I’ve gone to several town hall meetings regarding the sales tax referendum, so I’m familiar with the presentations now, and I’ve heard a lot of the same questions. But at last night’s town hall meeting at Northwoods Community Church, I actually learned some new things. Not all of these items are new information — some of it I probably should have known already — but they were all new to me:
First of all, I found out that the Caterpillar Experience will not have free admission for the general public. Mark Johnson of Caterpillar explained that employees/retirees of Caterpillar and their guests will get in free. But if you don’t want to hit up your Cat friends to get you in, or if you’re a tourist/visitor from outside the Peoria area, you’ll be paying $5 for adults and $2.50 for children under 12. I was very surprised to learn this, especially in light of my recent trip to Moline to visit the John Deere Pavilion, which is free for everyone.
Second, it was stated last night that the City of Peoria will own and operate the underground parking deck, and that the parking will not be free. Mr. Johnson stated that the City theoretically could offer free parking, but that they would probably charge the same rate as other City-owned parking decks. Just what the City needs — another money-losing parking deck. It’s worth pointing out that the museum could also offer free parking to their patrons. All they need to do is validate parking tickets and then pay their patrons’ parking fees for them. It’s also worth noting that patrons of Lakeview currently have free parking at the existing Lakeview campus.
Finally, it was stated that — if the referendum passes and the museum is built — the Peoria Riverfront Museum (PRM) would take over ownership of the historic houses currently owned by the Peoria Historical Society. I don’t see how the PRM could afford to own, operate, and maintain those historic houses when the county doesn’t feel PRM has adequate funds budgeted for capital maintenance on the museum building. Living in a 105-year-old house myself, I can tell you first hand that maintenance is not cheap, especially if you want to maintain the historical integrity of the structure.
There were a couple other notable items from last night’s town hall meeting, but I’ll save that for another post.
Why would the Peoria Historical Society give up ownership of the historic houses? They have done a wonderful job in maintaining these magnificent historical residences and now they will be out of the picture. Makes no sense to me. It is just another reason to vote against this regressive new tax.
C.J.,
This is in keeping with a few of my earlier posts. This is a travesty. The Peoria Historical Society was never able to maintain these houses [and everything in them] as they should have been. Now Lakeview is going to take over? With what? Lakeview has NEVER been an historical museum and has NEVER had anything to do with local history and/or historic preservation. The Peoria Historical Society has n.ever performed well as the stewards of Peoria’s history. This is as unprofessional and unethical as it gets.
Without the houses and the artifacts inside, Lakeview doesn’t have an historical element to it’s museum. Both houses are on the historic registry. I wonder how many regs Lakeview is going to break this time in getting what THEY want?
Ed,
We are in total agreement about the new tax [VOTE NO].
However, I must disagree with your assessment of the houses. These homes have never been utilized to their full potential. While basic maintenance has kept the houses from falling down, the artifacts inside have deteriorated noticeably over the years. Both homes are a mess and I doubt anyone associated with the PHS has any idea what they actually have in either home.
As C.J. mentioned, Lakeview will more than enough trouble just covering the costs of museum upkeep, etc. Now they are going to take on the added cost of maintaining two historic homes?!?!?
Mark my words. Lakeview WOULD NOT do this if they didn’t have something [questionable] in mind.
Am I going to get censored now?
The admission fee to the CAT Experience makes the visit numbers based on JD Pavilion even more questionable. I can’t emphasis enough how many Deere visits are related to its location directly accross the street from the i-wireless Center (fka The Mark) and the free price tag. Taking the kids to the circus? Show up a little early and pop in to the Pavilion. I think the fee is going to drastically cut down on the walk in visits they were going to have. They should at least give free admission if you show your museum ticket.
You’ve gotta be kidding me! The insides of the homes are beautiful and the artifacts are displayed artfully. They are deteriorating? With all due respect, wtf are you talking about? Do they just slowly decay according to you? Were either of you at the Candlelight tours over the Christmas holidays and St. Patricks day?
The houses do hold a lot of mystery and history and new details are being discovered everyday but to make such blanket derogatory statements is it no wonder the PHS can’t get the financial support they need? What a shame. Should there be NO Peoria Historical Society? As in, who gives a crap about Peoria history? Or do you feel that better management is needed, and if so, why not get involved?
The houses need new windows which won’t come cheap and some other big ticket items. If the money is simply not there what would the two of you propose? Let them crumble? Some of the sentiments on these boards never cease to amaze me…
As a member of the Board of Directors of the Peoria Historicial Society (PHS), let me clarify my comments from last evening in regard to the two historical houses. As a member of the Museum Collaboration Group (MCG) the Historical Society has had many discussions with the other members of the MCG regarding the issue of ownership and continued operation of these two treasures once the new museum opens. Although the board of the PHS has not yet made a final decision, the plan being proposed is that ownership and responsibility for operation would be transferred to the Peoria Riverfront Museum.
The primary driver behind this plan is the recognition that the PRM will be in a much better position to secure the funding necessary to insure the continued maintenance and operation of these two properties. In the end, unfortunately, many of these decisions come down to $ and this is one of them. While the PHS Board continues to be extremely committed to thse two properties, there is also a recognition that as the PRM project moves forward, funding for other organizations in Peoria such as the PHS will become increasingly challenging. However, this is not a situation where a definitive decision that must be made at anytime in the near future by the PHS Board as obviously, it will be at least several years until the PRM would open.
And the PHS would not be out of the picture, as a member of the MCG, the PHS would have representation on the PRM Board of Directors. Those of you who continue to represent the PRM as simply a Lakeview expansion, are really misrepresenting the depth of the involvement of the other collaborative partners in this project.
You are meddling with the primal forces of nature, Mr. Beale, and I won’t have it!! Is that clear?!
lol
PRM would be in a better position to get the funding… how? It is questionable whether or not the museum can pay for it self… so where is this extra funding going to come from? This isn’t one of those “if we build it they will pay for it” scams is it?
Diane,
With all due respect, stick to real estate. My sister visits the homes every X-mas. She tells me the basement of Flanagan is a nightmare!
“The insides of the homes are beautiful and the artifacts are displayed artfully.”
Is that your EXPERT opinion?
No. I do not want to see PHS come to end. I want PHS to do what it is supposed to do. Besides, if this museum becomes a reality, PHS [along with all the othe ‘collaborative’ partners], will cease to exist.
Mark,
With all due respect. How much is ANYONE willing to bet that the PHS rep on the PRM board will also be a former or current serving member of the Lakeview Board. Don’t play us all for rubes. It is politics as usual in Peoria. Unfortunately, Peoria’s history is caught in the middle.
Thanks for the clarification, Mark.
Regarding your statement that, “Those of you who continue to represent the PRM as simply a Lakeview expansion, are really misrepresenting the depth of the involvement of the other collaborative partners in this project”: That’s because we practically never hear from any other partners than Lakeview and Caterpillar. I’ve heard Amy Kelly answer one question at one town hall meeting, and that’s it. Never heard anyone from the African American Hall of Fame, or the IHSA, or the Nature Conservancy. I did not realize until last night that you were on the board of directors for the Historical Society (Incidentally, is that new? You’re not listed on their website), but regardless, you’ve been representing Cat, not the PHS, correct? These other partners are invisible to the public. It would appear to the casual observer that Lakeview is the engine driving this train, and the other partners are just along for the ride. I’m not saying that that’s in fact what’s happening — only that it appears that way. That’s why I think most people talk about this project as (at least primarily) an expansion of Lakeview.
Information slowly coming out in drips like with PHS is what is concerning about the current project to me! I had no idea that PHS will now come under PRM.
A drip that recently just surfaced is that the projected $11 million shortfall for PRM even if this referendum would pass could be made up through stimulus funds. Well what if the stimulus fails to come through to PRM? Expected federal taxcredits haved failed to trickle down to PRM from earlier museum funding efforts.
Does PRM plan to make up the $11 million shortfall ASAP or over a couple of years. A lack of donors stepping forward despite this project being approved in ’03 is concerning.
Why has Peoria County not seen the need to put in place a governing agreement with PRM? Oh I understand they wanted this issue on the ballot but still I don’t see the 911 in making sure the I’s are dotted and the Ts crossed.
Supporters of this museum want focus just on the positives like education and tourism. OK fine but lets get down to the meat and potatoes of this issue. What other info that we the taxpayer might not know about but could surface if this thing was to pass. Lets have full transparency.
Vote NO! and lets do this thing right.
CJ — look under Trustees on the website you linked to…Mark Johnson is clearly listed as a Trustee of the association.
The City ownership of the parking deck is an item that was addressed at the very beginning of this project…rightly or wrongly, it’s been the plan for them to own and operate. If they didn’t charge parking fees, it would definately lose money and with the fees will probably still love money (just not as much).
I would have loved to see the parking deck also owned and operated by the museum. The City is getting too deeply involved in the parking situation downtown and not in a good way. In limited cases, there is a need for the local government to step in and provide available parking to “assist” an area in developing – I’m just not convinced this is one of those situations.
Unfortunately, give the current parking situation downtown, I don’t think that anyone would pay the rates necessary to make the parking decks self-sufficient so we’re stuck with them being an annual drain on the City’s operating budget (This is one area where Councilman Sandberg is 100% correct and has been addressing this issue for many years).
You’re right. I was just looking under the “Officers” portion. I stand corrected. Sorry.
You’re forgiven 🙂 We’re all wrong once and a while. Keep up the good work.
As for PHS being a part of this collaboration because it will allow them to get more funding, does this ring clearly that there will be more fund raising efforts? Sounds to me like they are planning how to get more money out of us in the future. This whole thing is to muddy and murky and there are too many behind the curtain plans, of which, we the taxpayers are not being made aware. This has been going on for six years or so and now little bits and pieces are coming out here and there. How many little bits and pieces don’t we know about? This is not a private company that can do as it pleases. This is OUR company funded by OUR tax dollars and we should know every single detail now and for the future.
Please vote NO on April 7.
SD: “Sounds to me like they are planning how to get more money out of us in the future. ”
What would be the point of their being involved in this project if not to get more money?
It is the Howard Hughes theory of wealth that we are stuck in … How much money is enough? “One more dollar”, he replied. Always, one more dollar.
VOTING NO, no way, nope, nunca, niemals, nyet.
Voted Yes already!
Seems most of the “grass roots” heat is directed AGAINST the museum.
Ya hear that Block-heads?
The city can’t run the schools properly in debt. You don’t take on more debt when other things are failing. There are probably a lot of other problems hiden from the public too.
This is the start of endless tax hikes, Vote No.
We are not chicago, we don’t need two musuems, at 9.2 unemployment.
Caterpillar is not having a good year, if all those layoff are occuring
I don’t even need to give my word this is bad thing, you are really on 2nd tax hike.
You all now how I operate if I don’t give my word, its the god’s truth.
Get the museum, damned be to every other project, group, charity, and everything else in Peoria!!! We need a museum!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Again I ask, what is the attraction for anyone without kids between the age of 21-35?
The headline should read – “One last ditch effort by the anit-musuem people………”
this is bob
you all know me, me trip to turkey for you know what.
let’s all group hug in the community and vote the no on the musuem
if I walk backwards throw my hair over the front of my face, what am I
OMG I can’t wait until this election is over.
A note to Bill and Gary,
People should be upset about this tax. But anger only goes so far.
As a student of government and politics, I think I can safely say people are LESS LIKELY to vote when they are angry.
Angry people are more likely to stay home on election day. They are the ones who will get discouraged when it rains or snows.
The people who are voting FOR something are the determined ones. They are the ones who will brave a little weather or circle that date on the calendar to make double sure they vote that day.
While the wording of this referendum is such that people SHOULD mark “No” on their ballot, they also need to feel they are voting FOR something.
Whatever it is – FOR basic services, FOR lower (or unraised) taxes, FOR responsible spending, FOR an alternative.
As I said in another thread, the citizens will get what they deserve because not voting is a decision, too.
I wonder if anyone will prosecute for all those “No Tax” (read: no museum) signs on public ROW (at least in rural Peoria County)?
THE,
Why don’t you go and make a citizens arrest?
if memory serves me well, there is not an ordinance in rural Peoria County that prohibits signs in the right of way.
Anon E. Mouse: If one looks at the recent D150 issues where parents, teachers and community members have become fed-up and angry — thta passion and anger led them to action.
THE: There are Build the Block signs there too!
Karrie – anger and a healthy dose of incredulousness!
Karrie, while there is some mobilization that occurs, as a general rule, anger is not an effective voting tool.
See Also: 2004 Presidential election