Category Archives: City of Peoria

City Council, City of Peoria

Police at bottom of council’s priority list

13 Comments

Tuesday night, we got some insight into the Peoria City Council’s priority list. We know that the Fire Department is at the top of the list. All the proposed cuts to the Fire Department were restored. And we know that the Police Department is near the bottom of the list. The council chose to cut 17 additional staff positions there without any discussion whatsoever.

The reason? Well, because the firefighters agreed to give up their wages, but the police officers didn’t. Hence, the firefighters are being rewarded for being team players, but the police officers are being punished by taking the brunt of the budget cuts.

There’s only one problem with this plan: The joke’s on us. It’s the citizens who lose because police protection is reduced. To add insult to injury, the council reaffirmed their commitment to keep the Economic Development department fully staffed. [Upon further review, it appears Craig Hullinger’s position will not be filled upon his retirement; hence, although the council saved an Economic Development Specialist position, the department will not be “fully staffed” next year; at least, at this point — perhaps the director position will also be reinstated at the next council meeting.] And, to my knowledge, they’re continuing to pursue a downtown hotel deal that will cost around $4 million in debt service annually. That could pay for a lot of officers and other basic services.

City of Peoria

Moore: “critical loss of services,” “crippling effect” in store for Peoria

28 Comments

The new City Manager Scott Moore will have to forego the traditional “honeymoon” period new managers usually enjoy. He gets the unenviable job of reporting this distressing news to the council at his very first meeting:

The Finance Department is now projecting the FY2010 budget deficit to be $14.5 million. This re-forecasting is the result of continued poor performance in City revenues, especially sales tax receipts.

The Finance Department had previously predicted a deficit of $10.5 million, which was already unbearable. The new deficit projection is 38% higher. Ouch.

As an aside, I thought it was interesting that he says, “especially sales tax receipts.” I wonder what effect these “especially” lower sales tax receipts are having (or will have) on a couple of new sales taxes — the Hospitality Improvement Zone (HIZ) tax and the upcoming public facilities (museum) tax. And, conversely, what effect the addition of these new taxes will have on future sales tax receipts. Sales taxes are largely voluntary. If consumers don’t want to pay them, they simply make their purchases in one of the surrounding communities, like East Peoria. As taxes go up, I wonder how much more business Peoria will lose.

But I digress. What does this mean for city services? Read on:

A total of 46 positions have been identified for complete elimination and 14 have been identified for seasonal lay-off…. The Police Department will be faced with reducing its fore by 17 officers. The Fire Department is faced with eliminating 15 positions, including shutting down one fire company. If the Firefighters Local 50 had not conceded their 2010 wage increases, the closing of a second fire company would be facing the department. Other front-line departments like Public Works and Emergency Communications could also expect critical losses in service delivery internally and externally. Information Systems and Legal will lead to serious interruptions and delays that will impact front-line departments and citizens alike.

The report goes on to say, however, “The critical loss of services and the crippling effect of many of these changes is likely unacceptable,” and asks for more direction from the council. I’m not sure what else the council could do to reduce expenses; I think there’s going to have to be some talk about raising taxes — specifically property taxes — to mitigate some of these cuts. Property taxes are not volatile like sales taxes.

With sales taxes, the city sets the rate and then gets revenue based on public purchasing. When people don’t go shopping as much or shop somewhere else, revenue goes down. With property taxes, however, the city starts by determining the amount of money it needs to receive (called a “levy”) and then the necessary tax rate to raise that amount is figured based on the equalized assessed value (EAV) of property within the city. Thus the city is more or less guaranteed to receive the money it requests in this way.

The question is, what will public reaction be? Will they rather see draconian cuts to police and fire, or fewer cuts coupled with an increase in their tax rates to maintain an adequate level of service?

City of Peoria, Peoria Disposal Company, Village of Peoria Heights, Waste Management

PDC’s proposed recycling component improves, but still falls short

12 Comments

On the council’s agenda for next Tuesday, October 13, is a recommendation from the Public Works Department to accept Peoria Disposal Company’s (PDC) bid of $5 million annually to collect solid waste, lawn waste, and recycling for the next five years. I did some analysis of the plan last month, but now I’d like to revisit the recycling portion.

First, there has been a new development. According to the most recent council communication, alley collection of recycling will be restored and protected:

If a customer currently places their refuse and landscape waste in their alley for collection then recyclables will be collected from the alley. If a customer currently places their refuse and landscape waste at the curb for collection then recyclables will be collected from the curb. Any changes in set out location will need to be approved in writing by the City during this agreement.

That’s great news! It will reverse a unilateral change in “set out location” (as they call it) by Waste Management, and is a big victory for older neighborhoods.

However, I think it might be helpful at this point to ask what the goal is in offering recycling collection. I’m not sure what it is, but I can tell you what it is not: it’s not to incentivize recycling. There are a couple of big disincentives to participating:

  1. Deposit of $50 for a 96-gallon Toter — Why is Toter rental necessary? It’s not. Consider the fact that you needn’t rent a Toter for refuse, nor do you need to rent a Toter for lawn waste. This means (a) they are capable of accommodating different kinds of waste containers, and (b) they are capable of distinguishing between one kind of waste and another. For the sake of argument, let’s presume that there is some justifiable need for a Toter — why does it need to be supplied by PDC? Why couldn’t a resident use a Toter he or she purchased at the store? Does PDC have Toter manufacture a special, proprietary design for PDC? There doesn’t appear to be any believable reason why a Toter must be rented to participate in recycling. It looks like an arbitrary requirement intended to disincentivize participation.
  2. Infrequency of collection (only once a month) — Given that your capacity is limited to one 96-gallon Toter for a month, how much recycling will you be able to do? Some, to be sure. But, if you have a large family (I have a family of five, for instance), and you’re serious about recycling (like my wife is), you’ll find that most of the waste coming out of your home is recyclable. In fact, we only have one garbage can of regular refuse each week, but fill up a 64-gallon Toter plus one or two smaller bins every other week. If collection goes to once a month, we’ll easily have more recycling than a 96-gallon Toter can hold. What are we supposed to do? Rent a second Toter, so now we’re up to a $100 fee to participate? Or just throw half our recyclables in the garbage, which has no restrictions? Either way, it’s fair to say there’s a pretty good incentive not to recycle.

Local environmental activist David Pittman recently sent me this information:

Peoria Heights has achieved a 50% participation rate with their curbside bi weekly residential recycling program within 6 months. People usually want to recycle if it is easy and convenient and free. Normal is around 40%. Elgin is nearly 60%. Springfield about 40%.

I doubt we’re going to see participation rates that high under the proposed contract. But his comment got me thinking: Why not bid out the recycling separately? That’s how Peoria Heights does it. G & O Disposal takes care of their refuse while Eagle Enterprises takes care of their recycling.

If we bid it out separately, we might get more bids on the recycling portion than just PDC and Waste Management (WM). Perhaps a company that wouldn’t be able to handle all of Peoria’s waste hauling needs could handle just one portion, if you are now considering to start recycling check cheap skip bin hire Melbourne.

Here’s one thing I don’t want to hear when this is discussed Tuesday night: “We can’t afford any more than this.” It’s inevitable that someone (possibly everyone) will argue that the current proposal should be accepted because (a) it’s the cheapest and (b) it fulfills all the criteria they wanted. While that’s true as far as it goes, it’s worth noting that if PDC had suggested once-a-month pickup of lawn waste, the council likely wouldn’t have approved it due to the inconvenience factor. So it will be interesting to hear how much of a priority the council gives to recycling.

Some might protest that it is a priority, but that we simply can’t afford a robust recycling program right now, given the dire economic crisis we’re facing. I would point out that the dire economic crisis is not stopping the council from raising taxes and handing the proceeds over to a private developer so he can build a downtown hotel. I know I’m starting to sound like a one-string fiddle here, but facts are facts. As long as they continue to pursue and defend this non-essential and risky hotel scheme, I’m not buying any argument that says we “can’t afford” this or that. We can afford it, if it’s a high enough priority.

City of Peoria, Crime, Peoria County

Peoria County home to 20 gangs

20 Comments

That’s the happy news of the day, delivered in a news conference attended by Mayor Jim Ardis, Peoria Police Chief Steve Settingsgaard, Peoria County Sheriff Mike McCoy, and U.S. Representatives Aaron Schock and Mark Kirk.

Meanwhile, Kirk said, the city of Peoria is able to dedicate just 20 officers to anti-gang units. “We need to make sure a local city or town is not overwhelmed by the resources of a gang,” Kirk said.

I’d just like to take this opportunity to remind everyone that the City is still contemplating laying off police officers while concurrently planning to fork over $39.5 million to a private developer for a new downtown hotel. You see, Peoria’s Mayor and City Council don’t mind raising taxes for risky private ventures, but balk at tax increases for public safety.

Kirk pointed out that the average age for a gang member involved in a shooting is the equivalent of an eighth-grade student; that the combined size of U.S. gangs would create the fifth-largest army in the world, with at least 1 million members; and that state sentencing in court is not significant enough to use for leverage.

I wonder if any of these teenage gang members attend Peoria Public Schools, and if combining a couple of urban high schools will lead to any violence among said gang members. It’s a good thing we’ll have extra officers on hand when this happ– oh, wait…..

City of Peoria

Hullinger to retire Nov. 6

6 Comments

The City of Peoria’s Economic Development Director Craig Hullinger announced yesterday that he will be retiring, effective November 6. He explains his reasons for leaving on his department’s blog:

I believe that I have successfully met my goal of “Leaving my City a better place than I found it.” … The Mayor’s latest budget message of September 15, 2009 makes it clear that the City must make further substantial budget cuts. The City needs to cut expenses and senior staff. I will be 62 this year. I retired from the Marine Corps last year as a Colonel. It makes sense for both the City and me to retire. I will remain in Peoria (and Sarasota in the winter), and start a small part time economic development and planning consulting firm, continuing to help communities revitalize their older neighborhoods. And I will keep working to help improve the City and region.

His resume is posted online. I asked Craig about rumors that he would be rehired by the city as a consultant (a la District 150). He replied, “The City would be a great client. I plan to only work part time, targeting 1/2 time. I did propose to the City to continue to work for 25K a year to help close some developing development deals such as in Warehouse, Eagle View, and HIZ, but no response yet. The City is very busy with the budget crisis, and saving my salary and overhead will help. But I will help out with or without a consulting contract. I think most people want to see the Heart of Peoria successfully redevelop. And I live in the HOP [Heart of Peoria], and want it to succeed whether I am working for pay or not.”

He also has recommended having Chris Setti replace him as Economic Development Director. “Knows the City, worked in ED as our top ED Specialist, very capable guy.” Setti left the Economic Development department to become a Six Sigma blackbelt for the city. He’s now the assistant to the City Manager.

The Journal Star reports that new City Manager Scott Moore “said the position will be analyzed in the coming months as city officials examine a potential restructuring at City Hall. ‘I don’t want to do anything prematurely,’ Moore said. ‘I want to get feedback from the departments, from (Hullinger), and input from the council, so that when I’m making that decision, I’m not making it in a vacuum.'” Setti is quoted as saying, “I’m a team player. I’m willing to do whatever the city leadership thinks is best for the city.”

City of Peoria, Peoria Disposal Company, Waste Management

Public Works to recommend PDC for waste hauling contract

9 Comments

On July 28 the city agreed to send out requests for proposals (RFPs) for a new garbage hauling contract (the current one expires at the end of the year). Only two companies submitted bids: Waste Management (the current hauler) and Peoria Disposal Company (PDC). According to a report released today from the Public Works Department:

In reviewing the responses it is clear PDC provided the best pricing in almost all categories and further discussion in this report will be based on our recommendation to award all service contracts covered by this RFP to the Peoria Disposal Company (PDC). Staff will be recommending the Alternate Proposal from PDC for consideration by City Council at the October 13, 2009 City Council meeting.

PDC’s “alternate proposal” is to provide exactly the same service we have plus citywide recycling collection, all for a $5 million flat rate. Specifically, the proposal would include these services:

  • Residential Refuse Collection & Disposal (as currently provided)
  • Landscape Waste Collection & Disposal (as currently provided)
  • Neighborhood drop boxes, tire disposal and dead animal service (as currently provided)
  • Condominium and City Building refuse collection (as currently provided)
  • Collection of Recyclables from curbside on a monthly basis for customers wishing to participate. A 95-gallon cart for single stream recyclables collection will be provided for a refundable deposit of $50. There would be no monthly cost for the service.

The good news is that we wouldn’t be losing any services we currently have, and we would finally get recycling collection as part of our base contract. The bad news is that recycling would only be picked up once a month, curbside only, and only from a PDC-provided wheeled cart.

For families that really get into it, recycling can account for 75% or more of their refuse. That’s going to really pile up over a month’s time. Granted, it won’t stink like garbage, but it will take more than a 95 gallon toter to hold it all. This seems less than ideal, which is why I never fail to find some dumpsters for rent near me and dispose responsibly.

There’s no reason recycling pickup couldn’t be accommodated in the alleys, especially since that’s where all the garbage and lawn waste collection is done. By requiring recycling to be curbside only, many in older neighborhoods would be precluded from even participating. Since those participating will have to use PDC-supplied 95-gallon bins, and since many older homes don’t have direct outdoor access from their garages/back yards to the front of their homes, the only way these neighbors could participate is by wheeling their bin down the alley to the side street, down the side street to the intersection, then down their own street, finally placing it in front of their house. Or, alternatively, they could wheel the 95-gallon toter through their house and down their front steps to the street. Kind of ridiculous, wouldn’t you say? There’s a reason why older neighborhoods have alleys. The city should insist that garbage haulers use them.

The PDC-provided wheeled cart is only bad in that it’s exclusive. If someone already owns a dedicated toter for recycling, they will have to plunk down another $50 (refundable though it may be) for this PDC-branded toter. It’s nice to have the toters available for use if you need one, but why force others to take one they don’t need? Are they going to tell us that they have a special, proprietary design to their toters and trucks such that only PDC toters are compatible? If we’re trying to encourage recycling, why do we want to add this entry cost? We’re not requiring everyone to fork over $50 for a toter for regular garbage.

According to the report from Public Works, PDC also provided the cost of providing this same service except that they would pick up recycling and landscape waste on an every-other-week basis. The cost of that solution is $6,186,664.27 ($1,186,664.27 more than the plan outlined above). I don’t understand why this costs so much more. Maybe it will be explained at the council meeting. It seems to me the more expensive plan actually requires fewer collection trips. Think about it:

$5M Plan   $6.1M Plan
4 landscape waste collections per month   2 landscape waste collections per month
+ 1 recycling collection per month + 2 recycling collections per month
= 5 total collections = 4 total collections

“Ah,” you say, “but landscape waste is only collected from the third Monday in March through the third Friday in December, whereas recycling is collected year-round!” Okay, let’s look at the whole year:

$5M Plan   $6.1M Plan
40 landscape waste collections per year   20 landscape waste collections per year
+ 12 recycling collections per year + 24 recycling collections per year
= 52 total collections = 44 total collections

Where is the added cost? Of course, this is probably a futile exercise, because my guess is most of the council members will not go for lawn waste pickup every other week anyway (the lawn waste bags start getting soggy after a while). But it does raise a fair question about how they came up with the amounts quoted.

Bottom line: The proposed contract is better than what we have now at a reasonable cost. The council should try to work out the flaws mentioned above while still keeping costs low.

City Council, City of Peoria

Liveblogging the City Council 9/22/2009

5 Comments

It’s Tuesday evening, and time for another Peoria City Council meeting. I’m coming to you live from Peoria City Hall, Council Chambers. I’ll be updating this post throughout the evening, so refresh often.

Absent tonight are Mayor Ardis and 5th District councilman Dan Irving. Mayor Pro Tem is At-Large councilman Eric Turner.

Continue reading Liveblogging the City Council 9/22/2009 →

City of Peoria, Peoria Mayor

Mayor Ardis asks for feedback on budget

5 Comments

I received this yesterday but haven’t had a chance to post it until today:

September 15, 2009

As many of you know, the City Council has been wrestling with our 2010 budget for several months now. We have been working to balance the City’s budget like you have to balance yours……. Identifying needs vs. wants and being more efficient with the income you have available. During this challenging economic situation, the process has not been easy.

To this point, the City Council has already trimmed over $8.5 million dollars from next years budget. If sales tax revenue continues to come in below our expectations, it may be necessary to trim another $4 to $5 million to balance our budget. We’ve made significant reductions in our operating budget next year and identified over 40 positions that will not be filled throughout all city departments, including police and fire. In the coming weeks, we may find it necessary to lay off 20-30 more employees. This all equates to a drastic cut in service to our constituent taxpayers.

During this process we have focused on being open and transparent. With this in mind I’d like to solicit your input as we move towards making final decisions on next years budget. This will not be a scientific poll by any stretch, but an opportunity to provide me with your thoughts on a few budget related questions. I will share your responses with the rest of the City Council and the City Manager.

These are tough times but I am confident the City Council will make the right decisions to get us through this with the least amount of additional cost to you. And we hope to get this done with the least amount of job losses possible. Thank you for taking the time to respond. Feel free to pass this on to other concerned citizens.

Please click here to take this short, 3-question survey

Jim Ardis

City of Peoria

Quote of the Day

2 Comments

Think about that next time there’s a burglary in your neighborhood, or when you hit a huge pothole this winter. Maybe you can call council member Ryan Spain and ask him to send over an economic development specialist to help.

—Billy Dennis, in response to the City’s decision, upon Spain’s motion, to spare an Economic Development Specialist while simultaneously cutting police and public works personnel.