Category Archives: City Council

City Council, City of Peoria

On the Agenda: Peoria Urban Living Initiative

12 Comments

On the City Council’s consent agenda next Tuesday is a proposal to focus the City’s Six Sigma program on attracting homeowners back to the Heart of Peoria. “The City proposes creating a joint study group that will uncover existing programs and examine other possible methods of increasing middle class home ownership in the Heart of Peoria.” Included in the “study group” would be representatives from major employers and a couple city council members appointed by the mayor. It doesn’t appear from the agenda item that the Heart of Peoria Commission will be included in this effort, despite its focus on the Heart of Peoria area.

Here’s the full text of the agenda item:

AGENDA DATE REQUESTED: November 13,2007

ACTION REQUESTED: RECEIVE AND FILE A PLAN TO ENGAGE REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE CITY AND MAJOR EMPLOYERS IN AND NEAR DOWNTOWN TO EXAMINE WAYS TO INCREASE MIDDLE CLASS INVESTMENT AND HOME OWNERSHIP IN THE HEART OF PEORIA.

BACKGROUND: The City has been working to revitalize and rebuild the Heart of Peoria. The City has created the Heart of Peoria plan, the Renaissance Park program, an Enterprise Zone and nine Tax increment Financing Districts to lead this effort. Currently, the City also sponsors a program to provide lower interest rates for home buyers, and provides down payment assistance for first home buyers.

However, stabilizing the Heart of Peoria is also in the interest of Peoria employers within this area. These employers are seeking to improve the areas around their operations and are looking to be more competitive in attracting “creative class” employees. The City proposes creating a joint study group that will uncover existing programs and examine other possible methods of increasing middle class home ownership in the Heart of Peoria. Preliminarily, we have identified four major employers for this effort: Caterpillar, Bradley University, Methodist Medical Center and OSF. Other groups, such as District 150 and the Chamber of Commerce, could also be considered.

This study group would be comprised of two parts:

  • A policy group, comprised of a senior leader from each employer, as selected by that employer. The Mayor would select one or more Councilpersons to chair this policy group. The policy group would examine the high-level issues involved and give direction to the staff to pursue options.

  • A technical group, tasked with investigating the issues identified by the policy group. This group will be led by Christopher Setti, City of Peoria 6 Sigma Black Belt. Each participating employer would be asked to name an employee (preferably a Black Belt if available) to work with Mr. Setti. Broadly, this group will be determining who the customer of the end product might be; what motivates their home-buying decisions; and what programs could be established [to] increase homeownership in the target area.

The working title of this project is the Peoria Urban Living Initiative. The intent of the program would be to conserve and revitalize our neighborhoods in the Heart of Peoria, while helping our employers recruit and retain valuable employees. While the effort will be guided by the policy group, some of the areas of exploration might be:

  • The size and scope of down-payment assistance (and other homeownership initiatives) in the target area by both the City and employers.
  • How taxes can be reduced or mitigated in order to stimulate investment.
  • The best use of the City’s “bond volume cap” in encouraging homeownership.
  • Other initiatives, such as Neighborhood LEEDs, that might raise the profile of older neighborhoods.

FINANCIAL IMPACT: Improved homeownership in the Heart of Peoria will help to increase revenues to all taxing authorities through higher assessed property values.

NEIGHBORHOOD CONCERNS: Neighborhood leaders have consistently been in favor of greater homeownership rates. The technical group will seek their input in this initiative.

IMPACT IF APPROVED: The study group will be formed and the issue will be thoroughly examined. The result will be a set of recommendations to the City Council and partner employers about steps that can be taken to improve homeownership.

IMPACT IF DENIED: The City will continue to offer its incentive programs and employers will likely not address the issue.

ALTERNATIVES: None.

RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The development is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. VISION: WE HAVE A HEALTHY, THRIVING ECONOMY. GOAL: A. Provide an economic environment that supports existing and new businesses.

City Council, City of Peoria, Taxes

What’s the fairest way to raise revenue?

2 Comments

ScalesThe city council is going to have a chance again to make some decisions about how they raise revenue. Specifically, they’ll have to decide whether they will be raising property taxes.

First, let’s talk about the council’s action last night. Here’s how the Journal Star reported the vote:

With an 8-2 vote Tuesday, the council endorsed a plan to have a public hearing to discuss the merits of hiking the tax rate 16 percent, from $1.29 per $100 of assessed value to $1.50.

Accurate, of course, but I think it’s worth parsing a little bit. There are two parts to this action: (1) a public hearing, and (2) a maximum tax rate to be considered.

Public Hearing

First of all, the public hearing was going to have to take place regardless of whether the council decided to do anything with the rate. That’s because tax revenue is projected to increase by more than 5% next year. City Manager Randy Oliver explains:

The increase in property tax revenue cannot exceed 5% of last year’s amount without a Truth in Taxation Hearing. The City is projecting a 3.5% increase from assessment growth and 3% from new construction. Consequently, a Truth in Taxation Hearing is required. The question is the amount to advertise.

The only way the city could get out of a Truth in Taxation hearing is to agree to lower the tax rate so the proposed revenue growth would be less than 5%. Well, no one’s calling for the tax rate to be decreased, so the hearing is a foregone conclusion.

Maximum Rate

Now the question is, as Mr. Oliver points out, “the amount to advertise.” When the city holds a Truth in Taxation hearing, they have to set a maximum rate. They could decide to set the maximum rate at its current level ($1.29 per $100 assessed value). Or they could decide to set the rate at any amount above that to leave open the option of a property tax increase. However, the maximum rate they set for the hearing does not obligate them to raise the rate to that level. Again, Mr. Oliver explains:

If you will recall last year, the Mayor and Council directed staff to advertise a rate approximately 20 cents higher than the current rate to provide the flexibility to consider elimination of the garbage fee and provide additional police and fire protection. While the Mayor and Council elected to advertise the increased rate they subsequently decided to leave the tax rate unchanged. The end result is that the adopted tax rate cannot exceed the advertised rate.

The council voted 8-2 to set the maximum rate at $1.50 per $100 assessed value — 16 cents higher than the current level. It doesn’t obligate them to raise the rate to that amount, but it does give them the option of raising the rate to that amount, if they so choose.

What’s the fairest way?

And that brings me to the real subject of this post. What is the fairest way to raise revenue for things like police and fire, garbage pickup, public works, etc.? Is it to raise that revenue through property taxes or service fees?

If you talk to at-large councilman George Jacob, he’ll tell you that he doesn’t think raising taxes is the fair way. There are lots of properties that don’t pay property taxes in the city — hospitals, churches, credit unions, and other non-profit groups. Why shouldn’t all the people/institutions who benefit from police and fire services pay to support those services?

Those who hold this view look for ways to collect revenue from these not-for-profit entities through things like utility taxes. If the city were to impose a 5% water usage fee, for instance, the elderly widow that uses hardly any water would pay next to nothing in utility taxes, but the hospitals and churches and other tax-exempt institutions that use lots of water would pay a hefty sum.

Talk to at-large councilman Gary Sandberg, though, and he has a different idea. If the belief is that the people who benefit from a service should pay for that service, then we don’t need to institute new fees, he says. Let’s start by simply eliminating subsidies that only benefit a few people and make them pay their own way. For example, instead of subsidizing downtown parking decks for over $1 million a year, let’s double our parking rates and use that money on something that would benefit the most citizens — such as eliminating the garbage fee, adding police resources, and/or improving our infrastructure.

Sandberg also points out that to replace the $6 garbage fee with a property tax increase would mean that people with homes valued under $250,000 or so would actually be paying less.

If you ask me, it seems the underlying argument here is really about whether non-profit institutions should be exempt from property taxes or not. In one sense, it wouldn’t do the city any good to debate that topic because there’s nothing they can do to change it. But it would appear that those who favor service fees over property tax increases philosophically believe that all property owners should be paying for the services from which they benefit, and service fees are a way to get that money. Thus, even though the city can’t do anything about it, I think the topic should be discussed, since it’s the underpinning of the service fee argument.

*Full-disclosure: I work for a non-profit organization that doesn’t pay property taxes.

City Council, City of Peoria

Council Roundup: 4 a.m. liquor licenses

7 Comments

At-large councilman Eric Turner moved to extend 4 a.m. liquor licenses for a one-year trial period to only two businesses — Club Apollo and Club Excalibur — rather than an area of downtown as was proposed by other council members and the police department. Second district councilwoman Barbara Van Auken moved to divide the question — that is, to vote on each location separately.

Extending a 4 a.m. license to the Club Apollo location passed with 9 ayes, 1 nay (Sandberg), and 1 abstention (Jacob). The Club Excalibur location, however, failed with only 2 ayes (Gulley, Turner), 8 nays, and 1 abstention (Jacob).

One interesting point: City attorney Randy Ray mentioned that extending the 4 a.m. license to a satellite location is only legal because it’s a temporary one-year trial. If the council decides that this works, they will have to create a district to make it permanent.

Arts Partners, City Council, City of Peoria

Council Roundup: ArtsPartners to get funding

1 Comment

On another 10-1 vote tonight, the City Council approved funding ArtsPartners from collected Restaurant tax receipts capped at $75,000 per year for the next four years (until 2011). At-large councilman Ryan Spain sang the praises of ArtsPartners, even mirroring the language of ArtsPartners Executive Director Suzette Boulais’ prepared speech. Third district councilman Bob Manning was more circumspect in his comments, praising not so much ArtsPartners, but the process of questioning and publicly vetting this item instead of simply rubber-stamping it.

The only “no” vote was Gary Sandberg who said he was voting against it because of the source of the funds (“R” portion of the HRA taxes). Those funds were supposed to go toward paying off the debt on the Civic Center, he said, and now we’re using those funds for other things. He believes that that city is breaking its word by redirecting those funds.

City Council, City of Peoria

Council Roundup: Gateway Building

1 Comment

The City of Peoria will pursue possibly selling or leasing the Gateway Building. The City Council voted 10-1 to issue a request for proposals to that end. According to the council communication, city staff will now:

…solicit proposals and once received will assemble a committee consisting of representatives from the Legal, Economic Development, Public Works and City Manager’s Office who will then review the RFPs and evaluate on the following criteria:

  1. Proposals that do not require public contribution or incentives (15%)
  2. Price for the property (20%)
  3. Proposers ability to agree to the continued use of public restrooms (15%)
  4. Proposals that continue the public access to the Riverfront (15%)
  5. Proposals that generate pedestrian traffic on the Riverfront (15%)
  6. Highest and Best Use (20%)

Although at-large councilman Eric Turner vehemently opposed the idea of selling the Gateway building during his interview on WCBU’s Outside the Horseshoe program, during the council meeting he weakly countered that “not everything government does is intended to make a profit; some of it is quality-of-life,” yet simultaneously said he would support the motion.

First district councilman Clyde Gulley was the lone “no” vote. He thought the council should decide on a price before sending out an RFP. Leaving it vague, he believed, could potentially waste a lot of time on the part of city staff and those making proposals.

City Council, City of Peoria

More than one way to improve city sidewalks

11 Comments

On the City Council agenda tomorrow night are several City Sidewalk Participation requests — one for Komatsu, two for Caterpillar, and one for Bradley University. In a previous post, commentator “kohlrabi” asked me about these requests:

Do you happen to know what Sidewalk Participation Request means – consent agenda items Q through T? What I’m asking is if Requesting participation just gets the petitioner in the queue for city money that will cover the 20% or if Cat, Komatsu and Bradley have a go to the head of the line pass?

I sent the question on to City Manager Randy Oliver, and he gathered information from several people in the city administration, including Kenneth Andrejasich in the Right of Way Management and Permits Division. Here’s the answer to “kohlrabi” from Mr. Andrejasich:

From reading the blog request I believe there is a misunderstanding on the programs – there are several sidewalk programs in the City of Peoria, one being the Special Assessment Program where an entire block of a neighborhood can come to the City to request improvements (ornamental street lighting, curbs, sidewalks, drive approaches, street overlay, boulevard landscaping and traffic control). Another is the Sidewalk Participation Program, whereas an individual property owner request an application to replace their walks adjacent to their property.

In the case of the Special Assessment Program, the partnership agreement is between the neighborhood and the City and there is a queue of projects….

The Sidewalk Participation program starts with a property owner soliciting a minimum of two bids from contractors that are licensed and bonded with the City, submitting the paperwork for approval, then entering into an agreement between the property owner and the contractor to complete the work. Once the work is completed and accepted by the City, the property owner pays the contractor in full, then the City reimburses the property owner the pre-approved 80% participation funds. (see attached brochure information) This program is based on available funds, and is on a first come first served basis, there is no queue, the program runs from the first week of March until the second week of October each year (the program may close earlier if funds are depleted for that year)

The council agenda for this week includes Caterpillar, Bradley, and Komatsu under the sidewalk participation program, they have come in for sidewalks adjacent to their respective individual properties, and thus, no queue.

I hope this clarifies the different programs that are available regarding sidewalks.

Randy also sent along a couple of fliers the city publishes regarding these programs, which you can look at here (PDF format):

PDF Link City Sidewalk Participation Program
PDF Link Special Assessment Program for Public Improvement Projects

Here are the main differences, as I understand it: With the special assessment program, you have several adjacent property owners who share in one big project which the city pays for up-front; then each property owner pays back his or her share either in a lump sum or spread out over ten years. With the sidewalk participation program, you have one property owner, and that owner pays the whole cost of the sidewalk improvement project up-front and gets reimbursed for 80% of it by the city (as long as he got certain things pre-approved by the city).

Homeowners can participate in the Sidewalk Participation Program if they wish. It’s not just for businesses.

City Council, City of Peoria

Oct. 23 council agenda portends another protracted meeting

8 Comments

Last week, the council meeting lasted six hours, starting on Tuesday and ending on Wednesday. That’s probably not going to happen this coming Tuesday (Lord willing), but if the agenda is any indication, it’s still going to be a relatively long meeting. Here’s the agenda for Tuesday night’s council meeting:

Continue reading Oct. 23 council agenda portends another protracted meeting →

City Council, City of Peoria

City Council budget session minutes released

3 Comments

Did you miss the special City Council meeting on Monday where they discussed the proposed 2008 budget? Here is the meat of the official minutes from that meeting, which were released today (they’re long, so click on the “Read the rest of this entry” link below to see the whole thing):

City Manager Randy Oliver provided the City Council with an overview of the 2008 Preliminary Budget. He discussed 2008 projected revenues and property tax base (EAV) growth from 2000 through what was estimated for 2007. He pointed out that out of every tax dollar, the City’s share was only 11%, with 9% going to the Park District, 10% going to the County, 59% going to the School Districts, and 11% going to other. He further discussed sales tax revenues from 2003 to 2008, which included local revenues and from the State revenues. He also discussed projected 2008 operating expenditures with 30% for the Police Department, 22% for the Fire Department, 21% for Public Works, and the remaining split between the other smaller departments. He explained the Operating Budget and the amount of increases over the last four years. He closed by discussing the General Fund – Fund Balance and the amounts of increases from 2000 to 2006.

Continue reading City Council budget session minutes released →

City Council, City of Peoria

Council goes till the Midnight Hour

20 Comments

In honor of all the citizens who waited till the midnight hour to address the council, let’s all sing together this classic Wilson Pickett song:

Tonight made me nostalgic for the councils of yore when Bud Grieves was mayor and the council meetings would go late into the night every week.

Tonight’s council meeting ended officially at 12:15 a.m. Wednesday, October 10. And Jonathan Ahl had to be awakened to sign off.

City Council, City of Peoria

Abud gets compromise, but not the one he wanted

3 Comments

The City Council voted 9-2 7-2 with two abstentions (Jacob and Sandberg) Tuesday to relax one of the conditions on Adams Supermarket owner Ahmad Abud’s liquor license. But instead of granting Abud’s request to only require an off-duty police officer from 8 p.m. to midnight, the City Council went with the Police Chief’s recommendation to require an officer from 5 p.m. to midnight. Still, this is two and a half hours less than the original 2:30 to midnight requirement.

But councilman Clyde Gulley said if Abud didn’t get everything he wanted, he would recommend to Abud that he close his grocery store and leave town. That’s the spirit. Way to retain business, Gulley. Who else have you encouraged to flee your district because they didn’t get everything they wanted from the city?