The Illinois House of Representatives has voted 76-39-1 in favor of SB 2093, the IDEA bill that would allow STAR Bonds financing of a new tourism and retail development in Marion.
It was a quite vigorous debate. Going into it there was word that State Rep. Mike Bost, R-Murphysboro, would vote no. Instead, he voted for it and called on his fellow House members to support the bill in this video thanks to Capitol Fax.
Next stop is the Illinois Senate.
Meanwhile budget negotiations have broken down with the House voting down various aspects of it. That means the General Assembly won't be ending their session tonight as planned which gives the bill more time.
The deadline for final action on the bill has been extended to May 28. Both chambers have adjourned for the day.
Over in the Senate, state Sen. Gary Forby, D-Benton, has formally filed a motion to concur with the House's amendments which added the Marion incentive plan. The motion to concur has been referred to the Assignments Committee, whose chairman, state Sen. James Clayborne, Jr., D-Belleville, was the former sponsor of the bill when it focused on Glen Carbon.
In another late change, state Sen. Dan Reitz, D-Steeleville, has joined the bill as an alternate chief co-sponsor. He's got to be looking at the STAR bonds and how they could be used for the proposed Music City Illinois destination and convention resort in western Perry County.
Friday, May 07, 2010
Debate Begins in House on Bradley Bill
The live audio and video streaming of the House of Representatives is down, but the Capitol Fax Blog is reporting that the House is currently debating Bradley's bill.
Fiscal and Budget Notes Detailed, Somewhat
The following is the Fiscal and Balanced Budget notes that were filed earlier today on state Rep. John Bradley's IDEA bill for the Marion development.
The thing to keep in mind is that much of this sales tax revenue would not exist in the first place for Illinois if it wasn't for the project.
Fiscal Note, House Floor Amendment No. 4 (Dept. of Revenue)
The Department of Revenue was not provided with a plan or detailed description of the proposed development, its precise location, or any financial details. This information is critical to provide a comprehensive analysis of the proposed STAR Bonds development. Thus, the estimate below is limited in scope. SB 2093 (H-AM 4) would cost the State $12,500,000 per year over a 23 to 35 year period totaling between $287.5 million and $437.5 million in future sales tax revenue as estimated by the Department of Revenue. These funds would be diverted to the STAR Bond district. Based on the information provided by the developer, the Department is unable to forecast the impact on existing sales tax revenue.
Balanced Budget Note, House Floor Amendment No. 4 (Office of Management and Budget)
The Department of Revenue was not provided with a plan or detailed description of the proposed development, its precise location, or any financial details. This information is critical to provide a comprehensive analysis of the proposed STAR Bonds development. Thus, the estimate below is limited in scope. SB 2093 (H-AM 4) would cost the State $12,500,000 per year over a 23 to 35 year period totaling between $287.5 million and $437.5 million in future sales tax revenue as estimated by the Department of Revenue. These funds would be diverted to the STAR Bond district. Based on the information provided by the developer, the Department is unable to forecast the impact on existing sales tax revenue.
The thing to keep in mind is that much of this sales tax revenue would not exist in the first place for Illinois if it wasn't for the project.
Balanced Budget Note Filed, No Details Yet
Staff have filed the Balanced Budget Note which is the last of the 10 impact notes requested last night on state Rep. John Bradley's IDEA bill.
Details still await on this note as well as the fiscal impact. Neither have been posted, but with them filed, the House can now take a vote on the bill which is expected within hours.
Details still await on this note as well as the fiscal impact. Neither have been posted, but with them filed, the House can now take a vote on the bill which is expected within hours.
Fiscal Note Filed, Details Await on IDEA
The Fiscal Note, or how the bureaucrats at Revenue think the bill will affect the state's finances, has been filed for the IDEA bill, leaving the bill still waiting for one note - how the bill will affect the state's unbalanced budget.
The details haven't been posted yet.
Movement only appears slow on this until you realize the announcement for the project was last Saturday and the actual bill language wasn't filed until Wednesday.
So far the various notes shows that the legislation will not do the following:
The details haven't been posted yet.
Movement only appears slow on this until you realize the announcement for the project was last Saturday and the actual bill language wasn't filed until Wednesday.
So far the various notes shows that the legislation will not do the following:
- Impact the Department of Corrections either financially or in terms of prison populations,
- Require any appraisals because there are no land conveyances included in the bill,
- Impact any public pension fund or retirement system in Illinois,
- Change the amount of state-backed bonds authorized in the system as STAR bonds would not be an obligation of the State of Illinois,
- Either increase or decrease the number of judges need,
- Pre-empt home rule authority,
- Create a state mandate, and
- Have any effect on the cost of constructing, purchasing, owning or selling a single-family residence.
Marion's Hotel Industry Surges in 2009
Some thoughts on 2009 lodging in Marion
Despite the bad economy last year, tourism grew in Marion and Williamson County at least in terms of hotel taxable receipts.
Bed tax collections for the 25 active lodging establishments in the county grew by 15.5 percent last year over 2008 to $791,741.06. That was the best since 11.3 percent growth in 2005.
The bed tax receipts show tourists and travelers spent more than $15.8 million directly on lodging last year in the county with all but about 15 percent of that spent directly with establishments inside the Marion city limits.
In both 2005 and 2009, much of the growth could be attributed to a major new hotel being added to the mix. Country Inn & Suites opened in December 2008. Previously, Fairfield Inn had been the last player added.
With Country Inn, the Big 6 hotels in Marion became the Big 7 and collectively increased their market share from 78.2 percent to 79.1 percent, but the new hotel didn't cannibalize its competitors as some had feared. The other six major hotels collectively saw their taxable receipts grow by 6.6 percent in 2009 versus just a 1 percent jump in 2008.
All sectors but the oldest motels in the county saw growth last year.
Overall the Big 7 were up 16.8 percent, the mid-level motels (both the small chains and independents) were up 19.1 percent, and the specialty lodging category of bed and breakfast inns, cabins and vacation rentals grew by 41 percent thanks to new units being added.
The lodging operators inside the Marion city limits attributed for 84.8 percent of the market share.
All lodging operators in the county from the smallest vacation house rental up to the largest hotels pay a bed tax equal to 5 percent of their receipts to the county which is split 40/60 between the Williamson County Tourism Bureau and the Williamson County Events Commission (the funds to the latter group goes to pay the financing costs for the Williamson County Pavilion). The actual receipts taken in by the hotels are actually greater than the taxable receipts as rentals for more than 30 days are not covered by the bed tax.
Despite the bad economy last year, tourism grew in Marion and Williamson County at least in terms of hotel taxable receipts.
Bed tax collections for the 25 active lodging establishments in the county grew by 15.5 percent last year over 2008 to $791,741.06. That was the best since 11.3 percent growth in 2005.
The bed tax receipts show tourists and travelers spent more than $15.8 million directly on lodging last year in the county with all but about 15 percent of that spent directly with establishments inside the Marion city limits.
In both 2005 and 2009, much of the growth could be attributed to a major new hotel being added to the mix. Country Inn & Suites opened in December 2008. Previously, Fairfield Inn had been the last player added.
With Country Inn, the Big 6 hotels in Marion became the Big 7 and collectively increased their market share from 78.2 percent to 79.1 percent, but the new hotel didn't cannibalize its competitors as some had feared. The other six major hotels collectively saw their taxable receipts grow by 6.6 percent in 2009 versus just a 1 percent jump in 2008.
All sectors but the oldest motels in the county saw growth last year.
Overall the Big 7 were up 16.8 percent, the mid-level motels (both the small chains and independents) were up 19.1 percent, and the specialty lodging category of bed and breakfast inns, cabins and vacation rentals grew by 41 percent thanks to new units being added.
The lodging operators inside the Marion city limits attributed for 84.8 percent of the market share.
All lodging operators in the county from the smallest vacation house rental up to the largest hotels pay a bed tax equal to 5 percent of their receipts to the county which is split 40/60 between the Williamson County Tourism Bureau and the Williamson County Events Commission (the funds to the latter group goes to pay the financing costs for the Williamson County Pavilion). The actual receipts taken in by the hotels are actually greater than the taxable receipts as rentals for more than 30 days are not covered by the bed tax.
More Impact Notes Filed, Votes Set Later Today
More of the "notes" have been filed on the IDEA bill that state Rep. David Reis, R-Olney, had requested. We're still waiting for the last two.
So far most of these notes or impact statements from various state departments show that there would be no impact, evidence of stalling technique.
What's left is the Fiscal and Balanced Budget reports. These are the two big ones and are legitimate considering the proposal involves STAR bonds for the Marion project, an incentive that's never been tried in Illinois.
In order to pass, the bill has to be brought to the floor of the House of Representatives. They have to pass it and then it will go to the Senate for a vote. All of that needs to be done today.
Meanwhile, House Democrats are meeting with Gov. Quinn this morning about the budget.
So far most of these notes or impact statements from various state departments show that there would be no impact, evidence of stalling technique.
What's left is the Fiscal and Balanced Budget reports. These are the two big ones and are legitimate considering the proposal involves STAR bonds for the Marion project, an incentive that's never been tried in Illinois.
In order to pass, the bill has to be brought to the floor of the House of Representatives. They have to pass it and then it will go to the Senate for a vote. All of that needs to be done today.
Meanwhile, House Democrats are meeting with Gov. Quinn this morning about the budget.
Thursday, May 06, 2010
House Expected to Take Up IDEA Bill Tonight
Rich Miller at the Capitol Fax Blog is reporting that the House is expected to vote on Bradley's IDEA bill tonight.
Miller is still describing it "as the worst bill ever".
He noted that the Democrats substituted two members of Bradley's committee for the hearing tonight implying that they were needed for the vote. Still, it was 11-2 to move forward.
He also notes that the St. Clair Record is reporting that Mount Vernon's mayor Mary Jane Chesney is opposed to the bill.
Actually, Mount Vernon's chances are not very good. The city is already on record for not wanting any lodging establishments to go to the new exit which will be dominated by the new Good Samaritan hospital.
This is the first time I've heard of any effort to market the interchange for hospitality or retail, which they obviously should.
Also, Marion has a much better population base within an hour drive that likely to come to it, than Mount Vernon.
I'm not opposed to Mount Vernon, I'm a MVTHS grad and know Chesney well from when she taught at the high school. I support her efforts to turn around the city's declining population. What used to be the region's second largest community, is now the third, according to census estimates. The Hub has simply surpassed the King City this decade.
As to the legislation, State Rep. David Reis, R-Olney, has requested 10 various staff notes to be filed on the Bradley bill. These are impact statements of what the bill will do to certain areas such as the state's fiscal situation, state mandates, balanced budget, corrections, home rule, housing affordability, judicial impact, land conveyance appraisal, pensions and state debt.
I'm not sure what the rules are for these. There's a few that seem legitimate and actually deal with the bill. Others seem more like a parliamentary delaying tactics.
So far the Correctional Note and Land Conveyance Note have been filed.
Miller is still describing it "as the worst bill ever".
He noted that the Democrats substituted two members of Bradley's committee for the hearing tonight implying that they were needed for the vote. Still, it was 11-2 to move forward.
He also notes that the St. Clair Record is reporting that Mount Vernon's mayor Mary Jane Chesney is opposed to the bill.
“We have a new interchange and are in the process of building infrastructure on approximately 600 acres around the interchange to attract businesses to the area,” she wrote on May 6.
“What are our chances of attracting these businesses when only 40 miles down the interstate lies Marion with this proposed added development tool?
Actually, Mount Vernon's chances are not very good. The city is already on record for not wanting any lodging establishments to go to the new exit which will be dominated by the new Good Samaritan hospital.
This is the first time I've heard of any effort to market the interchange for hospitality or retail, which they obviously should.
Also, Marion has a much better population base within an hour drive that likely to come to it, than Mount Vernon.
I'm not opposed to Mount Vernon, I'm a MVTHS grad and know Chesney well from when she taught at the high school. I support her efforts to turn around the city's declining population. What used to be the region's second largest community, is now the third, according to census estimates. The Hub has simply surpassed the King City this decade.
As to the legislation, State Rep. David Reis, R-Olney, has requested 10 various staff notes to be filed on the Bradley bill. These are impact statements of what the bill will do to certain areas such as the state's fiscal situation, state mandates, balanced budget, corrections, home rule, housing affordability, judicial impact, land conveyance appraisal, pensions and state debt.
I'm not sure what the rules are for these. There's a few that seem legitimate and actually deal with the bill. Others seem more like a parliamentary delaying tactics.
So far the Correctional Note and Land Conveyance Note have been filed.
Lawmakers Consider Other Tourism Bills
The IDEA bill for Marion isn't the only piece of legislation winding its way through the General Assembly today that will affect tourism in Southern Illinois.
Lawmakers in the House Executive Committee are reviewing a proposal tonight to revamp the Chicago trade show business at McCormick Place.
The dirty little secret downstate is that it's Chicago tourism dollars that fund our state's tourism program. When they hurting, the rest of us get to feel the pain.
I'm not sure what the bill number will be yet, but expect it to pass. Chicago's about to lose some long-time trade shows if they don't make changes.
While the focus this week has been on the IDEA bill there are other pieces of legislation that would have greatly benefited tourism that are stuck for now in the Rules Committees of either the House or Senate.
Senate Bill 2559 would have created the Historic Preservation Tax Credit Act. This would have offered a powerful tool that's been used with great success in Missouri. It would have provided an income tax credit equal to the amount of 25 percent of qualified expenditures for restoration and preservation of qualified historic structures. It passed the Senate 48-6 but has been stuck in Rules since April 23. HB 4823 is the House version of the bill. It too is stuck in Rules.
Senate Bill 3458 would have created the Tourism Task Force Act to figure out what direction the state should take in its tourism efforts. According to insiders, this really hasn't been done since serious efforts began in the early 1970s. State Sen. Bill Brady who's running for governor sponsored this bill last year which explains why it's not going anywhere in the Democratic-controlled House.
HB 2556 would allow conservancy districts to create TIF districts, as well as counties to create TIF districts for tourism-related projects located outside municipalities. Bradley introduced this last year on behalf of Rend Lake Conservancy District in an effort to attract developers to their land near Exit 77 on Interstate 57. This bill ended up in Rules last year and has never left.
Lawmakers in the House Executive Committee are reviewing a proposal tonight to revamp the Chicago trade show business at McCormick Place.
The dirty little secret downstate is that it's Chicago tourism dollars that fund our state's tourism program. When they hurting, the rest of us get to feel the pain.
I'm not sure what the bill number will be yet, but expect it to pass. Chicago's about to lose some long-time trade shows if they don't make changes.
While the focus this week has been on the IDEA bill there are other pieces of legislation that would have greatly benefited tourism that are stuck for now in the Rules Committees of either the House or Senate.
Senate Bill 2559 would have created the Historic Preservation Tax Credit Act. This would have offered a powerful tool that's been used with great success in Missouri. It would have provided an income tax credit equal to the amount of 25 percent of qualified expenditures for restoration and preservation of qualified historic structures. It passed the Senate 48-6 but has been stuck in Rules since April 23. HB 4823 is the House version of the bill. It too is stuck in Rules.
Senate Bill 3458 would have created the Tourism Task Force Act to figure out what direction the state should take in its tourism efforts. According to insiders, this really hasn't been done since serious efforts began in the early 1970s. State Sen. Bill Brady who's running for governor sponsored this bill last year which explains why it's not going anywhere in the Democratic-controlled House.
HB 2556 would allow conservancy districts to create TIF districts, as well as counties to create TIF districts for tourism-related projects located outside municipalities. Bradley introduced this last year on behalf of Rend Lake Conservancy District in an effort to attract developers to their land near Exit 77 on Interstate 57. This bill ended up in Rules last year and has never left.
House Committee Approves IDEA Bill
The House Revenue and Finance Committee voted 11-2 to recommend to the full House of Representatives state Rep. John Bradley's IDEA bill (SB 2093) for Marion and Southern Illinois.
The next step is the House of Representatives which could come later tonight or tomorrow morning.
The next step is the House of Representatives which could come later tonight or tomorrow morning.
Hearing Begins on IDEA Bill
The House Revenue and Finance Committee has presumably begun their 5:30 p.m. hearing. The IDEA bill for Marion is the third one on the agenda.
As to the changes in Bradley's second version of the bill filed earlier (House Floor Amendment #4, they don't seem to be major, or at least directly affect the Marion plan.
The new amendment appears to be the same as to language for the Marion project. There's a new Section 63 (p. 74) of the latest amendment which amends part of the New Markets Development Program Act increasing the level of tax credits to $20 million from $10 million.
Then, Section 64 of the new amendment appears to be the Section 65 of the old one. Both expand the jurisdiction of the Auditor General to cover the various funds created with this piece of legislation.
As to the changes in Bradley's second version of the bill filed earlier (House Floor Amendment #4, they don't seem to be major, or at least directly affect the Marion plan.
The new amendment appears to be the same as to language for the Marion project. There's a new Section 63 (p. 74) of the latest amendment which amends part of the New Markets Development Program Act increasing the level of tax credits to $20 million from $10 million.
Then, Section 64 of the new amendment appears to be the Section 65 of the old one. Both expand the jurisdiction of the Auditor General to cover the various funds created with this piece of legislation.
IDEA Bill Set for a Hearing at 5:30 p.m.
State Rep. John E. Bradley, D-Marion, has introduced House Floor Amendment #4 to SB 2093. This is amending his main amendment (#3) for the Marion site. Not certain what the changes are at this point, but they seem to have helped the situation.
The House Rules Committee has forwarded the bill to the Revenue and Finance Committee which Bradley chairs. A hearing is set for 80 minutes from now.
The only other bill on the agenda is SB 377, which deals with a proposed tax amnesty period designed to get some more revenue flowing into the state. This has been talked about in the last few days as a one-time revenue generator to deal with the state's budget crisis.
I'm assuming the large delegation of Southern Illinois officials will be on hand for the hearing.
The House Rules Committee has forwarded the bill to the Revenue and Finance Committee which Bradley chairs. A hearing is set for 80 minutes from now.
The only other bill on the agenda is SB 377, which deals with a proposed tax amnesty period designed to get some more revenue flowing into the state. This has been talked about in the last few days as a one-time revenue generator to deal with the state's budget crisis.
I'm assuming the large delegation of Southern Illinois officials will be on hand for the hearing.
Bradley Answers Questions on Bill
State Rep. John Bradley, D-Marion, answers questions last night on the legislation for the new Marion development.
Forby Added as Chief Sponsor of IDEA Bill
Here's the latest on the IDEA (Innovation Development and Economy Act) legislation.
While he's been publicly onboard since Saturday, state Sen. Gary Forby, D-Benton, made it official today. He's now the chief sponsor of SB 2093, taking the place of Sen. James F. Clayborne, Jr., D-East St. Louis, who had been shepherding the bill for the Glen Carbon location.
On the House side, State Reps. Brandon W. Phelps, D-Norris City; Ed Sullivan, Jr., D-Mundelein, and Mary E. Flowers, D-Chicago, have all been added as alternate chief co-sponsors.
According to the General Assembly's website, the bill is still sitting in the House Rules Committee.
While he's been publicly onboard since Saturday, state Sen. Gary Forby, D-Benton, made it official today. He's now the chief sponsor of SB 2093, taking the place of Sen. James F. Clayborne, Jr., D-East St. Louis, who had been shepherding the bill for the Glen Carbon location.
On the House side, State Reps. Brandon W. Phelps, D-Norris City; Ed Sullivan, Jr., D-Mundelein, and Mary E. Flowers, D-Chicago, have all been added as alternate chief co-sponsors.
According to the General Assembly's website, the bill is still sitting in the House Rules Committee.
More on the New Tourism Proposal for Marion
I've now had a chance to read most of state Rep. John Bradley's House Amendment 3 to Senate bill 2093 which is the vehicle being used for this IDEA — the Innovative Development and Economy Act.
Here are some additional thoughts basically in the order that I read and compared Bradley's amendment to the previous version of the bill designed for Glen Carbon.
Glen Carbon's project had to be at least 600 acres. Marion's has to be 250 to 500 acres. It also has to be adjacent to an interstate highway and within one mile of two state highways, and within one mile of an "entertainment user, or a major or minor league sports stadium or other similar entertainment venue that had an initial capital investment of at least" $20 million.
The fifth requirement is that it includes land previously stripped mine. See "Abandoned Mines to Tourist Attractions" for the history of mining in this area.
Both amendments define an "entertainment user" as a business that "has a primary use of providing a venue for entertainment attractions, rides or other activities oriented toward the entertainment and amusement of its patrons". The MetroEast project would have required it to cover 50 acres and cost at least $100 million. The scaled-down version for Marion is just 20 acres and an investment of no less than $25 million.
I don't think the existing ball park can be the "entertainment user" for this district as there would be virtually no new taxes generated there over what has already been generated. I think this refers to something new.
Like TIF districts, the incentives can be used for a whole host of public improvements like streets and roads, parking lots, etc. Unlike a standard TIF, the STAR bonds could also be used for "vertical improvements" which normal persons would call buildings.
The legislation allows for the use of the STAR bonds to pay for construction of two "destination users" which are 150,000-plus square foot retailers that attract at least 30 percent of their customers from at least 75 miles away (or out-of-state). Think Cabela's or Bass Pro Shops rather than a Wal-Mart.
STAR bonds could also be use to build a "destination hotel" which is defined as at least 150 rooms and a venue for entertainment attractions, rides or other amusements, i.e. indoor water park. This is the Great Wolf Lodge-type establishment.
The bonds could also be used to cover the costs of one "entertainment user", i.e. theme park, specifically, "costs of buildings; rides and attractions, which include carousels, slides, roller coasters, displays, models, towers, works of art and similar theme and amusement park improvements."
In what appears to be different from last year's version of the legislation, rather than take 100 percent of the state's sales tax increment for everything in the STAR development, only 100 percent of transactions from up to 2 destination users (big retail attractions like a Cabela's), 1 destination hotel (Great Wolf or something similar), and 1 entertainment user (Legoland or another theme park). For everything else in the district, the state would be pledging only 25 percent of the tax increment.
Another limiting factor is that the state sales tax increment pledge to pay the STAR bonds cannot exceed 50 percent of the total development costs.
Before a STAR bond district can be created, the developer will have to submit a plan that includes at least $100 million in capital investments, at least $100 million in annual gross sales revenues and 500 new jobs.
Despite Holland's spokesperson's downplay of a Legoland, the legislation still requires a "potential entertainment user" or theme park as part of the initial plan as well as the retail "destination user". The language is not "either or", it's an "and".
Section 33 of the act (p. 60 of Amendment #3) outlines the STAR Bonds School Improvement and Operations Trust Fund, otherwise known as the reason why surrounding communities are backing this project, particularly schools. It's also why Regional Superintendent Matt Donkin is driving back to Springfield tonight or early tomorrow morning.
This fund is created in the state treasury. The moneys in the fund will be used to make "payments to school districts in educational service regions that include or are adjacent to the STAR bond district." This is later defined as the Franklin-Williamson Regional Office of Education.
Basically, 15 percent of the property tax increment generated from the development each year would go into this fund. Each fall, the regional superintendent would allocate the moneys to the various schools districts in proportion to the districts' fall enrollments.
What I don't see defined is a "qualifying school district". Even more loosey-goosey is a phrase that allows the regional superintendent the power to use "any other method or formula" he "deems fit, equitable, and in the public interest."
He would also be able to allocate "moneys to school districts that are outside of his or her educational service region or to other regional superintendents". However, politically, I don't think that will be case.
This weird language may be due to the simple fact that school district boundaries don't follow county lines. Thus there are schools in neighboring counties that include students from Franklin and Williamson counties.
In the Glen Carbon proposal, this fund was the "STAR Bonds Community Improvement Trust Fund" and the 15 percent property tax increment was to be distributed to municipalities within a 12 mile radius of the project. A third went to communities within 5 miles of the project and two-thirds went to communities in the 5 to 12 mile radius.
Section 45 in both amendments deal with restrictions. Both state that "no portion of a STAR bond project shall be financed" with basically existing TIF districts. I'm not sure how that would work out with the Hill, as TIF was used already for that development, and I believe that a TIF district has already been established for their undeveloped land on the east side of the interstate which will be included in this STAR bond district.
The Glen Carbon plan would have prohibited car dealerships and a minor or independent league baseball stadium to locate in the district. The Marion plan includes the ban on car dealerships, but not the stadium, which is probably not an issue since Rent One Park will be adjacent to the district.
The Marion plan also states that the developer can't use any land in the STAR bond district for a movie multiplex with more than 12 auditoriums or contain more than 900,000 square feet of floor space devoted to traditional retail use (that's the equivalent about about four super Wal-marts or Menard's.)
The theater bit is interesting. I guess we could see a new 12-screen complex to compete the existing 8-screen one behind the Illinois Centre Mall. Although still a very decent theater it's among the oldest 10 percent of properties owned by Kerasotes (and in the process of being sold to AMC). It's likely that AMC would be looking at a new complex sometime in the next few years anyway.
It's 12:39 a.m. Thursday morning and Bradley and state Sen. Gary Forby, D-Benton, have less than 48 hours to get this passed before the legislature adjourns.
Here are some additional thoughts basically in the order that I read and compared Bradley's amendment to the previous version of the bill designed for Glen Carbon.
Glen Carbon's project had to be at least 600 acres. Marion's has to be 250 to 500 acres. It also has to be adjacent to an interstate highway and within one mile of two state highways, and within one mile of an "entertainment user, or a major or minor league sports stadium or other similar entertainment venue that had an initial capital investment of at least" $20 million.
The fifth requirement is that it includes land previously stripped mine. See "Abandoned Mines to Tourist Attractions" for the history of mining in this area.
Both amendments define an "entertainment user" as a business that "has a primary use of providing a venue for entertainment attractions, rides or other activities oriented toward the entertainment and amusement of its patrons". The MetroEast project would have required it to cover 50 acres and cost at least $100 million. The scaled-down version for Marion is just 20 acres and an investment of no less than $25 million.
I don't think the existing ball park can be the "entertainment user" for this district as there would be virtually no new taxes generated there over what has already been generated. I think this refers to something new.
Like TIF districts, the incentives can be used for a whole host of public improvements like streets and roads, parking lots, etc. Unlike a standard TIF, the STAR bonds could also be used for "vertical improvements" which normal persons would call buildings.
The legislation allows for the use of the STAR bonds to pay for construction of two "destination users" which are 150,000-plus square foot retailers that attract at least 30 percent of their customers from at least 75 miles away (or out-of-state). Think Cabela's or Bass Pro Shops rather than a Wal-Mart.
STAR bonds could also be use to build a "destination hotel" which is defined as at least 150 rooms and a venue for entertainment attractions, rides or other amusements, i.e. indoor water park. This is the Great Wolf Lodge-type establishment.
The bonds could also be used to cover the costs of one "entertainment user", i.e. theme park, specifically, "costs of buildings; rides and attractions, which include carousels, slides, roller coasters, displays, models, towers, works of art and similar theme and amusement park improvements."
In what appears to be different from last year's version of the legislation, rather than take 100 percent of the state's sales tax increment for everything in the STAR development, only 100 percent of transactions from up to 2 destination users (big retail attractions like a Cabela's), 1 destination hotel (Great Wolf or something similar), and 1 entertainment user (Legoland or another theme park). For everything else in the district, the state would be pledging only 25 percent of the tax increment.
Another limiting factor is that the state sales tax increment pledge to pay the STAR bonds cannot exceed 50 percent of the total development costs.
Before a STAR bond district can be created, the developer will have to submit a plan that includes at least $100 million in capital investments, at least $100 million in annual gross sales revenues and 500 new jobs.
Despite Holland's spokesperson's downplay of a Legoland, the legislation still requires a "potential entertainment user" or theme park as part of the initial plan as well as the retail "destination user". The language is not "either or", it's an "and".
Section 33 of the act (p. 60 of Amendment #3) outlines the STAR Bonds School Improvement and Operations Trust Fund, otherwise known as the reason why surrounding communities are backing this project, particularly schools. It's also why Regional Superintendent Matt Donkin is driving back to Springfield tonight or early tomorrow morning.
This fund is created in the state treasury. The moneys in the fund will be used to make "payments to school districts in educational service regions that include or are adjacent to the STAR bond district." This is later defined as the Franklin-Williamson Regional Office of Education.
Basically, 15 percent of the property tax increment generated from the development each year would go into this fund. Each fall, the regional superintendent would allocate the moneys to the various schools districts in proportion to the districts' fall enrollments.
What I don't see defined is a "qualifying school district". Even more loosey-goosey is a phrase that allows the regional superintendent the power to use "any other method or formula" he "deems fit, equitable, and in the public interest."
He would also be able to allocate "moneys to school districts that are outside of his or her educational service region or to other regional superintendents". However, politically, I don't think that will be case.
This weird language may be due to the simple fact that school district boundaries don't follow county lines. Thus there are schools in neighboring counties that include students from Franklin and Williamson counties.
In the Glen Carbon proposal, this fund was the "STAR Bonds Community Improvement Trust Fund" and the 15 percent property tax increment was to be distributed to municipalities within a 12 mile radius of the project. A third went to communities within 5 miles of the project and two-thirds went to communities in the 5 to 12 mile radius.
Section 45 in both amendments deal with restrictions. Both state that "no portion of a STAR bond project shall be financed" with basically existing TIF districts. I'm not sure how that would work out with the Hill, as TIF was used already for that development, and I believe that a TIF district has already been established for their undeveloped land on the east side of the interstate which will be included in this STAR bond district.
The Glen Carbon plan would have prohibited car dealerships and a minor or independent league baseball stadium to locate in the district. The Marion plan includes the ban on car dealerships, but not the stadium, which is probably not an issue since Rent One Park will be adjacent to the district.
The Marion plan also states that the developer can't use any land in the STAR bond district for a movie multiplex with more than 12 auditoriums or contain more than 900,000 square feet of floor space devoted to traditional retail use (that's the equivalent about about four super Wal-marts or Menard's.)
The theater bit is interesting. I guess we could see a new 12-screen complex to compete the existing 8-screen one behind the Illinois Centre Mall. Although still a very decent theater it's among the oldest 10 percent of properties owned by Kerasotes (and in the process of being sold to AMC). It's likely that AMC would be looking at a new complex sometime in the next few years anyway.
It's 12:39 a.m. Thursday morning and Bradley and state Sen. Gary Forby, D-Benton, have less than 48 hours to get this passed before the legislature adjourns.
Wednesday, May 05, 2010
Theme Parks and Destination Hotels
The spokesperson for developer Bruce Holland told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch earlier this week in a story published yesterday that Legoland may not be in the cards for Marion.
While it certainly isn't a dead idea — Legoland certainly isn't the first theme park proposed for Southern Illinois — the others parts of the proposed destination plan shouldn't be overlooked.
Despite the story set to be published in tomorrow's paper that Great Wolf Resorts may or may not be looking at this project, such as facility would offer a tremendous boost to the region's tourism economy.
If you're not familiar with the chain, Great Wolf promotes itself as "North America's Premier Family Entertainment Brand".
Their first quarter report issued yesterday describes their resorts as "family-oriented destination facilities that generally feature 300 – 600 rooms and a large indoor entertainment area measuring 40,000 – 100,000 square feet. The all-suite properties offer a variety of room styles, arcade/game rooms, fitness rooms, themed restaurants, spas, supervised children’s activities and other amenities."
The main feature consists of a 40,000 square feet indoor water park.
So far they have 12 resorts with none closer than the Wisconsin Dells, Wisconsin; Kansas City, Kansas; and Kings Island theme park at Mason, Ohio.
The latest-announced resort will be one in suburban Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania adjacent to a major shopping center. The company signed a letter of intent to license their brand and take a minority stake in the new venture.
A smaller version of a Great Wolf Resort is Illinois' first indoor waterpark — Grizzly Jack's Grand Bear Resort just outside Starved Rock State Park near Utica, Illinois. Its waterwork is 24,000 square feet and their three-story lodge offers 92 over-sized guest rooms. In recent years they've added vacation villas and cabins to the mix as well.
I've never been inside, but I drove by it a few years ago while attending a conference at Starved Rock. The parking lot was packed and it looked a whole lot more fun than the tired CCC-era lodge and generally crappy cabin I was staying in.
[To be fair to the concessionaires of Starved Rock, I've been told DNR has updated those cabins since I stayed there. They needed to be, they were a disgrace to the state.]
As far as I can tell there are only three other indoor water parks, all in northern Illinois - CoCo Key Water Resort at Rockford, Key Lime Cove's Lost Paradise at Gurnee and the Mayan Adventure at Holiday Inn Chicago-Elmhurst.
Missouri only has one indoor waterpark and that's another CoCo Key Water Resort at Kansas City.
The closest one in Indiana is Big Splash Adventure at French Lick and I can't find any indoor parks in Kentucky.
Marion offers a good location with little competition. Combined with golf at Kokopelli and baseball at Rent One Park there's a core group right there, particularly if the developers can attract Cabela's or Bass Pro Shops, which have already been mentioned as possible tenants in the development.
...landing a LegoLand amusement park — one of the much-touted possibilities for the Glen Carbon site — is probably off the table, as those businesses tend to seek more urban settings. "That seems less likely in Marion," said [Rebecca] Rausch.
A more likely possibility, Rausch said, would be a venue like Cabela's at Village West in Kansas City, Kan., a hunting and outdoors store and museum, or similar large-scale venues that won't directly compete with existing Marion-area businesses.
While it certainly isn't a dead idea — Legoland certainly isn't the first theme park proposed for Southern Illinois — the others parts of the proposed destination plan shouldn't be overlooked.
Despite the story set to be published in tomorrow's paper that Great Wolf Resorts may or may not be looking at this project, such as facility would offer a tremendous boost to the region's tourism economy.
If you're not familiar with the chain, Great Wolf promotes itself as "North America's Premier Family Entertainment Brand".Their first quarter report issued yesterday describes their resorts as "family-oriented destination facilities that generally feature 300 – 600 rooms and a large indoor entertainment area measuring 40,000 – 100,000 square feet. The all-suite properties offer a variety of room styles, arcade/game rooms, fitness rooms, themed restaurants, spas, supervised children’s activities and other amenities."
The main feature consists of a 40,000 square feet indoor water park.
So far they have 12 resorts with none closer than the Wisconsin Dells, Wisconsin; Kansas City, Kansas; and Kings Island theme park at Mason, Ohio.
The latest-announced resort will be one in suburban Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania adjacent to a major shopping center. The company signed a letter of intent to license their brand and take a minority stake in the new venture.
A smaller version of a Great Wolf Resort is Illinois' first indoor waterpark — Grizzly Jack's Grand Bear Resort just outside Starved Rock State Park near Utica, Illinois. Its waterwork is 24,000 square feet and their three-story lodge offers 92 over-sized guest rooms. In recent years they've added vacation villas and cabins to the mix as well.
I've never been inside, but I drove by it a few years ago while attending a conference at Starved Rock. The parking lot was packed and it looked a whole lot more fun than the tired CCC-era lodge and generally crappy cabin I was staying in.
[To be fair to the concessionaires of Starved Rock, I've been told DNR has updated those cabins since I stayed there. They needed to be, they were a disgrace to the state.]
As far as I can tell there are only three other indoor water parks, all in northern Illinois - CoCo Key Water Resort at Rockford, Key Lime Cove's Lost Paradise at Gurnee and the Mayan Adventure at Holiday Inn Chicago-Elmhurst.
Missouri only has one indoor waterpark and that's another CoCo Key Water Resort at Kansas City.
The closest one in Indiana is Big Splash Adventure at French Lick and I can't find any indoor parks in Kentucky.
Marion offers a good location with little competition. Combined with golf at Kokopelli and baseball at Rent One Park there's a core group right there, particularly if the developers can attract Cabela's or Bass Pro Shops, which have already been mentioned as possible tenants in the development.
Update on Marion Tourism Projects
In what's very possibly an inaccurate supposition based on quotes in their story, the Southern Illinoisan is reporting tonight online that "Cabela's, Great Wolf aren't planning for Marion project."
In fact their spokesman never say such a thing (at least they're not quoted as such).
Note that Shattuck said his company's "development team" has no plans. According to their website, they do franchise which could be a lodge not actually developed by Great Lodge, but by another outfit.
Also, Castillo of Cabela's provided an honest answer when he said "that's not one that I'm aware of," in regards to Marion. Later he added, "I'm not aware of any discussions with the developer."
Both spokesmen remind me of Target's spokesmen 20 years ago during the "mall wars" between Carbondale and Marion. The then-new Illinois Centre was in its earliest phases; maybe not even under construction yet.
The Southern ran a top story one day that clearly stated that the company was not coming to Marion. They quoted the company spokesman and there was no buts about it, Target was not coming and the implication was it had never considered coming.
In reality of course, they were. No one had told the spokesman. If the real estate and development people in the company tell the spokesmen before a deal is final but before they're ready to announce, it forces the spokesmen to lie. In order to give them plausible deniability they're usually not told.
I'm willing to bet that the spokespeople for Great Wolf and Cabela's aren't told about projects until they're ready to go, which the Marion one obviously is not since the legislation itself has not passed.
Also, as publicly-traded companies both operate under strict rules about publicizing corporate moves in order to protect their investors' interest. In other words, they are lawyers involved.
In fact their spokesman never say such a thing (at least they're not quoted as such).
[Great Wolf] however, isn't necessarily on board.
"Our development team currently has no plans for a Great Wolf Lodge in Illinois," said Steve Shattuck, a spokesman for the Wisconsin-based water park operator.
Similarly, a spokesman for outdoor outfitter Cabela's say he hasn't heard about a possible southern Illinois location.
"That's not one that I'm aware of," John Castillo said Wednesday.
Note that Shattuck said his company's "development team" has no plans. According to their website, they do franchise which could be a lodge not actually developed by Great Lodge, but by another outfit.
Also, Castillo of Cabela's provided an honest answer when he said "that's not one that I'm aware of," in regards to Marion. Later he added, "I'm not aware of any discussions with the developer."
Both spokesmen remind me of Target's spokesmen 20 years ago during the "mall wars" between Carbondale and Marion. The then-new Illinois Centre was in its earliest phases; maybe not even under construction yet.
The Southern ran a top story one day that clearly stated that the company was not coming to Marion. They quoted the company spokesman and there was no buts about it, Target was not coming and the implication was it had never considered coming.
In reality of course, they were. No one had told the spokesman. If the real estate and development people in the company tell the spokesmen before a deal is final but before they're ready to announce, it forces the spokesmen to lie. In order to give them plausible deniability they're usually not told.
I'm willing to bet that the spokespeople for Great Wolf and Cabela's aren't told about projects until they're ready to go, which the Marion one obviously is not since the legislation itself has not passed.
Also, as publicly-traded companies both operate under strict rules about publicizing corporate moves in order to protect their investors' interest. In other words, they are lawyers involved.
Legislation filed for new Marion development
State Rep. John Bradley, D-Marion, filed House Amendment 3 to Senate Bill 2093 earlier this afternoon.
At first glance there's a couple of differences between the University Town Center development bill originally sponsored by Sen. James F. Claybourne and the Marion one.
1) The former bill was the "STAR Bonds Financing Act". Bradley's bill is the "Innovation Development and Economy Act".
2) While a destination hotel has been part of both plans, specific language is found only in the Marion bill. A "destination hotel" means a "hotel complex" of at least 150 rooms that also "includes a venue for entertainment attractions, rides, or other activities oriented toward the entertainment and amusement of its guests and other patrons.
Both versions of the bill targets the development of "destination user" retail attractions defined as at least 150,000 square feet of sales floor area, does not have another Illinois location within 70 miles, has at least 30 percent of customers traveling to visit from at least 75 miles away or from out-of-state, and includes an initial capital investment of at least $30 million.
As of 2:17 p.m. when I last checked, Bradley had filed the amendment and it had been assigned to the Rules Committee. Also, the alternate chief sponsor was changed to Bradley.
This bill was originally introduced last year and dealt with mental health issues. It passed the Senate but stalled in the House. Claybourne had amended it to use as a vehicle for the Glen Carbon development.
The bill is currently in the House of Representatives and would have to pass the House and then go to the Senate for passage. If lawmakers adjourn as planned, there's less than 80 hours for this thing to pass.
At first glance there's a couple of differences between the University Town Center development bill originally sponsored by Sen. James F. Claybourne and the Marion one.
1) The former bill was the "STAR Bonds Financing Act". Bradley's bill is the "Innovation Development and Economy Act".
2) While a destination hotel has been part of both plans, specific language is found only in the Marion bill. A "destination hotel" means a "hotel complex" of at least 150 rooms that also "includes a venue for entertainment attractions, rides, or other activities oriented toward the entertainment and amusement of its guests and other patrons.
Both versions of the bill targets the development of "destination user" retail attractions defined as at least 150,000 square feet of sales floor area, does not have another Illinois location within 70 miles, has at least 30 percent of customers traveling to visit from at least 75 miles away or from out-of-state, and includes an initial capital investment of at least $30 million.
As of 2:17 p.m. when I last checked, Bradley had filed the amendment and it had been assigned to the Rules Committee. Also, the alternate chief sponsor was changed to Bradley.
This bill was originally introduced last year and dealt with mental health issues. It passed the Senate but stalled in the House. Claybourne had amended it to use as a vehicle for the Glen Carbon development.
The bill is currently in the House of Representatives and would have to pass the House and then go to the Senate for passage. If lawmakers adjourn as planned, there's less than 80 hours for this thing to pass.
Monday, May 03, 2010
Legoland Egypt?
Saturday's announcement of a new destination shopping and entertainment center on Marion's north side did not mention Legoland, but that was part of the deal in its previous incarnation, and city officials believe it still is.
Up until last Thursday, April 29, Bruce Holland had been pushing the University Town Center development at Glen Carbon, Illinois, in the St. Louis Metro-East area. After opposition to the use of STAR bonds, the local state Rep. Tom Holbrook, dropped legislation that would create the state incentives.
At some point last week Southern Illinois lawmakers state Rep. John Bradley, D-Marion, and state Sen. Gary Forby, D-Benton, jumped on board. After a rash of meetings with the lawmakers, area mayors and economic development officials, Holland announced plans for the Marion project.
The clock though is ticking. House Speaker Michael Madigan wants to adjourn at the end of this week.
So what's the history on Legoland and the Midwest?
Four years ago Nick Varney, CEO of Merlin Entertainments Group, announced that his company was "actively engaged" in finding partners and a location for a fifth Legoland theme park. They already operated three in Europe and one in North America at Carlsbad, California.
The Theme Park Insider reported the news on Jan. 19, 2006, under a headlined time frame of "3 to 5 years":
Important for Marion and Southern Illinois is the following quote.
Merlin Entertainment found its East Coast location at Winter Haven, Florida last year when it acquired the legendary Cypress Gardens site.
In the Midwest, they first looked at Kansas City before targeting the St. Louis region.
In June 2007, the city council at Columbia, Illinois, learned that St. Louis developer G. J. Crewe, which they had been working with since 2004 to develop the Columbia Crossings site, had landed the interest of Merlin to locate a Legoland as part of the proposed 2,000 acre development. Amazingly, the city backed out of the plan.
Skip forward a couple of years with a new developer, Holland, this time, and the idea of a suburban St. Louis Legoland resurfaces at Glen Carbon, Illinois, on the northeast side of the MetroEast.
Holland was able to work with his local lawmakers to get the STAR bonds incentive legislation through the General Assembly in 2009, but Gov. Pat Quinn vetoed the bill with a change that only half of the state sales tax increment could be used rather than all of it.
Plans were to address that this year, but opposition grew from other MetroEast mayors over the retail development which they feared would threatened their own retail areas. That opposition killed the Glen Carbon proposal last week.
While Legoland officials have officially "downplayed" an Illinois location, company officials did approach Quinn last October while he visited Copenhagen to lobby the International Olympic Committee in support of Chicago's bid for the 2016 Olympics. For those who don't know, Lego is based in Denmark.
Holland probably didn't mention the park because he was still trying to sell Merlin Entertainment on Southern Illinois. Still the possibilities are tempting for area tourism. Holbrook's legislation provides an idea of the minimum investment on a theme park needed to qualify for the bonds - $100 million. That's an investment we can take to the bank.
On the lighter side, here's something we probably won't see in a Land of Lincoln Legoland.
Up until last Thursday, April 29, Bruce Holland had been pushing the University Town Center development at Glen Carbon, Illinois, in the St. Louis Metro-East area. After opposition to the use of STAR bonds, the local state Rep. Tom Holbrook, dropped legislation that would create the state incentives.
At some point last week Southern Illinois lawmakers state Rep. John Bradley, D-Marion, and state Sen. Gary Forby, D-Benton, jumped on board. After a rash of meetings with the lawmakers, area mayors and economic development officials, Holland announced plans for the Marion project.
The clock though is ticking. House Speaker Michael Madigan wants to adjourn at the end of this week.
So what's the history on Legoland and the Midwest?
Four years ago Nick Varney, CEO of Merlin Entertainments Group, announced that his company was "actively engaged" in finding partners and a location for a fifth Legoland theme park. They already operated three in Europe and one in North America at Carlsbad, California.
The Theme Park Insider reported the news on Jan. 19, 2006, under a headlined time frame of "3 to 5 years":
Varney said that the company's goal is to develop its Legoland parks as "mini Disney Worlds," destination resorts attracting visitors over several days, rather than just destinations for local day-trippers. As a result, Varney suggested that Merlin might build new installations of its SeaLife and Dungeon amusements next to Legolands, as well as working with local governments and developers to encourage more tourist development around the parks.
Important for Marion and Southern Illinois is the following quote.
"We have three parks in Europe. Looking to the future, in the blue sky, I could see three parks in North America, too. With a Legoland here in Southern California, it does not take a genius to see the Midwest and the East Coast as potential new sites," Varney said..
Merlin Entertainment found its East Coast location at Winter Haven, Florida last year when it acquired the legendary Cypress Gardens site.
In the Midwest, they first looked at Kansas City before targeting the St. Louis region.
In June 2007, the city council at Columbia, Illinois, learned that St. Louis developer G. J. Crewe, which they had been working with since 2004 to develop the Columbia Crossings site, had landed the interest of Merlin to locate a Legoland as part of the proposed 2,000 acre development. Amazingly, the city backed out of the plan.
Skip forward a couple of years with a new developer, Holland, this time, and the idea of a suburban St. Louis Legoland resurfaces at Glen Carbon, Illinois, on the northeast side of the MetroEast.
Holland was able to work with his local lawmakers to get the STAR bonds incentive legislation through the General Assembly in 2009, but Gov. Pat Quinn vetoed the bill with a change that only half of the state sales tax increment could be used rather than all of it.
Plans were to address that this year, but opposition grew from other MetroEast mayors over the retail development which they feared would threatened their own retail areas. That opposition killed the Glen Carbon proposal last week.
While Legoland officials have officially "downplayed" an Illinois location, company officials did approach Quinn last October while he visited Copenhagen to lobby the International Olympic Committee in support of Chicago's bid for the 2016 Olympics. For those who don't know, Lego is based in Denmark.
Holland probably didn't mention the park because he was still trying to sell Merlin Entertainment on Southern Illinois. Still the possibilities are tempting for area tourism. Holbrook's legislation provides an idea of the minimum investment on a theme park needed to qualify for the bonds - $100 million. That's an investment we can take to the bank.
On the lighter side, here's something we probably won't see in a Land of Lincoln Legoland.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Quinn Pledges to Reopen Parks, Historic Sites
The newly-installed Gov. Patrick J. Quinn Administration is expected to quickly re-open the 11 state parks and 13 state historic sites shuttered by former Gov. Rod Blagojevich.
This would include Fort Kaskaskia, Pierre Menard Home, Fort du Chartres, Cahokia Courthouse and the Vandalia Statehouse state historic sites in northwestern part of Southern Illinois.
Quinn made the comments specifically about the parks and in general about the historic sites at a news conference in the Statehouse minutes after he took the oath of office as Illinois' newest governor.
Quinn became governor following the Illinois Senate's 59-0 vote Thursday afternoon to convict Blagojevich for abuse of power during his six years in office. Now a private citizen the former governor still faces criminal prosecution for his alleged actions.
While Quinn would not - and self-admittedly could not - identify the scope of the state's budget deficit without further study, he reiterated earlier pledges to re-open the state parks. Comments by him and other state officials in recent days indicate a budget hole of at least $4 to $5 billion.
At his news conference he pointedly stressed the importance of heritage tourism as a growing industry and the need to make certain these sites, both Lincoln-related as well as others, be open to the public.
As to the leadership of Department of Natural Resources and other staff positions, he said nothing would be announced until next week.
When asked specifically about DNR and it's recently appointed director Kurt Granberg, Quinn once again reiterated earlier comments he's made indicating his belief that a natural resources professional should be in that position. Granberg is a long-time legislator who retired from the Illinois House earlier this month.
Quinn was not asked about the larger funding issues surrounding state parks and historic sites. In Southern Illinois staffing for state parks is down 40 percent in the last five years in Region 5 of DNR.
Throughout the state staffing for the Historic Sites Division of the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency is down 60 percent since 2000. If the recent cuts are restored, staffing levels will still be off 40 percent since the end of the last millennium.
Even if funding could be restored to 2000 levels, that would leave only one IHPA staffer in the 22 counties served by the Southern Illinois Tourism Development Office, an area with seven IHPA-owned historic sites.
This would include Fort Kaskaskia, Pierre Menard Home, Fort du Chartres, Cahokia Courthouse and the Vandalia Statehouse state historic sites in northwestern part of Southern Illinois.
Quinn made the comments specifically about the parks and in general about the historic sites at a news conference in the Statehouse minutes after he took the oath of office as Illinois' newest governor.
Quinn became governor following the Illinois Senate's 59-0 vote Thursday afternoon to convict Blagojevich for abuse of power during his six years in office. Now a private citizen the former governor still faces criminal prosecution for his alleged actions.
While Quinn would not - and self-admittedly could not - identify the scope of the state's budget deficit without further study, he reiterated earlier pledges to re-open the state parks. Comments by him and other state officials in recent days indicate a budget hole of at least $4 to $5 billion.
At his news conference he pointedly stressed the importance of heritage tourism as a growing industry and the need to make certain these sites, both Lincoln-related as well as others, be open to the public.
As to the leadership of Department of Natural Resources and other staff positions, he said nothing would be announced until next week.
When asked specifically about DNR and it's recently appointed director Kurt Granberg, Quinn once again reiterated earlier comments he's made indicating his belief that a natural resources professional should be in that position. Granberg is a long-time legislator who retired from the Illinois House earlier this month.
Quinn was not asked about the larger funding issues surrounding state parks and historic sites. In Southern Illinois staffing for state parks is down 40 percent in the last five years in Region 5 of DNR.
Throughout the state staffing for the Historic Sites Division of the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency is down 60 percent since 2000. If the recent cuts are restored, staffing levels will still be off 40 percent since the end of the last millennium.
Even if funding could be restored to 2000 levels, that would leave only one IHPA staffer in the 22 counties served by the Southern Illinois Tourism Development Office, an area with seven IHPA-owned historic sites.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)