Some have been wondering why the “Build the Block” campaign is able to put banners on the light poles around the city and who pays to put them up and take them down. I asked Interim City Manager Henry Holling about that issue and received this response:
Good day Mr. Summers. Thanks for your inquiry on City banners and the current display of “Build the Block”. The current banner display was paid for by Lakeview Museum, a principal partner in “Build the Block” and includes labor by City sign crews to post and remove; the sponsoring organization pays for all materials, design and artwork. City banner policy is that only requests from community-based non-profit, non-partisan, non-discriminatory, community-service organizations will be considered on a first come/first served basis. There is typically a wait of 90 to 120 days to get in the present queue. “Build the Block” was kicked off last June as the tagline for the huge Caterpillar Visitor Center/Museum $135 million project. Among others, the City of Peoria is a partner in the project as mentioned in the Mayor’s State of the City address. “Build the Block” was initiated way before the approval by the County Board of a referendum April 7, 2009. In fact, “Build the Block” banners were posted downtown last June, 2008 as part of the educational and communication initiative tied to the event of a massive positive development at the riverfront. Appreciate your interest in this spectacular project for Peoria.
Henry
What’s going on here? you ask. Well, it’s a combination of legal requirements and clever marketing.
You see, Lakeview and the rest of the Museum Collaboration Group cannot advocate for or against a political issue or candidate because they’re a not-for-profit organization. But they can do anything else, such as educate the public on their museum plans and solicit private donations and public subsidies. The “Build the Block” banners fall under that category. They’re put up by Lakeview, the not-for-profit organization, and they say nothing about the referendum.
All the signs and mailings that say explicitly to “vote yes” on the public facilities sales tax referendum are produced by a legally separate organization called “Friends of Build the Block.” This is a political advocacy group. If you look at the small print on these signs and postcards, you’ll see it says “Paid for by Friends of Build the Block.”
Here’s where the clever marketing comes in. Both organizations use the same graphic elements in their materials. They both use the “Build the Block” logo, the same fonts, the same kind of layout and design. So in the minds of residents and voters, the legal division between the two groups is transparent — that is, the average voter sees no difference between them. It all looks like one organization.
So, when Joe Citizen sees a banner hanging on a city light pole, his mind associates “Build the Block” with the “vote yes” literature he’s received in the mail. Ta-dah! All of the museum group’s advertising is effective in advocating for the referendum even though some of it doesn’t explicitly say so. To get a festive attribute get a banner for thanksgiving and enjoy the coming holiday.
Yea, Chicago produces some real winners.
I am still waiting to hear from Karl… or his lawyer KCDAD.
I am not KCDAD, I am kcdad… I am FOR greenspace!
You are KCDAD.
That is all.
$80 million includes the private Caterpillar Visitors Center, ($41 million) the $13 million pledged to the museum project by the Caterpillar Foundation and the $1.2 million pledged to the parking deck by the Foundation.
11bravo wrote:
I think your summary of the MCG’s beliefs is completely wrong.
“It would seem that special interests do not like nor embrace the concept of government of the people, by the people and for the people.”
****************************************************
To promote better understanding …..
MCG has publicly stated that their project always required public money. $24M with $12M in Fed and $12M in state dollars. It is usually very difficult for Joe and Jane Citizen to make inroads with state and fed legislators about such matters (I could cite several cases over the years.) The money, if able to be procured, will go to the asker irrespective of the citizens request to the contrary.
MCG or the museum group started in 2000, by their own documentation, with a Community Needs Assessment conducted by 35-40 community members. That is not a broad community based vision. In Peoria, ask neighborhood leaders, especially in the older neighborhoods about quality of life issues. Although a museum would be nice, it would not be in the top ten, more pressing needs. I do recognize and acknowledge that a museum is a quality of life issue for some community members. In talking with Peoria County residents, their feelings are along the same lines. One example although I have other examples. In Chillicothe, the government is looking to develop their riverfront, why would Chillicothe taxpayers want to fund Peoria’s riverfront development too? Great question!
Museum supporters put pressure on Peoria County Superintendents (December 2008) to not put their plans for a county school facility purpose sales tax referendum on the April 2009 ballot as it would compete with the public facility purposes sales tax referendum. Why interfer? Why not let the voters decide?
Peoria County conducts a written survey, Peoria County’s written survey, Peoria County National Citizen survey, conducted in Feb 2008 and results reported in April 2008,
The Peoria Riverfront Museum project – with a focus on education, history, arts, and sciences – has fallen short of its public and private fundraising goals. To what degree
would you support or oppose a voter referendum to increase the sales tax rate by .25 percent (for example, from 8.0% to 8.25% for the City of Peoria) to fund the
remaining cost of constructing the museum?
Riverfront Museum (page 31): 65% somewhat oppose or strongly oppose a sales tax increase
Committee members and Staff briefly discussed the results of the survey. Ms. Zinkel
said that Mr. Urich has made it very clear that it is “not” an option for the County to
disregard the results of the survey.
Please note that the highest % was that 45% of the respondents were strongly opposed and followed by the 3rd place response of 20% somewhat oppose from the Feb-Apr 2008 time period. So, 65% of Peoria County taxpayers responding are disregarded and in July the legislation is introduced in Springfield into a gutted bill which originally dealt with Cunty CD – Sheriff Discipline left over from 2007. Perhaps the MCG did not know about these survey results, nevertheless, Peoria County administration and county board members did.
So much for Peoria County having the stategic goal to partner with citizens for success.
*****************************************************************
you wrote:
The entire problem stems from the notion that they originally thought they could do it without the government and later discovered they were wrong. Now as a result of those mistakes the people DO have a chance to make the decision.
Please remember that the MCG was looking for $24M and was unable to secure federal and state funding which is still taxpayer money. Now, the amount is $40M in local taxpayer money. Although this is being marketed as a “tiny” amount, a sales tax increase, only $17 per person per year for 20 years, putting it in context is helpful. As a property tax, which I fully understand it is not a property tax, nevertheless, $40M would amount to a 13 cent Peoria County tax rate increase which would not fly with Peoria County residents for a non-core service.
Let’s let the voters decide via a sales tax. In January, at a Peoria County Finance and legislative committee meeting, I asked the question about how a voter would know that this proposed sales tax increase would be for a museum.
Patrick Urich’s response …. It is for the museum group to make their case.
*******************************
you wrote:
…. Whichever side of this argument wins has proven that the majority of Peoria County citizens sided with them and government of the people prevailed. You are being too presumptuous to state otherwise prior to the vote.
I would agree to disagree with you.
Whatever the vote tally, in my opinion, it will not prove that outcome. It will prove that the voters who decided to vote voted. Had this referendum been on the presidential ballot, I would be more inclined to agree with you, because a larger percentage of voters would have been aware of this issue. Historically, an off-year election has lower voter turnout which tends to favor issues which are able to rally their base to turn out the vote. (Please call Mr. Bride and/or Mr. Sonnemaker to verify that fact.)
Regrettably, many Peoria County residents/voters remain unaware of this issue and that they have a vote and that their vote is binding on April 7. Many feel that regardless of their vote, the museum group, akin to other groups in the past, will continue to press for funding approval for their project even if the referendum is defeated. Other voters feel that they still have a voice and will vote for or against.
Had citizens and voters been involved on a broad stakeholder scale from the beginning, back in 2000, and had it been a museum of the people, then perhaps it would be a plan which ‘sings to the hearts of the people’ and the museum would have already been built.
By struggling down the road with:
* an everchanging plan;
* increasing funding goals in the millions;
* short $11M in private funding (which taxpayers have recently been told the museum group is looking for additional state and federal funding aka public $)
* increasing government debt load;
* expansion of government partners and services and …..
does not lend itself for making sound public policy decisions in my opinion.
Thank you for the dialogue.
At least they didn’t approve the tax increase and put it to the voters to reject it.
Do you wish to reject a .25% tax increase to fund the museum? A yes vote rejects the tax, but without a 50% plurality of eligible voters in the county the tax will be initiated.
THAT is the way democracy ought to work! Do whatever you want and make the people get out and tell you they reject your idea. (It is the way Washington D.C. works, anyway.)
Almost ‘lost’ my breakfast bagel when I read the new museum headline.
Ouch! I am waiting for the VOTE YES people to start in. They know they have a great deal of catching-up because of this latest PRM goof. Of course all the pro-museum people will write this off as insignificant, especially when the completed museum project will be bringing in BILLIONS over the next 20 years!
Lets see……. “a penny saved…is a penny earned.” No, wait. A penny saved is a penny taken away by a museum sales tax…that will be spent somewhere else!
This is supposed to be a COUNTY-WIDE tax. How many of the small towns, etc that make up Peoria County are going to get a piece of the ‘museum pie’?
This museum project reminds me of the game of baseball. The PRM group is allowed to hit as many foul balls as its likes…without striking out!!!!!!
Karl?
Block the Block, Fail the Trail, then let’s put those Crooks in Jail!
I’d support the museum if it had something for the…average 20-30something in Peoria. An Imax! Whoopie.
How about something like the City Museum in St Louis.
http://www.citymuseum.org/home.asp
Karrie said” Whatever the vote tally, in my opinion, it will not prove that outcome. It will prove that the voters who decided to vote voted.”
How is this different than any other election since the begining of the REPUBLIC?
also said
… “Had this referendum been on the presidential ballot, I would be more inclined to agree with you, because a larger percentage of voters would have been aware of this issue.”
So if a larger number of voters came to the polls then the outcome is valid. If the election was held in 2000 or 2004 the outcome would be some what different as well.
If the entire voting age populations turns out and approves the issue what is the result?
Will the ATM’s (anti-this museum) accept the will of the people, expressed by their choice? You can not get more input if you have that kind of turn out.
I know some will chime you will never get 100%. That is an issue of voter engagement with the community and how accurate their vote is reflected in their representatives actions on all issues.
Precinct Committeeman: Please let me explain in another manner.
First, yes, the vote will be accepted whether approved or defeated.
Seocnd, I feel that you took my comment out of context.
11bravo wrote:
Whichever side of this argument wins has proven that the majority of Peoria County citizens sided with them and government of the people prevailed.
I responded to 11bravo’s comment — the majority of Peoria County voters will most likely not be voting in an off-year election. 20% voter turnout is a projected vote of regisitered voters. Whatever percentage of whatever number of registered voters will not be the majority of Peoria County voters. Regrettably, too many citizens do not vote.
I would love to see a large voter turnout and it is possible.
Third, the number of voters, whatever that number will determine the outcome. If more voters vote, then the sample size is larger.
Fourth, the fact that many voters do not yet know about this issue, indicates that communication could be improved.
I hope that helps. Thank you for the dialogue.
I
Karrie:
You appear to be making the point that referendums do not belong in an election that is not in the same cycle as the presidential races. If any issue or election is held outside of this time frame can you still embrace the result? The view that is coming thru (in my opinion) is that issues and races being decided in off year elections such as congressman, senator, or governor are suspect if they do not have the imprimatur of a national race to get a larger vote turn out.
I don’t see how your argument helps your case Karrie. If “the fact that many voters do not yet know about this issue, indicates that communication could be improved.” then it seems to me to be to your advantage. A voter with little knowledge about the issue is probably more likely to vote no on a tax increase.
The other points you are trying to make about voter turnout are a little ridiculous.
“I would love to see a large voter turnout and it is possible.”
Then as a part of the opposition group make it happen. If the MCG wins there had better not be an excuse about a lack of organizing of the opposition because you ARE the opposition. There would be no one to blame but yourselves.
Maybe Karrie is referring to the lack of information set out by the PRM group? One of the biggest problems I have had with their entire campaign is being forced to listen to the same old sales pitch; over, and over again.
Also, there are the many, many questions that continue to go unanswered by the PRM. This gets tiresome. Many people are unsure just how to vote. I would argue that in their [very] short campaign, CFRS has become more organized, and now delivers a much more data-oriented argument [against the current museum plan].
That is a sad commentary when the PRM group has literally had years to develop their project/plan.