Council Roundup 8/8/06

The council meeting was relatively short, mostly because a good number of items were deferred. Although, I have to give credit to Mayor Ardis for reining in debates — after watching several council meetings since he took over as mayor, I’ve noticed that he stresses brevity and tries to cut off debate once the council members start repeating themselves.

The council questioned staff regarding why fees have not been collected on banks that encroach on the public way, and deferred approval until they get some answers. Staff was also asked to report how much money the city has been losing because of this practice. Councilman Nichting made an excellent point as well — if the staff comes back in two weeks proposing the council continue to not collect these fees, they should bring back a request to change the municipal code so that it conforms to the city’s practices.

Councilman Nichting actually had two — count ’em, two — excellent points last night. He also questioned why the Peoria Civic Center (PCC) is giving part of their hotel tax (part of the “H” in “HRA”) to the Peoria Area Convention and Visitors Bureau (PACVB). The PACVB works on behalf of the entire tri-county area, yet only City of Peoria hotels pay HRA taxes. So the whole tri-county benefits, but the funding is coming disproportionately from Peoria hotels. Good catch. That item was deferred two weeks.

A day after the school board voted unanimously to support historic landmark status for Irving Primary School, the city council voted unanimously to make it official. The designation protects the building from demolition and the exterior from modification. The inside can be renovated and repartitioned, however, to accommodate alternative uses.

Gary Sandberg asked why the Nebraska overpass on I-74 wasn’t finished yet. IDOT officials had promised the council it would be completed in June of this year, and it’s still not open. Breaking that connection, in concert with the other I-74 construction and closures, has meant longer response times for emergency vehicles and greater inconvenience for Peoria motorists who have to drive further to get across town at a time when gas prices are soaring. Not a big deal if it were only closed for a few months, but it’s been over a year and a half now. Why isn’t it completed?

In addition to this, there were a few other notable items of business and some interesting citizen requests to address the council, which have been ably reported by Jennifer Davis in today’s Journal Star.

8 thoughts on “Council Roundup 8/8/06”

  1. If PACVB tries to obtain H tax from Wood and Taz counties there will be a tri-county war! We moved out of Peoria County to avoid paying taxes to poorly run organizations like PACVB, and bogus projects like Reg Museum, etc. Excuse my ignorance, but just how does PACVB help the tri-county area anyway?

    SC

  2. I agree. The better thing to do is not give PACVB any HRA tax money. HRA taxes were supposed to support the Civic Center, not the PACVB. They’re using our tax dollars for something those taxes were not established to support. If the Civic Center doesn’t need the money, then let’s reduce the hotel taxes by the amount they want to give to PACVB. The same goes for the HRA money they want to give to ArtsPartners. Why must these funds be funneled through the PCC? If it’s because there’s no (or not enough) support for direct funding of PACVB and ArtsPartners through taxes, then it’s not right to fund them indirectly with our HRA taxes.

  3. Peoria (including its airport) is hungily looking towards Tazewell and Woodford County for more tax money. Residents of Tazewell and Woodford need to let their elected representatives know that they will be voted out of office if they even consider giving these clowns a dime.

  4. The Nebraska Street overpass didn’t get completed because the support on the East side stood right on the west bound lanes. They built the new supports on the west side early on but had to wait until this spring to shut down the old west bound lanes, shift west bound traffic over to the new east bound lanes so they could safely remove the old support. Then they had to dig out the side and place the new support farther back and higher to make clearence for the new west bound lanes. So, in effect, they couldn’t do nothing until the east side was completely done and that included laying the steel/concrete supports across the intersate. That is why. Savy?

  5. Thanks, Emtronics. I actually was aware of most of that; I see now that my question was quite vague. I really meant to ask why it wasn’t completed and reopened by June like IDOT told the council it would be.

  6. I didn’t know IDOT told the city council that JUNE was the open date. I have always heard that October was the date. (2006) In fact, I subscribe to Update 74 newsletter and October is mentioned there also.

  7. Well, Emtronics, it looks like we’re both wrong. At the meeting, Gary Sandberg stated that IDOT had promised to have the Nebraska overpass open by June of this year, and I have been taking his word for it. However, I just checked the minutes of the February 28 council meeting, and it looks like Gary was wrong. IDOT Regional Director of Highways Joe Crowe said that “Nebraska Avenue would re-open by July, 2006, rather than the fall, due to the importance of this street to traffic patterns.”

Comments are closed.