Monthly Archives: August 2010

City Council, City of Peoria

No liveblogging again… sorry (UPDATED)

6 Comments

Hi everyone. Friends from Massachusetts are in town, and we’re spending the evening with them. But I’ll do a recap of the meeting later tonight. You can hear the meeting live on WCBU (89.9 FM) or watch it live on Comcast cable channel 22.

UPDATE: Here was the agenda for Tuesday night with some summary comments about each item:

ITEM NO. 1 PUBLIC HEARING Regarding a PLAN OF FINANCING for a CERTAIN REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT in Connection with the RENOVATION and REHABILITATION of the PERE MARQUETTE HOTEL in Peoria, Illinois.

Finance Director Jim Scroggins explained that this public hearing is required by law. You may recall that the City agreed a few weeks ago to give Gary Matthews $37 million to redevelop the Pere Marquette and build another hotel downtown. The City wants to use $2,195,000 in Recovery Zone Facility Bonds (the maximum amount allocated to the City under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) to fund a portion of that $37 million. Recovery Zone Facility Bonds are tax-exempt bonds. The entire City of Peoria is designated a “recovery zone.” This is not the time to argue the merits of the hotel project; this hearing is just about the type of financing that is used; specifically, the use of Recovery Zone Facility Bonds.

  • Phyllis Pryde — Asserts the hotel will be a better investment than the museum because it will earn money and pay taxes. Spoke more against the museum than in favor of the hotel.
  • Kenny Carrigan — He’s in favor of the hotel because it will provide union jobs and bring more activity to the Civic Center. Also speaks in favor of the museum because it will draw tourists, he said. Had positive comments to say about Gary Matthews.
  • Savino Sierra — Supports the hotel because it will provide jobs to union workers and service workers.

That’s it. All three people were in favor of it. Hearing closed.

ITEM NO. 2 CONSIDERATION OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS BY OMNIBUS VOTE, for the City of Peoria, with Recommendations as Outlined:

A.NOTICE of LAWSUIT Filed on Behalf of TERRANCE JACKSON Regarding a Complaint Against the City of Peoria and Several Police Officers Alleging Excessive Force During a Traffic Stop and Arrest on January 26, 2009, with Request to Receive for Information and Refer to the Legal Department.

B.Communication from the City Manager and Director of Public Works with Recommendation to ACCEPT the LOW BID of R.A. CULLINAN & SONS, INC., in the Amount of $872,242.50, and Award the CONTRACT for the WEST HICKORY GROVE ROAD ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (West of Dunmore Drive to Knoxville Avenue) ALTERNATE A, and to Approve CHANGE ORDER #1, in the Amount of $172,033.74, with Additional Authorization of $52,213.81 (5% for Contingencies).

C.Communication from the City Manager and Director of Public Works Requesting Approval of a FINAL PAY ESTIMATE, in the Amount of $12,501.26, which is $10,683.43, or 15% Over the Approved Amount of $67,849.93, for a Total Contract Amount of $78,533.36, for GLEN OAK IMPACT ZONE PHASE I SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS.

D.Communication from the City Manager and Director of Public Works Requesting Approval of the ADDITION of $140,000.00 to the CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT with J. C. DILLON, INC. for ANNUAL STORM SEWER REPAIR CONTRACT to Include the Repair at 1100 W. MacQUEEN AVENUE (24.6% of Original Authorization Amount of $570,000.00), for a Total Amended Authorization of $710,000.00. (Amends Item No. 10-118)

E.Communication from the City Manager and Corporation Counsel Requesting Adoption of an ORDINANCE Amending CHAPTER 31, Schedule A, of the Code of the City of Peoria Prohibiting the Use of Ground Water as a POTABLE WATER SUPPLY by the Installation or Use of POTABLE WATER SUPPLY WELLS or by Any Other Method.

F.Communication from the City Manager and Director of Planning and Growth Management with Request to Receive and File the GLEN OAK SCHOOL NEIGHBORHOOD IMPACT ZONE PROGRESS REPORT for the FIRST HALF of 2010, as Required Semi-Annually by Ordinance No. 16,461.

G.REPORT of the CITY TREASURER PATRICK A. NICHTING for the MONTH of JUNE 2010, with Request to Receive and File.

Riggenbach removed item F from the consent agenda. The remaining items were approved unanimously.

Riggenbach wanted to highlight the Glen Oak Impact Zone report. Recognized George Jacob and Bob Manning for starting this project. Stated the new Glen Oak School is scheduled to open on Monday, August 30. Highlighted sidewalk and street improvements around the new school. Says there are still challenges in the area, but things are improving. Says he sees fewer for-sale signs in that area now, and thinks that it may be because people are “feeling better about their neighborhoods than they have in the past.” (Or, maybe it’s because several blocks of homes were torn down, so there are fewer houses overall.) Wants staff to come back with “creative ways to increase homeownership in this area” and other improvements.

Motion to receive and file approved unanimously.

ITEM NO. 3 Communication from the City Manager and Director of Public Works Requesting Authorization for the Staff to APPLY to the U.S. DEPARTMENT of TRANSPORTATION for a $16,000,000 TIGER II GRANT for STREET IMPROVEMENTS in the WAREHOUSE DISTRICT.

No discussion. Passed unanimously.

ITEM NO. 4 Communication from the City Manager and Acting Human Resources Department Requesting Authorization for the City Manager to Enter into a THREE-YEAR AGREEMENT with the LOW BIDDER, PMA MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, to Provide THIRD PARTY ADMINISTRATION for the CITY’S SELF-INSURED WORKERS’ COMPENSATION PROGRAM at a Projected Cost of $216,000.00, for the Three-Year Term.

No discussion. Passed unanimously.

ITEM NO. 5 Communication from the City Manager and Acting Human Resources Director Requesting Authorization for the City Manager to Enter into a THREE-YEAR AGREEMENT with the LOW BIDDER, VRS-VERICLAIM, INC., to Provide Third Party Administration for the CITY’S LIABILITY PROGRAM at an Estimated Three-Year Cost of $142,000.00.

No discussion. Passed unanimously.

UNFINISHED BUSINESS

(10-057) Communication from the City Manager and Director of Planning and Growth Management with Recommendation from the Historic Preservation Commission Requesting Approval of the Following:

B. REQUEST to DEFER until NOVEMBER 9, 2010, the ORDINANCE Amending CHAPTER 16 of the Code of the City of Peoria Related to the DESIGNATION PROCESS.

Van Auken moves to approve. Also requests that Corporation Counsel give legal guidance to the ad hoc committee. Supports deferral so there’s adequate time for all parties to be heard. Motion passes unanimously.

Further unfinished business: Turner says they’re going to have another public hearing on Comcast’s cable service in October; specific date not yet set.

NEW BUSINESS

Turner thanks everyone who helped raise money last Friday (Elected Officials Got Talent); Gulley reminds everyone of the remaining budget open house meetings; Spain says he’s received complaints about barking dogs in neighborhoods; Ardis reminded everyone of the “Dine Out for Peoria Promise” fundraiser going on this week.

PETITIONS, REMONSTRANCES & COMMUNICATIONS – TOWN OF THE CITY OF PEORIA

ITEM NO. 1 Communication from the Town Attorney Requesting Approval of a Resolution Calling for TWO SPECIAL MEETINGS of the TOWN ELECTORS to Approve a LEASE or PURCHASE for the TOWNSHIP RELIEF OFFICE.

No discussion. Motion approved unanimously.

Irving moves that the Town of the City of Peoria go into executive session after regular meeting not to return in order to consider purchase or lease of property. Motion passes unanimously.

CITIZEN REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL

Savino Sierra is the only citizen to address the council tonight. Complains about people walking in the street where there are sidewalks. Also speaks in favor of the Golden Corral restaurant coming to town.

EXECUTIVE SESSION
ADJOURNMENT

The meeting was very short Tuesday evening. It adjourned shortly after 7:00 p.m. Gary Sandberg is on vacation didn’t say anything the whole meeting, and when he isn’t at the meeting doesn’t talk, pretty much everything gets approved with no discussion.

Peoria Public Schools

Sayonara, Schau

220 Comments

From the Journal Star: “In a surprise move Monday, the Peoria District 150 School Board terminated its contract with treasurer/controller Pam Schau, an at-will employee, effective immediately.”

The district isn’t saying why they fired Schau — they can’t discuss personnel issues. But Schau herself told the newspaper that Superintendent Lathan called her after the meeting and told her “the board felt I was not providing sufficient leadership in the area of accounting.”

Schau’s contract allows her to be fired without cause, according to the paper. She’s been employed by District 150 just over a year.

City of Peoria, Museum Block, Peoria County

County wants to acquire museum block for a buck

39 Comments

According to the recently-published Peoria Riverfront Museum redevelopment agreement, the County wants to obtain the museum site from the City for one dollar.

The site is reportedly valued at $10 million. The City acquired it after Sears moved from downtown to Northwoods Mall in 1998. At that time, the City also acquired the remaining parcels on the block, and in 2005 Caterpillar razed the land to prepare it for construction of the proposed museum and Caterpillar visitors center.

“The City’s conveyance [of the land] is in essence a $10 million contribution to the project,” explained County Administrator Patrick Urich. “In fact, the $145 million price tag figure for the entire project (Cat, PRM and parking deck) includes the City’s contribution and the $2 million Water Street upgrade.”

City representatives didn’t respond to requests for comment, except for at-large City Councilman Gary Sandberg. “Selling price toooo low. Should be $10,000,001.00 and I’ll give them the dollar,” he said via e-mail.

Urich also stated that, “Since at least February, the City has not given any of the parties any indication that they object to conveying the property to the County.” The Council has taken no public action or made any public comments regarding conveyance of the land to my knowledge.

The last museum agreement the City approved called for them to lease the land to the Peoria Riverfront Museum for $1/year for 99 years, not deed them the land permanently. “Initially there were discussions that included a ground lease,” Urich continued, “but since February (publicly at the County Board Committee of the Whole meeting) and prior to that in the negotiating sessions we have discussed the City conveying the property to the County.”

The City is facing a budget deficit of more than $10 million in 2011.

Museum Block, Peoria County

New redevelopment agreement published for museum

3 Comments

Karen McDonald reports that “The first meeting of the Peoria County Riverfront Museum Committee has been scheduled for 2:30 p.m. Friday on the fourth floor of the Peoria County Courthouse.” The agenda packet was posted to the County’s website just before 2:30 Wednesday afternoon — barely meeting the deadline set by the Open Meetings Act.

That gives the public just 48 hours to review the 348-page document which includes:

  • Bid Letting for the Riverfront Museum Parking Deck
  • Engineering Agreements for Construction oversight and materials testing to construct the Riverfront Museum Parking Deck
  • Redevelopment Agreement
  • Lease Operating Agreement
  • Design Concepts

I guess museum committee members have their reading assignments for today, as do local news reporters. Of course, its adoption is a fait accompli, at least for the County. The big question now is whether the City will approve it. I’ll have more on this after I get a chance to review the documents. If you have the time and inclination to read it today (due to, say, insomnia or masochism), please leave your observations in the comments section.

City Council, City of Peoria, Signs

Van Auken misses “Golden” opportunity

25 Comments

There I was Tuesday, beating the newspaper against my head after reading this:

The city’s Planning & Growth Management Department believes [Golden Corral’s] proposed sign is too big, much more so than what is allowed in the city ordinance. Proposals have the sign at 40-foot, 215-square-feet tall [sic]. The city requires 25-foot-tall, 70-square-foot signs for businesses such as Golden Corral […]

Russ Hruby of RJH Management Corp. said the company is willing to meet whatever restrictions are decided upon by the zoning commission or City Council. […]

[Second District City Councilwoman Barbara Van Auken says,] “We’re going to work with them and give them as close to the size as they want,” she said. “That area is a little unique in that way that there is a lot of big signs on University. While we like to get signs smaller, we have to be realistic. As new businesses locate there, they have big signs to compete with.”

Think about that for a minute and let it sink in:

Here’s a developer who is locating on University Street between War Memorial Drive and Forrest Hill — a stretch of road that is the epitome of poor urban design, and probably the most often-cited example of visual clutter in the City. Presumably, city officials would like to see the area improved and would jump at the opportunity to start scaling down the signs to bring them in line with the sign ordinance.

And it gets better! The developer says he’s “willing to meet whatever restrictions are decided upon by the zoning commission or City Council” — unlike Westlake Shopping Center which intimidated the City Council into giving it a big ordinance-busting sign by claiming its then-secret tenant (later revealed to be Fresh Market) would not locate there if they couldn’t have a humongous sign. No, this developer is very happy with the City, and doesn’t perceive the city as unfriendly to business. In fact, he’s quoted as saying, “It’s not an adversarial position at all…. Peoria has been (accommodating).”

What an opportunity! No threats, no intimidation. A new business on University street willing to abide by the code! Could this be the start of cleaning up University and reducing visual clutter? Could this business’s sign compliance be used as a shining, positive example for other businesses who locate there in the future?

Enter Barbara Van Auken, Second District Council Representative.

“We’re going to work with them and give them as close to the size as they want,” she said [emphasis mine]. What? Why in the world would you want to do that? “That area is a little unique in that way that there is a lot of big signs on University….” Hmmm, “unique” is one word for it; “ugly” is another. “Blighted” fits the bill, too.

“While we like to get signs smaller, we have to be realistic. As new businesses locate there, they have big signs to compete with.” I’m not sure whether this is doublespeak or just plain self-contradiction. If Councilwoman Van Auken really would “like to get signs smaller,” then she logically would not “give them as close to the size as they want,” which is three times the size allowed by ordinance and twice as big as the McDonald’s sign across the street, especially after the developer has already stated for the record that he’s “willing to meet whatever restrictions are decided.”

So the bottom line is that signs will continue to escalate in size along University, unless the rest of the council does the right thing and upholds the sign ordinance. The unwritten rule on the council is that you always vote for what the district council member wants for a project in his or her district. That’s a poor policy in general, and one that definitely should be disregarded in this case.

For those of you who like visuals, I drew this in Google Sketch-Up to show you a comparison of the maximum sign allowed by ordinance (on the left) versus the size of the sign requested by Golden Corral (on the right). These are to scale. Note also the size of an average human at the bottom:

City of Peoria, Museum Block, Peoria County

Museum moves forward despite dismal finances

56 Comments

According to a spreadsheet document distributed at a recent Peoria County Finance/Legislative Study Committee meeting titled “Peoria Riverfront Museum Capital Budget by Project,” updated 7/28/2010, pledges to the proposed Peoria Riverfront Museum total $23,073,484. Of that, only $6,475,076 (28%) have been collected.

In addition, whereas the County has said in the past it would only be contributing $34.5 million to the museum project from the public facilities sales tax revenues, the latest spreadsheet shows a full $40 million being contributed. While that’s the lion’s share of public money, there are also significant amounts coming from other public money pots, including the Illinois capital budget, Illinois Department of Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, Department of Energy, Illinois Department of Natural Resources, Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity, NASA, and the Peoria Civic Center Authority. Despite all of this public help, and presuming they’ll actually collect all the pledges that have been committed over their multiple years of fundraising, they’re still looking at a budget deficit of $6,448,988.

But they’re moving ahead with construction anyway. What happened to all the money that was going to come in after the sales tax referendum passed? Remember that? When questioned as to why they weren’t making their private fundraising goals before the referendum, their response was a very confident assertion that people were waiting in line to give money, but wanted to make sure the public would support the tax referendum first. Once the referendum passed, the funds would come rolling in, we were told then.

Perhaps the most shocking thing on this spreadsheet is the total amount that has already been spent. Are you sitting down? It comes to $13,471,440. $4.5 million has been spent on architectural and engineering fees for the museum building — another $1.8+ million in fees for the parking garage. $2 million has been spent on something called “pre-opening operating support.” Almost $1 million was spent on “public awareness” — which was their campaign to make sure the $40 million tax referendum passed, so I guess that was money well spent from their perspective.

There are two line items for endowments on the spreadsheet. One shows $2.3 million “committed” but not “received” from Lakeview as a funding source. Another line item shows a $5,248,000 “endowment enhancement” which has been neither committed nor received. The endowment is important because the museum needs the interest from the endowment to cover its ongoing operating expenses. If there’s no endowment, the museum will have no cushion when facing an operating deficit — and let’s not kid ourselves, there are going to be operating deficits.

But they’re moving ahead with construction anyway, undeterred.

Oh, and they’re still counting on the City just giving them the Sears block for nothing. That land is worth $10 million according to the Build the Block website. What is the City’s budget deficit for 2011? Hmmm…. $10 million, I do believe. Wouldn’t it make sense to sell the land to the museum/county and use those funds to plug our deficit so we don’t have to lay off any more police officers? Nah, the museum is more important than public safety, right?

The conventional wisdom now is that the money fairies will sprinkle the museum with cash once it’s built. You know, once people really see the thing being built, then they’ll start contributing! They’re just skeptical that we’re not really going to build it. If we show them we really mean business, then there will be a race to see who can give the most money fast enough.

Second verse, same as the first.