Category Archives: City of Peoria

2008 Campaign, Aaron Schock, City Council, City of Peoria

Schock fundraising cost keeps rising

92 Comments

The original city council agenda reported that President Bush’s visit to Peoria to raise funds for congressional candidate Aaron Schock cost taxpayers $13,195.63. That included police overtime and some miscellaneous expenses.

At last night’s council meeting, we learned that the tab is now $38,252. Adding to the cost are public works costs ($11,538 for 30 public works trucks used “for security purposes”) and fire department manpower ($3,218). I’ll try to get a copy of all the costs and post it.

But we may not be done tabulating the costs. Even the $38,000 figure doesn’t include the hours that police, public works, and other departments spent planning for the event. All this money comes out of Peoria taxpayers’ pockets.

One more thing — it violates city code:

Sec. 2-335(c). Employees shall not use city stationery, office equipment or other city resources for personal or political purposes.

Sec. 2-336. Prohibited political activities.

(a) City employees shall not intentionally perform any prohibited political activity during any compensated time (other than vacation, personal, or compensatory time off). City employees shall not intentionally misappropriate any city property or resources by engaging in any prohibited political activity for the benefit of any campaign for elective office or any political organization.

(b) At no time shall any executive or legislative branch constitutional officer or any official, director, supervisor, or city employee intentionally misappropriate the services of any city employee by requiring that city employee to perform any prohibited political activity (i) as part of that employee’s city duties, (ii) as a condition of city employment, or (iii) during any time off that is compensated by the city (such as vacation, personal, or compensatory time off).

Sec. 2-337. Prohibited political activity defined.

Prohibited political activity means:
(1) Preparing for, organizing, or participating in any political meeting, political rally, political demonstration or other political event.

I don’t know how the codes could be any clearer. A July 24, 2008, Journal Star article states that Schock’s fundraising event was “purely political,” which is the reason why Schock’s campaign had to pay back “costs associated with flying into Peoria on Air Force One and all costs for food, flowers and rentals at the Weaver Farm event.”

So let’s recap — the fundraising event was undeniably political in nature. The preparation, organization, and execution of city services for such a political event is prohibited according to city codes. However, the city has provided those services anyway (in violation of its own code) at a cost of $38,000+ without even asking the Schock campaign to reimburse the taxpayers.

Meanwhile, the Schock campaign isn’t offering to reimburse the taxpayers either. Is this an example of the kind of “service” a Congressman Schock will be providing to his district? Sticking local taxpayers with the bill for an event that personally benefits him, even as he reimburses the federal government for the same event?

A motion to bill Schock’s campaign for these costs was deferred until the next council meeting. Voting against the deferral: Councilmen Eric Turner, Patrick Nichting and Jim Montelongo.

Bradley University, City Council, City of Peoria, Peoria Public Schools, Traffic

“In the News” for 9/23/08

47 Comments

In the news today:

  • An allegedly inebriated council member confronts Bradley fraternity students over being too noisy in the middle of the night. Bradley police, then Peoria police are called to break things up. Van Auken says that neighbors have complained about this fraternity, Sigma Nu, 1300 W. Fredonia Ave., multiple times, but that things haven’t improved. Bradley police wouldn’t give the fraternity a citation for being too loud, but Peoria police did. The fraternity thinks they’re being treated unfairly, since the police didn’t cite Van Auken for disorderly conduct and trespassing after she and her companions refused to leave the premises. Van Auken says she acted appropriately. She also admitted to having a few drinks before the confrontation, and fraternity members and Bradley police said she showed signs of inebriation. My take: It’s laudable that Van Auken is willing to stand up to the university on this issue, but her apparent lack of sobriety calls her judgment — about the loudness of the party, for one thing — into question. It would have been better if she had confronted them while sober.

  • Public Works is going to recommend lane reductions for Main Street. The purpose of the meeting last night was to present their proposal and convince everyone in attendance that it was the best solution. They keep saying they want to hear from residents and are willing to do what the residents want, but when the residents asked for things, they were told that those ideas won’t work and we have to go with Public Works’ plans, based on their computer models. Perhaps the most telling statement was when I talked to Public Works Director Dave Barber after the meeting and expressed my concern over the traffic on Main Street consistently going 10-15 mph over the speed limit between University and Farmington Road, his response was, “The street was that way when you moved there, right?” So, apparently, if people are breaking the law, they’ve got a right to keep breaking the law. Good to know. Nevertheless, narrowing Main east of University will be a good thing.

  • District 150 is considering mandatory uniforms for primary and middle school students. My take: Great idea. Make it so.
City of Peoria, Traffic

Reminder: Traffic study forum tonight!

Leave a comment

From a previous post:

The Public Works Department and Hanson Professional Services will be hosting a public meeting on Monday, September 22, 2008; 7pm – 9pm at City Hall-Council Chambers, 419 Fulton Street, Suite 400, Peoria. This forum is a follow-up to the meeting that took place in early July. The City will be presenting a series of computer-generated illustrations showing how a variety of traffic-calming options will affect Main Street and the surrounding area using traffic counts and data collected in June.

2008 Campaign, City of Peoria

Pleasant Hill School District 69 withholding info from Krupa campaign?

10 Comments

The Journal Star has Jehan Gordon’s reaction to Joan Krupa’s press conference yesterday, during which she accused Gordon of lying about her attendance record. Krupa said Gordon missed 40% of the Pleasant Hill School District 69 board meetings.

But an attendance report issued by District 69 Superintendent John Bute on Friday shows that Gordon actually attended 68 percent of School Board meetings. The “40 percent” figure comes from a Freedom of Information Act request that the Krupa campaign filed.

Dates used to analyze Gordon’s attendance record, however, are not the same as those provided to the Journal Star by Bute’s office. For instance, Bute’s office recognizes several non-regular or “special” meetings of the board that occurred between June 20, 2007 – Gordon’s first meeting – and the most recent, Sept. 3.

The information Krupa’s campaign is using does not include the June 20, 2007, date, nor does it include an Oct. 31, 2007, special meeting, as well as a meeting in late August and early September.

Here’s what I wanted to know as I read this story: Why weren’t some of those dates included in Krupa’s analysis of Gordon’s attendance? So I e-mailed Krupa’s campaign manager Steve Shearer and asked. He said, “Those meetings were not in the FOIA response from the school.”

So the next question that I feel needs to be investigated is: Why was pertinent information not disclosed to the Krupa campaign in response to their Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request? If Krupa filed a FOIA asking about Gordon’s attendance record, why were different answers given to Krupa and the Journal Star? Why were some special meetings included in the report to Krupa, but not all of them? Was this just gross negligence, or does District 69 routinely omit information from FOIA requests?

Shearer added, “Had we known the number was lower I would always opt for that since a 32% absentee rate is damning when running for another office. There is no purpose in trying to be cute and bumping the figure up from 32% to 40% when the 32% is damning without being questioned. But the 40% figure was based on the FOIA response.”

City of Peoria

Bush fund-raising visit to Peoria costs taxpayers over $13,000

63 Comments

President Bush came to Peoria last month for one reason: to help Aaron Schock raise money for his congressional campaign. But that visit cost Peoria taxpayers $13,195.63, mostly in overtime pay for police officers handling traffic control, according to a report prepared by the city at Councilman Sandberg’s request.

Why should Peoria taxpayers — including many non-Republicans — have to pay for Aaron Schock’s fundraiser? “No one was billed for the Presidential visit,” the report states. Well, they should be billed. Schock’s campaign should reimburse every dollar associated with this visit.

City of Peoria, Streets, Traffic

Main and University traffic study forum next Monday

8 Comments

From a press release:

CITY OF PEORIA HOSTS MAIN AND UNIVERSITY TRAFFIC STUDY FORUM
September 22, 2008
7 pm – 9 pm

The Public Works Department and Hanson Professional Services will be hosting a public meeting on Monday, September 22, 2008; 7pm – 9pm at City Hall-Council Chambers, 419 Fulton Street, Suite 400, Peoria. This forum is a follow-up to the meeting that took place in early July. The City will be presenting a series of computer-generated illustrations showing how a variety of traffic-calming options will affect Main Street and the surrounding area using traffic counts and data collected in June.

This is a critical meeting for those of us concerned about our West Bluff community. This may be our final opportunity to provide input and influence the future of Main Street. Show your support of a walkable west bluff by attending this forum and wearing a green shirt to visually show our city leaders what our community wants.

If you are unable to attend this important meeting, please respond to this email to show your support of a vibrant, creative, pedestrian-friendly, and commercially-viable Main Street.

City Council, City of Peoria

Hy-Vee approved

24 Comments

The council gave the green light to Hy-Vee, even though they didn’t meet the city staff’s and zoning commission’s conditions/recommendations. Developers did make some improvements to the design, but the function of the west side of the store was not one of them. There will be no access from the west — in fact, Hy-Vee officials stated that even employees are not allowed to enter the rear (west side) of the store.

Officials also stated that an entrance in the rear “would not have worked from an operational standpoint of the supermarket’s business.” But I still think that, with a little creativity, they could have figured out a way to provide access from the west — even if it were just an indoor passageway from the west parking lot to the east entrance.

Construction is slated to begin in the spring, and will include demolishing an entire leg of the original strip mall. This will be the biggest change to come to Sheridan Village since it opened in the ’50s.

City of Peoria, Streets, Traffic

I-74 capacity estimates severely overestimated

22 Comments

I’ve been thinking about this article from the Journal Star — specifically, this information:

Numbers released last week to the Journal Star indicate that in several cases, there is less traffic on I-74 since the Upgrade 74 project was completed in 2006.

East of Adams Street, just off the Murray Baker Bridge, the Illinois Department of Transportation counted an average 56,600 vehicles each day in 2008. Comparably, there were 62,100 vehicles daily crossing the Murray Baker Bridge in 2003, around the time the upgrade project began.

West of Adams Street’s exit, the state counted 51,000 vehicles each day in 2008, compared to 59,100 on average each day in 2003.

In East Peoria, west of the Main Street exit, the 2008 count shows 56,800 vehicles daily, down 3,000 vehicles on average each day from 2003, when the count was 59,800.

My criticism of the Upgrade 74 plan has always been that it was too much. In fact, one of the first posts I wrote (because, like all bloggers, there’s an obligatory post early in our careers complaining about something traffic-related) — on April 18, 2005 — was about the I-74 overhaul:

I’m not denying that the expressway needed some improvements. Some of those exit ramps were very dangerous and needed to be reconstructed.

But isn’t this overhaul a bit excessive? I mean, do we really need six to eight lanes of traffic through Peoria?

It’s almost like they said, “hey, what needs to be done to improve I-74 through Peoria?”

And someone answered, “well, we need to fix those short ramps — especially that dangerous one by the bridge.”

“Yeah, yeah, good! Anything else?”

“Well, it would really help traffic flow to put in a new interchange at Sterling by the mall.”

“Excellent, yes, that would be a good idea. Anything else?”

“Hmmm…. no, not really….”

“Okay, well, what do we estimate that will cost?”

“We figure about $200 million.”

[Furrowed brow] “Well, we’ve got $460 million appropriated… we’re going to have to come up with some more upgrades. What else can we do?”

“Well… uh…. we could add more lanes — and a tunnel — and, and, let’s see how many roads and ramps we can get to intersect at Knoxville — that would be fun!”

And away it went!

Indeed. The Journal Star reported on May 18, 1999, that “The new road will be able to carry up to 100,000 cars a day. Right now, from 30,000 to 65,000 cars use the road daily.” In other words, they doubled the capacity of I-74 through Peoria. Why? There’s no evidence that we needed additional capacity. And now we find out there are fewer cars on the interstate than before the upgrade! More capacity means more maintenance of more infrastructure in a state that can’t pay its bills or maintain its existing infrastructure as it is.

But I guess that’s water under the bridge now. Except I’d like to point out this: As we’re trying to decide what needs to be done with Main Street, let’s remember that traffic engineers are not always accurate in gauging capacity needs. This I-74 overhaul is a very expensive case in point.

City of Peoria, Taxes

Coming soon: Higher taxes

16 Comments

Even without the $100+ million combined sewer overflow (CSO) project figured in, Mayor Ardis says the city is looking at a budget deficit of $2.5-3 million. That money is going to have to come from somewhere. “Common sense would dictate there won’t just be a new discussion about a new revenue stream, there is going to have to be one,” Ardis told the Journal Star.

On WCBU news this morning, Mayor Ardis stated, “The last thing the council will consider is a real estate or tax increase.” In other words, they will look for ways to save money or find other revenue streams, and will consider a tax increase a last resort. (Nevertheless, Ardis supports the proposed downtown museum which can only be completed if a tax increase is implemented county-wide.)

So let’s talk taxes. The city’s portion of your property tax bill is actually quite low, only about 9-10¢ of each property tax dollar. It’s been kept that way because the city over the years has relied more and more heavily on sales taxes and additional fees like the so-called garbage fee.

The argument for this trend is that sales taxes are spread among everyone who shops in Peoria, not just property owners. That would include people from the surrounding cities and towns who come into Peoria to shop at the malls or eat dinner or see a movie. Harder to defend is the garbage fee — a flat, regressive tax applied to everyone who gets a water bill. Property tax increases are also considered a last resort because, although the city’s portion is small, property taxes overall are high, and the city wants to attract homeowners.

Perhaps this would be a good time for the council to start looking at root causes. Why are expenses so high and why are revenues not keeping up with expenses?

Could it be our penchant for annexing more and more land and building out more and more infrastructure for those “growth areas” in a city that hasn’t seen population growth in decades? Annexation is consistently presented as the path to financial solvency, but despite nearly a half-century of annexation that has seen the city more than double in size, our taxes are higher, population growth is stagnant, older parts of the city are hollowed out, and revenues are insufficient. Methinks this strategy is not working.

City Council, City of Peoria

Hy-Vee back on the agenda

13 Comments

On Tuesday, the City Council will once again consider plans to put a new Hy-Vee grocery store in Sheridan Village. According to the Journal Star, Hy-Vee developers have made a few changes, but have still not met all of the city staff’s and zoning commission’s conditions.

Under the revised plans, Hy-Vee will include a sign on its west side, incorporate brick on portions of the building’s exterior and make the architecture of the back of the building similar to the front. Also, landscaping will block the view of a loading dock, which is also on the building’s west end. […]

Despite the improvements, seven outstanding issues exist. Some of these include questions about who pays for the installation of a sidewalk along Lake Street, restrictions on signage, limitation on community events within the parking lot and seasonal sales.

Senior Urban Planner Gene Lear says the new plans are an improvement, but from reading this article, it sounds like they’ve really only met maybe one or two of the conditions — they’ve included sidewalks around the whole store and “a proposed drive-thru pharmacy will not disrupt a sidewalk around the building.” The other changes they’ve made may be an “improvement,” but have not fulfilled the conditions.

For example, there still is no entrance or windows on the west side (back) of the building, although some of the building materials have been changed to make its appearance a little more like the front of the store. That’s a step in the right direction. But the condition isn’t just a concern about aesthetics; it’s an issue of functionality. Shoppers need access from both sides of the building because a good portion of the parking is to the back of the building. That parking loses its appeal and function if there is no access to Hy-Vee. It will basically become a dedicated parking lot for Bergners’ rear entrance and (presumably) Hy-Vee employees. That’s not a very efficient use of parking space, and one wonders how those parking spaces could even be used to meet the development’s parking requirements.

Hopefully the city council will insist that there be some sort of public access from the west side of the building. It’s in the best interests of the shopping center, the neighborhood, and the city. Perhaps another deferral would be in order if the supermarket and city planners cannot resolve the outstanding issues by next Tuesday night.