Tag Archives: City of Peoria

City Council, City of Peoria

Liveblogging the City Council 6-8-2010

3 Comments

Good evening everyone! There were a number of proclamations tonight, but we’re finally underway at 6:50 p.m. Not a lot of people are here in the chamber, and there’s plenty of parking; must not be anything controversial on the agenda, and no other events going on downtown. All the council members and mayor are here with one exception: George Jacob. Mayor Ardis gave an update on Councilman Jacob, stating that he is “stable” and that “stable is good” at this point. We will continue to pray for his recovery.

On to business. I’ll be updating this post throughout the meeting, so if you’re following live, be sure to refresh your browser often. Here’s the agenda for tonight:

Continue reading Liveblogging the City Council 6-8-2010 →

City Council, City of Peoria

More cuts on the agenda for tonight’s council meeting

34 Comments

Property values didn’t rise as much as the City of Peoria hoped they would, and that means less property tax revenue will be collected — $826,000 less, to be precise. To make up for this additional shortfall, more cuts are being made to the budget. The cuts primarily impact the police, fire, and public works departments, as usual.

Public Works is cutting $451,340 dollars they were going to use to purchase new vehicles. According to the Journal Star, that would have paid for three new trucks “used for snow plowing, removal of storm debris, hauling asphalt, etc.” David Barber says his department can manage without the new vehicles.

The police department will be giving up $90,000 in overtime. The fire department will be reducing their overtime budget by $45,072 and their clothing allowance by $26,815. Staffing is down in both departments, but especially in the police department, which took a big hit during last year’s budget crisis. Fewer cops means heavier reliance on overtime from the remaining officers to ensure everything is covered adequately. Now they’re cutting overtime, too.

And looming on the horizon is a predicted $10 million budget deficit for next year that will have to be filled with even more cuts and higher taxes/fees. Citizens will end up paying more for less service . . . again. I wonder if that’s at all related to the decline in sales and property tax receipts?

City of Peoria, Restaurants

River Station lease renewed for another 10 years

12 Comments

From the most recent Issues Update for Peoria:

The City has received notice from River Station LLC that it is renewing its lease to the River Station building for an additional ten (10) years. The original lease was dated August 28, 1979. On November 17, 2000, it was assigned from Mathers Co., Inc. to River Station LLC, which is Kert Huber’s entity. The right to extend is given to the Lessee, and the City cannot deny the extension. This matter will not come before the Council.

The original lease dated August 28, 1979, provides for a twenty?year term commencing when the restaurant opens. It provides for three (3) ten?year extensions. The first ten?year extension was executed by Mathers on November 16, 2000, providing for a ten?year extension which would terminate February 1, 2011. River Station LLC has provided notice of its intent to extend for an additional ten (10) years, until February 1, 2021, at which time there will be the probability of another, final ten?year extension until February 1, 2031, at which time the lease will end.

Rent under the lease is two percent (2%) gross sales from the operation of businesses on the premise. There is no minimum amount, so that the City is realizing some income from the presence of Martini’s on the premises.

Martini’s is the only tenant in the old Rock Island Depot, now known as the River Station. Not that other restaurants haven’t given it a try. Most recently, a restaurant called “Tilly’s” tried to make a go of it. Here’s to hoping a new restaurant can be successful in that location someday soon.

City Council, City of Peoria, Peoria Public Schools

Joint meeting of City Council and D150 School Board tonight

221 Comments

There will be a joint meeting of the Peoria City Council and the District 150 Board of Education tonight at 6:30 p.m. at the Gateway Building. The meeting is open to the public and will cover this agenda:

ITEM NO. 1 WELCOME – OPENING COMMENTS by MAYOR JIM ARDIS

ITEM NO. 2 WELCOME – OPENING COMMENTS by DISTRICT #150 SCHOOL BOARD PRESIDENT DEBBIE WOLFMEYER

ITEM NO. 3 PRESENTATION – PEORIA PROMISE

ITEM NO. 4 PRESENTATION – RACE TO THE TOP

ITEM NO. 5 PRESENTATION – DISTRICT #150 SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION – NEW and RENOVATIONS

ITEM NO. 6 PRESENTATION – SCHOOL/CITY IMPACT ZONES

ITEM NO. 7 PRESENTATION – PEORIA HIGH SCHOOL and READINESS to OPEN in AUGUST 2010

ITEM NO. 8 PRESENTATION – DISTRICT #150 ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE for 2010/11

ITEM NO. 9 PRESENTATION – MAYOR JIM ARDIS — MAYORAL INTERESTS in URBAN EDUCATION

ITEM NO. 10 ANNOUNCEMENTS and CLOSING COMMENTS by MAYOR JIM ARDIS and DISTRICT #150 SCHOOL BOARD PRESIDENT DEBBIE WOLFMEYER

Item No. 9 should be especially interesting, as it’s being reported that Mayor Ardis hopes to “put to rest” rumors that the City wants to take over the school district.

City of Peoria, Zoning Commission

Committee begins review of sign ordinance

36 Comments

From this week’s Issues Update:

The first meeting of the Sign Review Committee was held on Tuesday, May 25, 2010. This committee was created at the request of the Zoning Commission to review key issues involving sign regulations of the Zoning Ordinance. The 14?member Committee will meet monthly and intends to forward its recommendations to the Zoning Commission by December 2010.

I happen to be on this committee. All the meetings are open for public observation and will be posted. The first meeting was spent getting acquainted with each other, getting an overview of the current sign ordinance and the portions of it we will be reviewing (it’s not a comprehensive review — we’re just looking at some specific parts of it), and setting the meeting schedule.

The committee members are, in no particular order:

  • Ron Naples (Adams Outdoor Advertising)
  • Tim Shea (Zoning Commission)
  • Bill Hardin (Hardin Signs, Inc.)
  • Mark Misselhorn (Apace Design, Zoning Commission)
  • Julie Waldschmidt (Wald-Land Corporation)
  • Mike Wiesehan (Zoning Commission)
  • Jason Fuller (Manager, Peoria Metro Centre)
  • Marjorie Klise (Zoning Commission)
  • Ed Barry (Farnsworth Group)
  • Margaret Cousin
  • Robert Powers (Historic Preservation Commission)
  • Jim Hardin (Hardin Signs, Inc.)
  • Rob Parks (Peoria Area Chamber of Commerce)
  • C. J. Summers

And the sign regulation issues we will be reviewing are:

  • Size of digital display area
  • Definition of sign area
  • Violation penalties/enforcement
  • Size of wall signs and freestanding signs
  • Multiple application of the same sign (franchise)
  • Signs for multi-family development
  • Billboard extensions
  • Inflatable signs
  • Temporary banners/signs

Something I learned at the first meeting: Peoria used to have an enforcement officer on staff who was assigned solely to zoning violations. As a result of budget cuts, that position is gone and zoning enforcement is now assigned to planners. Each planner is responsible for a defined geographical area. Enforcement is complaint-driven.

Also, the last item on the list of issues to be reviewed, temporary banners/signs, were discussed quite a bit at the first meeting. Apparently, those large banners you see on the sides of businesses or staked in the ground in front of businesses require a permit. Few businesses actually apply for a permit, however. It could be that businesses are simply unaware that these signs are regulated. Or it could be that businesses are taking advantage of lax enforcement.

The next meeting is June 22 at 10 a.m. in Suite 402 of the twin towers (456 Fulton St.) where the City’s Planning and Growth Department is located.

City Council, City of Peoria

Liveblogging the City Council 5/25/2010

87 Comments

Hello everyone, and welcome to the Peoria City Council meeting for May 25, 2010. Hold on to your wallets, as a lot of your tax money is destined to be given to a private developer tonight. It’s also packed in council chambers. Outside there are a bunch of AFSCME employees chanting “chop from the top” very loudly to try to disrupt the meeting [note: the crowd was dispersed by the time the meeting got underway]. All the council members and the mayor are present, and we’re on our way. The clerk is reading the consent agenda now. As usual, I’ll be updating this post throughout the night, so please refresh your browser often to see the latest comments. Here’s the agenda:

Continue reading Liveblogging the City Council 5/25/2010 →

City Council, City of Peoria

What’s the justification for the Wonderful Development?

38 Comments

The ordinance that would authorize the Wonderful Development (downtown Marriott project) to move forward includes this justification:

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Peoria finds as follows:

  1. That the buildings on the Project Site have remained underused for a period of at least one year.
  2. That the Project is expected to create or retain job opportunities within the municipality.
  3. That the Project will serve to further the development of adjacent areas.
  4. That without the Agreement, the Project would not be possible.
  5. That the Developer, EM Properties Ltd., meets the high standards of credit worthiness and financial strength as demonstrated by a letter from a financial institution with assets of $10 million or more attesting to the financial strength of the Developer.
  6. That the Project will strengthen the commercial sector of the municipality.
  7. That the Project will enhance the tax base of the municipality.
  8. That the Agreement is made in the best interest of the municipality.

Is this the standard for getting $37 million from taxpayers? I can think of all kinds of businesses that could make such claims — it will create jobs, strengthen the commercial sector, enhance the tax base, meet “the high standards of credit worthiness,” etc., etc. Is that really a justification for taxpayer assistance? Where’s the line at City Hall for those handouts?

I would also like to point out that the buildings on the Project Site have been underused for the past year and a half precisely because of the previous unfulfilled redevelopment agreement with EM Properties, whose “high standards of credit worthiness and financial strength” were not impressive enough to result in actual financing of the original project. Why would the current owner try to get tenants for the vacant buildings when he has an agreement to sell those buildings for imminent demolition?

And I take great issue with the contention the Agreement is in the best interest of the municipality. If the hotels (there are two now!) do not perform up to expectations, the bonds will have to be repaid from the general fund — a fund which is insufficient to provide the basic needs of the City. The City Manager is asking City departments for wage concessions to plug an anticipated $10 million budget deficit for 2011.

Supporters of the project will point out that defeating this project will not help the current budget crisis, and they’re correct. But what Peoria residents need to know is that approving this hotel project will create a future budget crisis. The MidTown Plaza project didn’t create a budget crisis in year one either, but we’re feeling its effects now. The same goes for the Firefly Energy loan guarantee. We won’t have to pay the piper for this hotel fiasco for five years or so, but mark my words, we will be paying the piper for it.

City of Peoria, Kellar Branch, Museum Block, Peoria County, Peoria Mayor, Peoria Park District, Taxes

PJS Editorial pretends City asset giveaways have nothing to do with budget crisis

12 Comments

A couple of responses to today’s Journal Star editorial. First, there’s this:

Even Mayor Jim Ardis, who never saw a tax increase he didn’t greet with contempt, seems to have come to the realization that City Hall probably can’t cut its way out of this.

That’s not exactly accurate. Mayor Ardis happily voted to increase sales taxes by 1% within the Hospitality Improvement Zone downtown.

And then, there’s this:

As a result [of the need to make more cuts to city services or raise taxes to balance the budget], a fair number of locals are venting, understandably, though some of them paint either-or scenarios that do not exist. Indeed, the choice is not a recreational trail vs. police officers, or a museum vs. firefighters. The vast majority of the funding for those quality-of-life projects comes out of dedicated revenue streams controlled by other local governments – the park district and county, respectively, with the help of grants. Those dollars couldn’t be used to put more badges on the streets even if the council wanted to. Like them or hate them, those projects — one of them initiated by a successful citizen referendum — are not what created this operating deficit.

First of all, this framing of the argument is obviously a “straw man.” I know of no “locals” who have made the assertions they are countering. Clearly “either-or scenarios” as painted here do not exist. But to imply that these projects have absolutely no relation to the City’s fiscal crisis is also false.

Yes, construction of the rail-to-trail project is funded by the Park District, but it’s only made possible by the City of Peoria giving away a $3 million asset to the Park District for one dollar. The City just threw away $3 million (or at least $750,000, the last bona fide offer to purchase the rail line) while at the same time they need to cut $800,000 from this year’s budget. Why didn’t they put the land up for sale to the highest bidder? Putting this land into the hands of a rail carrier and working with them to woo new manufacturing business to Pioneer Industrial Park would have resulted in raising the tax base in Peoria through new business and new jobs.

Then there’s the Sears block, which has lain dormant for over a decade now because the City won’t enforce deadlines on redevelopment agreements. This is prime real estate that could be parceled off and sold, which would provide a couple of things: income from the initial sale, and on-going revenue from sales and property taxes by the businesses who locate there. Instead, the City is sitting on the land indefinitely, until they can finally give it away for nothing to be used by a non-profit organization that will be a perpetual drain on the county taxpayers.

In addition to the lost opportunity to generate revenue with these assets, taxpayers now have to pay for their development and maintenance in perpetuity. That means we have to pay higher taxes to support these drains on the economy. And that exacerbates the City’s budget woes. Since taxes are high because of increases by other local governments (to which the City directly contributed, as shown above), it puts pressure on the City not to add to the tax burden. And that means the City continues to try to balance its budget by cutting — police, fire, public works, etc.

The Journal Star is simply trying to rationalize its support for non-essential pet projects by using straw-man arguments to dismiss valid criticism.

See also Billy Dennis’s post in response to today’s PJS editorial.

City of Peoria

Changes to neighborhood zoning considered

2 Comments

From this week’s Issues Update for the City of Peoria:

NEIGHBORHOOD ZONING TOPICS MEETING. Staff is currently working on text changes that address several topics relevant to the appearance and quality of life in neighborhoods. Those topics include the following issues:

  • Width of driveways and location of parking spaces
  • Number and location for storage of recreational vehicles
  • Front yard fence permit process
  • Regulations for group living facilities (proposed changes to regulations for halfway houses, recovery homes, and residential substance abuse treatment facilities)
  • Transfers of property

Since these topics impact or have the ability to impact all neighborhoods in the City, the Planning Department is inviting all City neighborhood associations to a meeting on Thursday, June 3, 2010, at 6:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers to hear current regulations, issues, research, and possible options for the group to discuss and provide feedback to staff. Text changes will be finalized after this meeting and sent to the Zoning Commission for public hearing and then to the City Council for final consideration.

City Council, City of Peoria, Peoria Mayor

Mayor’s directive elevates district reps’ power

17 Comments

It’s no secret that district council representatives are given a lot of deference on “district specific business” already. Most of the council votes in lock step with the district councilman and are happy to defer items for no other reason than the district council person requested it.

Now Peoria Mayor Jim Ardis wants to take it a step further. He sent this e-mail to council members on Thursday, May 6:

In an effort to insure that agenda items are ready for council debate I have asked the Manager to put a sign-off line on council communications for district council-members to approve district specific agenda items before they are placed on the agenda. This will not only insure that the district member is ready for the item to come forward it should also minimize deferrals because they are, in fact, ready for council consideration.

Thanks in advance to District Members for assuring your district specific business is approved by you for placement on the agenda.

That means that an item will not even be put on the agenda unless the district representative approves it. To state it another way, under this system, items can be kept off the agenda by the will of a single city council representative. For instance, if Clyde Gulley didn’t want the Washington Street/Route 24 changes to come before the council, he could decline to sign off on this district-specific item, which would keep it off the agenda in perpetuity — even if all the other council members wanted to move forward on it.

The Mayor’s directive gives a special privilege to district council representatives, allowing them to dictate the will of the council on items impacting their districts. But where does the Mayor get the power to make such a directive? The City’s Municipal Code and Council Rules don’t confer this authority on the Mayor, nor does any ordinance preclude any council member from submitting an item for the agenda.

Section 2-31 of the municipal code states, “All reports, communications, ordinances, resolutions, contract documents or other matters to be submitted to the council shall, not later than 10:00 a.m. on Friday preceding each council meeting, be delivered to the city clerk, whereupon the city clerk shall immediately arrange a list of such matters according to the order of business and furnish each member of the council, the mayor, the city manager and the corporation counsel with a copy of the same prior to the council meeting and as far in advance of the meeting as time for preparation will permit.” Nothing in there requires the proposed agenda item go through the Mayor or the district council representative. It merely has to be delivered to the city clerk.

It would appear that the Mayor cannot make such changes without a majority vote of the council… unless, of course, the council voluntarily consents to the Mayor’s missive, abdicating their responsibility to represent all of Peoria, not just their own fiefdoms.