Indy Tax Dollars

A mixture...

... of public dollars and media self appraisal in today’s post.  Where the dollars go - or are likely to - and media questioning of those decisions.  Or the failure to do so.

With all the hullabaloo about Amazon and what it might mean to the area, we are reminded in the media that, as far as public officials are concerned, it’s none of our damned business as to what albatross may be hung around the neck of the taxpayer.  So far, we have not seen any suggestion that said media is prepared to question that stance.

All of which connects to today’s column by Mr. Tully in this morning’s paper.  He has interviewed a few high school journalists on their opinion about a recent movie idolizing a newspaper on its responsibility to the reader.

One of the students makes an extremely important point, to wit: " ‘The most important message in 'The Post’ (the movie)' she said, ‘is that media outlets must be willing to challenge those in power, even if that makes them unpopular.’"  (Our emphasis.) Tully blew right on by that one without comment.

For decades this city has had financial policies which ignore, except for talk, so-called structural financial problems, leaving it unable to handle adequately some ordinary municipal functions.  To the best of our recollection, neither Tully nor his employers have challenged city "leadership" - political or otherwise - about the decades long refusal to review continuing "old" spending before looking at "new" taxes.  In virtually all cases, media have strongly supported that approach.

As a horrible example, we will, once again, raise a question which we have never seen addressed in the media.  When the RCA Dome was destroyed to be replaced by Lucas Oil Stadium, it was reported in the same media that nothing had ever been paid toward the debt on the newly razed stadium.

It has, as far as we know, never been questioned as to the disappearance of twenty four years of revenue from the Food and Beverage Tax which was enacted for the specific purpose of funding that project.  Why not?  (Is it fair to wonder about payments on the current stadium debt?)

So long as the present situation continues without responsible reaction, we find it somewhat inappropriate for local media to assume a mantle of righteousness based on acceptance of responsibility to its readers, as that responsibility is properly stated by a senior high school "journalist."

And to get back to Amazon for a moment, we wonder whether inclusion in the final 20 is at least partly based on Amazon's recognition of Indianapolis's policy of generosity with taxpayer dollars toward corporate welfare. 

 

Priorities

We have commented on unusual priorities in Indianapolis many times.  Most frequently with regard to expenditure of taxpayer dollars.  Yesterday the question came to mind again, although admittedly with a somewhat less direct connection to taxpayer dollars.

The question is the timing and importance to our daily paper of what amounts to a biographical study of a local businessman requiring the use of two full pages of Section A, including about a third of the front page.

Our first reaction was sort of, "Wow! What would it have cost to buy those two inside pages?"  Looked like a pretty substantial loss of revenue.  Obviously, somebody at the paper decided this was really important stuff.

Then we read the article and found it very interesting, though possibly from a point of view different than the paper had hoped for. The subject is apparently a brilliant businessman who comes from a family of businessmen who have been astute enough to be nationally important in many areas.

The father of the subject has been smart enough to be the owner of the Indiana Pacers.  "A team valued at $880 million by Forbes."  The article dwells at some length on the intentions of both father and son to keep the Pacers in Indianapolis.  "That’s my final legacy" the father says.  The son echoes "This team only fits in Indianapolis."

We have to wonder how this all fits with a story in the same paper about two and a half months ago when the thoughts were worded a little differently.  At that time, we presented this paragraph.

"The owner of the team is quoted as saying, ‘We’re sitting down to try to extend the lease for the next 25 years...Simon (owner) says Bankers Life can be made viable for another quarter century - viable financially, and for the fan experience - with a major redo that would be considerably cheaper than building a new arena.’"

Pardon our cynicism but that sounds like the legacy might well have a few financial strings attached.  We’ve not been informed as to just what a "major redo" entails.  History tells us almost anything would be cheaper than another new arena!

And speaking of expenditures, one other sentence in the article caught our eye. Another member of the downtown promotion group - and family friend - says, "The city looks drastically different without the Pacers."  Well, yes.

Imagine having devoted $183 million to the cost of a Criminal Justice Center instead of a basketball court. Or suppose we were in the middle of a ten-year agreement to spend $16 million annually on parks, streets and sidewalks.

The gentleman is certainly correct. Things would definitely look different!

Nothing like good news...

...if in fact it is good news.  We’re talking about the announced anticipation of the addition of another large hotel - 800 to 1,000 rooms - in the downtown area of the city.  Which might, or might not, include a super sized ballroom which the city needs.

It seems the ballroom might be handled by extension of the convention center itself.  This is a little uncertain because of the inclusion of puzzling language in the article.  One sentence mentions a "...20,000-plus-square-foot ballroom." Later we get "...which could be as much as 20,000 square feet bigger than the convention center’s current largest ballroom at 32,000 square feet...."  That’s a helluva plus! (Our emphasis.)

If we’re to believe the IBJ edition which hit the mail box yesterday, it appears the convention/hotel business in the city is matching Dow Jones for skyrocketing optimism.

We are given a quote from the CEO of a professional hotel consulting group saying, "New hotels...can create demand on their own."  Unfortunately, he does not go on to say that they can create financial support on their own.  Why does such an economically beautiful project always start with pleas of poverty and the need to hack into the taxpayer's wallet?

And sure enough, down a couple of paragraphs from the end of the full page story, we finally get this minor news.  The project is being "...discussed by officials from Visit Indy, the Capital Improvements Board and the Mayor’s Office."

Can we get some early information as to how this is going to play out?  Why is the CIB involved?  It spends its time, and our money, handing out funds from the Food and Beverage Tax to sports operations.  Isn’t it probable that the millions (how many??) to be handed out for a hotel will come from TIF revenues?  Are we going to start putting those slush funds into a joint account?

Heaven help the poor taxpayer - with "poor" being the operative words here!

As an aside, the morning daily carried a full page ad on December 31 for Downtown Indy to thank its supporters for the year.  The taxpayer didn’t get mentioned there, either!

"Far Out!"

It’s a phrase sometimes formerly used as about the equivalent of "Wow" or maybe "Great news."  But it came to our thoughts as we read about the mayor’s decision to locate the proposed new criminal justice center on Prospect Street - many blocks (a mile or two?) from the center of the city.

We raised the question some time ago, and we presume it is now too late to talk about it again - but we will anyway.   We continue to wonder why the quarter of a block of land (now surface parking), immediately adjacent to the old City Hall building and combined therewith, would not have been a reasonable location for this project.

Efforts have been made (still are?) to maintain the building as a part of the city’s history.  It can still be useful as an important part of this new municipal project.  Historic preservationists ought to be out in full force to make sure that it is appropriately maintained and continued in use to the city and its residents.

 It has been pointed out earlier that many of the people having business requiring their presence at the complex will have to rely on public transit.  This location would be at easy walking distance from the new city transit center, which will be the focal point of the dramatically expanded transit system upon which we are now embarked.

Of course there is another alternative for these unfortunate folks.  For a few dollars more - free federal money of course - we could add a direct, high speed electric bus route from this project to the transit center.  

The Pink Line??