Category Archives: City of Peoria

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 of Peoria, Peoria Park District

Historic Preservation Commission makes the right decision

6 Comments

Park District LogoThe Journal Star is reporting tonight that Peoria’s Historic Preservation Commission is not in favor of designating Glen Oak Park as an historic landmark, but is willing to consider landmarking some individual structures, such as the pavilion.

That’s a reasonable approach. Designating the whole park as a landmark would be overreaching, in my opinion, and would challenge the sovereignty of the Peoria Park District. It would almost certainly have ended up in litigation, needlessly draining taxpayer dollars as the city and park district played tug-of-war.

That said, the park district does need to do a better job of maintaining Glen Oak Park, as well as the other parks under its stewardship. That’s the underlying reason this is being brought before the historic preservation commission in the first place. The parapet has been falling apart for years, and the foot bridge has also been undergoing “demolition by neglect,” to name two very visible examples. There seems to be no end to the resources the park district can dole out for new projects like the zoo expansion and rail-to-trail conversion attempt. Some of those resources would be better used maintaining what they already have.

UPDATE: Here’s Jennifer Davis’s full article from Thursday’s Journal Star. I was interested to read this statement: “Until [March 28], the park remains as if it was landmarked, which park officials protested because it stalls their plans to remove the old stone fort by the lagoon.” It seems their lack of maintenance over the years has caused the parapet to deteriorate to a point that it would cost over $800,000 to fix it, according to the one bid they received.

I don’t know what they’re so worried about. If the commission finds that it’s not an historic structure, they’ll be able to proceed with removing it; if it does get designated an historic structure, I would imagine it would make it eligible for grant money that could be used to repair it.

Glen Oak CannonFoot Bridge

City of Peoria

City Council Primary Election Results 2007

23 Comments

I’m reporting tonight from the studios of WCBU! Jonathan Ahl and Tanya Koonce were nice enough to let me hang out with them and let me blog from one of their computers.

So, without further ado, and with 100% of precincts reporting, the results from Tuesday’s primary are as follows:

Candidate Votes %
1 Gary Sandberg 5518.41 17%
2 Ryan Spain 4575.33 14%
3 George Jacob 4540.83 14%
4 Eric Turner 4371.16 14%
5 Jim Montelongo 3420.08 11%
6 Gale Thetford 2233.66 7%
7 Patti Polk 1622.24 5%
8 Dan Irving 1592.25 5%
9 Charles Schierer 1565.16 5%
10 Gloria Cassel Fitzgerald 945.83 3%
11 Dan Gillette 602.66 2%
12 Brad Carter 566.50 2%
13 Kelley Mammen 338.25 1%
14 Donald Cummings 327.58 1%

There was about a 9.7% voter turnout for this primary, which is, of course, pathetic, but in the world of local primaries is actually not that bad. The top ten vote-getters move on to the general election on April 17.

No surprise, Gary Sandberg came in first by a commanding margin. I mentioned this on the radio, but in the last at-large election Gary also got a large showing, and apparently people really couldn’t believe it. Really. They couldn’t believe it so much that they actually had Bradley do a study to find out if he only got in because of cumulative voting. The result: Gary had a very broad base of support. He not only had the most votes, but the most voters casting their ballot for him, too. It looks like he hasn’t lost that support over the past four years.

The biggest surprise was Ryan Spain finishing in second place, ahead of two of the three incumbents. He’s well on his way to the state house city council (sorry, I’m getting ahead of myself).

If the top five vote-getters end up being the five at-large council members in the general election, it’s not really going to change the makeup of the council. Spain is pretty much an even swap for John Morris. There is no one quite like Chuck Grayeb, but voting-wise, I’ll bet Jim Montelongo will be closer to him than, say, Sandberg.

Good news: Gale Thetford finished in sixth, about 1200 votes behind the fifth-place finisher. Let’s hope that holds up. Bad news: Dan Irving didn’t have a stronger showing and, while anything is possible, it’s realistically not likely that he’ll be able to make up the 6% difference to overtake the three candidates in front of him.

Of course, with the general election comes more voters, so the primary may not be an accurate picture of voter sentiment. So, who knows how it will all shake out. If I were to make a prediction at this point, though, I would bet that the top five vote getters are going to end up being the next at-large councilmen.

Finally, we must say goodbye to last place finishers Dan Gillette, Brad Carter, Kelley Mammen, and Donald Cummings. I was hoping that Brad would make it past the primary; perhaps he’ll run again in the future.

On to the general election! Let the games begin.

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 of Peoria, Kellar Branch, Village of Peoria Heights

Peoria misrepresents Peoria Heights to Surface Transportation Board

24 Comments

Today is the deadline for the City to file information with the Surface Transportation Board in the pending adverse discontinuance proceeding. The City filed their information this morning, basically just reiterating what was said at the last council meeting and informing the STB of the 9-2 vote in favor of CIRY as the carrier.

However, most curious was this statement (emphasis mine):

The Village of Peoria Heights concurs in the action voted by the City of Peoria. The Cities continue to support reconfiguration of rail service over the Branch whereby:

(1) Carver and any other shipper located near the north end of the Branch would be served from the west via CIRY’s connection with Union Pacific Railroad Company (UP) at Pioneer Junction;

(2) O’Brien Steel Service Co, (O’Brien Steel) and any other shipper located near the south end of the Branch would be served from the east via CIRY’s connection with Tazewell & Peoria Railroad, Inc. (T&P); and

(3) the segment of the Branch between the facilities of those shippers, on which there is no traffic, would be converted to recreational trail use.

That’s kind of funny, because I just read in the paper that the Village wants to put a trolley on that line, not a trail. Also, no Village representative certified the filing with their signature, and the Village wasn’t even served with a copy of the filing!

So I called Peoria Heights and talked to Administrator Tom Horstmann. I read him the STB filing and he said that it is not accurate, the Village does not concur with Peoria’s action, and he advised me to send a copy of the filing to Mayor Allen, which I did. I have a feeling the City will be getting an unhappy phone call.

To claim the Village’s concurrency in a legal document to the STB without the Village’s consent is an unconscionable oversight at best. It’s pretty apparent that there is no communication between the City and the Village on this issue, which is surprising considering how much is riding on the Village’s commitment to this project. Most of the section that the City wants to turn into a trail is not located in the City, but in the Village. Furthermore, the Village owns the trackage that is within their municipal boundaries. If the Village isn’t on board with the City’s plans, the City better start considering Plan B.

In the meantime, the City obviously needs to retract their erroneous statement to the STB. And since the City has demonstrated a lack of interest in communicating with the Heights, the Village probably should start communicating their intentions regarding the Kellar Branch directly with the STB.

UPDATE: City of Peoria attorney Randy Ray says, “Our STB filing is being amended to reflect that Peoria Heights does not agree with the City’s position. They wish to take no position on the matter before the STB.”

When I talked to Mayor Allen earlier tonight, he explained that since Peoria Heights doesn’t receive any freight, they didn’t feel the need to take a position on which carrier would be used on the line at this time. Also, as I stated in the comments section, Allen believes this was just an honest mistake.

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 of Peoria

Snow removal shows marked improvement

5 Comments

Snow PlowThe city did a very good job of plowing the snow the last couple of days. Everything seemed very organized. My alley was plowed before noon yesterday, and plowed again last night. The residential streets have had at least one pass, and I expect will be cleared curb-to-curb by tomorrow. The main roads are in excellent condition.

Perhaps the most impressive thing I saw was all the Cat end loaders and city trucks downtown last night actually removing the snow from the streets. I also saw little Bobcat-size tractors clearing the sidewalks. It was a sight to behold.

Congratulations to the Public Works Department on a job well done.

City of Peoria, Crime

Is your bicycle registered?

9 Comments

In the category of “little-known and never-enforced Peoria ordinances,” did you know that your bicycle is supposed to be registered and licensed?

Yup. I didn’t believe it either, but Gary Sandberg told me it was in the municipal code. Sure enough, here’s the chapter and verse (emphasis mine):

Sec. 28-489. Registration, etc., required; exemptions.
(a) No person shall ride or propel a bicycle upon any street or public way in the city, or upon any part thereof, unless such bicycle has been registered and provided with the proper license tags as provided for in this article.
(b) Sidewalk bikes, scooter bikes, junior bikes or any other type of bicycle with a tire of 20 inches or less shall be exempt from license or registration.
(Code 1957, § 19-147)

Sec. 28-490. Application for license; fee.
Application for a license to own and operate a bicycle shall be made to the superintendent of police, upon a form to be provided by the superintendent of police. The application shall be accompanied by a fee of $0.50 to be paid in advance at the time of issuance of the license.
(Code 1957, § 19-148)

Sec. 28-491. License tag.
(a) Upon submission of the application referred to in section 28-490 in proper form, the superintendent of police shall provide duplicate tags, one to be permanently attached to the frame of the bicycle, the duplicate to be attached in such a manner as to permit the removal of the same by the owner while the bicycle is not in operation. The removal of any permanent tag, except by proper authority, shall be a violation of this article. It shall be a violation of this article for any person to operate any bicycle upon any street of the city, unless such bicycle is equipped with and displays thereon the proper license tags.
(b) Duplicate license tags for bicycles will be issued by the superintendent of police to the owner of a bicycle, when such tags are lost or stolen, only upon written application, which shall state what disposition was made of the original tag, whether the same was lost or stolen.
(Code 1957, § 19-149)

There’s actually more, but I don’t want to bore you further. There’s a provision for transferring ownership (fee: 10¢) and for violating the ordinance (fee: $10).

On that last point, I think we’ve found a great way to raise some money for the city: this spring and summer, station an officer at the beginning of the Rock Island Trail and start handing out citations to bicyclists with unregistered bicycles. Trail proponents say there are 82,000 users of the Rock Island Trail. If just a quarter of those (20,500) are bicyclists (and I bet they’re all unregistered), that would bring in over $200,000!

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