Category Archives: City Council

City Council, City of Peoria

Council preview 4-28-09

14 Comments

Here are some items of note that will be discussed and possibly decided on Tuesday (if they don’t defer everything like last week):

  • Defending BVA. The City will be defending Council Member Barbara Van Auken against charges brought by the Sigma Nu Fraternity. This is the official notification to the council.

  • Funding PACVB. The Peoria Area Convention and Visitors Bureau wants to keep getting extra revenue from the hotel tax. The hotel tax is the “H” portion of the infamous HRA (Hotel, Restaurant, Amusement) tax. The PACVB originally got 40% of the revenue from that tax. Since July 2000, however, they’ve been getting an extra 4% to pay for the costs of leasing and subsequently buying their 456 Fulton Street office. Thus, this extra amount was supposed to be eliminated once the mortgage was paid off, which was supposed to be in 2006. But, unbeknownst to the Civic Center or the City, the PACVB refinanced their loan in 2003 over a longer time period. The difference between their old mortgage payment and their new lower payment was diverted to operations. The chickens came home to roost in 2006 when the PACVB came to the City asking for that 4% increase to be extended so they could continue paying their mortgage for another four years (until 2010). City Council members were none too happy, but gave them the money– for one year. So in 2007, the request came back again that the extra 4% be extended through 2010. That was approved. One would think that would be the end of it.

    But no! They’re back again, and now they want that extra 4% to be permanent. Of course, the current council communication doesn’t include any of the background information I just provided, nor does it explain why the PACVB wants it extended permanently, what they’re going to use the money for, or what benefit it would bring to the city. It also doesn’t include any information on whether the Civic Center Authority concurs with this request. It’s a poor excuse for a council communication, frankly.

    Furthermore, take a look at this breakdown of income sources published by the PACVB in their annual report:

    pacvb-income

    Keep in mind that this is the Peoria Area Convention and Visitors Bureau, covering eight counties: Bureau, Fulton, Marshall, Mason, Peoria, Stark, Tazewell, and Woodford. Now, doesn’t that income distribution look a little disproportionate? The PACVB needs to do more than explain why they should get an extra 4% indefinitely; they need to explain why the City shouldn’t reduce the other 40% of H tax revenue they’re receiving. Perhaps a reduction here could pay for the latest $500,000 upgrade the Civic Center has floated.

  • Upgrading streets around Glen Oak School. The city is contemplating upgrading the streets around the new Glen Oak School. This is necessary because the city allowed the School District to increase their footprint dramatically and cut off Frye, a major East Bluff thoroughfare. This not only affects motorists, but also utilities. A water line will have to be relocated along Maryland, and AmerenCILCO will have to relocate their facilities from the abandoned portion of Frye. A block of brick street on Maryland and two blocks of brick street on Kansas will be converted to asphalt. Upgrading the streets, curbs, and sidewalks is estimated to cost about $2.93 million. If they want to add ornamental streetlights and other streetscape enchancements, it would cost an additional $1.35 million. That should be a breeze, considering we can afford to give a private developer $40 million to build a hotel downtown. I sure don’t understand all the handwringing in the council communication about “the need to establish priorities” and “the need to further consider bonding for improvements.” There was none of that kind of talk in the communication about the — what was it they called the Marriott/Pere Marquette project? — oh yes, the “wonderful development”!

  • Approving Harrison Homes Subdivision. In addition to the new Harrison School, the Peoria Housing Authority is planning to put in a “RiverWest” type development to replace the slums known as Harrison Homes. Before the council on Tuesday will be the preliminary plat showing how the neighborhood will be arranged. My only complaint is that they have a great opportunity to restore the street grid system, but they are choosing instead to make inefficient use of their land by putting a couple streets diagonally. Why? To what advantage? It’s demonstrably inefficient and incongruous with the surrounding area. Why wouldn’t we want to restore the grid system, as is recommended in the Heart of Peoria Plan? Yes, that last question was rhetorical.

  • Saving money. The city is still trying to save money rather than raise taxes. What this effectively means is that they’re going to continue subsidizing downtown parking, the Civic Center, the proposed museum, the Gateway Building, and the “wonderful development,” at the expense of basic services such as sealcoating of streets, weed control, building inspections, and code enforcement. The city really knows how to tighten its belt when it comes to services that benefit all Peoria residents, doesn’t it?

No doubt, all these items will pass with little or no discussion, since what we really value on the Peoria City Council is “consensus.” Who needs deliberation or critical thinking, especially where the public can see? They make for long, boring, and informative meetings. We want a council that just comes and votes “yes” or “no” as determined ahead of time in private meetings outside the purview of the Open Meetings Act. No fuss, no muss.

City Council, City of Peoria, Crime

City to defend Van Auken

51 Comments

The City of Peoria will be defending Council Member Barbara Van Auken against the lawsuit that was filed by the Sigma Nu fraternity against her, District 4 County Board Representative Andrew Rand, and City Historic Preservation Commissioner Sid Ruckriegel. City attorney Randy Ray confirmed late today, “We will be filing a pleading on her [Van Auken’s] behalf and defending her.”

I’m so glad my tax dollars are going toward this. I assume this means our budget crisis is over and the City is operating in the black again.

Incidentally, it looks like Rand and Ruckriegel aren’t so lucky as to have their respective municipalities pick up their legal expenses. They have reportedly retained Tim Bertschy with Heyl, Royster, Voelker & Allen, P.C.

City Council, City of Peoria

Council Roundup 3/24/09 (Updated)

10 Comments

Some notable items from Tuesday’s council meeting:

  • First District Councilman Clyde Gulley voted with the majority of the council to give stimulus funds to a private not-for-profit organization in the third district instead of repairing sidewalks in the first district. Gulley is running unopposed on the April ballot to represent the first district for another term.

  • The council learned that tax revenues are down, resulting in a projected $2.5 million budget deficit. It could get worse next year. Naturally, the staff is looking to cut police officers and road repairs to make up the difference. They’re not talking about laying off any police officers — just not filling vacant positions. So public safety and public works will suffer, while private developers of the downtown Marriott will rake in $40 million in public money. Priorities, you know. Another vacant position they’re talking about not filling: city manager. This is their way of keeping Holling on indefinitely, contrary to the agreement that he would only be temporary until they could get a permanent replacement. They’re going to treat him as permanent, but continue calling him “interim” until some undetermined point in the distant future, evidently.

  • The sales tax just went up 1% within the boundaries of the Hospitality Improvement Zone downtown. These boundaries are very strange — I’m going to try to get a map from the city. Generally speaking — very generally — the HIZ is bounded by Kumpf, Fulton, Adams, and Fayette, but the actual boundary zigzags into alleys (active and vacated) and avoids certain blocks completely. Here’s the map:

    hizmapwithaerial1

    Nevertheless, if you go to a restaurant or bar within the HIZ boundaries, the sales tax on your meal/drinks will now be 11%. If the museum tax passes, it will be 11.25%. Meanwhile, over in Tazewell County right across the river, the sales tax is 8%.

2009 Campaign, City Council

Schock to stump for Smith in 2nd District

18 Comments

All politics is local, they say, and you don’t get much more local than a City Council race. That race in the second district is heating up. Incumbent Barbara Van Auken’s challenger Curphy Smith has recently announced a fundraiser for his campaign that will feature “special guest” Aaron Schock:

smith-shock-fundraiser

Not a bad move politically. Schock is popular and has shown an ability to get support even in Democrat-leaning districts (Van Auken, incidentally, is a Democrat). It won’t hurt Smith to hitch his wagon to a rising star. Until now, conventional wisdom has been that Smith is pulling in what I like to call the “NVA” (“Not Van Auken”) vote. Getting Schock’s endorsement may give voters pause to consider Smith on his own merits. If nothing else, it raises public awareness of his campaign, which hasn’t gotten much press since there was no primary in the second district.

2009 Campaign, City Council

Akeson, Riggenbach advance

8 Comments

Voters in Peoria’s third district selected two candidates to face off in the April 7 general election: Tim Riggenbach and Beth Akeson. The final results were:

Candidate Votes Percent
Timothy D. Riggenbach 507 54%
Beth Akeson 394 42%
Kelley C. McGownd Mammen 38 4%

Only 113 votes separate the two advancing candidates. Voter turnout was only 7% — 943 people voted out of 13,479 registered voters. (In case you’re doing the math, there were four “under votes,” meaning four people didn’t vote for any of the three candidates.) Since the April 7 general election will also include a school board race and a sales tax referendum, turnout will likely be quite a bit larger.

It promises to be a close and interesting race.

2009 Campaign, City Council, City of Peoria

Endorsement: Beth Akeson for City Council, Third District

18 Comments

Three candidates are vying to be the Peoria City Council’s third district representative: Beth Akeson, Kelley C. McGownd-Mammen, and Timothy D. Riggenbach. There is a primary on Tuesday, February 24, to narrow the choices down to two. The Journal Star Editorial Board is correct in their endorsement of Akeson and Riggenbach for the primary.

Beth Akeson and her familyI’m going to go a step further, though, and give you my endorsement for the general election, which will be April 7. I’m endorsing Beth Akeson for the Peoria City Council’s third district seat being vacated by Bob Manning.

Motivational speaker Joel Barker once said, “Vision without action is a dream. Action without vision is simply passing the time. Action with vision is making a positive difference.” This is what sets Beth Akeson apart from the other candidates: She has that rare combination of action with vision. And she will make a positive difference for the citizens of Peoria, especially in the third district.

Vision

First, Beth has a specific vision for the future of Peoria. It’s a vision that’s shared by many because it was shaped from lots of public input. The Heart of Peoria Plan was formed through a public process that included hundreds of participants: residents, business owners, city staff, and other stakeholders. Unfortunately, many candidates and even council members have not read the Heart of Peoria Plan or taken the time to really understand the vision that Peoria’s residents have developed. The result has been a lot of action without vision.

Beth Akeson has gone beyond simply reading the Heart of Peoria Plan. She has done extensive study on urban design. An understanding of how cities work gives her a strong foundation from which to make decisions. It allows her to see how the little decisions made today will impact the future of the city. It allows her to see through expensive, ineffective “magic-bullet” theories for city revitalization and focus on long-term, time-tested methods of urban planning that will lead to real revitalization.

An important part of Beth’s vision is the principle of inclusion and consensus-building. The reason why the Heart of Peoria Plan has wide support is because of the process that was used to develop it. It was an inclusive process. All the stakeholders had a seat at the table from the beginning. Every participant’s concerns were heard and taken into consideration. The final plan was worked out through consensus-building among these stakeholders.

Beth’s vision for representing the third district is the same. She believes in giving residents a seat at the table early in the decision-making process so their concerns can be heard and have an impact on the final outcome. Most projects in the city are presented for public input too late in the process to make any difference at all (for example, the recent downtown hotel project). Beth would work to change this culture of exclusion to a culture of inclusion.

Action

If there’s one thing I’ve learned about Beth from working with her on the Heart of Peoria Commission, it’s that she works hard. She took her appointment seriously and did a tremendous amount of research on the issues that came before the commission. She made phone calls, visited sites, sought out expert advice, talked to people who lived in affected areas, and more importantly, listened. Beth is a good listener; she seeks first to understand, then to be understood. I can tell you that I’ve personally witnessed this time and again — with city staff, business owners, residents, and other commissioners (including myself). She will bring this same level of commitment to her role as a city council member.

The Chairman of the Heart of Peoria Commission, the late Bill Washkuhn, recognized Beth’s hard work on behalf of the commission. He encouraged Beth to take her efforts to the next level. In an e-mail he wrote just this past December, he said, “Beth, continue to direct your energies toward the betterment of Peoria. Run for City Council.”

I lived in the third district for eleven years, from 1994 to 2005. It’s a diverse district with very diverse needs. I sincerely believe that Beth Akeson is the candidate that will make the biggest positive difference for her district and the city at large. I hope you’ll vote for her.

City Council, City of Peoria

CSO improvements head wish list for stimulus funds

3 Comments

On the Peoria City Council’s agenda for Tuesday is a “resolution establishing the City of Peoria’s highest priorities for stimulus package projects.” Here they are:

The City of Peoria’s highest priorities for stimulus package projects are as follows:

  1. Combined Sewer Improvement Projects as follows:

    a. Western Avenue Storm Sewer removal from Combined Sewer System. Estimated cost: $5.1 million.

    b. Glen Oak Avenue storm sewer removal from Combined Sewer System. Estimated cost: $1.2 million.

    c. Spring Street supplemental sewer. Estimated cost: $6.5 million.

  2. Various sidewalk projects including, but not limited to,

    a. Glen Oak School Impact Zone. Estimated cost: $475,000.

    b. Sidewalks at Kellar Primary School, Charter Oak School and Rolling Acres School. Estimated cost: $525,000.

    c. Lake Avenue sidewalk at Sheridan Village. Estimated cost: $90,000.

    d. Sheridan and Lake Intersection improvement. Estimated cost: $125,000.

    e. ADA Ramp Program. Estimated cost: $250,000.

    f. Liberty Park sidewalk improvement. Estimated cost: $100,000.

    g. Sheridan Road sidewalk improvement. Estimated cost: $230,000.

  3. Construction of Darst Street and Clark Street in the Southern Gateway Area. Estimated cost: $3.33 million.

Presumably, these are all “shovel ready” projects. My only thought is, we keep hearing that the total CSO project is going to cost at least $100 million, but the three CSO projects listed here total just $12.8 million. I guess I wish we could get more money for that project since it’s an unfunded mandate that’s going to be very hard for our city to afford.

But on the other hand, every little bit helps, and it’s pretty unlikely we would receive anywhere near $100 million from the federal government. So this sounds like a good list to me.

City Council, City of Peoria, Heart of Peoria Plan

LDC continues to go unenforced by Council

15 Comments

Tuesday night, the Peoria City Council decided twice not to enforce the Land Development Code (LDC). They made decisions that weren’t just minor variations to the LDC, but decisions that were a fundamental affront to the very intent of the LDC. In fact, they showed an ignorance of and contempt for the intent of the LDC. They have evidently never read the LDC nor the Heart of Peoria Plan on which it was based.

The two items on the Council’s agenda were:

  • New Taco Bell. The Taco Bell restaurant at 1811 N. Knoxville is going to be rebuilt. The developer is going to tear down the building and put up a new one. This would be the perfect opportunity to bring the property into compliance with the code. Yet Second District Council Member Barbara Van Auken moved to approve the developer’s request to comply with none of the LDC — to be completely non-conforming. Why? Because he’s reportedly spending $1.8 million and because she thinks there are “problems” with the LDC. That latter reason is the latest rage, don’t you know. Just declare something “broken” or “a problem” (like the Historic Preservation Ordinance, for instance) and then you can completely disregard it until it’s “fixed.” What does Van Auken think is wrong with the code? Wait till you hear.

    The code calls for buildings to be built close to the street — preferably right up to the sidewalk — so that they’re more pedestrian friendly and so that they’re pushed further away from the residential neighborhoods that are behind the businesses, among other reasons. When the code was enacted, buildings that didn’t conform to the code (like Taco Bell) were grandfathered in. They could even make minor additions and renovations without having to bring the building into compliance in an attempt to be “business friendly.” But if they were to make major renovations — like tearing down and reconstructing the building — then they would have to bring it into compliance. Makes sense, right? They’re rebuilding the thing anyway, why not build it in compliance with the code? No doubt the code would have been roundly criticized if it required a building to be torn down and rebuilt (i.e., brought into compliance) whenever the owner wanted to make any minor change.

    Yet Barbara Van Auken turned that reasoning on its head Tuesday night. She said the code was unfair to require major renovations to trigger full compliance, but not minor renovations. It rewards those who slap up shoddy additions, but penalizes those who want to invest $1.8 million to put up a “state-of-the-art Taco Bell,” she explained. That wasn’t her intent when she voted to enact the LDC, she said.

    Thus, she voted to approve a brand new building construction that completely defies the LDC, not just in siting, but also the buffering from the neighborhood. Under the LDC, a masonry garden wall would have been required as a buffer. The Council said a repaired wooden fence was sufficient.

  • Expanded pet clinic. Demanes Animal Hospital at the corner of Wisconsin and Forrest Hill has bought up four properties around it and wants to expand. They’re not tearing down their building, but instead adding on to it. However, they want to site the addition in such a way that it doesn’t conform with its current zoning, called CN (neighborhood commercial). The CN district requires that the building addition come right up to the sidewalk and that parking be put in the rear of the building. Where the existing building does not front the sidewalk, a street wall that can be as short as 3 feet tall would need to be built to establish the street edge and provide buffering.

    Instead of asking for a variance from these requirements, the decision was made to do a complete end-run around the requirements by asking for the property to be rezoned CG (general commercial). There is no legal justification for rezoning this property CG, as I outlined in my letter to the Zoning Commission, which I forwarded to Third District Councilman Bob Manning as well.

    You see, when you ask for a zoning change, the Zoning Commission and Council need to consider that request apart from the current use or current plans. Why? Because once the zoning is changed, it applies not just to the current owner, but any future owners. If Mr. Demanes were to decide to move his practice, or if (God-forbid) he got hit by a bus and the clinic needed to close, the next property owner could use that property for any permitted use under CG zoning, which includes such neighborhood-friendly uses as a pawn shop, oil and lube shop, and car wash. The zoning designation requested is the most intense land use designation available under the LDC. This is clearly inappropriate in a densely-populated residential neighborhood. It’s also completely contrary to the City’s Comprehensive Plan.

    But the appropriateness of the zoning proper was never discussed. Instead, Mr. Manning tore a page form Ms. Van Auken’s playbook and criticized the CN requirements, saying they weren’t appropriate for this part of his district. They may be okay for Main Street (in the second district), but they’re not “one size fits all,” he said. So the Council decided to continue a pattern of development that has proven over the past 50 years to deteriorate the third district. The Council decided to continue a pattern of development that the citizens found so undesirable that they wanted to change the zoning code. The Council decided to continue a pattern of development that has been proven to destabilize neighborhoods, not revitalize them.

The Council decided to repudiate the Land Development Code. They apparently think change will come by doing the same thing over and over while expecting different results. These aren’t isolated incidents, nor are they minor variances. Beginning with St. Ann’s right after the LDC was adopted, right up to the actions Tuesday night, the Council has consistently undercut the Land Development Code at every turn.

The Heart of Peoria Plan was adopted “in principle” in 2002, but it has yet to be adopted in practice, despite having been codified in the LDC.

2009 Campaign, City Council, City of Peoria, Elections

Beth Akeson to run for Third District council seat

77 Comments

I just received this e-mail from the vice-chairman of the Heart of Peoria Commission, Beth Akeson:

I have gathered the required signatures and completed the necessary paperwork to run for Peoria’s third district council seat.

These documents will be turned in tomorrow, December 15, 2008. I look forward to a positive campaign as I champion Peoria’s older neighborhoods, advocate for doing the right thing, for the right reason, in the right way.

In other correspondence, she also says she will be “an advocate for proactive policy.” Beth has served on the Heart of Peoria Commission since its inception in 2004, having been appointed by former Mayor Dave Ransburg. She ran unsuccessfully for a Peoria Board of Education seat in 2007. Beth has also contributed several guest editorials here at the Peoria Chronicle.

Current third district councilman Bob Manning recently announced he is not running for reelection. The only other candidate to formally announce a run for Manning’s seat is Peoria County Board member Tim Riggenbach. Candidates have until 5 p.m. Monday to file petitions, so more candidates may come forward.