What did the museum group promise the local labor force before the April 2009 referendum?
Mike Everett, West Central Illinois Building & Construction Trades Council: “The Build the Block project offers our local construction workforce a tremendous opportunity. Over a 25-month construction schedule, this project will create over 250 jobs and put $1.8 million back into our community. Plus, through an unprecedented agreement, this project’s going to be built with 100% local union labor. Building the Block is more than just building a museum. It’s a chance to strengthen our economy and help our local families.”
From today’s Journal Star:
Though there is no guarantee a local firm will be awarded the construction bid for the Peoria Riverfront Museum, county officials say they will do what they can to promote the use of local resources….
County Board member and museum committee member Mike Phelan said though the total museum project likely won’t be built exclusively by local union laborers, they will build a majority of the project….
Turner Construction – the same Chicago firm that worked on the Peoria Civic Center and also is managing construction of the new terminal at Gen. Wayne A. Downing Peoria International Airport – will serve as the county’s project manager through March 2013. Turner will be paid about $1 million to oversee the estimated $36 to $40 million project.
Another broken promise to add to the list. I’m sure Mike Everett won’t mind. He told the City Council he just doesn’t want to see a big hole when he drives into Peoria from his home in Tazewell County. Well, it looks like he won’t see 100% local union labor filling that hole, either.
What I find amusing is the attempt to make it sound like this hasn’t been a problem from the beginning. The news article states without attribution:
The game changed earlier this year when Peoria County decided to oversee construction of the museum to ensure what is done with public money on a public building on public property is the public’s business.
That responsibility previously fell under the direction of the Peoria Riverfront Museum board of directors, a not-for-profit organization not subject to the Open Meetings Act. As a public entity, Peoria County is bound to accept the lowest responsible bid and that firm may or may not be local, officials acknowledge.
Au contraire: Citizens for Responsible Spending asked about the promise of local union labor before the referendum vote. Here’s the County’s official response back then:
[Q:] If all labor for construction is going to be sourced locally, does this mean no bids?
[A:] If the referendum passes and public dollars are used, the museum portion of the project would have to be bid and construction workers paid at least prevailing wages.
So there never really was a guarantee that it would be 100% local union labor unless all the bids just happened to be won by local contractors.
Well…..
Since everyone opposed to the current museum plan has been told to …”grow up,” I don’t see why anyone has a right to complain about this.
I wonder if the 12 full-time and 30 part-time people employed by the museum will be union? HA!
PRM = Economic juggernaut…….. wait and see.
All that money spent by local unions and construction firms, propping up those feeble ‘private donations’, which stood to benefit from the construction. Of course they still may benefit but they have to be feeling a little nervous.
Well this museum better be a huge success and draw business to downtown.
too funny…way too funny.
What is a Project Labor Agreement and how does it affect workers?
A “project labor agreement” is when the government awards contracts for public construction projects exclusively to unionized firms.
Under the National Labor Relations Act, construction contractors and employees have the right to choose to unionize or not to unionize. The vast majority of contractors and their employees – more than 80 percent – have voluntarily opted against unionization.
Because most contractors and employees choose to refrain from unionization when they have the free choice, Big Labor turned to politicians to remove that choice and impose union representation on employees from the top down. The method by which this is done is a project labor agreement, which is also frequently referred to as a “PLA.”
A project labor agreement requires all contractors, whether they are unionized or not, to subject themselves and their employees to unionization in order to work on a government-funded construction project. This is done by including a union collective bargaining agreement in a public construction project’s bid specifications. In order to receive a contract, a contractor must sign the agreement and subject its employees to union control.
Project labor agreements usually require contractors to grant union officials monopoly bargaining privileges over all workers; use exclusive union hiring halls; force workers to pay dues to keep their jobs; and pay above-market prices resulting from wasteful work rules and featherbedding.
The use of a project labor agreement usually results in cost overruns and higher construction costs for taxpayers. Qualified non-union contractors who wish to make lower-cost bids, and employees who wish to work non-union, are locked out of the project. However, politicians and government officials continue to impose project labor agreements to reward the union officials that fund their political campaigns and keep them in power.
Some levels of government have taken action to stop abusive project labor agreements. President Bush signed an executive order prohibiting federal agencies, and other entities receiving federal aid for construction projects, from using PLA’s. (Click here to see the executive order.) Montana and Utah have enacted similar legislation prohibiting government mandated project labor agreements.
Even under a project labor agreement, employees do retain some rights. First, all employees have the right to refrain from being a full union member and to pay either no or reduced union dues, depending on the state in which they work. (Click here for more information.) Second, if the PLA requires all employees to be hired through an exclusive union hiring hall, the hiring hall may not discriminate between union and non-union workers. Finally, while a PLA may require union representation on a particular public construction project, this forced representation does not automatically extend to other projects a contractor works on.
The Foundation is opposed to project labor agreements, as they sacrifice employees’ rights of free choice and forcibly impose unwanted union representation on employees. The Foundation stands ready, willing and able to help employees who are victims or potential victims of these schemes. Workers who wish to request legal assistance may write us, call us toll-free at 800-336-3600, or send an e-mail message to legal@nrtw.org. Address your request for assistance to Legal Department.
The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation is a nonprofit, charitable organization providing free legal aid to employees whose human or civil rights have been violated by compulsory unionism abuses. The Foundation, which can be contacted toll-free at 1-800-336-3600, is assisting thousands of employees in more than 300 cases nationwide.
This means nothing. The winning firm is just going to underbid on the project to the point where they’re not making any profit (or even taking a slight loss) because of the high profile of this job.
Then once they’re hired, they’ll go ahead and build it and overrun costs and still make money on the construction.
High profile job????? Bass pro shops is WAY more high profile than this turd, and it’s a mile away.
Overrun costs? I’ve been on the county board almost 10 years. Cost overruns occur on almost every job in the past several years. Wait and see what happens with the nursing home now “projected” to cost $54.6 million (that was 2 months ago??)
JS reporter, Karen McDonald wrote today that Mark Johnson has resigned from his position with Peoria County. I posted on my blog over a month ago that Mark Johnson resigned September 1.
The JS reported also that Brad Harding was a member of the original CFRS.
Not true but what is gospel at the JS?
How many of you recall when the Journal Star Editorial Board reported early this year “that all the money has now been raised” for the museum project. When the facts finally are revealed, the record will show what I said was correct; that the now $93+ museum building, $145-7 million overall project is at least $10 million short. Unless the CEO Rountable and Ransburg can suck it from the taxpayers through the feds and the state.
The JS needs all the advertising dollars thay can get, did you note that the front section was 50% advertising a couple of days ago? With their shaky financial condition, they have not opposed any new tax funded venture from the ball park, the zoo, (if in doubt about the zoo, wait and see) the RiverPlex, the horribly planned libraries, the poorly planned museum, #150 School District’s $73 million schools, etc.
All built on borrowed money which means adding approximately 1/3rd to the actual costs.
I’ll go on record as “projecting” that after the first year or two, the museum will lose $2,000,000 a year for the next 50 years or more. Check out the museum built in Wichita, Kansas, Exploration Place, in 2000 as an example. Attendance is less than half projected. Some new tax will be needed after the facility tax runs out in 2032. My projection is based on facts, not thin air like 400,000 a year overall new attendance. Yes, one “mover and shaker” quoted this figure in the IB magazine.
A similair projection was made that the Peoria Park District had over $125,000,000 expansion plans (IB Magazine, source Bonnie Noble). They can’t even raise the money to complete the promised new entrance and the parking lot for the zoo expansion. It appears by observation, they don’t need the parking now.
Merle,
Are you trying to say the Journal Star… is a less than reliable source of local news and information?
Did I mention I canceled my subscription some time ago?
What promise have they keeped? Any?