Category Archives: State of Illinois

General News, State of Illinois

Illinois’ budget woes catch the attention of the New York Times

Leave a comment

Illinois is so bad that even the New York Times is taking notice.

For the last few years, California stood more or less unchallenged as a symbol of the fiscal collapse of states during the recession. Now Illinois has shouldered to the fore, as its dysfunctional political class refuses to pay the state’s bills and refuses to take the painful steps — cuts and tax increases — to close a deficit of at least $12 billion, equal to nearly half the state’s budget.

Then there is the spectacularly mismanaged pension system, which is at least 50 percent underfunded and, analysts warn, could push Illinois into insolvency if the economy fails to pick up.

When the state doesn’t pay its bills, it hurts a lot of other government agencies — for instance, school districts. At a recent District 150 school board meeting, Comptroller/Treasurer Pam Schau reported that the state owes District 150 $9,125,000, as of June 23. That’ll put a dent in your operating budget.

Despite this state of affairs, our representatives are continuing to spend money on non-essentials, such as giving tax breaks to millionaire developers.

State Legislation, State of Illinois

Quinn says time limits on campaign signs violate free speech

1 Comment

Following up my last post, I ran across this press release from Governor Quinn’s office explaining his support for HB 3785:

Governor Quinn Signs Legislation Protecting Free Speech in Illinois
Municipalities Cannot Restrict Political Signs on Residential Properties

CHICAGO – June 3, 2010. Governor Pat Quinn today signed a bill into law that prevents municipalities throughout Illinois from restricting the display of political campaign signs on residential property at any time.

“Government has no place restricting free speech,” said Governor Quinn. “This bill will protect the First Amendment rights of residents across Illinois and strengthens participatory democracy for us all.”

House Bill 3785 prohibits Illinois’ municipalities from restricting the display of outdoor political campaign signs on residential property during any period of time. Under current Illinois law, municipalities may pass and enforce local ordinances establishing time periods during which residents or landowners may display political campaign signs on their property. Under the new law, municipalities may still place reasonable restrictions on the size of such signs.

The new law brings Illinois into compliance with several court cases, including City of Ladue v. Gilleo. The 1994 U.S. Supreme Court decision affirmed that outdoor political yard signs are protected First Amendment speech and municipalities may not prohibit their display on residential property.

The legislation, sponsored by Rep. Michael Tryon (R-Crystal Lake) and Sen. Pamela Althoff (R-McHenry), passed the Illinois General Assembly nearly unanimously and was supported by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Illinois. It takes effect on January 1.

In a statement filed with the Illinois House Elections and Campaign Reform Committee, the ACLU of Illinois stated that, “yard signs are a traditional, effective and protected way for home owners to communicate with their neighbors and passersby about political elections and public issues.” The organization also argued that municipalities should not be able to prohibit the display of such signs at any time since many political candidates announce their candidacies long before an election takes place.

If you’re interested, you can read the 1994 Supreme Court ruling by clicking here. It seems odd that this ruling has been around for 16 years, but Illinois is only recently concerned about complying with it.

City of Peoria, State Legislation, State of Illinois

State eliminates time limits for campaign signs

16 Comments

Roof-top signs, “floppy-man” signs, and temporary banners were just some of the signs discussed at Tuesday’s Sign Review Committee meeting. But one thing the committee can do little about is political signs.

A new Illinois law set to take effect January 1, 2011, limits the city’s home rule authority to limit how long political signs can be displayed. HB3785 “[p]rovides that a municipality may place reasonable restrictions on the size of outdoor political campaign signs on residential property,” but also “[p]rovides that no municipality may prohibit the display of outdoor political campaign signs on residential property during any period of time.” The bill was passed unanimously by the Illinois House and Senate and signed by the Governor on June 3. The city currently requires that political campaign signs “be removed within seven days after an election.” That will have to be changed. Apparently, campaign signs can be left up year round starting next year. Won’t that make the city look fantastic?

Most of the discussion on other temporary signs revolved around how better to enforce the current ordinance during a time when the city is cutting staff. Ideas included lowering or eliminating the fee (currently $75) to apply for a temporary sign license (to improve compliance), utilizing city workers who are already driving around the city (such as police or public works employees) to call in violations to the sign ordinance when they see them, and partnering with printers and sign companies to educate those purchasing signs about the city’s rules.

The committee also recommended permitting inflatable signs so they can be approved administratively through the licensing process instead of through the Zoning Commission via the special use process. However, if permitted in this way, the change ordinance would add size limitations and prohibit “floppy man” types of signs (here’s an example).

Business, City of Peoria, State of Illinois

Hotel news recap

58 Comments

There were a couple of hotel-related news items over the weekend:

  • Gov. Quinn approved tax credits for the Wonderful Development. Incidentally, the Journal Star reported the bill number as SB2535, but it’s actually SB2534. The gist of Quinn’s comments was that these tax credits will help provide jobs for union workers, and that will spur economic growth that will actually generate more revenue for the state. “You put more people to work,” Quinn is quoted as saying. “They pay income taxes and other taxes. The key thing is more economic growth.” Koehler chimed in: “People say, ‘Doesn’t that drain money out of the state budget?’ No, it doesn’t. By the time you pay all those jobs and you are creating extra real estate value, the community and state are going to replenish all of that.”

    Are we supposed to believe these guys have suddenly converted to Reaganomics? Wasn’t it Gov. Quinn who proposed raising personal income taxes from 3 to 4.5% last year? And after he changed his proposed new rate to 4%, wasn’t it Dave Koehler who lamented, “From everything I’ve heard around the Capitol, there will not be any appetite for the income tax (increase) before the election. That’s too bad. I don’t agree with it, but it’s the decision I hear.” What? Why raise personal income taxes? Why not just cut corporate income taxes so the state can reap millions and millions of dollars from all the new jobs that would be created as a result? Or does supply-side economics only work on union-worker-built hotel projects at Main and Madison in Peoria?

    The paper also stated:

    The proposal potentially could reduce the project’s costs by $8 million, savings that are split between developer EM Properties and the city of Peoria. The City Council last month voted 7-4 in favor of a $37 million bond to assist in the hotel project. The tax credit could potentially drop that obligation to $33 million.

    Looking at it one way, this is good — the City’s obligation could be 12% or so less than originally planned. On the other hand, it’s actually a net increase of $4 million in taxpayer incentives, if one looks at tax incentives from all sources equally.

  • The Grand Hotel will be converted to a senior living center. Why? The hotel’s sales manager, Stan Marshall, explained: “[T]hose capacity needs [groups who come to Peoria for meetings or sports events] just aren’t frequent enough. There are a lot of holes in the calendar. We need a steady source of revenue.” Given that the Radisson (formerly Jumer’s Castle Lodge) closed last year, and now the City’s third-largest hotel is getting out of the hotel business, one would be tempted to think that there’s overcapacity of hotel rooms in Peoria. But I’m sure downtown hotel proponents will pooh-pooh such an obvious conclusion. After all, the whole rationale behind the Wonderful Development is this belief that Peoria’s hotel problem is undercapacity.
City of Peoria, State of Illinois, Taxes

Come watch the rich get richer

15 Comments

From my inbox, this notification from the City Clerk’s office:

WE HAVE JUST BEEN ADVISED AND YOU ARE HEREBY NOTICED THAT A MAJORITY OF A QUORUM OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF PEORIA, ILLINOIS, HAVE BEEN INVITED AND MAY ATTEND TO WITNESS ILLINOIS [GOVERNOR] PAT QUINN SIGN THE HISTORIC TAX CREDIT FOR THE PROPOSED HOTEL PROJECT ON MAIN STREET ON SATURDAY, JUNE 19, 2010, AT 9:15 A.M., AT THE PEORIA MARQUETTE, CHEMINEE BALLROOM, 501 MAIN STREET, PEORIA, ILLINOIS.

Please note this is not a meeting and no official action will be taken.

Tax credits for a guy making $9 million on this Wonderful Development, after he’s already received a $37 million gift from the city. That’s capitalism?

Thanks, State of Illinois. At least you can afford it. Oh, wait….

Education, State of Illinois

“Raise my taxes!” the people cried

30 Comments

I never thought I’d see the day that I’d read this in the paper: “…the crowd turned to face the Capitol and shouted ‘Raise my taxes.'”

A rally of 15,000 people from throughout the state roared in anger and frustration outside the state Capitol on Wednesday, protesting budget cuts affecting education and social services…. Sen. Dave Koehler, D-Peoria, co-sponsored legislation in the Senate calling for increasing the state income tax from 3 percent to 5 percent.

That’s right, a crowd of Illinois residents, including many from Peoria, descended on Springfield yesterday imploring lawmakers to raise their taxes — and not a little bit, either. Going from three to five percent is a 67% increase.

Raising taxes in order to maintain/increase spending is not the answer. Instead, reforms should be made to the pension system, and programs like FamilyCare/AllKids need to be means-tested. There are undoubtedly some programs that could be cut completely.

If anyone thinks that more money is the answer, look no further than the lottery. Remember that? The lottery was going to help schools! Well, they kept their promise. The proceeds from that tax on the poor did go to schools, but then they reduced other spending on schools by a commensurate amount, so it was a zero-sum bargain — an accounting trick. They found other ways to use the net increase in funds, and it wasn’t to help schools.

I guess it shouldn’t surprise me that people would ask to have their taxes raised. After all, they voted for an increase in their sales taxes here locally in the middle of a recession to pay for a non-essential boondoggle. I guess it really is better here — residents have money to burn.

Peoria Public Schools, State of Illinois

Note to D150 employees: Illinois offers whistleblower protection

34 Comments

Another potential scandal at District 150 was revealed last week by the WEEK-TV news team:

Sources tell us district 150 security this week was notified of employees possibly selling District 150 computers illegally over the Internet.

Those sources say there was a raid at the district’s Ricketts Center and several shredders and computer hard drives were confiscated.

Meanwhile, the State’s Attorney office is still investigating the circumstances surrounding Julie McArdle’s termination nearly one year ago. McArdle made multiple allegations of misconduct in a lawsuit against District 150, Academic Officer Mary Davis, former Superintendent Ken Hinton, and former Human Resources Director Tom Broderick.

In light of all this apparent corruption at District 150, I’d just like to offer this public service announcement to District 150 teachers and staff members: Illinois offers whistleblower protection. Julie McArdle not only made her complaints to the police, but also to former Superintendent Hinton, and it was her disclosure to Hinton that allegedly led to retaliation against her. But you don’t have to tell District 150 what you know. According to the State of Illinois’ website, “Your identity as a whistleblower is kept confidential, except in rare circumstances where disclosure is required by law.”

I would encourage any teachers or staffers at District 150 with knowledge and evidence of corruption to tell what you know through the State’s whistleblower process. It will protect you from retaliation, but be a huge benefit to students, parents, and taxpayers. Here’s that site again: whistleblower.illinois.gov.

General News, Peoria Civic Center, Peoria Mayor, State of Illinois

Civic leaders line up to tout Wonderful Development

9 Comments

I regret that I couldn’t make it to the Illinois Finance Authority’s public hearing on Tuesday regarding the Wonderful Development (i.e., the proposed downtown Marriott hotel project). It looks like I would have been the only dissenting voice. The Journal Star reports that “Every person who publicly spoke before the authority was in favor of it. No one spoke in opposition.” Those who publicly spoke included Mayor Jim Ardis, Civic Center General Manager Debbie Ritschel, Peoria Area Convention and Visitors Bureau President/CEO Bob Marx, and “various trade groups.”

Mayor Jim Ardis defended the city’s position that it has done the appropriate due diligence on a project that is backed by nearly $40 million in public bonds.

If they really did “the appropriate due diligence,” it was all done in secret. No vetting was done in public, nor was there any public hearing before the city council decided to commit $40 million to the project.

He also defended the use of a tax bond for the project, saying that without public assistance, major Downtown projects would languish. He cited the “10 to 15 years” without development within the museum block as an example of the lack of the private industry moving forward with a project.

The City purchased the downtown Sears property in 1998 when Sears announced it would be moving to Northwoods Mall. Following that, they acquired the rest of the block. Ever since then, they’ve owned the whole block. They spent a few years haggling over what to do with it, then ultimately decided to give it to the museum. And that’s why there was a “lack of the private industry moving forward with a project.” They couldn’t. John Q. Hammons expressed interest in building a hotel on the block and the Mayor wouldn’t even return his calls. Furthermore, the museum group has had public assistance (lots of it!) for almost a full year and they still can’t get anything built down there.

“I would ask any . . . critics to name for me projects of this importance to the city that will have a private investor come before us and shoulder all of the burden,” Ardis said. “It doesn’t happen anymore.”

First of all, I take issue with his characterization of this project as one of “importance.” It’s not important to Peoria. All it will do is give us an overbuilt hotel to go along with our overbuilt Civic Center. Secondly, the reason a private investor won’t come before us and shoulder all of the burden is because they know it won’t be profitable. That’s why banks won’t loan the money, either. Why should we build an unprofitable hotel? Peoria has money to burn, apparently.

Ritschel and … Marx defended the hotel project as something that will make the Civic Center a more attractive destination for larger conventions and events.

Marx said at least 10 groups representing more than 17,000 room nights have approached the city about wanting to have an event at the Civic Center only if there was an attached hotel.

“They won’t event talk to us until we have this project come to fruition,” Marx said.

If it were that important to the Civic Center, then why didn’t they include a hotel in their $55 million expansion plan? Why did they say they could be successful without an attached hotel?

And what about those 17,000 room nights? Suppose they got $120 per room night for those (keep in mind that it will probably be less because they’ll give lower rates to big groups like that), how much would that amount to? $2,040,000. That’s not enough to make one bond payment. 17,000 room nights out of 178,850 annual room nights available (proposed 490 total rooms times 365 nights per year) accounts for 10.5% occupancy. Considering the current Pere Marquette (which has only 287 guest rooms) is barely getting 50% occupancy, I’d say we’re looking at some serious losses on this project.

But there’s no reason why Peoria residents should have to go to the IFA to complain about it. We should have had an opportunity to voice our concerns before our own local elected leaders. It’s too bad the IFA has provided more opportunity for input than our own City Council.

State of Illinois

Koehler wants do-nothing job

14 Comments

State Sen. Dave Koehler has applied for the job of Lieutenant Governor of Illinois. The Lieutenant Governor of Illinois has no significant purpose or duties, and lawmakers are considering eliminating the position completely. At least one Lieutenant Governor has resigned due to boredom. So… I’m not sure what Koehler sees in the position, other than maybe a full-time paid vacation.

I would rather see the position eliminated.

State Legislation, State of Illinois, Traffic

Red-light camera update

12 Comments

Illinois State Sen. Dan Duffy may not get his wish for a complete ban on red-light cameras in Illinois, but he says “there’s more than one way to skin a cat.”

A special subcommittee on red-light cameras met Tuesday evening and heard testimony on both sides of the issue. Many citizens and experts, including the Illinois Policy Institute, spoke out against the cameras. Law enforcement representatives spoke in favor. In the end, a “shell bill” was passed out of committee:

A shell bill or vehicle bill is essentially a blank bill passed out of committee that allows lawmakers the flexibility of cobbling together a coherent bill, without the pressure of legislative deadline. In this particular case, because there were a total of five bills containing RLC [red-light camera] reforms, senators will have to work together to find agreement on a single, comprehensive bill on this issue.

What measures might make it into the shell bill?

The next step for anti-red light camera activists is to push legislators to include any and every measures possible that improve safety and decrease red light running. This includes mandating an increase in yellow light timing to 4 or 4.5 seconds, increasing the use of an [all] red interval, and eliminating RLC enforcement [for] right turns on red.

Short yellow-light intervals create what is known as a “dilemma zone.” The driver is too close to the intersection to stop without slamming on the brakes, but too far from the intersection to make it through before the light turns red. By increasing the yellow-light interval, the “dilemma zone” can be eliminated. This change in itself lowers the number of red-light running violations by giving motorists ample warning to stop. Some cities with red-light cameras have been caught deliberately shortening the yellow-light interval (or varying it) in order to induce more tickets. In Peoria, the yellow-light interval is three to four seconds, depending on the size of the intersection according to Public Works Director David Barber.

An all-red interval is the period of time that traffic traveling in all directions have a red light. In other words, once a light changes to red, the cross-traffic doesn’t immediately get a green. There’s usually a one- to two-second delay during which all lights are red before the the cross-traffic light turns green. This allows more time for the intersection to clear before allowing cross-traffic to proceed, which improves safety. In Peoria, signalized intersections have a one-second all-red interval.

Turning right on red is legal at signalized intersections unless they have a red arrow or are otherwise posted with “no right on red” signs. Because of the geometry of the intersections, it’s often necessary to pull up past the stop line in order to see around traffic in the forward lanes. In communities that have red-light cameras, a lot of their revenue is generated by giving red-light citations to drivers who pull up in order to turn right on red in this way.

“We want to put in every reform possible,” says Scott Tucker, GOP nominee for state representative in the 11th district and organizer of a road trip of citizens to the hearings. “So many sensible reforms will kill the cameras over time because there will not be enough revenue to operate the cameras.”

In most cities (perhaps all–I haven’t done an exhaustive search), the police department doesn’t buy the red-light cameras, but instead contracts with a third-party vendor. The vendor installs and maintains the cameras, and in many municipalities, actually sends out the citations to violators. Other municipalities have an officer review the violations and send the citations out from the police department. The vendor gets a cut of the fines imposed on violators. If there are fewer violators, there will be less profit incentive for the vendors. And if that happens, you won’t need a ban on red-light cameras because simple economics will drive the vendors out of business.