It’s the worst-kept secret in Peoria. Despite not getting anyone to speak on the record, information about the proposed hotel on the Pere Marquette block has been leaking like a sieve to the Journal Star and bloggers. Unfortunately, since we don’t have any official word, we don’t know how much of that information is accurate.
There’s something else we don’t know: what public incentives will be requested for this project. According to Billy Dennis’s source, “Public financing accounted for roughly 40 percent of the cost of building [East Peoria’s] Embassy Suites,” and “Project investors are hoping to secure a similar percentage of public financing for this project through a tax increment financing project agreement.” An ancillary issue is the request to move Big Al’s, with their “grandfathered” status and adult use and liquor licenses, presumably to 414 Hamilton Blvd.
And, of course, there is a sense of urgency for this project. According to the Journal Star, this whole project “could go before the City Council for consideration on Nov. 25.” That’s in two weeks. And, according to Billy Dennis’s source, any delays “would kill the $100 million project.”
Oh yes, the project has been estimated to be $100 million. So, going back to the earlier rumor that approximately forty percent of that would be “public financing…through a tax increment financing project agreement,” we’re talking about $40 million in public incentives. I’m not sure how a TIF is going to provide that amount of financing (consider that the proposed museum is in a TIF, is a similarly-sized development, and would arguably be built by now if they could get $40 million out of their TIF). I also don’t know how the city could afford to give $40 million to a private developer when the budget is already in a deficit.
I’m not sure about a lot of things, because when you get down to brass tacks, the citizens don’t really know anything about this project. We’re being told by many bloggers that this is the greatest project for downtown since the civic center (how do they know that?) and that the city should move heaven and earth to make it happen or else. Or else? Or else no small number of detrimental things will happen: the civic center will fail, downtown hotels will lose occupancy, Caterpillar won’t use Peoria’s hotels anymore, tax revenues will go down, downtown will deteriorate, no one will want to develop in downtown Peoria ever again because it’s so hard to do business here, etc., ad nauseum, ad infinitum.
Peoria is evidently on the precipice of oblivion and this hotel deal is its only savior. And that deal itself is tenuously held together — either the developers get everything for which they ask when they ask for it, or the deal’s off. No negotiation, no public input. They make the decisions and take your tax money, and you better thank them for it.
The Journal Star got it right:
We appreciate that negotiations like these can be sensitive and there’s a lot of financial risk involved and not all of that can or should be played out in a public hearing. Nonetheless, there is one overriding principle at work here: If you want the public’s support and especially the public’s money, the public needs to know a little something about the business government is doing on its behalf.
Right now, the public is in the dark. And this huge project might come before the council by Thanksgiving? Sorry, but that can’t be.
This sort of reminds me of the bailout:
We need 700 billion by Friday.
Don’t worry about the details.
We know what’s best.
mazr: Exactly. Will it be like AIG — repeated trips the taxpayer smorgsaboard for additional money?
The issue before the council at this moment is whether to let Big Al’s move 1 block down the road and keep it’s liquor license/adult use. That’s it.
The TIF is already in place. The existance of the TIF presupposes that someone if gonna come forward with a TIF development project.
I told my source that they NEED to get details out now.
But those opposed to this are opposed to it because they are opposed. Big Al’s is just an excuse. Big Al’s did not decide on this spot by pulling the location out of theut butt, like the suggestion they move tothe warehouse district, which doesn’t even have adequate sewers.
Hey Peoria,
When you and the developer enter into a development agreement it can be a two way street. Yes, you can require the developer to provide extra amenities. It would be unethical to not. Don’t make this another ballpark with palm trees. Don’t make this another underused grocery store. Don’t make this another restaurant on stilts. THINK about what this means and what Peoria needs from this.
If you MUST have this hotel and they are getting public incentives REQUIRE them to fully adhere to HOP plan. REQUIRE them to adhere to the LDC. And don’t give me that “follow the HOP/LDC in principle” BS. This building will be there for at least 50 years. It better be what you want and not just what THEY want.
I should have been more specific.
I was referring to the “original” bailout. There have been or will be so many it gets kind of confusing.