City Loses No Time Asking for Bids On Electric Fleet

Today's paper reports that just yesterday, Mayor Ballard and Council President Lewis signed an agreement over the new electric car fleet.  The 212 electric cars already delivered by Vision Fleet would continue to be subject to maintenance through Vision Fleet, but the remaining 213 would be put out for public bid.

Yesterday afternoon, the Purchasing Division put out RFP14-DPW-598

Four (4) Year Term Contract to provide an Electric Vehicle Program to the Consolidated City of Indianapolis - Marion County, through the Indianapolis Department of Public Works, Fleet Services Division

They wasted no time.

I have to ask, though, where is the public discussion on how many electric cars we should have, what attributes those cars should have and to whom they should be assigned?

Most certainly, the $45,000 lifetime cost per car was outrageous, and I am quite glad that the Council took a hard stance against the deal, if for that reason only.   Equally outrageous was the way the Mayor's office yet again circumvented the proper procedures - whether simply to avoid scrutiny by the Council and the public or to assure the award went to the favored company, or both.  Both of these have been stopped in their tracks, which is half a loaf.

Council discussions over filing the lawsuit against the Mayor have divulged other issues including problems with charging the cars overnight in the homes of those assigned the cars and lack of truck space for heavy arms that police officers want to carry.  The last one I still don't get - the cars were supposed to be assigned to administrators who don't really need a peppy car to get them to the scene.  So, whether more than this category of officers got the electric cars or these administrators just want to carry assault rifles, I don't know.

For me, it is not just about the Mayor's office circumventing proper procedures, and probably the law, its about them doing it so often that Vision Fleet has simply become a poster child for "The Ballard Way".  It is shocking to see how Ballard's time in office has devolved from him being a champion of transparency to being a manager of insider deals kept from the light of day, surreptitiously funded with moneys not appropriated for the purpose, and protected by a 'just say no' attitude to releasing public documents.

In any case, if you are interested in leasing the City 213 electric cars and taking care of them for 4 years, get your proposal in by October 2.

Board of Public Works Approves $6 M Expenditure for Blue Indy Infrastructure

Blogger Gary Welsh over at Advance Indiana has been following the Blue Indy contract with the Ballard Administration (see here and here for the latest).

He reports that on Tuesday the Public Works Board voted on putting $6 M in a Region's Bank escrow account for Blue Indy to draw down - refusing to take public comments when he requested time to speak.

I have embedded the WCTY broadcast of the Blue-Indy escrow account section of the meeting below.

From what was said at the Board meeting, the Ballard administration is pooling the $6 M from three funds - the parking meter fund, the city's cumulative capital projects fund, and the rebuild indy fund.  Whether this allotment of funding sources is a last-minute maneuver on the administration's part, or was buried in the budget from the get-go is not clear.  From testimony by Bart Brown, the Council's CFO, it is clear that the Council did not know of this project and to its thinking, did not appropriate funds for it.

What also is left up in the air, is whether the administration cancelled or postponed other projects in order to have enough money to pay the $6 M tab - which is evidently due by Sept 1 according to testimony on the details of the contract in response to a Board member's question.




The 2016 budget for the Department of Public Works is up at tonight's Council Public Works committee meeting - beginning at 5:30 pm in room 260 of the City-County Building.

Ballard Uses Neighborhood Services to Shill For Blue Indy

The Ballard Administration is pushing out ads for Blue Indy's electric car rental for profit business.

Like many of you, I receive messages from my Mayor's Neighborhood Liaison that sometimes tell you about trash pickup schedules, neighborhood clean ups, public information meetings and other items of interest to residents and neighborhoods.

Yesterday I got one from "Mayor's Neighborhood Services" and it contained an ad for Blue Indy.  When I posted on Facebook about it, Ted Dobracki mentioned it was the second one.  So I scrolled back through my not-yet-deleted emails, and sure enough, I had received an ad for Blue Indy in an email blast from my MNL on Tuesday as well.

This isn't right, guys.  These email communications are supposed to be for government business, not ads for companies.

The Tuesday ad was brief and followed by a note on the rise in stormwater drainage fee - which is where my attention was drawn.

Yesterday's ad was more glossy and came after information about a grant  opportunity for neighborhoods :

The blast list must be enormous.  Not to mention the further reach effected when public officials and neighborhood folks forward Neighborhood Services' emails to others.  It has actual monetary value to advertisers.

This misuse of taxpayer funded communications needs to stop.  Hopefully this will be the last ad I get from the City government.

State Legislature Meddling in Indy Yet Again

Last night began the City-County Council committee work to review, amend, and adopt the 2016 budget.

There was one particular item that got a bit of discussion that was quite interesting.

You will recall that the last few budget sessions have been punctuated with an ongoing fight over whether or not to eliminate the local homestead credit on property tax bills of homeowners.  The Democrat controlled Council has refused to eliminate it all at once and even refused to phase it out.

Well, it seems the Ballard Administration has once again turned to the State Legislature to change the rules so that Ballard can get his way.

Currently, income tax revenue (COIT) is used to fund the local homestead credit.  According to Council Counsel Fred Biesecker, with HEA 1485, COIT can no longer be used in this manner after January 1, 2017.  If the Council wants to continue the local homestead credit (LHC) in 2017, it will be forced to RAISE a NEW TAX.

The LHC costs $10 M, but only $2 M actually makes any difference in homeowners' property taxes, since so many of us are being protected by the tax caps.  But, the remaining $8 M doesn't just evaporate, it lessens the tax cap/circuit breaker impact on the many school districts in Marion County, IndyGo, Health & Hospitals, and the Library system.

By upending the current funding source, the Republican controlled State Legislature is reaching into what will likely be a Democrat controlled Mayor's office and forcing it to RAISE TAXES to maintain the status quo.  Of course, if a Republican were to somehow win the election, the Legislature left itself a year to 'correct' course so that no such dilemma would have to be faced by a Republican.

The upshot is not just having to raise a new tax - it also includes having to wade through the weeds and convince the public that it is somehow wise to raise taxes by $10 M so that members of the public can benefit by $2 M.

This is clever and cursed at the same time.

Whenever a local problem is brought to the State Legislature by a Republican, the solution is to do whatever makes the Republican's political life easier.

Whenever a local problem is brought to the State Legislature by a Democrat, the solution is to give them the authority to raise taxes.

And now we see that when a Republican is likely to be succeeded by a Democrat, the solution is to delay the authority to raise taxes until the Democrat is seated and crafting his first budget.

Can We Just Stop With The Lying?

So the income taxes are going up.

Front and center in the IndyStar review of last night's vote of the Council, is this quote from Councillor Aaron Freeman:

"We have fewer officers than we should because we have been taking in less property taxes in this bad economy the last several years."

He makes it sound like the Council and the Mayor have had less money to work with and that is why they didn't support funding recruit classes for IMPD these past few years, as the Council Democrats had continued to try to do.

Freeman either knows he is lying to the public, or he is just passing along the meme offered by Ryan Vaughn.

Yes the City-County takes in less property tax revenues than they did before the tax caps came into effect.  They also have fewer bills to pay.  This actually left the City-County with about $50 Million MORE to spend than they had before the tax caps.  Add to that the increased revenue from Peterson's Public Safety Tax, and well - they had plenty of money to do any hiring they wanted.

But, they did not.

Even without the tax increase, the 2015 budget does fund a recruit class of 50.  With the tax increase, they are looking at 40 additional.

So, its not true that "we have fewer officers than we should because we have been taking in less property taxes in this bad economy the last several years".  We've had the money, just not the interest.

Suppose for a second that Freeman's statement were true - why would we need to raise income taxes when both property tax revenues and income tax revenues are climbing now that the economy has improved?

And if the Ballard Administration truly sees a need to increase the number of officers, why is Jason Dudich saying that only $4 M will go to IMPD's budget in 2015?  The tax increase is expected to bring in $29 M.  $2 M goes to the excluded cities and towns, by State mandated division of Public Safety Tax revenue.  Likewise, $10 M will go to County functions - but no discussion as to how that money will be spent has been done in public.  That leaves $13 M that Dudich wants to put into IMPD fund balance.  This would be overruled in a heartbeat if Vaughn wanted the money to be spent by IMPD.

That's right folks - you get to pay more in taxes so that the biggest chunk can fatten the year end balance.  And a whopping fourteen cents of every additional dollar will go to hiring more police officers.  Fourteen cents.

One cannot ignore the fact that this tax hike comes just before the proposed Criminal Justice Center gets crammed through.  Could be a coincidence.

So, we'll see if this Administration actually moves toward keeping interested in hiring more officers as the years go by, or if they'd rather spend this new money on something else.

Meanwhile, can we just stop all the lying?

Slow Down the Criminal Justice Center Bullet Train

The Ballard Administration no longer pretends that it is transparent.

The behind closed doors decisions being made regarding the proposed criminal justice center is a prime example.

The administration is even blocking press access to the request for proposals it put out.  This comes AFTER the State's Public Access Counselor's opined against the City's position.

IBJ reporter, Kathleen McLaughlin wrote last Saturday in an article about funding the center

Director of Enterprise Development David Rosenberg declined to state the maximum annual fee, which the city already has shared with three pre-qualified bidders. The mayor’s office also refused to release the request for proposals, a type of document typically considered a public record.

Indiana Public Access Counselor Luke Britt said he couldn’t think of an exemption to open-records law that would apply to the RFP. The city still had not cited an exemption as IBJ went to press.

So, behind closed doors, Mayor Ballard's people are happy to share details with bidders, but not with the public who would pay for the deal.

While I'm on paying for the deal, McLaughlin's article extensively quotes past City Controller, Jeff Spaulding, and his skepticism that costs will really be confined to current budget expenditure levels for the services that would move into a justice center.

Former city controller Jeff Spalding said the administration’s unwillingness to walk through the math behind its conclusions makes him skeptical the new facility won’t end up requiring more public dollars.

“I want the criminal justice center to happen,” said Spalding, who left the Ballard administration in April 2013 to become director of fiscal policy and analysis at the Friedman Foundation. “There’s more potential downside if you don’t do it the right way.”

 Ballard is already spending significant amounts of cash that the City can't afford on the proposal.

It was revealed last week, to the shock of most, that a $750,000 no-bid contract had been awarded to the new employer of former campaign manager and special counsel to the Mayor, John Cochran.  Bose Public Affairs Group is in charge of public relations for the justice center by this contract.  John Tuohy, IndyStar reporter who broke the story, quoted Republican City-County Councillor Jeff Miller as saying

Miller said he was not aware of the $750,000 contract Cochran signed.

"That is a big number. Now I know why he's so easy to get a hold of," Miller said. "I knew he was not doing it for free, but I did not know (his firm) was getting that much."

Fellow blogger, Gary Welsh, has written extensively on the justice center and the money being thrown at it over at Advance Indiana.  About the $750,000 contract with Bose, Welsh writes

Does anyone else see the irony in Ballard throwing away $750,000 of our taxpayer dollars on a politically-connected firm which has just hired his likely Democratic opponent next year, Joe Hogsett, and which will in turn invest that money in doing all within its power to ensure that Hogsett defeats Ballard in next year's election?

As I recall, Ballard did the same thing when Melina Kennedy ran against him - awarded her law firm a fat contract on the deal that sold the water and sewer utilities to Citizens Energy.   That may have been one reason she never really had an opinion against it - in public at least.  So, with this one $750,000 contract, Ballard is sweetening his old pal's value to his new employer and potentially tying Hogsett's hands as far as being too vocal and too against a justice center.  Of course, who knows if Kennedy personally liked the Citizens deal and if Hogsett will really like or dislike the justice center proposal.

The latest stunner was broken by Mary Milz of WTHR.  Welsh summarized the nearly $10 Million of of additional no-bid contracts uncovered by Milz this way:

WTHR's Mary Milz has now uncovered millions more spent by Mayor Ballard on no-bid contracts. Those include:

• $1.5 million to Bingham, Greenebaum Doll for legal services, the former law firm of Ballard's likely Democratic opponent in next year's mayoral election, Joe Hogsett;
• $4.7 million to Hellmuth, Obata & Kassabaum, Inc. ("HOK") for project development services; and
• $3 million to KPMG Corporate Finance for financial services

Keep in mind that this boondoggle of a project still requires the approval of the City-County Council. If for some reason the council decides against the project, that $10 million is just flushed down the drain. Imagine how many new cops could have been hired with the money Ballard has blown on these no-bid contracts.

Exactly.  This is serious money that we need for other things right now.  But Ballard and his people are going to push this through if its the last thing they do.  And it very well might be.

The public is on the hook for the excessive contracts already let on this deal.  They are being kept in the dark about any details, made all the worse by the Ballard Administration's violation of the Open Records laws in order to keep secret from the public, what it is happy to share with bidders.

Today's IBJ has another article by McLaughlin.  This one deals with the potential impact moving all of the Prosecutor, Sheriff, and Court offices out of the heart of downtown.  Office vacancy rates still have not recovered from the Great Recession.  McLaughlin writes

At a time some large downtown law firms are cutting back on space, the proposed criminal justice center will gut the downtown office market.

Moving the Marion County prosecutor and public defender to the new center at the former GM Stamping Plant southwest of downtown will alone shift 130,000 square feet.

Add in the 590,000 square feet occupied by jails, traffic court and arrestee processing center and the downtown core is on track to empty a total of 720,000 square feet—roughly equivalent to the entire OneAmerica tower.

and

City officials claim the moves to the new justice center will add only about 1 percentage point to the existing 20-percent downtown vacancy rate. But Jon Owens, an office broker at Cassidy Turley, isn’t buying it. He said the vacancies could account for three times the amount city officials predict.

With a total of 10.5 million square feet of downtown office space, the removal of the prosecutor and public defender offices alone will move the needle 1 percentage point, Owens said.

“It has the potential to take a big chunk of that southeast quadrant, kind of like what the state government center did in the early 1990s,” he said. “It took forever to backfill that space.”

While the proposed justice center is being sold as a complete consolidation of criminal justice services, it is not.  Back in April, McLaughlin reported

Fullbeck [Ballard's senior policy advisor for economic development] said the request for proposals from developers, due out this month, will not include office space for the Marion County prosecutor and public defender. That space will be built under a separate procurement process, which he said will allow the developer to decide whether to build additional leasable space for other users, such as jail-service providers.

The price tag just keeps getting bigger and bigger.

The public deserves details and time for discussion.  The current trajectory is for the bids to be back just as the budget for 2015 is being finalized.  If they follow former practices, they'll put out information around the holiday season when most of the public's attention is elsewhere.

But complete transparency is feasible at this point in time.  There is no excuse to keep from the public what the Ballard administration is willing to tell bidders.  There is no excuse to put $10 M of taxpayer money at risk through no-bid contracts for a justice center that may not happen.

There is no excuse.  Then again, I don't think Mayor Ballard and his Chief of Staff, Ryan Vaughn, care one wit, what you or I or the Council or the press thinks.  They see our money as their money.  They see our City as their City.  They have their goals and they don't care how much of our money it takes to reach them, nor how badly it could go for future taxpayers of Indianapolis.

$3 Million of TIF Money (Taxpayer Money) Going To Enrich IndyStar

Resolution 2014-B-002 goes to the MDC for a vote Wednesday.

This resolution would float $5.5 Million in bonds as taxpayer investment in two projects - the "Pulliam Place" and "Millikan-On-Mass" projects.

The Pulliam Place project will take about $3 M of the money.  The agreement was worked out an unknown number of months ago, and has been wending its way through the MDC system - first being discussed at the Economic Development Committee meeting in early May, and then again by all of the Commissioners at their May 21 pre-meeting.

During this time, the Star failed to inform readers of its many editorials and opinion pieces that the deal was pending, a clear violation of the Code of Ethics as expressed by the Society of Professional Journalists.  Under "Act Independently", the third item on its Code of Ethics webpage, the SPJ says in part:

Journalists should be free of obligation to any interest other than the public's right to know.

Journalists should:

—Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived.
— Remain free of associations and activities that may compromise integrity or damage credibility.
— Refuse gifts, favors, fees, free travel and special treatment, and shun secondary employment, political involvement, public office and service in community organizations if they compromise journalistic integrity.
— Disclose unavoidable conflicts.

The Ballard Administration gift of taxpayer money would be repaid by revenues of the Consolidated Downtown TIF.

And what do you get for your gift?

 Some vaguely described improvements to N. Talbot, E. New York, and E. Vermont Streets, a dog park, and improvements of the existing Star building parking garage.

And how does this benefit you, the taxpayer?

Why the Pulliam Project is anticipated to create 49 new full-time jobs by mid-2017.  There is no mention in the resolution of the average salary of those positions.  And, there is no requirement that this number be reached.  That works out to a taxpayer investment of over $61,000 per job.  Of course the sales price of the Star building will rise concomitantly with the taxpayer gift.  One would also expect the time to sale would shorten with this sweetener, as well.

What also interests me is the last part of the resolution, where it states that the resolution to float the bonds will not be effective unless the Bond Bank "consents to and approves the adoption" of the resolution.  Anyone who follows City government knows that the person who envisions these projects is the same person to negotiates the taxpayer terms of these projects and is the same person who runs the Bond Bank; one Deron Kintner.  Why are they even pretending that there is any independent review of the taxpayer financing of these projects?

The taxpayers who pay attention to such things, are familiar with the extravagant accumulation of TIF funds and equally extravagant expenditure of the same, all while elected officials, including Mayor Ballard, seek tax increases to pay for basic services.  This one is different in that it calls into question the independence and integrity of the Indianapolis Star.

Rebuild Indy 2 - How We Pay for Roads Is Important

What's holding up Rebuild Indy 2?

To hear some tell it, Council Democrats.

Let me disclose right here, I am a Democrat, even though many party leaders would wish it otherwise.  I'm not going to talk party philosophy in this blog entry - rather, simple math.

So, lets back up to the beginning

What's holding up Rebuild Indy 2?

To hear some tell it, Council Democrats.  Hooray !  They are doing exactly the right thing.

RBI 2 was proposed last year, too.  For several months now, Mayor Ballard has been holding public forums pushing for its resurrection this year, although nothing has been introduced at the Council yet.  After hearing the DPW presentation at the March McANA meeting, I asked detailed questions about the proposed funding to pay the $350 million price tag.  None other than DPW Director, Lori Miser, replied that she would get me the information.  More than a month has passed and I have heard nothing but crickets.

So, I am left to believe that the funding plan for RBI 2 this year is the same funding plan proposed for RBI 2 last year.

In a nutshell, of the $350 million, $215 million is ready to roll out the door and $135 million would be raised from a bond issue.  The bond issue would be paid back over 30 years at $9 million per year, for a total repayment of $270 million.  $3.5 million of the nine, would come from increased gas tax revenue from the State.  The remainder would come from existing revenue streams normally used for other things.

First - why doesn't the Mayor propose a $215 million streets and sidewalks program that uses existing money?  Why does it need to be tied up with the $135 million bond issue?

Second - the bond issue is irresponsible any way you look at it.

The bond would be repaid over 30 years but the improvements would last half of that - 20 years if you think patch  on patch is good enough to call 'lasting'.

 

The bond would be repaid with mostly existing money, and not 'new' money.  That decreases the number of pay as you go projects we can do for 30 years.

 

The federal government will 'leverage' our road expenses 1 to 4 -  we pay 20%, the feds pay 80%.  The Mayor wants to 'leverage' $9 million a year for 30 years into $135 million.  If we go with the feds method of leverage, that $9 million a year for 30 years would give us $1,350 million.

 

Why would we pick the pocket of future taxpayers - taking $10 from what they could have to spend, so we can spend $1 today?

I'm glad the Democrats on the Council aren't signing off on RBI 2 - at least as long as the bond issue remains part of the plan.

Follow the Money

A long time ago now, the Marion County Alliance of Neighborhood Associations began following the City's annual budget based on one proposition.  That proposition is that our elected officials can say lots of things, spin lots of yarns, and try to influence public impressions, but they will always put money into the things they feel are priorities regardless of what they say.

Today we sit with news reports of yet more MILLIONS of dollars going to the Pacers and their billionaire owners - voted on by the CIB prior to public disclosure of the actual deal agreement(read Gary Welch's excellent piece on Advance Indiana for more). 

Our elected officials are prepping us for goodly increases in income taxes to provide more cops on the street - while saying violent crime is actually down, its just shooter's aim that has improved.

Our elected officials will be looking to eliminate the local homestead credit - the third time for this push.

Our elected officials will look for a calm moment within which they can place the mass transit referendum on the ballot to raise taxes even more - and you just know that the light rail boondoggle will somehow be included once again.

But, where do we actually stand?  What priorities has Mayor Ballard-Vaughn actually placed on his spending of tax dollars?

Below are two charts comparing the actual budget numbers for some City Departments and Municipal Corporations for 2014.

First is a comparison of several Municipal Corporations as well as the collective revenue from Marion County's TIF districts.  The total budget for all Muni Corps is nearly that of the entire City-County budget ($955 M vs $1.0 B).

You will notice that our elected officials value sports as much as they value the current IndyGo and public Library combined.  The slush fund that TIFs provide, of course, also rivals the basic public service spending that I thought City government was supposed to provide.

The chart below compares spending on different departments included in the City's annual budget.  The Fire numbers include the fire budgets for the three Townships that still operate their own departments in addition to IFD's budget.  The Parks budget number shown below also includes money Ballard has moved into DPW's budget.  DPW's budget number has the Parks money removed.

Elected officials give a little more priority to police and fire than they do sports, but not substantially more.  Parks has been gutted by this Mayor.  In fact, Ballard-Vaughn's proposed RebuildIndy 2 program would spend just about as much on painting bike lanes as he budgeted for all parks in 2014.

When an elected official talks to you about his or her priorities, ask them how they are really spending our money.

Update on SB 188 and Its Applicability to Marion County

Last week I noted some of the exciting changes the Legislature enacted through SB 118.  Well, an alert reader gave me a heads up that the bill did not apply to Marion County insofar as giving the City-County Council the authority to review the annual budget of the Metropolitan Development Commission.   I dug down into the Indian Code and verified that the alert reader was in fact correct and my previous depiction was incorrect.

I will go back and edit the old entry.  Not wanting to leave a false impression with those of you who read that entry already, I am going to recap the highlights and note whether the item applies to all of Indiana's redevelopment commissions, or to all but the MDC and Marion County.

1) Establishment of a sunset date for all old TIFs that do not now have an expiration date:  As noted, the consolidated downtown TIF is the only set of old TIFs in Indiana that will not have to have a sunset date created.  The date sunset date for the rest will be the later of June 30, 2025, or the last scheduled payment of outstanding bonds secured with that TIFs revenue.

2) Marion County will be the only County where the legislative body will not review the budget of that County's redevelopment commission (assuming any particular County has one).

3) In all Counties except Marion, the legislative body will review all property purchases either over 3 years in term or $5 M in cost.  Our City-County Council gets to review the property purchases of the MDC if the repayment of the debt for the purchase takes more than 5 years.

4) The MDC already must have the approval of the City-County Council in order to issue bonds.  While the Code does not specify that the Council can make changes to the term, interest rate, provision for early payment or collateralized interest, the Council certainly can withhold its approval for any of those reasons.  The other Counties get this legislative approval requirement placed on the issuance of bonds by their redevelopment commissions.

5) All County's legislative bodies get to approve, and adjust if it suits them, the annual determination of how much TIF increment will pass through to the other taxing units, once the expected revenue exceeds twice what is required to make the schedule debt payments and cover expected pay as you go projects for the coming year.

6) All Counties' redevelopment commissions, including the MDC, will have to show that any new tax revenues generated by the creation of a new TIF or expansion of an old TIF, would not have been generated except for the creation or expansion of the TIF.  It cannot be a simple claim; there must be supporting evidence.

So, the busy lobbyists for Mayor Ballard/Vaughn kept some of the changes from impacting their coveted slush funds.  Luckily for us, there still are important changes coming to Marion County, as well as the rest of Indiana's Counties.

Onus of TIFs Not Equally Shared

Anyone who has followed this blog for very long knows that TIF districts cause all of our tax rates to rise, account for at least half of the circuit breaker penalties that plague the delivery of basic services (from cops to schools), and are really slush funds so the Mayor can reward his favorite developers, bond salesmen, and lawyers.

Most of us know that the burden of having TIF'd real estate is not distributed evenly.  I was given a heads up last week, that there is information available on the State's Gateway website related to assessed values.  When I saw that information, I found it also had important data about the distribution of taxable property between the various taxing districts in Marion County.

From this information I was able to calculate the amount of real estate assessed value, personal property AV, and more, as a percent of the total for each Township.

Before I pull you too far into the weeds, let's back up a tiny bit and define some terms.

Property taxes are based on the value of the real estate and the value of personal property owned by businesses - from conveyor belts to manufacturing equipment.  Business personal property is in the crosshairs of Governor Pence and the Indiana Manufacturer's Association for eventual elimination.

The data available on the State's Gateway website go into a fair amount of detail.  It also notes how much of the assessed value of a TIF is being 'passed through' in a given year.  This decision is made each year by Mayor Ballard/Vaughn, through the actual vote of the Metropolitan Development Commission, which he controls.  Each TIF district is examined for how much tax money the Mayor wants to keep, and he 'generously' sends some back to the other taxing units.  But, next year he could simply decide to keep all that value in his slush funds.  It is optional.

I looked at the percentage of assessed value of real estate in each Township caught in a TIF - both before and after the pass through.  (for those who don't mind the weeds - these numbers are the net AVs after deductions, like the homestead deduction, are subtracted)  The number before the pass through is the truer value of the amount of real estate actually ensnared by the TIF.  The number after the pass through is the truer value of the tax base for the TIF in a given year.  I also pulled out the percentage of assessed value of the personal property in each Township caught in a TIF district.  Because Beech Grove, the City of Lawrence, and Speedway have all created their own TIFs, I also aggregated the number for each of these entities.  But, please be aware, that the Township data contains these three city/town data.

Township or City/Town	% Net Real Estate AV in TIF after pass through	% Net Real Estate AV in TIF before pass through	% Net Business Personal Property AV in TIF
Center	39.49%	44.58%	26.72%
Decatur	24.86%	24.86%	0.00%
Franklin	0.03%	0.03%	1.03%
Lawrence Tnshp	4.23%	7.71%	0.83%
Perry	0.70%	0.70%	0.00%
Pike	2.35%	8.91%	2.97%
Warren	0.65%	1.40%	4.16%
Washington	0.01%	4.86%	0.00%
Wayne	9.78%	10.02%	8.41%
Total Marion County	9.77%	13.10%	10.65%
Beech Grove	6.72%	6.72%	2.31%
Lawrence - City	14.06%	14.06%	3.49%
Speedway	4.09%	5.81%	37.52%

Center Township has a frightening amount of real estate trapped in TIFs, at 45%.  To add to the tax burden, they also have the lion's share of personal property in TIFs, at 27%.

My community, Decatur Township, is hit the next hardest for real estate value in a TIF, at 25%.  Luckily, for a while anyway, all the taxes from personal property are outside the TIF.

Wayne Township is hit next hardest with a combination of 10% real estate and 8% personal property value in a TIF.

Washington, Lawrence, and Warren Townships are each home to a 'dormant' TIF district, whose entire AV is passed through each year.  As noted above, that can change with the whim of the Mayor.  The City of Lawrence's TIF districts account for all of the active TIFs inside Lawrence Township.

Pike Township has one TIF district - the Dow Elanco TIF.  This was a dormant TIF just a couple of years ago, but was reactivated recently.  The majority of the value is passed through at the discretion of the Mayor.

The Town of Speedway has evidently gone a slightly different route, capturing far more value from business personal property than real estate inside its TIFs.

 Taking the County as a whole, we are up to 13% of our real estate tax base inside a TIF.  This year some of it was passed through to help pay for basic services, reducing the actual TIF tax base to 10%.  But, as I keep saying, next year the Mayor could decide to keep it all for his special friends.

These numbers probably illuminate the reason Decaturites hate TIFs.  It is a puzzlement, though, why Center Township residents haven't stormed City Hall with torches and pitchforks.

Parking Meter "Windfall" - Profit - Or - Loss ?

I read and see reports of the jump in revenues the City collected from ParkIndy last year; amounting to some $3 Million (click here for one).  ParkIndy is the entity that we sold our parking meter assets to three years ago.  I'll just remind readers that the City could have invested $8 M to install the fancy new credit card reading meters itself, and keep ALL the money.  But, instead our Mayor Ballard and his cohorts wanted to sell it out from under us.

The news accounts sound good - the City's portion of parking meter proceeds amounted to $1.5 M in 2011, $2.5 M in 2012, and now $3 M in 2013.  The ParkIndy folks kept $3.5 M, $5.2 M, and $5.7 M, in the respective years.

Then the reports go on to say that in 2010, the last year the City ran the meters, the fees generated only $339,165. 

Nope.  Not correct.  Must be a misprint in the City's press release.

I gathered the actual numbers from the last few years when the City ran the meters from the City's budget ordinances.  Here's how the parking meter revenues and expenses actually worked.

In the 2008 budget, the City expected to take in roughly $2.4 M from the meters, $1.2 M from fines and penalties, and $90,000 from miscellaneous sources.  They budgeted $1.65 M for the operation. 

Net profit from meters: $2.0 M. 

That allowed them to transfer $0.4 M to the City General Fund and $1.75 M to the IMPD General Fund.  2008 city budget (see page 36-37 and 58 of pdf; parking meter fund)



In the 2009 budget, the City expected to take in $4.35 M total, while budgeting $1.69 M for operations. 

Net profit: $2.65 M. 

Again, the City General Fund and the IMPD General Fund were beneficiaries of the profit.  2009 city budget (see pages 20 and 53 of pdf; parking meter fund)



In the 2010 budget, the City expected $4.2 M gross and $1.69 M expenses. 

Net profit: $2.5 M. 

City General Fund and the IMPD General Fund both were recipients of the profit.   2010 city budget (see pages 22 and 56 of pdf; parking meter fund)



For the 2011 budget, the City expected $4.2 M gross and $1.6 M expense. 

Net profit: $2.6 M. 

Since they were also draining the year end balance, the IMPD General Fund got a tidy $3.8 M that year.  2011 city budget (see pages 22 and 59 of pdf; parking meter fund)



The last three years that the City operated the meters they saw a total profit of $7.75 M.  Now, after parking rates have doubled, the City got $7.0 M from ParkIndy over the last three years.

We are not privy to the profit to ParkIndy, but their portion of the revenues for the past three years total $14.4 M.

As was clear when Mayor Ballard sold off our asset, ParkIndy was destined to be the huge winner.  As for us taxpayers, we are still catching up to the profit we saw when it cost us half as much to park.

Council Meets Tonight

The Indianapolis-Marion County City-County Council meets tonight.  The agenda lists a couple of items that caught my eye.

Among those Proposals to be introduced, three stand out.  Prop 162 would appropriate $150,000 to the Election board for legal expenses.  The proposal does not say what prompts the need, just that the necessity has arisen since the budget was finalized last fall.  It will be interesting to see what issue compelled the increased legal fees.

Prop 163 and 164 are tandem proposals aimed at sweeping up the last debris left over from Mayor Vaughn's successful budget blackmail action of last fall; when he vetoed several line items in the Council-adopted 2013 budget.  The former proposal reduces the approved budget by the amount vetoed (which targeted County Offices), while the latter proposal restores the targeted County Office budgets to pre-blackmail status.

Up for a vote is one I had not followed and seems innocuous enough.  Prop 108 would add one more appointment to the domestic violence fatality review team; this person being from a domestic violence response organization.  There currently are 15 members, all of which appear to be appointed by the Council.  According to the agenda, this proposal passed out of committee by a vote of 7-0 and was passed by the full Council 29-0.  And yet, it was vetoed by the Mayor.  Go figure.  This will be interesting, particularly to the point of who votes to override the veto, and who does not.

Prop 105 would establish an Economic Improvement District for the Fountain Square commercial area.  This would allow the collection of an extra tax based on street frontage.  The extra tax was approved by a majority of those affected.  After 5 years, another vote of those folks would decide if the EID would be approved for another 5 year stint.  At the 10 year mark, a new petition would have to be circulated to see if there was continued interest in the area.

Prop 133 is yet another abatement, or two actually, for Eli Lilly.  This proposal would approve a 10 year real property abatement and a 10 year personal property abatement for new construction and equipment at their 1555 Kentucky Avenue and 1223 W. Morris Street facilities.  There was much controversy over whether Lilly met its obligations for job creation and investment a couple of years ago in a previous property tax abatement deal.  This time they are not adding any new jobs and will either transfer 175 current employees or use contract workers.  They are also using vigorous hedging language to estimate the actual investment dollars and expected completion dates.  With all the hedging, one surely must wonder if anything in these new abatement deals are anywhere near legally binding.

Now, Prop 141 is the best proposal of the evening.  This one was initiated by Councillor Vernon Brown, cosponsored by Councillor Christine Scales, and significantly added to by Councillor Zach Adamson.  Brown reintroduced the creation of a fund which could be used for public safety recruit classes.  This was passed by the Council last year and was vetoed by Mayor Vaughn as part of the blackmail vetoes.  Brown makes a valid point in reintroducing this measure - that if public safety is truly the Mayor's top priority, then recruit classes or training of experienced, but newly hired, officers and firefighters is a must.  Adamson added that $6 million from RebuildIndy money should be appropriated to the fund - the same amount that is being dedicated to the dubious cricket park on the eastside.  That addition is poetic.

Mayor Removes Airport Director - Curiously Says Its About Economic Development

Anyone who had any reservations accepting the idea that nothing happens at the airport that the Mayor does not want to happen, need only look at the series of events that lead to the 'resignation' of John Clark as the Indianapolis Airport's Executive Director.

I first saw the news that Clark was out over at Gary Welsh's Advance Indiana blog, then the IBJ's news alert started circulating, and this morning I read more about it in the Indy Star.

Here are the dominoes.

December 16 - Michael Stayton, former President of the Airport Authority Board, announces he will step down, even though he still has two years left on his term.

December 31 - Mayor Ballard appoints Mike Wells to fill out the final two years of Stayton's term.

January 20 - Mike Wells elected President of the Airport Board at his first board meeting of this appointment.

March 10 - news reports suddenly appear of another year, more expensive trips abroad for John Clark and his top deputies.  Curiously, Mike Wells keeps using the word "I" instead of "we" or "the Board" in his statements that changes are coming.  For instance, the IBJ quotes him as saying "I'm making major changes to the travel policy".

March 19 - Wells announces immediate departure of Clark as Director.  Mayor Ballard is quoted as saying

"What I’m mostly concerned about out there is the economic development aspect of the airport,” said Mayor Ballard. "I think that’s been slow, much slower than I would have expected.

"It may have been the recession. It may have been all the economic downturn but I want to have more plans for development out there. That’s what I’m mostly focused on."

Those of you who wanted to blame Clark for announcing the cancellation of collective bargaining at the airport, which was delayed for about a month so candidate Ballard could bask in the light of a recent union endorsement - blame Ballard instead.  (see "Is Indy Airport Playing Politics For Ballard?")

Those of you who wanted to blame Clark for removing art from the airport in order to put up a garish electronic advertising screen, remember the timing.  On August 9, the removal is announced.  On August 24, Mayor Ballard swoops in to save the day.  Then, on November 30, right after the election, the art is removed.  Just in time for the 'holiday travel' season and the Super Bowl - where ads just might fetch a pretty penny.

Yes, anything the airport does leads directly back to Mayor Ballard - its a lesson John Clark has learned and its a lesson the public needs to learn.

Is Anyone Really Surprised? Parking Meter Deal Nets Less Than Expected

Its not like the Ballard Admininstration truely sold the residents of Indianapolis on the desirability of leasing our parking meters to an ACS group for 50 years.  Its more like they forced it through simply because the Republicans held the majority on the Council and they could.

Still, they made representations.  Turns out, those representations didn't hold water, even for the very first year.  Is anyone really surprised?

Jon Murray did an excellent job of running through all the numbers he could get his hands on in this morning's IndyStar ("Indy parking revenues fall short of projections") - the ACS group, ParkIndy, will not open their books so that the public, or even Mayor Ballard himself, can review the numbers for accuracy.

Murray reports:

The first year of Indianapolis' 50-year parking meter lease brought doubled rates in some areas as a tradeoff for a wholesale upgrade of equipment and the convenience of paying by credit card or smartphone.

Was it worth it?

New financial data provided by the city shows its share of revenue from the vendor in 2011 -- nearly $1.4 million, or 30 percent -- fell well short of the city's own projection of $2.1 million.

And the city didn't end up seeing the full amount: After the vendor subtracted $286,000 in charges to compensate for the city closing metered spaces, often for RebuildIndy road construction work, the city pocketed $1.1 million.

The budget for last year relied upon revenues of $2.4 million from 'charges for services' and $1.8 million from 'fines and penalties' for a total of $3.2 million - a far cry from $1.1 million.  That budgeted amount was not just a gravy account, as $3.8 million was being used to help fund IMPD that year.  (2011 budget - Prop 2010, 234 -- p 22 and 59 of pdf)

The budget for 2012 reflects the drop in revenue the Ballard administration fully expected from the parking meter contract.  Instead of the roughly $3.2 million revenue budgeted year before year earlier, the 2012 budget only anticipated $1.25 million from 'charges for services' and $0.5 million from 'fines and penalties' plus a bit more for a total of $1.8 million.  (2012 budget - Prop 2011, 241 -- p 25 and 62 of pdf)

Mayor Ballard, however, tries to low ball the profit to the City prior to the sale of the parking meters :

Ballard cites an $87,000 profit for 2010 -- the last year before ParkIndy's contract began -- but that figure overstates the tightness of the margin. It reflects the spending of some proceeds on street improvements.

Looking only at that year's operating costs -- $3.2 million -- the city pocketed a modest $600,000 profit, according to Darrell Fishel, an assistant public works administrator for the city.

Murray mentions the street improvements, for which $327,200 was appropriated that year, but his report does not bring up the $1.75 million that went to IMPD that year and what actual police ticketing costs were.  (2010 budget - Prop 2009, 321 -- p 22 and 56 of the pdf)

ACS/ParkIndy made out well from what numbers Murray could get:

The vendor, ParkIndy -- a trio of local and national companies led by Dallas-based ACS, a Xerox company -- kept more than $3.5 million.

 Mayor Ballard also cites the $20 million up front payment made by ACS/ParkIndy as part of the deal.  Murray has new information about that money, as well.  In a side panel in the paper version, Murray shows the following expenses paid from the $20 million (my wording):

$6.4 m - Broad Ripple Parking Garage
$5.9 m - road and infrastructure repairs downtown
$3.5 m - transition and advisor costs covering the parking meter deal itself
$3.8 m - to IMPD

The transition costs included $2.9 million to pay the high priced lawyers who cut and pasted the Chicago deal and those who were hired to be proponents of the sale and market the sale to the public (unsuccessfully, I might add).  The last charge, to IMPD, may sound familiar.  Above I noted that the 2011 budget called for $3.8 million to go to IMPD from the parking meter fund.  With the budget under pressure, the parking meter fund doubled what it usually sent to IMPD.  But the Ballard administration is now spinning it to be "reimbursement to IMPD for assisting with parking meter enforcement going back several years".   Shameless.

So folks, of the $20 million up front fee, all you really got was the Broad Ripple Parking Garage boondoggle.  Oh well.  Easy come, easy go.

Murray's article quotes City-County Council Vice President, Brian Mahern:

Mahern was among vocal critics who noted many large cities have modernized their meters by borrowing or striking shorter-term contracts. 

"We should have just worked with a vendor to provide us the service for a fee," he said, "rather than granting somebody an equity stake for what is a basic service."

Absolutely right.

Taxpayer Fleecing For NO-SO (aka City Way) Continues

On Monday night, the Council's Metro & Econ Devel Committee heard a number of interesting Proposals.  One of those was Prop 66, approving the designation of the old North of South (now City Way) fleecing of the taxpayers extraordinaire as a 'Certified Technology Park'.

So many things are brewing in my mind about this that I struggle to find a logical flow for all of them.  So, this blog entry will have more of a staccato effect than I would prefer.  Just a warning.

Let's start with the downplay of the Council's role in this designation of No-So (City Way) as a CTP.  It was said that the role of the Council is merely to allow the President of the Council to sign on the agreement.  Balderdash.  The Council is in fact, the only duly elected body that will review the CTP to determine if it is in the best interest of the public.  All other signatures are of appointees who surely know which way the wind is blowing.

Now, a CTP will allow the City to collect from the State, all new sales taxes and state income taxes that flow to the state from the development.  In addition new county option income tax revenues that normally flow to Indianapolis City/County government, would instead flow to a fund specific for this development.  Combined, these new state and local tax revenues, up to a maximum of $5 million, usually go to pay for infrastructure improvements in the immediate CTP area.  With No-So, the proceeds will go to help pay for the financing costs associated with the $98 million in bonds the City floated to make the loan to the Buckingham Group for the project - the costs anyone would say should be the developer's responsibility to repay, not the taxpayers'.  No mention was made Monday night regarding the anticipated split between sales tax and income tax revenues that would be generated in City Way.  But, please note, the COIT revenue could be a good fraction of the money since the COIT tax rate is 1.62 %, or a full third of all non-federal income taxes paid by Marion County residents.

No-So (City Way) is not a technology park.  The plan put forth last year (see  "North of South - Details of Proposed Deal", "No-So Field of Dreams - Lie And They Will Build It", "No-So Deal Worse Than Even I Thought", and "City Way - The Rebranding of North of South") called for a residential, retail development with a minor 30,000 square feet of office space (now only 10,000 square feet).  Within that office space, the developer hoped to lure one wet lab.  It was said back then, that this lone wet lab would qualify No-So for designation as a CTP.  Well, I guess that plan fell through.  The new scam is to define the CTP area as much larger than No-So's footprint, all while stating that only tax revenues from No-So (City Way) would be bundled.  Below are the outlines of No-So (City Way) in blue and the outline of the rest of the CTP area in red.  You will notice a gold arrow and a small area outlined with a dashed gold line.  This is the Faris Building which will house the new offices of Rolls Royce - no new jobs were created, just relocated to this space from other parts of the County and Central Indiana.  Rolls Royce is the only tech part of the CTP area.  It will receive no value from the CTP designation, and like the rest of the CTP area beyond No-So (City Way), it will provide no revenue to the cause.  It serves only as the legal underpinning for a CTP designation for No-So.  In normal parlance, that is called a scam against the taxpayers of Indiana and Marion County.

This matters because the CTP designation was created as a means to supplement the infrastructure improvements needed to attract high tech businesses to Indiana.  No-So is just bilking that intention.  It means that, like Prop 67 which was also discussed by the Committee on Monday night, two legitimate technology parks must share one CTP designation and split their $5 million in state sales tax, and income tax revenues for their infrastructure needs.  So, the fake CTP gets a full $5 million, while two legitimate high tech ventures (Purdue Technology Park and Intech Park) must share a $5 million.  Now how is that helping to attract high tech to Indiana?  It is not.

Before wrapping this entry up with the Committee vote, I also have to correct the numbers presented by the proponents of No-So (City Way).  They continue to overstate the investment by the developer and Lilly, while understating the taxpayer's contribution to the development.  They never did mention the allocation of risk being exclusively in the direction of the taxpayers, but I will.

The developer must, at a minimum, secure a $6 million line of credit with a bank.  That's all.  Eli Lilly is touted as putting up about $30 million, but that does not hold up on any level of inspection.  $15 million was from an unnecessarily early payment to Lilly for its part in a complex Harding Street TIF deal that benefited Lilly.  The taxpayers paid Lilly the $15 million and Lilly gave the developer that money.  The rest of Lilly's so called investment is the value of the land upon which No-So (City Way) is to be built.  Yet, Lilly retains ownership and expects an undisclosed lease payment from the owners of No-So (City Way) year after year. 

Marion County taxpayers, however, floated $98 million in bonds and loaned $86 million to the developer, when a bank would not.  The payback guarantee on the bonds is from the consolidated downtown TIF.  In addition, all property taxes paid by the developer/owners of the development over the next 10 years, will be credited as their partial repayment of the loan.  So, no property taxes will be paid on this property to the tax coffers of Indianapolis, nor to consolidated downtown TIF, but will be considered payment from the developer for the loan.  This is estimated to be about $12 million.  Add this to the $9 million in infrastructure improvements (the ONLY money acknowledged to be contributed by the taxpayers, mind you) and the $5 million from the CTP designation and taxpayers are into this project over $40 million.  While the developer is required only to have a $6 million line of credit with a bank.

But, the icing on the cake came when the final deal was revealed.  For repayment of the loan, the project is segmented.  The developer can default on one segment, while profiting on others.  The risk is on the shoulders of Indianapolis taxpayers alone.  If there is a default, the taxpayers will need to put in even more money to finish the project and more money to pay off the outstanding bonds.

Now, on to the Committee vote.  All Councillors on the committee voted for this boondoogle of a CTP designation, save one - Councillor Zach Adamson.  Many thanks to Councillor Adamson for voting against this last fleecing of the taxpayers for the largest boondoggle of the many boondoggles of the Ballard Administration.

The full Council will vote on this matter Monday night.  Again, despite the downplay of the role of the Council in legalizing this CTP designation, the City-County Councillors are the only elected officials who will evaluate the appropriateness of granting the designation.  This is a boondoggle, and a scam, and will do nothing to bring high tech jobs to Indianapolis.

Decatur Township - (Part 3 - More than a parking facility)

Like all neighborhoods of Marion County, Decatur Township has a unique blend of opportunities and challenges.  I have spoken to a number of neighborhood leaders throughout Indianapolis over the years, and almost all feel that their neighborhood is last on the City's list to be provided a leg up or assistance or much help dealing with their issues.  I conclude all are right.  If you are not downtown, you ARE last.  Unigov ensured that the resources of the non-downtown communities would be pooled to benefit downtown.  We all cover the cost of their City services, while their property tax revenues are spent on more benefits for downtown and favored developers.

Here is Decatur's profile.

Decatur has about 30,000 people.

Our Township is the smallest geographically; the eastern border follows the White River and not the same north-south dividing line used by other Townships.  The airport takes up at least 10 % of our land (latest info I have is from 1988, but that number would only have grown).  Our infrastructure, roads and sewers, have limited points of entry into our Township, unlike the other 8 Townships in the County.  The White River and the Airport substantially block access, and the areas of Hendricks and Morgan County that abut are largely farmlands with little infrastructure of their own.  There are only two roads over the White River, and no sewer crossings.  So, our development from farming to more intense land uses flows mostly from the north. 

Within I-465 we are pretty well all developed, with older homes, a small strip center, two grocery stores, two pharmacies, and a few fast food joints.  Outside I-465 is older subdivisions generally to the north, spreading to newer subdivisions and a great deal of remaining farmland to the south.  Little to no retail is located outside of I-465.

There is a railroad track running the length of Kentucky Avenue that has a huge impact on  our land use patterns.  Unlike other areas where it makes sense to have commercial nodes surrounded by residential uses, we are more laminar.  The existence of the airport dictates that few residences remain north of Kentucky Avenue outside of I-465.  The existence of the railroad dictates that when retail uses finally come in, they will mostly be located on the south side of Kentucky Avenue.  The remaining land is needed for homes.

Decatur has had a terrible time attracting retail.  This is somewhat due to our low population, but more notably due to the lack of rooftops on so much of Decatur land either occupied by the airport or anywhere near the airport.  This condition runs into Hendricks County as well.  When national chains do their analysis of market potential, they find no more than half the 360 degree view can ever be filled with the homes of customers, much less filled now.

This lack of retail is a chicken and egg thing.  Without the amenities of convenient shopping, many potential homeowners look elsewhere to live.  Decatur has only a tiny stock of move-up homes.

Just to round out the issues we face, we have mining at the north end, with Martin-Marietta blasting underground beneath the Southside Landfill that straddles the Wayne/Decatur line, and American Aggregates blasting and strip mining across the White River in Perry Township.  We have had no success engaging Mayor Ballard in the ill effects to our northern neighborhoods from the blasting and constant dust.

We have few sidewalks, few streetlights, a lot of septic tanks and wells.  We have one IndyGo bus route that reaches down as far as Ameriplex and returns to the north.  We are the only Township without a City Park's pool.  We have nothing to entertain the youth of the Township beyond school sponsored activities; no movie theaters, no bowling alleys, no skating rinks.  We have no bookstore, no place to buy a new shirt or new shoes.  We have two sit-down restaurants that bring you a menu; a Denny's and an El Rodeo.  We do have two golf courses, though; Buffer Park on the northeast and Winding River on the southeast.  And, through the combined efforts of our Lions Club and 4-H, we host the State's largest annual Township Fair.

Looking back through the Decatur history that I am aware of, it seems that what we do have are great people who have created the progress that we have enjoyed.  When Goldsmith turned a deaf ear to Hi-Acre Manor over the absolute need for a levee to protect their homes from the White River, the neighbors banded together and built their own.  Once a really bad zoning request had been defeated, the community banded together to raise the money to buy that property and add it to Southwestway Park.  And currently ongoing, the community is banding together yet again, to fund the Goodwin Center that focuses on Head Start and a much needed Senior Center.

Also to be noted in that list of accomplishments by the people who live in Decatur, is the existence of Ameriplex itself.  As I mentioned in the last post ("The 800 Pound Gorilla - Indianapolis Airport"), our Civic leaders hoped to create an industrial park to provide a catalyst for growth throughout Decatur.  It is a point of immense personal pride that I am part of the Decatur Township Civic Council, with its legacy of always trying to move Decatur forward.  Back in 1993, leaders of the Civic Council, including Bob Cockrum, Betty Montgomery, and Ken Bartlett undertook a study of the effects of an industrial park, the United deal, a third runway, and the TIF district on our Township's development and its taxbase.   They were not successful in staving off the ill effects of the Airport/United TIF, nor the airport's land grab to ensure a future 3rd runway totally in Decatur for exclusive use by FedEx.  But, they were successful in helping to get an interchange on I-70 and the establishment of Ameriplex itself.

I have lived in the heart of a big city.  And it was great.  I have lived in Decatur Township for the past 25 years now, and I find it equally great.  We have the best of all worlds (outside of access to retail) - the relaxing atmosphere of a semi-rural semi-suburban lifestyle that is 20 minutes from downtown.  And the people of Decatur cannot be beat.

[Yesterday's Zoning Case - It About Far More Than a ParkingFacility, The 800 Pound Gorilla]

Broad Ripple Parking Garage - Farce Extraordinaire

Its like we all went through the Looking Glass with Alice the day the City opted for the Keystone Group's proposal to build a garage on the corner of N. College Avenue and Westfield Boulevard in Broad Ripple.

I reported previously (see "Broad Ripple Parking Garage - Somebody Forgot To Which End of the Horse You Attach the Cart") about the fact that after the deal was inked down, Keystone Group, now going by 6280, LLC, for this project, filed for a number of variances.  Turns out the project as proposed and as accepted by the City, will not fit on the property without A) a variance for zero foot setback from the right of way (35 foot setback on College and 40 foot setback on Westfield required) and B) a variance to shrink the size of each parking space.  At what point does the Ballard administration admit that this project is too large for this site?

Well, as absurd as things were up to the point of filing for the variances, an alert reader gave us a heads up that things were actually even more absurd than we thought.  The folks at 6280, LLC, have also filed to extend into the City's right of way - meaning, they cannot fit in the space they actually own and must spill over and under the sidewalk.  The technical request is to 'vacate' the right of way from 17 feet up in the air to 62 feet up in the air on the three sides of the building, and to 'vacate' the right of way from 1 foot below ground to 8 feet below ground all the way around the building.

The 'ribbon of light' facade, it turns out, can't fit on the building if the entire building is actually required to fit on the lot.  Rather, the property is so inappropriate for the project, that the ribbon must be allowed to hang over the sidewalk and the alley if it is to be a part of the plan at all.  The developer says that the underground vacation is required for structural support, but that makes no sense.

How much more information does the Administration require as proof that this project is not on the right site?  The garage costs twice as much as comparable projects (even those cited by the developer in their own proposal), it is proposed for a location rejected in a 2007 study of Broad Ripple's parking needs, the building can't fit on the property without being granted a variance, and even then, the building is too small to fit 350 regulation size parking spaces in it without further variance, AND EVEN THEN the facade will not fit on the building without hanging over the sidewalk.

When does it become apparent that the project does not fit on the property?  It is all too absurd, even for government work.

I fully expect another round of variance requests should the pending matters be granted.  The 'ribbon of light' is proposed to serve as an advertising beacon.  That, of course, is not allowed by our ordinances. 

The Board of Zoning Appeals is scheduled to consider the filed variance requests on December 13 and the Plat Committee of the Metropolitan Development Commission is scheduled to consider the vacation of air and subterranean rights of way on December 14.  Maybe these bodies will bring sensible resolution to this farce by denying the petitions presented to them.

Indy Star Calls Ballard's Comments Like They Were

Today's Indy Star editorial calls out the Kennedy campaign - softly, but still it calls it out - on their deliberate warping of the facts to suit their gutter politics (my accurate choice of words, not the Stars').  Here is what they had to say:

In response to a question about high unemployment rates among racial and ethnic minorities in Indianapolis, Mayor Greg Ballard, in an Oct. 15 televised debate, made reference to a "difficult population" in connection with his administration's efforts to create jobs in the urban core.


Was it the "gotcha'' moment of the 2011 Indianapolis mayoral campaign, an indication of the incumbent's lack of respect for or insensitivity to minorities in the city? Marion County Democrats clearly think so. They've been running a hard-hitting radio ad in support of challenger Melina Kennedy that blasts Ballard's quote as an "outrage."

Let's agree that the mayor's phrasing was awkward. Ballard never will be mistaken for an eloquent public speaker. But a fair reading of his comments, kept in context -- and, more important, his record over the past four years -- should dispel fears that Ballard doesn't care about or hasn't tried to reduce joblessness among minorities, especially for African-Americans and Latinos. One example: The city during Ballard's term has significantly increased the number of women-, minority- and veteran-owned enterprises that it does business with.

The fact remains, however, that the unemployment rate among blacks is unacceptably high. That's true not only in Indianapolis but also the nation as a whole. In August, the national unemployment rate for blacks (16.7 percent) reached its highest level since 1984. It declined slightly, to 16 percent, in September, but the long-term trend is discouraging. The unemployment rate for blacks has stayed above 10 percent for more than four years, and many economists predict that it will stay that high for years to come.

Several factors help explain why the unemployment rate among blacks is higher than in the general population. Black workers tend to be younger and less experienced and have a lower level of educational attainment than the American workforce on average. Those are stiff challenges -- difficulties? -- in the best of times. In a stubbornly weak economy, it's a formula for deep suffering and despair.

Given that reality, a few awkward words in the heat of a political debate should have little lasting significance. Far more important is ensuring that this community does all it can to create a fertile environment for jobs to be created, and to ensure that all racial and ethnic groups have the opportunities and skills they need to thrive in the workplace.

My party can do better than this and Democrats need to demand it.