I have been looking recently for articles and research on small town revitalization and came across an article that summarizes an earlier journal article by Bert Stitt. I have not been able to find the original article by Stitt, but I have sent an email off to Stitt to request a copy. I’ll see if I can locate the actual journal article by more traditional methods at a later time.
Dr. Besser has summarized the main beliefs that Stitt believes diminish the revitalization of downtown areas. I keep added my feelings in green italics below Dr. Bessers comments.
Community Connections News Release
Beliefs That Hinder Downtown Revitalization
December 23, 1996
by Terry L. Besser
Assistant professor and extension sociologist
Iowa State University Extension to Communities
Vital, hospitable and active downtowns provide communities with a source of pride and a location for congregating, socializing and dealing with community affairs. Towns without functioning downtowns become a collection of domiciles housing people who work, shop, socialize and seek entertainment elsewhere. These places may continue to be recognized as towns by mapmakers, but they are not the same kind of community we commonly associate with small towns. The whole community is affected by the nature of the downtown. It is for these reasons that downtown revitalization should concern the whole community and not just the local business owners.
In a recent article in Small Town (July-August 1996), Bert Stitt warns small town business owners and community leaders that belief in a set of common myths jeopardizes constructive steps to revitalize main street business districts. Stitt was the downtown development coordinator for the state of Wisconsin and is now a private consultant. The beliefs that follow are a condensation of his ideas.
Belief No. 1. People should shop locally.
Stitt maintains that for most merchants this is a hypocritical position. He challenges business owners who make this claim to turn away the business of all non-local customers. Anyhow, according to Stitt, scolding people to shop locally doesn’t work. It might influence a few people, but many others are put off by the preachy tone.
More importantly, concentrating on the "disloyalty" of local people diverts attention and energy from the constructive tasks of learning about potential and current customers, and what they want in terms of services and product selection. Stitt cautions that if business operators don’t understand and cater to the wants and needs of current and potential customers, they will not be successful in retaining the business of even the most loyal local residents.
I understand the idea behind “Think Monroe County First” which Columbia supports and was all that came to mind when I read Belief #1. I do believe the “Monroe County First” initiative has stayed clear of sounding preachy as described above. They offer promos and rewards for shopping local rather than saying shopping elsewhere is bad. The closest they come to “preachy” is pointing out the positives economically of spending your money in Monroe County and the negatives of spending it elsewhere.
I do think sometimes people here tend to make a point specifically regarding how they shop locally or wear it as a badge of honor that they shop locally. This was never the case when I lived in Edwardsville where people often drove to Fairview Heights for many years.
Belief No. 2. Lack of parking is the major obstacle to main street vitality.
According to this logic, the ample parking provided by the "super stores" and shopping malls is the major reason for their success and the demise of downtown businesses. Stitt recognizes that parking requires attention. Improvements such as the provision of adequate lighting and maintenance, good signage, enough open spaces, easy passage between street and businesses, and a sense of hospitality are important.
Even so, all the parking in the world will not by itself attract customers. In fact, if there is plenty of parking and no cars, people may suspect that the business is not open or that the products and services offered are undesirable. Customers are attracted to stores, in Stitt’s opinion, that provide desired products and services in a convenient, pleasant atmosphere. Adequate parking is a necessity, but not a sufficient factor alone for retail success.
The Main Street Improvement Plan addresses the improvements mentioned above. I feel parking is hardly an issue in Columbia, at least right now. If downtown becomes a bustling center of commerce then it may creep up in the future. We have plenty of side streets where people can park. Certain parking areas could use some “beautification” I suppose, but overall I think this is not yet an obstacle for Columbia.
Belief No 3. We need more jobs in town in order to revitalize the downtown.
The falsity of this claim is apparent by considering all of the towns that have more jobs available than residents looking for work, yet they still have deteriorating downtowns. Adding more jobs won’t necessarily add more population to the community, nor customers to the downtown. Where we work, live and shop are independent of each other in the modern era of highways and automobiles.
A recent study at Iowa State University revealed that in the average small town 47 percent of employed people work in another town, 50 percent shop someplace else for daily needs, 73 percent go to another town for entertainment, and almost nine out of ten of them shop elsewhere for big ticket items. Residents have the choice of doing business in their home town, their work town, towns conveniently located in between or in a larger adjoining metropolitan area. Where they shop will be determined by a combination of convenience, product mix, price, service and shopping atmosphere.
This point is clear in that I can name a few areas in the St. Louis area where they have great down-towns that people from all over drive to; Delmar Loop, Kirkwood, Old St. Charles, Grafton, & Alton come to mind. Increasing Columbia’s population does not mean our downtown will all of a sudden become more vibrant.
Regarding convenience and product mix I’ll be honest that I haven’t tried every option in Columbia or even Monroe County for that matter to buy things when I need them. I head up to Ace and buy things that they have when I need them and I must admit from time to time they have something the “big box stores” don’t. If I am on my way home from work or need drywall, 2x framing material, etc. Home Depot is hard to pass up. I think the important point is to understand Columbia will never provide us with everything we need or want and even if Columbia somehow does accomplish this feat we may not always shop here.
Belief No. 4. Downtowns are made up of independent business people.
This statement is not totally inaccurate. However, according to Stitt, successful main streets are usually populated by business owners who have put their fierce individualism aside to work together for their shared interests. Cooperation, not independence, characterizes vital small town business districts. Examples of cooperation include coordination of store front restorations, marketing strategies, product and service offerings; deciding on consistent hours of business; sharing information on technology, suppliers, customers; pooling resources to be able to afford consultants, renovations, employee training and benefits programs; and on and on.
The list of areas that could result in mutual benefit through cooperation is extensive. Stitt contends that business owners must learn to work effectively as a group for their own and the community’s welfare. They should understand how to conduct effective meetings, how to organize and sustain effective group activities, and how to deal with difficult people and contentious topics.
Assistance in learning these important meeting and group skills is available from your local Iowa State University county extension education director. In addition, the county director has access to information about many aspects of small town business success.
While I do think our businesses are working “together” I think that may only be to a point since many of the businesses downtown are in competition with each other. There are a few groups that are creating for the lack of a better term “coalitions” to work to bring attention to Columbia’s downtown. Our town provides an excellent resource in Paul Ellis to work to gain interest and resources to develop not only downtown but Columbia as a whole.
I have to say that Columbia has many events that happen downtown that attract gatherings, if not downtown than at Metter Park only one block off Main Street. I have not lived here as long as most but Columbia seems to be making strides at developing the downtown district.
Friday, August 06, 2010
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Columbia's Attorney Woes.
With a vacation earlier this month to the Southeast including the wife's first trip to Epcot and a stop at the Georgia Aquarium in Atlanta was a nice change of pace Things seem to be getting busier at work again so time for the blog has slipped.
Not much has been happening up a city hall unless you want to talk about attorneys.
A legal bill is running up a total for an issue at the police station that I have to believe may be getting close to the amount of money that the attorney was hired to recover. It will be discussed in executive session at next weeks committee meetings. I am glad Alderman Stumpf brought it to light on Monday night.
The main attorney issue is that of the new city attorney who was selected a few weeks back. I missed the meeting (first one in a long time) but I was told it garnered little obstruction at that meeting. On Monday night when discussing the fee schedule for the newly appointed attorney Alderman Hejna presented the council with a enveloped packet detailing complaints from former clients and the Martindale Hubble rating for the new attorney.
Discussion then took place regarding if Tom Adams had a Martindale Hubble rating and what Tom Adams thought of Martindale Hubble ratings. Tom said he had been asked to be interviewed for an "A" rating but declined and that he knew of some attorney's with "A" ratings he would not recommend to anyone.
I don't know how the mayor weigh his decision to select a new attorney. I don't know what the new attorneys Martindale Hubble rating is or if that would even be a credible measure to use. I searched for it online but could not find one for Belsheim & Bruckert, LLC. I spoke with Alderman Oberkfell after the meeting and I asked him how long the new attorney is on board for. The response was for one year as all appointments.
I say let it go for a year and see how they perform. It seems the new attorney has a decent background in municipal law that will keep us out of trouble for a year, then the council can decide if they made a mistake.
The most ironic thing I took from the entire meeting was that Alderman Hejna presented the council with "surprise" material the night of the meeting. I do not know what was in the prepared packet, it may have been greatly valuable information.
The irony is that Alderman Hejna has voiced concern time and time again for information not being given to the alderman on the Friday before a meeting, in order for everyone to have time to review the information. In order to be an effective leader, which is what the all of the alderman should be, you must lead by example in order to obtain desired results.
Communication is the largest problem facing our council.
The state is now five months behind in payments to the city totaling approximately $343,000.
Not much has been happening up a city hall unless you want to talk about attorneys.
A legal bill is running up a total for an issue at the police station that I have to believe may be getting close to the amount of money that the attorney was hired to recover. It will be discussed in executive session at next weeks committee meetings. I am glad Alderman Stumpf brought it to light on Monday night.
The main attorney issue is that of the new city attorney who was selected a few weeks back. I missed the meeting (first one in a long time) but I was told it garnered little obstruction at that meeting. On Monday night when discussing the fee schedule for the newly appointed attorney Alderman Hejna presented the council with a enveloped packet detailing complaints from former clients and the Martindale Hubble rating for the new attorney.
Discussion then took place regarding if Tom Adams had a Martindale Hubble rating and what Tom Adams thought of Martindale Hubble ratings. Tom said he had been asked to be interviewed for an "A" rating but declined and that he knew of some attorney's with "A" ratings he would not recommend to anyone.
I don't know how the mayor weigh his decision to select a new attorney. I don't know what the new attorneys Martindale Hubble rating is or if that would even be a credible measure to use. I searched for it online but could not find one for Belsheim & Bruckert, LLC. I spoke with Alderman Oberkfell after the meeting and I asked him how long the new attorney is on board for. The response was for one year as all appointments.
I say let it go for a year and see how they perform. It seems the new attorney has a decent background in municipal law that will keep us out of trouble for a year, then the council can decide if they made a mistake.
The most ironic thing I took from the entire meeting was that Alderman Hejna presented the council with "surprise" material the night of the meeting. I do not know what was in the prepared packet, it may have been greatly valuable information.
The irony is that Alderman Hejna has voiced concern time and time again for information not being given to the alderman on the Friday before a meeting, in order for everyone to have time to review the information. In order to be an effective leader, which is what the all of the alderman should be, you must lead by example in order to obtain desired results.
Communication is the largest problem facing our council.
The state is now five months behind in payments to the city totaling approximately $343,000.
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
A little off topic for my blog, BP in the Gulf
On a more global outlook I cannot even grasp my mind around the problems in the Gulf of Mexico over the last 65 or so days. When the Deepwater Horizon sank and 11 people died we knew it would be bad. When we realized the riser pipe had broken off while it sank we knew it was getting worse. 
Then we realized the blow out preventer was not functioning and oil was pouring into the Gulf we knew things were getting much worse. After a few failed attempts at stopping/containing the spill in various ways BP used a scissor-like shear to cut the pipe in an attempt to cap the pipe once again. Well they cut the riser but the cut wasn't clean and the cap idea is not working as well as expected.
When the Deepwater Horizon first sank people said it could not be worse than Exxon Valdez. Right after the sinking the media was reporting that about 1,000 barrels a day were leaking. I was seven when the Exxon Valdez hit the reef in Prince William Sound but I remember reading about it in school and seeing it on children’s shows for years thereafter. The low end estimate for the Valdez is 10.8 million US gallons of crude. This amount covered roughly 1,300 miles of coastline and 11,000 square miles of ocean. We all thought that was as bad as it could get.
Take the original estimate of 1,000 barrels a day and lets do some math. 1,000 barrels at 64 days would yield a little over 2.6 million gallons which is not quite at Exxon Valdez proportions. Unfortunately estimates of how much oil is actually leaking have done nothing but get larger. The numbers and estimates vary wildly but one worst case scenario now touted by the federal government is around 44,000 barrels a day. It sounds worse when you extrapolate it out, 2.85 million barrels over 64 days comes out to 130,000,000 million gallons of crude.
How can all of this happen may be the first question you ask yourself. That answer may be any number of things including but not limited to corporate greed, lack of enforced regulations, or poor construction of the well or its components. Maybe it was too much turning a blind eye by politicians and businessmen or possibly a simple mistake made by an oil worker.
I tend to believe the correct question is “Why is there no better solution for fixing the leak?” It seems to me that we were led to believe that BP was coming up with these ideas on the fly. BP warned the fixes may not work because the leak was over 5,000 ft below the waves but they were the best options available and had proven to work in the past on shallower leaks. A clip from Rachel Maddow on MSNBC was brought to my attention which illustrates these “fixes” have been attempted in the past and did not work in shallower water. Please note that I rarely watch Rachel Maddow and rarely agree with one sided commentary from any source but this clip is worth the watch.
If the relief wells that are being drilled were our only true “fix” all along was all of the hurried work BP has done to this point merely a public relations campaign to look as if they were trying to fix the problem? As Maddow pointed out why hasn’t the technology to fix a leak improved at the same pace as the technology to drill deeper faster. Why hasn’t a better containment process been developed since the 70’s.
I simply don’t know what to say at this point.
Lets talk cleanup. How do you get 130 million gallons of oil out of the Gulf of Mexico? How fast can it be done? Will it be in time to miss a hurricane sweeping through the Gulf this summer? I don’t think anyone has a plan for collecting all of the oil from the surface of the Gulf let alone any oil suspended below the waves in the so called “oil plumes”.
More questions fill my head every time I spend any amount of time thinking about this issue. I know it’s an old picture but you cannot tell if he is just thinking or praying. I like to think he is doing both, he needs to be in this case.
Then we realized the blow out preventer was not functioning and oil was pouring into the Gulf we knew things were getting much worse. After a few failed attempts at stopping/containing the spill in various ways BP used a scissor-like shear to cut the pipe in an attempt to cap the pipe once again. Well they cut the riser but the cut wasn't clean and the cap idea is not working as well as expected. When the Deepwater Horizon first sank people said it could not be worse than Exxon Valdez. Right after the sinking the media was reporting that about 1,000 barrels a day were leaking. I was seven when the Exxon Valdez hit the reef in Prince William Sound but I remember reading about it in school and seeing it on children’s shows for years thereafter. The low end estimate for the Valdez is 10.8 million US gallons of crude. This amount covered roughly 1,300 miles of coastline and 11,000 square miles of ocean. We all thought that was as bad as it could get.
Take the original estimate of 1,000 barrels a day and lets do some math. 1,000 barrels at 64 days would yield a little over 2.6 million gallons which is not quite at Exxon Valdez proportions. Unfortunately estimates of how much oil is actually leaking have done nothing but get larger. The numbers and estimates vary wildly but one worst case scenario now touted by the federal government is around 44,000 barrels a day. It sounds worse when you extrapolate it out, 2.85 million barrels over 64 days comes out to 130,000,000 million gallons of crude. How can all of this happen may be the first question you ask yourself. That answer may be any number of things including but not limited to corporate greed, lack of enforced regulations, or poor construction of the well or its components. Maybe it was too much turning a blind eye by politicians and businessmen or possibly a simple mistake made by an oil worker.
I tend to believe the correct question is “Why is there no better solution for fixing the leak?” It seems to me that we were led to believe that BP was coming up with these ideas on the fly. BP warned the fixes may not work because the leak was over 5,000 ft below the waves but they were the best options available and had proven to work in the past on shallower leaks. A clip from Rachel Maddow on MSNBC was brought to my attention which illustrates these “fixes” have been attempted in the past and did not work in shallower water. Please note that I rarely watch Rachel Maddow and rarely agree with one sided commentary from any source but this clip is worth the watch.
If the relief wells that are being drilled were our only true “fix” all along was all of the hurried work BP has done to this point merely a public relations campaign to look as if they were trying to fix the problem? As Maddow pointed out why hasn’t the technology to fix a leak improved at the same pace as the technology to drill deeper faster. Why hasn’t a better containment process been developed since the 70’s.
I simply don’t know what to say at this point.
Lets talk cleanup. How do you get 130 million gallons of oil out of the Gulf of Mexico? How fast can it be done? Will it be in time to miss a hurricane sweeping through the Gulf this summer? I don’t think anyone has a plan for collecting all of the oil from the surface of the Gulf let alone any oil suspended below the waves in the so called “oil plumes”.
More questions fill my head every time I spend any amount of time thinking about this issue. I know it’s an old picture but you cannot tell if he is just thinking or praying. I like to think he is doing both, he needs to be in this case.
Passing a serious and responsible state budget is the most important thing lawmakers in Springfield do.
"Passing a serious and responsible state budget is the most important thing lawmakers in Springfield do. So far this year, it's safe to say that they failed miserably. And residents from every corner of the state will pay for their inaction."The text above is the conclusion to an article by Adam Doster at Progress Illinois regarding a paper called "Passing the Buck" which was written by Larry Joseph and Manya Khan of Voices for Illinois Children. It's worth the read.
It should becoming more of an issue everyday for the people of Illinois to find and support candidates that will do their jobs in Springfield once elected.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Grant Application
It was actually revealed during the budget discussions a few months ago that the city was looking to possibly purchase some of the land that the American Legion now owns, I did not say anything in the blog at the time as it was a slip at the meeting and better left not mentioned.
It was said last night that the city is planning to use the grant money I talked about yesterday to purchase land from the Legion for park use. Not sure what the price is or what amount the city is planning to purchase. I might file a FOIA for the grant application just to see what information I can get on the subject.
It's not that I am against parks or their development. It's an issue when you figure we have park space that is currently undeveloped and the city is still tracking unpaid real estate taxes from the state for four months previous. With no solution on the horizon from the state and available land on hand is this the best use of money? Its hard to know without all of the info.
UPDATE:
I filed a FOIA request to the city on 6/22/10 for a copy of the Grant Application. I'll share the info once I receive a copy.
It was said last night that the city is planning to use the grant money I talked about yesterday to purchase land from the Legion for park use. Not sure what the price is or what amount the city is planning to purchase. I might file a FOIA for the grant application just to see what information I can get on the subject.
It's not that I am against parks or their development. It's an issue when you figure we have park space that is currently undeveloped and the city is still tracking unpaid real estate taxes from the state for four months previous. With no solution on the horizon from the state and available land on hand is this the best use of money? Its hard to know without all of the info.
UPDATE:
I filed a FOIA request to the city on 6/22/10 for a copy of the Grant Application. I'll share the info once I receive a copy.
Monday, June 21, 2010
What I have been doing.
I have not been posting as often as I would like to. People are still checking the page and for that I am grateful. I'll try my best to get back to posting a little more often.
I have been attending the meetings on Mondays as usual but overall things seem to be running smoothly for the city. Grants have been an issue of discussion for a little while and one is up for approval tonight, an Open Space Land Acquisition & Development (OSLAD) Grant to the Illinois Department of Natural Resources.
It looks to be a 50% match type of grant for the purpose of developing existing or purchasing new land for park use. Its the 50% match that worries me when the grants can be upwards to $750,000 for new purchases. I would hope the city is going to use this money to develop existing land the city already owns, but I think we're looking at buying some more land for park use. Perhaps we can find out tonight or just FOIA for a copy of the grant application or better yet the city could just let everyone know whats going on, we'll see what happens tonight.
I have been attending the meetings on Mondays as usual but overall things seem to be running smoothly for the city. Grants have been an issue of discussion for a little while and one is up for approval tonight, an Open Space Land Acquisition & Development (OSLAD) Grant to the Illinois Department of Natural Resources.
It looks to be a 50% match type of grant for the purpose of developing existing or purchasing new land for park use. Its the 50% match that worries me when the grants can be upwards to $750,000 for new purchases. I would hope the city is going to use this money to develop existing land the city already owns, but I think we're looking at buying some more land for park use. Perhaps we can find out tonight or just FOIA for a copy of the grant application or better yet the city could just let everyone know whats going on, we'll see what happens tonight.
Friday, May 28, 2010
You Have to be Kidding, Right?
The state has left the largest budget question this year without an answer; How to fund this years pension contributions.
Link to the article over at Progress Illinois
I have always found Progress Illinois to have a very Barak Obama feel to it. The site as a whole seems to tilt a little to the left, which is fine so long as when you read it you keep that in mind. Their party has let them down and they know it.
Link to Center for Tax and Budget Accountability "White Paper"
I know this was linked to in the Progress article as well but its to important to miss. It more like a "red paper" as the budget as we knew all along does not look pretty. Everyone can see now there simply is not enough money to fund what the state needs to fund.
The "deficit" without the pension contribution is about $7 billion. Divide that among the roughly 13 million people living in our fine state and that's about $540 a person. Spread each persons share over three years and add 5% interest to defer the payments and would would each end up owing the state about $190 a year, well we wouldn't owe the state really because they aren't paying their bills.
Does anyone want this? No. But its an idea which is more than Springfield has provided us in the last couple of years. Spread it over five years or ten years, it doesn't matter. The money must come from us the taxpayers. Yes I think the state should ask us for more money, in tough economic times, its a solution. Its the simplest solution which might also lead to fewer votes in November.
Now we just need somewhere to get another $4 billion to make those pension payments, to a pension fund that is already underfunded.
Link to the article over at Progress Illinois
I have always found Progress Illinois to have a very Barak Obama feel to it. The site as a whole seems to tilt a little to the left, which is fine so long as when you read it you keep that in mind. Their party has let them down and they know it.
Link to Center for Tax and Budget Accountability "White Paper"
I know this was linked to in the Progress article as well but its to important to miss. It more like a "red paper" as the budget as we knew all along does not look pretty. Everyone can see now there simply is not enough money to fund what the state needs to fund.
The "deficit" without the pension contribution is about $7 billion. Divide that among the roughly 13 million people living in our fine state and that's about $540 a person. Spread each persons share over three years and add 5% interest to defer the payments and would would each end up owing the state about $190 a year, well we wouldn't owe the state really because they aren't paying their bills.
Does anyone want this? No. But its an idea which is more than Springfield has provided us in the last couple of years. Spread it over five years or ten years, it doesn't matter. The money must come from us the taxpayers. Yes I think the state should ask us for more money, in tough economic times, its a solution. Its the simplest solution which might also lead to fewer votes in November.
Now we just need somewhere to get another $4 billion to make those pension payments, to a pension fund that is already underfunded.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Madison County Pay Increases
Does this seem like a no brainer to anyone else.
Link to BND Article
How can so many elected officials continue to do what they want in the face of their constituents, many of which are struggling in these economic,is times. I think the more important question is why do we keep electing them.
Some will feel I may be biased to Matt Rice as I went to college with him. I can attest to some good political talk with him while we were in school. We did not always see eye to eye when discussing the topics but I think he has a good view on what matters. Matt is a guy who "gets it" from what I know of him. I only hope that if elected he can stay true to what he says now.
The naysayers may note its easy to say what he did when the office he is running for is not getting a pay raise. I would rebut that if he said something like this now in print, it will be far easier to call him out if his elected position comes looking for pay increases any time soon.
The sitting Treasurer Frank Miles who has said he would decline the raises. Maybe our local city officials could do the same.
Link to BND Article
How can so many elected officials continue to do what they want in the face of their constituents, many of which are struggling in these economic,is times. I think the more important question is why do we keep electing them.
Some will feel I may be biased to Matt Rice as I went to college with him. I can attest to some good political talk with him while we were in school. We did not always see eye to eye when discussing the topics but I think he has a good view on what matters. Matt is a guy who "gets it" from what I know of him. I only hope that if elected he can stay true to what he says now.
Matt Rice, Republican candidate for county recorder, said county officials are already "extremely well-compensated," and don't need a raise.
"In the real world, you're lucky to have a job, much less get a pay raise in this economy," Rice said. "The only thing this vote demonstrates is that our county officials need a wake-up call this November."
The naysayers may note its easy to say what he did when the office he is running for is not getting a pay raise. I would rebut that if he said something like this now in print, it will be far easier to call him out if his elected position comes looking for pay increases any time soon.
The sitting Treasurer Frank Miles who has said he would decline the raises. Maybe our local city officials could do the same.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Discussion 5/17 Regarding Council Aldermanic Commitees & Committee Meeting Minutes
Discussion regarding the makeup of which alderman are on which committees and who should be be on which. The real disagreement was regarding none other than meeting minutes. Minutes used to be a hotly discussed topic. Lately they have been agreed upon rather easily. I have said before that all of the petty arguments like this are the problem with the council.
City Attorney Tom Adams
He will not be seeking re-appointment as city attorney with the city for the fiscal year that started May 1, 2010. There will be a committee meeting next Monday May 24 to discuss possible candidates to fill this vacancy.
Committee Meetings 5/10
I had half of this done last week, better late than never?
All of the elected officials were in attendance at this meeting.
Parks, Playgrounds, and Recreation
• Columbia CUSD No. 4 Presentation
Ed Settles was in attendance to further discuss land use options for the school district at Bolm-Schuhkraft Park or across Route 3 where the city owns 33 acres set aside to be a future city park.
Superintendent Settles explained that the district would like to use Bolm-Schuhkraft during school hours for physical education classes and after school for band practice, soccer practices, and football practice. The schools are landlocked and the will that presented the land that is now Bolm-Schuhkraft to the city prevents the selling of some or all of the land to the district or anyone for that matter. The district had expressed interest in the past to purchase some of Bolm-Schuhkraft Park from the city. Settles also expressed interest in purchasing portions of property the city owns across Route 3, referred to in the meeting as the Weigman(sp) property.
Al Hudzik asked Settles how much land the district would be interested in buying. Settles expressed interest in anywhere from ¼ to ½ of the 33 acres, but said they would be interested in whatever the city would be willing to part with. It was noted the district would like to locate a practice field and a game field if possible.
Alderman Stumpf said he would rather trade land parcels with the district rather than selling land for cash.
Alderman Roessler asked if the district already used the park area at Bolm-Schuhkraft for activities. Superintendent Settles said that they do but he would prefer that a type of reservation system be put in place. Roessler then asked if the city had a plan in the works for the Weigman property. Alderman Niemietz responded that there is a trail there with no future plans in store at this time; there is a plan that has been prepared and awaiting funding for “Creekside Park” that would be developed first.
Alderman Roessler asked if the Weigman property floods. Niemietz responded that the land is “swampy”. Stumpf added that the land flooded for a few hours when the storm that was hurricane Gustav passed through our area. Stumpf also noted that it’s a shame the land is not being used and that there is no plan for the Weigman property. He reiterated the idea of not taking money for the land if the city were to “sell” some of the Weigman land to the school district; he would prefer a trade for land elsewhere for the city to develop a park. Alderman Ebersohl noted that one acre of the Weigman land sat higher out of reach of flooding and that was planned to be used for restrooms and parking.
Superintendent Settles asked when there may be a decision or plan for a reservation system for Bolm-Schuhkraft so he could pass that info on to his replacement that starts July 1. Niemietz said that the Play Commission is looking into creating updated park policies. Stumpf noted the district should put together a plan that would illustrate the areas of Bolm-Schuhkraft the district would utilize and what times they would want to use those designated areas. In regards to “selling land” Stumpf asked Settles for a plan of what the district would want and what they would be willing to give to the city in return. Stumpf also noted that if the school district is ever in a position to abandon the property that the high school sits on now he would like the city to be offered ownership to extend its current park area there.
Executive and Rules
• Committee Appointments Discussion
Alderman Ebersohl started the meeting stating that the Rules Committee saw no reason to change the members or chairmen of any of the council’s aldermanic committees.
Alderman Stumpf asked if there could be an economic development committee formed and if there was he would like to serve on it. Niemietz asked what its purpose would be and Stumpf replied that it could bring fresh ideas and accountability to the economic development of the city.
It was then asked if the committee chairs ever change, Ebersohl said that really doesn’t happen.
Alderman Agne asked if larger cities have economic development committees. Mayor Hutchinson replied that the Planning Commission reviews projects and their associated zoning and they move projects over to the council.
Alderman Oberkfell noted that he would like to be back on the Fire Committee. Alderman Row mentioned that if someone wanted to drop off of a committee and switch with someone else that could be a solution. No one volunteered to switch with Oberkfell. Row said he would like to switch chairmanships with Alderman Hejna moving him from Library back over to Refuse & Recycling. Niemietz asked Hejna what would happen to all of the recycling plans Hejna had for the Refuse & Recycling Committee. The idea of Hejna & Row switching was not mentioned again.
Hejna mentioned that she would like to Finance chairman again.
Stumpf said he would like to be parks chairman instead of Niemietz.
Hejna asked why the council has an education committee.
Alderman Niemietz said that the city works hand in hand with the taxing body that is the school district and that committee provides for that communication. Niemietz also noted that she would prefer to keep her chairmanship of the Parks Committee for one more year.
All of the elected officials were in attendance at this meeting.
Parks, Playgrounds, and Recreation
• Columbia CUSD No. 4 Presentation
Ed Settles was in attendance to further discuss land use options for the school district at Bolm-Schuhkraft Park or across Route 3 where the city owns 33 acres set aside to be a future city park.
Superintendent Settles explained that the district would like to use Bolm-Schuhkraft during school hours for physical education classes and after school for band practice, soccer practices, and football practice. The schools are landlocked and the will that presented the land that is now Bolm-Schuhkraft to the city prevents the selling of some or all of the land to the district or anyone for that matter. The district had expressed interest in the past to purchase some of Bolm-Schuhkraft Park from the city. Settles also expressed interest in purchasing portions of property the city owns across Route 3, referred to in the meeting as the Weigman(sp) property.
Al Hudzik asked Settles how much land the district would be interested in buying. Settles expressed interest in anywhere from ¼ to ½ of the 33 acres, but said they would be interested in whatever the city would be willing to part with. It was noted the district would like to locate a practice field and a game field if possible.
Alderman Stumpf said he would rather trade land parcels with the district rather than selling land for cash.
Alderman Roessler asked if the district already used the park area at Bolm-Schuhkraft for activities. Superintendent Settles said that they do but he would prefer that a type of reservation system be put in place. Roessler then asked if the city had a plan in the works for the Weigman property. Alderman Niemietz responded that there is a trail there with no future plans in store at this time; there is a plan that has been prepared and awaiting funding for “Creekside Park” that would be developed first.
Alderman Roessler asked if the Weigman property floods. Niemietz responded that the land is “swampy”. Stumpf added that the land flooded for a few hours when the storm that was hurricane Gustav passed through our area. Stumpf also noted that it’s a shame the land is not being used and that there is no plan for the Weigman property. He reiterated the idea of not taking money for the land if the city were to “sell” some of the Weigman land to the school district; he would prefer a trade for land elsewhere for the city to develop a park. Alderman Ebersohl noted that one acre of the Weigman land sat higher out of reach of flooding and that was planned to be used for restrooms and parking.
Superintendent Settles asked when there may be a decision or plan for a reservation system for Bolm-Schuhkraft so he could pass that info on to his replacement that starts July 1. Niemietz said that the Play Commission is looking into creating updated park policies. Stumpf noted the district should put together a plan that would illustrate the areas of Bolm-Schuhkraft the district would utilize and what times they would want to use those designated areas. In regards to “selling land” Stumpf asked Settles for a plan of what the district would want and what they would be willing to give to the city in return. Stumpf also noted that if the school district is ever in a position to abandon the property that the high school sits on now he would like the city to be offered ownership to extend its current park area there.
Executive and Rules
• Committee Appointments Discussion
Alderman Ebersohl started the meeting stating that the Rules Committee saw no reason to change the members or chairmen of any of the council’s aldermanic committees.
Alderman Stumpf asked if there could be an economic development committee formed and if there was he would like to serve on it. Niemietz asked what its purpose would be and Stumpf replied that it could bring fresh ideas and accountability to the economic development of the city.
It was then asked if the committee chairs ever change, Ebersohl said that really doesn’t happen.
Alderman Agne asked if larger cities have economic development committees. Mayor Hutchinson replied that the Planning Commission reviews projects and their associated zoning and they move projects over to the council.
Alderman Oberkfell noted that he would like to be back on the Fire Committee. Alderman Row mentioned that if someone wanted to drop off of a committee and switch with someone else that could be a solution. No one volunteered to switch with Oberkfell. Row said he would like to switch chairmanships with Alderman Hejna moving him from Library back over to Refuse & Recycling. Niemietz asked Hejna what would happen to all of the recycling plans Hejna had for the Refuse & Recycling Committee. The idea of Hejna & Row switching was not mentioned again.
Hejna mentioned that she would like to Finance chairman again.
Stumpf said he would like to be parks chairman instead of Niemietz.
Hejna asked why the council has an education committee.
Alderman Niemietz said that the city works hand in hand with the taxing body that is the school district and that committee provides for that communication. Niemietz also noted that she would prefer to keep her chairmanship of the Parks Committee for one more year.
Lost Generation
This is old but still worth the look.
February 7, 2008
Contact: David Goldstein, AARP, 202-434-2560, dgoldstein@aarp.org
AARP Announces Winners of U&50 Challenge on You Tube
The Top Five Videos Win Cash Prizes Including $5,000 for First Place
Washington, DC - Today AARP announced the winners of its U@50 Challenge. The contest, launched in August 2007 on YouTube, gave people between the ages of 18 and 30 the chance to submit short videos on the subject of what they expect their lives to be like at age 50. The goal of the U@50 Challenge was to encourage intergenerational dialogue enabling young people to speak their minds and give AARP insight into their views. More than 50 videos were submitted from across the country and from these; the five top videos were selected by a panel of judges.
This video won second, watch the whole video.
February 7, 2008
Contact: David Goldstein, AARP, 202-434-2560, dgoldstein@aarp.org
AARP Announces Winners of U&50 Challenge on You Tube
The Top Five Videos Win Cash Prizes Including $5,000 for First Place
Washington, DC - Today AARP announced the winners of its U@50 Challenge. The contest, launched in August 2007 on YouTube, gave people between the ages of 18 and 30 the chance to submit short videos on the subject of what they expect their lives to be like at age 50. The goal of the U@50 Challenge was to encourage intergenerational dialogue enabling young people to speak their minds and give AARP insight into their views. More than 50 videos were submitted from across the country and from these; the five top videos were selected by a panel of judges.
This video won second, watch the whole video.
Friday, May 14, 2010
TIF's In Chicago, This Process Sounds Familiar
Taken from Progress Illinois' article.
This maneuver, in which revenue captured in one TIF district is transferred to projects in an adjacent district, is known as "porting." It's not illegal by any means, but it provides ample opportunities for abuse.
Link to the entire article at Progress Illinois
While the wording in Columbia Crossing talked of a "pass through" which I have never received a clear answer or explanation on. Chicago's planned idea of sharing revenue between TIF districts is possible. I do not have a map of Columbia's current districts and have not gone back to see how far Columbia Crossing reached to the East I would have to imagine this idea could maybe be used.
The issue then, is it a good idea? In the case of Chicago not really. The claims that the mayor's office is using the power of distributing the revenues between TIF districts to gain votes on certain items is a troubling enough. Let alone when a district has valid needs and uses for the TIF revenue in its own district only to see it funneled somewhere else.
In Columbia's case if a development were to happen in the bottoms (which I am not sure is the best location) and a TIF district be used (which I am not sure is really the best financing measure) and the new TIF district "touched" the current TIF district that includes at least the middle school it seems possible Columbia could take a page out of the Daley playbook (which I would not advise doing)and have at it. But it seems completly possible, maybe.
This maneuver, in which revenue captured in one TIF district is transferred to projects in an adjacent district, is known as "porting." It's not illegal by any means, but it provides ample opportunities for abuse.
Link to the entire article at Progress Illinois
While the wording in Columbia Crossing talked of a "pass through" which I have never received a clear answer or explanation on. Chicago's planned idea of sharing revenue between TIF districts is possible. I do not have a map of Columbia's current districts and have not gone back to see how far Columbia Crossing reached to the East I would have to imagine this idea could maybe be used.
The issue then, is it a good idea? In the case of Chicago not really. The claims that the mayor's office is using the power of distributing the revenues between TIF districts to gain votes on certain items is a troubling enough. Let alone when a district has valid needs and uses for the TIF revenue in its own district only to see it funneled somewhere else.
In Columbia's case if a development were to happen in the bottoms (which I am not sure is the best location) and a TIF district be used (which I am not sure is really the best financing measure) and the new TIF district "touched" the current TIF district that includes at least the middle school it seems possible Columbia could take a page out of the Daley playbook (which I would not advise doing)and have at it. But it seems completly possible, maybe.
Thursday, May 13, 2010
To Mike Madigan: What the heck? :: The SouthtownStar :: Phil Kadner
To Mike Madigan: What the heck? :: The SouthtownStar :: Phil Kadner
Go ahead read the article.
Ok, now do you think Madigan will provide an answer?
If he does it won't answer the questions posed. It will blame the Republicans and not the Democrats. The Republicans will respond and say it's the Democrats fault. How can most citizens understand the problems and know a solution must be found while the elected in Springfield do nothing. And they are doing nothing, they went home last week Friday. Republicans should vote for the tax increase and if they don't the Democrats should activly be voicing that issue and not waiting until the elections to call out the Republicans. Democrats should get down to cutting some programs, sure that may cost them some votes. It may also cost some Republicans some votes to say yes to a tax increase.
What I can say for sure is that all elected Representatives and Senators in Springfield are costing their constituents and the state far more than the outcome of the upcoming election. They were not elected to work full time preparing and positioning for a future election. They are all failing to do the jobs they were elected to do, its that simple. I am not saying I have the answers but we should as citizens shift our votes elsewhere this November based on the current performance of those in Springfield.
Go ahead read the article.
Ok, now do you think Madigan will provide an answer?
If he does it won't answer the questions posed. It will blame the Republicans and not the Democrats. The Republicans will respond and say it's the Democrats fault. How can most citizens understand the problems and know a solution must be found while the elected in Springfield do nothing. And they are doing nothing, they went home last week Friday. Republicans should vote for the tax increase and if they don't the Democrats should activly be voicing that issue and not waiting until the elections to call out the Republicans. Democrats should get down to cutting some programs, sure that may cost them some votes. It may also cost some Republicans some votes to say yes to a tax increase.
What I can say for sure is that all elected Representatives and Senators in Springfield are costing their constituents and the state far more than the outcome of the upcoming election. They were not elected to work full time preparing and positioning for a future election. They are all failing to do the jobs they were elected to do, its that simple. I am not saying I have the answers but we should as citizens shift our votes elsewhere this November based on the current performance of those in Springfield.
Monday, May 10, 2010
Sunday, May 09, 2010
What happened? Nothing really.
Well the elected could not figure out how to pass a budget but they sort of finished up some other items.
STAR Bonds are a go for the Marion area according to the House. The Senate will vote sometime before May 31, they had to leave a few weeks early since they finished what they get paid to do.
If passed we'll wait and see how long it takes for a STAR Bond district to pop up in Glen Carbon and for Chicago to divert all state sales tax back to itself with the use of this new tool.
In regards to the budget the officials will take some time off and come back before the end of May for "a couple of days" to pass a budget. They have been working on it for months and they'll come back for a few days to pass one? Wouldn't it be better served to stay a few weeks more and work out the details on the budget rather than having meetings between a few people at a time in Chicago with Gov. Quinn to make agreements to get what you want?
It will not be what we as citizens want or need, I guarantee the budget will be the same useless proposal that we have seen for the past few years.
STAR Bonds are a go for the Marion area according to the House. The Senate will vote sometime before May 31, they had to leave a few weeks early since they finished what they get paid to do.
If passed we'll wait and see how long it takes for a STAR Bond district to pop up in Glen Carbon and for Chicago to divert all state sales tax back to itself with the use of this new tool.
In regards to the budget the officials will take some time off and come back before the end of May for "a couple of days" to pass a budget. They have been working on it for months and they'll come back for a few days to pass one? Wouldn't it be better served to stay a few weeks more and work out the details on the budget rather than having meetings between a few people at a time in Chicago with Gov. Quinn to make agreements to get what you want?
It will not be what we as citizens want or need, I guarantee the budget will be the same useless proposal that we have seen for the past few years.
Friday, May 07, 2010
Some Good News.....Ok It's Really More Bad News
Taken from this article at The State Journal Register
The budget includes $26.1 billion from the state’s general checkbook account which pays for most state services. The money is allocated in large lump sums within various state agencies and Quinn will be given broad authority to direct how the money is spent.
The budget does not include the $3.8 million due to the state-funded pension systems in the next budget year. The plan is to suspend payments into those systems for the first six months of the year and hope that a funding scheme can be worked out.
The budget includes $26.1 billion from the state’s general checkbook account which pays for most state services. The money is allocated in large lump sums within various state agencies and Quinn will be given broad authority to direct how the money is spent.
The budget does not include the $3.8 million due to the state-funded pension systems in the next budget year. The plan is to suspend payments into those systems for the first six months of the year and hope that a funding scheme can be worked out.
My View:
SB3660 calls for suspending payments to an already unfunded pension system, this seems like a good idea, right? Its nothing to worry about as as we can rely on "hope that a funding scheme can be worked out". Does anyone with a vote in Springfield take anything seriously? The state is looking at a possible $13Billion deficit and the one of the items they felt could be put off is the state funded pension system? I believe the above cited article is incorrect as other sources say its between $3.7-4Billion they will not fund to the pension system.
Another hot topic issue with the budget includes the no brainer cigarette tax. It adds a $1 a pack tax to cigarettes. Making people spend more or quit is ok by me, sorry. If you wanted to add a tax to my vices I would live with them.
I understand the difficult decisions being placed on our elected officials in deciding what to cut but they have made the process much more complicated than it should be. Their lack of controlling the spending or raising sufficient revenues for years could have curtailed the current budget issues. The officials have also mandated their spring session should end a few weeks early so everything is a rush today so they can get home early.
They'll need the extra time to campaign after their complete lack of effort opr ability to fix muxh of anythung so far in 2010.
SB3660 calls for suspending payments to an already unfunded pension system, this seems like a good idea, right? Its nothing to worry about as as we can rely on "hope that a funding scheme can be worked out". Does anyone with a vote in Springfield take anything seriously? The state is looking at a possible $13Billion deficit and the one of the items they felt could be put off is the state funded pension system? I believe the above cited article is incorrect as other sources say its between $3.7-4Billion they will not fund to the pension system.
Another hot topic issue with the budget includes the no brainer cigarette tax. It adds a $1 a pack tax to cigarettes. Making people spend more or quit is ok by me, sorry. If you wanted to add a tax to my vices I would live with them.
I understand the difficult decisions being placed on our elected officials in deciding what to cut but they have made the process much more complicated than it should be. Their lack of controlling the spending or raising sufficient revenues for years could have curtailed the current budget issues. The officials have also mandated their spring session should end a few weeks early so everything is a rush today so they can get home early.
They'll need the extra time to campaign after their complete lack of effort opr ability to fix muxh of anythung so far in 2010.
Star Bonds
Seems to be hitting some opposition but not enough.
This sums up my issue with the plan all along.
This sums up my issue with the plan all along.
Thursday, May 06, 2010
Star Bonds - Alive.....No Surprise
As I said last Friday when I wrote about this ongoing Bond issue.
The development is being moved. The target is Marion for this always ambiguous "destination development"
Story from St. Louis Business Journal - 5/4
The Southern online story - 5/1
Second Southern story - 5/4
From Progress Illinois - near the bottom- 5/4
Would have put this up earlier in the week but I was out of town for business. I have to say the local acceptance of the project from elected officials is much greater this time around it seems. Carbondale's mayor seems to be one of the few asking questions. Costello is out of the development team as it moved into his fathers congressional district.
I can understand how this seems like a great deal for the economy of Southern Illinois. This isn't just a deal for part of the state. The state budget far from stable and creating a development that "could" send money to help at the state level without these Bonds does not improve the situation. It will create jobs both during construction and upon completion but the revenue to the state is my issue. I have not read too far into the new bill but I did see one major change.
Its not called "The STAR Bonds Financing Act" anymore its short name is "The Innovation Development and Economy Act". This is a good move as some of the negative press associated with the STAR Bond name may be sidestepped. Misleading as politics usually is this change should not surprise anyone.
While I think the plan has a lot of work to accomplish before the end of this week. I think one item is being forgotten. In the original plan I remember there being a condition of no STAR Bond districts being allowed within a 250-mile radius of another, or something along those lines. With the Glen Carbon location that radius would cut a large majority of Chicago out of the party. With the move to Marion anything north of I-80/94 is fair game. The field day that will take place in the TIF District known as Chicago could be astounding. A quick search I did of the bill turned up no radius requirements at the current time.
Link to Ammendment 3 of SB2093
Which town will they turn to next and what funding will they attempt to receive for their business. Time will tell.
The development is being moved. The target is Marion for this always ambiguous "destination development"
Story from St. Louis Business Journal - 5/4
The Southern online story - 5/1
Second Southern story - 5/4
From Progress Illinois - near the bottom- 5/4
Would have put this up earlier in the week but I was out of town for business. I have to say the local acceptance of the project from elected officials is much greater this time around it seems. Carbondale's mayor seems to be one of the few asking questions. Costello is out of the development team as it moved into his fathers congressional district.
I can understand how this seems like a great deal for the economy of Southern Illinois. This isn't just a deal for part of the state. The state budget far from stable and creating a development that "could" send money to help at the state level without these Bonds does not improve the situation. It will create jobs both during construction and upon completion but the revenue to the state is my issue. I have not read too far into the new bill but I did see one major change.
Its not called "The STAR Bonds Financing Act" anymore its short name is "The Innovation Development and Economy Act". This is a good move as some of the negative press associated with the STAR Bond name may be sidestepped. Misleading as politics usually is this change should not surprise anyone.
While I think the plan has a lot of work to accomplish before the end of this week. I think one item is being forgotten. In the original plan I remember there being a condition of no STAR Bond districts being allowed within a 250-mile radius of another, or something along those lines. With the Glen Carbon location that radius would cut a large majority of Chicago out of the party. With the move to Marion anything north of I-80/94 is fair game. The field day that will take place in the TIF District known as Chicago could be astounding. A quick search I did of the bill turned up no radius requirements at the current time.
Link to Ammendment 3 of SB2093
Friday, April 30, 2010
Star Bonds - Dead?
The Links:
stltoday
Belleville News Democrat
Suburban Journals
A couple of items that struck me when reading through these stories.
I feel this development is strong enough to stand on its own. I understand finding financing is tough right now as many projects people thought were going to happen simply are not because organizations cannot get funding, banks aren't even willing to fund their long planned expansions in some cases.
Maybe the project can be scaled down and started on. If two or three of the anchors begin construction many of the others will come on their own I would think.
The most troubling note I read was this
Holland said in a press release that opponents made it clear they didn't want the development in Madison County.
I don't really remember anywhere along the way any voices saying the project was not wanted in Madison County. The issues with the project were in regards to funding. If he was told that his development was not wanted in Madison County he should have made that more public.
The most interesting part of this whole saga is yet to take place. Where will this "development" move to next. There are some large tenants like LegoLand & Ikea which were rumored in the Columbia Crossing development and were mentioned as part of the University Town Center project as well. These are very large tax revenue producing city changing locations that have an obvious desire to locate in the metro region.
Which town will they turn to next and what funding will the attempt to recive for their business. Time will tell.
stltoday
Belleville News Democrat
Suburban Journals
A couple of items that struck me when reading through these stories.
"The reason is simple," said Rebecca Rausch, vice president of public affairs for Fleishman-Hillard of St. Louis, who served as spokeswoman for developer Bruce Holland and the University Town Center. "For more than a year, Bruce and his team tried to get the support of local mayors and lawmakers, but couldn't get it. Bruce and his team are not moving forward with the University Town Center Development."
I feel this development is strong enough to stand on its own. I understand finding financing is tough right now as many projects people thought were going to happen simply are not because organizations cannot get funding, banks aren't even willing to fund their long planned expansions in some cases.
Maybe the project can be scaled down and started on. If two or three of the anchors begin construction many of the others will come on their own I would think.
The most troubling note I read was this
Holland said in a press release that opponents made it clear they didn't want the development in Madison County.
I don't really remember anywhere along the way any voices saying the project was not wanted in Madison County. The issues with the project were in regards to funding. If he was told that his development was not wanted in Madison County he should have made that more public.
The most interesting part of this whole saga is yet to take place. Where will this "development" move to next. There are some large tenants like LegoLand & Ikea which were rumored in the Columbia Crossing development and were mentioned as part of the University Town Center project as well. These are very large tax revenue producing city changing locations that have an obvious desire to locate in the metro region.
Which town will they turn to next and what funding will the attempt to recive for their business. Time will tell.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Star Bonds - Mayors to Make Their Case
Link to the story.
I think it will get the push before early May. I find myself continuing to follow this story as it seems many of the "major elements" from Columbia Crossing are appearing in the UTC Plan and the Edwardsville are is where I grew up.
Here is an article from earlier this month.
I think it will get the push before early May. I find myself continuing to follow this story as it seems many of the "major elements" from Columbia Crossing are appearing in the UTC Plan and the Edwardsville are is where I grew up.
Here is an article from earlier this month.
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
Levee Informational Meeting
I received an email from Gene Bergmann this afternoon containing an open invitation for the public to attend a meeting regarding the levee issues and how they will affect Columbia and Monroe County as a whole. From his email I understand the meeting is being put together by the Progress for Columbia group.
I hope everyone will come to this meeting regardless of who is organizing it. I am sure the meeting will be a good opportunity to get updated with the most recent information concerning the levees. We all should be interested in how the levee issue is progressing no matter who is organizing the meeting.
As sent to me here is the invite.
Public Meeting to Discuss Levee Upgrade
When : Wednesday, May 12 – 7:00 p.m.
Where : Columbia Middle School
Speakers :
-Les Sternam, East West Gateway Council
-Other Civic Leaders from Dupo, Waterloo, & Columbia
Come to hear an update from the key leader of the levee upgrade and the importance of this project for Monroe County’s future development. Their will also be an opportunity to get answers to your questions.
I hope everyone will come to this meeting regardless of who is organizing it. I am sure the meeting will be a good opportunity to get updated with the most recent information concerning the levees. We all should be interested in how the levee issue is progressing no matter who is organizing the meeting.
As sent to me here is the invite.
Public Meeting to Discuss Levee Upgrade
When : Wednesday, May 12 – 7:00 p.m.
Where : Columbia Middle School
Speakers :
-Les Sternam, East West Gateway Council
-Other Civic Leaders from Dupo, Waterloo, & Columbia
Come to hear an update from the key leader of the levee upgrade and the importance of this project for Monroe County’s future development. Their will also be an opportunity to get answers to your questions.
Columbia Budget
The council passed the budget last night with a very quiet and quick 4-3 vote. Alderman Row was out of town, yeas were cast by Agne, Roessler, Ebersohl, & Niemietz while the nays were cast by Stumpf, Hejna, & Oberkfell.
The public comment period which took place before the meeting had a total of two people comment. Former Mayor Lester Schneider said he would prefer there be an itemized list for expenditures out of the capitol development fund. I was the other to comment and made the following statement.
I feel the alderman should engage in some sort of discussion before they vote no on something. Alderman Hejna gave her opinion that total disbursements should not exceed total revenues during the discussion period before the vote but Al Hudzik gave a rebuttal to her reasoning in that expenditures for the Old Town Bond were previously funded but that money is now being paid out. I really never had any indication while the council was discussing the budget either this week or last week that Oberkfell and Stumpf would vote no on the budget.
I had another paragraph prepared for the public comment portion of the meeting but chose not to speak it in fear it would be taken the wrong way by the council. Given now how it is evident they were split on the issue with little to no conversation or voicing of opinions over the budgeting process it seems I should have said what I planned to.
Budget that was voted on. Coming.
Revisions made since last weeks committee meeting.
The public comment period which took place before the meeting had a total of two people comment. Former Mayor Lester Schneider said he would prefer there be an itemized list for expenditures out of the capitol development fund. I was the other to comment and made the following statement.
First off I would like to thank Al and Linda for their time to prepare the budget.
I would however not use the term “worst case scenario” when describing either the revenue or disbursement side of this budget. The revenue side will not likely be what is shown in the budget right now. The arrearage money owed to the city will more than likely not be received from the state and it would seem more than likely that the state will miss 3-4 monthly payments over the next fiscal year. The state has not proven that they will be able to do any better than that. Depending on what months the state chooses to not pay, the city could be missing possibly over $250,000 in projected revenue.
These projected shortfalls in revenue can be made up with a few tweaks and not spending what is projected in only a few line items. If legal fees for Columbia Crossing, tourism, risk management, can stay near what they were last year a great amount of this can be made up. It will be difficult but it can be done.
In regards to disbursements I would like to see the council make an attempt at prioritizing the list of capitol expenditures for this year and the next few. While I feel that some of the items that are funded out of the capitol development fund are not truly capitol development items, this is only my viewpoint. I tend to classify road projects, new buildings or building upgrades/improvements along with other infrastructure improvements as true capitol development projects. It should have become very evident last week that while this year the city will be able to fund what they want to make projects with matching or other supplemental funds get done, this may not be possible in the next fiscal year. The capitol development fund will not be able to continue funding the number of projects the city would like to accomplish. Prioritizing projects can take away the strain of choosing which ones to do down the road.
I feel the alderman should engage in some sort of discussion before they vote no on something. Alderman Hejna gave her opinion that total disbursements should not exceed total revenues during the discussion period before the vote but Al Hudzik gave a rebuttal to her reasoning in that expenditures for the Old Town Bond were previously funded but that money is now being paid out. I really never had any indication while the council was discussing the budget either this week or last week that Oberkfell and Stumpf would vote no on the budget.
I had another paragraph prepared for the public comment portion of the meeting but chose not to speak it in fear it would be taken the wrong way by the council. Given now how it is evident they were split on the issue with little to no conversation or voicing of opinions over the budgeting process it seems I should have said what I planned to.
I would also encourage the council to discuss issues. The council must communicate and set aside their differences if the city is to succeed and prosper. It is not my intent to point blame on this issue, as you all must work to improve how you interact with each other on every issue including this budget.
Budget that was voted on. Coming.
Revisions made since last weeks committee meeting.
Sunday, April 18, 2010
Remainder of the Budget Meeting Video
I feel these two clips offer the best information regarding the budget. Some good questions were asked by Alderman Row and Stumpf.
I think what is the most frustrating thing when watching the council "talk" about an issue is that they really do not talk to each other. They ask for questions, an alderman will have a question or ask for the other aldermans input or perspective and they all sit and stare at each other.I know some of the alderman take issue with what the others have done in the past but you at least have to talk to each other.
I would encourage everyone to come and voice any concerns you may have regarding the budget tomorrow night before the council meeting at 6:45.
I would watch the whole clip but Alderman Stumpf asks some good questions starting around 2:50 in.
Alderman Row has a good question starting around 2:50 in, but watch the whole clip.
I think what is the most frustrating thing when watching the council "talk" about an issue is that they really do not talk to each other. They ask for questions, an alderman will have a question or ask for the other aldermans input or perspective and they all sit and stare at each other.I know some of the alderman take issue with what the others have done in the past but you at least have to talk to each other.
I would encourage everyone to come and voice any concerns you may have regarding the budget tomorrow night before the council meeting at 6:45.
I would watch the whole clip but Alderman Stumpf asks some good questions starting around 2:50 in.
Alderman Row has a good question starting around 2:50 in, but watch the whole clip.
Friday, April 16, 2010
Walmart possibly leaving St. Ann - A "TIF Story" - Continued
A follow up to a story I posted back on the 5th of January. I have to say in this case TIF seems like a bad deal. If Wal-Mart and THF want a store in this part of town they'll build it, I would guess they offer a deal to St. Ann if Bridgeton tells them no.
Link to article at stltoday.com
Link to article at stltoday.com
My questions of the Budget.
I sent my questions over to Al Hudzik yesterday as he is the one putting the budget together along with Linda Sharp. I have a hard time understanding how the city can project the revenue they are when all signs point to similar cash flow to the year we are just finishing up.
My questions in black, Al's answers in blue.
I have looked at this a few times and I see where the money can be made up if this occurs and expenses need to be wrangled in to stay in the black but wouldn't the budget be "more real" & "worst case scenario"if we showed up front with a negative income right below the positive for the arrearage figures the state owes us for the same amount. I understand we need to show the money owed somewhere but realistically that money will not be flowing into the city in the next year, or ever for that matter.
It’s difficult to show a worst case scenario by indicating that you feel some of the projected revenues are not going to be received (even if there is a 50-50 chance of that being the case), because you would then have to make a similar calculation on the reduction of expenses put in the budget that you don’t feel will be spent (e.g. total amount of legal fees) – in order to be able to spend funds, the expense items must appear in the budget; however, steps can be taken throughout the year to reduce the expenses (as necessary) if the income reflected is not received. Additionally, our goal was to show a cash balance at year end greater than or equal to the $288,000 state income tax arrearage – the Draft Budget falls a little short, but other adjustments are being made to meet that goal.
I believe you mentioned the budget reflects $77 a resident for funding from the state. Should we be taking into account that the state will miss at a minimum 3-4 payments? Nothing over the last year has showed us they can or will provide what is owed to us. This would be another (-$250,000) depending on what months the state decides to keep what is owed to us.
I feel there’s a possibility that the state may fall farther behind than the current 4 mos., however, there’s no way to tell; therefore, I wouldn’t know how to estimate the arrearage we are going to see – as stated above, expenses will have to be controlled throughout the year based upon the income we see coming in.
On the same issue should the city figure anything in for the decline in funding the state is proposing to the municipalities in regards to income tax? The reduction from the municipalities share of 10% down to 7%. Again I am not sure when this would take place in regards to them passing a budget but should we take this into account? As the state really has no backup plan and if this reduction do not take place then I feel the missed payments mentioned above would most definitely continue, either case would be a large reduction in revenue, I fear both will happen.
There’s no way to tell what steps the state legislature will take in the matter of the governor’s request on the reduction of the state income tax receipts to the cities – this would take legislative action and is not something the Governor can implement without the legislature; additionally, there’s a possibility that the state will increase its income tax rates (both individual and corporate), and if so, the reduction the governor mentioned in his budget speech may be reduced/alleviated depending on whether the cities receive a portion of the funds attributable to the income tax rate increase.
In regards to the revolving loan fund, I noticed Bon Vivant was listed, I believe this was some improvement work to the facade of the building or it was in a main street improvement program and since the store is no longer there I wondered what the status of that would be. I have nothing against the uses of these funds to help our local businesses, just trying to see what their status would be.
Bon Vivant is current on its loan and it was a topic discussed at a meeting held this morning – this issue will be reviewed and addressed, and I’m sure whatever funds are due the city will be repaid.
Could the city prioritize the capitol development plans in terms of streets and infrastructure plans for the next few years so when they need to be scaled back or cut the community, the council, and the streets department knows what stays and what goes in order of importance and not just what people want at the time.
I feel the capital development plans suggestion is a good one and will try to work on it, however, one thing to keep in mind is that elections are held every two years and the priorities of different councils may change with the election results.
In general I feel Al gave some good responses. I still have an issue with projecting more revenue than anyone can realistically expect.
My questions in black, Al's answers in blue.
I have looked at this a few times and I see where the money can be made up if this occurs and expenses need to be wrangled in to stay in the black but wouldn't the budget be "more real" & "worst case scenario"if we showed up front with a negative income right below the positive for the arrearage figures the state owes us for the same amount. I understand we need to show the money owed somewhere but realistically that money will not be flowing into the city in the next year, or ever for that matter.
It’s difficult to show a worst case scenario by indicating that you feel some of the projected revenues are not going to be received (even if there is a 50-50 chance of that being the case), because you would then have to make a similar calculation on the reduction of expenses put in the budget that you don’t feel will be spent (e.g. total amount of legal fees) – in order to be able to spend funds, the expense items must appear in the budget; however, steps can be taken throughout the year to reduce the expenses (as necessary) if the income reflected is not received. Additionally, our goal was to show a cash balance at year end greater than or equal to the $288,000 state income tax arrearage – the Draft Budget falls a little short, but other adjustments are being made to meet that goal.
I believe you mentioned the budget reflects $77 a resident for funding from the state. Should we be taking into account that the state will miss at a minimum 3-4 payments? Nothing over the last year has showed us they can or will provide what is owed to us. This would be another (-$250,000) depending on what months the state decides to keep what is owed to us.
I feel there’s a possibility that the state may fall farther behind than the current 4 mos., however, there’s no way to tell; therefore, I wouldn’t know how to estimate the arrearage we are going to see – as stated above, expenses will have to be controlled throughout the year based upon the income we see coming in.
On the same issue should the city figure anything in for the decline in funding the state is proposing to the municipalities in regards to income tax? The reduction from the municipalities share of 10% down to 7%. Again I am not sure when this would take place in regards to them passing a budget but should we take this into account? As the state really has no backup plan and if this reduction do not take place then I feel the missed payments mentioned above would most definitely continue, either case would be a large reduction in revenue, I fear both will happen.
There’s no way to tell what steps the state legislature will take in the matter of the governor’s request on the reduction of the state income tax receipts to the cities – this would take legislative action and is not something the Governor can implement without the legislature; additionally, there’s a possibility that the state will increase its income tax rates (both individual and corporate), and if so, the reduction the governor mentioned in his budget speech may be reduced/alleviated depending on whether the cities receive a portion of the funds attributable to the income tax rate increase.
In regards to the revolving loan fund, I noticed Bon Vivant was listed, I believe this was some improvement work to the facade of the building or it was in a main street improvement program and since the store is no longer there I wondered what the status of that would be. I have nothing against the uses of these funds to help our local businesses, just trying to see what their status would be.
Bon Vivant is current on its loan and it was a topic discussed at a meeting held this morning – this issue will be reviewed and addressed, and I’m sure whatever funds are due the city will be repaid.
Could the city prioritize the capitol development plans in terms of streets and infrastructure plans for the next few years so when they need to be scaled back or cut the community, the council, and the streets department knows what stays and what goes in order of importance and not just what people want at the time.
I feel the capital development plans suggestion is a good one and will try to work on it, however, one thing to keep in mind is that elections are held every two years and the priorities of different councils may change with the election results.
In general I feel Al gave some good responses. I still have an issue with projecting more revenue than anyone can realistically expect.
Budget Meeting
Its been a busy week and I still have a few videos to edit down and get online but I would still encourage everyone to pick up the budget at the city's website and look it over, no one has a reason to complain if they don't voice their issues with the councils plans to spend your money now rather than after the fact.
I did cut parts of the meeting out as no one needs all of the dead space where no one was talking and parts of the budget process and explanation simply are not all that vital to the process as a whole. The first clip states the meeting was a regular session council meeting which is incorrect, it was a Committee of the Whole meeting, I missed changing part of the title clip.
I did cut parts of the meeting out as no one needs all of the dead space where no one was talking and parts of the budget process and explanation simply are not all that vital to the process as a whole. The first clip states the meeting was a regular session council meeting which is incorrect, it was a Committee of the Whole meeting, I missed changing part of the title clip.
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
Article on Local Cities and Development
I thought this was a good article showing examples of two cities with very similar characteristics with Columbia. O'Fallon relies on sales taxes from car dealerships like Columbia does and Brentwood is similar in size to Columbia. I would have to say Brentwoods location for development is far superior to locations Columbia could offer but there are many people who drive through Columbia on Route 3 everyday.
Interesting points of view regardless and the story isn't all pro-tif so give it a read.
Interesting points of view regardless and the story isn't all pro-tif so give it a read.
Monday, April 12, 2010
City Budget Draft
I read through it over the weekend and scanned through it again at lunch today. A couple things jump out that are hard to figure with only this proposed budget in front of me.
1. I cannot tell if the city is forecasting a decline in revenue from the state, it appears they are not.
2. The city has the money owed to the city from the state, Illinois Income Taxes (arrearage) as income. I wouldn't count on this $288,000 ever making it to the city's account. I would figure for the state missing three months payments next year as well.
3. The budgeted amount for the what is now common place transfer of funds from the capitol development fund to the general fund is $445,000 for this year. I know the money is meant to be used on capitol development projects but I would feel better knowing exactly what these projects are up front. Road repairs and new cars are hardly what I would consider a "good" use of these funds. Save the cash and get the main street plan done, construct a new better looking police station/fire station, or repave main street Route 3 to Route 3. I would prefer seeing this money go to large expenditures.
4. $13,000 for seminars, conventions, and meetings. Skip them this year. Save the money. Send two or three people if absolutely necessary. I would applaud the alderman that gives up their seat to the yearly conference.
5. $50,000 for Tourism expenses?
6. A positive of legal fees not being a large projected expenditure and not being large expenditure last year.
I want to hear the council, the city administrator, Linda Sharp, and any department heads speak on their budgets before I comment on any real specifics.
Should be an interesting meeting. I'll see if I can tape it and post it. I have never taped a committee meeting before.
1. I cannot tell if the city is forecasting a decline in revenue from the state, it appears they are not.
2. The city has the money owed to the city from the state, Illinois Income Taxes (arrearage) as income. I wouldn't count on this $288,000 ever making it to the city's account. I would figure for the state missing three months payments next year as well.
3. The budgeted amount for the what is now common place transfer of funds from the capitol development fund to the general fund is $445,000 for this year. I know the money is meant to be used on capitol development projects but I would feel better knowing exactly what these projects are up front. Road repairs and new cars are hardly what I would consider a "good" use of these funds. Save the cash and get the main street plan done, construct a new better looking police station/fire station, or repave main street Route 3 to Route 3. I would prefer seeing this money go to large expenditures.
4. $13,000 for seminars, conventions, and meetings. Skip them this year. Save the money. Send two or three people if absolutely necessary. I would applaud the alderman that gives up their seat to the yearly conference.
5. $50,000 for Tourism expenses?
6. A positive of legal fees not being a large projected expenditure and not being large expenditure last year.
I want to hear the council, the city administrator, Linda Sharp, and any department heads speak on their budgets before I comment on any real specifics.
Should be an interesting meeting. I'll see if I can tape it and post it. I have never taped a committee meeting before.
Wednesday, April 07, 2010
City Budget
The budget for fiscal year '10-'11 I believe will be posted to the city's website sometime tomorrow. The council will discuss the budget at next week Monday's committee meetings and the vote to approve on Monday April 19th. The time for public comment will be Monday April 19th at 6:45 just before the city council meeting.
I would strongly encourage people to pay attention to the process this year. The state will more than likely cut into what the city normally gets back from state collected taxes. It will be interesting to see how the city budgets the money this year.
I have a fear the city will budget anything that can be deemed a capitol development expense item to get its funding from the capitol development fund, this may work for a year or two to adjust for the reduction in state provided money. If the state never increases the funds to current levels then this fund will be depleted and the city will then have to make drastic changes. Also with how the budget has been running lately on the city level funds will be hard to find to rebuild these cash reserves.
I fear the "barebones budget" that will be proposed will not have the reductions that are really needed. If this year should have taught the council something it would have to be that the "worst case scenario" that you plan for can always be much worse than you imagined.
I would strongly encourage people to pay attention to the process this year. The state will more than likely cut into what the city normally gets back from state collected taxes. It will be interesting to see how the city budgets the money this year.
I have a fear the city will budget anything that can be deemed a capitol development expense item to get its funding from the capitol development fund, this may work for a year or two to adjust for the reduction in state provided money. If the state never increases the funds to current levels then this fund will be depleted and the city will then have to make drastic changes. Also with how the budget has been running lately on the city level funds will be hard to find to rebuild these cash reserves.
I fear the "barebones budget" that will be proposed will not have the reductions that are really needed. If this year should have taught the council something it would have to be that the "worst case scenario" that you plan for can always be much worse than you imagined.
Thursday, April 01, 2010
Good Column
This gives a good overall picture of the disaster that is facing our state right now. I am not sure of all of his figures and am going to check his figures on Illinois tax ranking.
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Something to Think About
Very rarely do I find mass forwarded email useful or nonpartisan. They are usually one sided rants which present a single opinion leaving you to decide if you want to explore the other side of the story or simply take the rant for what it is. The main issue with these mass forwarded emails is nine time out of ten they are simply lies. If they are not lies then they have been changed, edited, and twisted to make them what someone at the beginning of the chain or any random email forwarder along the way wants you to read.
I seldom forward these on but I do like getting them. On occasion they make you at least think of something from a point of view you might not have “seen” before. I always check snopes.com once I finish reading a mass forwarded email to see what they have uncovered on the email.
I received an email that was said to be a column from a retired Orlando Sentinel columnist by the name of Charley Reese. After checking into it Charley did write a column similar to the one in the email back in 1985, which he updated in 1995 and has since been added and subtracted to by email forwarders worldwide, which is what I had email to me.
The topic of Mr. Reese’s article is something I have been battling with on my own. The topic being the issue of our politicians continuing to make excuses for not getting things done and then passing the buck on to someone else. I admit I am not old enough to really have the first hand knowledge that many of you might have but the main points of the article ring true still today. We as residents of Illinois should can and should apply this reasoning to our current state government.
Charley Reese of The Sentinel Staff
Mar 7, 1995
I seldom forward these on but I do like getting them. On occasion they make you at least think of something from a point of view you might not have “seen” before. I always check snopes.com once I finish reading a mass forwarded email to see what they have uncovered on the email.
I received an email that was said to be a column from a retired Orlando Sentinel columnist by the name of Charley Reese. After checking into it Charley did write a column similar to the one in the email back in 1985, which he updated in 1995 and has since been added and subtracted to by email forwarders worldwide, which is what I had email to me.
The topic of Mr. Reese’s article is something I have been battling with on my own. The topic being the issue of our politicians continuing to make excuses for not getting things done and then passing the buck on to someone else. I admit I am not old enough to really have the first hand knowledge that many of you might have but the main points of the article ring true still today. We as residents of Illinois should can and should apply this reasoning to our current state government.
LOOKING FOR SOMEONE TO BLAME? CONGRESS IS GOOD PLACE TO START
Politicians, as I have often said, are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.
Everything on the Republican contract is a problem created by Congress. Too much bureaucracy? Blame Congress. Too many rules?
Blame Congress. Unjust tax laws? Congress wrote them.
Out-of-control bureaucracy? Congress authorizes everything bureaucracies do. Americans dying in Third World rat holes on stupid U.N. missions? Congress allows it. The annual deficits?
Congress votes for them. The $4 trillion plus debt? Congress created it.
To put it into perspective just remember that 100 percent of the power of the federal government comes from the U.S. Constitution. If it's not in the Constitution, it's not authorized.
Then read your Constitution. All 100 percent of the power of the federal government is invested solely in 545 individual human beings. That's all. Of 260 million Americans, only 545 of them wield 100 percent of the power of the federal government.
That's 435 members of the U.S. House, 100 senators, one president and nine Supreme Court justices. Anything involving government that is wrong is 100 percent their fault.
I exclude the vice president because constitutionally he has no power except to preside over the Senate and to vote only in the case of a tie. I exclude the Federal Reserve because Congress created it and all its power is power Congress delegated to it and could withdraw anytime it chooses to do so. In fact, all the power exercised by the 3 million or so other federal employees is power delegated from the 545.
All bureaucracies are created by Congress or by executive order of the president. All are financed and staffed by Congress. All enforce laws passed by Congress. All operate under procedures authorized by Congress. That's why all complaints and protests should be properly directed at Congress, not at the individual agencies.
You don't like the IRS? Go see Congress. You think the Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms agency is running amok? Go see Congress.
Congress is the originator of all government problems and is also the only remedy available. That's why, of course, politicians go to such extraordinary lengths and employ world-class sophistry to make you think they are not responsible. Anytime a congressman pretends to be outraged by something a federal bureaucrat does, he is in fact engaging in one big massive con job. No federal employee can act at all except to enforce laws passed by Congress and to employ procedures authorized by Congress either explicitly or implicitly.
Partisans on both sides like to blame presidents for deficits, but all deficits are congressional deficits. The president may, by custom, recommend a budget, but it carries no legal weight. Only Congress is authorized by the Constitution to authorize and appropriate and to levy taxes. That's what the federal budget consists of: expenditures authorized, funds appropriated and taxes levied.
Both Democrats and Republicans mislead the public. For 40 years Democrats had majorities and could have at any time balanced the budget if they had chosen to do so. Republicans now have majorities and could, if they choose, pass a balanced budget this year. Every president, Democrat or Republican, could have vetoed appropriations bills that did not make up a balanced budget. Every president could have recommended a balanced budget. None has done either.
We have annual deficits and a huge federal debt because that's what majorities in Congress and presidents in the White House wanted. We have troops in various Third World rat holes because Congress and the president want them there.
Don't be conned. Don't let them escape responsibility. We simply have to sort through 260 million people until we find 545 who will act responsibly.
Charley Reese of The Sentinel Staff
Mar 7, 1995
Monday, March 22, 2010
Star Bonds
Full story as released 3/23/10
Link to BND.com story
State Rep. Tom Holbrook, D-Belleville seems to have seen the light on the Star Bond issue. I am not against the development just the financing. The rumors circling this development mention an IKEA, the wife and I cannot get enough of their Swedish furnishings.
Link to BND.com story
State Rep. Tom Holbrook, D-Belleville seems to have seen the light on the Star Bond issue. I am not against the development just the financing. The rumors circling this development mention an IKEA, the wife and I cannot get enough of their Swedish furnishings.
Commitee Meetings Tonight
I would like to encourage anyone to come to the committee meetings at city hall tonight. The budget for next year will be discussed a bit, and then the council will enter executive session to consider buying more land for parks. Does anyone know what land we are looking to buy?
Here's a link to the agenda
Here's a link to the agenda
Friday, March 19, 2010
Proposed School Funding Cuts
I usually do not comment on the schools here in Columbia as my wife is a teacher at the middle school. This is important enough to make a point of though.
As we all know the state is well behind in making payments to pretty much everyone. It is four months behind in paying tax to the city at an amount of more than $240,000.The city council noted on Monday night that they will have to look at reducing expenditures for the next fiscal year given the states planned cuts to municipalities.
It is extremely important that something be done to fix the budget on the state level. If you ever needed a reason to call your representative the states financial crisis should be a good enough reason. If the best possible solution that can be agreed on in Springfield for fixing the states budget is to cut funding to the school system then we have elected the wrong people in my opinion.
I'll let Mr. Settles' letter speak for the school districts financial concerns.
As we all know the state is well behind in making payments to pretty much everyone. It is four months behind in paying tax to the city at an amount of more than $240,000.The city council noted on Monday night that they will have to look at reducing expenditures for the next fiscal year given the states planned cuts to municipalities.
It is extremely important that something be done to fix the budget on the state level. If you ever needed a reason to call your representative the states financial crisis should be a good enough reason. If the best possible solution that can be agreed on in Springfield for fixing the states budget is to cut funding to the school system then we have elected the wrong people in my opinion.
I'll let Mr. Settles' letter speak for the school districts financial concerns.
STAR Bond Update
Story from the Belleville News Democrat
Link to the study paid for by the Southwestern Illinois Council of Mayors.
Link to letter in response to the study from Holland who is preparing their own independent study.
I have to admit I am following this story for three main reasons that I must clarify.
1. Our state is broke, well worse than broke actually. Should we as a state fund what should be a successful development with our tax dollars? These type of incentives have become the norm in the St. Louis Metro area but should we as constituents allow it to continue?
2. I grew up in Edwardsville and continue to follow its growth and expansion along with Glen carbon. I understand that this development is technically in Glen Carbon but I feel it is strategically placed just within the Edwardsville School District. I have included a map to illustrate my point, the UTC Development is in the lower left of the map. Its important for people to see the the sheer size of CSUD 7, which could as any school district use the additional funding. The school district is one clear cut winner in this whole project.
3. Our mayor, Kevin Hutchinson, is the president of the Southwestern Illinois Council of Mayors. The work he does for for this organization will reflect directly on Columbia. He should be viewed by our citizens for the work he does (both positive and negative in your personal view)as our representative wherever he is active. Whether that work is in Columbia, on a more regional level with the Council of Mayors and East-West Gateway, or any work he pursues regarding issues in Springfield.
Link to the study paid for by the Southwestern Illinois Council of Mayors.
Link to letter in response to the study from Holland who is preparing their own independent study.
I have to admit I am following this story for three main reasons that I must clarify.
1. Our state is broke, well worse than broke actually. Should we as a state fund what should be a successful development with our tax dollars? These type of incentives have become the norm in the St. Louis Metro area but should we as constituents allow it to continue?
2. I grew up in Edwardsville and continue to follow its growth and expansion along with Glen carbon. I understand that this development is technically in Glen Carbon but I feel it is strategically placed just within the Edwardsville School District. I have included a map to illustrate my point, the UTC Development is in the lower left of the map. Its important for people to see the the sheer size of CSUD 7, which could as any school district use the additional funding. The school district is one clear cut winner in this whole project.
3. Our mayor, Kevin Hutchinson, is the president of the Southwestern Illinois Council of Mayors. The work he does for for this organization will reflect directly on Columbia. He should be viewed by our citizens for the work he does (both positive and negative in your personal view)as our representative wherever he is active. Whether that work is in Columbia, on a more regional level with the Council of Mayors and East-West Gateway, or any work he pursues regarding issues in Springfield.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Budget Plan Posted
Link to the budget plan.
I cannot imagine anyone could be happy with this plan. The tax hike is simply replacing money they are taking away for something else and making the public feel obligated as the new money will go to education which everyone has a soft spot for. Fair enough but I did the quick math and came up with this based on the estimated FY2010 individual income tax revenues.
Projected individual income tax revenue $8.46 billion at the current 3% rate (page 2-28 in the FY2011 budget)
If the 1% income tax surcharge to support education is passed then there will be an extra $2.82 billion for education. Couple this with the $1.3 billion cut that is proposed for education that will leave the state with $1.52 billion to "catch-up" with what the currently are behind in funding education statewide. I have to wonder how far behind the state is with the education system statewide? Is this enough?
What is planned for paying what is owed to municipalities. If I remember correctly the state owes Columbia over $250,000. Maybe that's payed with short term loans the state will take out. Where do we get the money to pay those loans as a state? Since I have a feeling we as a state are now borrowing money to pay for loan payments.
I welcome anyone to correct me if I am doing the math wrong here.
I have to give them credit that they did not completely destroy education funding so long as Springfield can pass the 1% increase in an election year. I would rather see the 1.5% increase and more rational cuts.
I cannot imagine anyone could be happy with this plan. The tax hike is simply replacing money they are taking away for something else and making the public feel obligated as the new money will go to education which everyone has a soft spot for. Fair enough but I did the quick math and came up with this based on the estimated FY2010 individual income tax revenues.
Projected individual income tax revenue $8.46 billion at the current 3% rate (page 2-28 in the FY2011 budget)
If the 1% income tax surcharge to support education is passed then there will be an extra $2.82 billion for education. Couple this with the $1.3 billion cut that is proposed for education that will leave the state with $1.52 billion to "catch-up" with what the currently are behind in funding education statewide. I have to wonder how far behind the state is with the education system statewide? Is this enough?
What is planned for paying what is owed to municipalities. If I remember correctly the state owes Columbia over $250,000. Maybe that's payed with short term loans the state will take out. Where do we get the money to pay those loans as a state? Since I have a feeling we as a state are now borrowing money to pay for loan payments.
I welcome anyone to correct me if I am doing the math wrong here.
I have to give them credit that they did not completely destroy education funding so long as Springfield can pass the 1% increase in an election year. I would rather see the 1.5% increase and more rational cuts.
Illinois Budget
Well today is the day that Gov. Quinn will let us all know what his solution is. From the early reports the solution sounds weak. $2 billion in cuts while borrowing $11 billion. Cuts going to education and municipalities, the state is already 3-4 months behind on paying what it owes to locals school districts and municipalities so why not just give them less as well.
I have had the privilege of meeting some of the students at our middle school and I would have to believe they could take note of the negative number in the equation and come up with a better solution.
The state is in a bad situation. There is no question about that. Cuts need to be made and revenue needs to be raised. Borrowing money is not a solution. Springfield is taking their stand in this an election year and opting to duck the hard choices. The people want action, we have all made hard decisions over the last few years and its time our state begins acting like the elected officials we need.
No cut is too small to worry about. One suggestion made in Quinn's website was to have him use the same bic pen instead of a new fancy pen to sign all legislation. Quinn wrote that off as it may only save a few hundred dollars a year. I say save that money and find more small cuts, to go along with larger ones. If our elected officials are afraid of making cuts to programs that may lose them votes at least make some cuts that will make us feel like their not wasting our money.
Do not waste time, action should be taken, doing nothing will not help your campaign this year.
Taking a quote which has inspired me throughout my life to accept hard challenges that come my way should ring in the ears of those in Springfield.
I have had the privilege of meeting some of the students at our middle school and I would have to believe they could take note of the negative number in the equation and come up with a better solution.
The state is in a bad situation. There is no question about that. Cuts need to be made and revenue needs to be raised. Borrowing money is not a solution. Springfield is taking their stand in this an election year and opting to duck the hard choices. The people want action, we have all made hard decisions over the last few years and its time our state begins acting like the elected officials we need.
No cut is too small to worry about. One suggestion made in Quinn's website was to have him use the same bic pen instead of a new fancy pen to sign all legislation. Quinn wrote that off as it may only save a few hundred dollars a year. I say save that money and find more small cuts, to go along with larger ones. If our elected officials are afraid of making cuts to programs that may lose them votes at least make some cuts that will make us feel like their not wasting our money.
Do not waste time, action should be taken, doing nothing will not help your campaign this year.
Taking a quote which has inspired me throughout my life to accept hard challenges that come my way should ring in the ears of those in Springfield.
.......this country of the United States was not built by those who waited and rested and wished to look behind them. This country was conquered by those who moved forward......We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too..... - JFK, Moon Speech, 9/12/1962
Friday, February 26, 2010
Star Bonds Hiding in Other Places
Link to Article from "The Record"
This idea is still being pushed in Springfield. The Star Bond amendment is now attached to a facility closure bill thanks to a Senate Amendment by Sen. James F. Clayborne, Jr.
SB2093 which also carries the Star Bond amendment has its Sponsor and two alternate chief co-sponsors in the State Senate. Its no surprise that the Chief Sponsor in the Senate for this bill is now Sen. James F. Clayborne, Jr.
If the idea here is to find a must pass bill to attach this amendment to for it to pass maybe pass it with the budget, that should be the only the only legislation anyone in Springfield should be working on, while its the least likely to be completed anytime soon.
Article from "The Bellevile News Democrat". Our Mayor in Columbia is on top of it, but from what I can tell Columbia really has no developments that we should be scared of losing to this development, its the state funding we should have an issue with. Talking with the developer about third party studies is pointless, the fiscal note from the Department of Revenue should have cleared up the negative aspects of the Star Bonds.
This idea is still being pushed in Springfield. The Star Bond amendment is now attached to a facility closure bill thanks to a Senate Amendment by Sen. James F. Clayborne, Jr.
SB2093 which also carries the Star Bond amendment has its Sponsor and two alternate chief co-sponsors in the State Senate. Its no surprise that the Chief Sponsor in the Senate for this bill is now Sen. James F. Clayborne, Jr.
If the idea here is to find a must pass bill to attach this amendment to for it to pass maybe pass it with the budget, that should be the only the only legislation anyone in Springfield should be working on, while its the least likely to be completed anytime soon.
Article from "The Bellevile News Democrat". Our Mayor in Columbia is on top of it, but from what I can tell Columbia really has no developments that we should be scared of losing to this development, its the state funding we should have an issue with. Talking with the developer about third party studies is pointless, the fiscal note from the Department of Revenue should have cleared up the negative aspects of the Star Bonds.
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Star Bond Update
A fiscal note was posted by the Illinois Department of Revenue on February 5th for House Floor Amendment No. 2 I went ahead and copied the text of the fiscal note below. I am still trying to figure out how this is good for the region.
Fiscal Note, House Floor Amendment No. 2 (Dept. of Revenue)
This fiscal note for SB 2093 (H-AM 2) reflects only the proposed University Town Center (UTC) project in Glen Carbon and does not reflect the fiscal impact of other potential STAR bond developments enabled by this legislation.
(1) Based on data received from the developers, the Illinois Department of Revenue estimates that between $450 million and $525 million in annual sales will be displaced from the surrounding communities to stores in the STAR bond district once the development is completed.
(2) The Illinois Department of Revenue estimates State sales tax generated in UTC's first fully operational year and pledged for the purpose of repaying STAR bonds at between $19 million and $30 million.
(3) The Illinois Department of Revenue estimates aggregate local sales tax generated in UTC's first fully operational year and pledged for the purpose of repaying STAR bonds at $24 million.
(4) The Illinois Department of Revenue estimates that the combined State and local sales tax available to repay STAR bonds will be between $43 million and $54 million in UTC's first fully operational year.
(5) Over the first 20 years of UTC's operation, the State sales tax available to repay STAR bonds will be between $456 million and $729 million, while the aggregate local sales tax available to repay STAR bonds reaches almost $600 million over the same period.
(6) The Illinois Department of Revenue estimates that the combined State and local sales tax available for debt repayment over a 20-year period at between $1.0 billion and $1.3 billion. This range represents the potential tax subsidy for the UTC development.
(7) UTC will have both positive and negative State revenue effects during the duration of the STAR bond district.
(8) The Illinois Department of Revenue estimates a State revenue gain of $40 million during UTC's construction phase and then annual revenue losses thereafter caused by the displacement of taxable sales from outside of UTC to inside UTC.
(9) After a few years of UTC operation, the losses from displaced taxable sales erode the early gain from the construction phase. If the full increment is used to pay debt service for 15 years, then the aggregate net State revenue loss over this period is between -$42 million and -$178 million. If 20 years, then the aggregate net State revenue loss over this period is between -$75 million and -$267 million.
Fiscal Note, House Floor Amendment No. 2 (Dept. of Revenue)
This fiscal note for SB 2093 (H-AM 2) reflects only the proposed University Town Center (UTC) project in Glen Carbon and does not reflect the fiscal impact of other potential STAR bond developments enabled by this legislation.
(1) Based on data received from the developers, the Illinois Department of Revenue estimates that between $450 million and $525 million in annual sales will be displaced from the surrounding communities to stores in the STAR bond district once the development is completed.
(2) The Illinois Department of Revenue estimates State sales tax generated in UTC's first fully operational year and pledged for the purpose of repaying STAR bonds at between $19 million and $30 million.
(3) The Illinois Department of Revenue estimates aggregate local sales tax generated in UTC's first fully operational year and pledged for the purpose of repaying STAR bonds at $24 million.
(4) The Illinois Department of Revenue estimates that the combined State and local sales tax available to repay STAR bonds will be between $43 million and $54 million in UTC's first fully operational year.
(5) Over the first 20 years of UTC's operation, the State sales tax available to repay STAR bonds will be between $456 million and $729 million, while the aggregate local sales tax available to repay STAR bonds reaches almost $600 million over the same period.
(6) The Illinois Department of Revenue estimates that the combined State and local sales tax available for debt repayment over a 20-year period at between $1.0 billion and $1.3 billion. This range represents the potential tax subsidy for the UTC development.
(7) UTC will have both positive and negative State revenue effects during the duration of the STAR bond district.
(8) The Illinois Department of Revenue estimates a State revenue gain of $40 million during UTC's construction phase and then annual revenue losses thereafter caused by the displacement of taxable sales from outside of UTC to inside UTC.
(9) After a few years of UTC operation, the losses from displaced taxable sales erode the early gain from the construction phase. If the full increment is used to pay debt service for 15 years, then the aggregate net State revenue loss over this period is between -$42 million and -$178 million. If 20 years, then the aggregate net State revenue loss over this period is between -$75 million and -$267 million.
Illinois Budget
I will be the first to admit my limited understanding of the state budget, but I cannot understand how a group of elected officials cannot understand the basic facts of fiscal responsibility. Spend only what you have. If you need to borrow money then plan to pay that money back as required. Do not over extend yourself. Do not spend money on one thing when it was intended for use in another way. These should be simple accounting policies that every adult should understand.
I read an article last week regarding what the state officials are thinking of doing or not doing since the primary is over. It can be found here. I have copied over the excerpt that really stuck out to me as troubling.
I fully support paying the bills, but shouldn’t our officials have realized and cared about this problem long before it affected them personally? If the state were a private company Verschoore would not be looking for his medical bills to get paid he would be looking for a new job because the state would be out of business. Verschoore from the looks of his website seems adamantly opposed to tax and fee increases of any kind. If Verschoore is against spending cuts and against tax increases to raise revenue I think something is going to need to change in his stance in order to “pay the bills”.
Elected officials are meant to work for their electorate and not worry and plan on how they will get elected again. The frustration level among “common people” is rising. Hope that things can be fixed is turning into frustration and doubt. As I said before I have limited knowledge of the state budget but if revenue needs to be increased by the state to make things work then get it done, but I also have to believe that some spending can be reduced or cut. Families across the state have reformulated their budgets to reduce debt and make ends meet, why our elected officials can’t do the same with our tax money is unbelievable.
On a more local level the state currently owes Columbia over $190,000. I think our local officials should strive to limit unneeded spending and live within our means. The council will begin discussing the budget next week Monday, February 22.
I read an article last week regarding what the state officials are thinking of doing or not doing since the primary is over. It can be found here. I have copied over the excerpt that really stuck out to me as troubling.
State Rep. Pat Verschoore, D-Milan, said the state needs to pay its bills before it looks at spending cuts.
“As far [back] as six months they have not paid my medical bills. I’m starting to get threatening bill collector notices…So something has to be done there.”
Verschoore said he’s willing to wait to see what Gov. Quinn is proposing before starting to work on the budget. But he’s all but ruling out a tax increase. Verschoore said he doesn’t see how the governor can get a tax hike through the General Assembly.
I fully support paying the bills, but shouldn’t our officials have realized and cared about this problem long before it affected them personally? If the state were a private company Verschoore would not be looking for his medical bills to get paid he would be looking for a new job because the state would be out of business. Verschoore from the looks of his website seems adamantly opposed to tax and fee increases of any kind. If Verschoore is against spending cuts and against tax increases to raise revenue I think something is going to need to change in his stance in order to “pay the bills”.
Elected officials are meant to work for their electorate and not worry and plan on how they will get elected again. The frustration level among “common people” is rising. Hope that things can be fixed is turning into frustration and doubt. As I said before I have limited knowledge of the state budget but if revenue needs to be increased by the state to make things work then get it done, but I also have to believe that some spending can be reduced or cut. Families across the state have reformulated their budgets to reduce debt and make ends meet, why our elected officials can’t do the same with our tax money is unbelievable.
On a more local level the state currently owes Columbia over $190,000. I think our local officials should strive to limit unneeded spending and live within our means. The council will begin discussing the budget next week Monday, February 22.
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Commitee Meetings 2/8/10
License, Insurance, Claims, CEMA, and Contracts
• Kleen Sweep Cleaning Service Contract
I got there a little late for this meeting as it started at 6:30. It sounded like the city will be entering into a contract renewal with this company for one year at an increase around 6.7% more than last year’s rate. The city also agreed to require less insurance but wanted the city to be named as an additional insured on Clean Sweeps policy. The city may bid this out next year to be sure the pricing is competitive.
Committee of the Whole
•Tourism Bureau of Southwestern Illinois Presentation
Two representatives from this organization basically explained what they do and how they promote tourism for the ten counties they cover. They are celebrating their 25th year promoting tourism in Southern Illinois.
Tourism Bureau Website
Parks, Playgrounds and Recreation
• Columbia CUSD No. 4 Presentation
Superintendent Settles and Assistant Superintendent Horner presented their plan to provide more green space for use by the school district. As it stands now the district does not have practice fields for the football team, the band, or a dedicated field for the baseball team. Bolm-Schuhkraft Memorial City Park sits directly between two of the districts schools and would be a favorable parcel for the district to buy. The will that presented that land to the city will prevent the district from happening.
The proposal by the district is that they will buy some of the land in the large parcel that the city owns for future park development in the Admiral Trost development near Illinois Route 3. The district does not want to use this for their complex as it is across Route 3 and transportation will be an issue for them. They propose to buy and develop this land with a baseball field, a football field, parking and restroom facilities. The district will then let the city use these new facilities at their leisure.
The school district would in turn for providing these new facilities for the city would like to have use of the baseball field and football field in Bolm-Schuhkraft Park. It was unclear whether this would be sole use of the facilities and or if the community would have the right to continue to use them. It sounded like the district would prefer the community not have access to these parts of the park as they would be providing new alternatives at the new location for the community to use freely.
Not many details were discussed as the district would like to know if the idea is even a possibility with the city council before too many details are planned out and the district puts too much effort into a plan that may never have support from the city. Numerous concerns were voiced by the council and I will list them below. I would encourage you to contact your alderman or Al Hudzik if you have any concerns or questions regarding the topic. The council will compile a list of concerns and questions to talk over before moving forward with any action with the district.
Aldermen Roessler – Is there enough room in the Admiral Trost land for the facilities the district is proposing?
Aldermen Hejna – Would this displace the Blue Jays to the new facility? How much will the new facilities cost to develop?
Aldermen Stumpf – Size of the Trost area? Would this be a permanent agreement? What would happen if the district builds a new high school on the outskirts of town?
Aldermen Agne – Could the city lease the land to the district? Use the money from that to develop all of the city’s parks?
Overall I understand the need for more space for outside activities in the school district. I am sure this will be a sticky legal situation so a lot will hinge on that but I think the main concern should be the costs. I think the city should not put the entire burden on the district. At the same time the city should not pretend this is a way to get new free facilities for the town on someone else’s dime. The citizens of the community fund both the city and the school district so it’s our money regardless of who is spending it. I do think the plan makes sense since the optimal solution is not possible and that would be to sell the land to the district between Parkview and the High School.
•Discussion to consider the purchase of specific parcels of real estate.
This was discussed in executive session so I left at this time. It is always an unknown how long executive session will take. I do not know where the land in the discussion is located but I would like to see the city develop more of the existing land it has already purchased and set aside for park use before it buys more land for future use.
Streets, Sidewalks, Drainage and Public Utilities
• Sitzes Subdivision issues discussion
• Other items to be considered or discussed
Personnel
• Appointment of additional volunteer police chaplain discussion
• Executive Session
Update/discussion on collective bargaining negotiations and employee salaries.
• Kleen Sweep Cleaning Service Contract
I got there a little late for this meeting as it started at 6:30. It sounded like the city will be entering into a contract renewal with this company for one year at an increase around 6.7% more than last year’s rate. The city also agreed to require less insurance but wanted the city to be named as an additional insured on Clean Sweeps policy. The city may bid this out next year to be sure the pricing is competitive.
Committee of the Whole
•Tourism Bureau of Southwestern Illinois Presentation
Two representatives from this organization basically explained what they do and how they promote tourism for the ten counties they cover. They are celebrating their 25th year promoting tourism in Southern Illinois.
Tourism Bureau Website
Parks, Playgrounds and Recreation
• Columbia CUSD No. 4 Presentation
Superintendent Settles and Assistant Superintendent Horner presented their plan to provide more green space for use by the school district. As it stands now the district does not have practice fields for the football team, the band, or a dedicated field for the baseball team. Bolm-Schuhkraft Memorial City Park sits directly between two of the districts schools and would be a favorable parcel for the district to buy. The will that presented that land to the city will prevent the district from happening.
The proposal by the district is that they will buy some of the land in the large parcel that the city owns for future park development in the Admiral Trost development near Illinois Route 3. The district does not want to use this for their complex as it is across Route 3 and transportation will be an issue for them. They propose to buy and develop this land with a baseball field, a football field, parking and restroom facilities. The district will then let the city use these new facilities at their leisure.
The school district would in turn for providing these new facilities for the city would like to have use of the baseball field and football field in Bolm-Schuhkraft Park. It was unclear whether this would be sole use of the facilities and or if the community would have the right to continue to use them. It sounded like the district would prefer the community not have access to these parts of the park as they would be providing new alternatives at the new location for the community to use freely.
Not many details were discussed as the district would like to know if the idea is even a possibility with the city council before too many details are planned out and the district puts too much effort into a plan that may never have support from the city. Numerous concerns were voiced by the council and I will list them below. I would encourage you to contact your alderman or Al Hudzik if you have any concerns or questions regarding the topic. The council will compile a list of concerns and questions to talk over before moving forward with any action with the district.
Aldermen Roessler – Is there enough room in the Admiral Trost land for the facilities the district is proposing?
Aldermen Hejna – Would this displace the Blue Jays to the new facility? How much will the new facilities cost to develop?
Aldermen Stumpf – Size of the Trost area? Would this be a permanent agreement? What would happen if the district builds a new high school on the outskirts of town?
Aldermen Agne – Could the city lease the land to the district? Use the money from that to develop all of the city’s parks?
Overall I understand the need for more space for outside activities in the school district. I am sure this will be a sticky legal situation so a lot will hinge on that but I think the main concern should be the costs. I think the city should not put the entire burden on the district. At the same time the city should not pretend this is a way to get new free facilities for the town on someone else’s dime. The citizens of the community fund both the city and the school district so it’s our money regardless of who is spending it. I do think the plan makes sense since the optimal solution is not possible and that would be to sell the land to the district between Parkview and the High School.
•Discussion to consider the purchase of specific parcels of real estate.
This was discussed in executive session so I left at this time. It is always an unknown how long executive session will take. I do not know where the land in the discussion is located but I would like to see the city develop more of the existing land it has already purchased and set aside for park use before it buys more land for future use.
Streets, Sidewalks, Drainage and Public Utilities
• Sitzes Subdivision issues discussion
• Other items to be considered or discussed
Personnel
• Appointment of additional volunteer police chaplain discussion
• Executive Session
Update/discussion on collective bargaining negotiations and employee salaries.
Friday, February 05, 2010
Ideas on the MDD
I sent out an email to a few people in late January to ask them a few questions regarding the MDD and the absence of any language in it spelling out incentives the developer might have in mind. I sent this email to my two aldermen, Gene Ebersohl and Brad Oberkfell., and Jay Unnerstall as I figured he might have some info on the topic.
I received a reply from Gene stating that incentive language should be separate from the MDD much like Jim Agne stated the last time this issue was discussed. Gene went on to state that he feels the city should let developers know what incentives are available without specific amounts but this information regarding incentives should be discussed in the negotiations of a development as each development is different. I have not had a chance to discuss this with Gene any further, I plan to next Monday.
I chatted with Brad after this past Monday’s council meeting as he sent me an email back that he would rather discuss it in person. Brad wants to have some type of incentive language related in some way to the MDD. We discussed that most developers who approach the city should either have financing in place or know the amount of incentives it may take to get their development built. We seemed to agree that incentive language should not be part of the MDD document but asking for developers to let the city know up front what incentives would be asked for seemed reasonable.
Jay sent me an email back as well letting me know that talking to him would be better than an emailed response as it would take a great deal of time to write out. I understand that and I hope to find a chance to give him a call this weekend, as I feel he would be able to give a great perspective on the issue.
I understand why the incentive language should not be part of the “zoning” language in the MDD. But making it city policy to have developers let the city know up front what incentives they specifically will be seeking should not be an issue for a serious developer and defiantly not for the city. If a developer has taken the time and spent the money to meet all of the criteria spelled out in the MDD then they should have an idea if they will be seeking incentives of any kind from the city.
I think it would be a waste of everyone’s time if the city has a developer go through the MDD process only to start an incentive negotiation to find out the city will not give them what they need. The city may not have an issue with a developer on the basis of the MDD application but letting them know that the requested incentive(s) are possible or not possible upfront would be beneficial to everyone involved.
It already seems the council has wasted enough of their time on the issue of just formulating MDD criteria. It should be noted that while the council cannot agree on whether incentive language should be included there has never been anything in writing as incentive language that has been reviewed or discussed by the council. I would encourage one of the aldermen who feel it should be included in the process to formulate a document that could be reviewed and possibly included into the MDD process. It could be as simple as a form that asks the developer to state what type of incentive they would be seeking and how much that incentive would need to cover. Include it as a form to be filled out whenever a MDD “application” is submitted. If a developer is not asking for incentives then I think much of the council and community would feel better about the development as a whole and if they are asking to have the city fund their development everyone would know upfront. The city should not promote any type of incentive as any smart developer would take whatever the city offers.
My last point would be that the process as a whole should be ironed out. I know that an MDD “application” would go through a number of approval processes but the process of negotiations and who will be and who will not be included in any negotiation talks with developers should be spelled out before a developer approaches the city. Transparency should be the goal of the council. Letting the community know who is responsible for negotiating with developers and what type of incentives developers may be asking for may make everyone feel better when the next development comes along to Columbia.
Call or discuss the topic with your aldermen.
I have added the links to all available MDD documentation below.
MDD
MDD Appendix A - Use Matrix
MDD Appendix C - Landscape Requirements
MDD Appendix D - Signage Requirements
MDD Appendix E- Schedule of Parking Space Requirements
I received a reply from Gene stating that incentive language should be separate from the MDD much like Jim Agne stated the last time this issue was discussed. Gene went on to state that he feels the city should let developers know what incentives are available without specific amounts but this information regarding incentives should be discussed in the negotiations of a development as each development is different. I have not had a chance to discuss this with Gene any further, I plan to next Monday.
I chatted with Brad after this past Monday’s council meeting as he sent me an email back that he would rather discuss it in person. Brad wants to have some type of incentive language related in some way to the MDD. We discussed that most developers who approach the city should either have financing in place or know the amount of incentives it may take to get their development built. We seemed to agree that incentive language should not be part of the MDD document but asking for developers to let the city know up front what incentives would be asked for seemed reasonable.
Jay sent me an email back as well letting me know that talking to him would be better than an emailed response as it would take a great deal of time to write out. I understand that and I hope to find a chance to give him a call this weekend, as I feel he would be able to give a great perspective on the issue.
I understand why the incentive language should not be part of the “zoning” language in the MDD. But making it city policy to have developers let the city know up front what incentives they specifically will be seeking should not be an issue for a serious developer and defiantly not for the city. If a developer has taken the time and spent the money to meet all of the criteria spelled out in the MDD then they should have an idea if they will be seeking incentives of any kind from the city.
I think it would be a waste of everyone’s time if the city has a developer go through the MDD process only to start an incentive negotiation to find out the city will not give them what they need. The city may not have an issue with a developer on the basis of the MDD application but letting them know that the requested incentive(s) are possible or not possible upfront would be beneficial to everyone involved.
It already seems the council has wasted enough of their time on the issue of just formulating MDD criteria. It should be noted that while the council cannot agree on whether incentive language should be included there has never been anything in writing as incentive language that has been reviewed or discussed by the council. I would encourage one of the aldermen who feel it should be included in the process to formulate a document that could be reviewed and possibly included into the MDD process. It could be as simple as a form that asks the developer to state what type of incentive they would be seeking and how much that incentive would need to cover. Include it as a form to be filled out whenever a MDD “application” is submitted. If a developer is not asking for incentives then I think much of the council and community would feel better about the development as a whole and if they are asking to have the city fund their development everyone would know upfront. The city should not promote any type of incentive as any smart developer would take whatever the city offers.
My last point would be that the process as a whole should be ironed out. I know that an MDD “application” would go through a number of approval processes but the process of negotiations and who will be and who will not be included in any negotiation talks with developers should be spelled out before a developer approaches the city. Transparency should be the goal of the council. Letting the community know who is responsible for negotiating with developers and what type of incentives developers may be asking for may make everyone feel better when the next development comes along to Columbia.
Call or discuss the topic with your aldermen.
I have added the links to all available MDD documentation below.
MDD
MDD Appendix A - Use Matrix
MDD Appendix C - Landscape Requirements
MDD Appendix D - Signage Requirements
MDD Appendix E- Schedule of Parking Space Requirements
Decided to Change the Look
I am wanting to find a blog template that stretches the full width of the page. I would prefer to have one that has three columns. One out of two isn't bad but I am still trying to find an easily readable color set.
Wednesday, February 03, 2010
Council Meeting 2/1/10 (Corrected 2/23/10)
I am not one for the two-sided politics in Columbia, it really accomplishes nothing.
• Discussion on election rules.
I have been corrected, Alderman Hejna sent me an email today 2/23/10 to explain that Alderman Agne brought this issue up and she merely echoed his sentiments. Formerly I had stated that she brought the issue up. Changes below are in bold italics.
The idea was brought up by Alderman Agne that the city should maybe look into reform similar to what Florissant recently passed. Florissant recently passed “a bill” that prohibits city employees from working on political campaigns.
The mayor asked if there had been an issue with this in the past as he stated those would be some serious allegations to make. He also noted that the rules for this issue are spelled out in the campaign packets. The issue quickly died out as fast as it had been brought up.
Article on Florissant Situation
• Discussion on Minutes at Committee Meetings
The mayor brought up an issue of who should take the minutes at city committee meetings from here on out. The mayor wanted to know whether it would be Ron Colyer the City Clerk, Donna or Sandy. Sandy has recently has been taking the minutes at these meetings. Mayor Hutchinson’s issue was that it had previously been stated by certain members of the council that the clerk’s office should be taking the minutes and Sandy is not really a full time employee of the clerk’s office.
The disagreement went on for some time with a number of the council members voicing their take and wondering why the mayor even brought the subject up. He said he was simply pointing out that the viewpoints of some council members have changed drastically on certain issues. The mayor’s stance on the double standard was supported by at least one other alderman on Monday night.
The issue was a non-issue as it seems when you get down to it now no one on the council really cares who takes the minutes. The subject was only brought up by the mayor to make a point, which could have gone without being made. It was decided that Al Hudzik would work with the clerk’s office to ensure someone was there to take the minutes.
I had begun to have hope the council had left their differences in the past.
Disappointing to say the least.
.
• Discussion on election rules.
I have been corrected, Alderman Hejna sent me an email today 2/23/10 to explain that Alderman Agne brought this issue up and she merely echoed his sentiments. Formerly I had stated that she brought the issue up. Changes below are in bold italics.
The idea was brought up by Alderman Agne that the city should maybe look into reform similar to what Florissant recently passed. Florissant recently passed “a bill” that prohibits city employees from working on political campaigns.
The mayor asked if there had been an issue with this in the past as he stated those would be some serious allegations to make. He also noted that the rules for this issue are spelled out in the campaign packets. The issue quickly died out as fast as it had been brought up.
Article on Florissant Situation
• Discussion on Minutes at Committee Meetings
The mayor brought up an issue of who should take the minutes at city committee meetings from here on out. The mayor wanted to know whether it would be Ron Colyer the City Clerk, Donna or Sandy. Sandy has recently has been taking the minutes at these meetings. Mayor Hutchinson’s issue was that it had previously been stated by certain members of the council that the clerk’s office should be taking the minutes and Sandy is not really a full time employee of the clerk’s office.
The disagreement went on for some time with a number of the council members voicing their take and wondering why the mayor even brought the subject up. He said he was simply pointing out that the viewpoints of some council members have changed drastically on certain issues. The mayor’s stance on the double standard was supported by at least one other alderman on Monday night.
The issue was a non-issue as it seems when you get down to it now no one on the council really cares who takes the minutes. The subject was only brought up by the mayor to make a point, which could have gone without being made. It was decided that Al Hudzik would work with the clerk’s office to ensure someone was there to take the minutes.
I had begun to have hope the council had left their differences in the past.
Disappointing to say the least.
.
Let me explain what a "Unique Visitor" is. It's tuff to tell as visitors is based on cookies which some people disable and some people often clear.