Journal Star reporter Gary Panetta recycled his blog post of Sept. 2 (also see his follow-up post Sept. 3) as a print article on Sunday. He thinks the Block the Bonds group is “nitpicking and making much over nothing much at all and potentially mucking up a project that could turn out to be a real turning point for the city’s art scene.” I’ll let my comments on the two blog posts stand as my response to his article. I’ve reprinted them below the jump for archival purposes.
Category Archives: Museum Block
WCBU news misses the mark
WCBU News this morning said that a successful effort to stop the issuance of general obligation bonds for the museum would be “a moot point” because the County Board could just use a different kind of bond to fund the project. Apparently the reporter fails to understand that the type of bond being used is the issue. If we were to stop the issuance of general obligation bonds and the County issued revenue bonds instead, then we will have prevailed. Hardly a “moot point.”
Usually WCBU does a good job reporting the news, but this story sorely missed the mark.
Harding to ask County Board to put bond referendum on ballot (UPDATED)
From a press release:
Peoria County Board member Brad Harding will be offering an amendment at the Thursday, September 9, 2010 monthly Peoria County Board meeting to place the museum bond referendum on the February or April ballot by a direct vote of the Peoria County Board.
The passage of the new bonding instruments offers this is an alternative to gathering 9,849 petition signatures which is the other way offered by the August 2010 affirmative Peoria County Board meeting vote.
I wonder if a majority of the Board will support giving a voice to the citizens of Peoria County.
UPDATE: Assistant State’s Attorney Bill Atkins says Harding cannot offer an amendment tonight. Here is his e-mail to Brad:
The public hearings for the bond issues for Bel-wood and the museum project are not action items for the County Board. These are opportunities for the public to be heard concerning these matters, not opportunities for Board Members to offer their own views of what should be done. Offering amendments to the actions previously taken by the Board on each of these items would be a violation of the Open Meetings Act because no action item has been placed on the agenda and notice has not been given to the public. Since 48 hours public notice must be given for action to be taken it is impossible to properly notice your proposed amendments for tonight’s meeting.
Even if your proposed amendments complied with the Open Meetings Act, I don’t think they are authorized by law. Backdoor referenda are a possibility for each of these bonds and if a sufficient number of citizens want a referendum on either or both of these bonds, then they can petition for such a referendum. The County Board has to be specifically authorized by law to place a binding referendum on the ballot and I am not aware of any law that would authorize such a referendum at this point in the process of authorizing these two bond issues.
William W. P. Atkins
Chief Civil Assistant State’s Attorney
Peoria County Courthouse
324 Main Street
Peoria IL 61602
Museum bonds hearing tonight
The Peoria County Board will meet this evening at 6 p.m. in the County Courthouse, 324 Main Street, County Board Room 403. On tonight’s agenda is a required public hearing for the $41.6 million debt (bonds) to construct the proposed Peoria Riverfront Museum. If you ever wondered whether such public hearings were perfunctory, just remember that they already had the museum groundbreaking two days ago. That’s how highly they regard your opinion.
Nevertheless, this is an opportunity to tell the County Board — on the record — how you feel about these bonds. I would encourage all those who are concerned about this debt to attend the meeting tonight and make your voice heard. If you haven’t signed the petition yet, you can do so at the meeting tonight — members of the Block the Bonds group will be there collecting signatures.
What did they promise the children?
Here’s another Build the Block ad from the days leading up to the referendum. It really tugs at the heartstrings as children are brought in to sell the referendum:
Did you hear that part where it says, “An IMAX theater will put viewers into the action right downtown,” and the excited child says, “That’s big-city stuff”? I hope the PRM people take a good look at that same child at the end when she says, “build it for me.” She’s talking about an IMAX. That’s what she was promised. Are the PRM people going to take it away now?
What did that TV ad say?
I was looking at some Build the Block videos on YouTube and was shocked — shocked! — to find this old TV ad from early 2009:
What you’ve just watched is a figment of your imagination. It doesn’t really exist because Tim Riggenbach says they never promised us an IMAX.
This online promotion from “Friends of Build the Block” doesn’t exist either:
What’s that sign say?
I was downtown today and took a picture of a sign on the exciting and inspiring ExploraFence around the old Sears block. I was shocked — shocked! — to find this sign:
Can’t read it? I’ll get a little closer:
Did you see that last sentence? “IMAX-like cutting-edge technology is coming right here.”
Okay, you caught me. That’s not really what it says. It says, “3-D IGST cutting-edge technology is coming right here.”
No? Still not right? Well, Tim Riggenbach said they never promised us an IMAX, so I’m sure it doesn’t say, “3-D IMAX cutting-edge technology is coming right here.”
Urich memo raises questions about museum bonds
If you pick up a Journal Star this morning, you’ll see a “First in Print” article about the museum bonds debate:
Delays in issuing bonds, coupled with changes in the public financing of the Peoria Riverfront Museum, could result in $1.6 million to $3.4 million in additional taxpayer costs, according to a memo issued by Peoria County Administrator Patrick Urich on Thursday…. According to Urich’s memo, federally backed Build American Bonds will rebate 35 percent of taxes paid on the bonds issued before New Year’s Day. Urich projects any stall on issuing those bonds until next year could cost $2 million to $2.5 million.
The rebate could be extended at a lesser amount, which would potentially reduce taxpayers’ savings.
“It will cost the taxpayers money if we have to delay,” Urich said Friday.
The type of bonds has been the subject of debate since last week. General obligation bonds, according to Urich, save taxpayers money over a longer period of time because their interest rate is lower. With revenue bonds, the interest rate — and the risk to the bond holder — increases.
Question: Why didn’t Urich tell the voters about all the glories of G. O. bonds before the April 2009 referendum? Just to refresh your memory, here’s what the County said during the weeks leading up to the referendum in town hall meeting after town hall meeting:
If the referendum passes, the County Board has committed to issuing up to $40 million in Revenue Bonds for the museum…. Only money collected from the sales tax increase can be used to pay the Bonds off each year. If the annual payment cannot be met with the sales tax collection, the bond holders bear the burden, not Peoria County or the tax payers…. Why would anyone take the risk to invest in Bonds that may not be paid off annually? As with all investments, the higher the risk, the greater the return. A diverse risk portfolio is a prudent investment strategy, and Revenue Bonds represent a component of that strategy.
Note that the County didn’t say “general obligation bonds” or “Build America Bonds.” They said “Revenue Bonds.” They were very clear and specific. They acknowledged then that Revenue Bonds carry a greater return (that means a higher interest rate) for the bond-holder, but that the trade-off is that the bond-holder carries greater risk. The made it a selling point to the community that “the bond holders bear the burden, not … the taxpayers” if sales tax receipts were insufficient to cover the bond payments.
Now I want to know what has changed since the town hall meetings? Don’t tell me that Build America Bonds are new since then, because they’re not. Build America Bonds were established as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act which President Obama signed into law on February 17, 2009. That was before the referendum, and before the town hall meetings which took place in March and April of that year.
If Revenue Bonds are such a bad, expensive funding mechanism, why did the County promote it in March and April 2009? Why did they sing the praises of mitigating risks to the taxpayer then, but now claim there are no risks to mitigate?
One last question. How can Build America Bonds be used on this project in the first place? The rules for these bonds specifically exclude “private activity bonds,” which are defined as bonds where “more than 10 percent of the proceeds of the issue are to be used for any private business use,” including non-profit businesses. The preamble to the County’s bond ordinance makes it clear that the bonds will “finance the acquisition, construction, and installation of facilities and improvements constituting the art, science, and education components of a new Peoria Riverfront Museum, and related facilities, improvements and costs.” The Peoria Riverfront Museum is a private, not-for-profit organization incorporated June 7, 2010, in the State of Illinois. It’s unclear to me how this project qualifies for Build America Bonds.
Last chance to vote on museum changes
A petition drive was launched today by Citizens for Responsible Spending, County Board members Brad Harding and Merle Widmer, and At-Large City Councilman Gary Sandberg. It’s an effort to allow Peoria County residents the opportunity to vote on whether or not to issue $41 million in general obligation bonds to construct the proposed Peoria Riverfront Museum.
Why? Because things have changed since April 2009 when the revenue to pay for the bonds was approved by the voters. Back then, we were promised they would issue revenue bonds, so as to limit the exposure of Peoria County taxpayers and protect our general sales tax receipts. Now they’re trying to issue general obligation bonds. Back then, they made it very clear there was going to be an IMAX Theater — the contract was just sitting on their desk waiting to be signed as soon as the referendum passed! Now they say IMAX isn’t compatible with their mission. Back then, the County assured us that they would insist that all the private financing be raised and in hand before construction would begin. Now they’re planning to start construction before the private money is raised, before vital grant money is awarded, before they own the land, before the bonds are issued, before the bond hearing is held, and even before Caterpillar has voted on the redevelopment agreement.
In short, the County has betrayed the trust of the Peoria County taxpayers. They’ve reneged on their promises. They’ve broken their word. Peoria County residents deserve better.
The last available option to residents is to gather signatures to put the museum funding on the ballot so we can vote on their real plan, not the bill of goods we were sold in the Spring of 2009.
For more information, or to get involved, please go to BlocktheBonds.com.
City staff omits key fact about HOPC’s ‘review’ of museum design
Before the City Council can give away the museum block for $1, they first have to approve the “design concepts” for the museum. On the council communication, under “neighborhood concerns,” it states, “Heart of Peoria Commission reviewed the drawings prior to Council approval on April 4, 2006.” This is misleading. First of all, the design plans have changed dramatically since 2006. The council communication does acknowledge that there have been “some revisions,” but that’s rather understated, considering the size of the building decreased by 26%, retail development has been pushed off to a future phase, etc. Secondly, the Heart of Peoria Commission recommended denial of the changes that reduced the building size in 2007.
Why is City staff not providing council members with all the facts? What other facts have they omitted?