Mass Transit - TIF Out, Eminent Domain Out, Other Good Ideas Avoided

First off, lets take a moment to celebrate that HB 1011 was amended to omit the option to establish a TIF district along any rail lines. This amendment was offered by Representative Cherrish Pryor. Whew ! One very bad idea down !

Now on to other good amendments - some that made it and others that didn't get far.

I tripped on a link to documents provided to Legislators on the ISL website (in.gov/legislative).  These apparently are the documents that are available on the Legislators desks at various hearing dates.  I poked on the mass transit bill (HB 1011) and the House Ways and Means committee and finally found a hearing on February 13 with several amendments, some voted on and others not.

In this group were some very good ideas.  Amendment 35 (here is the link, but it requires ftp and may not work for you) banned the use of taxpayer assets or forced employee time to promote the public question unless those assets were also made available to those opposed to the public question.  It also would have banned vendors from promoting the question. 

Amendment 35 was not heard - an author was not even found at the hearing.

Amendment 38 (click here - again I hope the link works for you) was heard and passed by consent.  It wasn't clear to me if Rep. Pryor authored it, but she certainly championed it in the House Ways and Means Committee meeting. It included the elimination from HB 1011, the transit authority use of eminent domain.  Discussion mentioned that the Cities and Counties have the authority and most of the right of way already.  It also included the additional requirement that any bonds floated by the transit authority must also be approved by the fiscal bodies of the Counties involved, and set minority and women hiring goals.  And also notable, the transit authority board would have additional seats appointed by the County Councils and County Commissioners.  The Marion County appointments would be 5 - 2 by the Mayor, 2 by the Council, and 1 by the Commissioners.

Amendments 37, 40, and 41 all included a township by township referendum vote.  The final evolution of this issue was to allow the outer townships of the outer counties to have individual referenda, but not the internal townships in those counties, and no township votes in Marion County at all.  Of course, they need the donors from Decatur, Perry, and Franklin Townships, who will not see any improvement in the lacking transit we now 'enjoy,' should this mass transit plan go all the way through.

HB 1011 did pass out of the House and now goes to the Senate.  Hopefully they will include language to limit taxpayer's subsidizing only the proponents of the public question, trim the costs in half, include township by township opt-in votes, and find a way to ensure that any plan implied in the public referendum be the plan that must be implemented with the tax revenue approved.

But, today, I intend to enjoy the fact that the TIF district is out.

Indiana - The Hate State ?

If the State Legislature doesn't change course, it will push Indiana into the unholy position of the most hateful State in the Union.

Besides its headlong rush to vilify unions and gut collective bargaining, the Legislature is pushing bigoted anti-GBLT and anti-Latino bills through. I do not know if Governor Mitch Daniels has to sign these bills in order for them to become law. That certainly is a significant question.

HJR 6 seeks to put discrimination into the Indiana State Constitution by banning same sex marriage or civil union, partner benefits, and anything else that can be interpreted as being 'substantially similar to marriage'. This bill passed the House prior to the Democratic Caucus' self-imposed exile to Urbana, IL. There is a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on this bill scheduled for tomorrow, March 16, beginning at 9 am in the Senate Chambers. If it passes this year, it must pass again in either 2013 or 2014. If it passes through the General Assembly a second time, it would have to pass a vote of regular Hoosiers through a public referendum, for the Constitution to be so amended.

SB590 seeks, among other things, to require Indiana's police to ask for proof of legal residency from anyone they 'suspect' could be here as an illegal alien. It is doubtful that a Canadian accent would be deemed sufficiently suspicious. A Spanish accent, however, would certainly qualify the speaker for unconstitutional requests to produce proper papers or be detained (aka, arrested), until such papers could be produced. This bill passed the Senate and has been referred to the House, where the Democrats are in exile.

While I tend to believe that the human rights, the civil rights, and old fashioned decency are enough reason for these bills to be defeated, others bring up economic costs to the State should these bills be enacted.

Gay bashing laws tend to make States less inviting to a very talented and upper income population. This impacts the ability of companies to attract and retain valued employees. This impacts the decision of companies to locate or expand or remain in those States.

Latino bashing laws tend to make States less inviting for tourism; a consequence clearly seen in Arizona. Increased costs for policing efforts are said to be significant and ill considered in this economy at any price.

While the push for these hate-filled laws is illuminating the radical agenda of the Republican controlled General Assembly, these are not issues that attract complete Republican support. There is significant Republican antipathy to both of these bills. This fact alone makes it incumbent upon those Republican Senators and Representatives to do all they can to kill these hate bills.

The Democratic Caucus exile can help with SB590 - but for how long? Additionally, influential Senator Luke Kenley is now asking for amendments, which is a positive sign, but may not mean much to House members who now control that bill.

Thus far, HJR 6 doesn't have any high profile Republican Senators pushing against it. That is a travesty and does a huge disservice to Republicans in the general public who do not support this attack on themselves, their friends, or their family members who are gay or lesbian.

All of the majority's radical agenda is alarming for another reason. While control of the House swaps back and forth from year to year, control of the Senate does not. Should any piece of the radical agenda be passed, it will be years, if not decades, before a Senate could be voted into office that would allow a bill reversing the hate to be considered.

If there ever was a time to call your Senators and Representatives, it is now. Stand up and be counted if you oppose Indiana rocketing to the bottom, to be known and codified as the 'Hate State'.

Senator Delph Wants Study Committee on Redistricting Process

From an editorial in today's Indianapolis Star, I have learned that Senator Mike Delph has authored Senate Concurrent Resolution 95, which would create a 'Census Data Study Committee' to examine the processes that could be used in 2011 to redraw new Districts according to the population numbers to be generated by the upcoming Census.

The editorial quotes Delph as saying, "Voters should pick their elected officials rather than elected officials picking their voters." Well said, sir. Well said.

Delph's Resolution has gained other authors; Senators Sue Landske (R, District 6), Timothy Lanane (D, District 25), and Connie Lawson (R, District 24). It passed out of the Senate Elections Committee on April 6 with a unanimous 'do pass' recommendation. The Star editorial reports that it was approved by the Senate on Monday and now awaits an uncertain future in the House.
There are two co-sponsors in the House; Representatives Matt Pierce (D, District 61) and Jerry Torr (R, District 39).

The Star sees this as an opportunity for Indiana to move past the old and tarnished practice of gerrymandering districts to ensure the incumbents retain their seats. This is the very thing that could kill this measure. The resolution does not carve out any particular aim of the study committee to bring Indiana out into the sunshine, rather it suggests

SECTION 1. That the Legislative Council is urged to direct the Census Data
Study Committee to study the topic of redistricting and to make recommendations on processes that could be utilized by the Indiana General Assembly to promote the establishment of easily identifiable boundaries that keep communities of interest together.
SECTION 2. That the Census Data Study Committee, if so directed, shall review the redistricting process and make recommendations on ways to improve the process for 2011. As part of this review, the committee shall investigate computer programs that are available to assist in the redistricting process and make recommendations on the use of such programs. In addition, the committee shall make recommendations on methods to include the public in the process, such as, holding public meetings or holding advisory meetings with community leaders.
SECTION 3. That the committee, if so directed, shall operate under the direction of the Legislative Council and shall issue a report when directed to do so by the Council.
SECTION 4. The Secretary of the Senate is hereby directed to transmit a copy of this Resolution to the Legislative Council through the Executive Director of the Legislative Services Agency.

Surely the House can find a way to support a study committee that would look at the process of determining Districts. The House Democrats in particular are being quite obstructionist in this General Assembly. Crafting only one year's budget and rolling back the referendum process come immediately to mind. Nothing will scream 'absolutely, totally, obstructionist' quite like killing Delph's Resolution.

Lets talk.

The CIB - An Example of Bad Government In Action

The Capital Improvements Board (CIB) budget shortfall is causing no shortage of outrage and angst in Indianapolis. For the purposes of this blog entry, lets not go into the merits of that debate. Rather, lets look at what the CIB illuminates in how really perverse and structurally unaccountable our government can get.

The CIB is classified as a Municipal Corporation tied to Indianapolis-Marion County government. It provides a political 'arms length' between the duly elected officials - the Mayor, the County Commissioners, and the City-County Councillors - and the decisions of the CIB. These elected officials all appoint members to serve on the CIB, but the Mayor gets 5 of the 9
CIB members and it is really his organization to steer. The CIB has the authority to float bonds and has done so, although they have also used the services of the Indianapolis Bond Bank for other bonds. Part of the CIB budget is reviewed by the City-County Council which must approve that part of the budget. The state law that set up the CIB gave it the authority to levy a property tax, with the prior approval of the City-County Council to do so. So far the CIB has not dipped into that well.

The supposed purpose of the CIB is to manage or operate the Indianapolis Convention Center, Victory Field (triple A Indianapolis Indians baseball team stadium), Conseco Fieldhouse (Pacers stadium), Lucas Oil Stadium (Colts), Capital Commons (a park between the Convention Center and the Statehouse), and a parking garage underneath Capital Commons.

The northern third of Capital Commons was donated by the CIB to Simons Property Group for their new World Headquarters in 2004, as part of a $23 million package of incentives approved by Mayor Bart Peterson and the City-County Council. The building is right across the street from the Indiana Statehouse. The Simons also own the Indiana Pacers.

The CIB manages and operates the facilities, but does not own them. The Indiana Stadium and Convention Building Authority (ISCBA) built and owns the new Lucas Oil Stadium and will build and own the pending expansion of the Convention Center. Both are leased by the ISCBA to the Indiana Office of Management and Budget (IOMB) which in turns subleases them to the CIB. In addition to the costs of the sublease, the CIB must pay the expenses of the IOMB - presumably only those connected to the stadium and convention center. The other facilities are owned by the Marion County Convention and Recreational Facilities Authority (MCCRFA) which also owns the ill-fated United Maintenance Facility on the grounds of the Indianapolis International Airport. The MCCRFA leases Victory Field, Conseco Fieldhouse, the existing part of hte Convention Center to the CIB. Again, the CIB pays for the expenses of the MCCRFA in addition to the lease payments.

The CIB negotiates and holds the contracts with the ball teams that play in the stadiums run by the CIB. Bob Grand is the current President of the CIB and he and his law firm, Barnes & Thornburg, represent the Simons and the Indiana Pacers. Joe Loftus, also a partner in Barnes & Thornburg, is a member of the board of the ISCBA. Barnes & Thornburg also represent the City of Indianapolis at the Indiana Statehouse.

Why is it so convoluted? Whether on purpose or not, the result is a Rube Goldberg device that makes accountability and transparency pretty much impossible.

The CIB collects taxes from a number of sources -- cigarette, innkeepers, food and beverage, admissions tax, car rental tax, and the sales taxes captured in a special district around the CIB's properties. The CIB must share a fixed percentage of the innkeepers tax revenue it receives with the Indiana Convention & Visitors Association (ICVA). The ICVA advertises the Convention and offers discounts on hotel space through its website, www.indy.org.

The much touted reason for keeping the CIB afloat is to keep the Indianapolis tourist and hospitality industry afloat. Oft repeated number is 66,000 service industry jobs. To that end, we not only find taxpayers funding stadiums, conventions centers, and advertising, but the City also has been quite generous with abatements and financing for hotels, and the Circle Center Mall was funded by carving out a TIF area. In addition to the players already mentioned, the City, through a variety of agencies, funds Indianapolis Downtown, Inc. (IDI) to the tune of about $1 million a year. Besides advertising and monitoring downtown office occupancy rates, IDI hires off duty police officers to patrol the mile square. What? IMPD can't do that? Guess not. The Metropolitan Development Commission waived a $6 million fine for the early sale of the Pan Am Plaza by the Indiana Sports Corp. (ISC) A lawsuit has been filed to recoup that money as modest payment for loss of precious downtown public open space.

The CIB has asked major investors of the Circle Center Mall project to forgive $34 million of the money they are owed for their loan of Mall profits to help build Conseco Fieldhouse. They are $20 million short for the annual operating costs of the Lucas Oil Stadium. They anticipate being $6 million in the hole for operating costs of the expanded Convention Center. They owe $17 million to the Indiana Treasurer for a loan so they could get out of some bad swap options. They need another $26 million to create a cash reserve for the repayment of bonds it holds. They are asking for $3 million more to give to the ICVA. And, they want to volunteer to take over the $15 million operating costs of the Conseco Fieldhouse now obligated to be paid by the Simons/Pacers.

The CIB has not been demonstrably successful. From 1998 through 2007 (the latest figures released by the CIB), the number of events held, the number of attendees, and the revenues generated at CIB managed properties has remained flat - despite a 2005 expansion of the Convention Center that increased floor space by one-third.

All these folks are busy busy busy. What never gets done, though, is an analysis of what it has cost the taxpayers to build this 'thriving' downtown and when, if ever, it will be successful enough to fund itself.

Let's talk.

Progress on Open-Door Laws In Jeopardy

Representative John Bartlett (D), Chairman of the Indiana House Government and Regulatory Reform Committee, has pocketed SB 232, which would strengthen Indiana's Open Door Laws by putting forth penalties for government officials who wantonly ignore the public's right to access and require posting of meeting notices on a governmental website.

Mr. Bartlett represents District 95 which is wholly inside Indianapolis. (link to the district map) Generally, the district is within Lawrence Township, straddling I-465 with a western boundary approaching Binford Blvd., a southern boundary along E. 38th St., the northern boundary encompassing Fort Harrison State Park, and the eastern boundary just past German Church Rd.

You may contact Representative Bartlett with your comments at h95@in.gov or 232-9600. Make sure you mention if you live in District 95.

SB 232 passed unanimously out of the Senate Local Government Committee on February 18 and unanimously out of the Senate on February 4. It was referred to Representative Bartlett's committee on March 3 and there it has sat.

Here is the Legislature's digest of the bill:

Public access issues. Provides that the court may impose a civil penalty against an officer or employee of a public agency, or the public agency for violating the public records law or the open door law of: (1) not more than $100 for the first violation; and (2) not more than $500 for any additional violations. Provides that a public agency (excluding a state agency) may provide to persons who annually request notice of meetings, notice by: (1) electronic mail (if the agency has the capacity to transmit electronic mail); or (2) posting the notice on the agency's web site at least 48 hours before the meeting (if the agency has a website). Provides that a public agency may withhold personal information from public disclosure regarding an individual less than 19 years of age who participates in an activity conducted or supervised by a state educational institution, including personal information regarding the individual's parent or guardian. Requires (rather than allows) a court to review public records in camera to determine whether redaction of the records violates the public records act. If a formal complaint is filed, requires the public access counselor to review public records in camera without redaction (excluding redacted information that is work product of an attorney) to determine whether the redaction of the records violated the access to public records act. Creates an education fund for a program administered by the public access counselor to train public officials and educate the public on the rights of the public and the responsibilities of public agencies under the public access laws.

According to an editorial in today's Indianapolis Star, Representative Bartlett remains silent on why he has pocketed this bill and refused to schedule it for hearing, even though it commands wide support and even as the clock ticks toward a deadline for bills to move out of committee.

Let's talk - to Representative Bartlett