Election 2010 -- Voter Information Portal

The election is on Tuesday. If you have questions - like where you vote and what your ballot will look like, there is a really helpful 'Voter Information Portal' on the City Clerk's Election website.

Click on the link below to get to the Portal:

http://maps.indy.gov/VIP/

When you do, you will be taken to this screen (I added the red arrows, though):

Enter your address in the box that the top red arrow pointing at, and click the 'verify address' button. Once the address is verified, the 'search' button, noted with the bottom red arrow, will become active. Fill in your date of birth in the boxes provided, if you want to find out if you are registered to vote. You do NOT have to fill in your birthdate to proceed. Select any particular item you wish in the 'view' dropdown box. All of the options will remain available when you get to the next screen, so you can choose to leave this at the 'polling place' option. When you have filled in all that you wish to, click the 'search' button.

Then you will get this screen below (again, I added the red arrows):

Depending upon what 'view' you selected in the dropdown box on the first screen, you will see one of the tabs at the top of the screen open (highlighted with the top red arrow). I wanted to see the ballot, so I clicked on the 'sample ballot' tab. That led to this screen. I got stuck on this screen, waiting for the 'loading' circle to stop spinning (I've highlighted that with the bottom red arrow). Just ignore that spinning icon and click on the hotlink '2010 General Election Ballot', to see the ballot as it will be in your voting place.

This Voter Information Portal is fat with information that you may want to have before Tuesday.

The Act is Getting Old

Sometimes, when I go long between posts, it is because I have other things I must get done. Once in a while it is because I don't have anything to say. This time, it is because I have too much to say and needed to let things perk for a while.

I guess the core of it all is that I am so very disappointed in those Republican Councillors for whom I have some personal respect. Not that my opinion will carry any weight with them - or even should. But, with the exception of Councillor Christine Scales, the Rs have clearly demonstrated that they will get in line and do whatever their party leaders want them to do - regardless of what it means for their constituents, or for the City's welfare as a whole.

Last Monday night's vote on the CIB budget is just the latest in a string of truly bad decisions - all of which have just eeked by with the minimum of votes.

There was the vote last year, to approve the requisite zoning on 450 E. Market Street - that was the Council's only bite at the apple to shut down a plan by Mayor Ballard to spend $18 million on a garage that was only worth about half that, and give tens of millions of dollars of property to Tadd Miller Enterprises.

There was the hotel tax increase and the grant of permission for the CIB to take in a $27 million loan from the State - with no idea how they would be able to pay it back without raising yet another tax in 2012. Barnes & Thornburg lobbyists Bob Grand and Joe Loftus, who have insinuated themselves firmly in charge of the Mayor's office and now the Council, through Council President Ryan Vaughn, pushed all the levers to get their clients more money through the CIB. Hoteliers shamelessly hid behind the maids' skirts in order loosen the City's purse strings - then even more shamelessly, outsources the maids' jobs.

The sale of the sewer and water utilities had some bright spots. I think that Chris Cotterill tried to make as much information available as physically possible. Unlike others on the 25th and 23rd floors, he and Dave Sherman tried to sell the sale on the basis of facts and figures. Many people disagreed with them on the final decision - but it was an honest debate with honest differences of opinion.

The parking meter deal is cut from a very different cloth. What we are seeing now is a formula - make a PR push and keep to a script in order to sell the deal - but, make sure you do not share all of the relevant facts. We are seeing the very same thing with the North of South project.

But shades of this formula have been visible in the Council review of the CIB budget - particularly on the $10 million to be given to the Pacers in 2011, $8 million of which is from property taxes shuttled through to the CIB in a process that was the antithesis of transparency; it deliberately kept the deal from the light of day and any public scrutiny. There was much wringing of hands and gnashing of teeth and pseudo hard questions volleyed at the CIB representatives. All theater. And the act is getting old.

A friend of mine quipped, "Its amazing how much posturing can be done by a governing body with no spine."

Its all sad for Indianapolis. Lobbyists are in charge. Those folks elected to serve their constituents' interests, are instead serving their Party's interests. Its an abdication of their responsibility. And a mighty few are getting more and more wealthy because of that abdication. The bill keeps getting paid by the taxpayers and the ratepayers, and the bills will keep coming due for the next 50 years.

Council to Take Stand On Property Tax Dollars to Pacers

Tonight's City-County Council meeting will see final adoption of the various budgets for the City, County, and municipal corporations.

The CIB budget has become the poster child for how to glam up the usually boring budget process. Just try to pass $8 million of property tax money to a sport organization; that's apparently all it takes.

The rest of the budget should pass in with little excitement.

The CIB budget, however, is different.

It is time for the individual Councillors to take a stand on the movement of $8 million in property taxes from the consolidated downtown TIF to the Pacers, through the CIB. They can amend the proposed budget to redact the $10 million total gift, or just vote against the budget as it now stands.

If no new budget is approved, the CIB would have to live on the same budget as last year. Although the CIB cried wolf throughout all of their bailout hearings in 2009, they still managed to pad the 2010 budget enough so that there was an extra $10 million in it to give to the Pacers.

If you compare the proposed 2011 budget ($104 m) with the approved 2010 budget ($94 m), there is a request for $10 m extra dollars. But, if you compare the proposed 2011 budget ($104 m) with the amount expected to actually be spent in 2010 ($85 m) you find a huge increase, amounting to nearly $20 million in new dollars. And remember, that $85 m figure includes the $10 million 2010 installment of the Pacers gift from the taxpayers of Indianapolis.

As some Councillors will try to tie the IndyGo and Library budgets to their CIB vote, let me remind everyone that IndyGo got the budget it asked for and the Library got $800,000 less than it asked for. IndyGo's 2010 budget is $75.7 m, while its proposed 2011 budget is only $63.5 m; a $12.2 m reduction. The Library's 2010 budget is $49.5 m, while its proposed 2011 budget is only $45.2 m; a more modest, but still real, reduction of $4.3 m.

Isn't it time the priorities for how we spend tax dollars get put on services for Indianapolis residents, rather than on bailouts for sports teams?

It is time for the Council to say clearly to the Capital Improvement Board - "enough". We shall see how each Councillor votes tonight, after all of the hand-wringing and declarations of it being a hard decision are over. Remember folks - it is your money they are spending.

North of South - Details of Proposed Deal

The North of South development is the next big thing to be promoted by City officials. Presumably their timetable had been predicated upon the completion of the parking meter deal by now.

North of South is anywhere from 10 to 14 acre development proposed for land owned by Lilly and just north of their main campus. A rezoning petition is in process, and is scheduled to be considered by the Metropolitan Development Commission on November 17.

Just yesterday, the economic development committee of the MDC heard for the first time, details about the proposed deal between the City of Indianapolis (who would finance the lion's share of the project), Buckingham Companies (who would develop and own the project), and Eli Lilly (who developed the plan and who will continue to own the land upon which the development would occur). The Commissioners requested that their vote on this proposed deal also be postponed to November 17. At the moment it is scheduled for November 3. Should the MDC approve the proposed deal, it would move to the Council for its verdict. The City hopes to be floating the bonds before the end of the year.

I made an open records request for the proposed deal, and received a document titled "Memorandum of Understanding As of September 27, 2010 With Respect to North of South - Mixed Use Development". I have posted that document. (you will need to sign in with a google account to access it -- if you just want me to email it to you, please send me a note to hadenoughindy@gmail.com) This document alludes to two attachments, neither of which did I get. I have requested those, and when I get them, I will post those as well.

Between the presentation at yesterday's MDC committee meeting and the MOU, here are the details of the proposed deal.

Two years ago, Lilly began planning for the undeveloped ground it owns north of its main campus. It currently serves as parking lots, primarily. One year ago, the City entered the picture, and has been working with Lilly and Lilly's chosen developer, Buckingham Companies. Lilly sees development of the area as a means of creating a link from downtown to the southeast quadrant and as a way to create a sense of place that is 'interesting and energizing', which would help them attract and retain talent. The Lilly representative at yesterday's meeting said they had chosen Buckingham because of their commitment to Indianapolis, and their 'strength both financially and in developing this kind of thing'.

The exact square footage, like the acreage of the project, shifted slightly, depending upon who was talking. Therefore, I will stick with the MOU and the presentation yesterday of Deron Kintner, Executive Director of the Bond Bank, and evidently the City's spokesman on the deal. He relied upon a PowerPoint presentation, which I have also uploaded.

The project includes:
320 apartments
150-152 room hotel
15,000-18,000 square feet conference center
30,000-40,000 square foot retail & restaurants
10,000 office/lab space
a new YMCA
sustainability garden/city park with significant public art
the MOU mentions 'parking garages' as well.

The total cost would be about $163 million. ($155 million for project costs and $8 million for capitalized interest)

The City would float a bond large enough to generate $86 million in cash for the project, plus $8 million to cover the first three year's payment on the bond - those three years being interest-only payments. More on how the bonds would be paid off later.

The City proposes spending $9 million from the consolidated downtown TIF on infrastructure improvements - roads, sewers, sidewalks, and the like.

The City would also pay $14 million back to Lilly for a loan Lilly made on the Harding Street TIF in 1991. This money would become Lilly's cash contribution to the project. It also will be allowing the development to occur on its land, valued at $14 million - but would retain ownership of the land.

The YMCA is expected to cost $18 m, most of which was said to be coming from a 'significant donation' from the Lilly Foundation.

Buckingham has to come up with its own cash investment of $7.5 million, plus about $6.25 million to be set aside as insurance of one year's bond debt payment. The latter could, instead, be guaranteed by a letter of credit or similar instrument, instead of with cash.

The City considers the total contributed by the Developer and Lilly to amount to $41.75 million - but it could be argued that the $14 million for the land isn't really a cash investment, the $6.25 million to be set aside for one year's debt payment isn't cash if its just a line of credit, and the City is providing the $14 million cash to Lilly - which would drop the actual developer/Lilly investment to $7.5 million. In addition, there is the $18 million for the YMCA, evidently to be supported by a Lilly Endowment grant to the Y.

More investment money is expected from the State. Indiana Economic Development, Inc., is supposed to give $6 million to the development. The 10,000 square foot office portion of the development, is anticipated to contain within it, a wetlab, which is evidently being used as the hook to get the State to designate the entire project a 'Certified Technology Park'. CTP designation allows income, sales, and use taxes that usually go to the State, to go to the City instead. This could add up to at least $5 million for the City, who through the MOU, has agreed to send it to the developer for either project development funds or repayment of the bonds.

The bonds are to be repaid by the developer within 10 years, unless the agreement is extended at that time. Except, significantly, ALL property tax money generated by the project will be used to pay down the amount of money that the developer has to come up with. The first three years payments are interest only, and will come from the $8 million portion of the bond mentioned earlier. In year 4, the developer's payments begin. The City, in its presentation yesterday to the Commissioners, and in its statements to the press, have downplayed the contribution of the property taxes to the repayment of the bond. These funds should definitely be included in the cost to the City, just as Kintner included the abated taxes as costs to the City in other developments he used for comparison. Kintner estimated the property taxes to amount to $1.7 million per year, which over 7 years, amounts to just under $12 million.

Under the proposed agreement, the City would get the first mortgage. The Lilly representative said yesterday, that Lilly would get the second mortgage on the project.

While Kintner is trying to present the proposed development as a $155 million deal that costs the City only $9 million, I would beg to differ. This proposal would cost the $9 million for infrastructure improvements, the $12 million in property taxes that would be applied to the bond payments, the $5 million for the Certified Technology Park designation, and the $14 million cash to repay Lilly for the loan back in 1991. That comes to $45 million. And, that is only if the project is a success. If it is not, then the City and its taxpayers will be on the hook for the bond payments and own a partially completed project that will undoubtedly need another infusion of cash. The risk is all on the City here.

In addition, the City will use Buckingham Construction as its construction manager for the City's infrastructure projects, with City paying Buckingham an undefined amount of fees for those services.

Of interest is one item in the MOU and another mentioned yesterday, regarding Wellpoint, which leases a building abutting this area. Kintner mentioned that their lease is up in 2015, and the City is already talking with them. The MOU mentions that the City is 'obligated' to build Wellpoint a parking garage.

It never stops, does it?

Its Raining in Indianapolis - Raining Money, That Is !

Are you rich, powerful -- or just know people who are?

Well then, Indianapolis is for you. We're GIVING money away ! Not chump change -- but MILLIONS !

You could be our next recipient ! Come on down !!!

Just call 1 (800) BAL-LARD !!!!!


void where prohibited by law -- aw ! forget that -- for YOU, we'll pretend it meets all our laws !

Don't walk !! Run !!

Call 1 (800) BAL-LARD !!!!

operators standing by

Muni Corps Committee Passes $10 Million to the Pacers

The Municipal Corporations committee passed the CIB budget, without amendment, to the full Council with a do-pass recommendation by a vote of 5 - 2.

Voting for the budget, which includes $10 million gift to the Pacers, were: All of the Republicans - Malone, Lutz, Cardwell, and Rivera - and one Democrat - Nytes. Voting against were two Democrats - Dane Mahern and Maggie Lewis.

Muni Corp Committee To Move Forward on CIB, Library, IndyGo Budgets

Tonight, the City-County Council's Municipal Corporations committee will do the final review, revision, and vote to move all of the municipal corporations budgets out of committee. There are 5 municipal corporations - the Airport, Health & Hospitals, IndyGo, the Library, and the Capital Improvement Board.

The Airport and H&H budgets will enjoy little to no drama tonight. This is not the case with the other three.

Will Higgins reports in this morning's Indy Star, that there is a deal to replace all of IndyGo's and much of the Library's proposed shortfall appeal with money set aside when the United TIF was created.

What's a shortfall appeal? Its easiest to explain by starting with how a tax rate is determined. You determine a tax rate by dividing the amount of property tax requested in a budget, by the assessed value of all property that will be used to pay that property tax. The taxing unit, whether it be a school, a library, or the City, are bound by the property tax rate. If somebody doesn't pay their taxes, too bad. If the property owners appeal their individual assessed value, and win, then the total assessed value drops. This, too, reduces the property tax revenue that the taxing unit gets -- unless it files for a property tax shortfall appeal. If granted, the next year's tax bills will show an additional line for those properties that have not already hit the tax caps - raising those property tax bills.

In the case of IndyGo and the Library, a shortfall appeal cannot be submitted to the State Department of Local Government Finance without the prior approval of the Council. If granted, the additional tax would be applied to next year's tax bill -- just in time for the reelection campaigns for Mayor and City-County Council. And, none of those folks want to HAVE to be explaining how its REALLY NOT a tax increase.

This alone would be incentive enough for the 'deal' that seems to have been struck by the Council leadership. Higgins reports,

A bipartisan group of council leaders on Monday agreed to recommend adding $1 million to the library's 2011 budget, partially offsetting the library's property tax shortfall appeal request for $1.8 million.

The group's plan also would provide IndyGo with the $1.5 million it initially sought in its shortfall appeal.

...

The money would come from a fund created in the 1990s to service debt from a tax-increment financing district that helped finance the former United Airlines maintenance hub at Indianapolis International Airport.

Under the proposed deal, the funding source would be recurring for the library but a one-time-only fix for the bus service.

This deal would not increase the proposed budget for either IndyGo nor the Library - and actually would decrease the Library budget by $800,000.

The drama with the CIB is still bubbling. I think we can be sure that the deal struck on the IndyGo and Library shortfall appeals will be played, behind the scenes of course, as a sufficient trade to allow the $10 million gift to the Pacers in the CIB budget. The question is, who will bite? Council President, Ryan Vaughn, has been quoted in previous Star reports by Jon Murray, as tying the two issues together. He quotes Vaughn as saying,

Members of both parties say they are reluctant to approve the CIB's budget. Council President Ryan Vaughn, a Republican, says it's a tough call when the library and bus systems' long-term fiscal health is in question.

"I think people are open to passing it as long as we are finding solutions to the library situation," Vaughn said in an interview. "We want to work hard to send the right message to the public."

We shall see what happens tonight. Will the Councillors on the committee think that not cutting the proposed IndyGo budget and cutting the proposed Library budget by only $800,000, is sufficient trade for $10 million to the Pacers in the CIB budget. If they do, then Councillor Vaughn is correct - if that deal is struck, the Councillors WILL BE FORCED to "work hard to send the right message to the public." I say that because I don't think the public is that dumb or ill-informed.

Councillors serving on the Municipal Corporations committee are: Republicans, Barb Malone (Chair), Jeff Cardwell, Bob Lutz, and Angel Rivera -- and -- Democrats, Maggie Lewis, Dane Mahern, and Jackie Nytes. The meeting begins at 5:30 in room 260 of the City-County Building.