Two half-page editorials, including artwork, in Sunday morning’s paper were in agreement. Indianapolis has a problem concerning the staffing of the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department (IMPD).
One - "NOT ENOUGH POLICE" - was the product of the paper’s editorial board. The second - "KEEPING THE PUBLIC SAFE" - came from an individual.
The first discussed the problems of finance in a general way with no specific preference indicated. The second mentions a variety of tax increases as possibilities, including income taxes.
One sentence in this second presentation stood out for us. "...does Indianapolis’ economic development plan do enough to create the jobs that will create the income to generate the tax revenue to pay for these police officers?"
There is no mention of the fact that wide spread usage of TIF districts in so-called "economic development policy" has in fact decimated the property tax base of the city, a situation which forces the city to look at other revenue streams for usual and ordinary municipal functions. Meanwhile we fill the "slush fund" coffers with the "missing" property tax dollars shifted by the TIF approach.
What we found particularly interesting was the unstated agreement between the two editorials. Neither, as usual, mentioned any possibility of reviewing current expenditure patterns. Neither came close to suggesting that millions of dollars are being diverted, mis-spent or downright wasted through current fiscal policies.
Should a professional basketball team have a higher priority for obtaining public funds than an adequate law enforcement team? Can we - just this once - pause long enough to take a serious look at the financial priorities of this city?
Is it too much to expect an agreement among city "leaders" to consider the need of the general citizenry instead of the greed of the downtown inner circle?