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.

Billboard Lobby Donations Create an Appearance of a Conflict of Interest

Just posted on Indiana Forefront...
***

The powerful Metropolitan & Economic Development committee of the City-County Council has postponed a decision on the billboard industry-written Prop 250.  If enacted, Prop 250 would allow digital billboards now, and any future technology that fits in the same frame would also be allowed – without timely public or Council review.

IndyStar reporter, Brian Eason, reports that billboard lobbyists were extremely generous with campaign contributions last year – with more than $12,000 being donated.

He also reports that a lobbyist firm held a fundraiser for committee Chair, Leroy Robinson.  Robinson, by the way, was beneficiary of nearly a third of all billboard lobby donations last year.
Another committee member, Zach Adamson got $1100.

Eason notes that Council leadership in combination, pulled down more than $5000 from billboard lobby sources.

Those who chose to talk with Eason about the contributions didn’t seem to grasp that by accepting the money, the Councillors, at a minimum, solidified an appearance of a conflict of interest. 

Suspicious minds are already correlating the donations with the fast track that Prop 250 was on and the postponement of a vote after hours of testimony against Prop 250, rather than a vote to kill it.  I have been privately assured that, had it not been delayed, the vote would have been “NO”; that the delay means little.

The public trust is a valuable commodity and important, especially in an election year.

The Councillors who took billboard lobby money can and should return it.  That would help clear up the appearance of a conflict of interest that they helped establish by accepting the money in the first place.

Yes Kids, TIF Bases Really Did Erode

I was pretty taken aback when alerted recently to a Twitter exchange between City-County Councillor Zach Adamson and Mayor Ballard's Chief of Staff, Ryan Vaughn.

Yes, Ryan Vaughn actually stated that "TIFs don't touch the base.  That's why it's called Tax 'Increment' Financing."

It is discouraging that someone so involved with spending our tax dollars, does not understand the difference between the promises made about TIFs and the reality.

The erosion of the base was so prevalent in Indiana, that two years ago the Legislature enacted changes in how the base is recalculated each year (the TIF neutralization). 

I have obtained all of these forms for all Marion County TIFs from 2008 to 2013.  Below I chart the increment and base for all TIFs whose base was not already zero in 2008.  I did not include 2013 data because they grouped the TIF numbers - for instance, all the component TIFs of the Consolidated Downtown TIF are no longer reported individually.  Suffice it to say, the new base recalculating method is most helpful in preserving the base.

Some notes to the graphs:
Assessments are done in one year, and the taxes are billed the following year on that assessment.  Thus, the x-axis reports time in the format of 2008pay2009.
The y-axis for the increment is on the left and increment is shown in red.
The y-axis for the base is on the right and base is shown in blue.

29 TIFs had non-zero base in 2008.

 

 

 

I think TIF 151 had a transcription error on the pay 2011 form

 

TIF 640 had been dormant before 2012, when it was reactivated.  The base was reconfigured at that point in time.

 

 

 

 

Regardless of what happened to the increment - rise or fall - the base always fell.  The combined erosion of the bases between 2008 and 2012 (not counting TIF 640 - the Dow Elanco TIF because its base was reconfigured during that period) amounted to $283,579,872.  The taxes on that eroded base did not continue to flow to the schools, libraries, or the city, as was promised.  Instead it went into the increment to fatten the TIF slush funds.



Gas Tax "Windfall" - Not What the Mayor Makes it Out to Be

Here's how it looked back on August 14, 2013, when IBJ reporter Kathleen McLaughlin penned an article about Mayor Greg Ballard's proposal to float a bond to add revenue to the nearly depleted RebuildIndy fund:

City officials said Thursday that they intend to spend $350 million over the next three years to improve streets, sidewalks, trails and bridges.

Most of that money will come from existing funds, but $135 million will be borrowed against increased state transportation funding.

...The city expects its share of state gas tax revenue to increase by $7 million, and will leverage that into the bond issue.

The increase in gas tax revenue sent to the City from the State was refined to $7.8 million.  That's were it stood on August 29, when the Public Works Committee of the City-County Council rejected Proposal 250.  I noted in a blog entry the next day that the Mayor's statements to the press were far from the truth.

Well, add one more lie to the list.

I received the real gas tax revenue numbers from the State Auditor's office.  The estimated 2013 distribution of the "Motor Vehicle Highway" revenue to the City of Indianapolis and the County of Marion is $20.25 million.  The estimated 2014 distribution is $23.75 million.  That is a difference of $3.5 million.  Less than half of the $7.8 million the Mayor, Bond Bank Director/Deputy Mayor Deron Kintner, and DPW Director Lori Miser have been touting as the windfall that will pay for the bond.



I added the color highlights to better direct attention to the figures applicable to the City and County

As I noted earlier, the Proposal actually called for annual payments of $9 million on the bond.  So, given that the real gas tax revenue increase is a paltry (by comparison) $3.5 million - they had plans to tap $5.5 million every year for 30 years of money that is usually needed for other things in DPW.  That's not only taking the next generation's increased gas tax, its also trading existing services that by rights should remain in place for the next 3 decades.

There still remains the $240 million of revenue that is already earmarked for road and sidewalk repair over the next 3 years - and that is no small amount of money.

But, to hear Greg Ballard tell it, if the Council does not allow the City to float this additional bond, there will be no infrastructure improvements at all.  That's the story he and his administration are repeating to the media, to the neighborhoods, and to the Council.  It is all a pack of lies.  Mayor Ballard even went so far as to accost Democrat At-Large Councillor Zach Adamson at the Hob Nob with "We're going to murder you guys on this.  You're dead."

They must think they have a lock on the press, a lock on what information gets to the neighborhoods, and a lock on the facts as they prefer to make them out to be.  They must think we are all stupid.

As more of the truth comes out, and it will, I am increasingly grateful to the members of the Public Works committee who voted against this fiscally unsound and cynically presented Proposal to float these bonds - Councillors Vernon Brown, Pam Hickman, Bill Oliver, Monroe Gray, and Zach Adamson.

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.

City Council Postpones Prop 148 - Waiting for Outcome of Airport Board Vote

This Friday, the Airport Authority Board will vote on whether to terminate the lawsuit they filed to stop off airport parking in Ameriplex.  Prop 148, a Council Resolution that urges them to do so, was postponed at last night's Council meeting, waiting to see exactly what Friday's decision is.

As I noted in my last entry, Prop 148 was initiated by Councillor Adamson and co-sponsored by the two district Councillors, Lutz and Holliday, as well as 10 other Councillors in a bipartisan show of support for Decatur Township.

In offering the motion to postpone, Adamson had a few thoughts to share, and I, for one, am glad he shared them.  I particularly thought it an important idea, that the Airport should consider reimbursing Mid-West Logistics, the owner of the ground in  Ameriplex where the Fast Park facility would be built, the $215,000 they spent fighting this frivolous lawsuit.

Here are Adamson's comments from the WTCY video of last night's meeting.

Is it Most Sincerely Dead ? Airport Chief Says Lawsuit Over Fast Park To Be Withdrawn

In an exclusive this afternoon, Jon Murray, IndyStar reporter, quoted Indianapolis Airport Director, Bob Duncan, as saying the Airport's two year battle to stop a Fast Park facility from locating in Ameriplex, will end.  Murray relays the following:

Authority Board President Mike Wells discussed the issue with other board members and found consensus in support of airport officials’ plans to drop the lawsuit, Duncan said this afternoon.

Coincidence or final straw, this comes as the Council readies for Prop 148 on Monday night.  This Council Resolution chides the airport for continuing to engage in the lawsuit filed to overturn the land use changes, granted by the Metropolitan Development Commission, that would allow a Fast Park & Relax facility to be built on 31 acres just off Ameriplex Parkway.

In keeping with the long strange trip this has been, Murray quotes Councillor Bob Lutz, whose district includes the northern half of the Indianapolis Airport, and who aptly put it :

 “I am so happy and so furious all at the same time!” he wrote in an email to The Star. “All of the wasted effort and taxpayer dollars. Plus the time, energy and money Ameriplex and Chavez had to spend and what was accomplished? Nothing!”

Lutz was the key driver of the Council's decision last fall, to dock the Airport budget by $100,000; the expected cost of the lawsuit in outside attorneys.  He also got 13 Councillors to vote against the entire Airport budget when it came before the full Council.

IBJ reporter, Kathleen McLaughlin, reports that Prop 148 may be withdrawn if the termination of the Airport's lawsuit can be directly verified.

At-large City-County Councilor Zach Adamson, a Democrat, said he would not pull his resolution from Monday night's agenda until Midwest Logistics confirms that the airport will withdraw its appeal. "They had two and a half years to do the right thing, and they refused to do it," he said of the airport authority. "It's criminal what they've done to this business."

Adamson initiated Prop 148 and has been a steadfast opponent of the lawsuit.

Can this day have finally arrived?  I looked on the Airport's website and cannot find any press release.  But, Murray has Bob Duncan's comments and I am hearing of email verifications coming from the Mayor's office and from Mike Wells, President of the Airport Authority Board, as well.

So, just maybe the wicked witch is not only dead, but most sincerely dead !

The Insane Priorities of the Ballard Administration

The first half of at least $5.8 million from RebuildIndy funds to be used for the insane cricket/Gaelic sports complex in Councillor Ben Hunter's district was spent yesterday.  This action comes despite no basis in sanity for such a complex and despite no private partner to help with the cost and/or to reap the Ballard fantasize rewards.

Fellow blogger Gary Welsh put it well this morning over on Advance Indiana:

Streets and sidewalks are crumbling, crime is skyrocketing, IMPD has fewer police officers patrolling the streets than the day Mayor Greg Ballard took office in January, 2008 and the budgets of city agencies across the board are being slashed to make up for a multi-million dollar budget deficit, but Mayor Greg Ballard insists on spending millions of dollars intended for infrastructure improvements on a new world sports park on the city's east side that he hopes will play host to international cricketing events.
 

IndyStar reporter, Jon Murray, reports that none of the three Council appointees showed up for the vote.  The three Board of Public Works appointees from the Mayor's office joined with DPW Director, Lori Miser, to vote 4-0 in favor.

The Council appointees need to explain why they were not there, especially given the gravity of the vote.  The Council Democrat leadership wants to say the Council has been cut out of this decision, but that is not entirely so.  Ducking important issues by standing on the sidelines is not leadership.  The lack of votes by the three Council appointees, if left unexplained, leaves the option that the Democrat leadership wants this cricket nonsense to go forward as much as Ballard does, as a reasonable opinion for members of the public to hold.

I do have to note that some Councillors did weigh in - as I cited two days ago -- Councillors Zach Adamson and Christine Scales, in particular.

Meanwhile, the priorities of the Ballard administration continue to spiral out of the realm of an sane policy and have clearly entered the Twilight Zone. 

Let us all remember this come budget time, when the Council Democrat leadership and the Ballard administration join hands to eliminate the Homestead Credit from property tax bills and when they cut services and when they lay off cops and firefighters (either directly or through attrition).  Let us remember the insanity of this cricket crap.

Email Eavesdropping - RE: Cricket

Tomorrow the Board of Public Works  will consider letting a $2.5 million contract for the proposed Gaelic Sports Park (aka Cricket fields, aka World Sports Park) using RebuildIndy money.

Here is an email exchange that began with Councillor Zach Adamson appealing to the members of the Board of Public Works .  I have to say, it is good to see our Councillors stand up for reasonable use of taxpayer funds in this way.

***

Councillor Adamson to Public Works Board:

Dear Members of the Public Works Board.

I am writing to you today to ask you to vote against the awarding of the contract for the Global Sports Complex with the use of Rebuild Indy funds. I believe this to be an illegitimate use of these funds.  

I do understand the need for city leaders to be ambitious, forward thinking and visionary. That being said,  there’s a difference between being visionary and delusional. The possibility of any real return on this investment is questionable at best, especially in light of news from the city  in Florida who already has such a Cricket Complex and their regrets for investing in it.  

And ultimately, these funds are deliberately set aside for addressing the multi million dollar back log of failing infrastructure across our city. This is NOT what these funds are for.  

Thank you in advance for your serious consideration of a NO vote on the use of RebuildIndy Funds for this purpose and thank you for your service to our fine city.  

Warmest Regards,  

Zach Adamson, Councillor, At-Large
 

Reply from Mayoral appointtee to the Board of Public Works, Dennis Rosebrough:

Good morning Councilor. Thanks for sharing your opinion. Improving parks infrastructure seems to be an appropriate use of the funds. At the end of the project, we end up with first class athletic fields that can be used for many activities including soccer, lacrosse and other games that require fields. The design does not preclude any use including cricket or Gaelic sports. In the worst case scenario, we end up with a beautiful, multi-functional recreational facility on the east side of the city that can be used by young and old.  It could also become a regional center for emerging sports like cricket and draw thousands of people to our community in the future.  

There were those who thought a domed stadium addition to the Convention Center was foolish and that even involved a new tax. As a member of the PR group for the that project, we heard all of the arguments. With Mayor Hudnut’s and the City-Council’s bold vision, it was built - and as they say, “the rest is history.”  Obviously, this project is not even in the same league (maybe $5 million cost and no tax impact vs. $50 million and a new tax), but it does represent a “vision” for our community. I will proudly continue to support this project.  

Dennis L. Rosebrough  

Deputy Commissioner - External Affairs 

Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles
 

Comment back from Adamson to Rosebrough:

Mr. Rosebrough, 

You’re flowery words about this Complex are small consolation to the dozens of people who have been hit by cars and killed in our city because they lack sidewalks to connect them to needed resources, just in this last year alone. I’m sure the communities across our city who have been waiting for major repairs on their streets for decades will be equally unmoved by your embrace for this Complex at their expense.  

I am by no means opposed to the Complex itself and if we could afford it, I’d be excited to hear about it. However, you might not have heard, the city has both a multi million dollar budget shortfall and several hundred million dollars in backlogged infrastructure needs. Needs the RebuildIndy Funds were deliberately created for. This investment is not for repair or stabilization of an existing park. It is for a whole new repurposing of an existing park. One that is not in need of repair.  

I hope when you cast your shortsighted vote in support of this inappropriate use of the RBI funds, you’ll also include a message to all the folks who will not see the needed infrastructure repairs because these funds were diverted. Perhaps, the best thing for me to do at this time is to publish your email reply and include your email so my constituents will be able to send YOU their cries for needed infrastructure. I’m sure they’ll be thrilled to hear from you and I’m sure you’ll be able to pacify them with the grand vision of the new Cricket Stadium.  

Since you took the liberty to include Mr Lotter in your reply to me, clearly so you could earn good graces with the mayor, I’m including the other councillors in this reply so they might know what to tell their constituents when they call or they read in the newspaper about yet another grandmother, cyclist or child is killed while trying to pass down a busy street with no sidewalk or shoulder.  

Again, my warmest regards.

Zach Adamson, Councillor, At-Large
 

Hitting the reply to all button, Councillor Angela Mansfield added her point of view:

I concur with Councillor Adamson's statements.  Using Rebuild Indy funds for this purpose is absolutely wasteful!  These funds were raised on the backs of our rate payer constituents and the funds should go back to our neighborhoods. We need sidewalks for every day use for safe transportation to grocery stores, drug stores, jobs, schools, religious institutions, etc. The sidewalks would also provide an opportunity for many to exercise and create a connected community. Building a cricket field for just a few is not only shortsighted given our budget constraints, it is completely delusional.

And, chiming in on the conversation we have this from Councillor Frank Mascari:

I also agree with councilor Adamson. We in Indianapolis have more issues at hand then a sports park.  

Frank Mascari  

City Council District 20

Councillor Zach Adamson Speaks Out Against Lopsided Executive Power

In a very well phrased letter to the editor in today's IndyStar, Councillor At-Large, Zach Adamson, pushes against proposed legislation that would transfer most, if not all, of the fiscal responsibility properly residing in the City-County Council, to the Mayor.  Here is his the letter:

 Stop political bullying for more mayoral control 

There’s a strange smell in the air at the west end of Market Street. There are several bills, specifically SB 621 and HB 1399, making their way through the Indiana legislature that should concern every Hoosier. 

A system of checks and balances within government is a cornerstone of our democracy to ensure that no single person or body can hold unchecked reign over the people and/or their resources (property, money, etc). Indianapolis already has a strong mayor system.  

Even so, both the aforementioned bills seek to consolidate even greater power within the executive branch. These measures would remove the legislative oversight from many critical areas such as confirmation of department heads and allow unelected persons to spend your tax dollars as they will. If passed, they will concentrate the power of the executive over the Metropolitan Development Commission, where many of our tax dollars are spent and important zoning and development decisions are made.  

Unbelievably, these bills allow the executive unchecked spending power — not only the authority to line-item veto parts of the budget, but the unprecedented ability to write in different amounts, to change spending priorities at will, deliberately circumventing the legislative branch’s historic duty as the fiscal body, thereby creating an imperial executive. 

When Indianapolis and Marion County were consolidated, the mayor became the city-county executive, but we gave up our seven-member county council for four at-large city-county council members in the new city-county government. We now have three few representatives than other Indiana counties. SB621 seeks to remove those few remaining county-wide seats because demographic shifts suggest they are trending democratic; and more to the point, with a supermajority in the General Assembly, because Republicans can. 

These moves are nothing more than political bullying and it’s up to you to stop it. Please call your legislators and let them know your feelings on these issues. 

Zach Adamson
City-County Councilman, At-Large

Councillors Mahern and Adamson Stand Up for What is Right

Yesterday was a bad day for sense and sensibility in Indy government.  The Council voted 25 to 2 to pass Prop 15, which expands the consolidated downtown TIF by more than a square mile.

The only two who had the strength of their convictions were Councillors Brian Mahern and Zach Adamson.  Angela Mansfield appeared to be absent and Vernon Brown was excused from voting due to a conflict of interest. 

By my count, at least 7 Councillors, bent their principles and voted in favor. (Others were always going to vote the party line, the public interest be damned.)  Sure, their vote would not defeat the measure, but it would have sent a message that the ongoing community discussion on TIFs is necessary.  That conversation will continue.

Councillor Vop Osili made promises to folks living in the Riverside and UNWA neighborhoods.  The language he negotiated and inserted into Prop 15 fails to target those promises to those neighborhoods. 

Councillor Joe Simpson refused to amend the Mass Ave portion of the TIF to exclude 2 of the several parcels that are already slated for private investment.  This extension of the consolidated downtown TIF is merely being created as a slush fund for the Ballard administration, and Simpson is fine with that.  He and they are stealing revenue that would have gone to help teach the children of IPS, stealing revenue that would have gone to deliver poor relief in Center Township, stealing revenue that would have gone to IMPD, IFD, IndyGo, Health & Hospitals, Parks, and the libraries - and spending it on development that could and would have happened without the TIF.

I sincerely hope that a dye was not cast last night.  I hope we merely walked down the wrong path on a course that we can change before it is too late.  TIFs have consequences.  They are not free money.  At some point, we will cross a line that harms Indy's economy and the services we pay taxes for.

Councillors will feel the urge to get in line to get a TIF for their area, too.  By my count, the two that passed last night are just the first of 8.  I don't know where the line of economic harm is.  Perhaps it isn't even a bright line, but rather a gradual loss of services and quality of life for most of Indy's residents until drastic cuts in public safety and education become routine, and we do the best we can to wait out the 25 year lifespan of the TIFs.

The issue of TIFs is a hard one.  I have been happy to see the community trying to get on top of it, digest it, and decide upon it.  The conversation began in earnest about a year ago as key people in key groups began to understand there is no free ride with TIFs.  And the conversation will continue. 

Today I want to thank Councillors Mahern and Adamson for standing up for Indy, even when the powers that be tried to make them bow.  We need elected officials with spines and principles and who will fight for what is right and best for Indianapolis and its people.

The public good suffered a blow last night, but the fight continues.

The Case Against Prop 15

Tonight the Indianapolis-Marion County City-County Council is poised to vote on Prop 15 - which would expand the consolidated downtown TIF district in two directions for a total addition of 1.1 square miles.

There are three components :

A) 112 acre easterly expansion, less than half of which runs along Mass Ave (see "What's Wrong With This Picture - The Proposed Mass Ave TIF" for maps of the proposed TIF) all supposedly needed for the development of 0.8 acres.

B) 604 acre westerly expansion (see "Proposed Bush Stadium TIF - Google Aerial View" for maps of the proposed TIF) all supposedly needed for the development of a couple of block area.

C) Also pasted on top of the expansion TIFs are three programs - a $2 million microloan, a $10 million microloan, and a $1.5 million job training program - to be funded by the TIFs.  It must be noted here that TIF funds may only legally be spent on projects within the TIF boundaries and these programs run significantly beyond boundaries.

These are the reason that come readily to mind as to why Prop 15 should be defeated.

1) Prop 15 is dead --- Council rules require that any proposal that is tabled for more than 6 months be removed from the list of pending proposals.  This is exactly what happened to Prop 16, another TIF proposal, which had been introduced and tabled on exactly the same dates as Prop 15.

2) There is a lawsuit pending against the Council for taking any action on Prop 15 because it is dead.  It should give any member of the public pause as to why the Council did not simply follow its own rules and reintroduce the proposal under a new number.  It would only be two weeks from now, before it would be back to the full Council.  Likely, they did not want the TIF Study Commission recommendations (Prop 316) to beat it into law.  This brings me to 3)....

3) The TIF Study Commission recommendations (Prop 316) (see "Finally, TIF Study Commission Recommendations At Committee"), which would require full disclosure of the underlying finances of the proposed projects and the abilty of the TIF to generate adequate revenue to make payments on any debt incurred.  The way I have been framing the need for information is so that the Council and the public could see for themselves - Why a TIF?  Why this location?  Why this project? Why this footprint?  Clearly, the rush on Prop 15 is because there is a concerted effort to avoid full disclosure.

4) The Mass Ave area is thriving, if not downright booming, and has at least 3 large projects already slated for 2013 and 2014 - needing no public dollars.  (Well, suddenly the developers are supposedly telling Deron Kintner, deputy mayor for economic development and director of the bond bank, they think they might need public dollars after all.  Believe him if it makes you feel better.  Many Councillors, who know for a fact that Kintner has previously lied to the Council and to the press, will be citing his words when these TIFs don't work out well.  But, I digress.)  Creating a TIF here is ass backwards from how TIFs are supposed to be created.  The intent is to create a TIF to fund a project to spark development with private dollars.  Instead, the Mass Ave TIF is being created to cannibalize tax revenues from development made with private dollars.  By all rights those tax revenues should be flowing to the schools, library, IndyGo, etc, instead of to a TIF fund.  This is how you set up a thriving slush fund - not a beneficial TIF.

5) The Mass Ave TIF contains three 'nodes' - two along Mass Ave and one abutting the current consolidated downtown TIF.  At least half of the 112 acres is contained in this mystery node.  I have only heard one question asked in a public venue about this huge footprint.  Councillor Zach Adamson (who ultimately was the lone, brave, vote against Prop 15 in committee) asked why that node was needed.  Kintner's answer was that he could not divulge that information at this time.

6) One of the bids responding to the RFP put out by the City to solicite plans to relocate the Mass Ave fire station, actually offered $2 million to the City to buy the property and did not request any public dollars. This proposal was rejected.  The three proposals still in the running curiously all ask for a TIF to be established and for public dollars to be invested in the project.  Now, why would a developer care where public dollars came from?  Really !  This is an example of exactly how stupid and gullible Kintner and the Vaughn/Grand/Ballard administration think the public and the Councillors are.

7) I have not heard one question asked as to why there must be 604 acres of TIF to support a couple of blocks of infrastructure improvements in the Bush Stadium area.  This is the only project publicly acknowledged by the administration.  Obviously, the Councillors have no answer to why this footprint is necessary and wise.  Instead, they focused their attention on getting residents of the area to speak in favor of the TIF because their neighborhoods need help.  Mark Fisher of Develop Indy worked to turn out the residents.  While any caring human being wants to help, we have no gauge for whether or not this TIF is the answer, whether or not other public funds can address the issues, and where this area lands on a prioritized list of neighborhoods in need.

8) The language added to Prop 15 to satisfy some of the neighborhood leaders' interest in tearing down the old Bryant Heating & Cooling facility, is slipshod and may not be enforceable. Lets see if anyone introduces an amendment tonight to clear up the language, or if the Councillors are content to leave it in doubt.

9) There has been no financial data or analyses introduced that would justify why a TIF, why this location (although some need was demonstrated), what project much less why that project, and why this footprint for the proposed Bush Stadium area TIF.

10) The $2 million microloan and the $1.5 million job training programs would be made available to anyone within a 2 mile perimeter of the outline of the two-way expanded consolidated downtown TIF. The language is so poorly written that the recipients may not have to be low income, and/or may not have to have a business located in a low income neighborhood.  Promises have been made to nearby neighborhoods and the Indianapolis religious community at large, that these programs are to help the residents within or abutting the TIF area.  These promises are false promises - if you go by the agreement that has actually been reduced to writing.

11) Expending TIF funds, or swapping TIF dollars for other City dollars, to pay for the $2 million microloan and $1.5 million job training programs outside of the footprint of the TIF would be illegal.

12) The $10 million microloan program has no details except it would be funded by the TIF and spent throughout Indianapolis.  Expending TIF funds, or swapping TIF dollars for other City dollars, to pay for the $10 million microloan program outside of the footprint of the TIF would be illegal.  The City could use $10 million to fund raises for IMPD and IFD, and/or a recruit class for IMPD and IFD.  Money the administration insists is not available.  What will be sacrificed for this microloan program, if the law is actually followed and TIF funds are not used for the program?

13) There has been no consideration given to the question, how many TIFs are too many TIFs for Indianapolis and Marion County.  Already 11% of all taxable property is contained in a Marion County TIF, 33% of all taxable property is contained in a Center Township TIF, and 22% of all taxable property is contained in an IPS district TIF.  Prop 15 seeks to add another square mile of TIF to each of those jurisdictions.  Prop 15 will cannibalize taxes that would have flown to the schools, library, IndyGo, Health & Hospitals, Townships, Fire, IMPD, Parks, as well as the City and County government.  Prop 15 will decrease the tax revenues that flow to these units, as well.

For completeness sake, I recommend the following blog entries as well -- "TIF Fact #1 -- We've Been Bailing Out TIFs for Years", "TIF Fact #2 -- $490 million of property value was transferred from the base to the increment this year", "TIF Fact #3 -- TIFs Cause Higher Property Taxes For Everyone and  Cause 41% of Circuit Breaker Penalties To The Taxing Units", "TIF Fact #4 -- TIFs Comprise 11% of All Taxable Property In Marion County - How Much More is Prudent?",   "TIF Fact #5 -- 16 of 40 Marion County TIFs Have Seen Their Base Driven to Zero Value",  "TIF Fact #6 -- 5 of 6 TIFs Comprising the Consolidated Downtown TIF Have Seen Their Base Driven to Zero Value", "TIF Fact #7 -- 33.3% of All Taxable Property in Center Township is Contained Within a TIF -- How Much is Prudent?", "TIF Fact #8 -- 20% of IPS Taxing District Contained Within a TIF -- How Much is Prudent?", "TIF Fact #9 -- Most TIF Districts Underperform County as a Whole" )

There are many excellent reasons for Prop 15 to be voted down tonight.  But, instead, what we will witness is greed, ambition, threats of retaliation, blackmail, and willful ignorance drive the Council to pass this retched dreck.

Prop 15 - A Nightmarish Mess

The tortuous life of Prop 15 through the Indianapolis-Marion County City-County Council is not the Council's finest hour by any stretch of the imagination.

The ridiculoucity continued this past week with two evenings of meetings of the Metropolitan & Economic Development committee.

Even before Monday night's meeting began, the committee knew it would be recessing that night without passing Prop 15 due to a disagreement with the Ballard administration over a proposed amendment that sought to add language guaranteeing two microloan programs and one job training program.  Councillor Vop Osili had a memo from Deron Kintner to the effect that the City agreed to those programs, but wanted it written into the proposal.  I uploaded to Google Docs the disputed, and never introduced, amendment.  What you'll notice is it's clarity of language.  The header suggests this amendment was intended to be voted on at the full Council meeting where, instead, the Council decided to send Prop 15 back to committee.

What was introduced Friday night, after they had four full days and nights to come to an agreement, was a mess - tortuous language construction, dubious protections for the intended beneficiaries of the programs, and massive loopholes.  Not to mention the misspelling of the word "Councillor" - which is defined in Council rules, by the way.  Plus you'd think commas were an endangered species that had to be included sparingly.  This amendment passed by a vote of 6 to 1, with Councillor Zach Adamson providing the sole no vote.  I have uploaded my copy of this amendment, as the Council website has not yet updated their version of Prop 15.  Sorry for the scribbling, I wasn't thinking I'd be sharing it with everyone.

From the header one might think this amendment would be introduced at the full Council.  The meeting Friday night did start 5 minutes late and the amendment was not available until seconds beforehand.  So, it may be the negotiations were deemed done enough and this messy amendment was introduced at the committee instead.

Here are some attributes of the amendment that catch my eye:

The $10 million microloan program will require "the leveraging of current resources" which usually means floating bonds to be repaid with some revenue stream.  There aren't many details provided on this proposed program.  One thing that is stated is that it would be a county wide program.  It would be a violation of state law for the funds to come from the downtown TIF.

I looked through google street maps and the Marion County Assessor's interactive map to try to locate the "Bryant Heating & Cooling Facility located at 21st and Montcalm".  All parcels at that intersection are owned by private entities, none of which are Bryant.  To the west, however, at 1100 W. 21st Street, there is a large parcel with large buildings that appear abandoned, which is owned by DMD.  Why the lack of specificity when an address or parcel number is three mouse clicks away?  This is important because there is an attempt to require the demolition of this facility.

In multiple places the phrase "the area" is used.  From context it seems like it refers to possibly different boundaries at times - but the phrase is never clearly defined, which results in little to no protection of the residents of the Bush Stadium area that any of the promises made to them will actually be fulfilled - or even be required to be fulfilled.

The $2 million microloan program can be awarded to any business within a two mile radius of the enlarged downtown consolidated TIF.  The language is poor, again a comma or two might clarify, but it is either attempting to say the business must be located in a lower income area (median household income 75% or less of the median income in the County) or that the 2 mile perimeter must be centered on a low income area.  Just by the way, the median household income in the County is $40,421.  But a two mile radius?  How does that adequately target the Riverside or UNWA residents who came out to say they needed help?  Looking at maps, this perimeter could reach the Speedway to the west, Garfield Park to the south, Butler University to the north, and nearly Emerson Avenue to the east.  The intent is to take the funds from the TIF.  But TIF revenues must be spent within the TIF.  These requirements are a clear attempt to circumvent the state laws regarding the expenditure of TIF revenues, and it does not target the folks who live in the Bush Stadium area.

The exact same thing can be said of the $1.5 million job training program as was just stated for the $2 million microloan program.

And the last I'll mention is the really botched attempt to get work for the TIF district residents.  The language seems to say that any business receiving TIF money, should they require new hiring, would have to ensure that 40% of those hired lived in the TIF district.  The business could get out of this by filling out a form that indicated why it tried but failed to get to the 40% figure.  Or, they could bring in all their additional help from out of state, since those folks will not be counted.

Osili has been all over town touting the targeted benefits he personally negotiated for the residents and businesses of the Bush Stadium expansion area.  But, he is not delivering on that promise with this language.  Someone is being scammed - its either Osili or the residents.

Prop 15, that twice beaten dead horse now burdened with the worst amendment in the history of amendments, was voted on twice by the committee Friday night.  The first time the phrasing of the motion left off the key part where it would be sent back to the full Council with a do-pass recommendation.  On the advice of Council counsel, they did a do-over with the correct motion.

Both times the vote was 6 yeas and 1 nay.  Councillor Zach Adamson was the lone no vote both times.  The yeas were Councillors Robinson, Talley, Adams, Osili, Miller and Cardwell.  The last two are Republicans and the rest are Democrats. 

Prop 15, that raggedy, tattered zombie that it is, returns to the full Council Monday night.

Council Committee Followed Improper Procedure In Pushing TIF Expansion Out the Door

Recently fellow blogger Fred McCarthy, over at Indy Tax Dollars, made a startling discovery regarding the outrageous meeting conducted by members of the Council's Metropolitan & Economic Development committee back on August 27.  McCarthy noted that the committee failed to properly vote on amending Prop 15 before voting to move it to the full Council with a 'do-pass' recommendation (see "Haste Makes Waste").

I just watched the ad hoc extension of the committee meeting and followed closely what motions were made and voted on.  (See "WCTY Archive For Metro Devel Committee" to view this section of the meeting for yourself.)

McCarthy is right.

It is surprising, given Councillor Adams lengthy tenure on the Council, that she would goof this up, but she did.

Here are the series of motions and votes.

0:26 -- Chairman Talley adjourns the meeting.

1:56 -- Councillor Osili moves to take Prop 15 off the table.  Adams seconds.  Cain 'thirds'.

Talley does not recognize Osili's motion.

4:40 -- Adams takes control of the meeting by consent.

5:00 -- Osili again moves to take Prop 15 off the table.

5:48 --  Osili reads full text of Prop 15 with amended parts.

No motion to amend is made.  No second to amend is made.

11:59 -- Councillor Robinson moves for recess.  Adams does 'not entertain at this time'.

12:30 -- Adams say incorrectly that the proposal as amended has been moved and seconded.

13:00 -- vote is taken to move Proposal 15 off the table.

Adams follows vote to take off the table with erroneous statement that the matter is "before us as amended".

19:20 -- Adams says they "need to take a vote on the amendment"

no vote is taken

20:05 -- Adams says, erroneously, that they have amended version of Prop 15 before them.

20:20 -- Adams says she will take a vote on Proposal 15 "as amended" - voice vote, not sure if Robinson in the room.

20:38 -- Councillor Adamson explains his vote, Osili thanks him for his assistance.  It should be noted that if Adamson had not remained in the meeting, and left with Talley and Robinson (who came and went during the ad hoc portion), there would not have been a quorum of the members and no doubt that the meeting could not continue.

22:50 -- Cain makes a motion to move Prop 15 as amended to the full Council with a do pass recommendation.  Cannot hear a second on the video.  Vote proceeds again with a 5-1 outcome (Osili, Adamson, Adams, Cain and Miller yes -- Robinson no).

There is never a motion to amend Prop 15.  There is never a second to amend Prop 15.  There is never a vote to amend Prop 15.

The five yes voting members of this committee clearly do not value public notification that a hot topic will be considered by the committee and therefore real opportunity for public input.  There likely will be protests of this characterization, but when push and shove came together, they acted without public input and were fine with it.

Council rules do not require public input in this type of ordinance, unfortunately.  But, Council rules do require proper motions, seconds, and votes to amend.  If the full Council is not interested in sending Prop 15 back to committee because of lack of public notification and input, then they surely must send it back due to improper Council procedure. 

Kudos to Fred McCarthy for bringing this to light.

Slush Funds Advance Out of Public View

From WCTY archives:

 



 

There were no proposals seeking to establish TIF districts on last night's Metropolitan and Economic Development committee's agenda.  This is all we have this morning.  You can clearly see and hear Chairman Steve Talley adjourn the meeting at time stamp 1:33:40.  At the end of the WCTY tape you can hear, but not see, Councillor Virginia Cain ask Republican Council Attorney Elrod for advise.  Then audio cuts out, too.

 

Early on, before this clip begins, when members of the public are addressing the committee, you can see Deron Kintner in the last row of the room.  Trust me, I've been to more budget hearings than some Councillors, but nobody comes to one if their interests aren't being entertained.  So, Deron  Kintner, Executive Director of the Bond Bank, was given a heads up that this would happen.  The public was not informed.

 

From Jon Murray, IndyStar reporter, we have the skeleton of what happened.  He reports that Democrats Mary Adams, Zach Adamson, Vop Osili and Republicans Virginia Cain and Jeff Miller all voted in favor of the proposal, evidently after amending it.  There was one lone "no" vote by Democratic Councillor Leroy Robinson. 

 

Thank you, Councillor Robinson.

 

Murray reports on the amendment:

But the ice thawed Monday after the administration reached an agreement with Democratic council members Vop Osili and Joseph Simpson. They represent districts near those proposed new development zones.

In a newly released memo outlining the agreement, Deron Kintner, Ballard’s new deputy mayor for economic development, commits to tapping $13.5 million from city economic development funds for three loan and workforce training programs.

The committee also amended the proposal to require some local hiring by contractors on new projects and to promote minority employment.
 

The proposed expansion of the downtown TIF to the west aims to capture 604 acres to support road improvements around Bush Stadium and to the east to capture 111 acres to support redevelopment of a block no more than 3 acres in size.  Now add to it more tax dollars swapped by the two district Councillors and you clearly have huge new slush funds being set up. 

There has been no disclosure of basic information justifying or answering the questions : Why this TIF?  Why this place?  Why this project?  Why this footprint?  The three submissions in response to the RFP for the Mass Ave TIF (the 111 acre expansion to the east) are held in embargo; kept out of sight of public eyes and disclosure.

The recommendations of the TIF Study Commission would have required all of this disclosure so that the public AND the Councillors had real information upon which to base a real evaluation of the proposed TIFs.  These recommendations would have protected the public.

The Ballard administration, including Ryan Vaughn and Deron Kintner, do not want any details to escape into the public and have held as much under wraps as they could.  Now we find that Councillors are deliberately helping them keep the wraps on.  This is foul.

The full Council will have an opportunity to send this back to committee where the public can take their rightful place in the discussion.  As it stands now, this action by Adams, Adamson, Osili, Cain and Miller is a travesty that screams of their real distain for proper proceedure, public process, and putting in place recommendations that will protect the public interest.  If this is an inaccurate review of their attitudes, then they have the opportunity to clarify things by walking this proposal back to committee themselves.

 

 

Big Night At Rules Committee

The City-County Council Rules Committee will be taking up some big issues tonight, including partner benefits for City/County employees, and an ordinance banning blackballing of hotel workers who preveiusly worked for a temp agency. 

While most people attending will be interested in one of those two, I do want to make mention of an additional proposal that,if passed, would seek a half million loan from the state and then increase your taxes in 2013 to pay it back.  Hmmm...
Prop 168 does not say what purpose the half million would serve, just that it would be deposited in the City's Cumulative Capital Development Fund.  According to the budget for 2012, this fund was estimated to have over $3.7 million fund balance at the end of this year.  They used this fund to handle some of the property tax circuit breaker credits, eating into the over $8.8 million beginning balance. (see p 82 and 33 of the pdf) So why they need to feed this fund with a loan and add to our taxes next year is not clear.

Prop 179, sponsored by Councillor Brian Mahern, would establish a new requirement for a hotel to qualify for its annual operating license from the City.  No hotel would be able to enter into a services contract if that contract contained a stipulation that the hotel could not employ a person who had previously worked for the services agency.  This practice traps people in the employ of these temporary agencies and their attendant low wages with no benefits.  The hotels were quite happy to hide behind the skirts of the maids and other hotel workers in petitioning for more and more taxpayer funds to flow to the ICVA and the CIB - then unceremoniously cut these workers' jobs in favor of these black-hearted outsourcing agreements.
Prop 213, sponsored by Councillors Mansfield, Adamson, Barth, Hickman, Lutz and Hunter, would make various benefits available to City and County government employees who are in domestic partnerships. To qualify, the couple would have to be living together for at least one year and file a Domestic Partnership declaration the Human Resources.  The benefits provided to the partner would be the same as those now afforded to a spouse of an employee - such as health insurance and pension benefits - and family/medical leave would be provided to the employee for situations arising with their partner.  Should the domestic partners cease being a couple, HR would have to be notified immediately.  All benefits provided to a partner would be taxable to the employee.

On Prop 213, all I can say is - about time.  The State refuses to allow same sex partners to marry, stripping these couples of many legal rights married couples take for granted.  The least we can be as a City is progressive enough to provide equal benefits for partners as we provide to spouses.

The agenda for the Rules Committee lists 8 items.  The meeting will begin at 5:30 pm in the Public Assembly Room.

Six Councillors Stand Up for the Taxpayers

On Monday night the full City-County Council took up the issue of whether or not the North of South (aka City Way) boondoggle warranted a Certified Technology Park status (see "Taxpayer Fleecing for NO-SO (aka City Way) Continues").  Six Councillors stood up for the taxpayers of Indiana and Indianapolis and voted 'no'.

The six were Democrats Adamson, Brown, Gray, Hickman, Mahern, and Oliver.

All remaining Councillors, with the exception of Hunter and Mansfield, who were not present, voted in favor of declaring shops, hotels, and a few apartments, with their attendant minimum wage jobs, the very high tech jobs we need to be attracting to our City.

To view the discussion, click here and then scroll down to Prop 66 under "all items".

Councillor Brian Mahern began with a statement, in which he clearly outlined the lack of an actual high tech component.  He also mentioned the $98 million financing for the City's loan to the developer was with Federal 'Disaster Relief Bonds', which just might have been put to good use in Southern Indiana about now.  Excellent point.

Councillor Zach Adamson, who voted against the boondoggle in Committee, also made a statement - saying outright that "Designating City Way a CTP is dishonest and would further add to justify the distrust the public has in its elected officials".  Exactly.

So, from one taxpayer, thank you to all six Councillors.

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.