« Chapter two... | Main | Still no rear view mirror »

September 03, 2016


Karen Neiswinger

Senate Bill 176, passed in 2014, states that the bill: "prohibits a political subdivision from using public funds to promote a position on a local public question regarding transit."

Wouldn't giving free rides, as a "preview" of purple line, violate this, assuming that IndyGo is paying the cost to run the free rides, including employee time and all other costs associated with "free" rides?

Fred McCarthy

Karen - Seems perfectly clear to me. I'll guess that the response would be to question whether IndyGo qualifies as a "political subdivision." I assume the CIB gives a perfect example of a body spending public funds without being a "political subdivision."


The article makes some very good points, including the cost of these buses, never-ending changes to routes, and, what so many people seem to ignore, the effect these buses will have on traffic flow (already a problem whenever a bus is around--and even when one isn't). The taxpayers of Indianapolis are being taken for a ride, alright. But it's not a smooth bus ride they'll be paying for.

Karen Neiswinger

IndyGo is the Indianapolis Public Transportation Corporation, funded mostly by taxpayers. Only about 17% of its revenue comes from fares, so whatever activities it engages in that are calculated to influence the vote on the referendum comes 84% from "public funds".

The comments to this entry are closed.