been toward a lesser goal: connecting Peoria with Normal. It seems the community leaders are now seriously considering train service that would simply go from Peoria to the Normal Amtrak station, at which point passengers will have to disembark and wait for a connecting train to complete their trip. That’s a recipe for failure.

There are many benefits of taking a train to Chicago: it’s cheaper than parking and avoids a lot of traffic congestion, just to name a couple. But what benefits are there of taking a train to Normal? Parking is free and there’s no congestion between our two towns. Instead of saving time, it would actually add time to the trip. That alone will depress ridership. But ridership would also be low because there’s not much population on the Norfolk Southern line that runs between Peoria and Bloomington. A train from Peoria to Chicago could hit many underserved communities, picking up much needed ridership.

The fact is, people don’t want to take a train to Normal. They want to take a train to Chicago. You wouldn’t want to take a flight to Bloomington’s airport and switch planes to continue on to Chicago, but that’s exactly the kind of service that’s being considered for passenger rail. I hope this disastrous plan for new rail service is abandoned, and direct rail service to Chicago is once again pursued.

If you feel the same way, I would encourage you to add your voice to the coalition.

Peoria Journal Star, State Journal-Register

Springfield paper offers exclusive content ‘first in print’

16 Comments

The State Journal-Register is now publishing some of its content in print before it publishes it on the web. The lag time is unspecified.

Called First in Print, the move aims to increase the value of the print edition for readers, many of whom pay to read the newspaper. Many of the articles appearing first in the print edition will appear on the newspaper’s website after a delay….

The First in Print effort is a change from how the newspaper traditionally has treated publication of news items. For years, nearly all of the newspaper’s content has been placed on the website where it could be read for free.

“That meant that readers of the print edition, who pay for information, got less advantage for their investment,” Broadbooks said. “This change means that those readers who pay for the paper have the opportunity to see select features first. We believe it enhances the value of the print edition.”

The Springfield paper is owned by GateHouse Media, the same company that owns the Peoria Journal Star. I wrote to the Journal Star’s managing editor John Plevka to ask if his paper will be following suit. I received no response.

Personally, I think “First in Print” is a good idea. Right now, I receive no added value as a subscriber of the Journal Star. Non-subscribers get all the same content for free over the internet, while I’m paying over $200 a year for it. So why shouldn’t I cancel my subscription?

Come to think of it, I might just do that.

City of Peoria, Economic Development, Peoria Streets

Peoria’s priority problem

33 Comments

“The city doesn’t have a budget problem,” Gary Sandberg told me after the city council voted to spend taxpayer money for a walking trail and a private hotel. “It has a priority problem.”

That was the same observation made by Dr. Heywood Sanders of the University of Texas-San Antonio. Sanders is a well-known critic of the convention center (and increasingly, headquarters hotel) “arms race” taking place in cities across America. He’s currently writing a book about it. I asked for his thoughts on the argument that cities simply must offer huge, tax-supported incentives.

The argument goes like this: “In an ideal world, the free market would reign and projects like the hotel would be built 100% by private investment. But that’s not the world we live in. We’re in a struggle with other communities that are providing public incentives in order to lure businesses to their cities. If we don’t compete in offering these kinds of
incentives, we’ll lose out. It’s not the way it’s supposed to be, but it’s the way it is, and we just have to play the game.”

Dr. Sanders has heard the argument many times before. His response was instructive:

The “we have to do it because everyone else is” argument is repeated endlessly in city after city to justify a host of “economic development” efforts. But that doesn’t make it correct. Cities do need to compete for some things. The crucial questions are what the goals are that the city seeks, and whether the decisions make sense or not. The “we have to” argument neatly avoids laying out real goals and objectives, things that can be measured and assessed over time. And an investment decision necessarily involves risk.

The real [important things to consider are] what the potential rewards are, how they relate to community goals, and what the balance of costs and benefits are. It’s all too easy to hide behind simple homilies so that one doesn’t have to really consider what you’re trying to get, and whether it makes sense. As we’ve discussed, Peoria (like a great many cities) has been trying to “save” its downtown for decades. It doesn’t appear to have made much headway. If that’s really the goal, then you need to consider multiple strategies and alternatives, and see what actually happens.

The problem is that planners and local officials almost invariably seek to imitate what someone else has done, with little understanding of how it came about and why it works. There’s an endless parade of architects, planners, and local officials who visit San Antonio’s famed Riverwalk and conclude that all they need is [a] river (or a canal) to get “economic development.” It’s not that simple. Just like everyone thinks building a new convention center will bring hordes to town, and that they then need a new hotel to make the convention center work. And there are a host of consultants who are willing and eager to give local officials (and the business interests they serve) the urban solution du jour.

Peoria has a long history of trying to use large civic projects as a silver bullet to revitalize downtown:

  • The Civic Center was supposed to revitalize downtown, but it hasn’t. It does bring people downtown for Civic Center events, but once the events are over, they all get in their cars and empty out of downtown. The restaurant with the best location relative to the Civic Center — the Grill on Fulton — couldn’t even stay in business. The Civic Center continues to operate in the red every year.
  • Then the City developed the riverfront. There was $2.6 million for the Gateway Building, which the City spends $170,000 a year to operate and maintain. They tried to sell it in 2007, but were evidently unsuccessful. Riverfront Village — the raised concrete slab with parking underneath it that blocks your view of the river — was supposed to “pay for itself” with increased property taxes and parking fees. Parking is now free, and the tax-exempt Heartland Partnership is one of the three tenants on the slab. According to the 2010 budget, the Riverfront is expected to bring in $1.07 million in revenue toward the bond payment of $1.3 million.
  • Then there was One Technology Plaza, which was supposed to “redefine downtown.” Remember that? As the Journal Star editorialized a year after it opened, One Technology Plaza “was advertised as a novel way to put Peoria on the high-tech map, to distinguish Peoria and its work force from virtually every other mid-sized city in America.” The city spent $9.6 million on that project “in part because the $28 million private development would feature the computer-training agency.” That agency — RiverTech Center — opened in April 2000 and closed in May 2001.
  • Then the City acquired and prepared the land for a new ballpark to the tune of $3.3 million. That was supposed to lead to a renaissance south of downtown, turning blighted properties into a “Wrigleyville” atmosphere. The ballpark opened in 2002, but no Wrigleyville has materialized.
  • Along the way, the City picked up the Sears property for around $1 million — the so-called “crown jewel” of downtown Peoria. They’re poised to give the land away to the County so Lakeview Museum can relocate to the block at taxpayer expense.
  • And then there’s the Wonderful Development (City attorney Randy Ray’s ebullient appellation for the downtown hotel project), which the City Council has approved twice now. It’s a big project with a single developer and no public benefit — but a lot of public risk. This is the latest big, civic, silver bullet that will finally bring tourists to Peoria and make the Civic Center profitable. But just like with the other projects, no measurable, objective criteria for success has been identified for the downtown hotel project. Presumably, as long as the project meets its debt obligation, it will be declared a success, regardless of whether it brings in new conventions, regardless of whether other hotels and restaurants close.

The completed projects have not delivered on their promises of downtown revitalization, and there’s little reason to be hopeful that the proposed projects will fare any better. These projects are all big, flashy, and give the appearance that “things are really booming in Peoria.” Meanwhile, many less-exciting projects get put on the back burner or eliminated altogether. Those projects are called “basic services.” Things like road and sidewalk repair.

At the same time the Council approved the Wonderful Development, there was another $40 million project the council could have funded instead. It’s the Washington/Adams (U.S. Route 24) upgrade project. This would improve Route 24 from I-474 to I-74, which would benefit the public (it’s a public street) as well as numerous business/land owners and developers all up and down the stretch. It would implement key elements of the Heart of Peoria Plan (adopted “in principle” by the City Council) and the Warehouse District form-based code.

It would remove the median from the southern portion of the roadway, making the properties along that stretch more accessible and marketable, thus raising their value. It would make the Warehouse District area more pedestrian-friendly, spurring development of loft apartments/condos which would bring more residents back to downtown, which will spur more demand for retail services in the City’s central business district. Currently many of those properties sit vacant, contributing to the City’s budget woes.

This project is not without risk. There might not be enough property improvements or increases in tax receipts for the project to “pay for itself” (although I’m sure the City could find a consultant to say it will pay for itself if they really wanted to do it). But the project also carries significant public benefit, and the presence of multiple developers and property owners over a large, diverse area mitigates the risks. Yet this project languishes in the Land of Insufficient Resources while the Wonderful Development moves forward.

Conclusion: Success is not a priority for Peoria. Downtown revitalization isn’t really a priority for Peoria. Peoria’s’ biggest priority is the appearance of progress. And based on that criteria, we can all say “mission accomplished.” There’s a lot going on. Stuff being built. Stuff being torn down. Money being spent (mostly tax money, alas). It all contributes to the image that Peoria is moving and shaking.

But it’s not. Peoria is in debt and it’s continuing to lose population. City services are being slashed every year, driving more people away. The appearance of progress is bankrupting us. It doesn’t just affect the City. It also affects the County and, especially, the school district (Things are changing! Look at our shiny new buildings! Just don’t look at our test scores).

Sandberg is right. Peoria doesn’t have a budget problem. It has a priority problem.

Peoria Public Schools

Davis gets to keep her salary unless she’s convicted…and maybe even then

171 Comments

Since Mary Davis was fired from District 150, I’ve been wondering if the taxpayers would be getting their money back from all those months she was on paid administrative leave. Today I got the answer from the district’s spokesperson Stacey Shangraw: Only if she’s convicted:

Mary [Davis] will be required to pay back the salary she received while she was on administrative leave if she is convicted of a crime. The pay back requirement does not come into play when a person is indicted or charged. Her trial for the criminal charges has been set to begin August 16.

So we will not know if she is required to pay back the salary she received while on leave until the criminal proceedings are finished. It is outlined in the Illinois State Statute, the state officials and employees ethics act, under 5 ILCS 430/5-60 that she will be required to pay the salary back, however it is not part of the criminal code.

If convicted, we will ask the State’s Attorney to include a request to include payments as part of her sentencing, but the Judge is not required to include that in the sentence or order. If the Judge does not include this payment requirement in the criminal sentencing order then the district would have to seek payment by first demanding it pursuant to the statute.

Here’s what 5 ILCS 430/5-60(b) says:

As a matter of law and without the necessity of the adoption of an ordinance or resolution under Section 70?5, if any officer or government employee of a governmental entity is placed on administrative leave, either voluntarily or involuntarily, pending the outcome of a criminal investigation or prosecution and that officer or government employee is removed from office or employment due to his or her resultant criminal conviction, then the officer or government employee is indebted to the governmental entity for all compensation and the value of all benefits received during the administrative leave and must forthwith pay the full amount to the governmental entity.

Sounds complicated. It also sounds like District 150 won’t be getting that money back. Read the wording of that statute again, especially the part that says, “and that officer or government employee is removed from office or employment due to his or her resultant criminal conviction, then the officer or government employee is indebted….” They fired her before she was convicted of anything, not because of a criminal conviction. So, I’ll bet the statute is moot and the district doesn’t get that money back, unless they can get it included as part of her sentencing.

Any lawyers out there, feel free to correct me if I’m reading the statute incorrectly. I’d really like to be wrong about this.

City Council, City of Peoria

Liveblogging the City Council 6-8-2010

3 Comments

Good evening everyone! There were a number of proclamations tonight, but we’re finally underway at 6:50 p.m. Not a lot of people are here in the chamber, and there’s plenty of parking; must not be anything controversial on the agenda, and no other events going on downtown. All the council members and mayor are here with one exception: George Jacob. Mayor Ardis gave an update on Councilman Jacob, stating that he is “stable” and that “stable is good” at this point. We will continue to pray for his recovery.

On to business. I’ll be updating this post throughout the meeting, so if you’re following live, be sure to refresh your browser often. Here’s the agenda for tonight:

Continue reading Liveblogging the City Council 6-8-2010 →

City Council, City of Peoria

More cuts on the agenda for tonight’s council meeting

34 Comments

Property values didn’t rise as much as the City of Peoria hoped they would, and that means less property tax revenue will be collected — $826,000 less, to be precise. To make up for this additional shortfall, more cuts are being made to the budget. The cuts primarily impact the police, fire, and public works departments, as usual.

Public Works is cutting $451,340 dollars they were going to use to purchase new vehicles. According to the Journal Star, that would have paid for three new trucks “used for snow plowing, removal of storm debris, hauling asphalt, etc.” David Barber says his department can manage without the new vehicles.

The police department will be giving up $90,000 in overtime. The fire department will be reducing their overtime budget by $45,072 and their clothing allowance by $26,815. Staffing is down in both departments, but especially in the police department, which took a big hit during last year’s budget crisis. Fewer cops means heavier reliance on overtime from the remaining officers to ensure everything is covered adequately. Now they’re cutting overtime, too.

And looming on the horizon is a predicted $10 million budget deficit for next year that will have to be filled with even more cuts and higher taxes/fees. Citizens will end up paying more for less service . . . again. I wonder if that’s at all related to the decline in sales and property tax receipts?

City of Peoria, Restaurants

River Station lease renewed for another 10 years

12 Comments

From the most recent Issues Update for Peoria:

The City has received notice from River Station LLC that it is renewing its lease to the River Station building for an additional ten (10) years. The original lease was dated August 28, 1979. On November 17, 2000, it was assigned from Mathers Co., Inc. to River Station LLC, which is Kert Huber’s entity. The right to extend is given to the Lessee, and the City cannot deny the extension. This matter will not come before the Council.

The original lease dated August 28, 1979, provides for a twenty?year term commencing when the restaurant opens. It provides for three (3) ten?year extensions. The first ten?year extension was executed by Mathers on November 16, 2000, providing for a ten?year extension which would terminate February 1, 2011. River Station LLC has provided notice of its intent to extend for an additional ten (10) years, until February 1, 2021, at which time there will be the probability of another, final ten?year extension until February 1, 2031, at which time the lease will end.

Rent under the lease is two percent (2%) gross sales from the operation of businesses on the premise. There is no minimum amount, so that the City is realizing some income from the presence of Martini’s on the premises.

Martini’s is the only tenant in the old Rock Island Depot, now known as the River Station. Not that other restaurants haven’t given it a try. Most recently, a restaurant called “Tilly’s” tried to make a go of it. Here’s to hoping a new restaurant can be successful in that location someday soon.

Museum Block, Peoria County

County wants more control over museum construction

3 Comments

An interesting item is on the agenda for the Peoria County Board Rules Committee this coming Thursday evening:

ISSUE:
Establishment of Museum Standing Committee of the County Board and temporary Museum Building Committee

BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
In the initial Capital Lease and Operating Agreement (posted on the County website in February 2010) between the County and the Peoria Riverfront Museum (PRM), it was determined that the County would construct the parking deck and the PRM Board would construct the museum and the perimeter improvements. The following changes to the County Board Rules of Order would establish a standing committee of the County Board to oversee construction of the PRM and leasing of the PRM site and create a temporary Museum Construction Committee to oversee construction of the PRM building.

The Museum Standing Committee would be comprised of County Board Members. The general duties of the Museum Standing Committee would be to: a) make recommendations to the County Board for awarding contracts for the construction of the PRM; b) approve all change orders for the construction of the PRM of less than $250,000 additional cost; c) exercise general oversight of the PRM building and grounds; d) review and comment upon those items provided in the Lease and Operating Agreement with PRM; e) initiate all actions of the County exercising powers under the Lease and Operating Agreement; and f) review all actions of the Museum Construction Committee.

The Museum Construction Committee would be comprised of individuals selected by the Peoria County Board Chairman from the County Board, the PRM Board of Directors, county staff, and/or other citizens with building and construction experience. The Museum Construction Committee is a temporary committee that shall automatically dissolve upon the opening day of the Peoria Riverfront Museum. The general duties of the temporary Museum Construction Committee include: a) approve all change orders for the construction of the Peoria Riverfront Museum of less than $100,000 additional cost; b) Exercise general oversight of the construction of the Peoria Riverfront Museum Project; and c) report regularly to the Museum Committee regarding the progress of construction.

The advantages of the County managing the construction are numerous: a) for transparency purposes, having the construction of a public building on public property performed by a public body assures that the discussions will be open to the public; b) the PRM Board of Directors can spend more time focusing on operations, exhibit planning, and fundraising; and c) the County can be assured contractually that our capital contribution is a set dollar amount. In addition to memorializing this change in the County Board Rules, the Capital Lease Operating Agreement will have to be modified. The PRM Board of Directors is scheduled to have their organizational meeting on June 8, 2010. Once organized, the PRM Board can take up the Capital Lease and Operating Agreement and Redevelopment Agreement for either a late June or early July approval by the County Board.

At first blush, it looks like a reasonable action given the benefits listed. But look closer. This establishes a new standing committee, and the County Board Chairman is responsible for making appointments to all standing committees. Only those appointed to the Museum Standing Committee could “initiate all actions of the County exercising powers under the Lease and Operating Agreement.” That stipulation effectively freezes out board members who are opposed to the museum. Board members who believe the museum group is not fulfilling the terms of the agreement will have no way of holding them accountable because they can’t initiate any action on it. How is that in the public’s interest?

Furthermore, the County Board Chairman is free to appoint only those who agree with him, and remove anyone who crosses him. Just recently the Chairman removed board member Brian Elsasser from the Tri-County Regional Planning Commission because he (the Chairman) “owed a political favor to a friend.” Just imagine what political favors might be called in for the museum project, especially since this committee will also “make recommendations to the County Board for awarding contracts for the construction of the PRM,” and the County Board promised to have local contractors build the project.

This is a recipe for political corruption.

General News

Blood Donors to Honor City Councilman George Jacob

Leave a comment

From a City of Peoria press release:

Friends and co-workers of George Jacob encouraged to give blood.

PEORIA, Ill. (June 4, 2010) –George Jacob has served the people in our community as a Peoria City Councilman since 2005. He is known for his dedication to the city, his job, his church and, most importantly, his family and friends. George has been hospitalized since the Memorial Day weekend, receiving treatment for injuries suffered in an accident.

As part of his treatment, George has received blood transfusions. Now his friends, co-workers, city officials/employees and the citizens of Peoria have a chance to give blood in his honor. From Monday, June 7 through Monday, June 14, donors at the Peoria Blood Donation Center can roll up their sleeves to help patients like George. All presenting donors will be able to sign a “get well” card that will be delivered to George and his family.

The Peoria Blood Donation Center is located at 405 W. John H. Gwynn Jr. Ave.

Day Date Hours
Monday June 7 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.
Tuesday June 8 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.
Wednesday June 9 6:30 a.m. to 3 p.m.
Friday June 11 6:30 a.m. to 3 p.m.
Saturday June 12 7 a.m. to 2 p.m.
Monday June 14 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. *June 14 is World Blood Donor Day

Donors with type O negative blood are especially encouraged to schedule an appointment. Type O negative blood, the universal blood type, is always in high demand because it can be transfused to patients with any blood type, especially in emergency situations.

How to Donate Blood
Simply call 1-800-GIVE-LIFE (1-800-448-3543) or visit redcrossblood.org to make an appointment or for more information. All blood types are needed to ensure a reliable supply for patients. A blood donor card or driver’s license, or two other forms of identification are required at check-in. Individuals who are 17 years of age (16 with parental permission in some states), weigh at least 110 pounds and are in generally good health may be eligible to donate blood. High school students and other donors 18 years of age and younger also have to meet certain height and weight requirements.