> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.thestreatorstandard.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# Becks Already Bought In — So Why Are We Paying Them to Build?
- URL: https://www.thestreatorstandard.com/f/becks-already-bought-in-so-why-are-we-paying-them-to-build/
- Published: 2025-06-16T20:16:04.000Z
- Updated: 2026-10-19T13:59:03.000Z
- Author: The Streator Standard
- Tags: Opinion

*Public Hearing July 2nd 6 pm - Your Voice Matters*

![](https://storage.ghost.io/c/e9/ce/e9cef966-7d64-4cad-8a00-a2753d6b59d3/content/images/2026/10/img-035.png)

Let’s be clear from the start: **this is not a debate about whether it’s smart to tear down a historic church to make room for a gas station.** That’s a separate conversation — and one this community deserves to have — but it’s not what’s on the table right now.

Right now, we’re being asked whether the City of Streator should hand over decades of future tax revenue to **Beck Oil**, a company that already owns the land, already has plans, and is simply **waiting to see how much public money they can get before breaking ground.**

### What Beck Oil Wants

Beck Oil is requesting a **Tax Increment Financing (TIF) agreement** — a deal that would let them collect the *increase* in property tax revenue generated by their project for **up to 23 years**.

And here’s the problem:  
That money — which would normally go to help fund essential services — **won’t go to our roads. It won’t support our police and fire departments. And it absolutely won’t go to Streator’s public schools**, which are already stretched thin and in need of every dollar they can get.

Instead, it would go back to Beck Oil — to reimburse them for costs they were well aware of when they purchased the property.

### Are They Going to Build Without the TIF?

We don’t know for certain. But here’s what we *do* know:

- Beck Oil already bought the property — including the former St. Mary’s Church and two other parcels.
- They haven’t begun demolition — not because they can’t, but because they’re waiting to see if the city will offer them a taxpayer-funded incentive package.
- There’s been no indication they’re abandoning the project — only that they want a better financial deal before moving forward.

So the question becomes:

> **Why should taxpayers subsidize a project that’s already in motion?**

### Even If You Support the Gas Station — Ask This:

Plenty of folks might think replacing the church with a modern gas station is a good move. Fine. That debate can be had.

But even if you’re in favor of the project, ask yourself:

> **Does it make sense to hand over 23 years of new tax revenue to a company that already owns the land and is likely to build anyway?**

Because the alternative is letting that new property value support:

- Our first responders
- Our crumbling streets
- Our underfunded schools
- And the people who live here year-round — not just pass through

### A Strong Towns Warning

Charles Marohn, founder of the Strong Towns movement, has written about this exact kind of scenario:

> *“If the private market is already willing to build, a public subsidy isn’t an incentive — it’s a gift.”*

> And in this case, it’s a gift that costs the city **23 years of potential revenue.**

### Show Up – Speak Out – July 2nd at 6:00 p.m.

The **public hearing is set for Wednesday, July 2nd at 6:00 p.m. at City Hall.**

Whether you support or oppose the Beck Oil project, this hearing isn’t about whether there will be a gas station. It’s about **who should pay for it** — the private company that bought the land, or the public that’s being asked to give up a generation’s worth of funding.

Because this isn’t just about one project.

**It’s about the future of Streator — and who we’re building it for.**