2011 Election, City Council, City of Peoria, Peoria Public Schools

The District 150 conundrum

37 Comments

I find it really interesting that, as a City Council candidate, I regularly get asked about what the City can do (or what I can/will do as a City Council person) to help District 150. Oftentimes, the questions go beyond the support areas over which the City has control, and gets into school board policy — concerns over school closures, returning schools to a K-8 configuration, and similar things. In fact, from the questions I get asked at forums and in personal interactions, it looks to me like the state of District 150 is, if not number one, at least the number two priority of Peoria residents.

And yet…

Not a single person circulated petitions for the third ward school board seat. As a result, all the candidates there are write-in candidates. The third ward school board member vacating his seat this year is running for City Council instead. In the second ward, there’s only one challenger to sitting school board president Debbie Wolfmeyer. The last time Martha Ross was up for reelection, she ran unopposed. If I were to judge the public’s concern for District 150 by their efforts to change policy by getting on the board and challenging the status quo, I’d have to say it’s not a very high priority at all.

How are we to explain this strange phenomenon?

Bradley University

Main Street Commons update from Bradley Scout

10 Comments

The Bradley Scout has been keeping an eye on the new Main Street Commons and how quickly the new student housing facility is selling leases:

More than half of the apartments at Main Street Commons have yet to be leased, but both university administration and Main Street Commons are still optimistic.

“I’m really excited about second semester,” said Jennifer Dunbar, the building’s marketing specialist and leasing agent. “We had a slow first semester. It’s hard to lease a building when you can’t give a tour.”

Of the 188 units available only 88 have been leased, which is about double the number of units that were leased in November.

…Even though Bradley is financially involved in the building, Vice President of Student Affairs Alan Galsky said he is hopeful and would be surprised if Main Street Commons isn’t completely filled by the fall.

“I am cautiously optimistic the building will fill up,” he said. “We would like to see the whole building filled with Bradley students. If not, Main Street Commons is prepared to fill it with other students in the area such as medical students and graduate students.”

Main Street Commons is the multi-story apartment building being constructed on the site of the old Walgreens on West Main Street.

City of Peoria, History

Another historic property may see wrecking ball

12 Comments

Included in the Peoria City Council’s evisceration of the city’s historic preservation ordinance was a provision that exempts church-owned property from historic preservation. Specifically, the motion said, in part, “No property or structure that is owned by a religious organization and is used primarily as a place for the conduct of religious ceremonies or to further the religious mission or business of the owner shall be subject to the regulations set forth in Articles I through IV of this Chapter by reason of its location within a Historic District….”

That’s all Westminster Presbyterian Church needed to file suit against the City:

Westminster Presbyterian Church, 1420 W. Moss Ave., wants a judge to declare Westminster House has a religious use and therefore can be demolished under changes made to the ordinance Feb. 8…. For years, Westminster has tried to demolish the Westminster House, located at 1508 W. Moss Ave. and in the heart of Moss-High Historic District. The efforts have led nowhere until perhaps now. In 2008, the church unsuccessfully tried to convince the historic preservation commission to allow it to demolish the building. Then they filed suit in federal court, a legal action that was defeated last fall.

The suit filed Monday states the church began holding men’s fellowship prayer meetings on March 9 and that makes the building, which had been used until 2006 as office space, a religious building.

This illustrates the can of worms opened by the council’s action. Do existing historic landmarks automatically get de-listed if they are owned by religious organizations now they are exempt? What if a religious organization purchases an historic landmark building? Does it then automatically get de-listed?

I wonder if those on the council who voted for this amendment had really thought through all the ramifications before passing it.

2011 Election, City Council, City of Peoria

Last scheduled Council candidates forum tonight

16 Comments

There’s a candidates forum for the Peoria City Council at-large race tonight at 7:00 p.m. at the G.A.R. Hall, 416 Hamilton Blvd., downtown Peoria. The event is sponsored by the Central Illinois Landmarks Foundation (CILF), so there will certainly be questions about the candidates’ views on historic preservation. However, the questions will not be limited to that topic. Any city- or council-related issues are fair game.

City Council, City of Peoria

Peoria City Council 3/22/2011 (Live Blog)

14 Comments

Good evening, everyone. I’m live-blogging from home tonight, as I have had a terrible head cold the last couple of days — especially last night and this morning. So, I’ve got my Kleenex handy and lots of fluids nearby, and my radio tuned to WCBU 89.9 FM. This is probably a good time to encourage everyone who appreciates WCBU’s live coverage of the Peoria City Council meetings to make a donation to them — you can pledge online here.

This is the last council meeting before the April 5 at-large election. There are a couple of controversial issues on the agenda tonight: the low-income elderly housing facility proposed near the corner of War Memorial Drive and Sheridan Road (Item 3) and the East Village Growth Cell and Tax Increment Financing (TIF) district (Items 4-6). If you’re following along live, be sure to refresh your browser every so often to get the latest updates. The meeting starts at 6:15, and begins with a few proclamations, so it will be a few minutes before we get into the agenda.

One of the proclamations was a touching commemoration of the life of Les Kenyon. May he rest in peace.

And now, without any further ado, here’s tonight’s agenda:

Continue reading Peoria City Council 3/22/2011 (Live Blog) →

City of Peoria, Peoria Fire Department, Peoria Mayor

Ardis pooh-poohs city-run ambulance service, but explanation raises more questions

21 Comments

The City Council candidates are often asked at forums what ideas we have for generating more revenue for the city. Gary Sandberg has suggested that the City should provide its own ambulance service, severing its contract with Advanced Medical Transport (AMT). The way he sees it, we already have a professional fire department that is first on the scene and capable of providing basic life support (BLS); it would not take much to have these guys trained to provide advanced life support (ALS) as well.

Mayor Jim Ardis apparently heard about this and took up his pen to write an editorial in the Journal Star. He says:

During the current campaign for City Council, some candidates have suggested that the city consider starting its own ambulance service. As a 14-year veteran on the council, I have studied this question time and again and the answer is always the same. A city-operated ambulance provider will require a taxpayer subsidy from our general fund and lose millions of dollars each year.

AMT doesn’t receive a taxpayer subsidy. In fact, AMT pays the city a dispatch fee that generates $100,000 per year. We have a good medical emergency response system. It is not broken and meets the highest national standards defined to date. Private studies have provided the same conclusion.

Start-up costs to begin transport would be nearly $3.5 million for equipment and training. AMT writes off more than $2 million per year as uncollectable, bad debt. The company also discounts $5 million for Medicare and Medicaid. The city could not afford to lose a penny of revenue and still wouldn’t run this operation in the black. Simply put, transport is not a core service for our citizens.

…Our ambulance service agreement with our professional fire department is an idea that works. Adding to our already strained payroll is an idea that does not make sense.

I’m not going to dismiss Ardis’s criticism out of hand. But this explanation leaves a lot to be desired. Given the numbers put forth in this editorial, one has to wonder how AMT didn’t go bankrupt years ago. Why is AMT able to operate in the black, but the City of Peoria couldn’t? Since AMT is a not-for-profit organization, I took a look at its Form 990.

According to the 2009 Form 990 (the latest available), AMT’s total revenue was $11,696,795. That revenue went up every year from 2005 ($9,224,551) to 2009. Total expenses were $10,776,223, including the executive director’s salary of $256,549, the assistant executive director’s salary of $113,612, and the controller’s salary of $110,651. Considering they’re a non-profit company, and thus their services are priced accordingly, I’d say they’re doing pretty well, and have been for a number of years.

Again, I’m not saying that Ardis is necessarily wrong — I’m just saying his article doesn’t explain why AMT is able to make almost a million dollars a year and pay handsome salaries to its top brass, but somehow the City would lose money hand over fist if it provided the same service. I’m also unclear why we would have to “[add] to our already strained payroll.” Why couldn’t the existing personnel who are already BLS-trained also be ALS-trained? There would be training and equipment costs to be sure, but why couldn’t those costs be covered by the revenue the City would receive the same way AMT’s training and equipment costs are covered by the revenue they receive?

We need Paul Harvey to give us the rest of the story.

Census 2010, City of Peoria

A picture of Peoria’s shifting population

20 Comments

From the City’s Planning and Growth Department, here are a couple of pictures that show the migration of Peoria’s population from the older neighborhoods to the south into the newer neighborhoods to the north. Areas in red and orange saw a decline in population, whereas areas in yellow and green saw an increase. As you look at these, take particular note of how large the area is that is losing population versus the area that is gaining population. Here’s a map that shows the change just over the past ten years:

And here’s what the change looks like over the past forty years:

Here are some other revealing statistics:

Year Population Area
1970 126,963 40 mi.2
2010 115,007 49.84 mi.2

That means that, over the past 40 years, there has been a 9.42% drop in population, and a 24.6% increase in land area that has been annexed into the City. In other words, our city has gotten physically bigger, but the burden of providing city services to all that land is falling on fewer taxpayers.

Now, to be fair, we had large population losses from 1970 to 2000, but have seen a slight population gain between 2000 and 2010. So let’s compare just the changes in the past ten years. Population increased from 112,936 to 115,007, or 1.83%, yet land area grew from 44 to 49.84 square miles, or 13.27%. If it takes over 13% growth in land to net a little under 2% growth in population, I would submit that we cannot sustain such a policy.

These charts illustrate that we have to find ways to get people moving back into our heritage neighborhoods. Northern growth alone is demonstrably insufficient to pull the city out of its fiscal crisis.