Three separate articles appear in the July 4 issue of the IBJ. Two of the stories begin, side by side, on the front page. The third is the top story on page 3. Not one of the stories mentions either of the other - a disconnect that we find interesting - or even puzzling.
The left hand item on the front page (No. 1)is headed, "Seeking a lifeline," and has to do with the dire financial straits of all of professional basketball, but specifically and particularly including the Pacers. The right hand story on the front page (No. 2)is headed, "Shrinking revenue puts mayor in hot seat," referring to a drop in income tax revenues caused by general economic situation. Page 3 (No. 3) gives us this headline; "City not explaining garage subsidy," referring to a proposed parking garage for the Broad Ripple area with serious questions about several aspects of the deal. For the sake of brevity, we’ll refer to the item numbers. No. 1 gives us the news that, for the 2009-2010 season, more than half the teams in the league lost money, and only two lost more money than the Pacers. Two questions and a comment. Do the people who put out the statistics get to see the books which are not opened here, and if not, how reliable are the numbers? What do other teams get in the way of public subsidy to make an accurate comparison with the multi-million dollar handouts the Pacers get? If financial success for professional basketball is a national problem, then it appears that it is really time to consider giving a dying business decent rites. This suggestion is made even though, under the present culture, we’d still be propping up the buggy business at Studebaker in South Bend. No. 2 offers lots of numbers about shrinking revenues and how bad the situation is going to be. Despite this, we learn, "...both Ballard and City-County Council President Ryan Vaughn, a Republican, say they won’t pursue any kind of tax increase." There is even more good news. The city controller "...intends to make the city’s cuts without affecting service." Based on the immediate past, we must presume that this means we will still have police and fire departments, which is fine. But you may have to wade through knee-high grass in the parks or stand in line for the few hours your local library is open - if it is still open. And you probably won’t be able to get to either by way of IndyGo! No. 3 is the most interesting, and possibly the most dangerous of all the stories, because it pretty well lays out the basis of the fiscal philosophy which has led to much of the current situation in Indianapolis. Here we find that a $15 million parking garage proposed for the Broad Ripple area will apparently be constructed with important details of the project being kept secret, despite the fact that the city is expected to put up a large chunk of the money. There is a connection between these news stories because together they represent nothing more than a continuation of long-standing public fiscal policy. It is a policy which makes taxpayer dollars available for back room deals with professional sports and with private developers for proposals approved for the right people by the right people in the current administration. And we use the term "current" because it has apparently carried through administrations of both political parties. We continue to shovel public funds into the local branch of a dying enterprise. We continue to make deals smelling very much of crony corporate welfare. And we also continue reducing or eliminating ordinary municipal services to which taxpaying individuals are entitled. Is this really how a "world class" city operates?
Comments