IBJNews

Democrats want more cops living in tough neighborhoods

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Democrats in Indianapolis today proposed using $1 million of Rebuild Indy funds to refurbish or construct rent-free housing for police and sheriff's deputies in high-crime areas.

City-County Council Democrats will officially introduce Safe Neighborhoods Now! on July 14 in hopes of testing whether the concept counters crime. The houses would be built on empty lots Councilor John Barth described as eyesores that decrease property values. Officers would have the option of buying the houses after living in them for two years.

A pilot program would be developed with Mapleton-Fall Creek Community Development Corp. in the Mapleton-Fall Creek neighborhood. The $1 million would fund five houses. A statement from party officials did not specify where the houses would be located.

“This proposal will be the cornerstone of the council’s plan to ensure IMPD and sheriff resources are where they are needed the most—close to home,” Council President Maggie Lewis said in a prepared statement.

Sheriff John Layton said in the statement that he backs the idea for its potential to support community policing, neighborhood preservation and better compensation for officers.

Democrats point out that 76 people have been murdered this year, the most at this point in the year since 2008.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Too much per unit
    I agree with Madeofpizza, the cost per unit is twice what it should be since we aren't paying for the land, or at least very much for an unimproved lot. Or is it because certain council members own these lots and plan to strike it rich on the program? The houses shouldn't cost more than $100k to build or they will become targets themselves.
  • Idk
    I like the idea but 200,000 per unit is just to high.
  • Future purchase?
    I think the reporter should find out the details of the "future purchase" of the homes at the end of the rent free period. After so many contract fiascos the city has shown no ability to protect the taxpayer's money. What are the details of the option to buy and how is value fixed at that time? Details, details, details.
  • Emmitt Carney needs to be elected to replace John Layton
    Vote this November 4th for Emmitt Carney and replace the dysfunctional inept John Layton who cant even keep his department from accidently releasing prisoners which is VERY dangerous to our city and puts people's lives at risk.
  • Where the Dem's at?
    I would like to see where these Democrats live who proposed this idea? Guarantee none of them live in these "high crime" areas.
  • Bad idea
    If the police and sheriff's departments want to provide financial incentives to officers willing to live in high-crime areas that is perfectly acceptable. However, if public funds are going to be used to create rent-free housing, that housing should go to those who really need homes.
  • Go back to the drawing board
    Did anyone ask the officers or their families? Is the Sheriff or Safety Director going to move into one of these homes? While the concept is intriguing, why would an officer want to put himself/herself and their family deliberately in harm's way? They are already on call 24/7 and to ask them to live in the midst is too much. Hire more police officers. Put more officers on the street.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. Apologies for the wall of text. I promise I had this nicely formatted in paragraphs in Notepad before pasting here.

  2. I believe that is incorrect Sir, the people's tax-dollars are NOT paying for the companies investment. Without the tax-break the company would be paying an ADDITIONAL $11.1 million in taxes ON TOP of their $22.5 Million investment (Building + IT), for a total of $33.6M or a 50% tax rate. Also, the article does not specify what the total taxes were BEFORE the break. Usually such a corporate tax-break is a 'discount' not a 100% wavier of tax obligations. For sake of example lets say the original taxes added up to $30M over 10 years. $12.5M, New Building $10.0M, IT infrastructure $30.0M, Total Taxes (Example Number) == $52.5M ININ's Cost - $1.8M /10 years, Tax Break (Building) - $0.75M /10 years, Tax Break (IT Infrastructure) - $8.6M /2 years, Tax Breaks (against Hiring Commitment: 430 new jobs /2 years) == 11.5M Possible tax breaks. ININ TOTAL COST: $41M Even if you assume a 100% break, change the '30.0M' to '11.5M' and you can see the Company will be paying a minimum of $22.5, out-of-pocket for their capital-investment - NOT the tax-payers. Also note, much of this money is being spent locally in Indiana and it is creating 430 jobs in your city. I admit I'm a little unclear which tax-breaks are allocated to exactly which expenses. Clearly this is all oversimplified but I think we have both made our points! :) Sorry for the long post.

  3. Clearly, there is a lack of a basic understanding of economics. It is not up to the company to decide what to pay its workers. If companies were able to decide how much to pay their workers then why wouldn't they pay everyone minimum wage? Why choose to pay $10 or $14 when they could pay $7? The answer is that companies DO NOT decide how much to pay workers. It is the market that dictates what a worker is worth and how much they should get paid. If Lowe's chooses to pay a call center worker $7 an hour it will not be able to hire anyone for the job, because all those people will work for someone else paying the market rate of $10-$14 an hour. This forces Lowes to pay its workers that much. Not because it wants to pay them that much out of the goodness of their heart, but because it has to pay them that much in order to stay competitive and attract good workers.

  4. GOOD DAY to you I am Mr Howell Henry, a Reputable, Legitimate & an accredited money Lender. I loan money out to individuals in need of financial assistance. Do you have a bad credit or are you in need of money to pay bills? i want to use this medium to inform you that i render reliable beneficiary assistance as I'll be glad to offer you a loan at 2% interest rate to reliable individuals. Services Rendered include: *Refinance *Home Improvement *Inventor Loans *Auto Loans *Debt Consolidation *Horse Loans *Line of Credit *Second Mortgage *Business Loans *Personal Loans *International Loans. Please write back if interested. Upon Response, you'll be mailed a Loan application form to fill. (No social security and no credit check, 100% Guaranteed!) I Look forward permitting me to be of service to you. You can contact me via e-mail howellhenryloanfirm@gmail.com Yours Sincerely MR Howell Henry(MD)

  5. It is sad to see these races not have a full attendance. The Indy Car races are so much more exciting than Nascar. It seems to me the commenters here are still a little upset with Tony George from a move he made 20 years ago. It was his decision to make, not yours. He lost his position over it. But I believe the problem in all pro sports is the escalating price of admission. In todays economy, people have to pay much more for food and gas. The average fan cannot attend many events anymore. It's gotten priced out of most peoples budgets.

ADVERTISEMENT