I wasn’t able to attend the East Village Growth Cell meeting this past Tuesday night, but a regular reader of the Chronicle (who wishes to remain anonymous) was there and has turned in this report:
Councilman Riggenbach was present, Gulley was absent.
They discussed changes to the rehab qualification. The first issue was the loan terms. City officials recommended:
“0% interest if paid back within the specified loan terms (outlined below) however, the loan becomes immediately due and payable upon sale, transfer, or if the homeowner ceases to occupy the home excluding any one or more of the following (each a permitted transfer): any sale, conveyance or tranfer (A) to a spouse upon dissolution of marriage, (B) to the surviving spouse upon death of a joint tenant Owner or (C) by will.
LOAN > $20,000 = 20 yr term
LOAN > $15,000 = 15 yr term
LOAN > $10,000 = 10 yr term
LOAN = $10,000 or less = 5 yr termSome people had an issue with the 0% loan, suggesting that it may cause funding problems for the TIF in the future from bad loans that aren’t getting paid back. The item passed unanimously.
The owner of the Cornerstone building was there asking if businesses in the TIF district qualified for this. At this point, it’s home-owners only.
The next item addressed was how often an owner can re-apply for the $5000 grant and additional $25,000 loan. Vote on one:
“a. the $5000 grant may be obtained one time and every approved application will receive the $5000 grant if the total project costs are in excess of $5000”
or
“b. the grant can be obtained multiple times if more that $30000 total is invested in the project.”
There was a great deal of discussion on this. Someone suggested the grant and loan be applied only to one address and not to a particular person because the purpose of this program is to “better the property more than the person.” Someone disagreed and suggested that if someone is willing to put the full $30,000 into repair of a property and has paid it back, he should be able to get the grant and loan for the same property a second time to further improve the property. This motion gained a lot of support and was motioned for approval. I asked if there are any provisions to insure the recipient of the grant and loan are using the money properly and not spending it on luxuries unrelated to the property. I was told these are details that will be worked out later. I asked if the program is set up to allow do-it-yourselfers to pay themselves from this grant and loan before they can dip back into it or if they must provide receipts and receive no self-compensation for their own work. Again, was told this hasn’t been addressed yet and will be worked out in the details. City staff appeared to be noting these concerns. Item b. passed unanimously with wording changed to allow the 2nd $5000 grant after the loan is paid back.
Someone asked when funds are expected to be available. Nothing set yet, but it could be soon or as long as 3 years from now. It’s up to Council.
Someone made a comment about the people who weren’t there to vote and whether they’ll be notified first before this passes to the draft stage. A comment was made by the speaker to the effect of: “they should have been here to vote.” My thoughts are that many of them would if the webpage would be updated properly. I asked Bobby Gray about this later in the evening. He admitted to being tardy on updating the website.
Next item discussed was the point system similar to Decatur and Springfield’s TIFs. Money is distributed based on points collected from the different repairs to be done. Different categories were “Exterior Improvements, Sustainability, Density, Code Improvements and Comprehensiveness of the Project.” The crowd received this whole point system negatively, saying if shouldn’t matter what the project is, if a homeowner is willing to live in and improve the neighborhood. A motioin to deny point system and a motion to add a priority list for anyone who borrows as follows: “1. life safety (doors, windows, etc), 2. Structural integrity (roof, foundation,) 3. Occupant health (Asbesthos, mold removal) 4. Exterior.” Both motions pass
There were addtional questions about fences, lighting & landscape removal if it endangers the property. These will be looked at for the next meeting. I asked about the owner occupancy status and wether of not non-profit rehab groups can qualify for this grant. At this time, no. But this can be addressed at the next meeting because its never been discussed.
Next meeting was set for two Tuesdays from now.
So once again, I ask. Why are the residents of the East Bluff Housing Services allowed to continue to tax residents when they do not provide loans to the residents..one of the primary goals in setting the organization up. I could wear a tee shirt on this one.
I have not driven by their rental properties, but got a call from an East Bluff resident concerned that the properties are not being mowed and that work has stopped on the Illinois property. I have not personally verified these reports. I suggested that the resident 1. take pictures and 2. call code enforcement. 3. give the documentation to the two new council members as much of the council deliberately ignores these concerns. My other suggestion was to write to WMBD for assistance. Nothing motivates people like media asking questions.
Will the City of Peoria be bound to the rules for loans as the EHNHS is now bound by? And will the COP hire/pay and have a person(s) for this TIF? Will the COP take TIF funds and pay that person (s)? Also since this TIF runs for 23 years will the loans need to be paid back before the 23 years end?
“Someone asked when funds are expected to be available. Nothing set yet, but it could be soon or as long as 3 years from now. It’s up to Council”.OSF is 1st in line for funds. Payback for study.
“
Marty, I will take a significant amount of time for a million $ to be saved giving the slow increase of assessed values, unless someone comes in and artificially raises the values to pump money into the TIF, remember, that would come out of the homeowners pocket with higher taxes, but without the benefit of the ability to sell your house at a higher value, so assuming that is NOT the plan, it would be years before there is enough money for loans. What about the infastructure? The city just lowered the amount of the sidewalk funding from $1.2 million to $300,000. That is a huge impact city wide in the ability to get any improvements done. I have no idea where the rest of the funding is going, time to follow the dollars. It will be interesting to see what else will be cut. We are not going to be investing in maintaining our streets and sidewalks, I would guess that we will only be investing in building new, out north, diverting funds to warehouse District and other pet projecs. Very frustrating because the cost of repairs is simply going up and we are diverting more resources away from that. This will ensure we simply will not have funds to maintain many neighborhoods, which have paid taxes for a 100 years or more. Perhaps the plan is simply to hire bull dozers and begin knocking everyone’s homes down and fund more development? Have no idea, but deeply concerning.
Why not just bust on the residents to maintain their properties? They bought ’em… take care of ’em. If they don’t, fine ’em. If they don’t, or can’t, pay their fines, throw ’em in jail. I’m sick and tired of people, particularly council people, thinking that it’s everyone else’s responsibility to maintain other people’s homes. There were a LOT of poor people back in the 50s and 60s, who somehow maintained their properties with elbow grease. I know ’cause I lived in the south end then. It’s not poverty, it’s laziness. Quit making excuses for lazy people. That includes landlords, too. Especially landlords.
exactly Prego!
For the past few years, the members of the West Bluff Council have canvassed their neighborhoods to compile a list of suspected rental properties that have not been registered with the City. Just from the 8 neighborhoods that participated, we located quite a few, which we gave to the City for follow-up. I know several were sent “warning” letters, while a few actually were fined. We’ll probably do this assessment again this year and I’d like to see neighborhoods throughout the City do this, as well. City staff doesn’t have the resources to be pro-active on this issue, so residents need to be pro-active in helping the City indentify ordinance violators.
The other shoe drops as to the sweetheart deal($$$) for OSF.Coucil set to bless this.