Tag Archives: City of Peoria

City of Peoria, Economic Development, Peoria Streets

Peoria’s priority problem

33 Comments

“The city doesn’t have a budget problem,” Gary Sandberg told me after the city council voted to spend taxpayer money for a walking trail and a private hotel. “It has a priority problem.”

That was the same observation made by Dr. Heywood Sanders of the University of Texas-San Antonio. Sanders is a well-known critic of the convention center (and increasingly, headquarters hotel) “arms race” taking place in cities across America. He’s currently writing a book about it. I asked for his thoughts on the argument that cities simply must offer huge, tax-supported incentives.

The argument goes like this: “In an ideal world, the free market would reign and projects like the hotel would be built 100% by private investment. But that’s not the world we live in. We’re in a struggle with other communities that are providing public incentives in order to lure businesses to their cities. If we don’t compete in offering these kinds of
incentives, we’ll lose out. It’s not the way it’s supposed to be, but it’s the way it is, and we just have to play the game.”

Dr. Sanders has heard the argument many times before. His response was instructive:

The “we have to do it because everyone else is” argument is repeated endlessly in city after city to justify a host of “economic development” efforts. But that doesn’t make it correct. Cities do need to compete for some things. The crucial questions are what the goals are that the city seeks, and whether the decisions make sense or not. The “we have to” argument neatly avoids laying out real goals and objectives, things that can be measured and assessed over time. And an investment decision necessarily involves risk.

The real [important things to consider are] what the potential rewards are, how they relate to community goals, and what the balance of costs and benefits are. It’s all too easy to hide behind simple homilies so that one doesn’t have to really consider what you’re trying to get, and whether it makes sense. As we’ve discussed, Peoria (like a great many cities) has been trying to “save” its downtown for decades. It doesn’t appear to have made much headway. If that’s really the goal, then you need to consider multiple strategies and alternatives, and see what actually happens.

The problem is that planners and local officials almost invariably seek to imitate what someone else has done, with little understanding of how it came about and why it works. There’s an endless parade of architects, planners, and local officials who visit San Antonio’s famed Riverwalk and conclude that all they need is [a] river (or a canal) to get “economic development.” It’s not that simple. Just like everyone thinks building a new convention center will bring hordes to town, and that they then need a new hotel to make the convention center work. And there are a host of consultants who are willing and eager to give local officials (and the business interests they serve) the urban solution du jour.

Peoria has a long history of trying to use large civic projects as a silver bullet to revitalize downtown:

  • The Civic Center was supposed to revitalize downtown, but it hasn’t. It does bring people downtown for Civic Center events, but once the events are over, they all get in their cars and empty out of downtown. The restaurant with the best location relative to the Civic Center — the Grill on Fulton — couldn’t even stay in business. The Civic Center continues to operate in the red every year.
  • Then the City developed the riverfront. There was $2.6 million for the Gateway Building, which the City spends $170,000 a year to operate and maintain. They tried to sell it in 2007, but were evidently unsuccessful. Riverfront Village — the raised concrete slab with parking underneath it that blocks your view of the river — was supposed to “pay for itself” with increased property taxes and parking fees. Parking is now free, and the tax-exempt Heartland Partnership is one of the three tenants on the slab. According to the 2010 budget, the Riverfront is expected to bring in $1.07 million in revenue toward the bond payment of $1.3 million.
  • Then there was One Technology Plaza, which was supposed to “redefine downtown.” Remember that? As the Journal Star editorialized a year after it opened, One Technology Plaza “was advertised as a novel way to put Peoria on the high-tech map, to distinguish Peoria and its work force from virtually every other mid-sized city in America.” The city spent $9.6 million on that project “in part because the $28 million private development would feature the computer-training agency.” That agency — RiverTech Center — opened in April 2000 and closed in May 2001.
  • Then the City acquired and prepared the land for a new ballpark to the tune of $3.3 million. That was supposed to lead to a renaissance south of downtown, turning blighted properties into a “Wrigleyville” atmosphere. The ballpark opened in 2002, but no Wrigleyville has materialized.
  • Along the way, the City picked up the Sears property for around $1 million — the so-called “crown jewel” of downtown Peoria. They’re poised to give the land away to the County so Lakeview Museum can relocate to the block at taxpayer expense.
  • And then there’s the Wonderful Development (City attorney Randy Ray’s ebullient appellation for the downtown hotel project), which the City Council has approved twice now. It’s a big project with a single developer and no public benefit — but a lot of public risk. This is the latest big, civic, silver bullet that will finally bring tourists to Peoria and make the Civic Center profitable. But just like with the other projects, no measurable, objective criteria for success has been identified for the downtown hotel project. Presumably, as long as the project meets its debt obligation, it will be declared a success, regardless of whether it brings in new conventions, regardless of whether other hotels and restaurants close.

The completed projects have not delivered on their promises of downtown revitalization, and there’s little reason to be hopeful that the proposed projects will fare any better. These projects are all big, flashy, and give the appearance that “things are really booming in Peoria.” Meanwhile, many less-exciting projects get put on the back burner or eliminated altogether. Those projects are called “basic services.” Things like road and sidewalk repair.

At the same time the Council approved the Wonderful Development, there was another $40 million project the council could have funded instead. It’s the Washington/Adams (U.S. Route 24) upgrade project. This would improve Route 24 from I-474 to I-74, which would benefit the public (it’s a public street) as well as numerous business/land owners and developers all up and down the stretch. It would implement key elements of the Heart of Peoria Plan (adopted “in principle” by the City Council) and the Warehouse District form-based code.

It would remove the median from the southern portion of the roadway, making the properties along that stretch more accessible and marketable, thus raising their value. It would make the Warehouse District area more pedestrian-friendly, spurring development of loft apartments/condos which would bring more residents back to downtown, which will spur more demand for retail services in the City’s central business district. Currently many of those properties sit vacant, contributing to the City’s budget woes.

This project is not without risk. There might not be enough property improvements or increases in tax receipts for the project to “pay for itself” (although I’m sure the City could find a consultant to say it will pay for itself if they really wanted to do it). But the project also carries significant public benefit, and the presence of multiple developers and property owners over a large, diverse area mitigates the risks. Yet this project languishes in the Land of Insufficient Resources while the Wonderful Development moves forward.

Conclusion: Success is not a priority for Peoria. Downtown revitalization isn’t really a priority for Peoria. Peoria’s’ biggest priority is the appearance of progress. And based on that criteria, we can all say “mission accomplished.” There’s a lot going on. Stuff being built. Stuff being torn down. Money being spent (mostly tax money, alas). It all contributes to the image that Peoria is moving and shaking.

But it’s not. Peoria is in debt and it’s continuing to lose population. City services are being slashed every year, driving more people away. The appearance of progress is bankrupting us. It doesn’t just affect the City. It also affects the County and, especially, the school district (Things are changing! Look at our shiny new buildings! Just don’t look at our test scores).

Sandberg is right. Peoria doesn’t have a budget problem. It has a priority problem.

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.