Now that they’ve lost their federal earmark funding, the already-heavily-underfunded Peoria Riverfront Museum is looking for something — anything — to prop up their big plans for the old Sears block. The latest funding scheme: The New Markets Tax Credit (NMTC) program.
As I understand it, the way NMTC works is that investors would donate money to a for-profit corporate entity (usually a limited liability company) called a Community Development Entity (CDE) which, in turn, makes debt and equity investments in low-income areas — presumably the proposed museum in this case. The benefit to the investors is that they get a 39% Federal income tax break distributed over seven years, plus a possible cash return during the life of the CDE if it’s profitable.
The first question I had was how the Sears block could possibly be considered a “low-income area.” It’s the crown-jewel of downtown Peoria, right next to Caterpillar’s world headquarters. It’s a prime piece of real estate. Well, it turns out that the way the federal government figures whether or not it is a low-income area is by census tract. Museum Square is in census tract 12, as shown here:
As you can see, this census tract not only includes downtown, but also an equal area northeast of I-74. Thus, statistically, the census tract poverty rate is 50.2%, and therefore qualifies as a low-income area. Don’t you just love statistics?
Whether this funding will be the panacea for the museum group’s fundraising woes remains to be seen. It looks like this project would qualify based on the standards set forth by the NMTC statute. However, there is still an application process through the Treasury Department, and the Museum Collaboration won’t find out if their application is approved until late summer, which means, according to the Journal Star’s report:
Officials hope to finish the New Markets financing plan by late summer and start construction of the underground parking deck by September 2008. Construction would begin on the visitors center and museum by January 2009. Exhibit installation would begin in March 2010 with a grand opening scheduled for November 2010, about a year behind original projections.
But there’s another option: redesign. Most of the $24 million they’ve already raised can be used to build a state-of-the-art Peoria History Museum on a smaller footprint, and the rest of the block could be sold for commercial development once the new Land Development Code is adopted. That would put the project more in line with the Heart of Peoria Plan, the available funding, and a reasonably-manageable project scope. It could open a whole lot earlier, with construction of commercial ventures starting even sooner, meaning more property tax revenue for the city.
Thanks for your investigation of the cenus tract issue. That does clairfy one question that puzzled some people. Just one correction, from my understanding, the Museum Collaboration Group will not be making any sort of application to the Treasury Department. The application process which was referred to will be submitted by the Community Development Entities (CDE). The Treasury Department will not notify the CDE’s of the the amount of their allocation of tax credits until late summer. It won’t be until after the CDE’s learn the exact size of their tax credit allocation that the CDE’s will be able to have any level of detailed discussions with the Museum Group regarding the extent of each individual CDE’s involvement in the Museum Square NMTC financing arrangement. Until then it’s all just speculative (what if) discussions.
Yes, off to Oz again, with a horse of a different color. Amazing that developer welfare comes in so many different varieties.
The original plan called for retail facilities on the ground level, where the museum was not, and residential up above. This was the original plan that was sold to Peoria before the ole bait n switch. Go back to the original plan.
well we could deflate the Dragondome and drag it over here or better yet let it deflate on it’s own. I take it we’re going to be looking at a hole in downtown for a good many years. That was some great planning. So scrap the museum, let Cat build it’s thing and make it a nice Central park with green space, fountains, Shade trees. A place to watch the fireworks, have festivities instead of baking on the concrete down the by riverfront. A place for people to enjoy sack lunches downtown, etc. Just thoughts.
I hope this doesn’t become our version of Chicago’s Block 37, vacant for years.
I agree with Paul. Let Cat build its thing, and it will be done in a year. With the rest of the land solicit RFP’s for private sector redevelopment. The City can use property tax abatement and long term low cost lease incentives to encourage larger, more intense, investements. After all, the City wouldn’t be out any cash, they’d simply be leveraging a public assest to generate additional investement. Whereas under the museum deal all shorts of long-term public subsides will be required.
@Paul
The last thing downtown needs is more
inactive greenspace.
I’d like to see a more intense mix of uses on the site. Living, retail, entertainment and culture all living happily together. THAT to me, would be better draw to Peoria than an museum island lacking other urban amenities.
The Lakeview Godfather is going to hold on to his property and let it sit vacant until his suburban dream is realized.
CJ
Where are those answers we have been waiting for from the Lakeview spin machine?
Paul and Chef
Cat has said “CAT WILL NOT BUILD THEIR THING” unless and until the Museum builds their thing. The CITY is NOT doing or has NOT done anything to STOP or DELAY Cat or Cat’s thing.
Gary,
I’m not saying the City has impeeded Cat’s progress, I’m simply saying that Cat should realize this won’t happen for decades if they’re really going to wait for lakeview, and thus should move forward alone. While the City should scrape the museum deal and move forward with private sector investment on the remainder of the site.
The editorial today “Museum a marathon,” mentions that Peoria’s museum is intended to “build cultural center[s], spur[n] tourism and create jobs.”
Cultural center? Maybe. Please define culture. Spur tourism? Something like the tourism spurred by casino-boat, Festival of Lights…etc.? Create jobs? Lakeview’s entire staff will simply relocate to new museum, taking most [if not all] of important jobs. Of course coffee/gift shop, janitorial, etc jobs will bring college grads and professionals back to Peoria in droves. Hell, Peoria Museum will probably, magically transform Dist #150 into a model of secondary/primary education!
The original plan for the museum block was beautiful in that if the museum failed in some fashion, the whole block wasn’t a loss, as it would be with the current design. With the original plan, the part that would have been the museum, could have easily been used as a retail or office space. Meanwhile you would have retail and residential spaces all providing taxes and rental revenue. CJ you have a pic of the original concept.
The original concept can be seen here: http://peoriachronicle.com/2006/06/27/circle-the-square/
As a concept the H.O.P. plan is leaps and bounds ahead of what the Lakeview Collective is planning. It proves that just like many other great schemes in Peoria this one started out giving me lots of hope for Peoria’s future only to devolve into the current FUBAR that it has become.
The shame of this is that having a museum, a REAL museum in Peoria is such a great idea. The problem is that no one on the “Lakeview Collective” will listen to anyone outside their little circle. Richerson might be a good admin and front man, but he knows squat about what really makes a museum tick.
Having community leaders who will take the lead and promote city projects is good, but let these people stick to what they KNOW. The credability of this project has suffered because the people involved are letting egos get in the way of common sense and common knowledge.
As I have said before…”whose legacy is it?”
I am curious… who owns the Sears block atm?
The City of Peoria, I believe.
Gary,
never implied the city was impeding anything, just offering a suggestion for a plan B if there is not enough public support of the Lakeview museum through contributions.
Could this all be some “ploy” of CAT to force the museum down the throats of Peorians? The people from CAT and Lakeview involved in this collaboration are one-in-the-same. How many present Lakeview board members are current and/or former big-time CAT execs? Whether a former CAT man or not, big money and politics will stick together in this city. I believe CAT is bluffing when they say they will not build unless museum goes through.
Sarah, I can’t understand why you might think CAT is bluffing on this. If the Peoria area community ultimately is not supportive of the constuction of a new museum on the site, you can be assured that CAT has plenty of other things to do with it’s $35M instead of building a Visitor Center. Things that will do something like, “RETURN A PROFIT”, not a black hole just for some type of contribution to civic redevelopment. Plus, their building a Visitor Center just makes them more stuck in Peoria. The day they conclude that it’s unlikely that the Museum will ever raise their $65M, you can bet that fence will be painted white again in a day, and they’ll be asking the city to reinburse them for the costs of the demolition on the site as stipulated in the redevelopment agreement. Then, since the city owns the entire site, the city council can begin negotiations with all those other developers that are so eager to invest their money on this site.
Kat, are you implying that the Sears block would not be in high demand if it were commercially available for redevelopment? Maybe I misread the tone of your last comment, but it sounded like you might be implying that. I would think that location would be in high demand.
Oh, and I meant to tell you earlier, thanks for your earlier clarification on NMTCs.
CJ: I think Katmandu 2 is employing a little sarcasm regards all the other developers. There are no other developers. The place sat there empty for 10 years without a viable proposal coming forward. If you think the Cat/Museum project is going to get in the city’s pockets, wait until you see what private developers will want. Look at the stuff on the raised platforms. Two empty buildings and Old Chicago is struggling, only serving lunch on Fridays and the weekend. How many places has the old CILCO substation been turned in to (Crooked Waters, Roxy’s and whatever the new one is called)? Same with River Station. The new River Station got loans from both the city and county to re-open. No developer is going to risk their money until some kind of traffic is created in that area. It just doesn’t exist now. The museum and visitor center will create that traffic. The Imax type theater alone will bring people downtown. We travel to the Quad Cities regularly to go to the one there. These things take time, aren’t easy, often are painful, everyone thinks they have the right way to do it, but in the end they end up benefitting the community. It’s way too early to pull the plug and go to the HOP plan of filling the area with a bunch of buildings, especially when there is no one willing to build the buildings.
Kat,
I see your point, however I am just posing a theory. Think on this…how will the completion of the planned museum change anything? The [a] museum will never become a “profit” making entity. In other words, a museum on site will not change the fact that the area will become a profit making “black hole.” CAT will not turn a dollar either way. It is still CAT though. Is $35 million to much to spend to glorify the name even further? You present a good argument, but I still wonder.
Observer,
Wow! Your opitimism is impressive. Of course no one can tell the future, but do you really think museum+visitor center will increse traffic, which will inturn cause an economic upswing? First; what businesses will benefit? Sure there is some cool stuff downtown, but with museum taking up all the prime property where will any new business develop? Also, new business does not have to be chain oriented or large scale [or even a bar]. Small shops, book stores, ice cream, antiques, coffee, Peoria tourist “stuff”…….etc.
You must also consider what can a city offer ALONG WITH an Imax? I mean really, as downtown stands now, what can Peoria offer along with a funky museum, with it’s funky hours, etc? In the end, the neat lawnscape of the museum will attract more visitors [eating their lunch] than the actual museum will.
Scott,
Do not forget that the museum’s green space could attract many of Peoria’s homeless if there is seating. Remember Fulton Plaza and its reconfiguration? Also, why do you think that the Downtown library has removed all of its comfortable furniture over the years?
Yes, my wife has always said a “little sarcasm” was one of my most endearing traits. If the City Council had had an alternative proposal for development of the site that would have represented the potential for $ million of tax revenue, they certainly would have pursued it and the museum concept would have gone no where. Everything else is speculation.
Scott: My optimism is based in reality. I travel a lot, and never miss a chance to get the local flavor of a place. There are many other people who do the same, and yes, I believe the new museum plus visitor center will increase traffic. Lakeview already attracts more than 100,000 people a year. Why would they stop coming? That’s 100,000 people downtown rather than out north. And the “funky hours” comment confuses me. How do you know what the hours will be? With an Imax they will be late into the evening. Lakeview offers laser shows now that attract sell out crowds at night. Downtown businesses have expressed confidence that the new complex will help them grow. Regarding homeless people in the open space, that will have to be addressed as it occurs. But it certainly is not a reason to drop the idea. If it doesn’t work and money can’t be raised, then move on. But this is the best idea with a chance of happening that has been presented. If we want to try and undo things from the past, then the awful development sitting right on the river should be ripped out. From my viewpoint, Joe’s Crab Shack, which is a fine eatery, shouldn’t have THE prime riverfront space in all of Peoria. That should belong to the people of Peoria. But a former council and riverfront development guru (Tom Tincher) got the deal done. As I’ve always said about the raised platforms, the city wanted riverfront development in the worst way, and that’s exactly what they got!
Observer,
I have and do travel a great deal as well. “Local flavor” is important. Never said I was against a museum, just don’t agree with the present concept of “museum.” I guess I tend to judge a museum on it’s ability to perform as a MUSEUM, not as the centerpiece for a new booming, city [Peoria] economy.
Where in the heck did you get the figure 100,000 people a year visiting Lakeview? NO FREAKING WAY! I am sorry, if Lakeview is posting numbers like these….they are simply blowing smoke.
Sorry,
What businesses are expressing confidence that the new complex will
help them grow? Are these the same “businesses,” along with the majority of Peorians, who are expressing such an overwhelming amount of support for this project [sarcasm]? Did I mention anything like a Joe’s Crab Shack?
Scott: If you don’t believe Lakeview’s numbers there’s not much I can do about that. They are accredited by the AAM and as such I believe are regularly audited, etc. There is nothing else in this area that goes through accreditation like Lakeview. There have been numerous stories quoting businesses near the complex who are hungering for the traffic it will bring. The museum people have never said their intent was to be the focus of a booming Peoria economy. If you look at their concepts they are clearly putting forth a museum with programming that will be first class. I wasn’t referencing Joe’s relative to the museum block, but only that that’s what the city gave us in the first go around of riverfront development. They stole the view of the river for economic purposes and gave a profit-making entity the best view of the river for dining, sitting, etc. That side of Water St. should have been an extension of Liberty Park, and many people advocated for that years ago (Liberty Park was built in 1988). But the city opted for a private developer who gave us Joes, the now defunct Damon’s, and the now defunct gift shop, and a struggling Old Chicago. So the effort for economic glory has fallen flat on its face with private developers. I say let people who have big ideas that are for the good of the community give it a try, even if the view will be of the back of buildings instead of the river. Perhaps as an art project, Lakeview can paint the back of the buildings to re-create the lost view that private developers everyone seems to want gave us (sarcasm).
Observer,
I appreciate your views. We really could go around about this forever. I am very familier with AAM and the regs. Auditing “numbers” through the door has very little to do with accredation. There is NOTHING wrong with hundreds or even thousands of school kids, scouts etc coming through a museum. In my opinion this why we have museums! However, most museum visitors [at least in the case of LV], are the above school aged children. Hardly the “traffic” expected or desired by local business.
Strange as it sounds, it seems that the Museum Group has done nothing but promote the economic benefits of this contraption from the start! The increase in business traffic, tourism, culture appeal for potential professionals moving into area, etc.
I do understand this, we do need to be practical.
Now….trust me, I have looked at the programming, exhibits, etc. the museum people are promoting. I understand exactly what they are doing. I am sorry, but for $65 million plus, this museum is not first class, if museum I would call it. Pretty power points do not mean a first class museum. I know the joke – new museum BIGGER version of old Lakeview – is a little crude. Maybe new museum should be a SMALLER version of Chicago Field Museum.?.?.? New buildings, snappy lights, etc. are not going to change Lakeview’s poor interpretation of Peoria History, Material Culture, etc. This museum does not promote scholarship beyond the secondary school level! I am sorry this does not justify $65 million and loss of prime space.
Scott: Lakeview as it is now has nothing to do with Peoria history…it is an art and science museum. Why do you say it has a poor interpretation of Peoria history when that has never been its mission. Seems odd to me that virtually every other community has some kind of a history museum except Peoria. We have a couple of houses, which you cannot construe as museums of any kind. What have the history people been doing for the last hundred years or so? Sorry, but you can’t blame Lakeview for lack of history interpretation. At least now they have given history an opportunity to be on display where people will actually see it. As far as I know the museum group includes local history buffs, including Dr. Peter Couri who seems to be quite knowledgeable and respected in this area. I, too, respect your views, but you seem to be pushing for a one dimensional approach–history only. Regardng numbers through the door, either you accept the 100,000 or you don’t. School kids have parents and grandparents, aunts and uncles, and they are good candidates to return. With larger space there will be more to do. All of the plans today are conceptual in nature. They certainly provide a much more expanded view of Peoria history than currently provided by the Peoria Historical Society.
Observer,
You must not know the same people at LV I do. They HAVE claimed to be an all encompassing museum. Ask Jim Richerson about LV and their attempts to present and interprate Peoria history. WHY is LV planning the design, layout, exhibit presentation, etc? To be sure they have hired many a million $ consulting firm, but……… Also, I did not mention history alone! I said history, material culture [archaeological interpretations, etc]. The houses are a different story I admit.
Last. Dr. Peter Couri…the dentist????? Are you serious? He is a buff! Would you entrust your BMW to a guy who digs fixing cars? Couri may be passionate about his history hobby, but that does not make him a source to go to where a $65 MILLION museum is concerned! I happen to be an armchair dentist. Will you come to me for your next filling?
Scott: I have been a member of Lakeview for 20 years and there is NO WAY they have ever claimed to be an all-encompassing museum. The new museum will be that, using the Delta concept, but that has never been Lakeview’s mission in the past. They are one of a handful of arts and sciences museums in the country, and of 14,000 AAM members they are one of 800 that are accredited. Other people from the Historical Society are involved as well, but given their woeful track record of not ever having put together a museum, they don’t have the expertise either. Perhaps you should apply for the job?
Scott: An addendum: I talked with the LV staff and they say that Jim Richerson has always said you can’t do arts and science programming without some link to history…BUT THAT DOESN’T MEAN THEY ARE A HISTORY MUSEUM. With the Delta concept, there will be the opportunity to put everything in context and I believe the concept is the first of its kind in the nation.
Observor,
Yes, yes…Delta Concept. This is/was really pushed by White Oaks. What a novel idea, change exhibits on a regular basis! I fully agree, LV is NOT an history museum. They should stop acting like they are. It is hardly the first of its kind in the nation. You had better conduct your own research and not take Richerson’s word as gospel.
The LV approach will result in a mish-mash approach, producing much in the way of eye-candy, but little in the way of true exhibit interpretation [whether history – social, political, economics, etc]. I don’t know about the Peo Hist Soc or any of the other “partners.” I can only assume that LV is taking the lead because they have the resources [certainly not the expertise].
It certainly is disheartening to hear your view and assessment. I believe LV has been an outstanding resource to this community and that Jim Richerson personally is a quality person and leader,if the powers to be let him lead. The Delta concept, by the way, is not about changing exhibits. It’s about melding history, science and art so that one has a true impression of the era that is being discussed and presented. I am sure that LV will find the expertise need to interpret historical situations. They don’t need that person or persons now because they are not at that stage. And LV did not seek to do the history component, it was forced on them by Ray LaHood who said he couldn’t get funding for a stand alone history museum and a science an art museum. If course, he’s not getting much in the way of grants for anything at this point. Again, since you seem to have a passion for the history side of this, why not apply and try to be a part of the solution instead of criticizing and tearing down the museum? One thing is for sure, whatever history component comes about, it will be far superior to the two houses that now exist and haven’t changed in the 31 years I have lived in Peoria. Visit them once, maybe twice, and that’s it. Perhaps, by the way, you should do a little research on the Delta concept so you have a better understanding of the uniqueness this musuem will provide. Apparently you would like to have a set display of a historical nature without any context in terms of other things going on at the time. How uninspired and boring.
Observe,
HA! You amuse me. O.K.
CJ has a first rate blog site going here. It is a great way for people to comment on current events, etc. The problem is that trying to carry on a real debate [especially one as involved as the museum] on a blog site is nearly impossible.
I am more than familiar with Delta, yes it is much more involved than changing exhibits. Peoria Hist houses…I agree with you. “Passionate” is not the word I would use. It would take forever for me to explain my ideas, the rights and wrongs of this project, etc. Trying to do it on the i-net only adds to confusion and misinterpretation.
In the end, public opinion, support or lack of it might determine everything. Starting with CJ’s first entry, the above series of entries speaks volumes. Most people on this site appear to be for a “museum.” Most, if not all the people/entries seem to disagree with the planning, location, etc of the present design. I guess time will tell.
I agree with the difficulty, etc. of carrying on a debate here. But counting CJ, you and me, there are 12 people commenting here. It’s not reasonable to conclude that there is a tidal wave against the museum. Let’s agree to call it a draw for now, and let time do it’s thing.
No, no, please, don’t call it a draw. Don’t just wait around for time to do it’s thing. Besides the fact that you’re both very entertaining, it’s obvious you’re both very interested in this proposal. So please step forward and volunteer to get involved. Scott, you seem to imply that you’ve attempted to become involved and the Lakeview powers have thwarted your efforts. Well I wouldn’t let them just have their way, an intelligent, passionate individual ought to be able to find some way to squeeze into the operation and have an impact on the planning of this thing. From what I understand, they’re still designing the building and haven’t even hired the exhibit design consultants yet, so it appears to me they’re still in the yacking phase. It’s easy to sit at your computer and throw rocks, are you so discouraged that you won’t try and get involved to make a positive difference.
Kat,
I appreciate your zeal in the matter. Who is to say that I am not taking an active part in this process now? I live in Peoria and I am interested in everything that goes on in this city. I am not giving up on anything…trust me. I am just saying it is difficult to carry on a debate this way [over the internet], and no-one is throwing stones. There is a big difference between constructive criticism and “throwing stones.” “Sitting at the computer” is only one way to express our opinions. If every time we express an opinion on a blog site or in an editorial, someone accuses us of hiding behind our computers, etc. Why have editorials? Perhaps we should tell CJ [and others] to knock off this silly-ass blog stuff?
Kat, Scott: There are so many things in Peoria to give our time to. All of my free time (with exception of a little blogging now and then) goes to trying to better older neighborhoods which are really struggling. But I see the new museum complex as a major boost for those neighborhoods in terms of educational, cultural and even entertainment opportunities. We need to engage our youth with challenging and interesting concepts. Lakeview does its best now, but with limited space it’s difficult. I just think an expanded museum, close to the river, with science, art and history included, gives us as a community one more way to help kids grow and develop. Will it be perfect? Of course not. But I’m betting it will be exciting and meaningful. I just hope the community at large sees it as a cornerstone for helping improve the quality of life for everyone in central Illinis, and particularly for kids and families who are struggling economically and educationally. I know first hand that kids–no matter their socio-economic status–respond to interesting and engaging ideas, visuals, concepts and so forth. For the future of central Illinois, we need a place that creates that kind of interest. Everything else–tourism, economic growth, a boost for business–is icing on the cake in my opinion. Jim Richerson talks about the museum as a Legacy Project, and I really believe that’s what it is. It’s our legacy now for central Illinois’ future.
I happen to think this discussion has been very interesting and educational. I love to hear both sides of the issue, and I feel like that’s what we’re getting here.
If you want, and if it would make this forum easier for each of you, I’ll make you an offer. Each of you write up your “side” of the argument — make your case — and send it to me via e-mail, and I will post both of them as guest editorials on my blog.
It sounds like you two are quite involved in Lakeview and can make a good case for your opinions, and I think my readers would love to hear both sides of the argument. Scott could write about what his vision is for a museum and why the Museum Collaboration plan isn’t living up to that ideal. Observer can write about why the current museum plan is better than the Heart of Peoria Plan vision. … Or however you want to organize it — I’m just trying to say you can both feel free to give your positive vision of how the museum project should go. If you’d rather not proceed in this way, that’s fine too. Just wanted to provide you with another option, if you’re interested.
Since most people are familiar with Billy’s new open blog design, I want to just add for clarification that I’m not setting my blog up that way. I will occasionally solicit “guest editorials” and I reserve the right to choose who I will and won’t publish. I’m much more of a control freak than Billy. 🙂 However, those editorials I do publish will be published with the contributor’s byline (which can be an anonymous handle if you so choose). I won’t edit them except to remove libel or obscene language. Fair enough?
CJ: Works for me, and thank you. The availability of your forum is a real service to the community. I will put my thoughts together this week and e-mail it. More open discussion such as this, as difficult as it can be, is beneficial to the community as a whole.
Yes, thanks CJ, I think that’s an excellent offer. In another vein, we heard from the Museum folks at their press conference that they are in the process of interviewing and selecting the exhibit designers for the various portions of the Museum. I’d certainly hope that the Peoria Historical Society is involved in that process and perhaps even has a committee working on that portion of the museum exhibit design process. I’d think both Scott and justan observer would be valuable additions to that type of committee.