Peoria Pundit

Lack of funding for district projects had two district council members demanding changes at the Peoria City Council’s first meeting over the 2008 budget.

Barbara Van Auken was angered that the preliminary $22 million capital improvement budget had no funding for the Sheridan Triangle facade improvement program in her 2nd District. It was especially galling because last week, she tried and failed to get the council to approve spending on an engineering study* the project, which was supposedly included in the budget now in effect.

“I want to make sure … I fully understand the process,” she said, sarcastically. “I thought the district council members would have been contacted and asked about their capital needs in their district. I never got that call.”

Last year, council members were given an opportunity at the start of the process to rank a list of proposed capital improvement projects. That didn’t happen this time.

Clyde Gulley wanted the capital budget to include money to install sidewalks on various streets in his 1st District. He was dissatisfied with the given explanation, that Peoria School District 150 was consulted about what its wished were concerning the streets near Manual and they didn’t consider the sidewalks a priority.

“Even recently, we are still having problems with people having to walk in the street because there are no sidewalks,” Gulley said. “And the explanation is because we’re trying to figure out where the new schools are going to be, and that reason has nothing to do with these streets.”

How projects end up on the capital improvement list one year, and took up quite a bit of time at the relatively short budget meeting. There was no satisfactory explanation given for why this happens, or what criteria is used, other than general changes in politics or the will of the council.

At-large member George Jacob asked the administration to prepare a list of these dropped projects over the last several years. He called it a “HÅ«sker DÅ« game of trying to remember what was promised.”

Jacob also suggested a two-year budget cycle might make the process more fair and less subject to whim.

City Manager Randy Oliver, who seemed a bit taken back by the request for a dropped project list, agreed that a two-year budget cycle is something he would recommend, although it’s too late to do this year.

The council members who spoke seemed ready to abandon what has in the past been a practice of showing favor to those projects for which a claim is made that it would generate revenue on some way. Other consideration, such as neighborhood stabilization, not to mention the length of time neighbors have been waiting, should be given greater consideration.

At large council member Gary Sandberg was critical of both the process and the lack of funding for capital improvement projects.

“We are too timid to our infrastructure,” he said. “We want to pass a magic wand with TIF money. The magic isn’t there. Need to start funding capital projects. We are holding our breath and are going to pass out from lack of oxygen.”

He noted he is often criticized for not voting for budgets that are agreed upon by consensus.

“I will vote for budgets that invest in Peoria. It comes through new taxes. It’s not magic. It’s not through economic development (schemes).”

Mayor Jim Ardis said he agreed with most of Sandberg’s comments and said they are worthy of future discussion, but noted that TIF and enterprise zone projects use money that cannot be used for these sorts of infrastructure improvements. Also, he said any additions to the “revenue stream” would need to be identified before they are added to the capital improvement list.

I’ll discuss ideas for additional revenue in a future post.

* City Manager Randy Oliver has a different version of the background on the project.