A recent article in the Indianapolis Business Journal (IBJ) was headed "Councilor seeks review of TIF-district strategy." We couldn’t agree more that it is time for someone to take a look.
The first sentence tells us the mayor "...plans to expand a downtown tax increment financing district and add four more such zones...."
The councilor is reported to have said that current operations make the consolidated downtown district look too much like a slush fund. Could he be saying that because recent reports tell us the bond bank is sitting on nearly $100 million "surplus" tax funds? Well, it is what it is!
This is property tax money we’re talking about. The IBJ recently told us that the bond bank gave Indianapolis Downtown, Inc. (IDI), a private non-profit organization, $600,000 toward its $3 million budget last year. A few days ago the morning paper told us "IDI’s operations rely on $750,000 a year from city economic development funds..." in its budget. Again, those are property tax dollars folks, whatever the correct number.
IDI recently was awarded management of the 3-block Georgia Street party plaza and apparently has plans to make it an attraction for tourists from all over the mid-west. (At the risk of redundancy, we offer a two-word reminder. Union Station!)
One of the first of their proposals is to offer grants of up to $10,000 to businesses along Georgia Street to spiff up the buildings. That’s property tax money too, folks. The term "spiff" comes to mind because we saw an editorial cartoon some time ago about the city "spiffing" up Georgia Street. To be quite frank about it, we would say that $4 million per block is already a helluva spiff job, even if it was mostly federal money. You know. That free stuff.
Despite the fact that we would like to see one or two representatives of the taxpayers on his proposed commission, we heartily applaud the councilor and recommend to all his compatriots that his proposal be adopted unanimously and put into effect immediately.
At least before Indy becomes one gigantic TIF district.
Comments