Category Archives: City of Peoria

City of Peoria

Leitch banking on short memories for dual fleecing

24 Comments

According to Monday’s “Word on the Street” column, State Rep. David Leitch wants to “consider financial relief” for investors in the downtown ballpark. In case you don’t remember, the City of Peoria contributed a little over $3.5 million towards this project (mostly in land acquisition), plus a TIF district.

“Leitch said he would like to see some public relief the investors spent on relocating AT&T fiber optic lines, which he believes cost the group more than $1 million,” according to the article. “They [ballpark investors] got stuck with expenses in that project I don’t think were legitimately theirs,” Leitch said.

But wait! According to a December 5, 2001, Journal Star article by Jennifer Davis, “the city has spent $700,000 more than it expected – $1.7 million instead of the $1 million estimated – to move underground Ameritech fiber-optic lines in the stadium’s way.”

So, does Rep. Leitch not know this? Or does he want the taxpayers to pay for this expense twice now?

I can find no record of ballpark investors paying the City back for that $1.7 million. But let’s suppose they did, just for the sake of argument. So what? Why would such a scenario be “unfair”? The City paid $2.2 million for Eagle Cleaners to make way for the stadium, and a total of $3,525,175 in direct city assistance. Talk about someone getting stuck with expenses that weren’t legitimately theirs–what about the taxpayers, Rep. Leitch?

City Council, City of Peoria, Energy Issues

Aggregation opt-out letter a day late and candor short

5 Comments

On March 20, 2012, in the primary election a majority of citizens voted yes on a referendum question allowing corporate authorities to form a Municipal Opt-Out Electricity Aggregation. City Officials are happy to offer eligible residents and small businesses SAVINGS over Ameren Illinois (“Ameren”) rates by banding together all eligible electric service classes.

So begins the official notice I received Monday about the City’s electric aggregation opt-out program. I have been expecting this notice. But there are a couple of things that I didn’t expect:

  1. Less than 15 days to opt out. To opt out, you are required to return a form “before the deadline date of June 1, 2012.” In the Plan of Operation and Governance document received and filed by the City Council on April 10, it was stated that “there will be an Opt-Out Period of at least 15 days from the postmark date on the notice to postmark the return Opt-Out notice if they do not wish to participate in the Program.” At least 15 days, they said. So, what was the postmark on the letter? May 18. May 18 to June 1 is 14 days. Am I being nit-picky? Try paying your parking fine a day late and see how nit-picky the City is with you.
  2. No fee disclosure. The letter also avers that “you will not be charged a fee for partaking in this program.” However, the April 10 council communication states, “The program will also create a modest income source for the City of Peoria ($0.001/kWh).” Elsewhere, this is called “additional margin available to Peoria.” What is this if not a fee? I’m not necessarily saying this fee can’t be justified, but it is a fee, and should be disclosed as such.
Caterpillar, City of Peoria

Who’s actually paying for the Caterpillar Sky Walk?

9 Comments

Remember in my last post, how I said Caterpillar had purchased the naming rights for $1 million? Well…

Under the “Purchase” section of the Naming Rights Agreement, one of the conditions that must be met for the deal to go through is this: “Pere Marquette Hotel Associates, L.P., a Kansas limited partnership shall have paid to Caterpillar the amount of One Million and 00/100 Dollars ($1,000,000.00).” Pere Marquette Hotel Associates, L.P., is the company that sold the Hotel Pere Marquette to developer Gary Matthews.

So here’s how this works: Peoria gives $29 million to Matthews. Matthews gives $7,384,000 to the Pere owners to purchase the property. Pere owners give $1 million to Cat. Cat gives $1 million back to Matthews for naming rights. That $1 million then must be used (as specified in the naming rights agreement) “to pay for non-qualified rehabilitation expenditures … related to the construction of the project.”

This raises a couple questions. First, was the selling price of the Pere artificially inflated in order to kick back a million dollars to the developer? Did that million really come not from Cat’s pocket, but from the taxpayers? And second, where is that money going? Do “non-qualified rehabilitation expenditures … related to the construction of the project” include the developer’s fee, for instance? Or if it’s reinvested in the project, does it count toward Matthews’ personal equity in the project?

Caterpillar, City of Peoria, Peoria Civic Center

Caterpillar purchases naming rights to Civic Center-hotel connector

28 Comments

One of the most prominent pieces of the hotel redevelopment will carry a corporate sponsor’s name: the Caterpillar Sky Walk.

Part of the downtown hotel project is the construction of a pedestrian bridge over Fulton connecting the renovated Pere Marquette and new Courtyard Marriott to the Peoria Civic Center. Caterpillar, Inc., purchased the naming rights to the bridge for one million dollars.

The naming rights agreement, which is only between the hotel developer and Caterpillar (not the City of Peoria or the Civic Center), allows Caterpillar to “name the Connector, including the right to display appropriate signage on the exterior and interior of the Connector,” but “not includ[ing] any other marketing, advertising, or other rights.” The agreement specifically says that Caterpillar does not have any rights to name the hotel or garage, but it also forbids the developer from granting naming rights to “any person or entity that competes with Caterpillar in any industry that is part [of] the core business of Caterpillar.”

Neither the redevelopment agreement between the City of Peoria and the hotel developer, nor the easement agreement between the Peoria Civic Center, City of Peoria, and the hotel developer, precludes the sale of naming rights. Council members contacted Monday said they were unaware that naming rights had been sold for the connector, or that there were any plans to do so.

Artist's rendering of the planned pedestrian walkway over Fulton, looking northwest

 

Amtrak, City of Peoria, Illinois Dept. of Transportation, Streets

Passenger Rail or Eastern Bypass?

39 Comments

Of course the title of this post need not be an either/or question. But I pose the question that way because I want to draw some contrasts between the two projects.

Peoria currently has four automobile bridges across the Illinois River (McClugage, Murray Baker, Bob Michel, and Cedar Street). Peoria does not currently have passenger rail service.

The Eastern Bypass would connect Route 6 at Mossville to I-74 near Morton via a north-easterly route in Tazewell County. Passenger rail service (as currently proposed) would connect Peoria to Chicago and St. Louis via Bloomington/Normal.

The Eastern Bypass is estimated to cost $650-700 million to build. The estimated cost to establish a passenger rail link between Peoria and Normal is $74.6 million.

Building the Eastern Bypass will require acquisition of the entire corridor via eminent domain and result in the destruction of more farmland. All that’s required to establish passenger rail service is the upgrading of existing rail lines.

There have been three public hearings and at least four major studies completed so far for the Eastern Bypass. There have been no public hearings and only one limited feasibility report on establishing passenger rail service to Peoria.

Opponents of passenger rail service (like Ray LaHood) contend that it’s convenient — or at least perfectly acceptable — for Peoria area residents to drive to Bloomington (40 miles away) to catch the train. Supporters of the Eastern Bypass (like the Tri-County Regional Planning Commission) say it’s too inconvenient for those in North Peoria to drive to the McClugage bridge (10 miles away) to cross the river, or to experience minor congestion for a few minutes twice a day.

IDOT has devoted several pages of their website to the Eastern Bypass study with encouragements to the public to get involved and a depository of study documents. The only thing on IDOT’s website about the possibility of establishing passenger rail service to Peoria is the aforementioned feasibility report which can be downloaded from IDOT’s Amtrak page.

Passenger rail is cheaper to establish, more sustainable to maintain, more ecologically and socially responsible, and covers a greater distance, yet it’s perceived as a greater cost to taxpayers than a highway that is nearly ten times as expensive, unnecessary, unsustainable, and only moves you in circles. Read the newspaper and you’ll see the cost of the Eastern Bypass mentioned in passing at the end of the article, as if it’s being included with a shrug saying, “that’s the way it is these days; everything costs money.” But read an article about passenger rail, and you’d think we needed to start mining for gold to afford it; the whole focus of the article is on the “tremendous cost to the taxpayers,” even though it’s a fraction of highway funding.

The Eastern Bypass is being pursued by IDOT et. al. with an aura of inevitability. There’s no serious question of “if” it will happen, but rather when and by which route. Meanwhile, IDOT is not giving any serious consideration to the establishment of passenger rail service to Peoria. They spent five years coming up with a “feasibility report” that didn’t even consider direct service to Chicago (which is the study that was actually requested), but instead studied feeder service to Normal, with no explanation of who authorized the change in scope.

At least as much effort should be going into the establishment of direct passenger rail service to Chicago as is going into the development of the Eastern Bypass. Local transportation officials as well as local legislators should be pressuring IDOT to do a real feasibility study–the one that we asked for in the first place. The assumption should be that we are going to get passenger rail service established, and the only question is which route is best (for ridership, cost, future expansion, etc.).

Why shouldn’t we approach passenger rail with the same aura of inevitability as the Eastern Bypass?

City Council, City of Peoria

Ante up!

35 Comments

The Journal Star reports that the City is all in now. They’ve mortgaged the house to make their bet, and they believe they’re going to win big!

Just consider all the success they’ve had with gambles like this before. We have the beautiful Cub Foods on Knoxville that has revitalized the East Bluff and drawn patrons from Morton and East Peoria, as promised. We have One Technology Plaza, filled to capacity with high-tech companies employing hundreds and making Peoria the tech capital of the Midwest. And there’s Riverfront Village, just raking in the property taxes to pay for itself. And let’s not forget that sure-fire investment in Firefly Energy, the battery maker that is paying us dividends today.

And where would we be without the Peoria Civic Center? Just look at how it operates in the black every year and has spawned private investment all the way around the block, revitalizing downtown Peoria for generations.

Yes, I have full confidence that the downtown hotel project will be just as successful as the other wonderful developments the City of Peoria has gambled our tax money on in hopes that they would “pay for themselves.” What with the 360,000 people who will be coming to the museum starting this fall, and with all the people who are drawn to our own little Wrigleyville around the downtown ballpark, this should be a cinch to make us an even wealthier City.

We’re going to be rich, I tell you! Rich! Rich! Rich!

City Council, City of Peoria, Peoria Journal Star, Peoria Mayor

Mayor/Council=pot, Journal Star=kettle

7 Comments

The Mayor held a press conference on Monday and released a letter that he and the rest of the City Council members signed (except for Gary Sandberg, natch) and sent to Journal Star publisher Ken Mauser. You can read it at PeoriaWatchdog.com, the official site of Peoria Unit 86 of the United Media Guild.

Among other things, Mayor Ardis says, “I and other city leaders are concerned about plans we’ve heard to outsource jobs, slash employees and cut wages.” And later in the letter:

I fail to see how additional moves against employees and staffing would allow the newspaper to continue as a valuable public watchdog and community resource. I have never run a newspaper. But less is surely not more, when it comes to reporting the news.

Does it strike anyone else odd that this concern is coming from a mayor and council that recently eliminated 52 positions themselves, including a third of the inspections/code enforcement department? I mean, I’ve never run a City, but less is surely not more when it comes to inspections and code enforcement. I fail to see how all these moves against employees and staffing would allow the City to add value to the taxpayers.

Don’t get me wrong. I don’t like the way GateHouse Media is pillaging the Journal Star. I actually agree with the sentiments in the letter. I just think it’s a little inappropriate for the Mayor and Council to be passing judgment when they have acted similarly. After you slash important services to the taxpayers while simultaneously giving over $30 million to an out-of-town developer, it doesn’t give you much moral standing to scold the Journal Star’s publisher for doing essentially the same thing.

City Council, City of Peoria, Peoria Journal Star

“Save the Journal Star” news conference Monday

18 Comments

From a press release:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

PEORIA MAYOR JIM ARDIS AND OTHERS TO CALL FOR FAIR NEGOTIATIONS AT THE JOURNAL STAR DURING 9 A.M. NEWS CONFERENCE MONDAY, APRIL 9, AT PEORIA CITY HALL

It’s time to save the Journal Star.

As downstate Illinois’ largest newspaper, the Journal Star continues to be highly profitable. However, New York-based owner GateHouse Media continues to push for the slashings of jobs and salaries of the people who write, create and deliver the paper.

Why? GateHouse recently lavished a $800,000 bonus on CEO Michael Reed, who makes a salary of $500,000 a year. Further plump bonuses to other executives pushed the total to far over $1 million.

While GateHouse continues to try to slash the Journal Star, readers might ask questions. How does a smaller local staff make for a better local paper? How do continued cuts at the newspaper make for a better value for readers?

We ask the same questions. We are Peoria Unit 86 of the United Media Guild, which represents those targeted employees. We want only reasonable contract negotiations and a fair settlement. We just want to do our jobs as Peoria’s public watchdog.

Please join us at 9 a.m. Monday, April 9, in front of Peoria City Hall, 419 Fulton Street. Mayor Jim Ardis will present a letter signed by the City Council urging GateHouse to reach a fair settlement with the Guild.

We also will present a similar letter from the head pastors of two of the largest churches in Peoria – who requested to meet with Journal Star publisher Ken Mauser, but were denied – urging justice and moral fairness in ongoing contract negotiations.

In other Journal Star news, Managing Editor John Plevka is leaving the paper to head up the student newspaper at ISU.

City Council, City of Peoria

Congratulations to the City Council

17 Comments

I just want to congratulate the Peoria City Council on accomplishing something I really thought was impossible. According to the Journal Star, the Council has managed to find a deadline that Gary Matthews was able to meet. This is no small feat. It only took three and a half years, three redevelopment agreements, and five or six deadline extensions, but through persistence, perseverance, and a political will unrivaled by any other effort the council has made, they have succeeded in foisting this folly on the taxpayers.

I sincerely wish they would put this much effort, determination, and tax money toward the things they should be doing: enforcing law and order, maintaining existing infrastructure, and making Peoria a safe and beautiful place to live for those who actually, you know, live here, and pay taxes that increasingly go toward baubles that hang on our deteriorating civic structure.

No doubt, I ask too much.

City of Peoria

How high, how long before changes are made?

19 Comments

Here are some random thoughts about gas prices and the future of the City of Peoria that I wanted to throw out there for your consideration.

Gas prices are now $4.09 per gallon in Peoria. It’s not a record high, but it’s getting close.

Have the higher gas prices changed how much you drive? Do you consciously try to make fewer trips, or shorter trips in the car? I do. If it hasn’t made any difference to you yet, how high would gas prices need to go–or how long would they have to stay high–to force you to rethink your driving habits? Or to perhaps buy a more fuel-efficient car?

Or what about more drastic actions? How high would gas have to get before you decided to move closer to where you work? Or closer to where you shop for groceries?

In fact, how long before the demand for more efficient, mixed-use, compact neighborhoods rises enough to change residential development patterns in Peoria?

The fact is, the City of Peoria should be thinking about changing their development patterns right now. Well, yesterday, really. As you watch the digital numbers rise at blazing speed at the gas pump these days, have you ever thought about the tremendous cost of high gas prices to the City? All those police cars, fire trucks, city buses, school buses, snow plows, code enforcers, road maintenance vehicles, ambulances, garbage trucks, etc.? You know all those costs get passed on to you in the form of taxes and (ahem) “fees.”

And how about those infrastructure costs? The cost to maintain all the roads and bridges and, where they exist, sidewalks gets higher and higher per capita the bigger be get without growing in population. Yet instead of maintaining the streets we have and seeking to increase density there, we’re instead spending millions (in a combination of state, federal, and local money) to build an extension to Pioneer Parkway and an extension to Orange Prairie Road.

A 50-plus-square-mile sprawling city of 130,000 residents is only sustainable as long as gas is cheap and abundant and the population growth is proportionate to land area growth. It’s a fact that population growth has not kept up with our land growth. Now if gas ceases to be cheap and abundant, our city is really going to be in a world of hurt, as it is almost completely reliant on motor transportation.

The City supposedly has a sustainability commission. They were established in 2008, and a website went up in 2009. Have you ever heard anything about them since then? Has the City Council solicited their input on any of the road projects that have come before them? Has the Planning Commission solicited their opinion on any of the retail or residential developments that have come before them? Has the Planning & Growth Department solicited their opinion on any changes they’ve made recently to the Land Development Code or Zoning ordinance?

My guess is the Sustainability Commission gets about as much respect and consideration as the now-defunct Heart of Peoria Commission did. It’s there for window dressing.

The time is now to start planning for a sustainable city. The built environment doesn’t change overnight. It changes little by little, over many years. Let’s get serious and start planning–and becoming–a sustainable future for our City now.