WRTV Takes Look at Broad Ripple Garage

Kara Kenney, WRTV reporter, did a very good job summarizing the issues revolving around the proposed garage to be built in Broad Ripple with $6.4 million of public money.

I'd embed the video, if it were possible.  Print version of report - click here.   Video version of report - click here. Gary Welsh of Advance Indiana and Zach Adamson, candidate for City-County Council, were both interviewed, among others.

Happy Father's Day !

Happy Father's Day to all you Dads out there.  Hope you have a fantabulous day with your kids !

Are Taxpayer Dollars Being Flagrantly Misused?

Yesterday I posted about the announced Broad Ripple parking garage and some tidbits I had gathered by simply going through government public records.

One document was the Request For Qualifications that was posted by the Ballard administration to solicit proposals for a parking structure in this area.  It specifically asked respondents to include construction cost estimates and operational expense estimates in their proposals.  Since this was not included in the winning group's proposal that I received from the City, I inquired after those numbers.  My request was denied with the citation of an Indiana State statute that trade secrets may be held from public disclosure laws.  I will, of course, take this up with the Indiana Public Access Counselor's office later this morning.

But, for now, I would like to share with you some conclusions of a 2007 study by Walker Parking Consultants analysing the adequacy of parking in the Broad Ripple Village area.  Walker Parking Consultants, along with Newpoint Parking, Keystone Construction, and RATIO Architects, formed the partnership that won the City's approval to build a 350 parking space garage with retail and a police substation at 6280-6286 N. College Avenue.

In the 2007 study, Walker Parking Consultants employed their 'trade secrets' to analyze the parking supply,  estimate cost of construction, estimate cost of operation, estimate costs to park, and locate where a new parking facility would be best suited to the needs of the area.  These are what I'd like to share with you today.

PARKING SUPPLY - the study concluded that of the 40 blocks of Broad Ripple Village, parking was adequate for almost all areas, at most times of the day, night, and week, in 2007 and as projected into the future.  There were 16 blocks that were shown to exceed 85% capacity at 11 pm on weekends.  A particular 6 block area was calculated to have a deficit of 132 parking spaces at 11 pm on weekends (adequate at all other times) and projected to have a deficit of 180 parking spaces at 11 pm on weekends in the future.

COST OF CONSTRUCTION -  the study noted the rising cost of concrete and cost of construction of parking garages over the previous 4 years, rising about 17% over that time span.  They concluded that it would cost $4.5 million to construct a 4 story, 300 space, parking garage.  They note that additional spaces would cost $21,878 per space.  Using that figure, a 350 space garage would come to $5.6 million - not including acquisition of land or demolition costs.

COST OF OPERATION - They concluded that it would cost between $450 and $600 per space, per year, to operate a garage in the Broad Ripple area.  Combining these figures with the construction costs, the study conclude that the enterprise would break even with a parking fee of $5 per car.

BEST LOCATION - the study found two 'best sites' - the one selected by Mayor Ballard's administration in the last few days, and one two blocks to the east, behind the Vogue.  They rejected the College/Westfield corner as requiring visitors to cross busy College Avenue to actually get to the venues of Broad Ripple, and concentrated on the area behind the Vogue.


So, fast forward to today.  We have a project which is being awarded $6.4 million dollars from the City to help fund what we are told will be a 350 space garage with retail and a police substation costing $15 million.  Unfortunately, the City has decided to keep the costs analysis to itself, so we cannot review it for adequacy.  What we can do is look at numbers that are available to the paying public.  Land is assessed at market values in Indiana now, so we should be able to rely somewhat upon assessed values for the cost of property.  The Assessor's records show that one of the two parcels needed for the proposed garage is owned by a group named 6286, LLC, c/o J. Todd Morris.  A Todd Morris is noted in the Keystone Group's proposal as the Parking Manager for group member Newpoint Parking.  The AV of that parcel is $106,100.  The property at 6280 N. College has an AV of $999,600, bringing the total AV to $1,105,700. 

Say the cost of a new garage rose another 17% in the four years since the 2007 study, even though we are in a recession -- that would bring the cost of construction to $6.5 million.  Total cost with land acquisition and construction, but without demolition, of $7.6 million -- very much in line with the cost to construct the Ivy Tech Multimodal Parking Garage/Library/Retail structure that was used in the Keystone Group's proposal to show expertise.

Instead we are supposed to accept, without documentation, the need to spend $15 million - $6.4 million, or 42%, to come from City funds.

Are taxpayer dollars being flagrantly misused?

Tidbits on the Proposed Broad Ripple Garage Project

The announcement of the use of a third of the up front money collected by the City from the sale of the parking meter system to fund a garage in Broad Ripple set me to inquiring for the details.

Other blogs have pointed out the cozy relationship between the Ballard administration and Ballard re-election campaign finance with Keystone Construction as well as the seeming inability of this administration to craft a plan that makes any economic sense for taxpayers.  Well noted and what has become two of the trademarks of all deals made by this administration.  I send you to Ogden On Politics ("Taxpayers Pay to Build Broad Ripple Parking Garage; Garage and Revenue to Be Given Away") and Advance Indiana ("Big Ballard Campaign Contributor Scores Big With Broad Ripple Parking Garage Deal").

I've been poking on some public documents to try to ferret out details of the proposal.  Mayor Ballard's press release can be found online here.  I have uploaded the RFQ and the winning 'Statement of Qualifications' on Googledocs.  You must have a google account to access it.  If you prefer, drop me an email (hadenoughindy@gmail.com) and I'll forward either to you.

Here are some tidbits.

The group that won the deal is composed of Keystone Group, LLC, Keystone Construction Corp., Newpoint Parking, Walker Parking Consultants/Engineers, Inc., and RATIO Architects.

The RFQ (Request for Qualifications) put out by the City to solicit proposals, asked that responses be sent to the Bond Bank.  Why the Bond Bank has taken on a prominent role in this administration is beyond me.  Now, to have them acting as the pivot point in dishing out proceeds of the parking meter deal is an even further stretch of all reasoning.  Regular readers of this blog know well my love affair with Deron Kintner (that's sarcasm for new readers), who is the Executive Director of the Bond Bank.

More humorous than anything else, the RFQ states "Responses (without attachments) should not exceed 20 pages in length."  The winning proposal was 33 pages.

The winning proposal proposed two locations and two options for what turned out to be the winning location.  These two alternatives were: Option 1-- for 308 parking spaces plus retail space on the first floor at a total cost of $12 million with the City funding $5.2 million.   Option 2 -- for 428 spaces plus retail space on the first floor at a total cost of $13.5 million with the City funding $6.4 million.  The final deal was for 350 parking spaces with retail space and a police substation at a total cost of $15 million with the City funding $6.4 million.

The location would be at 6280 and 6286 N. College Avenue (the southwest corner of the intersection of College and Westfield/Broad Ripple).  The current owner of 6280 is Marathon Ashland Petroleum, LLC, and is the site of a closed gas station.  The assessed value of this parcel jumped from $392,400 in 2009 to $888,900 in 2010 - I have no idea why, especially given its inactive state.  The current owner of 6286 is 6286, LLC, c/o J. Todd Morris.  Now, the winning proposal happens to list a Todd Morris as the Parking Manager for Newpoint Parking.  The Assessor's website states that the ownerships are current as of July 19, 2010.  The assessed value of this parcel rose from $76,600 in 2009 to $106,100 in 2010 - not nearly as dramatic as the other parcel.

The zoning is in place to accommodate a parking garage.  I have no information regarding the need or lack of need for any environmental remediation given that a gas station was on the largest part of the property.

Included in the winning proposal was a series of prior and current projects undertaken by the principals to show their expertise in such endeavours.  Included were two mixed use projects that were reminiscent of this project.  One was the Ivy Tech Multimodal Parking Garage/Library/Retail project that has 4 levels with 500 parking spaces as well as Library and retail space.  The price tag was $7 million.  The other was the Duke University Parking Garage IX (LEED) project that has 7 levels with 1917 parking spaces as well as Library and retail space, all being LEED certified.  The price tag was $35 million.  For some reason, the winning proposal of three to four levels with 350 parking spaces as well as police substation and retail space will cost $15 million.  I don't get it.  That seems like twice the cost at least.

We'll keep digging for details, for sure.  But, let's not forget the big picture.  The Ballard administration is saying that there is an urgent need for parking in the Broad Ripple area.  So, if there is such a need, why can't the private sector underwrite the entire cost?  Why do the taxpayers have to cover almost half the cost but get none of the proceeds?

Going For Broke - The Ballard Paradigm?

We all either know people who have done this, or are people who have done this.  People who bought more house than they could afford.  People who cranked their credit cards up to the max and then went out and got more credit cards.  People who, since the economic downturn, have felt the full force of debt on their shoulders.

The Ballard administration has all the markings of such folks.  But, they also appear not to care to alter their ways in face of the new economic realities.

They have sold assets that could have been a source of revenue for generations to come.  They have made sweetheart deals with well connected developers and companies where few of the plans' details work to the benefit of the public and the taxpayers.  They cursed the previous administration, then outdid it in debt creation.

Now, they are proposing four new TIF districts - with few details yet known.  They are only saying that these areas were chosen because they may be future transportation hubs.  They are proposing to extend the biotech corridor further west on 16th Street and turn old Bush Stadium into apartments - again few details yet known.  The City has been busy trying to woo neighbors onto their bandwagon.

It is possible that these projects are beneficial and should receive wide support.  But, given the Ballard administration's proclivity for withholding pertinent financial details from the Council, the MDC, and the public and given their seeming inability to craft deals that actually benefit the public, a wise approach is to wait and see what the details really are.

How big a catchment area will be needed for each TIF district?  What types of projects will be funded?  What other collateral will be needed besides future tax revenues to underpin any bonds?  Who will the developer be?  Are they campaign donors or well connected individual firms?  Why can't they fund their projects without public subsidies?  How will any projects act as catalysts for future, private, investment?  How many city services will be required for the new development areas and how will those extra expenses be paid for?  Will the creation of the TIF district include language limiting its future uses and set a date certain by which the TIF will be retired?  Could the City craft a TIF district whereby only City/County taxes are redirected and where ALL future taxes that normally would flow to schools and township government continue to do so?

And, last but not least --  How much debt is going to be generated?  How much debt do we already have in Marion County? 

I can tell you that every neighborhood in Marion County feels that they have been left behind.  One would assume that, should these areas actually become future transportation hubs, that change alone would spur private development without the prior assistance of public dollars. 

But, all in all, as we have see time and time again with this administration - the devil is in the details.  Details that they do not want to disclose yet.  So, we will wait and as firm information is available, it will be discussed in this blog and hopefully all across Marion County.

What Every Citizen Should Know About INDOT

This past week has seen INDOT-related items simply everywhere.  They paint a pretty accurate picture of INDOT.


First, there was a letter to the editor in Friday's Indy Star.  It was written by a consortium of interest groups - the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana, Health by Design, Hoosier Environmental Council, Indiana Citizens' Alliance for Transit, Indiana High Speed Rail Association, Hoosier Rails to Trails Council, and AARP.  It is nicely written and you very well might want to read it in its entirety.  In short, though, it exposes how INDOT pretends to fulfill federal public input requirements for its transportation plans, but in reality makes its meetings as inaccessible to the public as possible, all the while not getting timely information to the public that any hearings are actually being held.  By holding public input meetings in out of the way places, at inconvenient times, INDOT reduces real public input to a minimum and can have its parade of special interest groups attend and weigh the 'public input' in a direction that the well connected campaign contributors would want.


The same day (Friday the 13th was certainly shaping up for INDOT), an email announcement from Thomas and Sandra Tokarski of Citizens for Appropriate Rural Roads hit mailboxes throughout the State.  Once again, the Bloomington/Monroe County Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) booted I-69 from its long range transportation plan.  The email thanked supporters and "Mayor Mark Kruzan, and all the members of the MPO who took this courageous action".  And, courageous it was. 


Saturday's Bloomington Alternative had an article by reporter Linda Green, illuminating what occurred at that MPO meeting and exposing INDOT's bullying tactics toward the various MPOs throughout the state. 


Before I quote that report, let me divert for a second to why the MPO system was set up in the first place.  The federal government saw the States putting in transportation improvements with gas tax proceeds that were not what was most needed. This sort of thing has led, for instance, to the huge number of bridges that are in serious need of repair throughout the Country. The US DOT began to require public input and set up the local MPOs so that local needs could be recognized and integrated within local transportation plans. These local plans would be coordinated with the entire state's plans through a cooperative relationship between the MPOs and the state's DOT.


INDOT abuses this relationship and denies access to funds if a local MPO does not do what INDOT wants. INDOT wants to spend money on highways. A pittance of the nearly $1 billion a year of gas tax money goes to much needed and desired mass transit. Another pittance goes to local improvements. The bulk goes to highways, highways, and more highways. Why? Because the highway lobby gives money to political campaigns and owns one Governor after another and one Legislator after another. And, because the gravel industry pulls the wagon at local Chambers of Commerce (including here in Indianapolis).

Green reported on the MPO meeting thusly:

Opponents of Interstate 69 erupted in cheers and applause when Mayor Mark Kruzan and the Bloomington/Monroe County Metropolitan Planning Organization Policy Committee (MPO) on May 13 voted to exclude I-69 in its Transportation Improvement Program for fiscal years 2012–15.


The 8-to-3 vote followed several hours of intense testimony from the public in opposition to I-69. The move includes section 4, which would bisect Monroe County.


“There comes a time when you stand up to a bully,” City Council member Andy Ruff said. “It is time to stand up for ourselves. It is time to stop the bully from adding I-69 to his political trophy case.”

On INDOT's tactics she wrote:

Last November’s vote to include I-69 followed blackmail threats from the Indiana Department of Transportation (INDOT) to withhold other state and federal funds from Bloomington and Monroe County in retaliation. MPOs were created to coordinate transportation planning at the federal, state and local levels. If the local and state plans do not match, federal funds can be withheld until an MPO either comes into compliance or is re-certified.
State highway officials last fall also warned that Gov. Mitch Daniels had the legal authority to assume responsibility for transportation projects in Bloomington if the MPO denied I-69 in its plan.


INDOT Deputy Commissioner Sam Sarvis told the Bloomington Herald-Times after the latest vote that he had not anticipated the MPO not including I-69 in its plan.


“I haven’t talked to anyone about the consequences of the action,” Sarvis said. “(INDOT) would take a serious look at all discretionary funding within the MPO area.”

Today's Indy Star has an article on the Bloomington/Monroe County action by reporter Chris Sikich and an editorial on INDOT's quackery when it comes to true public input.
 
Sikich omits the fact that the Indianapolis-Marion County City-County Council formally opposes I-69 through Perry Township and that I-69 is only temporarily in the Indianapolis MPO's long range transportation plan.  INDOT must return with thorough environmental studies on the impact of the proposed route for I-69 in central Indiana in order to convince our MDC (which acts as our MPO) to include it permanently.
 
The MPO system struggles with enough autonomy, at least here in Indiana.  We citizens need to be aware of the ideal relationship between MPOs and INDOT; where local MPOs spend their portion of the State's funds in ways that help their area.  We citizens need to be aware of the perverted relationship between Indiana's MPOs and INDOT that actually exists; where INDOT bullys and insists and threatens and spends the lion's share of the money in politically advantageous ways that benefit the few and well connected.  We citizens need to push for more autonomy for the MPOs and more courageous actions for the benefit of the MPOs' regions by those with a vote in these matters.

Congratulations to the Bloomington/Monroe County MPO for standing up for its citizens and for standing up to INDOT.  This is what Democracy looks like.

Hallelujah ! They Are Paving My Street - Warning, This Post Takes A Turn

Not since 1987, has my one block street been repaved.  With one pothole connected to another, we have survived on pothole filler for at least 10 years.  We were to the point where the real choice was - repave, or let it revert to gravel and dirt.

This morning when I saw the parade of trucks staging, then inching down my street, I was envisioning writing an entry about the impact of massive road repair on Ballard's re-election campaign, and the low regard many D's and some of my R friends have for giving Ballard an edge.  But, I also began reflecting on a few things I heard on the campaign trail and this entry turned to a new focus.  At some point I will make mention of DPW's role in any chance Ballard has to gain a 2nd term.  Just not today.

For now, let me describe what I see happening.  This morning's activity has been to scrape the years of built up paving, some as recent as last week's pothole filling, off the top.  As I write, they have gone down each side once and are now scraping the middle.

My block is somewhere between a quarter to half a mile long.  No sidewalks.  No sewers.  No city water.  No streetlights.  So, I figure, we've sort of been a donor block with regard to City and County taxes for quite a number of years.  Until today.  So, a hardy thanks to all of you who live in the rest of Indianapolis.

The parade of vehicles begins with a dump truck, travelling at a leisurely walking speed.  Behind is a machine that is scraping the top layer off the road and, via an aerial conveyor belt, sending the old paving off to the dump truck.  Then comes a water truck.  Then a medium size plow, doing what I cannot tell.  Then, at varying distances and seemingly occupied by its own activities, is another plow, rigged with a large wire brush on its underbelly, cleaning the scraped roadbed of remaining debris.  There are also two extra dump trucks awaiting their turn in rotation.  And, there is a police car stopped at each end of the block - both T intersections with other streets that are far more busy than mine.

All well and good.

Except, I then began to recall the comments I heard in various locations across the City, that a) the road crews were not diverse, and b) they seemed to hail from other Cities, with Ohio origins mentioned most often.  So, I looked a little closer.  Each truck was manned by either one or two white men.  No women.  No men of color.   Around the corner was apparently the spot for the crew to park their cars.  I could only catch the county on the license plate of one of about 6 cars - it was county number 41, or Johnson County (Marion County is 49).  All did have Indiana plates, though.

The sign on one of the police cars was Pittsboro Police.  The other was ATS.  A Google search of ATS does bring up Advance Tactics Security, out of Indianapolis.

The sign on the scraper and the water truck, and on the reflective vest of one of the walking workmen, was Mamco, Jeffersonville, IN.  Jeffersonville is across the Ohio River from Louisville, KY.

I didn't spy any other signs of origin.

So, here you have at least one road crew that will prosper from the taxes and water rate hikes that Indianapolis residents pay.  Maybe some live in Indianapolis, which would be an excellent situation.  Still, Jeffesonville, Pittsboro, and Johnson County were three of the four locations I could discern from the vehicles.  I just think that there should be more concern from the Ballard administration to hire Marion County firms and Marion County residents with all of our money (and children's money and grandchildren's money).  The employees should also reflect our pool of workers.

Oh, and one (and only one) complaint about the crew.  Most everyone was occupied in their work, so no problems there.  I had run an errand and as I was beginning to unload my car, one of the road crew was very nice in asking if I needed to get out of my driveway, not realizing I had just returned.  But, minutes before...  As I turned onto my block from a busy street, about two car lengths in, and on the right hand side of the road, sat the Pittsboro Police car.  The sun was reflecting off his windshield and I just barely caught the glimpse of his hand held up to the window with the universal 'halt' signal.  I then had to back up onto the busy street to exit.  Come on.  There are better ways to control traffic at work sites.  They do entail getting out of the air conditioned comfort of your vehicle, but they weigh public safety just a bit higher. 

All in all, and for many reasons, I look forward to seeing the crew that lays down new asphalt.  It has, after all, been 24 years since this tired old street was gussied up.