IBJNews

Carmel councilors want final say on city's debt

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

After seeing a detailed accounting of nearly $249 million in debt issued by the Carmel Redevelopment Commission, a group of city councilors is moving to bring that entity under council control.

Carmel City Councilor Eric Seidensticker on Thursday morning proposed an ordinance that would require the council to sign off on any additional debt. Such an ordinance would be more restrictive than state statutes as interpreted by Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller.

Indiana redevelopment commissions need approval from a common council to issue bonds, but Zoeller said in a 2010 opinion that the statutes don’t apply to other forms of debt. The Carmel Redevelopment Commission has issued $140 million in contracts, certificates of participation and installment purchase contracts, all without council approval.

The commission’s debt load is no secret, but the council only recently received a full accounting.

“They’re running so close to the edge,” Seidensticker said. “They don’t have the wherewithal to create a bond or create permanent financing.”

The redevelopment commission received $21 million in tax revenue from the city’s expansive tax-increment-finance, or TIF, districts in 2011. Applying that amount of revenue to all its debt-service obligations this year will leave the commission with $5,929, according to a projection the commission shared with the council.

Carmel Mayor James Brainard, who appoints most of the commission members, has pointed out that the city’s residential tax base is not paying for any of the redevelopment commission’s projects, including the $175 million Center for the Performing Arts.

Rising to its defense at the March 5 council meeting, Brainard noted that the commission's annual operating expenses, budgeted at about $6.6 million this year, do not come out of the city’s general fund, as they do in other cities. He also pointed out that none of the debt horizons are longer than 25 years.

Brainard could not be reached Thursday morning for comment on Seidensticker’s proposal.

Seidensticker thinks he has a good chance of avoiding Brainard’s veto because the ordinance is sponsored by five of the seven councilors. The other four sponsors are Council President Rick Sharp, Luci Snyder, Kevin Rider and Carol Schleif.

Sharp contends that the redevelopment commission could benefit from council oversight because the council might be willing to pledge property-tax revenue to refinance some of the debt. That would free up TIF revenue for future projects.

About $40 million of the debt carries interest rates ranging from 7.75 percent to 9.25 percent, and the commission is making interest-only payments on about $80 million.

“It’s wasting money to avoid bringing these issues to the council,” Sharp said.

Yet, it was the council’s opposition to further financing for the Center for the Performing Arts that pushed Brainard and the redevelopment commission toward more creative financing in the first place.

Sharp is one of the councilors who opposed building a $12 million parking garage, just as the Palladium concert hall was nearing completion. “I believe that’s the beginning of the financial fall,” he said. “We turned down the method of financing.”

City councilors aren't the only ones wary of redevelopment commission activities. Sen. Luke Kenley, R-Noblesville, has sponsored a bill for the past two years that would require city and town councils to sign off on debt issues. This year, Kenley said he's disturbed by the fact that redeveloment commissions, which are not elected, can control large portions of a city's tax base, and he said in some cases they're operating as "shadow governments."

Kenley's bill died in the House.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Brainard's comment intentionally misleading
    I live in this community. When Mayor Brainard says residents do not pay for this debt, he is being very disingenuous and he knows it. The way it works is certain districts are earmarked with the TIF designation. Then the taxes for all new growth can be allocated to paying off whatever the redevelopment agency obligated that debt for. So residents and existing businesses are responsible for the growth of city government required to pick up the tab for new services, since the TIF isn't paying for schools, fire, police, and other services that new growth is consuming. To make matters worse, they slapped that TIF designation on some of the most desirable real estate in the state, where growth was inevitable anyway, but the increment isn't base-lined against the growth trend.

    By the way, millions of dollars worth of contracts go to contractors with "special" connections such as campaign contributors. And as for anything they want to spend that money on but can't for legal or political reasons? They "grant" millions more each year to a made-up organization called the 4CDC, whose job is to disperse the money off the record. We have absolutely no idea how millions of our city tax dollars are spent each year through this quasi-governmental agency.
  • Really?
    Does the City Council really know the total debt accrued by the Carmel Redevelopment Commission? The only way the City Council can get a hold on all of this is to audit the whole shebang. Bring on the lawyers.
  • Education
    Am wondering where the funds went that were paying for our children's well rounded eductaion. Carmel schools stopped teaching Spanish in the elementary schools. Did Carmel sacrifice education for downtown glitze???
  • Stop the Madness
    If they put one more statue in Carmel, someone's going to go postal. I read about another one in today's paper. What a total waste -enough already!!! I think we need to wait at least 5 years for the Performing Arts Center to run and see how much it bleeds before they spend any more of my money! Interest only on $80 million in loans - isn't that how the mortgage crisis and implosion of our economny began?
  • Falling down...
    The entire thing is a house of cards. Maybe something will finally stick to the mayor for once.

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. Of what value is selling alcoholic beverages to State Fair patrons when there are many families with children attending. Is this the message we want to give children attending and participating in the Fair, another venue with alooholic consumption onsite. Is this to promote beer and wine production in the state which are great for the breweries and wineries, but where does this end up 10-15 years from now, lots more drinkers for the alcoholic contents. If these drinks are so important, why not remove the alcohol content and the flavor and drink itself similar to soft drinks would be the novelty, not the alcoholic content and its affects on the drinker. There is no social or material benefit from drinking alcoholic beverages, mostly people want to get slightly or highly drunk.

  2. I did;nt know anyone in Indiana could count- WHY did they NOT SAY just HOW this would be enforced? Because it WON;T! NOW- with that said- BIG BROTHER is ALIVE in this Article-why take any comment if it won't appease YOU PEOPLE- that's NOT American- with EVERYTHING you indicated is NOT said-I can see WHY it say's o Comments- YOU are COMMIES- BIG BROTHER and most likely- voted for Obama!

  3. In Europe there are schools for hairdressing but you don't get a license afterwards but you are required to assist in turkey and Italy its 7 years in japan it's 10 years England 2 so these people who assist know how to do hair their not just anybody and if your an owner and you hire someone with no experience then ur an idiot I've known stylist from different countries with no license but they are professional clean and safe they have no license but they have experience a license doesn't mean anything look at all the bad hairdressers in the world that have fried peoples hair okay but they have a license doesn't make them a professional at their job I think they should get rid of it because stateboard robs stylist and owners and they fine you for the dumbest f***ing things oh ur license isn't displayed 100$ oh ur wearing open toe shoes fine, oh there's ONE HAIR IN UR BRUSH that's a fine it's like really? So I think they need to go or ease up on their regulations because their too strict

  4. Exciting times in Carmel.

  5. Twenty years ago when we moved to Indy I was a stay at home mom and knew not very many people.WIBC was my family and friends for the most part. It was informative, civil, and humerous with Dave the KING. Terri, Jeff, Stever, Big Joe, Matt, Pat and Crumie. I loved them all, and they seemed to love each other. I didn't mind Greg Garrison, but I was not a Rush fan. NOW I can't stand Chicks and all their giggly opinions. Tony Katz is to abrasive that early in the morning(or really any time). I will tune in on Saturday morning for the usual fun and priceless information from Pat and Crumie, mornings it will be 90.1

ADVERTISEMENT