Q & A with Mayor

This page allows me to answer questions that I receive (from community members) to the entire community. It also allows the public to get such answers from the “horse’s mouth”–something that adds to transparency.

Please send me questions you have by email at pschwart@ci.galesburg.il.us

Thank you for visiting this page. Please share it with others so we can all be better informed!

[These questions are arranged chronologically from most recent to oldest.]

Date: 8/5/23
Question: Is Churchill a safe building for human use?
Peter’s Answer: Community Members, How frustrating it is to continue to hear falsehoods and misinformation still being communicated about the Community Center project and the Churchill building in particular. Please read the City’s Executive Report (from Dec. 2022) on the subject. https://cms7files.revize.com/…/Community%20Center…

Please look at Page Number 7 of this document. You will see that the estimate to refurbish Churchill was pegged at $7.35 million with $600,000 of this being used to demolish the southern portion of the building; obviously, if the full building is repurposed, the $600,00 can be used productively, not destructively.

Page 7 of the report also contains very important information about the health conditions of the building. I am an environmental scientist and very aware of the potential hazards of old buildings. I directed the City to do several thorough studies last summer to ensure the health safety of the building. This is what page 7 says, verbatim: “A memo was also subsequently provided by staff summarizing the environmental conditions in the building. The report indicates that there does not appear to be issues [of] radon gas, and there is no presence of toxic black mold, or vermin/insects. The report elaborates that there is some mold in the building but does not appear to be a major issue. Asbestos was identified in the building based on testing from 2017 and $60,000 has been included in the budget for the needed hazard abatement. Lead paint testing has not been conducted, but if lead paint is found, an abatement plan will be developed by the architect for the project.” The full memo (36 pages) can be found by clicking Footnote 19 on Page 8. It was issued by Wayne Carl (then Public Works Director) on Dec. 12, 2022 (so it is about as up-to-date as one could expect).

I hope everyone reads this very comprehensive report and calls out misinformation when they see it.(I answered this on my Mayor’s Facebook page: LINK.) 

Date: 7/31/23
Question: Do you think that the Future Community Center build (or renovation) should be capped at $2.5 million? (This question was prompted by a discussion at the 7/31/23 Work Session and the conversation among the Councilors that ensued after public comment.)
Peter’s Answer: No, for the reasons below. One, and most importantly, the Task Force hasn’t met yet. Limiting them in this way even before they begin discussions and extensive research is unnecessary and counterproductive to their mission.

Two, the amount is arbitrary. Is it based on “need”? No–no quantitative needs assessment has been done. Is it based on “resources available”? Again, no. The City bonded $5.3 million early this year for the project and it has at least another $1 million available for such an investment. Very importantly, “resources available” should include external funds (from state or federal agencies or private benefactors)–consider that the $20 M new library obtained nearly all of its capital from these types of funding streams. It seems that those City Councilors that created this cap don’t have any expectations that if a strong plan was put together and the community was fully behind it, that outside sources would be available; importantly, the “cap” was determined by a majority of the Council without input from the Mayor or all City Councilors. Didn’t we just get 50% of the HT Custer Park renovation and 50% of the Lancaster Park renovations from state grant funds (not to mention the $2+ M Lake Storey Loop Project whose funding came mostly from non-City sources)?

Is the cap based on what the residents want to spend on it? Well, the City did have a scientific survey done on this question in Summer 2022. The results?  The majority (54%) of those that responded to this question said they were supportive for “up to $5 million” or more to be spent on the initiative while 46% supported “up to $2 million.” So even this information, taken directly from the community, isn’t consistent with the “cap”. (However, the survey findings in this specific area should be taken with a “grain of salt” as only 33% of respondents to the survey were following the City’s efforts on the Community Center “closely” or “very closely” and, as most residents of Galesburg do not work with budgets on the order of millions of dollars either.)

So, in closing, the “cap” is arbitrary, unnecessarily “limiting”, and, additionally, wasn’t even decided upon with full Council/Mayor (or resident) knowledge or input. I don’t know what the Community Center will cost but I have hope that the Task Force can do a thorough analysis of need, options (for funding and programming) and costs (construction and operations) and, with all of this information at hand, can provide the Council (and the community) valuable information from which to make an educated and informed recommendation.

Date: 5/4/23
Question: Do you still teach at Knox College?
Peter’s Answer: Yes, I am a “full” professor in Environmental Studies, a department I helped found in 2000. Upon my mayoral election in 2021, I made my professorial commitment a 5/6 position, in order to adjust the new responsibilities that came with shifting from a Councilor to a Mayor; this shift reduced my overall income by about 6%. I have maintained a 5/6 contract with Knox College in each of my first two years as Galesburg’s Mayor.

Date: 4/23/23 & 4/24/23 (additional answer provided on 4/17/23)
Question: Please provide more details about the purchase of Rescue Mission: Which buildings are being considered? Are they safe? Does the City’s efforts in the “unhoused” arena conflict/compete with other local agencies doing this work?
Peter’s Answer: The purchase is for both buildings, the building currently used for housing the unhoused and the newer building, which is used for the sale of merchandise. (The sale also includes the adjoining land.) The City intends to clear both buildings for a few months and eliminate any hazards that might exist. The City has a goal of eliminating homelessness by 2027 (in its Strategic Goals, formally agreed to in Feb. 2022). For the past two years the City has partnered with local agencies to operate a warming shelter. This partnership has been very successful in housing the unhoused–during the coldest months–and providing clients assisting in finding employment, health care, and permanent housing. (A report of 2022-23 effort will be issued early in May.) However, the location of these warming shelters are not suitable for a longer term program. Discussions with local agencies have alerted us to the potentiality of continuing this relationship and accessing external funds for this work, something very common in the arena of the unhoused. Ownership of two buildings that might serve in this effort gives the City and cooperating agencies a “leg up” in moving forward with such funding efforts.

Over the past two years, the City’s ability to assist local agencies in their effort to help the unhoused without negatively impacting other efforts shows that the City is not interfering but enhancing the care of its most vulnerable population. The willingness of the Rescue Mission to sell their property to the City is perhaps the best evidence of this harmonious relationship.
More Qs: Why have economic development funds been targeted for the purchase? What improvements are needed and what are expected costs? Which fund will pay for those costs? Which agencies specifically do you anticipate will partner with the city and at what level? What do you anticipate the annual budget would be to provide housing and food?
Peter’s A: It is routine for ED funds to be used to buy property. The City doesn’t intend to improve the “old” building with City money. It has reason to believe there is substantial HUD money for affordable apartment development.  (We will be doing a housing study commencing in the next few months.) There is also the possibility of having mental health care, job training, etc., at one of the sites. The new building would need some relatively minor improvements in order to be a “warming shelter”–some sprinklers & showers added to a bathroom. We believe these funds can be obtained through outside sources as well. The KCHA and the Salvation Army are the two agencies so far involved but others have been at previous conversations and will be drawn in once the purchase is made. We have allotted $75,000 toward this effort the past two years and anticipate drawing that number down as external grants are obtained. We don’t fund food. Most has been donated.
More Qs: Related to the homeless population: How many are there? Of those, how many go to the Rescue Mission? Where are the homeless not currently housed at the Rescue Mission today? What’s the anticipated average number of nights stay at a city-owned facility? 
Peter’s A: There are different measures for “homeless”, some agencies include “couch surfers” while others rely on the “PIT count” (which is done once a year on a cold winter day). The numbers range from 50-500 depending on which measure one uses. The Rescue Mission currently houses about 20-30 people but this number fluctuates. The Rescue Mission has restrictions that prevent certain people from staying at their facility. They also have banned people who have not followed their rules. They also have rules that some unhoused do not want to live by. The City’s “warming shelter” is considered a “low barrier” facility with modest accommodations. The numbers at the Moon Towers facility this winter were generally 8-15 individuals. We anticipate similar numbers at a future site.

Date: 4/19/23
Question: What is going to go in the Broadview lot once it is removed?
Peter’s Answer: We will be exploring many options. The most likely is a nice downtown hotel, something that will enhance the ability for visitors to come to Galesburg by train and “hang out” in the downtown area, enjoying all of its wonderful venues.

Date: 4/18/23
Question: Why is the City offering a position for Director of Public Works/Assistant City Manager?
Peter’s Answer: Our Director of Public Works retired in March 2023 and we have to fill this important position. We decided to add the potential title of “Assistant City Manager” as this might attract more candidates for this position. Some qualified candidates for a Director of Public Works may have a desire to be a City Manager someday. Thus, an added title of “Assistant City Manager” would be attractive to that person. We want to hire someone who has excellent qualifications and a proven track record. Galesburg may appear “small” in size to some but it has a very extensive network of public work subdepartments and a large number of employees, particularly because we operate our own water department.

Date: 4/17/23
Question: What is the City desiring to purchase the property at 435 E. 3rd Street?
Peter’s Answer: see article on WGIL: LINK