I just want to congratulate the Peoria City Council on accomplishing something I really thought was impossible. According to the Journal Star, the Council has managed to find a deadline that Gary Matthews was able to meet. This is no small feat. It only took three and a half years, three redevelopment agreements, and five or six deadline extensions, but through persistence, perseverance, and a political will unrivaled by any other effort the council has made, they have succeeded in foisting this folly on the taxpayers.
I sincerely wish they would put this much effort, determination, and tax money toward the things they should be doing: enforcing law and order, maintaining existing infrastructure, and making Peoria a safe and beautiful place to live for those who actually, you know, live here, and pay taxes that increasingly go toward baubles that hang on our deteriorating civic structure.
No doubt, I ask too much.
Here here!!
Well said!
Why do I have the continuing feeling that some official misconduct has taken place by the council over the past several years?
interesting that the city council is doing business with Monte Brannen:
Monte Brannan, a partner with EM Properties, called having the Pere Marquette completed by March 1, 2013, a superhuman feat, saying that date is “five months” earlier than the original construction deadline.
Monte Brannen the same guy who brought us River Front Village:
Monte: I’m sure as the brewpub develops and opens for business, there will be even greater interest. To date, we have three letters of intent. The first, the brewpub, is now under construction, and we intend to open that in May 1996. The second is for a floating restaurant on a platform, which is part of the city’s marina project. We are anxious to complete this as soon as the city gets approval for the marina. The third is from a restaurant that is very anxious to be part of the Riverfront Villages. In addition to these letters of intent, we also have a long list of potential tenants who have expressed interest in Riverfront Village. We feel as long as the city can provide parking parallel with our building schedule, we will have all the space pre-committed before we complete each building pad.
Monte: The other major players in the private sector who will make riverfront development happen are the ones willing to try creative projects, take unique risks, and be innovative.
Mike and I have done an immense amount of research on this project, and we have never seen a city or location that has as much potential. We feel the Illinois River and the Peoria area will help us and others develop a unique riverfront complex that will benefit everyone in the Peoria area.
Once the riverfront is built out, we think it will help Peoria take another giant step forward, like the Civic Center did when it was built.
If I’m not mistaken, Monte Branen was a lotto winner a while back.
The only thing that I would like to say is that this is not tax money that is being used for this project(yet). It is borrowed money that hopefully will be repaid by taxes (some new some not) from the project. The real problem comes if the project is not able to pay the bonds, then tax money will be used to repay them and those funds will come from other sources.
The City does not have the money sitting in an account and if not used for this project could use it for other public needs.
anp — Anyone who thinks this project is going to “pay for itself” is dreaming.
“anp” : May not be taxpayer money now but how would you like to be a co-signer on this loan? No wait! All taxpayers are co-signers on this project. We (taxpayers) are paying for MidTown Plaza, a developer project that was going to work…but didn’t. I think everyone knows, or should know that of course the city doesn’t have $40 million laying around for this grand hotel. The city is going to sell bonds, general revenue bonds, and hopefully, the money this project earns will pay them off in what? 30 years? If not, guess who pays? We taxpayers will pay and with that will come more police layoffs, more cut in city services, and most likely more and new fees to cover everything. This council that voted for it, the Mayor, the developers and his clan will all be gone with the money by then. So “anp” people do know that money isn’t there. What I and many object to is taking out the ol credit card and charging this crap on the City of Peoria which shouldn’t be in the hotel business in the first place and this city doesn’t exactly have a great track record when it comes to private loans to companies and financing developers private projects on the taxpayer’s dime. This is why this city is in debt and facing financial crisis every budget cycle. We should be using taxpayer funds to curb crime, re-enforce our police, fire, and public services that maintain our roads and infrastructure. Instead, we cut police, city services, build hotels and other shiny buildings,(museum) roads to no where, all on the promise from wealthy private developers who seem to disappear when these things fail. Think about it. Who wants to visit a place with dirt roads and gunfire?
I am not in favor of this project and have posted that several times on this blog and the PJStar. All that I was trying to say is that the money that the City is putting into this project is not money that would go to other services since it is not from an operating budget/reserve account.
I also mentioned that this only becomes taxpayer money if the project revenues do not pay the debt. The City sold GO bonds not revenue bonds – there is a significant difference in the two types of financing and how they are repaid. GO bonds are obligations of the City and need to be repaid by any revenue source the City has. Revenue bonds can be tied to a specific project and are not general obligations of the City (although most likely other revenue would be used to avoid default).
The fundamental issue is that the need (rather real or not) of a hotel at the Civic Center has not been addressed in the 30 years that the Civic Center has been in operation. It is a common reason given for the lack of the venue to attract certain types of conventions. Again, not really sure this arguement is legit or not.
the $7 million loan from the retirement fund is from what should be a reserve account. raiding the retirement funds to pay for pet projects has screwed the state and federal gov’ts budgets. In the state of the city address, pensions were to be addressed as they are “out of control”. One irresponsible hand washes the other. most importantly the learning curve of the majority of the council appears to be flat.
Addtionally, anp, the property taxes, etc are supposed to be paying the bonds. but the property taxes were going into the general revenue fund. That money will no longer be there. So that in turn creates an additional budget shortfall, not including when the taxpayers are stiffed from this poorly planned and executed “project”.
When this deal eventually collapses with this city taxpayers losing tens of millions of dollars, those who voted for it and bent the rules in favor of the developer will be remembered on Peoria’s wall of Most Economically Stupid People to Serve a City.
Spain and Ardis haven’t had been tested in hard one on one competition in elections in a long time. Next time that happens, they will see how people feel about this. This misrepresentation will be corrected. Poor Ryan, still in his 20’s and he has this million pound albatross around his political neck for the rest of his life–and the conflict of interest that all the “deals” he pushed really benefit his day job at heartland partnership. Smile Ryan, that’s the only way to get votes for you. You aren’t getting votes for voting for crooked deals that are destined to fail.
Sapphire … oh that it were true!
Come next election cycle …
(1) no other or more competent challengers come forth;
(2) the electorate’ memory is very short as they seem to repeatedly vote for those who promise trinkets and outlandishly improbably solutions to the real problems we face each election cycle;
(3) just look at other public officials who have albatrosses around their necks and see how it works … that they continue to advance to higher office
people just do not remember and/or other competent candidates are not to be found.
Looking at the recommended district map. (redistricting would not be a correct term). we will have more of the same. Clyde doens’t want Moss Bradley in the first district as that would toss him out in a heart beat. (yeah yeah, he says he doesn’t want to run). W. Bluff needs Van Auken to keep their perks, extra police coverage, etc.
Riggenbach needs an area where there won’t be any likely competition as he would loose. 4th and 5th districts retain the political clout…aka $$$$. So the product produced by the foxes watching the hen house is to ensure the status quo. Van Auken who gives a quote in the paper of wanting change, when that’s a load of bs. The last thing she wants is a district with small check books and a lack of an open bar at cocktail parties.
Re: Spain. Saphire, he would loose in a district election as there would be head to head debates and all of the conflicts, the pet projects, the lack of any actual action regarding the city’s largest problems (crime)…oh yeah, the landlord training ran by slumloards is a joke, so that doesn’t count as any effort.
Suddenly being concerned about the cost of a street sweeper when you have ensured bankrupting the city down the road is hardly being fiscally conservative/responsible as noted in past campaign literature.
There is little hope for this burg with such self centered leadership.
BVA is acting in her best interests by supporting other scenarios, She needs to dump the West Bluff and a few other areas in order to ensure re-election. The West Bluff residents are tired of being rolled over on by her and will not re-elect her.
West Bluff residents? You mean those that live on McQueen, Nowland, Brons, McClure? 90% of them don’t bother to vote. Most are barley out on parole. That is why that part of her District gets nothing. Now Moss/Bradley area has people with money that vote and have nice cocktail parties.
Soothsayer,
I do offer an apology, although I would have not thought it possible that the West Bluff would be willing to cut her loose, esp after some have said, “she’s a drunk, but she’s our drunk”.
Apparantly she has been behind the scenes trying to get W.Bluff cut from the second district and is furious that the other council members have not taken her side.