I don't think the funding of these projects can be or should be considered donations. When the cell tower was erected, the agreement was set in place to give the money to the youth baseball teams. End of story that is not a donation. It is something they are entitled to because of that agreement.
I have sat in on many Finance Committee meetings and the usual procedure for donations was for the city clerk to announce that he had a request from this organization or another organization looking for a donation from the city, the committee would then agree to it or not. Recreational units within the city were never included in the donation process that I recall. When it was brought up at the city council meeting, it should have been make very clear, that changes have been made and baseball is now considered a donation and of the $20,000 limit we are setting, automatically deduct 7.000 that we give to summer baseball and the remaining $13,000 will be the limit for anyone else asking for money. Even that seems to be a lot of money to give away for a city that is not in good financial condition at this time.
22 comments:
It should be seen as a donation since the tower is built on city property and not Little League Baseball property and not District 20 Property.
So since it's built on city property then at the end of it all it is up to the city where the money from it goes.
I could be wrong here since I'm not going to go and find out for sure but I don't think that there was ever any law or anything that automatically gives the money to baseball. I would have to guess that Mayor Baker probably agreed to it but since he is no longer in office then that stands about as well as Mayor Harl's promise to end the sales tax hike in 5 years?
I really need to get a copy of whatever type of agreement was made as to how the revenue from the cell tower was to be used. Was it for only so many years or was it in perpetuity. Guess I need to foia that info sooner rather than later. What did they call the funding to the baseball leagues before this year? There should be people out there who had kids in the little league teams that were involved enough to exactly what took place.
"to exactly know"
Ok then - call it a donation. Then my next question is why are we only giving our "youth" $3500 a year and "Central States" (outsiders) a donation of $2500 for less than one week of baseball? Doesn't seem quite right to me!
That cell tower should have never been erected in the middle of a public park.
Some very good questions are asked above and I thought that Alderman Potthoff of the Finance Committees explanation for how the maximum figure of $20,000 was determined and what guidelines are to be utilized was very through.
It appears that the $3,500 to boys baseball and the $3,500 to girls softball was never considered as a donation before because it was money earmarked for this purpose. Now for accounting purposes the $7,000 is being cosidered a donation.
Peru has a pillow tax which in fairness to those paying should recieve something in return. This tax should promote tourism and advertisement for Peru. it should create business for motels, resturants, gas stations, grocercy stores and other business. The $2,500.00 to Central States should come from monies accumulated from the pillow tax.
Thirdly, Some of the donations are asked for by auto clubs etc. that may ask for $500.00 or a $1,000 and than turn around and donate their entire profit which could be $2,000 or $3,000 and give it to a good cause being conduted in Peru. This is considered more of a investment than a donation.
I thought that another good example of a outstanding donation was the $1,000 given to the Better Fishing Association for their annual fishing debry conducted at Baker Lake in which over 400 children participated along with their families. This is considered a investment in our children. A investment which we cannot put a figure on its return but do know it is manyfold over $1,000.
I am sure I have not touched all bases of the $20,000 figure to be set as the guideline for this year and would appreciate any further explanations which anyone wishes to submit.
May I say that I agree with Lois putting the line item under "donation" for the recreational programs instituted by the city, is not correct. This is a cost incurred by the City. How they pay for it should show in the budget. I hope she can find exactly what the terminology was when in fact the allocated money from the cell tower lease came into city coffers. Another avenue of quick information should be our city attorney who I believe was present when this all came into play....try him or find out who the attorney may have been.
Secondly, it is being forgotten that Peru needs to CUT COSTS. Now if it was one of our personal budgets, we would have to reduce our output to those unnecessary expenditures. No, do not stop having recreational programs but certainly take a percentage reduction. Save a little here and save a little there. Balance a budget and LIVE WITH IT until we can again see above water.
You guys are very spoiled. Most other towns get nothing from the city for baseball and softball. I know the people from Oglesby who get their funds through registration, concession stand, tag day, hosting tournaments, etc. Meaning they work and volunteer their time for the kids, not take handouts. You should be sooo happy that you get that amount from the city. That is very generous.
6:58AM
I am getting together some further information on city recreation and the money budgeted to the recreation commission and how it is used. I do know this past year we gave them $30,000 to use with no strings attached.
So Lois are you saying that they are a separate entity,and are given the $30,000 to use for summer recreation?
11:08AM
I understand there is no oversight by our city council.
You people have it all wrong. Unless things have drastically changed throughout the years Peru parents and kids also pay to play, sell candy, host tournaments, volunteer, work the concession stand, etc. etc. And, no body questioned the money going to youth programs as was hinted by the news tribune article. The only question is whether or not that money is a donation or money earmarked for baseball years ago when the cell tower was arbitrarily installed. If we insist on calling this money a donation then what do we call the $4000 we give monthly to PVAS, or the money we give to IVAR or the Hygenic Institute? I was at the meeting and nobody questioned or wanted to deny the "YOUTH PROGRAMS" and money for them.
Of course not, who wants to be the bad guy! But this mayor and the new aldermen, all ran on a platform of reforming city government, cutting costs and being fiscally responsible. The aldermen who were in place have that responsibility as well. They just served the past administration and have to change. Peru does not have the money - nor will it have any unless changes are made and problems worked out. NOW IS THE TIME!
Correction on the Recreation Budget:
50,000 comes from property taxes, 25,000 transferred from general fund for the current budget this year for a total of 75,000. 20,210 specifically for fireworks. I will post the specifics tomorrow.
I remember sitting in the meeting years ago when a decision was made to place a tower in Washington Park. A person in the audience asked how much revenue could be generated from 1 license. I believe the response was more than $40,000. The next statement said that there could be up to 10 licenses from one tower. Unfortunately, I did not write down the information and I would be amazed if our records from that meeting were accurate. I do remember one thing for sure. When the amount of licenses fees were calculated, Baker said, "I should put the tower in my back yard then" as he chuckled. Maybe someone should research how much fees are generated annual for use of that tower and compare it to minutes from years ago. I remember that the surrounding citizens were very upset of the placement of that tower and the council assured us that funds would be designated to the recreation department "to make us happy." Does anybody have a different recollection?
ANON 1:18 According to our 2012 budget that tower is designated to bring in $70,000. I too remember that the income from those towers was to fund boy's baseball. Isn't it ironic that today we say we're going to donate $7000 to our local baseball program and do, who knows what, with the remaining $63,000.
Anon 1:18 Do you remember the year that discussion took place?
I was not at the meeting that night but followed it in the News Tribune. And I have to admit that I was appalled at the decision made to put that monstrosity in the middle of a city park. And now as I drive by that park I can see that the tower was only the tip of the iceberg, because now there are buildings and fences around the tower. The city saw it as easy money, but did not take into consideration what the citizens of Peru wanted. The citizens had some common sense the council did not.
If the idea of placing a tower in Washington Park was so unpopular why wasn't a referendum initiated or was it a popular idea at the time of its conception?
Fourth of July was a event which everyone looked forward to with great anticipation at Washington Park. Youth baseball going on all day along with children activities and than the band. The fireworks were beautiful and most people walked to the park to see the fireworks. What a family event!
As a youth growing up in Peru I remember Washington Park as a great recreational area, major league barnstorming teams and Negro League teams with a huge canvas fence being put up for games. The Twilight League with its great local talent and huge crowds. With the location of the tower and buildings the park can no longer be utilized for baseball of this caliber.
Another activity conducted in the park was professional wrestling with the big name stars - Hans Schmidt, Lou Thez, Georgeous George etc.
I also remember the ice skating rink in the park for winter activity and the always packed swimming pool in the summer. Now neither of these exist. If Peru cannot afford a swimming pool for a number of years I think it would be a great idea to take some of the $300,000.00+ which came from the pillow tax and is going to be put into streets and curbs and instead put $100,000.00 of it into a splash pad for the children to enjoy.
Before my time I understand auto racing was another activity held in the park.
When did the governing body become the ruling arm rather than the representative of the Citizens of Peru. Is misuse of Home Rule which was approved in 1970 partially to blame. Something is very wrong when no one can pinpoint or be specific about how much this tower actually does produce financially and where the monies are supposed to go.
What happened and whats going on?
I am trying to track down the date of the meeting where the tower was approved. I remember that Witzcak was an alderman and he was very much against the tower according to phone calls made to him and his conversations with the citizens. Once he got to the meeting, all of a sudden he voted for the tower out of the blue. Audience was shocked. We always thought that the votes were "pre determined" after that. Comments were very vocal after the vote was taken and we began to laugh because we knew the rec dept would never see any of the large amounts of money that were to be generated from these towers. I wonder if anybody ever counted the number of leased antennae sitting on that tower and double checked to make sure the city is the recipient of those lease agreements. I remember that the "free income" from the rentals on the tower space was going to be huge! Hopefully, we can find the minutes from that meeting.
Peru appears to be the model child for the saying "You don't need a gun to hold up the bank".
Please keep on it ANON 8:09 and see if you can find any more facts regarding this issue.
Post a Comment