City Council, City of Peoria

Ideas abound at special council meeting

16 Comments

The Journal Star has an excellent report (it was written by Jennifer Davis, so I expected nothing less) on the special council meeting last night. Last year, new council members Bob Manning and Barbara Van Auken were just learning the ropes of city budget planning. This year, they’re ready to make good on their campaign promises of increased fire protection and elimination of the regressive garbage tax.

Mayor Ardis is helping that cause by starting early to establish budget priorities and communicate them proactively to city staff (in the past, the city manager would write up a proposed budget and the council would react to it). But the big question is, how do you pay for more fire protection and eliminate a $2.4 million revenue source (garbage tax)?

In 2007, Mayor Jim Ardis wants the city to fully restore Fire Station 11 and find a “dedicated total public safety revenue stream.” Exactly what that is, Ardis admits he doesn’t know yet….

One idea is to take public safety funding off the property tax bills and replace it with a separate public safety tax. The difference is that the public safety tax could be applied to everyone who benefits from public safety services. Right now, non-profit organizations like hospitals, churches, and charities don’t pay property taxes, yet they benefit from police and fire protection.

If the protection we all share were paid for through a public safety tax instead of property taxes, the cost of that protection would be shared by all as well. Spreading out the cost would be more equitable, and may actually lower the amount homeowners pay for public safety services while increasing overall revenue at the same time.

Council members Van Auken and Manning also are throwing around ways to help strengthen Peoria’s older neighborhoods:

Van Auken also supports helping stabilize the older neighborhoods by freezing their property taxes so any additional increase in property tax revenue can be reinvested in those areas, somewhat of a pseudo TIF district. […] Third District Councilman Bob Manning suggested a similar “urban renewal” plan to Van Auken’s – freezing property taxes in certain areas to entice people to move back into the city’s core and reinvest.

It should be mentioned that these are just ideas and nobody has run the numbers yet to see how much such a plan would cost. This meeting was more of a brainstorming session. If the cost estimates come back too large, then the whole idea may be scrapped. But I’m glad to see them (forgive me for using this cliche) “thinking outside the box.”

That said, I doubt this plan is going to get off the ground. Whenever you freeze property taxes, you’re taking money out of district 150’s pocket, and they can’t afford any more revenue loss. And the state of the schools is one of the prime reasons people aren’t moving to the older neighborhoods (crime being the other reason) in the first place — not high property taxes. So this plan would seem to be self-defeating.

John Morris had several ideas, including one to make Peoria “a walkable city”:

He suggests $2 million each year from capital for sidewalks connecting Peoria’s neighborhoods to its assets, like the library and parks. “I can’t walk my two children from my home in the heart of the city to the library without feeling I’m taking our lives in my hands,” he said.

Well, there’s a difference between making the “heart of the city” more walkable and making the whole city more walkable.

In the heart of the city, sidewalks will help, but only if it’s coupled with slower traffic and a buffer between the sidewalk and the street. For instance, not long ago I walked from my house in the Uplands to the Blockbuster video store in Campustown. Walking on my street with its on-street parking and 25 mph speed limit was very pleasant. Walking on Main Street was a nightmare. Main Street is five lanes, which means traffic moves much faster than the posted 30 mph speed limit, and the narrow sidewalks abut the street, making you feel very unsafe as cars go whipping past you.

In the newer parts of the city, as you go north, these areas were not created to be “walkable,” but to be accessible only by automobile. Adding sidewalks (other than for recreational walking around the neighborhood) is not going to allow you to walk to the park or the library, unless you’re willing to walk several miles along an arterial road. My dad and I have walked down the shoulder of Route 150 from Charter Oak Road to Glen Hollow and let me tell you, it’s not a pleasant walk on which you’d want to take your family. And when you get to the end, you still haven’t seen a park or library. It would take some radical changes to make these newer neighborhoods “walkable” in the way Morris describes.

There were more ideas that I may discuss in future posts, but this one is long enough!

Amtrak, State Legislation, State of Illinois

New state budget includes money for more Amtrak routes

7 Comments

The Chicago Tribune reports that funding for Amtrak routes in Illinois was doubled in the 2007 budget — from $12 million to $24 million — so they’re planning to use that money for “[t]wo additional daily Amtrak roundtrips between Chicago and St. Louis and an extra run each on the Quincy and Carbondale lines….”

I hope the extra trains make it possible for me to take Amtrak down to St. Louis for a Cardinals game and come back the same day.

Even before gas prices started soaring, I would always take the train to Chicago for business meetings and stuff because it was so much cheaper than driving. Parking alone can cost you $20 up there, plus gas and tolls. The train? $30 round trip. And, frankly, it’s the civilized way to travel. I bet adding more routes will increase ridership.

Now, when are we going to get a passenger train to come through Peoria again? We can always re-convert the old Rock Island Depot (aka “The River Station”) back into a train station.

Blogosphere, City Council

No council meeting tonight — Blogger Bash instead!

There’s no “regular” City Council meeting tonight, but they are meeting in a special session to discuss council “priorities and goals.”  No final action will be taken.

What’s a blogger to do without a council meeting?  Why, go to Blogger Bash, of course!  Of course, you don’t have to be a blogger to attend.  Come on out, all you bloggers, commenters, and other informed citizens.  We always have a fun time of socializing and discussion.

You can see who all is coming by going to Bill Dennis’s site.  The bash will be at Whitey’s Tip Top Tap in the Sheridan Road Façade Improvement Corridor, 2601 N. Sheridan, at 8 p.m. tonight.

City of Peoria, Heart of Peoria Plan

Urban design forum planned for May 19-20

4 Comments

From the Department of Planning and Growth Management:

Much has happened since 2002 when the Heart of Peoria (H.O.P.) Plan was developed using a charette process directed by the firm of Duany Plater-Zyberk. Learn of the progress we have made in implementing this plan and join us for the exciting second phase of the project. Voice your opinions and add your ideas to those of City Council members, commissioners, city staff, neighborhood and business leaders, and your fellow citizens.

The weeklong urban design forum of Studio H.O.P., directed by the experts at Ferrell Madden, will result in specific concepts and designs for the Sheridan-Loucks Corridor, the Warehouse District and the Prospect Road Corridor. Other New Urbanism strategies will also be created for other Heart of Peoria neighborhoods.

The opening session will be held at the Civic Center on Friday night, May 19, at 6:30 p.m. The hands-on design session for neighborhoods will be held on Saturday, May 20 from 8:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. at the Iron Front Building (424 SW Washington). You can find out more information by going to www.heartofpeoria.com or calling the Planning and Growth Management Department at 494-8600.

It’s very encouraging to see the city actively working on implementing the Heart of Peoria Plan. It’s also refreshing to see public input proactively welcomed and seen as valuable (in contrast to the school district’s actions of late).

The website is very informative, although its graphics are so large that it takes a long time to load each page, even with a broadband connection. They should look into reducing the file size of the pictures to make the site more user-friendly and so it doesn’t detract from the excellent content.

At this point, I’m planning to attend the charette. I never got a chance to attend the original charettes back in 2002 because of my work schedule, but I think I will be able to attend one of the dates this time.

City of Peoria, East Bluff, Kellar Branch, Peoria County, Peoria Disposal Company, Peoria Park District, Peoria Public Schools, Peoria Regional Airport

A taxing weekend

4 Comments

Yesterday I got my property tax bill.

Looking it over, I see that over half my taxes go to Peoria Public School District 150. They’re going to have another forum on the future plans for Glen Oak and White schools, this time just for parents of kids who attend those schools. Superintendent Ken Hinton said, “It’s important to me to hear the voice of the parents.” Okay, I’ll take him at his word, but he’d be a whole lot more convincing if he had listened to their voice before deciding the site of a new school.

I have the same concerns about the format as other people, so I won’t repeat that here. But I would like to make another point: I think it’s important to listen to the parents of kids who attend there, but this decision doesn’t just affect them. Alterations to Glen Oak Park affects all of Peoria. Replacing the Glen Oak School site with a park, public housing, or a vacant building affects all of the East Bluff. Let’s just suppose, for the sake of argument, that the parents of kids at Glen Oak and White right now are indifferent to the location of a new school. That should be taken into consideration, but shouldn’t trump overall neighborhood and city concerns.

Also on my bill, I see I’m paying a good amount to the “Pleasure Driveway PKD,” aka the Peoria Park District. The park board was just slapped with a lawsuit this weekend by neighborhood activists Karrie Alms and Sara Partridge. According to the Journal Star, the suit “alleges closed meetings held by the board on March 8 and 22 violated the state’s Open Meetings Act by discussing plans to replace Glen Oak School when that wasn’t appropriate.” If the court finds that the board met illegally, and if the decision to enter into an intergovernmental agreement with District 150 was made in one of those meetings, one possible remedy would be to nullify the agreement that was made in secret.

I’m glad somebody cares enough to act on this. People complain about back-room deals and shady politics, but more often than not nobody does anything about it. Here are a couple of people who are willing to hold the Park Board accountable for their actions. Kudos to Karrie and Sara!

Let’s see, what else is on my tax bill? There’s Illinois Central College and the Peoria Library. Don’t have much to say about those except that I think the library here in Peoria is under-utilized. There’s a wealth of information and expertise down there — I’ve learned more about Peoria from the library than one could ever learn online.

The Greater Peoria Mass Transit District, aka CityLink, makes an appearance on my bill. They do a pretty good job of moving people around the city — a tough job when the city is as spread out as it is. On the Peoria Rails Yahoo group, several people have been throwing around the idea of using the Kellar Branch for a light passenger rail system instead of a walking/biking trail:

The expansion of Peoria population into the far northwest part of the city, the growth of shopping in that area, and greatly increased fuel costs might make light rail service feasible. The Kellar branch could up upgraded and extended over Rt 6 to a parking and depot area behind or near the Grand Prairie. Interconnecting bus service there, downtown, and perhaps at a stop or two along the way would make public transportation quicker and more user friendly. The light rail service could terminate at the old Rock Island Depot and the light rail unit could be run in the push/pull – Chicago METRA style. A shuttle bus could take passengers to and from the CITYLINK terminal on Adams St.

Not a bad idea, especially given the cost of gas these days. However, there are two things not mentioned that would have to happen for it to be successful: (1) the speed limit for this light rail system would have to be faster than the 10 mph city code dictates for trains, and (2) part of the upgrade of the Kellar Branch would have to be better signals at grade crossings and fences along the tracks where the tracks pass through neighborhoods.

CityLink isn’t the only transportation entity on my tax bill. There’s also the Greater Peoria Regional Airport Authority. They have a new skipper (Ken Spirito from Gulfport, Mississippi), and part of his mission is to “redevelop and redo this terminal building. […] I want it to be a ‘wow’ impression. I want to ‘wow’ them,” according to the Journal Star‘s May 1 article. At least one person doesn’t like that idea. Polly Peoria, usually an advocate of tearing down old buildings, likes this one, so it can stay. I haven’t flown since before 9/11/01, so I honestly have no idea what kind of condition Peoria’s airport is in. If remodeling can bring in more business though, I say go for it. It’s not like that terminal was built to be a hallmark civic building.

What’s left? Let’s see, Peoria County, which recently voted down an expansion to the hazardous waste landfill. Now there’s a public board that listened to the public. District 150 and the Park Board could learn a few things from them. I’ve already blogged about this issue at length, so I’ll move on.

Finally, there’s the City of Peoria and Peoria Township. Why we need both I don’t quite understand, and yes, I have read the Journal Star’s special series on this issue. It’s an interesting read, but given what services the township now provides, it seems like they could just as easily provide it as part of city services and eliminate redundant government bodies.

As usual, my wife and I will pick a day to go down to the courthouse, eat at the pushcarts, listen to the Arts in Education bands play, enjoy the beautiful weather (hopefully), and pay our property taxes. Doing it that way lessens the pain of all the money we’re paying.

City of Peoria, Kellar Branch

Response to George Burrier and the RTA

1 Comment

“This issue has dragged on long enough,” said George Burrier, president of both Recreational Trail Advocates and Friends of the Rock Island Trail.

He wonders why Carver Lumber Co. doesn’t withdraw its complaint and cooperate with the city, which has constructed a $2 million rail line to the company’s site from the west.

Customers of the Kellar line enjoyed city-subsidized service for years, Burrier said, because the city leased the line for $1 a year.

“And what is the definition of ‘adequate’?” asked Burrier, a retired lawyer.

That quote is from today’s Journal Star. I’d like to answer Mr. Burrier’s questions.  First of all, Carver won’t withdraw its complaint and “cooperate with the city,” because it tried that route once already and it cost them $60,000.  The city promised in writing that service would continue over the Kellar Branch until the western spur was completed. That service did not continue, and Carver had to truck its lumber for several months at great expense.  That’s what they got for their “cooperation.”  They’re not complaining out of spite, but to protect their business and the jobs of their employees.

Burrier’s claim of city-subsidized service shows a profound ignorance of the history of the city’s involvement in the rail line.  The city paid $856,000 for the rail line in 1984.  To recoup that investment, the city charged user fees of $175 per car, plus every business on the line had to pay a special assessment, whether they used the line or not.  The city eventually dropped the per-car user fee when one of the companies on the line went out of business.  Businesses along the line have not had a free ride, as Mr. Burrier implies.

As for the definition of “adequate,” we need only read the city’s very own contract with DOT Rail (parent company of the Central Illinois Railway which replaced Pioneer Industrial Railway).  This contract was signed June 26, 2000, and says in Article 2 (emphasis mine):

DOT shall use all commercially reasonable efforts to [secure] an interchange agreement with UP [Union Pacific] under terms that will not materially increase the rates charged the Rail Line’s customers or significantly alter the service level presently provided over the Kellar Branch.  Commercially reasonable efforts shall include, if necessary, the duty to pursue all available remedies through the Surface Transportation Board (“STB”) (or other regulatory agency or body having jurisdiction) to obtain such interchange agreement.

It’s only reasonable that the new service over the western spur be tested to make sure it meets these requirements before the Kellar Branch is removed. Remember, Carver has access to eight major rail lines via the Kellar Branch, but only one (UP) via the western spur.  If UP charges them an exorbitant tariff to provide service to the spur, they will have little or no recourse.

Burrier’s statements indicate he is either ignorant of the complexities surrounding this issue, or that he is apathetic to the plight of Carver Lumber.

City of Peoria, Kellar Branch

You be the judge: is this a news report or an editorial?

1 Comment

The Journal Star has posted a midday report on the Surface Transportation Board decision from two weeks ago (reported here on April 25).

The headline says “Rails staying on trail for at least 90 days.” I know reporters don’t write headlines. I’m sure the person who wrote it was looking for a clever turn of phrase. However, it reveals the newspaper’s bias — notice they already consider the Kellar Branch a trail. The rails, which have been there for over 100 years, are made to sound like an evicted tenant who refuses to leave his apartment.

If you read the whole story, you’ll notice a couple of other little biases. While they interview George Burrier, president of both the Recreational Trail Advocates (RTA) and Friends of the Rock Island Trail, and Bonnie Noble, executive director of the Peoria Park District, they don’t interview Carver Lumber Company. Isn’t that interesting?

They talk about the grants the Park District has had on hold for twelve years waiting to build the trail, but don’t mention the $55,000 Carver Lumber had to spend on additional transportation costs when the city broke their promise to provide uninterrupted rail service via Central Illinois Railway.

They talk about trail advocates (like the RTA) being unhappy, but don’t mention rail advocates (like the Illinois Prairie Railroad Foundation) being thrilled.

In short, it’s an editorial masquerading (poorly) as an unbiased news report.

UPDATE 5/6/06: They’ve run a lengthier article in today’s paper that does interview Carver Lumber and has a different headline (“Trail delays drag on“). This article is much better than the original one in the “midday report.”

Blogosphere, Peoria County, Peoria Disposal Company

Whither goest the civic-minded?

4 Comments

Not too long ago, I was doing some research on the Richwoods Township annexation back in 1964. During the time leading up to the referendum, there was a lot of heated rhetoric, and when the vote came around, the citizens were split almost right down the middle. The annexation passed by a mere 336 votes.

Yet, when it was all over, I was struck by a comment made by one of the opposition leaders. He expressed his disappointment over the loss, but then he added that he was a civic-minded man and wanted to see Peoria succeed, so he would get behind the annexation and do what he could to make sure the transition went smoothly. He wanted what was best for Peoria. This man was a true statesman.

Compare that response to the hazardous waste landfill proponents after the county board denied PDC’s application for expansion:

  • Hazardous-waste enthusiast Bill Dennis said on his blog, “The NIMBY […] crowd think they won last night. I’ll let them savor their ‘victory.’ After the lawsuits start and the bills rack up […] and the unemployment claims are filed, I’ll try not to gloat about being right.”
  • County board member and expansion supporter Merle Widmer wrote similarly, “This highly Christian community denies they are of the NIMBY crowd. Good Christians are compassionate and willingly accept other people’s problems, they say. We’ll see. The businesses leaders of this community see why the closure of this disposal site could prevent waste creating companies from coming here like, say medical laboratories….”
  • A pro-expansion commenter on Bill’s blog added, “The Peoria County Board reacted in cowardice because they are politicians and their chief responsibility is to ensure that they get re-elected. Had more of them looked at the facts, and had the virility to make the right decision even though the vocal minority of the public wouldn’t like it, the vote would have been to approve by a good margin.”

You get the feeling from reading some of the blogs and comments that these proponents actually wish the county would lose an appeal, or PDC would lay off a bunch of workers, or some other ill-will, just so they can spitefully say “I told you so.” Where are the statesmen today who lose gracefully and wish the best for the community?

The only comment I could find that had a hint of graciousness was, in all places, the Journal Star’s editorial: “Though we endorsed the landfill’s expansion, with conditions, for the community’s sake we hope there is no reversal.”

If proponents are correct that a reversal would mean PDC could expand the landfill without any of the conditions or safeguards the county requested, including their offer not to add to the oldest part of the landfill, I would hope proponents wouldn’t really be wishing the worst on Peoria just because the vote didn’t go their way.

Caterpillar, Peoria County, Peoria Disposal Company

Landfill expansion soundly defeated; time to move on

10 Comments

Last night, the Peoria County Board voted 12-6 to deny Peoria Disposal Company’s (PDC) hazardous waste landfill expansion application.  Opponents cheered, proponents were disappointed (if not a little bitter), PDC is planning to appeal to the Illinois Pollution Control Board.

But I think regardless of how the appeals come out, it’s time we all got on the same team and started seriously researching alternatives to burying hazardous waste.  It can be done.  I found this interesting piece of information (PDF) on Caterpillar’s website.  On page 11 of this document, it says:

We can set the example for others to follow.  In 1997, an employee team at our Sumter, South Carolina, facility set out to develop a process that would, for the first time ever, recycle 100 percent of hazardous waste and totally eliminate landfill. They succeeded. It cost half-a-million dollars to do it, but the new process also saves Caterpillar more than $400,000 every year. It was the right thing for the environment. It saved Caterpillar money as well.

The first thing that struck me was the fact that this happened in 1997 — that’s almost ten years ago.  Has this process been refined/improved?  Marketed?  Is this something that PDC and other hazardous waste landfills could employ?  Or that Keystone could employ?

The second thing that struck me is that it cost “half-a-million dollars to do it.”  Converting that to 2006 dollars, that’s still only $631,000 (approx.).  It doesn’t sound like it takes a tremendous amount of money to find these solutions, does it?  Compare that to the million dollars PDC spent just on their expansion application — let alone how much it’s going to cost to appeal the board’s decision.

I don’t think one has to be a rabid environmentalist to see the value of recycling this waste versus encasing it in concrete and burying it in the ground.  Even if you’re a proponent of the landfill expansion, wouldn’t you still rather live in a world where there’s no need for such landfills?