Tag Archives: Peoria County

Peoria County, Taxes

Unhappy taxpayers should follow appeals process

63 Comments

The Peoria Times-Observer is reporting that a bunch of North Peoria residents are “upset with the practices of the Peoria County Board of Review” and may file a lawsuit. Among those upset are realtors Michael Maloof and Brian Monge and county board member Bob Baietto.

One member of the group, who requested to be anonymous, said it appears the only way to affect change is a lawsuit.

“What it comes down to is politics,” he said. “I was incredibly naive. I thought we could win this by going through channels and giving them proof. I was wrong. We need to make noise. We need to find more people who are mad.”

The remaining members of the group agreed. A consensus was reached that efforts now need to concentrate on finding an attorney who can advise the group on what grounds they can use to sue.

Of course, the politics runs both ways. Some members of the county board attempted to resolve the situation by removing two Board of Review members: Gary Shadid and Nancy Horton. Having failed in that attempt, they’re now looking at a possible lawsuit.

But here’s my question: Have they indeed gone through all the channels, as was implied? Or have they only gone as far as the local Board of Review? According to a state publication called “The Illinois Property Tax System,” there are a couple of ways to appeal the decision of the local Board of Review:

  • The decision may be appealed (in writing) to the Property Tax Appeal Board, a five-member board appointed by the governor. The Property Tax Appeal Board will determine the correct assessment based on equity and the weight of the evidence. Taxes must be paid pending the outcome of the appeal.
  • The taxes can be paid under protest and the county board of review’s decision can be appealed directly to the circuit court by filing a tax objection complaint. Taxes and levies are presumed to be correct and legal, but this presumption can be rebutted. The taxpayer must provide clear and convincing evidence.

If the Board of Review’s actions are so unfair, then it should be a cinch to get them overturned on appeal. A large number of successful appeals could then be used as evidence of the local Board of Review’s alleged poor decisions and presented to the full County Board for appropriate action. On the other hand, if the decisions are upheld on appeal, then the local Board of Review will be exonerated.

Bottom line, the complainants should follow the appeals process, not resort to political and/or legal strong-arm tactics to force the Board of Review to render decisions in their favor.

Museum Block, Peoria County

Gee, if only we knew of some unnecessary capital project we could cut…

32 Comments

This story popped up on the PJStar.com website tonight:

Peoria County faces $4 million deficit by year’s end

A sharp decline in revenue streams has Peoria County officials looking down the barrel of a $4 million deficit by year’s end that likely will affect budgets for years to come….

The picture has officials balancing needs with wants: What essential services are required by law, and what can be postponed?

“We’re kidding ourselves if we say we’re going to cut (our budget) and not cut staff,” board member Bob Baietto said. “We’re not going to get out of this without cutting.”

Hmmm… what can we cut? What large, completely unnecessary public expenditure could we eliminate to help plug this deficit? If only there were some new, fungible source of revenue coming on line next year that, while currently slated to go toward a non-essential project, could instead be redirected so that basic county services can continue to be provided. Can you guys think of anything? I’m drawing a blank here…..

Caterpillar, City of Peoria, Museum Block, Peoria County

What happened to Peoria’s stimulus package? Also, will Ardis be drinking the Kool-Aid this time?

32 Comments

Well, it certainly is heartwarming to hear that $3 million in additional donations have rolled in for the proposed downtown museum, but it got me wondering… remember all the talk about this project putting people to work during the recession? Who was it that said that? Oh, yeah, Michael Bryant in InterBusiness Issues:

The message to “Build the Block” as our own stimulus package should be viewed very positively. We would be taking control of our destiny and using our talents and resources to help each other, not waiting for a helping hand. While Peoria may get some monies from President Obama’s economic stimulus package, it would be a mistake for us to wait and see what monies we may get while we have our own outstanding stimulus package right in front of us, literally “shovel-ready.”

Except that they’re not going to start shoveling until at least next year. But according to a new report by Bradley professors Scott and Lewer (you remember them), “the recession will end sometime during the second half of this year.”

So much for helping us stimulate the economy or helping our residents through tough times. Sounds like the economy is correcting itself just fine without turning a spade of dirt for the proposed museum. Who’da thunk? Why, I bet once the recession is over, there would even be a market for the land that’s been held hostage by the museum for the past 11 years.

It’s not too late to correct past mistakes. The current redevelopment agreement for the old Sears block is set to expire at the end of June and must be renegotiated. Now would be the time for the city to require a larger portion of the block be opened up to private, mixed-use development. That would allow the museum to still locate on the block, but in a different form, and it would allow a larger portion of the land to produce property and sales tax income for the city — something we desperately need.

It would not be unprecedented, you know. After voters overwhelmingly supported the library referendum, the city decided to scale back their plans, issuing only $28 million for expansion/updating instead of the $35 million voters approved. I believe the phrase at that time was that the mayor wasn’t “drinking the Kool-Aid on the 72%” of voters who approved the referendum. In fact, Ardis said, taking into account the low voter turnout, that really meant that only 15% of all registered voters voted in favor, and the council has a responsibility to look at the bigger picture and represent all residents whether they voted or not. Well, guess what percentage of registered voters voted in favor of the museum? 12.29% (15,327 of 124,730). So, it only stands to reason that the city would take the same cost-saving measures with this project that they did with the library project, right? After all, times are even more dire now than when the library referendum passed; now we’re staring in the face of a $10 million deficit. Will the mayor be representing all residents whether they voted or not this time?

Of course, the city won’t actually do what I’m suggesting. They’ll pass up (for the fifth time now on this project alone) an opportunity to save money for taxpayers and increase revenues to the city, and instead look for more regressive ways to plug the budget deficit, like cutting public works and public safety, and raising garbage fees.

Chamber of Commerce, Peoria County

The Peoria Area Chamber of Oddities

50 Comments

The Peoria Area Chamber of Commerce has been making some strange moves lately, even for them.

They got behind an effort to bring — of all people — Karl Rove to town, ticking off Democrats on the County board — which is to say, almost the whole board. To add insult to injury, Jim McConoughey, head of the Chamber’s umbrella company Heartland Partnership, sent an e-mail that was perceived as very derogatory toward organized labor. They’ve since backpedaled on both fronts, but it may be too late. The County board might consider “ending the county’s $113,000 annual contract with the Economic Development Council, said Peoria County Board member Allen Mayer, who chairs the Tax/EDC committee,” according to the Journal Star.

I really wonder how the Chamber makes its decisions. I theorized once that they used a magic 8-ball, given their inconsistency on tax increases. They’ve now supported a property tax increase for the library expansion and a sales tax increase to benefit the proposed downtown museum. Yet they have traditionally opposed any tax increases that would go toward basic services, such as poublic safety (police, fire), even when the proposed increases were less than the taxes they’ve supported. That kind of inconsistency earned them no small amount of criticism from former City Councilman Bob Manning, who also called them the “Peoria Area Chamber of Some Commerce” — a reference to the fact that they only seem to really represent certain large employers in the area.

As part of their effort to support the museum, you may recall that they sent letters to Peoria County public school superintendents asking them not to request a sales tax increase for school purposes the same time the museum’s sales tax referendum was going to be on the ballot. They also supported District 150’s “efforts to make tough decisions,” and spoke in favor of District 150 closing schools at a recent School Board meeting. The Chamber’s strange alliance with District 150 has also cost them some members, from what I’ve heard.

All of this makes me wonder… Do they really speak for Peoria business people when they issue these press releases? Do they take a poll of their membership before speaking for them? Do Peoria business people, by and large, support higher taxes for museums and libraries, but oppose them for police and fire protection? Do Peoria business people, by and large, support closing public schools and increasing class sizes? Do Peoria business people, by and large, have antipathy toward organized labor? Are Peoria business people, by and large, Republican?

I can’t help but get the impression that perhaps the Chamber is just a little out of touch with the people they say they represent.

Museum Block, Peoria County

Stimulus money sought for “The Block”

4 Comments

As has been mentioned before, the museum group has two funding goals — a private funding goal and a public funding goal. The $40 million county tax is supposed to plug the public funding goal, but that will still leave the museum $11 million short on the private funding side. Whenever they’re asked about this at town hall meetings, the answer heretofore has been that the CEO Roundtable had committed to raising $8 million of the remaining money from private sources, and that the museum group is “confident” that they can raise the remaining $3 million not covered by that.

Now, it appears they’re trying to plug the private funding gap with (drum-roll, please) more public funds! Stimulus funds, to be exact. There was a press conference yesterday that featured state senator Dave Koehler and Illinois Secretary of Transportation Gary Hannig.

There might yet be additional state and federal money available for the $136 million Build the Block project, maybe enough to close the funding gap that would still exist even if voters approve the sales tax increase next week. At least that’s the hope of state Sen. David Koehler, D-Peoria. He said Monday he would try to help procure $4 million of federal economic stimulus money for an underground parking garage and an additional $10 million from a state capital bill to close the funding gap.

Isn’t that interesting? If we were to get, say, $14 million additional from state and federal sources, the plan is to use it to plug the private funding gap, not lower the local tax commitment. The reason the museum is coming to the county for funding is because they didn’t receive as much in federal/state funds as they originally thought they were going to get. Now that they’re possibly going to get more federal/state funding, it should go to reduce the local tax burden, not prop up private funding shortfalls.

Museum Block, Peoria County

Reasons for spiking school referendum weak

98 Comments

By now, you’ve probably heard or read about how museum supporters successfully discouraged efforts by county school superintendents to put a referendum on the April 7 ballot. That referendum would have been very similar to the museum referendum, only instead of money going toward a museum and big-screen theater, the money would have gone toward school facilities in Peoria County. Each school district would get a portion of the sales tax proceeds based on enrollment. Museum supporters decided county residents shouldn’t have that choice because it would threaten passage of the museum tax. You can read the letters here.

The Journal Star got reaction from some museum supporters.

“We met with school superintendents and in very cordial conversations decided it seemed to be a matter of timing,” [Michael] Bryant [head of the CEO roundtable and the CEO of Methodist Medical Center] said. “The superintendents didn’t have a plan or projects ready, when on the other hand, the museum’s time is now. After April 7, if the referendum doesn’t pass, the museum goes away.”

First of all, this is simply false. The superintendents did and still do have projects ready. IVC is ready to build additions. Brimfield needs a new high school. Peoria Heights wants to pay off bond debt which will lower property taxes in the village. And I think we all know that District 150, which would receive the lion’s share of any sales tax proceeds, has just a few building projects underway or commencing soon. I frankly don’t know how anyone could claim with a straight face that school superintendents in Peoria County “didn’t have a plan or projects ready.” Why would they even be pursuing this option if they didn’t have a plan for how the money would be used?

But secondly, and more importantly, there’s no requirement under the statute that the superintendents have a plan before asking for a referendum to be placed on the ballot. So the argument is a red herring anyway.

“The county made the museum a top priority in February of 2008 and started working toward the goal of finding a funding mechanism,” [County Administrator Patrick] Urich said. “We met with school officials last summer and talked about the path the museum was on and that it was first in line with the sales tax referendum. The fact that the museum group definitely had a plan in place and the schools had no definitive plan on how it intended to spend the money kept us on this path.”

What is this imaginary “line” to which Urich refers? The statute states that if school districts representing 51% or more of the county’s total school enrollment votes to put a referendum on the ballot, the county is obligated to put it on the ballot. The county is not the gatekeeper as Urich implies — there is no statutory limit on the number of referenda that can be placed on the ballot, and referenda are not placed on a first-come-first-served basis. There is simply no “line” in which to wait.

Anything the county had to say to the superintendents would have been advisory at best. And that begs the question: Why was the county meeting with the school superintendents? Was the county also trying to dissuade them from putting the school funding referendum on the ballot?

Bryant said school districts will have future opportunities to see if voters are willing to raise sales taxes to pay help schools. The museum won’t.

With all due respect, that’s the museum’s problem, not the school districts’. Schools should not have to take a back seat because the museum group has been incapable of raising the funds they need over the last seven years.

Museum Block, Peoria County

Museum looks to meet private shortfall with public funds

22 Comments

The latest town hall meeting on the county sales tax referendum took place tonight at Dunlap Valley Middle School. The presenters were Brad McMillan for the museum, Erik Bush for the county, and Karrie Alms for Citizens for Responsible Spending. I was pleased to see that tonight’s meeting was a balanced presentation, pro and con. Kudos to the county for now allowing both sides a seat at the table.

While most of the evening was filled with no new information, there was one significant development. As you may know, the museum has set separate goals for private and public funding. The sales tax is supposed to plug the gap in public funding, but there is still an $11 million shortfall on the private funding side. At just about every meeting, the question is raised as to how the museum group plans to close that $11 million private funding gap. And the answer has always been that they’ve gotten a commitment from the CEO Roundtable to raise $8 million of it, and that they’re confident that people will come out of the wings to support the project once they know the public funding is in place. Sounds far-fetched to me for various reasons, but I don’t want to digress on that right now.

What we learned tonight is that they are also trying to plug that gap with (perhaps not surprisingly) more public money from state and federal sources. Mr. McMillan said the group is working with state senators Risinger and Koehler, as well as Congressman Schock to get grants, stimulus money, and any other funds the government might have lying around that could go toward the museum.

This indicates a bit of a shift in strategy on the museum’s part. It would appear that they are now changing their public/private funding goals. Why might they be doing this? Could it be because they don’t really believe they can make up that $11 million shortfall with private donations after all?

(P.S. On a side note, do you remember a comment on another post from “kcdad” where he said today’s schools are set up to teach children consumerism? Well, after seeing the brand new, state-of-the-art Dunlap Valley Middle School tonight, I’m inclined to agree with him. The building looks like a shopping mall inside and out, not an educational institution. Architecture and environment teach you something about what a community values; clearly the value here is consumerism.)

Museum Block, Peoria County

PI reports on latest county advocacy meeting

17 Comments

I couldn’t make it to the latest museum advocacy meeting held at Bradley University Monday night. But PeoriaIllinoisan was there and turned in his own report. He doesn’t know it, but he’s a mighty fine citizen journalist. I found this particularly interesting:

One of the speakers pointed out that several fliers and information was available at the back of the room, which they were, and just to show that he was fair, he said a flier of a dissenting opinion was also there… it was… on another table was a small stack, blocked and shielded from view by a very enthusiastic Museum supporter who made snide remarks about Merle Widmer, Gary Sandberg, and anyone else who dared to question the “facts”.

Classy.

UPDATE: I’ve been told by another source that it was county board member Andrew Rand — not Richerson — who made the comment about the flyers. PI has corrected his report and that correction is reflected in the quote above.

Museum Block, Peoria County

Advocacy by any other name is still advocacy

49 Comments

The first town hall meeting on the Peoria County public facility sales tax referendum took place Thursday night at Kickapoo Creek Winery. The event was sponsored by County Board members Carol Trumpe and Bob Baietto. Presenters were Jim Richerson for the museum group and Scott Sorrell for the County. Questions had to be written out ahead of time, so attendees weren’t allowed to verbalize the questions themselves. Everything was highly controlled.

The meeting is billed as informational, not advocating for or against passage of the referendum. But if Thursday’s meeting wasn’t advocacy, I sure don’t know what is. Richerson gave his pitch piece for the block and used phrases like “when [not “if”] the referendum passes.” Questions were answered by board members, Sorrell, Richerson, and Mark Johnson from Caterpillar. Obviously, Richerson and Johnson are for the referendum. No one who is against the referendum was allowed a place at the table. The county did not present any risks, cons, or critical information. Everything shared at the meeting was positive toward the referendum. Yet we’re expected to believe we’re hearing an unbiased and fact-based presentation.

In the back of the room was a table full of materials from the the pro-referendum advocacy group Friends of Build the Block, including a flyer that said flat-out, “Vote Yes.” No advance effort was made to contact the anti-referendum advocacy group Citizens for Responsible Spending and offer them a table for their materials.

So, we have an event at which only pro-referendum presenters are invited, only pro-referendum materials are provided, and passage of the referendum is only shown in a favorable light. There’s an old saying: “If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.” So if the event looks like advocacy and sounds like advocacy, guess what?