Category Archives: Museum Block

City Council, City of Peoria, Museum Block, Peoria Journal Star

Journal Star says it’s too late to turn back now… I believe they’ve fallen in love

19 Comments

As I read Sunday’s Journal Star editorial, “Our View: Too late to turn back now on museum project,” I couldn’t help but think of that old Cornelius Bros and Sister Rose song — perhaps that was the intention of the headline writer:

The Journal Star has fallen in love with the museum project. And you know what they say about love: it’s blind. Those in love overlook all the flaws (even major ones) in the object of their desire. Such is the case with the Journal Star overlooking the major problems with the museum project, apologizing for them, justifying them, or just plain refusing to believe them in some cases. One can almost see them gazing at a framed picture of the museum rendering with a dreamy, far-away look in their eyes, wrapping their Caterpillar class ring with angora.

The starry-eyed Journal Star editors are wrong. In fact, it’s not too late to stop the madness. Not a spade of dirt has been turned yet. The museum plans only exist on paper. Yes, a lot of money has been expended, but that’s no justification for spending millions more on a flawed, doomed-to-fail plan that has gone from bad to worse since the referendum. As C. S. Lewis famously said, “We all want progress, but if you’re on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive.”

The City Council should send the museum folks back to the drawing board Tuesday night by voting against the design concepts and the redevelopment agreement.

City Council, City of Peoria, Museum Block

Council agenda includes museum redevelopment agreement

31 Comments

The City Council agenda for August 24 includes three items regarding the proposed museum. They include approval of the design concepts, the redevelopment agreement (which includes conveying the land to the County for $1), and vacating certain portions of Liberty and Main streets between Water and Washington streets.

Dave Ransburg, chairman of the Peoria Riverfront Museum, has been meeting privately with City Council members two or three at a time (to avoid an Open Meetings Act violation) to talk about the museum’s plans and to line up at least six votes in favor of the redevelopment agreement and land conveyance.

City of Peoria, Museum Block, Peoria County

Yes, Mr. Riggenbach, we were promised an IMAX

52 Comments

Former County Board member and current Third District City Councilman Tim Riggenbach is quoted in the Sunday Journal Star as saying “We were very specifically told it may or may not be an IMAX…. We were not promised an IMAX.”

On Saturday, March 7, 2009, Friends of Build the Block chairman Brad McMillan stated in the Peoria Journal Star: “If The Block is built, we will be able to experience: (1) A state-of-the-art 3-D IMAX theatre that will allow children to dive into a mystical, undersea world during the day and adults to watch current films in the evening….”

On the “Build the Block” website under “Frequently Asked Questions,” it states, “What will the Peoria Riverfront Museum include? The 81,000-square-foot Peoria Riverfront Museum will feature wide-ranging opportunities for learning, culture and fun, including a digital 3-D IMAX Theatre….”

The January 2009 “Build the Block” Newsletter stated this: “The Block’s IMAX Theatre will be a five-stories-tall, 3-D-equipped classroom kids will love!” And this: “‘At The Block, we’ll have even more to share, including expanded exhibits just for kids, a state-of-the art planetarium and a 3-D, digital IMAX Theatre,’ says Lakeview Museum President and CEO Jim Richerson.”

The March 3, 2009, Attendance Analysis put out by the museum group stated: “When analyzing the museum attendance projections listed above, it becomes apparent that the IMAX Theatre is assumed to be the primary generator of attendance at the new museum.” And this: “…museum planners are projecting 146,000 for annual attendance at the Peoria Riverfront Museum IMAX….”

Pay close attention to this one. The March 9, 2009, Sustainability paper published by the museum group stated:

On average, Lakeview Museum receives approximately $600,000 per year through earned income, including general memberships, gallery admissions, planetarium admissions, museum store, book court and book sales, museum schools and programs, and rental of museum space. This represents approximately 40 percent of total annual income. The remaining 60 percent of annual income, or approximately $900,000 per year, is categorized as support income. The support income is generated from the museum endowment, annual fund drives, exhibit sponsors, other miscellaneous fundraising events, and grants received from various foundations and governmental agencies.

In the proposed Peoria Riverfront Museum Pro Forma, the relationship between earned income and support income is shifted, with earned income now representing 65 percent of the total and support income representing only 35 percent of the total. This change is due to the presence of the IMAX Theatre in the new museum, projected to generate almost $1 million per year in operating income. The concessions area adjacent to the IMAX Theatre also would be a new source of income at the Peoria Riverfront Museum and is projected to generate close to $300,000 annually.

Finally, there’s this lengthy report from January 8, 2009, titled, “Report to the County Board – Peoria Riverfront Museum Policy Considerations.” It comes with a cover memo addressed to none other than “Timothy Riggenbach, Chairman, Finance Legislative Study Committee.” In the 241-page document, which I’m sure Riggenbach read, are the results of a phone survey conducted by the County, including the questions asked. Here’s one:

The Peoria Riverfront Museum will enhance educational opportunities for all of Central Illinois. The museum will house collections, a state-of-the-art planetarium, and an IMAX theater [emphasis added]. The adjacent Caterpillar Visitor’s Center will welcome visitors from around the world. The project will create 250 union construction jobs, and upon completion will generate nearly $14 million annually to our local economy. The museum project is 86% funded. To complete the project, would you support an increase in the sales tax of one quarter of one percent in Peoria County? This is 25 cents on every $100 of retail purchases.

The report also includes the “Proposed PRM Operating Budget (Stable Year)” which is replete with references to IMAX. Oh, and it also includes the museum’s pro forma which states in no uncertain terms, “IMAX Revenue.”

So, with all due respect, Mr. Riggenbach, yes, we were promised an IMAX, your historic revisionism notwithstanding. It was promised to us by museum officials in official public documents. Furthermore, IMAX was essential to the attendance and revenue projections that were used to sell the museum to the County and the community.

What’s most surprising is that Riggenbach’s statement went unchallenged in the Journal Star’s article. Promises of an IMAX are so well-documented, I can’t believe anyone seriously believes there’s a question about it. Perhaps Mr. Riggenbach and the Journal Star want us to believe the entire County of Peoria just imagined we were promised an IMAX — that it was some sort of mass psychosis. Maybe we were all hypnotized by aliens.

City Council, City of Peoria, Museum Block, Peoria County

County told State it already owns land for museum

23 Comments

In April, Peoria County applied for a $5 million grant through the Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity (DCEO). A copy of the grant application was acquired from the County:

DCEO Grant Survey – Peoria Riverfront Museum

The County listed itself as the “grantee” on page 2, and 203 SW Water St. (which is the City-owned Sears block) as the “project location” on page 4. Then, in answer to question 2d — “If the property is being improved, is the property owned by the grantee?” — the County checked the “Yes” box.

Question 10c asked, “If grant funds are to be utilized to make capital improvements to real property (structures/land) that your organization does not own [emphasis in original], provide a copy of the lease or other agreement (i.e., easements, rights-of-way. etc.) between your organization and the property owner that will allow your organization to continue to use the improved premises for an appropriate length of time, consistent with applicable state law and rules.” The County’s answer: “N/A.”

Question 10d asked, “Does your organization have an executed contract for the purchase/acquisition of the land/building in question?” The County’s answer: “N/A.”

Question 10g asked, “Provide the name, address, phone number and email address (if applicable) of the entity from which the land/building(s) is/are being purchased.” The County’s answer: “N/A.”

As you can see, the County consistently represented itself to the State as the owner of the land. When asked why, Peoria County Administrator Patrick Urich said:

By April when the grant survey was submitted, we had already negotiated the title transfer issue with the City of Peoria. As I said before, the redevelopment agreement has included language regarding title transfer since at least February, and by April, this issue had been to the County’s understanding, resolved. There were several other issues (paying permit fees, the commercial space approvals, the assurance that the funds would be there to build the museum, and what happens to the property if PRM no longer operates the museum) but the negotiating teams had moved on from the title issue.

That still doesn’t explain why this information wasn’t included on the grant application. The proper way to complete the application would have been to answer “No” to question 2d, and explain these negotiations in question 10d, at minimum. The questions couldn’t be any more specific; they clearly expect even anticipated ownership to be disclosed. The County misrepresented its ownership status no matter how one looks at it. No response was received from Urich to follow-up questions on this issue.

Other Questions

Urich’s answer raises another question: is it true that the title transfer issue with the City of Peoria had been resolved by April of this year? That was surprising, considering it has appeared as such a contentious issue here in August. I asked City attorney Randy Ray for some clarification. He replied:

There is no contract in place that requires the City to convey title to the Museum Site to the County.
It is true that there were negotiations, and draft agreements which contemplated such a conveyance. That was a major topic of a series of meetings with 3 or fewer council people that took place the first week of March, 2010. Obviously, those meetings did not convey the property, nor did anything else the City has done up to this point. If Council does not approve a Redevelopment Agreement, no conveyance will occur.

Ray acknowledges that negotiations did in fact take place, and we know from Urich’s statement that the County believed the issue of land conveyance was “resolved.” These negotiations were not just with City staff, mind you. There were “a series of meetings with 3 or fewer council people” at a time. Unfortunately, we’ll never know the real story because the City took great pains to completely skirt the Open Meetings Act (OMA).

The funny thing is that negotiation of the sale or lease of property can take place in closed session according to OMA, so why not just discuss it in executive session instead of these little meetings? Did they not want the negotiations on the record? (Minutes are taken during executive sessions.) Were they not giving the same information to each of the council members? Somewhere there seems to be a breakdown in communication because the City now appears reluctant to convey the land, but the County thought the issue was “resolved” way back in April.

Of course, there’s no legitimate reason not to conduct these negotiations in public, in open session. The reason property transactions are allowed to be conducted in secret is to protect taxpayers from market reaction. In this case, since the land is owned by one government body and being conveyed to another government body, there are no market forces and those concerns are moot.

During the 2005 mayoral campaign, then-candidate Ardis promised, “My leadership, a new generation of leadership, will be open, not closed; inclusive, not reserved for the select few; and bottom-up, not top-down.” Yet from the hotel deal to the museum, right up to the recent secret meeting with Ransburg — against whom Ardis ran in 2005 and, ironically, whom Ardis criticized for doing the public’s business in secret — he has not shown us this so-called “new generation of leadership.”

Museum Block, Peoria County

County approves museum agreements

48 Comments

A number of agreements regarding the proposed Peoria Riverfront Museum were passed by the Peoria County Board on Thursday. They passed nearly unanimously, with only board members Merle Widmer and Brad Harding voting nay.

The six agenda items pertaining to the museum included an ordinance and five resolutions:

  1. An ordinance for the issuance of $41,600,000 debt to cover construction expenses for the museum
  2. A resolutions approving the museum “facilities design concept”
  3. A resolution approving a $5,040,000 bid from Williams Brothers Construction to building the museum parking deck
  4. A resolution approving engineering agreements with PSA-Dewberry and Whitney & Associates for “construction oversight and material testing” for the project
  5. A resolution approving the museum redevelopment agreement
  6. A resolution approving a Capital Facility Development, Lease and Operating Agreement

Dave Ransburg and Ryan Beasley (the chair and vice chair of the Peoria Riverfront Museum, respectively) gave presentations on behalf of the Peoria Riverfront Museum. Ransburg stated that this will be the “greatest building built in Peoria since the Civic Center.” He also gave a brief history of how we got to this point, stressing that thousands of hours and millions of dollars have already been spent on this project.

Beasley gave a lengthy presentation, including an update on the IMAX situation. He stated that “it has always been our plan” to deliver a “giant screen” theater with a 70′ x 52′ screen capable of showing 2D and 3D digital, ultra-high definition movies. While that may well have always been their plan, they’ve told the public in no uncertain terms they would be building an IMAX theater, specifically. It’s well documented, even on their own “Build the Block” website.

Beasley went on to say that the museum is “a mission-driven organization,” and that the theater has to fit with their mission, which is “to inspire lifelong learning for ALL, connecting art, history, science and achievement through collections, exhibitions and programs.” In order to do that, the museum has three “negotiating terms”: control over programming, technology, and exclusivity. The biggest obstacle is control over programming. The museum wants to show “classic” (i.e., educational) films during the day and second-run movies on evenings and weekends. That has been IMAX’s traditional model. However, IMAX is apparently interested in seeing their theaters run more first-run movies — what they call “day and date DMR” movies — that would require multiple showings for the first two or three weeks the movie is out. “DMR” is IMAX’s proprietary large-screen film process. The museum’s concern is that agreeing to “day and date DMR” would be more profitable, but violate their mission. They’re also concerned about being required to show some films that are R-rated or otherwise not family-friendly.

The “next steps” for the museum are:

  1. To “continue preferred IMAX path” — that is, they’re going to continue negotiating with IMAX. Board member Merle Widmer asked about an e-mail one of his constituents received that indicated IMAX “does not have a client interested in opening an IMAX theatre in Peoria.” Beasley stated that was not surprising, given that IMAX received an inquiry from the general public about their “internal operations” — he would expect them to either give no answer, or to answer in the negative. He assured Widmer that he could provide proof of on-going negotiations with IMAX on IMAX letterhead. Media inquiries to IMAX by the Peoria Chronicle have gone unanswered.
  2. To “continue to evaluate alternative options,” none of which have “the brand power of IMAX,” he admitted.
  3. To “communicate progress and direction” to everyone, including the County Board and the general public.

There was another speaker (didn’t catch his name, sorry) who provided an overview of the building and grounds. There will be three “free-standing” signs (they looked like monument signs in the illustration) that would be lighted. Also, on the large blank walls of the museum, there will be humongous banners that can be used for decoration and/or to advertise the movie(s) playing at the “giant screen” theater. The only entrances are the main entrance off of Washington street and the elevator entrance from the parking garage. Thus, most of the area around the museum will be dead space (i.e., there will be no meaningful pedestrian activity outside).

County Administrator Patrick Urich explained that the cost of the project (including the parking deck) has risen from $83.4 million in April 2009, to $87.1 million in February 2010, to $92,198,731 this month. He then went on to talk about various “protections” that are built in to the agreements. For instance, there is $4.3 million in construction contingencies that will not be spent if the bids come in on budget and there are no change orders. There are also fundraising requirements built into the development and lease agreement with the museum: they have to raise $2.5 million by October 2011 and another $2.5 million by October 2012. If they don’t reach this target, then they have to reduce their capital or operating budgets “consistent with the shortfall from the goal.”

This is a marked departure from assurances the County gave to voters before the April 2009 referendum that no construction would start until the money was raised. In the July 9, 2009 Regular County Board Meeting minutes, it states explicitly, “Mr. Urich replied that currently the commitment for private funding is $8,000,000.00. If the funding is not there on the private side, the project will not go forward.” And later in the same meeting, “Mr. Urich has made it clear that ground will not be broken, even for the parking deck, until there is $8,000,000.00 in private funds to cover the gap.” Now, this has been replaced with toothless requirements that money be raised during construction.

Against all evidence to the contrary, everyone seems to be very confident in the museum’s ability to raise additional funds. When asked in a follow-up question about the stall in fundraising, Beasley said that “it’s not as simple as passing the referendum and then the money flows in,” although they did receive some additional funding (he declined to specify how much). Of course, this is exactly what the museum group assured us would happen before the referendum. Then, the only thing holding up donations was the referendum. But now people “want to see shovels in the ground” before they give more money, so we need to start building to get more funds, Beasley said. The target continues to move.

Several board members stated that the agreements weren’t “perfect,” but that they were “very good.” Several board members also stated that they had reservations and concerns about the plans, but not enough to vote against going forward. And there were a lot of self-congratulatory speeches all around as the final votes were taken.

Museum Block

The big museum bait and switch

47 Comments

How many people voted for the $40 million museum tax referendum in 2009 because they were promised an IMAX theater downtown? No small number, to be sure. Opponents of the museum plan questioned whether we were really going to get an IMAX since no contract was signed. We were assured there would be an IMAX. Their attendance and revenue predictions were predicated on it. The contract with IMAX was sitting on the desk at Lakeview just waiting to be signed once the referendum passed! Remember that?

Well, guess what?

Lakeview Museum’s president/CEO Jim Richerson said while an IMAX theater is not off the table, other alternatives are being explored.

“We want to build the best thing going out there,” Richerson said, adding that ETI 3-D digital screens also are a giant screen possibility for the riverfront museum.

“If it’s something better, we plan to go with them,” Richerson said. “We won’t open this for another two years, but again, we want to make sure we deliver the best thing.”

County Board member Andrew Rand, chairman of the county’s museum construction committee, said utilizing the IMAX brand could be costly.

He said museum officials would have to plunk down $1.2 million in an advance payment in order to utilize the IMAX brand, an amount that is twice as much as what other vendors are asking.

“I don’t think we’re specifically hung up on IMAX, which is a specific brand, for any reason,” Rand said. “The agreement the county has is for a high-definition, giant screen digital cinema. That’s what we expect.”

Huh. Who’da thunk they wouldn’t follow through on their promise of an IMAX? I mean, they’ve followed through on… um… come to think of it, they’ve never followed through on anything they promised, have they?

To all the voters who fell for the propaganda of the museum group in April 2009, I have just one thing to say: Suckers.

For more great updates on the museum fiasco, see County Board Member Merle Widmer’s blog entries: Peoria Riverfront Museum and Peoria Riverfront Museum – Additions.

City of Peoria, Museum Block, Peoria County

County wants to acquire museum block for a buck

39 Comments

According to the recently-published Peoria Riverfront Museum redevelopment agreement, the County wants to obtain the museum site from the City for one dollar.

The site is reportedly valued at $10 million. The City acquired it after Sears moved from downtown to Northwoods Mall in 1998. At that time, the City also acquired the remaining parcels on the block, and in 2005 Caterpillar razed the land to prepare it for construction of the proposed museum and Caterpillar visitors center.

“The City’s conveyance [of the land] is in essence a $10 million contribution to the project,” explained County Administrator Patrick Urich. “In fact, the $145 million price tag figure for the entire project (Cat, PRM and parking deck) includes the City’s contribution and the $2 million Water Street upgrade.”

City representatives didn’t respond to requests for comment, except for at-large City Councilman Gary Sandberg. “Selling price toooo low. Should be $10,000,001.00 and I’ll give them the dollar,” he said via e-mail.

Urich also stated that, “Since at least February, the City has not given any of the parties any indication that they object to conveying the property to the County.” The Council has taken no public action or made any public comments regarding conveyance of the land to my knowledge.

The last museum agreement the City approved called for them to lease the land to the Peoria Riverfront Museum for $1/year for 99 years, not deed them the land permanently. “Initially there were discussions that included a ground lease,” Urich continued, “but since February (publicly at the County Board Committee of the Whole meeting) and prior to that in the negotiating sessions we have discussed the City conveying the property to the County.”

The City is facing a budget deficit of more than $10 million in 2011.

Museum Block, Peoria County

New redevelopment agreement published for museum

3 Comments

Karen McDonald reports that “The first meeting of the Peoria County Riverfront Museum Committee has been scheduled for 2:30 p.m. Friday on the fourth floor of the Peoria County Courthouse.” The agenda packet was posted to the County’s website just before 2:30 Wednesday afternoon — barely meeting the deadline set by the Open Meetings Act.

That gives the public just 48 hours to review the 348-page document which includes:

  • Bid Letting for the Riverfront Museum Parking Deck
  • Engineering Agreements for Construction oversight and materials testing to construct the Riverfront Museum Parking Deck
  • Redevelopment Agreement
  • Lease Operating Agreement
  • Design Concepts

I guess museum committee members have their reading assignments for today, as do local news reporters. Of course, its adoption is a fait accompli, at least for the County. The big question now is whether the City will approve it. I’ll have more on this after I get a chance to review the documents. If you have the time and inclination to read it today (due to, say, insomnia or masochism), please leave your observations in the comments section.

City of Peoria, Museum Block, Peoria County

Museum moves forward despite dismal finances

56 Comments

According to a spreadsheet document distributed at a recent Peoria County Finance/Legislative Study Committee meeting titled “Peoria Riverfront Museum Capital Budget by Project,” updated 7/28/2010, pledges to the proposed Peoria Riverfront Museum total $23,073,484. Of that, only $6,475,076 (28%) have been collected.

In addition, whereas the County has said in the past it would only be contributing $34.5 million to the museum project from the public facilities sales tax revenues, the latest spreadsheet shows a full $40 million being contributed. While that’s the lion’s share of public money, there are also significant amounts coming from other public money pots, including the Illinois capital budget, Illinois Department of Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, Department of Energy, Illinois Department of Natural Resources, Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity, NASA, and the Peoria Civic Center Authority. Despite all of this public help, and presuming they’ll actually collect all the pledges that have been committed over their multiple years of fundraising, they’re still looking at a budget deficit of $6,448,988.

But they’re moving ahead with construction anyway. What happened to all the money that was going to come in after the sales tax referendum passed? Remember that? When questioned as to why they weren’t making their private fundraising goals before the referendum, their response was a very confident assertion that people were waiting in line to give money, but wanted to make sure the public would support the tax referendum first. Once the referendum passed, the funds would come rolling in, we were told then.

Perhaps the most shocking thing on this spreadsheet is the total amount that has already been spent. Are you sitting down? It comes to $13,471,440. $4.5 million has been spent on architectural and engineering fees for the museum building — another $1.8+ million in fees for the parking garage. $2 million has been spent on something called “pre-opening operating support.” Almost $1 million was spent on “public awareness” — which was their campaign to make sure the $40 million tax referendum passed, so I guess that was money well spent from their perspective.

There are two line items for endowments on the spreadsheet. One shows $2.3 million “committed” but not “received” from Lakeview as a funding source. Another line item shows a $5,248,000 “endowment enhancement” which has been neither committed nor received. The endowment is important because the museum needs the interest from the endowment to cover its ongoing operating expenses. If there’s no endowment, the museum will have no cushion when facing an operating deficit — and let’s not kid ourselves, there are going to be operating deficits.

But they’re moving ahead with construction anyway, undeterred.

Oh, and they’re still counting on the City just giving them the Sears block for nothing. That land is worth $10 million according to the Build the Block website. What is the City’s budget deficit for 2011? Hmmm…. $10 million, I do believe. Wouldn’t it make sense to sell the land to the museum/county and use those funds to plug our deficit so we don’t have to lay off any more police officers? Nah, the museum is more important than public safety, right?

The conventional wisdom now is that the money fairies will sprinkle the museum with cash once it’s built. You know, once people really see the thing being built, then they’ll start contributing! They’re just skeptical that we’re not really going to build it. If we show them we really mean business, then there will be a race to see who can give the most money fast enough.

Second verse, same as the first.