IHPC Delays Digital Billboard Decision

I just posted this entry on the IBJ's Indiana Forefront.  I would only add - many thanks to Councillors Joe Simpson and Zach Adamson for supporting the broader community interest by asking that the digital billboard variance be delayed until after the sign regulations are reviewed in a vigorous, transparent, and public process. ---

Last night, as reported by Hayleigh Colombo in the IBJ, the Indianapolis Historic Preservation Commission continued to October 7, both the building design and the digital billboard variance proposed for Mass. Ave.

I was in the audience, waiting to speak to the digital billboard variance on behalf of the Marion County Alliance of Neighborhood Associations.

From November to June, 59 organizations joined forces to move the digital billboard debate from behind closed doors to the appropriate public venue – the upcoming Department of Metropolitan Development review of the entire sign ordinance.  After all the meetings and all the debate, the Council agreed.

The proposed ‘digital canvas’ envisioned for the building that would replace the Mass Ave fire station needs a variance expressly because it would be a digital billboard.  They propose posting ‘sponsors’ information either on 20% of the space or 20% of the time.  Motion and sound would be allowed.

A continuance was proposed by two Councillors – Joe Simpson, whose current district includes the site, and Zach Adamson, who is running for reelection to the new district boundaries that will include this site – via letter to the IHPC.  Initially the Commission was moving toward a continuance until after the Council passes the new sign ordinance, presumably some time next year.  Then the developer and his representative asked for the October 7 date so they could discuss it with the two Councillors.

Continuing this variance request is wise for a couple of reasons.  The broad community deserves its hard fought and hard won vigorous public process that would decide if digital billboards are right for Indianapolis.  If lifting the ban was found in the community’s best interest, then issues such as how to measure and regulate light levels, size, motion, sound, appropriate locations, interactivity with the driving public, and other safety issues would be discussed and appropriate parameters would be set.

If the Mass. Ave. digital billboard variance comes first, it could create a precedent and set a standard that became the tail that wagged the dog.  That, undoubtedly, was why John Kisiel, Vice President of Clear Channel, was in the audience for 5 hours last night.  Kisiel has stated that he was assigned to Indianapolis by Clear Channel to open Indy up to digital billboards.

Let’s face it, the billboard industry is a litigious group.  They have shown they will take cities to court if they can find any chink in the rules or application of the rules.  Indy’s billboard ban has successfully weathered their attempts to gain variances and prevailed in the subsequent lawsuits.  Granting this digital billboard variance would demonstrate uneven application of the ban.  Given these are the waning months for the Ballard administration, who know whether the variance would be challenged.  As they did in other cities, the biggest mess being in Los Angeles, this would give the billboard industry just the opening they need to seek unfettered and unregulated access to Indy’s streetscapes.

Some will say this is only relevant to the Mass. Ave. neighborhoods.  But, given the dynamics at play in the digital billboard arena, the digital billboard variance is about all of our neighborhoods.

IBJ Editorial - City Should Release Details About Broad Ripple Parking Garage

Thanks to a tip from Zach Adamson, Candidate for City-County Council, I was alerted that the IBJ has an editorial in today's edition.; "City should share more details on garage deal".  The editorial is locked on their website, but the essence is this:

Parking is a problem in Broad Ripple and the City's investment in and finding a developer for a garage there is appropriate.  But, the financials of the deal should be revealed by the City.

This follows last week's IBJ article by Cory Schouten, who, like I, was denied access to the construction costs and operating expense analysis submitted with the winning bid by the Keystone Group. 

Good.  We all need to continually push for the public's right to know.  Sometimes things are hidden by officials because revealing them would bring embarrassment or worse to an office holder.  Other times things are hidden simply for convenience.  Sadly for our democracy, when officials withhold information, they forget that they are elected to serve the public.  For the public to ask for proof that they are doing that job well, is appropriate.

IBJ On Topic Yet Again

The IBJ is on top of it, yet again.  In today's issue, Cory Schouten follows up on the issue of the Broad Ripple Parking Garage.  (Unfortunately for those without a subscription, the article is locked)

To summarize the article without trespassing too far into IBJ copyright territory...  the summary provided as a teaser to all says:

"City mum on economics of $15M Broad Ripple garage project"
Both city officials and the developer of a proposed 350-space parking garage in Broad Ripple have refused to share financial projections for its construction and operation, describing the documents -- as a "trade secret" exempt from public disclosure."

The article covers more than the public assess issue.  Schouten goes through the high points of each competing bid and offers quotes from many of the players.

Schouten has a fantastic quote from Ersal Ozdemir, CEO of Keystone Construction, a partner in the winning project.

“I think it’s a heck of a deal,” Ozdemir said. “We’re spending a lot of time and money developing this project. Do we want to make money? Sure. We won’t make the same profit as a private deal, but there are intangible values for us here.”

All I can say about that is -- if the garage was doable as a private deal, and they would make more money doing it that way, why are the taxpayers involved at all?

Of particular interest, to my eye, was the side bar that provides an IBJ analysis of the cost breakdown of the proposed garage project and how it might add up to $15 million.  This analysis includes $4.5 million for acquisition of the property.  The property will be leased, however, not purchased.  The cost of the land, therefore, becomes an operating expense, and not a cost of construction.

Schouten also touches on the 2007 study of parking needs in Broad Ripple, done by Walker Parking Consultants, another partner in the winning proposal.  This study determined that the current site was inadequate and also estimated the cost of construction, without land purchase or building demolition, at about half the price of the current proposal.

Schouten brings up Ozdemir's campaign contributions to Greg Ballard and his hiring of former Ballard Chief of Staff, Paul Okeson.

Schouten goes into the fact the the winning bid actually proposed two versions of this project FOR LESS MONEY.  Yes folks, thanks to the keen fiscal responsibility and business acumen of the Ballard Administration, the price tag went UP during negotiations between the City and the bidders with the winning proposal.   Wow ! Adequate words escape me.

Back to the public access issue.  As I noted in a previous blog entry (see "Are Taxpayer Dollars Being Flagrantly Misused?"), I was denied the financial analysis of the winning proposal, with the City stating it was information to be protected as a 'trade secret'.  I have filed a formal complaint with the State's Public Access Counselor.  I will have to amend that complaint to add the fact, ferreted out by Schouten, that other bids, losing bids mind you, had the financial analysis included in the materials provided to the public by the City.  So, how can they claim that only the winning bidder's numbers need protection.  In addition, Schouten reports that the City will release the winning bidders' financial analysis, once the deal has closed.  

So, let me summarize the Administration's position on public access to the key portion of the winning proposal.  Nope, you can't have it because it is a 'trade secret' and State law protects disclosure of 'trade secrets'.  Yes, you can have the financial analysis from non-winning bids.  No 'trade secrets' there.  Once we have the deal finalized and the terms become contractual obligations of the City and the City's taxpayers, then the financial analysis of the winning bid will be provided to the public.  At that point it will no longer be a 'trade secret'.  Anyone know what kind of logic is being applied here? 

ICVA - Seems More Money Wasn't The Answer After All

You all remember the logic dominoes that were set falling about two years ago -- the convention center has been enlarged and we added all these additional hotel rooms to the downtown inventory (all with the ever generous support of the taxpayers) so now we have to spend even more money on the Indianapolis Convention and Visitors Association (ICVA) to market that new space and new rooms.

Here's a reminder of the vast increases in taxpayer and private dollars that have gone into the ICVA in the last year and a half.  This is part of a report from the January 28, 2010, IBJ article by Scott Olson entitled "ICVA receives $5.4 million gift":

The Indianapolis Convention & Visitors Association announced at its annual meeting Thursday afternoon that it has received a $5.4 million gift-its largest from a private donor.


The contribution, which will be used to promote the city's tourism and convention business, came from the Dean and Barbara White Family Foundation Inc.

Dean White is the founder of Merrillville-based White Lodging, the developer of the $425 million, 1,600-room Marriott Place hotel complex downtown. The flagship 1,000-room JW Marriott is expected to open in February 2011.

"It's fantastic news," ICVA Executive Director Don Welsh said. "With the funding that we have, and the great product that we have, basically any excuses not to be successful are gone."

The grant from the Whites is to be spent over the next three years and totals nearly half the ICVA's $13 million annual budget. In a typical year, the association receives about $700,000 in private contributions.

The Indianapolis Capital Improvement Board funds 70 percent of its budget. The CIB, which operates the city's Indiana Convention Center and professional sports venues, increased the ICVA's funding from $6.9 million to $9 million in 2010.

Thursday's announcement follows a pledge Mayor Greg Ballard made earlier this month to give $1.5 million to the ICVA from funds returned to the city by companies that failed to meet job-creation promises tied to tax breaks.

Those funds also will enable the ICVA to better market the city both as a tourism and convention destination. The recent windfall is welcomed by John Livengood, president of the Indiana Restaurant & Hospitality Association.

"That has been our priority, to make sure [the ICVA has] the money to market Indianapolis," he said.

The ICVA has argued that it needs additional money to attract more conventions to the city. A $275 million expansion of the convention center, set to be finished early next year, adds 420,000 square feet to the mix. Including Lucas Oil Stadium, the ICVA will have 1.2 million square feet of convention space, 65 percent more than it had in the convention center and RCA Dome.

I love that quote from now Chicago resident, Don Welsh - "With the funding that we have, and the great product that we have, basically any excuses not to be successful are gone."


Fast forward to today.  This item in the current IBJ again by Scott Olson, entitled "ICVA expects to fall short of 2011 room-night goal":

The Indianapolis Convention & Visitors Association likely will fall far short of its aggressive goal of booking 725,000 hotel room nights this year for future conventions.


New ICVA CEO Leonard Hoops cautioned members of Marion County's Capital Improvement Board on Monday that, through April, the association is pacing at about 75 percent of its target.

“My goal is to get us back to where we were last year,” he said. “So I might as well fire that warning shot right now.”

ICVA sales staff met their goal in 2010 by booking 650,000 room nights for future conventions, but in doing so tapped most of their prospects. As of the end of April, ICVA had booked about 165,000 room nights.

“To get to that 650,000, the team worked very hard to close that out,” Hoops said, “and we started the year with nothing in the tank.”

You just cannot throw enough money at these guys.  And what's even better, there is nobody holding them accountable.

Indianapolis Business Journal Hits a Grand Slam

If you enjoy thoughtful and thought-provoking discussions on important topics, and you do not ordinarily get the Indianapolis Business Journal, I would suggest you run to your local newspaper retailer and get yourself a copy of the latest issue - today.

The IBJ didn't just hit a home run, they hit a grand slam. With 18 separate editorials on government, education, economic development, and more, the IBJ has elevated the discourse. If only we could discuss the facts and philosophies all the time, without devolving into partisan sniping, so much more could be accomplished in our City, State, and Country.

If you have time to read only one, I would suggest Aaron Renn's piece, "Indianapolis must reinvent itself -- again". (link will only work if you have a subscription to the IBJ)