Good evening, and welcome to Peoria City Hall! Sorry I wasn’t able to liveblog last week’s special meeting. I had a scheduling conflict. I was disappointed that it was carried on neither WCBU nor cable channel 22, but more on that later. For now, it looks like all council members are present and accounted for, and ready to tackle this agenda (remember to refresh your browser often as I’ll be updating this throughout the evening):
Tag Archives: City Council
Liveblogging the City Council (from home) 2/9/2010
Hello everyone. I’m not going to venture out in the snow and try to find parking on a night that Bradley is playing ISU at the Civic Center. So, I’m going to snuggle up at home and listen to the council meeting on WCBU radio. As usual, I’ll be updating this post throughout the evening, so be sure to refresh often. Here’s the agenda:
PETITIONS, REMONSTRANCES & COMMUNICATIONS – CITY OF PEORIA UNFINISHED BUSINESS
(09-500) PUBLIC HEARING Regarding Proposed ANNEXATION of 9900 N. ALLEN ROAD (Temporary Address) (Continued from November 24, 2009).
Councilman Irving moves to open the public hearing, seconded by Van Auken.
- Joyce Blumenshine: Has a few issues with the annexation — actually with the plan for the site. She asks that the annexation not be voted on tonight. Developer is trying to maximize density for the site to the detriment of the environment. It’s not consistent with the City’s ordinances, such as the stream buffer ordinance.
- Kiersten Sheets: Lives in Marshall County, but is on the Sustainability Commission as well as a member of other environmental groups. She also is concerned about the site plan, not so much the annexation. She also takes issue with the storm-water management plan. Recommends a “low-impact development storm water ordinance.”
That’s it. No one else wishes to speak.
(09-501) Communication from the City Manager and Director of Planning and Growth Management with Recommendation from the Planning Commission to Adopt the Following:
A. RESOLUTION Approving the ANNEXATION AGREEMENT for Property Generally Located NORTHEAST of the ROCK ISLAND TRAIL (Parcel ID No. 09-31-251-004) EAST of ALLEN ROAD, SOUTH of BROMPTON COURT and Parcel ID No. 09-31-208-031, and WEST of Parcel ID No. 09-31-226-027; the Property Proposed for Annexation is Parcel ID No. 09-31-251-006, with a TEMPORARY ADDRESS of 9900 N. ALLEN ROAD, Located within One and One-Half Miles of the City of Peoria;
Councilman Irving makes several changes to the resolution in his motion, seconded by Turner. Councilman Sandberg is concerned about the proposed apartment complex. There is too much traffic in this area already, and this apartment complex adds 96 units which will make traffic even worse. He’s also concerned about the amount of dirt that they’re planning to move and the impact it will have on drainage. In the Comprehensive Plan, this is designated as a conservation area, and the developer wants to “shoehorn in” three significant buildings. Sandberg is okay with the proposed single family home on Brookshire. Motion passes 10-1; Sandberg voting no.
B. ORDINANCE ANNEXING TERRITORY Contiguous to the City of Peoria – 9900 N. ALLEN ROAD (Temporary Address).
Irving moves to approve, seconded by Turner; no discussion. Passes 10-1 (Sandberg).
(09-502) Communication from the City Manager and Director of Planning and Growth Management with Recommendation from the Zoning Commission and Staff to Adopt an ORDINANCE Rezoning Property Located in the 9900 BLOCK of ALLEN ROAD Upon Annexation from Class R3 (Single Family Residential) District to a Class R6 (Multi-Family Residential) District.
Irving moves to approve, seconded by Turner; no discussion. Motion passes 10-1 (Sandberg).
(09-503) Communication from the City Manager and Director of Planning and Growth Management with Recommendation from the Planning Commission and Staff to Adopt an ORDINANCE Approving the MULTI-FAMILY PLAN for Property Generally Located NORTHEAST of the ROCK ISLAND TRAIL (Parcel ID No. 09-31-251-004), EAST of ALLEN ROAD, SOUTH of BROMPTON COURT and Parcel ID No. 09-31-208-013, and WEST of Parcel ID No. 09-31-226-027, with the Property Identified as Parcel ID No. 09-31-251-006, with a TEMPORARY ADDRESS of 9900 N. ALLEN ROAD, with Conditions.
Irving moves to approve with some changes; seconded by Spain. Irving thanks the developer. Motion passes 10-1 (Sandberg).
ITEM NO. 1 CONSIDERATION OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS BY OMNIBUS VOTE, for the City of Peoria, with Recommendations as Outlined:
A. Communication from the City Manager and Police Chief Requesting Approval for the ANNUAL PURCHASE of FACTORY AMMUNITION for POLICE DUTY USE from KIESLER POLICE SUPPLY, INC., in the Amount of $28,992.32.
B. Communication from the City Manager and Police Chief Requesting Approval of a SOLE SOURCE PURCHASE of THREE POLICE CANINES, One with Specialty in Explosives Detection and Patrol Function and Two with Narcotics and Patrol Specialties from SOUTHERN POLICE CANINE, INC., in the Total Amount of $41,800.00, with Funds Coming from the Federal Asset Forfeiture Account.
C. Communication from the City Manager and Director of Public Works Requesting Approval to PURCHASE THREE (3) PICK-UP TRUCKS Through the State of Illinois Contract Bid Process for the PARK DISTRICT’S USE to Include TWO FORD F250 TWO-WHEEL DRIVE PICK-UP TRUCKS and ONE FORD F250 FOUR-WHEEL DRIVE PICK-UP from LANDMARK FORD in Springfield, Illinois, for ROUTINE REPLACEMENT, in the Amount of $63,000.00.
D. Communication from the City Manager and Director of Public Works Requesting Approval to PURCHASE TWO F550 SUPER DUTY TRUCKS, Fully Equipped with Dump Box, Snow Plow and Salt Spreaders from LANDMARK AUTOMOTIVE GROUP in Springfield, Illinois, in the Amount of $138,124.00, Utilizing the State Contract Bidding Process.
E. Communication from the City Manager and Director of Public Works Requesting Acceptance of the LOW BID of R. A. CULLINAN & SONS, INC. and Award the CONTRACT, in the Amount of $1,803,195.91, with Additional Authorization of $90,159.80 (5% for Contingencies) for the GLEN OAK SCHOOL IMPACT ZONE STREET IMPROVEMENTS for WISCONSIN, REPUBLIC, MARYLAND, and KANSAS STREETS.
F. Communication from the City Manager and Director of Public Works Requesting Acceptance of the LOW BID of ILLINOIS CIVIL CONTRACTORS, INC. and Award the CONTRACT, in the Amount of $1,373,739.95, with Extra Authorization of $68,687.00 (An Additional 5% for Contingencies) for the HOLLY HEDGES/DEVEREUX CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS. (Refer to Item Nos. 08-615 and 09-430)
G. Communication from the City Manager and Director of Planning and Growth Management Requesting Approval of an AMENDMENT to the HAND UP DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 2009 CHDO PROJECT SCOPE to Develop ONE NEW, SINGLE FAMILY, OWNER-OCCUPIED HOME Located at 522 W. WILLCOX AVENUE (Parcel ID No. 14-33-152-020) and CANCEL DEVELOPMENT of ONE NEW, SINGLE FAMILY, OWNER-OCCUPIED HOME Located in the 3400 BLOCK of SYLVAN LANE (Parcel ID No. 13-24-453-012). (Amends Item No. 09-450)
H. Communication from the City Manager Requesting Approval to FORBEAR on a LOAN to GLOBE ENERGY for 90 DAYS and Requesting Authorization for the City Manager to Execute the Necessary Documents. (Refer to Item No. 07-268)
I. Communication from the City Manager and Director of Public Works Requesting Approval to Execute a TWO-YEAR CONTRACT with INDUS LUBRICATING for OIL PRODUCTS used by the CITY’S FLEET MANAGEMENT DIVISION and FIRE GARAGE, as Outlined.
J. Communication from the City Manager and Director of Public Works Requesting Approval of a CONTRACT with FOTH INFRASTRUCTURE & ENVIRONMENT for 2010 ENGINEERING SERVICES for the PEORIA CITY/COUNTY LANDFILL, in the Amount of $376,000.00, as Recommended by the Peoria City/County Landfill Committee.
K. Communication from the City Manager and Director of Public Works Requesting Approval of a SEWER IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT with the GREATER PEORIA SANITARY DISTRICT for the REPAIR of SEWERS, as a Part of the City of Peoria’s Sewer Rehabilitation (Design Area 1 Sewers, Manhole Rehabilitation Project 3), and Requesting Concurrence in the Award of the CONTRACT for the Work to MIDWEST TRENCHLESS SERVICES, in the Amount of $358,660.00.
L. Communication from the City Manager and Finance Director/Comptroller Requesting Adoption of an ORDINANCE ABATING the TAX Heretofore Levied to PAY SPECIAL SERVICE AREA TAXES on the RIVERWEST NEIGHBORHOOD (Formerly the Colonel John Warner Homes Development).
M. Communication from the City Manager and Finance Director/Comptroller Requesting Approval of an ORDINANCE Partially ABATING the TAX Heretofore LEVIED to PAY PRINCIPAL OF and INTEREST ON GENERAL OBLIGATION LIBRARY BONDS SERIES 2008A, in the Amount of $798,000.00.
N. Communication from the City Manager and Finance Director/Comptroller Requesting Approval of the ORDINANCE ABATING the TAX Heretofore LEVIED to PAY PRINCIPAL OF and INTEREST ON GENERAL OBLIGATION CORPORATE PURPOSE BONDS, of the City of Peoria,1998 SERIES C, 2002 SERIES A & B, 2003 SERIES A & B, 2004 SERIES B & C, 2005 SERIES A & B, 2007 SERIES A, and 2009 SERIES A.
O. Communication from the City Manager and Finance Director/Comptroller Requesting Adoption of an ORDINANCE Amending the CITY OF PEORIA BUDGET for FISCAL YEAR 2010 Relating to the OUTSTANDING ENCUMBRANCES as of DECEMBER 31, 2009, in the Amount of $6,481,002.00.
P. Communication from the City Manager Requesting Approval of the Following:
1. TRANSFER of PROPERTY Located at 720 E. PARK AVENUE to PEORIA AREA COMMUNITY EVENTS (P.A.C.E.) FOUNDATION for the Amount of $1.00, and Authorize the City Manager to Execute the Necessary Documents;
2. ADOPT an ORDINANCE VACATING a PORTION of LAKE VIEW AVENUE Approximately 315 FEET NORTHEAST of PERRY AVENUE.
Q. Communication from the City Manager and Corporation Counsel Requesting Approval of DATES for SCHEDULED EVENTS SPONSORED by PEORIA AREA COMMUNITY EVENTS, INC. (P.A.C.E.), Subject to Their Filing the Necessary Permits and Approval as Required by the Peoria City Code. Dates Scheduled are: Steamboat Festival – June 17 through 19, 2010; Taste of Peoria – August 11, 2010 (Rain Date: August 12, 2010); Labor Day Picnic – September 6, 2010; and RibFest & Chili Cookoff – October 1 and 2, 2010.
R. Communication from the City Manager and Corporation Counsel Requesting Approval of a SITE APPLICATION for a CLASS A (Tavern) LIQUOR LICENSE at 7719 N. UNIVERSITY, with Recommendation from the Liquor Commission to Approve.
S. Communication from the City Manager Regarding the PEORIA PARK DISTRICT FOURTH QUARTER 2009 REPORT of ACTIVITIES for the RIVERFRONT and GATEWAY BUILDING, with Recommendation to Receive and File.
T. Communication from the City Manager with Request to ACCEPT the PEORIA PARK DISTRICT RIVERFRONT PROGRAMMING WORK PROGRAM AND BUDGET REPORT for 2010.
U. REPORT of the CITY TREASURER PATRICK NICHTING for the MONTH of DECEMBER 2009, with Recommendation to Receive and File.
Item Q removed by Montelongo. Jacob abstaining on Q and R, removes item F. Motion to approve remaining items by Spain, seconded by Turner; passes unanimously.
- Item F: Motion to approve Jacob; Spears seconds; passes unanimously.
- Item Q: Montelongo moves to approve; Spain seconds; passes unanimously.
ITEM NO. 2 Communication from the City Manager Requesting Approval of the CITY OF PEORIA’S PORTION of the COMMUNITY LEGISLATIVE AGENDA Regarding FY2011 CONGRESSIONAL APPROPRIATION REQUESTS.
City Manager Scott Moore asks if staff can bring this item back at a later date so they can be discussed at next week’s policy session before submitting. Motion to defer by Van Auken; seconded by Riggenbach. Motion passes unanimously.
ITEM NO. 3 Communication from the City Manager and Corporation Counsel Requesting Approval of the MAIN CONSTRUCTION and DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT with ILLINOIS-AMERICAN WATER COMPANY, and Requesting Authorization for the City Manager to Execute the Necessary Documents.
Irving moves to approve; seconded by Van Auken. Sandberg asks for clarification, that the City is not obligated to build water main extensions; it would be the developer’s responsibility. City attorney Randy Ray assures Sandberg that the City is not obligated. Motion passes 10-1 (Sandberg).
ITEM NO. 4 Communication from the City Manager and Director of Planning and Growth Management with Request to Concur with Either the Recommendation from the Zoning Commission to ADOPT or Concur with the Recommendation from the Staff to DENY the Following:
A. ORDINANCE Rezoning Property Located at 1717 W. GLEN AVENUE from the Present Class R3 (Single Family Residential) District to a Class O2 (Exclusive Office Park) District, with Conditions;
B. ORDINANCE Amending Ordinance No. 13,345, a Previous Use with Approval as Amended, for a SPECIAL USE in a Class O2 (Exclusive Office Park) District for an OFFICE DEVELOPMENT Commonly Known as the GLEN PARK PLACE OFFICE PARK to Add the Property Located at 1717 W. GLEN AVENUE and Allow for a BUILDING ADDITION and PARKING LOT for Property Located at 4909 N. GLEN PARK PLACE and 1717 W. GLEN AVENUE, with Conditions.
Councilman Spears moves to approve ordinance A; seconded by Van Auken; passes unanimously.
Spears moves to approve ordinance B; seconded by Riggenbach; passes unanimously.
ITEM NO. 5 Communication from the City Manager and Director of Planning and Growth Management with Request to Concur with Recommendations from the Historic Preservation Commission Contained within the ACTION PLAN to:
A. ADOPT an ORDINANCE Amending CHAPTER 16 of the Code of the City of Peoria Related to the DESIGNATION PROCESS and the CERTIFICATE of APPROPRIATENESS PROCESS;
B. APPROVE a PROCEDURAL CHANGE Related to HOUSING and DEMOLITION CASES; and
C. RECEIVE and FILE a COMMUNITY LIST of PROPERTY NOTED as WORTHY OF POTENTIAL HISTORIC LANDMARK STATUS and the LONG-TERM RECOMMENDATIONS.
Van Auken asks chair of Historic Preservation Commission, Robert Powers, to speak before she makes a motion. Powers gives a history of the ad hoc committee that worked on this council request. He also gave an explanation of the request, which is basically a restatement of what is written here. Van Auken thanks the ad hoc committee and compliments them.
Van Auken moves to approve item A; seconded by Montelongo. Sandberg also compliments the committee. However, he suggests a couple small amendments limiting the number of colors one can have on their house without having to get a certificate of appropriateness. Sandberg moves that Item A be deferred until May 11; seconded by Gulley. The reason is so neighborhood organizations and other stakeholders who live in historic districts have time to read and clearly understand the ordinance before final action is taken. Van Auken supports deferral. Motion passes unanimously.
Van Auken moves to approve item B; seconded by Spain. Jacob asks if this ordinance will unduly delay the process of demolishing other structures. Planning and Growth Director Landes answers: No. Inspections Director Kunski agrees. Motion passes unanimously.
Van Auken moves to receive and file item C; seconded by Gulley. The floor is opened to anyone who would like to address the council on this item.
- Margaret Cousin: Reads a prepared speech about the virtues of historic preservation, complete with dramatic analogy about being a ball instead of a cube. Cue violins. (I’m sure she was sincere; I’m just jaded.)
- Jim Bateman: Spoke off the cuff. Makes snide comment about the city losing a previous list that was also received and filed! (“No one can find it. I guess that’s what happens when you receive and file.” LOL!) For the most part he reiterated information already presented. He did explain that the list is a list of historic properties and includes properties that are already landmarked, properties in historic districts, and properties that could potentially be landmarked.
- Roger Meyer: Member of Trinity Lutheran Church, speaking for the church. Requests removal of the church building (135 NE Randolph) because it’s a church building and changes to the sanctuary shouldn’t be subject to a secular body. Believes all churches on the list should be taken off the list.
Van Auken basically says in response to Mr. Meyer that they’re not going to take any properties off the list at this time.
Turner asks if merely being on the list will cause a hardship — i.e., will it make it difficult for property owners to sell properties that are on the list? Van Auken says no; preservation is economical and reusing properties is sustainable development. She also says the ordinance is “not as onerous as people think it is.” Sandberg agrees with Van Auken. “There’s a whole cadre of developers who will only invest in historic properties,” he says. “Historic preservation is not a negative in almost all cases.”
Sandberg would like to see historic properties put on the City’s website, not just received and filed. He’d like to see us “show off” our historic community.
Jacob asks if all areas of the community were included. Bateman says “we tried,” and says that there very well could be properties that they missed. He says he hopes the list will be a work in progress. The list is not exclusive and can have properties added to it. Jacob says that there is a perception among some developers that the historic preservation ordinance has been used as a weapon to stop some development; he wants to make sure property rights are preserved.
Spain is “conflicted on this issue.” He’s received calls from property owners who are concerned about their properties being on the list. Yet, he recognizes that the City Council asked for this list because of previous attempts to landmark properties at the eleventh hour. So, he wants to know what the process is to get off the list. Bateman says the problem is one of uncertainty — will the property fall under the ordinance or not? In a perfect world, all the properties on the list would have applications drawn up and decided in short order to take the uncertainty out of it. “That’s in a perfect world, but we live in Peoria.” So, his suggestion is to try to get the applications done as quickly as possible, but recognize it’s going to take time to get through 115 properties. Bottom line, the way to get off the list is for the property to fail the landmarking process. Spain concludes that he will support this item.
Montelongo will be supporting this item, and would like to see a process for getting properties on and off the list.
Motion passes unanimously. That was a lot of discussion on a motion to receive and file!
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
(09-616) Communication from the City Manager and Director of Planning and Growth Management with a REQUEST TO DEFER for 30 DAYS a REPORT BACK Regarding CONDITIONS to ENTER into an ANNUAL CONTRACT with the EAST BLUFF NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING SERVICES (EBNHS) Related to Ordinance No. 14,534.
Riggenbach reports that they have had some “really productive negotiations” in the last couple of weeks. He would like to defer the item for two weeks instead of 30 days. Moves to defer two weeks; seconded by Irving; motion passes unanimously.
NEW BUSINESS
- Turner mentions a couple upcoming boys tournaments.
- Spain moves to remove item 09-506 from the table and place it on the 2/23/10 council meeting; seconded by Gulley. Passes unanimously. Item 09-506 was from the October 27, 2009, council meeting: “Communication from the City Manager and Director of Public Works with Recommendation to ACCEPT the LOW BID of ILLINOIS CIVIL CONTRACTORS, INC., and to Award a CONTRACT, in the Amount of $492,382.70, Plus a 5% Base Bid Contingency of $21,753.14 for the JEFFERSON AVENUE SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS.” I didn’t cover that council meeting, so I don’t know why it was deferred, if any reason was given at all.
- Ardis will host a “community call to action” forum at the Dream Center this Saturday at 10 a.m.
PRESENTATION
ITEM NO. 1 PRESENTATION by the ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL Regarding the FOURTH QUARTER 2009 PERFORMANCE INITIATIVES Under the SCOPE of WORK for the CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT Between the City of Peoria and the Economic Development Council, with Request to Receive and File.
Van Auken moves to receive and file, seconded by Montelongo. Spain is abstaining due to the EDC’s relationship with his empoyer. Presentation ensues. Technical difficulties precluded the use of a PowerPoint presentation. I think it was sabotage. 🙂 Kidding. Motion passes unanimously.
CITIZEN REQUESTS TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL
Nobody wants to address the council tonight. And there was much rejoicing.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
ADJOURNMENT
Spears moves to go into executive session, seconded by Riggenbach; passes unanimously. And then they move to adjourn and we’re done!
I realized right before Citizens to Address that somehow the ability to leave comments on this post was turned off. I do not know how that happened, but that’s really annoying! I was having some technical difficulties with this post early on, so something must have gotten messed up then. Sorry if you wanted to leave a comment earlier and couldn’t.
Goodnight everyone!
Liveblogging the Peoria City Council 1/26/2010
Good evening, and welcome to Council Chambers at Peoria City Hall. Once again, I’ll be liveblogging the meeting tonight. If you’re following live, please remember to refresh this post frequently as I’ll be updating it throughout the meeting. All council members and the Mayor are present tonight. A hyperlinked copy of the agenda is available here.
It’s 6:26 and the City Clerk is reading the consent agenda:
Continue reading Liveblogging the Peoria City Council 1/26/2010
Council looks to state for help, but won’t help themselves
The city council can be so schizophrenic sometimes.
At Tuesday’s meeting, they first decided to keep taxing residents of the East Bluff Special Service District 18 cents per $100 equalized assessed value for another ten years to continue funding the East Bluff Neighborhood Housing Service, a controversial organization residents feel is ineffective and secretive. The vote was 9-1.
Then, just a couple of agenda items later, fourth district councilman Bill Spears made a motion “to begin discussions [with state legislators] on innovative ways to bring back the core of the inner city by giving incentives, such as tax breaks to homeowners and owned businesses.” After some discussion, that passed 9-1 also.
So they’re for talking about tax breaks with state reps, but not actually giving tax breaks to a distressed part of town when given the opportunity. Tell me that isn’t dysfunctional.
Liveblogging the City Council 11/10/2009
Welcome to room 400 of Peoria City Hall. Once again, I’ll be providing live news and comment on tonight’s City Council meeting. The agenda is below. I’ll be updating this post with my comments throughout the evening, so refresh often.
The mayor and all council members are present.
Here’s the agenda:
City Council preview
There’s a city council meeting tonight. Here are some items of interest:
- There’s a request to use Tazewell County Asphalt Company to seal a parking lot behind the city’s municipal services building. I wonder why the council would even consider patronizing businesses in East Peoria — a city they believe tolerates discrimination, as they made perfectly clear a few weeks ago. Will they reject this bid and any others until these communities adopt the same Fair Employment and Housing Commission statutes as Peoria?
- Despite all the cost cutting, the city will still have to raise property taxes. A truth in taxation hearing will be held tonight.
- Comcast’s cable franchise agreement with the city, which expired way back in 2006, is up for yet another temporary extension. Will a permanent agreement ever be reached?
- Continued discussion on the 2010 budget, including a discussion on the cost of police uniforms.
- Taxes are also going up in the “Town of Peoria.” You gotta love the “Town of Peoria.” It has the same borders as the City of Peoria, and the City Council members are the Town Trustees. Yet, they get over $2 million in separate tax levies. Illinois: king of superfluous municipal organizations.
Word on the Street counterpoint
Let’s talk about today’s Word on the Street column:
Critics of publicly financing a Downtown hotel have linked last year’s City Council vote to extend $39.3 million in bonds for the $102 million Marriott with this year’s budget reduction decisions.
Some council members are fighting back, saying the criticism is unfair and inaccurate. They say the bond issue for the hotel project has nothing to do with next year’s budget deficit, or with the budget in general.
This ought to be good. I can’t wait to hear how $39.3 million has nothing to do with the budget.
“There is a misperception being promoted that the city has $39 million in the bank and is giving it away to a private developer when that is just not the case,” at-large City Councilman Ryan Spain said.
Oh, no. I know the city doesn’t have $39 million in the bank. That’s precisely the point. The city is going to have to go $39 million in debt to give $39 million away to a private developer.
At-large City Councilman Eric Turner agreed. “It doesn’t impact anything,” he said.
By “anything” here, I’m assuming he meant it in the context of the 2010 budget. And this may shock you, but I don’t disagree with him in that assessment. It won’t impact anything in 2010. But it will certainly impact the budget in 2012 and beyond. But I suppose that’s irrelevant, eh? Why look past the end of your nose when making decisions, right?
Linking this year’s deficit-related decisions, such as cutting police officers, with last year’s hotel project vote has been done at times during council meetings and on blogs.
He’s talking about me here, in case you didn’t catch it.
At-large City Councilman Gary Sandberg has brought up the issue before, saying the priorities of the council are screwed up. He said he has received calls from constituents concerned with why the city is assisting a developer build a hotel at a time when police officers may be laid off.
If the city wanted to assist the developer by improving public infrastructure around the site, that would be one thing. It’s quite another thing to just hand over cold hard cash to a developer to help him construct his project.
At issue is the city’s public financing portion of the project.
The city’s bond will be paid back through revenues generated by the project, including tax-increment financing and additional hotel, restaurant and sales taxes it generates.
“Revenues generated by the project.” That assumes revenues will be generated, which is a point of contention. Private banks, whose loans would have to be repaid through revenues generated by the project, have not been willing to loan the developer the money he needs to start the project, despite all this backing from the city. What do they know that the city doesn’t? Or is it just that the city is content to take higher risks with taxpayer money than banks are willing to take with their private funds?
Also, not explicitly mentioned in this statement is the fact that the council raised sales taxes 1% within the Hospitality Improvement Zone. Why was this necessary if “revenues generated by the project” are sufficient to pay back the bonds?
Projections show the city is to owe $2.5 million in 2012, the year the hotel is anticipated to open. The opening date likely will be pushed back because of delays in moving the project forward.
Not mentioned is the reason for the delays: inability to get private financing.
If the revenue from the project doesn’t materialize as anticipated, it is possible the city can make its bond payments from revenues from adjoining tax-increment financing districts (the hotel project is located within a TIF district, a key economic incentive device allowing the project to potentially happen).
City officials have estimated that about half of the $39.3 million can be raised from three adjoining TIF districts and directed to a fund that is separate from the city’s general operations fund, which pays for police, firefighters and other services.
If other TIFs are so flush with cash, why don’t they use that money to retire those TIF bonds early so the tax revenue go into the city’s general operations fund where they could pay for “police, firefighters and other services”? Wouldn’t that be a better use for those funds than on a hotel?
Recently retired Economic Development Director Craig Hullinger said the project “shouldn’t have a negative impact on the budget. It creates jobs and a tax base. That’s the logic for doing this.”
That’s what they said about MidTown Plaza.
Spain said the timing is right for the project. The hotel, when completed, would connect to the Civic Center via a skywalk.
And that’s relevant because…? I’m unclear whether these are just two disjointed statements the reporter decided to put in this paragraph, or if he’s implying that the skywalk was Spain’s justification for “the timing [being] right for the project.” If the latter, I have to believe there was more to his reasoning than what was reported. No one would say that a skywalk is justification for giving a developer $39.3 million in tax money. No one would be that foolish.
Project naysayers may have another chance to publicly sway the project. If developer Gary Matthews gets the financing needed to proceed, then the council will have to vote on the sale of bonds in order to officially participate in the financing of the project.
Matthews is still attempting to secure the private financing to begin a project that was originally supposed to start last spring. A national economic recession, though, has slowed the progress. (J.S.)
Yes, the recession is slowed progress, because the economic climate makes this project too risky for credit markets. But not too risky for our tax dollars, according to Mr. Spain and Mr. Turner. After all, we won’t have to pay the piper for several years, so it’s all good.
Moore’s list of critical city positions
It was mentioned during the city council meeting that City Manager Scott Moore asked the council to restore 22 critical positions with the city. The list was projected on the wall briefly, but wasn’t included in the packet on the city’s website (at least, I couldn’t find it). I was able to get a copy after the meeting — here are the positions:
Manager Recommendations for Operations
Positions Restored
In Priority Order6 Police officers (PPBA)
2 ECC Communicators (AFSCME)
Network Specialist (AFSCME)
Computer Operator (AFSCME)
Legal Administration Coordinator (AFSCME)
1 Animal Control Officer (AFSCME)
Police Records Manager (Exempt)
1 Animal Control Officer (AFSCME)
2 Part-Time Kennel Technicians (AFSCME)
1 ECC Supervisor (Exempt)
Public Safety Coordinator (Exempt)
1 Accountant (Exempt)
1 Code Enforcement Inspector (AFSCME)
2 Police Info Tech for 3rd Shift (AFSCME)Subtotal (22 Positions)
Note: “ECC” stands for Emergency Communications Center. According to the city’s website, “The ECC provides dispatching services to Peoria Police, Peoria Fire, Peoria County Sheriff, Emergency Medical Services, Peoria County Fire & EMS agencies and other City departments as part of the Peoria City/County Enhanced 9-1-1 system.”
“Wonderful Development” Update
The “Wonderful Development” (that’s what City Attorney Randy Ray called proposed downtown Marriott project when the City was still keeping it a closely-guarded secret) has yet to meet any of the deadlines in its redevelopment agreement with the City. The most recent Issues Update gives the details:
REDEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF PEORIA AND EM PROPERTIES, LTD. This Redevelopment Agreement was approved by the Council on December 15, 2008. This Agreement provides that the Redeveloper shall commence construction of the Project not later than one year from the execution of the Agreement (December 19, 2009). Alternatively, the Redeveloper is to commence within 20 days of closing the initial series of the Bond, and the Bond issue has not occurred and the pre-conditions to the Bond issue have not yet been met. There is another deadline contained in Paragraph 3.5 of the Redevelopment Agreement which provides that the Redeveloper shall submit construction plans to the City no later than June 1, 2009. That has not occurred. Although this deadline has not been met, the Contract remains in full force and effect.
Going back to Paragraph 3.2.1 concerning commencement of the Agreement, the Agreement provides that if the Redeveloper does not commence construction of the Project within 18 months from the date of the execution (June 19, 2010), the City shall have the right to terminate the Agreement.
According to a recent Journal Star article, the Redeveloper is “optimistic” that he will be able to get all the financing he needs to acquire the Pere Marquette and adjacent properties by January 1, 2010, or thirteen days after the deadline for construction to commence. That would leave him five months to submit construction plans to the City (already four months past deadline itself), secure approval, and start construction — or else the City could terminate the agreement.
I don’t think he’s going to make it. But then, I don’t think it’s going to matter, either, because the City never cancels redevelopment agreements that miss deadlines. In fact, I don’t know why they even bother to put deadlines into their agreements anymore when they’re demonstrably meaningless.
This Wonderful Development — to the tune of approximately $4 million in debt service per year on average — will continue to sail through, even as we cut police officers (to save $1 million annually), road resurfacing, animal control, and other vital public services. Your streets will take a little longer to get plowed in the winter, but we’ll have a downtown Marriott. The police will take a little longer to respond to your emergency, but we’ll have a downtown Marriott. That rabid dog in your neighborhood threatening your family’s safety on a Saturday? Call back Monday; the office is closed weekends due to budget cuts — but we’ll have a downtown Marriott.
As taxes continue to rise and service continues to decline, more people will give up and move out of Peoria. But that’s okay, because when those folks come back to visit, they’ll have a place to stay: the downtown . . . Embassy Suites in East Peoria.
Police at bottom of council’s priority list
Tuesday night, we got some insight into the Peoria City Council’s priority list. We know that the Fire Department is at the top of the list. All the proposed cuts to the Fire Department were restored. And we know that the Police Department is near the bottom of the list. The council chose to cut 17 additional staff positions there without any discussion whatsoever.
The reason? Well, because the firefighters agreed to give up their wages, but the police officers didn’t. Hence, the firefighters are being rewarded for being team players, but the police officers are being punished by taking the brunt of the budget cuts.
There’s only one problem with this plan: The joke’s on us. It’s the citizens who lose because police protection is reduced. To add insult to injury, the council reaffirmed their commitment to keep the Economic Development department fully staffed. [Upon further review, it appears Craig Hullinger’s position will not be filled upon his retirement; hence, although the council saved an Economic Development Specialist position, the department will not be “fully staffed” next year; at least, at this point — perhaps the director position will also be reinstated at the next council meeting.] And, to my knowledge, they’re continuing to pursue a downtown hotel deal that will cost around $4 million in debt service annually. That could pay for a lot of officers and other basic services.