Category Archives: Peoria County

Peoria County home to 20 gangs

That’s the happy news of the day, delivered in a news conference attended by Mayor Jim Ardis, Peoria Police Chief Steve Settingsgaard, Peoria County Sheriff Mike McCoy, and U.S. Representatives Aaron Schock and Mark Kirk.

Meanwhile, Kirk said, the city of Peoria is able to dedicate just 20 officers to anti-gang units. “We need to make sure a local city or town is not overwhelmed by the resources of a gang,” Kirk said.

I’d just like to take this opportunity to remind everyone that the City is still contemplating laying off police officers while concurrently planning to fork over $39.5 million to a private developer for a new downtown hotel. You see, Peoria’s Mayor and City Council don’t mind raising taxes for risky private ventures, but balk at tax increases for public safety.

Kirk pointed out that the average age for a gang member involved in a shooting is the equivalent of an eighth-grade student; that the combined size of U.S. gangs would create the fifth-largest army in the world, with at least 1 million members; and that state sentencing in court is not significant enough to use for leverage.

I wonder if any of these teenage gang members attend Peoria Public Schools, and if combining a couple of urban high schools will lead to any violence among said gang members. It’s a good thing we’ll have extra officers on hand when this happ– oh, wait…..

Alas, poor Urich

I’ve been waiting for an excuse to use that headline. Today, I have one.

Journal Star county beat and occasional society reporter Karen McDonald writes in Monday’s “Word on the Street” column that County Administrator Patrick Urich is under scrutiny by some County Board members, “amid growing concerns of lagging communication and issues related to the museum, Bel-Wood Nursing Home and the deficit budget.”

“I think we need better communication. We need to tackle these problems. We need to build better policy,” said board member Mike Phelan…. “It seems like the board isn’t fully informed at all times about what’s going on,” board member Pat Hidden said. “It was my understanding that the County Board made the rules and we were his boss. Maybe I was wrong. It’s like the County Board is just puppets now.”

Board members now want to do a formal performance evaluation of Mr. Urich. My guess is that he’ll come through it with flying colors. In fact, board members might just discover a new-found appreciation for the job he does. It will also give disgruntled board members a chance to explain the reason for their displeasure with Urich’s performance, and give him the opportunity to mend those relationships.

I don’t always agree on policy with Patrick, who also happens to be my neighbor, but I’ve always found him to be candid, professional, affable, and accessible. We’ve sparred quite a bit over issues involving the proposed downtown museum (which is still underfunded, by the way), but our disagreements have never gotten personal. My guess this is just a misunderstanding among some board members and it will all get worked out once they get a chance to sit down and discuss it with Patrick.

County takes charge of museum project

PRM LogoI received a copy of the following letter in the mail from an anonymous source. The letter is on State’s Attorney letterhead and is signed by Kevin Lyons. It’s not addressed to anyone in particular — in fact, it looks more like a memo than a letter:

RE: Persons and organizations vested in the Peoria Riverfront Museum project

On Thursday, August 13, 2009, the Peoria County Board certified a necessary resolution that will inform the Illinois Department of Revenue that, commencing January 1, 2010, a special sales tax shall be collected throughout the County of Peoria (County) to carry out the objectives of the March, 2009, referendum. The County is pleased to partner with your efforts, and with the fine men and women of Caterpillar, to organize and shape a superior project that, when complemented by The Caterpillar Experience, will serve well the many interests of this enterprise and all of Central Illinois.

To that end, the County of Peoria will provide the appropriate guidance for creating the organization(s) necessary to develop and to carry out the objectives of the project. As this is no time to learn as we go, I have engaged well experienced counsel at the law firm of McDermott Will & Emery to help provide for this important detail and direction. I have, in part, carefully selected this reputable firm because of their long history of experience with issues relative to museums, including those public and private and blended, and their appreciation for the broad collaboration of interests that birthed and brought this project to its place today.

Because it will be largely funded by public money, through sale of non-general obligation revenue bonds, it is important that the project commence and operate in compliance with public policy and statutes. A gathering of all interested parties will be planned for September so that the County may provide detailed framework that can be followed in order to formally organize, commence, develop, construct, and carry through the project.

This will involve, but certainly not be limited to, the following items:

  1. The organization and eventual tax exempt qualification of a museum authority. The museum authority would serve as lead coordinator for the project’s space, programming, and development.
  2. A description of roles and responsibilities of a museum authority and the steps required to form a board of directors and all other necessary project components.
  3. An explanation of how funding will be delivered and how the County and the museum authority will develop and refine the project, and how entities (licensees) will occupy and operate within the project.
  4. As with any County capital development project, construction of the project would be bid, let and overseen/administered by the County.
  5. The County would engage the museum authority to operate the project pursuant to the terms of an operating agreement and, upon completion of construction of the project, and pursuant to the operating agreement, the county would deliver the project to the museum authority for operation.
  6. The museum authority would annually account to the County regarding financial performance and community benefit.
  7. A clear and partnered coordination with Caterpillar, Inc., to insure that the project and The Caterpillar Experience, and the many shared goals and responsibilities attendant thereto, are smoothly addressed and accomplished.
  8. Although licensees and entities may be otherwise self-identified, it is understood that the project will be named exclusively Peoria Riverfront Museum.
  9. Your overwhelming efforts, along with ballot box support and the work of others, can permit you and your communities to now step closer to the realization of a magnificent facility along the Peoria riverfront. A September gathering will further assist everyone in understanding, in greater detail, how this significant project can now launch and grow.

    Thank you for your meaningful contributions on behalf of the citizens of Peoria County and all of the greater Peoria area.

    Very truly yours,
    KEVIN W. LYONS
    State’s Attorney

There are a few notable things here:

  • Transfer of Power: First of all, the letter states that in order for “the project [to] commence and operate in compliance with public policy and statutes,” a tax-exempt “museum authority” would need to be organized. This is interesting because there’s already a tax-exempt umbrella organization called the Museum Collaboration Group (MCG). The MCG has, to this point, been calling the shots on everything regarding the proposed museum. But now, it appears that will be coming to an end.

    The new “museum authority,” under the guidance of a newly-established board of directors, will “serve as lead coordinator for the project’s space, programming, and development.” It will be a separate entity from the County, and will also be in charge of museum operations.

    This can be characterized as nothing less than a transfer of power. I suppose it could just be a renaming/reorganization of the MCG, but why that would be necessary (other than providing some additional billing for lawyers) is mysterious to me. It will be most interesting to see who gets a seat on the new museum authority’s board of directors . . . and who doesn’t get a seat.

  • Bidding/letting overseen by County: Museum representatives have long touted their “unprecedented agreement among Caterpillar, the Museum Collaboration Group and the Greater Peoria Area Contractors and Suppliers Association,” promising that “both the Peoria Riverfront Museum and the Caterpillar Experience would be built with 100 percent local union labor.” However, that may be a promise they can’t keep, given that Peoria County Code 6.5-21(9) requires:

    All bids and contracts for the purposes of public works, as defined and provided for by the Illinois Prevailing Wage Act (Act), 820 ILCS 130/1 et seq., prohibit the prime contractor and all participating subcontractors from discriminating in employment practices. This act requires that the prevailing wage shall apply to these projects. [820 ILCS 130/2 specifies: “‘Public works’ means all fixed works constructed by any public body, other than work done directly by any public utility company, whether or not done under public supervision or direction, or paid for wholly or in part out of public funds.”]

    Clearly, under this statute, a non-local and non-union shop could very well have the winning bid, and the County would have to award it. This isn’t a new revelation. The question came up during the County’s public forums on the referendum, but the local unions continued to support the referendum anyway, and museum supporters continued to promise that local union labor would definitely be used. It will be interesting to see what bids come in, and who wins.

  • Don’t change the name: It looks they want to avoid this fiasco from happening again. Apparently the name of the Peoria Riverfront Museum is now non-negotiable.

David Kennedy methods rolled out in Peoria

The Journal Star reports that the Peoria Police Department, in cooperation with the State’s Attorney’s office, is rolling out a Drug Market Initiative/Intervention strategy here in Peoria. Although he’s not named in the article, this is the program developed by David Kennedy on which I reported back in March, with a follow-up article in April. In March, Chief Settingsgaard said that he had “a team being trained by Kennedy and his staff.”

The paper summarizes the program thus:

The Drug Market Initiative/Intervention strategy targets geographic drug markets and involves prosecuting the most violent offenders. Low-level offenders are offered a second chance through interventions and help from social service agencies, along with the warning that another crime means jail time.

I applaud the police for trying new methods to reduce crime, and I’m especially pleased to see the police working with the State’s Attorney’s office. Too often there is an adversarial relationship between these two agencies. Best of luck to everyone involved in implementing this new strategy.

City and County have golden opportunity to save $80 million+

Both the city and county of Peoria are facing hard times. They’re in a budget shortfall and are looking at increasing revenue and cutting costs (which means services will be cut in some way). Each entity has unwisely committed themselves to large, approximately $40 million capital outlays for non-essential projects: the city for a private Marriott hotel downtown, and the county for a private museum that has received tepid support for multiple years.

Here’s the good news: Both of these projects have missed their contractual deadlines, meaning that the municipalities could easily cancel these agreements and save taxpayers a boatload of money, both in up-front capital costs and on-going operational expenses.

Here’s the bad news: They ain’t gonna do it. Despite a history of just these types of white elephants that have contributed to the current budget mess, you can bet your heavily-taxed bottom dollar that they’re still going to go through with them, even as they cry poverty when it comes to essential city services such as police protection and road maintenance.

It seems no one in the city is able to make the connection between large, non-essential projects, and high taxes. They all hate high taxes, and they all hate service cuts, yet they continue to support large, money-losing, unnecessary projects that swallow their tax money and give them little to nothing in return.

Residents are content to believe the tortured logic of their local politicians. Here are a few of my favorites:

  • “Canceling this capital project won’t do any good because the money to pay the debt can’t be reallocated to operational expenses; it can only be spent on this project.” — That’s true, but irrelevant. From the taxpayer’s perspective, canceling the project will save us money because we won’t have to support it with our tax money. It doesn’t matter that it can’t be reallocated; the municipalities are still going to have to plug their budgets with increased revenue from either taxes or fees. By canceling the agreements, that saves us from an even higher tax increase.
  • “This project will pay for itself.” — Let’s look at the hotel project. The developer can’t find financing for the rest of the project (apparently banks are a little more cautious with their money than the City of Peoria — which is saying something), and the Embassy Suites expansion in East Peoria was recently scrapped because, “The hospitality business as a whole in the country is experiencing extremely hard times.” Yeah, sounds like that will pay for itself, doesn’t it? Obviously the museum will never pay for itself; even ardent supporters don’t claim that.
  • “But the people voted for it.” This applies only to the museum, since the public didn’t know anything about the hotel until two days before the council voted on it, and basically had no voice in the matter. It’s not as if there isn’t precedent for the city council to ignore a vote by the people. They cut funding to the library expansion even after it was approved by a large majority of voters. This project was only narrowly approved, and mostly on the backs of Dunlap and North Peoria voters. It lost handily outside the city. I’ll bet if we had an referendum on increasing garbage fees, that would lose. Should the municipalities thus take that off the table? The fact is that any cuts in service or increases in revenue are going to be unpopular. Leadership requires that unpopular, but fiscally-responsible decisions be made in tough times.

The city and county need to cut the fat. They’re in debt. They can’t afford to provide basic services to their residents. If these developments are really the sure-fire money-makers they claim to be, let private interests finance them, not the taxpayers who are stretched already in this poor economy. Show some leadership.

Unhappy taxpayers should follow appeals process

The Peoria Times-Observer is reporting that a bunch of North Peoria residents are “upset with the practices of the Peoria County Board of Review” and may file a lawsuit. Among those upset are realtors Michael Maloof and Brian Monge and county board member Bob Baietto.

One member of the group, who requested to be anonymous, said it appears the only way to affect change is a lawsuit.

“What it comes down to is politics,” he said. “I was incredibly naive. I thought we could win this by going through channels and giving them proof. I was wrong. We need to make noise. We need to find more people who are mad.”

The remaining members of the group agreed. A consensus was reached that efforts now need to concentrate on finding an attorney who can advise the group on what grounds they can use to sue.

Of course, the politics runs both ways. Some members of the county board attempted to resolve the situation by removing two Board of Review members: Gary Shadid and Nancy Horton. Having failed in that attempt, they’re now looking at a possible lawsuit.

But here’s my question: Have they indeed gone through all the channels, as was implied? Or have they only gone as far as the local Board of Review? According to a state publication called “The Illinois Property Tax System,” there are a couple of ways to appeal the decision of the local Board of Review:

  • The decision may be appealed (in writing) to the Property Tax Appeal Board, a five-member board appointed by the governor. The Property Tax Appeal Board will determine the correct assessment based on equity and the weight of the evidence. Taxes must be paid pending the outcome of the appeal.
  • The taxes can be paid under protest and the county board of review’s decision can be appealed directly to the circuit court by filing a tax objection complaint. Taxes and levies are presumed to be correct and legal, but this presumption can be rebutted. The taxpayer must provide clear and convincing evidence.

If the Board of Review’s actions are so unfair, then it should be a cinch to get them overturned on appeal. A large number of successful appeals could then be used as evidence of the local Board of Review’s alleged poor decisions and presented to the full County Board for appropriate action. On the other hand, if the decisions are upheld on appeal, then the local Board of Review will be exonerated.

Bottom line, the complainants should follow the appeals process, not resort to political and/or legal strong-arm tactics to force the Board of Review to render decisions in their favor.

Deficit? Oh, pshaw. Let’s rebuild BelWood!

Peoria County, which has in the past been pretty fiscally conservative, is on a spending spree these days. You’d think they were the City of Peoria. After a successful advocacy campaign for a sales tax to help build a museum downtown, now they’ve decided to not even ask the voters if they want to rebuild BelWood Nursing Home; they’re just going to do it.

County Board Member Merle Widmer has a couple of posts on his blog that explain what happened and why it’s a bad idea:

BelWood: Safety Net or Local Nursing Home Competitor?
BelWood: Safety Net or Local Nursing Home Competitor? Part 2

Oh, and did I mention the County is looking at a $4 million deficit by year’s end, and they are looking for non-essential services to cut?

Of course, supporters of the project point out that the taxes received for BelWood can only be used for BelWood, so getting out of the nursing home business won’t give the County any more money to plug the deficit. No, all it will do is give the citizens of the County more money in their pockets that they’re not paying in taxes, and heaven knows we can’t have that. Apparently the goal is to cut non-essential services only when the overall size of government can be maintained. In other words, if getting out of the nursing home business benefits the county government, they’ll do it. If only benefits the county’s citizens, they won’t. That’s the way government operates.

Gee, if only we knew of some unnecessary capital project we could cut…

This story popped up on the PJStar.com website tonight:

Peoria County faces $4 million deficit by year’s end

A sharp decline in revenue streams has Peoria County officials looking down the barrel of a $4 million deficit by year’s end that likely will affect budgets for years to come….

The picture has officials balancing needs with wants: What essential services are required by law, and what can be postponed?

“We’re kidding ourselves if we say we’re going to cut (our budget) and not cut staff,” board member Bob Baietto said. “We’re not going to get out of this without cutting.”

Hmmm… what can we cut? What large, completely unnecessary public expenditure could we eliminate to help plug this deficit? If only there were some new, fungible source of revenue coming on line next year that, while currently slated to go toward a non-essential project, could instead be redirected so that basic county services can continue to be provided. Can you guys think of anything? I’m drawing a blank here…..

What happened to Peoria’s stimulus package? Also, will Ardis be drinking the Kool-Aid this time?

Well, it certainly is heartwarming to hear that $3 million in additional donations have rolled in for the proposed downtown museum, but it got me wondering… remember all the talk about this project putting people to work during the recession? Who was it that said that? Oh, yeah, Michael Bryant in InterBusiness Issues:

The message to “Build the Block” as our own stimulus package should be viewed very positively. We would be taking control of our destiny and using our talents and resources to help each other, not waiting for a helping hand. While Peoria may get some monies from President Obama’s economic stimulus package, it would be a mistake for us to wait and see what monies we may get while we have our own outstanding stimulus package right in front of us, literally “shovel-ready.”

Except that they’re not going to start shoveling until at least next year. But according to a new report by Bradley professors Scott and Lewer (you remember them), “the recession will end sometime during the second half of this year.”

So much for helping us stimulate the economy or helping our residents through tough times. Sounds like the economy is correcting itself just fine without turning a spade of dirt for the proposed museum. Who’da thunk? Why, I bet once the recession is over, there would even be a market for the land that’s been held hostage by the museum for the past 11 years.

It’s not too late to correct past mistakes. The current redevelopment agreement for the old Sears block is set to expire at the end of June and must be renegotiated. Now would be the time for the city to require a larger portion of the block be opened up to private, mixed-use development. That would allow the museum to still locate on the block, but in a different form, and it would allow a larger portion of the land to produce property and sales tax income for the city — something we desperately need.

It would not be unprecedented, you know. After voters overwhelmingly supported the library referendum, the city decided to scale back their plans, issuing only $28 million for expansion/updating instead of the $35 million voters approved. I believe the phrase at that time was that the mayor wasn’t “drinking the Kool-Aid on the 72%” of voters who approved the referendum. In fact, Ardis said, taking into account the low voter turnout, that really meant that only 15% of all registered voters voted in favor, and the council has a responsibility to look at the bigger picture and represent all residents whether they voted or not. Well, guess what percentage of registered voters voted in favor of the museum? 12.29% (15,327 of 124,730). So, it only stands to reason that the city would take the same cost-saving measures with this project that they did with the library project, right? After all, times are even more dire now than when the library referendum passed; now we’re staring in the face of a $10 million deficit. Will the mayor be representing all residents whether they voted or not this time?

Of course, the city won’t actually do what I’m suggesting. They’ll pass up (for the fifth time now on this project alone) an opportunity to save money for taxpayers and increase revenues to the city, and instead look for more regressive ways to plug the budget deficit, like cutting public works and public safety, and raising garbage fees.

The Peoria Area Chamber of Oddities

The Peoria Area Chamber of Commerce has been making some strange moves lately, even for them.

They got behind an effort to bring — of all people — Karl Rove to town, ticking off Democrats on the County board — which is to say, almost the whole board. To add insult to injury, Jim McConoughey, head of the Chamber’s umbrella company Heartland Partnership, sent an e-mail that was perceived as very derogatory toward organized labor. They’ve since backpedaled on both fronts, but it may be too late. The County board might consider “ending the county’s $113,000 annual contract with the Economic Development Council, said Peoria County Board member Allen Mayer, who chairs the Tax/EDC committee,” according to the Journal Star.

I really wonder how the Chamber makes its decisions. I theorized once that they used a magic 8-ball, given their inconsistency on tax increases. They’ve now supported a property tax increase for the library expansion and a sales tax increase to benefit the proposed downtown museum. Yet they have traditionally opposed any tax increases that would go toward basic services, such as poublic safety (police, fire), even when the proposed increases were less than the taxes they’ve supported. That kind of inconsistency earned them no small amount of criticism from former City Councilman Bob Manning, who also called them the “Peoria Area Chamber of Some Commerce” — a reference to the fact that they only seem to really represent certain large employers in the area.

As part of their effort to support the museum, you may recall that they sent letters to Peoria County public school superintendents asking them not to request a sales tax increase for school purposes the same time the museum’s sales tax referendum was going to be on the ballot. They also supported District 150’s “efforts to make tough decisions,” and spoke in favor of District 150 closing schools at a recent School Board meeting. The Chamber’s strange alliance with District 150 has also cost them some members, from what I’ve heard.

All of this makes me wonder… Do they really speak for Peoria business people when they issue these press releases? Do they take a poll of their membership before speaking for them? Do Peoria business people, by and large, support higher taxes for museums and libraries, but oppose them for police and fire protection? Do Peoria business people, by and large, support closing public schools and increasing class sizes? Do Peoria business people, by and large, have antipathy toward organized labor? Are Peoria business people, by and large, Republican?

I can’t help but get the impression that perhaps the Chamber is just a little out of touch with the people they say they represent.