Category Archives: City of Peoria

Arts Partners, City of Peoria

ArtsPartners makes its case for public funding

ArtsPartners LogoCouncilmen Bob Manning and Ryan Spain listened to ArtsPartners representatives make the case for continued public funding of their organization this morning at City Hall. Although the meeting was called by the mayor, he did not attend. Instead, Dr. Peter Couri led the meeting.

Couri gave a brief history of ArtsPartners and then turned it over to others in attendance to give their views on the importance of continued funding.

Julie Russell, past president of ArtsPartners, distributed an official statement (PDF) that answers many of the objections that have been raised. One point she stressed was that ArtsPartners relies largely on city subsidy so as not to compete for donations with other arts groups.

George Brown, Department of Theatre Arts Chair at Bradley University, stated that he believed the funding was not only necessary, it wasn’t enough. He cited a report released by Americans for the Arts in May of this year (titled “Arts and Economic Prosperity“) which states, “the nonprofit arts and culture industry generates $166.2 billion in economic activity every year — $63.1 billion in spending by organizations and an additional $103.1 billion in event-related spending by their audiences.” He argued that the arts don’t just provide “quality of life” in Peoria, but have economic impact as well.

Brent Lonteen, Executive Director of the Peoria Area Convention and Visitors Bureau (PACVB), explained that PACVB does not rely exclusively on city funding, but is a member-based organization. Nevertheless, they allow any arts group affilitated with ArtsPartners to utilize PACVB services because they recognize the arts community is struggling financially. He said the suggestion to combine PACVB with ArtsPartners did not originate with the bureau, but that they are willing to help in any way the city and/or ArtsPartners would request.

Manning explained that the reason for the meeting was to explore whether giving $75,000 to ArtsPartners is the best way to leverage those funds, or if there might be a better way, such as giving funding to arts groups directly. He also said there was some confusion over whether this was originally meant to be a permanent subsidy or simply seed money to get ArtsPartners established.

Spain was a strong supporter of continued funding, saying he thought the work of ArtsPartners was critical to the economic health of the community.

Several different funding ideas were suggested. One was combining ArtsPartners with the PACVB; another was to bring it under the Heartland Partnership umbrella. Another attendee suggested establishing a Public Arts Commission and funding it directly from the city budget (similar to the way the Municipal Band is funded) instead of receiving funding through HRA taxes.

The meeting lasted about an hour. ArtsPartners Executive Director Suzette Boulais attended but did not speak during the meeting. The city council will decide whether and how to continue funding ArtsPartners at their October 9 meeting.

City Council, City of Peoria, Peoria Civic Center

What’s the Civic Center trying to hide?

5 Comments

Tuesday’s Peoria City Council meeting included this intriguing exchange:

[audio:https://peoriachronicle.com/wp-content/uploads/Audio/PCC-Budg-Req-091107.mp3]

The Peoria Civic Center submitted this five-page budget summary document to the City Council. Councilman Sandberg asked, “Is there an itemized budget that culminates in this four or five page document that the City Council has before it? And if so, where is it available for either the council or the general public to review?”

Peoria Civic Center logoDebbie Ritschel, general manager of the Civic Center, answered, “We do have an internal document, councilman, that is significantly longer than the document you get and we’d be happy to sit with you and go over with you at any time…. It is not a public document.” She went on to say, “We’ve always considered [the itemized budget] work product,” and further stated after additional questioning, “We have always considered this an SMG budget between SMG and the [Peoria Civic Center] Authority and then have created then the public document off of that.”

Well, whenever a governmental entity takes your tax dollars and then says you can’t see how they’re planning to spend it because that information is confidential, you know something is rotten in the state of Denmark. I submitted a Freedom of Information Act request today to get a copy of the itemized budget. It will be interesting to see how they respond (they have seven days to do so).

First of all, the Peoria Civic Center Authority is established by state law (70 ILCS 200/205, known as the “Civic Center Code”) and is “a political subdivision, body politic and municipal corporation,” so there’s no question that it’s a public, governmental entity. Thus, it falls under the Freedom of Information Act, which states, “[e]ach public body shall make available to any person for inspection or copying all public records.” Just to drive the point home, the Civic Center Code itself states (70 ILCS 200/205-60), “All records of the Authority shall be open to public inspection at all reasonable hours.” See that first word there? “All.”

The State of Illinois’ FOIA Guide states that a document is “a public record under the Act if it was prepared, or was or is being used, received, possessed, or under the control of any public body.” It’s clear the itemized budget was received and is under the control of the Civic Center because it was from that document that they created the summary document.

Now, it’s true that “[p]reliminary drafts of memoranda in which opinions or policies are formulated [are] exempt from disclosure” — I’m assuming that’s what Ritschel meant when she called the itemized budget “work product” — but an itemized budget upon which a summary document was based can hardly be considered a “preliminary [draft] of memoranda.” They submitted the summary budget document to the City Council; are they seriously going to argue that their summary is based on nothing more than a draft memo?

In short, I believe the itemized budget is a public document and should be open to public inspection and copying. They haven’t provided any good reason for it not to be, and the fact that they want to keep it under wraps makes me suspicious of them. I have to wonder, what are they trying to hide?

City of Peoria

I met Mr. Barber

I got to meet and briefly talk to the new Public Works Director tonight after the city council meeting. He was very cordial and didn’t hold my previous post about him against me. Although he doesn’t call it “new urbanism,” he does espouse the same beliefs, including pedestrian-friendliness, mixed-use, context-sensitive solutions, bringing more residential options downtown, etc. I’m much more optimistic about him now that I’ve met him.

I was also told that Planning & Growth Director Pat Landes and Second District Councilwoman Barbara Van Auken did question the candidates extensively about their experience with older neighborhoods and new urbanism principles. So I have a greater comfort level with the process.

Even though at 57 years old he’s probably not going to be a long-term employee (he’ll likely stay fewer than 10 years), he will be responsible for hiring some key positions in the next few years, and the selection committee would like him to fill those positions with an eye toward succession planning — in other words, put someone second in command who can take over for Barber when he leaves. So keep an eye on whoever emerges as the No. 2 person in Public Works.

Arts Partners, City Council, City of Peoria

ArtsPartners: Should they keep getting city subsidies?

19 Comments

ArtsPartners LogoThe city council will be considering whether or not to approve giving ArtsPartners a 2.5% share of the restaurant portion of Peoria’s HRA tax for four more years. Here’s a little background from the council communication:

In 2000, the City and Civic Center amended their Intergovernmental Agreement to provide that ArtsPartners of Central Illinois receive 2.5% of the collected Restaurant Tax revenue collected commencing with the September 2000 Restaurant Tax receipts and continuing through August 2002. In August 2002, that Agreement was extended through August of 2004, and again from 2004 to 2006. In 2006, the City approved an Amendment through August 2007. The Civic Center Authority Board unanimously voted on August 23,2007 to continue funding and approve a four (4) year Intergovernmental Agreement with ArtsPartners capped at $75,000 per year and continuing to receive the 2.5% of Restaurant Tax through August 31, 2011.

A recent Chronicle commentator argues that ArtsPartners duplicates the efforts of other organizations. Since arts groups do their own local advertising/promotion, and since the publicly-funded Peoria Area Convention and Visitors Bureau promotes the Peoria area (which would presumably include promotion of the arts offerings) to tourists and those relocating, why do we need yet another publicly-funded agency to focus on the arts?

I think the commentator has a point. Furthermore, while the arts are important, so are other things. What about sports? Should we start a publicly-funded “SportsPartners” organization to market and promote all the sporting events in Peoria? Schools are important — how about a publicly-funded “SchoolPartners” to promote all the great public and private schools we have in Peoria?

Here’s a better idea: If the Civic Center doesn’t need all that HRA money, how about reducing the tax instead of trying to find other ways to spend it? Lower taxes have wide appeal — I’ll bet they would help tourism and relocation at least as much as ArtsPartners.

City of Pekin, City of Peoria, Illinois American Water

How high’s the water (rate), Mama?

5 Comments

Illinois American Water has petitioned the Illinois Commerce Commission to raise their rates in Peoria and Pekin by 20 and 26.7 percent, respectively.

Water company officials say the increases are necessary to cover rising operating costs and infrastructure improvements….

And now, let’s compare this with what Illinois American Water said two years ago according to an April 4, 2005, Journal Star article:

The current business plan of Illinois American Water does not call for a general rate case before 2009, and that means customers will not see the impact of a general rate increase before 2010. Barring an extraordinary event like Sept. 11, the average residential bill will still be $34.74 [average bill in 2005] in 2010.

It is also important to note that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimates that municipal water systems need to spend $18 billion in order to bring their existing systems up to government standards for water quality. Peorians don’t have this problem because the necessary and timely investments have been made in their water system by Illinois American Water.

So, in 2005, everything was hunky-dory: no rate increases until 2009/2010, infrastructure all up to date. That was when the city was on the brink of buying out the water company. Now, just two years later, and without “an extraordinary event like Sept. 11,” they’re back to the ICC again asking for a 20% rate increase to cover operating expenses and infrastructure improvements. What changed? Why did they have to accelerate their business plan by two years and ask for such a massive increase all of a sudden?

For a company that doesn’t want the city to buy back its water works, they couldn’t have picked a worse time to ask for a rate increase. If it goes through, it will likely take effect next year, just in time for the city to consider buying them out again. Only public pressure has stopped the buyout before; if the public feels like Illinois American Water is screwing them, nothing will get in the way of the city buying them out.

City of Peoria

Who is David Barber?

29 Comments

David Barber will be taking over as Public Works Director when Steve Van Winkle retires October 1. According to WMBD Radio:

Barber has over 20 years experience as a Public Works Director in four communities in Illinois and Ohio including Downers Grove, Naperville and Evanston, Illinois and Bowling Green, Ohio. Barber’s first day in Peoria will be September 6th working closely with current Public Works Director Steve Van Winkle before he retires October first. Barber, who is 57, will be paid $116,000 a year.

As far as I can put together from searching the Internet, Barber worked in Naperville from 1996 to 2001. He was the Public Works Director there from 1996 to September 1999, at which time the city spun off a new Department of Traffic and Engineering to focus specifically on traffic issues (Chicago Tribune, 9/23/1999). Barber became the director of that new department and Naperville hired a new Public Works Director. On Jan. 31, 2001, Barber left the city of Naperville to take a job at Harza Engineering of Chicago (Chicago Tribune, 1/24/2001).

In January 2004, Barber went to work for Downers Grove as Public Works Director, and he worked there until June 5, 2007. According to DGreport.com, a local Downers Grove blog, Barber was asked to resign by the Village Manager:

Barber and Village Manager Cara Pavlicek reached the decision together, according to a Village Hall staffer. Barber, who has also been working as a continuing education instructor at the University of Wisconsin has decided to focus his interests in academia. He came to Downers Grove in January 2004 after more than 30 years experience in civil engineering and public works.

Some of the complaints during his short tenure included “residents of Oakwood Avenue challeng[ing] the department’s computations on the cost of repairing their brick street,” “complaints about the sidewalk matrix, the tool by which new sidewalks are prioritized for construction,” and “storm water drainage problems,” according to the site.

There’s no indication that Barber has any experience with the principles of New Urbanism. If that’s so, it’s a real disappointment. It will indicate that familiarity with and advocacy for those principles was not a high priority for the selection committee collectively, which included council members Van Auken, Jacob, and Turner. I’ve written to Van Auken and City Manager Oliver asking what experience Barber has with the principles of New Urbanism; I’ll update this post when I receive any information.

Given Barber’s age and recent job history, I will be surprised if he stays in Peoria more than five years, if that long.

City of Peoria

Peoria making good use of river

8 Comments

The NiñaIt’s exciting to see Peoria utilizing its riverfront by bringing in floating museums. First they brought in the LST 325 that has been here the past several days (today’s the last day to take a tour), and now we find out that a replica of The Niña is coming on September 21. It goes without saying, but you have to have a river to bring in these exhibits, so you won’t see them coming to, say, Bloomington or Galesburg. We’ve got quite an asset in that river.

The Niña is actually a nickname; the formal name of Columbus’s ship was the Santa Clara. The ship was a caravel and reportedly Columbus’s favorite ship. According to Wikipedia:

On Columbus’ first expedition, the Niña carried 24 men, captained by Vicente Yáñez Pinzón. They left Palos de la Frontera on August 3, 1492, stopping at the Canary Islands on August 12, 1492, and continued westward. Landfall was made in the Bahamas at dawn on October 12, 1492. After running the Santa Maria aground, Columbus returned on the Niña in early 1493, arriving in Palos de la Frontera on March 15.

The replica that’s coming to Peoria was built “in Valenca, Brazil, using only adzes, axes, hand saws, and chisels, in addition to naturally-shaped timbers from the local forest,” according to the exhibit’s website. “In December 1991, the Niña left Brazil and sailed to Costa Rica on a 4000 mile unescorted maiden voyage to take part in the filming of 1492. Since then, the ship has visited over 300 ports in the U.S.”

The Niña will be on display in Peoria from September 21 to October 2.

City Council, City of Peoria, Museum Block

Museum hours: “9 or 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.”

20 Comments

One of the criticisms of the museum having the entire Sears block is that the block will be dead after the museum closes each night at 5:00. By having a mix of residential and retail, the block could be hopping around the clock.

Whenever that objection is raised, the rebuttal has always been along the lines of, “how do you know the museum will close at five? No one has ever said what the hours of operation are going to be. You’re assuming facts not in evidence!”

Not anymore. Councilman Bob Manning asked Jim Richerson point-blank what the new museum hours will be, and he answered that they will be the same as the hours now: “9 or 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.” He did say that the large screen theater “may” be open “later.” And that the museum “could” have “extended hours.” Maybe. Could. To only one thing did he specifically commit: “9 or 10 a.m. to 5 p.m.” So those are the hours, for the record.

City Council, City of Peoria

Satterfield to temporarily run Fleet Services Department

3 Comments

The city’s Fleet Services Manager is retiring, and the city apparently has no succession plan to replace him. As I reported earlier, city staff took steps toward outsourcing the management position temporarily until a permanent replacement could be found.

That plan went over like a lead balloon with Fleet Services personnel. They wrote a letter to Mayor Ardis advocating “an alternative plan…in which Tom Satterfield [a current Fleet Services union employee] would be made a super crew chief in which there would be a percentage added to his base pay.” The letter didn’t sway the mayor, but it did sway 7 of the 11 council members last Tuesday night. They voted to hire Satterfield. In addition to Ardis, those voting against that solution were Jacob, Spain, and Turner.

The back story, of course, is that there is still an open question as to whether or not the whole department will be outsourced. No doubt the personnel in the Fleet Services department saw the “temporary” outsourcing of the manager position as a step toward that outcome, and that’s why they reacted so negatively to the idea. That, and the fact that Satterfield was essentially the second in command anyway — the one who usually filled in when the Fleet Manager was away.

In the end, I believe the council made the right decision. It will save the city money, and it’s only temporary. No need to outsource what we can do ourselves in-house for less money.