Category Archives: City Council

Bradley University, City Council, City of Peoria

Supermajority approves Bradley’s institutional plan

2 Comments

Rubber StampA while back, there was a motion to require a supermajority vote to approve institutional zoning boundary changes. That motion failed. As it turns out, that initiative was moot because Bradley’s request to change their boundaries passed 10-1 last night.

There was a lot of talk about the importance of strong neighborhoods last night. Bradley and the neighborhoods have a symbiotic relationship, it was said. Bradley needs the neighborhoods surrounding it to be strong because that’s a reflection on the university. The neighborhoods need the stabilizing force of the university to remain strong neighborhoods, they say.

If that’s true (and I think it is, theoretically), then why is Bradley doing so much damage to their relationship with the neighborhoods by their unilateral behavior? Why are they destabilizing the Arbor District — the neighborhood to their immediate west?

There can be no doubt that the Arbor District has been destabilized, despite any protestations to the contrary. The president of the Arbor District’s neighborhood association, Mr. Wagner, stood up at the meeting and told the council members that in the 800 block of Cooper alone, thirteen homes had been converted from single-family, owner-occupied residences to rentals. Is this Bradley’s idea of a stable neighborhood: One where owners are moving out and absentee landlords are buying up their property?

Bradley likes to portray itself as neighborhood-friendly, but only when it serves their purpose. In my opinion, they’re opportunistic. They point with pride to the public meetings last fall and this February when they “communicated” with the neighbors. But this was one-way communication, not two-way collaboration. The major components of their plan, such as the parking deck, were non-negotiable.

Marjorie Klise got it right when she said that the issue here is not just the ends, but the means. She gave the best analogy of the flawed nature of this process when she addressed the council:

[audio:http://www.peoriachronicle.com/wp-content/uploads/Audio/Klise-03132007-Council.mp3]

Bradley would just as soon forget about the past and start moving forward from here. Forget about the process that got us here and look at their commitments for the future. Consider their “commitment” to the neighborhood, measured in dollars invested and conditions agreed to, like this one from staff:

Bradley University shall continue the positive ongoing communication strategy with surrounding neighborhood associations. Prior to each implementation of the improvements in the official development plan, Bradley University shall initiate timely discussion with the impacted and nearby neighborhood associations. Bradley University shall work with the neighborhood to stabilize and improve off-premise student housing, increase home ownership in nearby neighborhoods, and encourage a mutually beneficial campus-neighborhood relationship.

That sounds lovely, but there’s no enforcement mechanism. Ask yourself this, if Bradley started stonewalling the neighborhoods tomorrow in direct violation of this clause, what would happen? What could or would the city do? If past actions are any indication, the answer is nothing. Consider that the city couldn’t get Bradley to pave a gravel parking lot for the past 15 years. If they can’t enforce something as simple, obvious, and tangible as that, how are they ever going to enforce something as nebulous as “initiat[ing] timely discussion with the impacted and nearby neighborhood associations”?

By passing this ordinance last night, the city council tacitly endorsed Bradley’s tactics and offered no real assurance to the surrounding neighborhoods that this wouldn’t happen again in another 10-15 years. Instead of “removing doubt,” like Mrs. Klise said the city indicated was the purpose of institutional zoning, last night’s action has increased doubt. And that doubt will lead to more speculation along Cooper and other surrounding streets.

There were a lot of good sound bites about communication and neighborhood stability, but it was all belied by a vote that gave Bradley everything it wanted, and left the neighborhoods with the same empty promises they’ve had all along. Bradley’s plan should have been denied.

City Council, City of Peoria, Elections

The first quadrennial At-Large Prediction Contest

8 Comments

On the suggestion of my good friend Mahkno, I’m going to tear a page out of the Journal-Star-Cue-Section playbook and open up this thread for At-Large City Council Member predictions.

This will be kind of like the Movie Match contest the Journal Star does every year, only there are no prizes — just the satisfaction of knowing you called it right. Here’s how it works:

In the comments section, type who you think will be the five winning candidates in order of finishing in the April 17 general election. After the election, I’ll post the names (or pseudonyms, as the case may be) of those who either got it spot-on or came the closest to the actual results.

Fortune Cookie

Good news: You don’t have to guess how many votes they’ll get or how wide the margin of victory will be. Just the names in the correct order. No wagering, please.

Good luck, everyone, and let the games begin!

City Council, City of Peoria, Elections

Schierer drops out of council race

2 Comments

Charles SchiererI just got this e-mail from Brad Carter:

I just left the East Bluff candidates forum and Dan Gillette was there because Charles Schierer dropped out. He was notified by PJStar.com.

Gillette, of course, finished 11th in the primary, so apparently with the departure of Schierer, he moves up to the general election. The Journal Star quotes Schierer as saying:

“Being in ninth and in looking at the numbers, I think there are some significant hurdles in getting to the top five,” Schierer said. “That being the case, I don’t want to be mucking it up for the other folks. I think I am a realist. It’s probably best to step aside. This wasn’t my time.”

In contrast, Dan Irving called me the day after the primary and said he’s definitely not throwing in the towel — despite coming in eighth with only 27 more votes than Schierer. Instead, he’s going to step up his campaigning and work all the harder to get his name and message out. I found his energy and optimism inspiring, and it made me rethink my initial pessimism about some of the election results.

Well, that saves me a call to Brentwood, Missouri, to find out more about Schierer’s term as alderman there.

City Council, Elections

City Council Primary Endorsements

5 Comments

Here are my endorsements for the at-large City Council election tomorrow:

  1. Gary Sandberg — Gary does his homework, asks the hard questions, and votes consistently in favor of essential services first. He’s chosen to live on a section of Bigelow street most wouldn’t want to drive through, let alone take up residence, which shows he’s not afraid to practice what he preaches and keeps him keenly aware of the challenges facing older neighborhoods, from crime to code enforcement to sidewalk maintenance. He appears to have an immunity to groupthink. And the Journal Star hates him, so you know he must be doing something right. If you’re unsure about anyone else, you can’t go wrong voting for Gary.
  2. George Jacob — George was appointed to finish out Jim Ardis’s at-large term when Ardis became mayor. I was dubious about his appointment, but George has won me over. He’s not afraid to get down in the trenches, so to speak, going out on police patrols and spending evenings at residents’ houses in areas prone to crime. His liquor license doesn’t appear to have hampered his ability to be a constructive member of the council.
  3. Dan Irving — Dan is currently on the city’s liquor commission. He grew up on a farm in Hanna City and now works for Lincoln Office. I met him recently for coffee and got to ask him quite a few questions about his philosophy on city issues. His views remind me a lot of Bob Manning’s. On issues ranging from TIFs to the Heart of Peoria Plan to city assistance for District 150 and other issues, Dan seemed to me to be informed, level-headed, and realistic in his approach.

Only three? Yes, only three I feel comfortable unreservedly endorsing.

However, there are other candidates that are worth further consideration (maybe we can consider this a “qualified” endorsement): Brad Carter, Dan Gillette, Patti Polk, and Charles Schierer. With the exception of Polk, I’ve spent a fair amount of time talking to these candidates, but only about one or two issues. After reading their answers to the Chamber of Commerce’s and Journal Star’s questionnaires, I have some further questions. Polk’s answers to the questionnaires I found to be rather vague. So hopefully, if all these candidates make it through the primary (and I hope they do), I’ll try to meet with them and get more information before I publish my General Election Endorsements.

Blogosphere, City Council, City of Peoria

PeoriaIllinoisan posts council questionnaire results

23 Comments

PeoriaIllinoisan did something that I had wanted to do but just don’t have time. He sent out his own questionnaire on city issues to all the candidates and has posted their responses on his blog. Take a look at what they said about:

The Kellar Branch
The Civic Center Hotel
Glen Oak School
Peoria’s Cumulative (Bullet) Voting System

And there are five other interesting questions that let you get a glimpse into their personalities as well.

There are 14 candidates and we’re going to be whittling them down to 10 at the primary election next Tuesday, February 27.

I’m not ready to make any endorsements yet, but I have ruled out a few candidates: Gale Thetford, Ryan Spain, Kelley Mammen, Gloria Cassel-Fitzgerald. I think Thetford’s record is well documented and needs no further explanation. Ryan Spain is, in my opinion, a “progressive” and not an “essential-services-first” candidate, so I’m fundamentally opposed to his platform. His flashy campaign materials ($$$) and endorsement by Ray LaHood also make me uncomfortable (and before someone asks, yes, I know Jacob is spending more on campaign materials, but the difference is that he has visible means to do so). Kelley Mammen answered the question regarding the Kellar Branch, “That is such a beautiful area and I feel that it should be a trail only.” I’m not going to vote against someone just because they don’t agree with me on the Kellar Branch, but if this is any indication of how she will make decisions that will impact jobs and economic development, I have no confidence in her as a council person. Gloria Cassel-Fitzgerald would make a better school board candidate. Education is clearly her passion, not broader city issues.

Now, this is not to say they aren’t all very nice people. I have nothing personal against them. All I’m saying is that I’m not interested in voting for them for the reasons listed. I think there are stronger candidates who will be better for Peoria. Who are my top five? I’ll continue whittling down the list….

City Council, City of Peoria, Peoria Civic Center

Council says no to TIF for Civic Center hotel

7 Comments

The City Council tonight decided (4-6) not to add the Civic Center property to the proposed Warehouse District TIF, despite heavy lobbying from the Civic Center Authority.

I think this was the right decision. The Civic Center property has no business being in a TIF at all, let alone the Warehouse District. Despite their protestations to the contrary, I’ll bet the Civic Center Authority is back before the council soon with another plan to lure a hotel to their site — this time without requiring a TIF.

City Council, City of Peoria, Kellar Branch

Pioneer Railcorp ups Kellar Branch offer to $750,000

15 Comments

Below is the text of the latest letter from Pioneer Railcorp to the Mayor and council members regarding the Kellar Branch. They’ve raised their $565,000 offer to $750,000. Tomorrow night, the city will decide if they want to pursue this three-quarters-of-a-million-dollars offer or continue paying legal fees out the nose for the benefit of the park district. It’s not like the city needs the money or anything.

February 16, 2007

Dear Council Member ——-:

Thank you for allowing me to speak at your meeting Tuesday night. I am writing to encourage you to support the selection of our Company to provide competitive rail service to the Peoria area, via the Keller Branch, and to reaffirm our commitment to share the railroad right of way with a trail, and work to develop a trolley/commuter service on the line to help local business and tourism.

Our sister Company Keokuk Junction Railway Co. is willing to purchase the Kellar Branch/”western connection” for $750,000. This is our last, best and final offer. I am confident that this offer is more than generous, especially since it is likely the City has already received a significant payback of its original investment from previous surcharges that were collected. Putting the Kellar Branch back in private hands will put it back on the tax rolls, allow us to make necessary investments in the track, and obviate the worsening weed/brush situation, which CIRY refuses to address.

Selling the railroad to our Company would facilitate the quickest and easiest means to build a trail, and will once and for all put an end to a problem that has festered for over 10 years. Please consider the fact that it is an unanswered question as to how much of the underlying real estate is actually owned by the City, if any. Aside from the rail issues, construction of a trail could be significantly delayed if it turns out that the property reverts to the adjoining landowners, if the Keller Branch were to be removed. This would not be an issue if the railroad remains intact. I am confident that a way to fund the construction of the trail will be found, once the decision has been made to keep the Keller Branch intact, just as it was for the trail between East Peoria and Morton along Highway 150. As I mentioned Tuesday, shared right of ways are being used all over the country and I would like to point out that the City already has a trail on railroad right of way along the downtown riverfront! Resolving this issue once and for all would allow the City to turn its attention to more pressing issues, such as reducing crime and increasing economic development. To date the City has wasted in excess of $100,000 of taxpayer money on legal fees alone on this issue, not to mention untold hundreds of thousands of dollars in staff and council time. Without immediate closure, this problem will be ongoing for many more years.

In regard to comments made concerning the importance of a rail carrier having a good relationship with the Union Pacific, please be assured that Pioneer Railcorp subsidiaries perform millions of dollars of business with the Union Pacific Railroad, all over the country, including handling 10,000 cars a year for the Union Pacific in Fort Smith, Arkansas and delivering 1 million tons of coal from the Union Pacific in Central Illinois. Of course, none of this would be possible if we were not able to work with the Union Pacific, as some have falsely claimed.

We have been the only company able to operate the Keller Branch at a profit, and anticipate significant growth in usage of the Keller Branch in the coming years. In addition, both current users of the line, including O’Brien Steel, have told the Council our Company provides excellent service. CRY has never provided reliable or dependable service to Carver Lumber, and I have concerns that CRY employees are not actually performing railroad services for O’Brien Steel, and instead believe the handling of O’Brien Steel rail traffic is being performed by O’Brien employees directly. If this is accurate, it is a potential liability exposure the City cannot afford to have. Mr. O’Brien’s company, contrary to the information he presented the Council, has historically been a moderate user of the Keller Branch. Please see the table below:

O’Brien Steel Rail Usage

Year Railcars
1998 95
1999 30
2000 76
2001 66
2002 74
2003 81
2004 116
2005 82
Total 620

In addition, it is my understanding that O’Brien received at least 45 cars in 2006. I think it is a safe assumption to make that O’Brien Steel would not have used rail it was not the most cost effective way to receive its product.

Thank you for your consideration of my request. Please be assured we want to be part of the solution, not part of the problem. If you have any questions you would like answered please contact me anytime at […].

Respectfully,

J. Michael Carr
CEO and President

By the way, do you think rail and trail can’t coexist? Well, it does in South Elgin, Illinois. I guess they’re just more creative than we are here in Peoria:

Fox River Trail with Rail

City Council, City of Peoria, Kellar Branch

My first address to the City Council

24 Comments

Tonight, I addressed the Peoria City Council regarding the Kellar Branch issue. It was my first time addressing the council on any topic, and while I didn’t mentally feel nervous, physically I got cotton mouth and ended up speaking too fast. I guess that just goes to show I don’t have a future in public speaking. You can read my prepared remarks below by clicking the “Show More” link. I stuck pretty close to them, but I did ad lib a couple of times.

I got to meet Alexis Khazzam. We had a nice talk about the Kellar Branch issue. He’s often described to me as “energetic,” and after having met him in person, that’s a very accurate description. The first thing he asked me was if I was being paid by Pioneer Rail in any way, shape, or form. He could hardly believe me when I said I wasn’t. He was very nice and, even though we disagree on the Kellar Branch thing, he didn’t hold it against me personally.

In contrast, I also got to meet David Maloof who said exactly nothing to me. Barbara Van Auken introduced me to him and he somewhat reluctantly shook my hand. I’m not sure what to think of that. Maybe he’s just shy.

Former Mayor Dick Carver was actually a lot fairer than I thought he would be in discussing the issue. That was a pleasant surprise. I still think he’s overly optimistic about service via the western spur. He stressed the importance of having a carrier who has a good working relationship with the Union Pacific railroad in order for service from the west to work. That’s a perfect example of why service via the Kellar Branch is superior — competitive rail service is not dependent upon the benevolence of Union Pacific.

There were surprisingly few people who spoke. My guess is that there will be a lot of people speaking next week. I decided to speak tonight because I felt, while it’s unlikely my speech will change anyone’s mind, it would be more likely to change their minds this week when they’re not under pressure to vote right away.

|inline

City Council, City of Peoria, Elections

The Candidates Forum

18 Comments

I was at the candidates forum Wednesday night (2/7). It was good, but with 14 people running, there was only time to give each person 4 minutes for a speech and 4 minutes of Q&A — not a lot of time to get to know them. But it was a good introduction anyway.

I’m not going to go over all the candidate’s platforms because it’s already been more than adequately covered on the Chamber of Commerce site and in the Community Word. Instead, I’d just like to give a few impressions I had of some of the candidates (sorry, I’m not going to hit them all).

As Gale Thetford got up to speak, I overheard a person sitting behind me whisper to no one in particular, “I sure hope she doesn’t get reelected!” Amen, sister. Thetford said she wants to strengthen older neighborhoods, but she didn’t say her idea of “strengthening neighborhoods” is to allow places like MidTown Plaza to be built. She said she didn’t raise taxes while she was in office, but didn’t mention that she lobbied and voted for the $6 garbage tax fee. She said she was disappointed the city cut funding to District 150 for crossing guards, and one can only wonder where she would have suggested the city get the money for that.

District 150 came up a lot with several of the candidates, actually. While they all made the obligatory caveat that District 150 is its own entity and the city can’t run the district, several spoke of the need for the city to help District 150 any way it can. What most of them didn’t mention was the need for that to be a two-way street. In fact, according to my notes, only Dan Irving made a point of saying helping D150 “should be a two-way street.” Irving also is a supporter of city-wide wi-fi, so I expect he’ll be endorsed by Billy Dennis.

Eric Turner got a cool reception, which I didn’t expect. After he got finished telling everyone that one way the council needs to address neighborhood concerns is to have an at-large councilman team up with the district councilman and meet with the neighborhood leaders to strategize, one audience member said, “Well, you’ve had a long time to work on that.” I guess, while there are benefits to incumbency, there are apparently also pitfalls.

I got to ask George Jacob how he answers those who would criticize his numerous abstentions on liquor-related issues because of his job. He said he had to abstain x-number times (I think it was something like 62 times — he gave me actual figures but I didn’t write them down), and most of those (47, I think) were on the consent agenda, which were unanimous votes. Of the 15 or so remaining votes, 8 were unanimous and the remainder were non-unanimous, but not controversial. The closest vote was 6-4 on the liquor license for the bar on W. Main St. So, he feels it’s a non-issue. I have to admit, I kind of like the guy. He’s unpretentious and he gets out in the neighborhoods. And, of course, he wins the award for “Most Expensive Campaign Materials.” Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

Ryan Spain had a lot to say about economic development, but not much to say about anything else (Spain on crime: “Crime is a problem that needs to be dealt with”; Spain on city services: they are “an important commitment we need to live up to”). In fairness, he did only have 4 minutes, so maybe he has some fleshed-out ideas he just didn’t have time to share. But then I picked up his ad flier and saw that he’s endorsed by Ray LaHood, and that raised a red flag. It appears he’s being groomed for bigger and better things in the Republican party, and this is just the first step. He wins the award for “Most Aaron-Schock-ish Campaign.”

Gary Sandberg wore his trademark bow tie and had the crowd in the palm of his hand. I know of no one who lives in an older neighborhood (remember, this forum was held in the 2nd district) that doesn’t like Sandberg (don’t write and tell me you know someone — I know they are bound to be out there; I’m just saying I’ve never met one). He has an impeccable record for putting essential services first and supporting older neighborhoods, and he touted that record Wednesday night. He pointed out that he was the only candidate running in this election who can say he voted for requiring a supermajority to expand institutional zoning boundaries within 20 years of their filed institutional plan. He was also the only candidate who mentioned the Land Development Code, which is near and dear to my heart, of course.

Someone who came across as somewhat similar to Gary was Dan Gillette. He worked for the streets department before taking early retirement. He seemed to be a firm believer in putting essential services first and looking for forms of revenue other than taxes and fees of citizens. He gave the example of providing certain services (such as thermal striping of streets) to nearby cities for a fee. He’s worth further consideration.

Also worth further consideration are Charles Schierer and Brad Carter, with whom I spent a fair amount of time in conversation. Carter came to the last Blogger Bash (2/3), so I know him a little better. He is also an essential-services-first candidate, and he’s in favor of keeping the Kellar Branch a rail line, so obviously he’s clear-thinking. Schierer is a former accountant and current lawyer, which wouldn’t be bad skills to have on the council; he’s also a fan of form-based code. Incidentally, Carter wins the award for “Most Unintentionally-Humorous Campaign Materials.” You’ll have to get your own flier to find out why.

Those are just my initial thoughts, so sorry if they seem a bit sketchy. I’d be interested to hear if anyone else has met the candidates and has any further impressions to share.

City Council, City of Peoria, Kellar Branch

City stacks deck against rail supporters

4 Comments

Three weeks ago, Pat Nichting (5th District) asked the council to grant the privilege of the floor to Mike Rucker of the Recreational Trail Advocates. Rucker proceeded to hand out binders full of information to each council person and give a 10-minute presentation on why the council should continue to support the trail.

On Tuesday’s agenda, the first item is, “PRESENTATION by FORMER MAYOR RICHARD CARVER and Communication from the City Manager and Corporation Counsel Regarding REPORT on ALTERNATIVES AVAILABLE Regarding the KELLER BRANCH RAIL LINE with a Request for Direction from the City Council.” Carver is, of course, on the Peoria Park District dole to help facilitate the conversion of the Kellar Branch to a recreational trail. He’ll probably have all the time he wants.

Meanwhile, rail supporters — e.g., Michael Carr of Pioneer Railcorp, former mayor Richard Neumiller — will probably be told to limit their comments to five minutes each. Are trail proponents afraid they’ll lose the argument if they have to give equal time to rail supporters?

Alexis Khazzam is expected to produce some sort of expert testimony that a shared use of the trail with the rail line is impossible or too expensive, and there are some other presenters lined up to present how great of a boon this trail is going to be to our economy, raising property values and improving Peoria’s “quality of life.”

Be sure to bring your pooper-scooper on Tuesday. The RTA and Park District’s dog and pony show should be a memorable event. Most of the council members’ minds are already made up at this point, so this is all just a formality anyway. They’ll hear what they want to hear and vote like they planned to vote all along. If you want my take on the issue, you can read it by clicking here.