CIB budget could face rough ride in council

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Capital Improvement Board on Monday will begin the arduous task of convincing a skeptical panel of City-County Council members to adopt a budget for next year that includes $10 million for the Indiana Pacers.

Members of the council’s seven-member Municipal Corporations Committee already are expressing discontent about the $73.1 million operating budget CIB officials will present to them on Monday evening. While the committee won’t vote on its recommendation until Oct. 19, councilors from both political parties said last week they were inclined to reject it.

That could signal a tough ride for the budget in the full council, which is expected to vote on it Oct. 25.
“I could see us just saying, ‘No, we’re not going to approve your budget,’” Bob Lutz, a Republican who sits on the Municipal Corporations Committee said of the committee vote.

“There’s a lot of discontent on the council with what they did,” he said in reference to the Pacers’ funding.

This summer, CIB and Republican Mayor Greg Ballard’s administration laid out a plan to provide the Pacers with $33.5 million over three years, including $10 million per year to operate Conseco Fieldhouse where the NBA franchise plays and a total of $3.5 million for improvements to the venue.

CIB provided the Pacers’ first $10 million in July from this year’s $63 million budget, which the council already had approved. But the council must sign off on the $73.1 million for next year, which includes the next $10 million installment.

If the council committee were to reject CIB’s budget later this month, it would go to the full council with a negative recommendation. The 29-member council ultimately will decide whether to approve it, based in part on that recommendation. The committee or the full council also could amend the budget to remove $10 million from CIB’s budget, but it’s not clear whether the council could specifically bar CIB from providing the Pacers with $10 million, said Bob Elrod, the council’s attorney.

Ryan Vaughn, the council’s Republican president, said the CIB budget is always among the toughest to pass, but he expects this year’s will be particularly difficult.

If the full council were to reject next year’s budget, CIB would revert back to its budget for this year, which is $10 million less.

CIB President Ann Lathrop said she “would not want to predict” whether the board could find $10 million in cuts needed to make the Pacers payment and carry out CIB’s other functions operating the city’s convention center and sports venues.

“That’s a significant percentage,” she said.

Councilors such as Lutz disapprove of providing the Pacers with tax dollars. He said he made a tough choice last year in approving a 1-percent hotel tax hike, which, along with state loans and an increased take of sales and income tax revenue, helped CIB avert a projected $47 million deficit.

It angers him that the board is now asking to spend more to help a private operation.

“I’m furious about the CIB,” Lutz said. “They came to us last year and said we don’t have the money to operate and we need this tax increase.”

CIB officials, however, point out that the board also made draconian cuts and maneuvered to resolve a $25.4 million debt insurance issue.

For other councilors, funding CIB seems a misplaced priority when other agencies such as IndyGo and the Indianapolis-Marion County Public Library, whose budgets they also approve, are struggling. Those agencies receive funding from different sources than CIB, which this year will get some property tax money from a downtown tax district but gets most of its revenue from taxes on things such as income, food, beverages, auto rentals and hotels.

But Maggie Lewis, a council Democrat on the Municipal Corporations Committee, said the city needs to come up with creative solutions for the other entities before CIB gets her support.

“If we can find dollars to support [the CIB], why can’t we do the same for the other two municipal corporations?” Lewis said. “We find ways to fund things that are important to us.”

Jackie Nytes, another Democrat on the committee, said her frustration stems from the way the process was handled.

Earlier this fall, the city’s Metropolitan Development Commission approved setting aside $8 million in property tax money from a downtown tax-increment financing (TIF) district to CIB. That money must be used to benefit the Indianapolis Convention and Visitors Association, but it also frees up other CIB money that otherwise would go toward that group.

Nytes said she sees using the TIF money as a way of getting around having the council approve additional CIB dollars to benefit the Pacers.

“If I were voting Monday, I probably would vote against it,” Nytes said. “My whole problem with the whole thing is the surreptitious way they went about it.”

City officials, however, have said the process was transparent because all MDC meetings are public.

Lathrop said she hopes the council discussion will be positive and emphasized the importance of CIB's having adequate funding next year. The expanded convention center is scheduled to open early in 2011.

“In a time when we’re nearly doubling the size of our convention center, we have to service the people who are going to be in that building,” Lathrop said.

The CIB budget will be presented to the Municipal Corporations Committee at 5:30 p.m. Monday in room 260 of the City-County Building, 200 E. Washington St.



  • Ballard can only Lie
    Ballard promoted that deal publicily and falsely told people that property tax money would not be used.
    What did you expect. He did it in the campaign about property taxes to get elected, claiming he would rescend the tax increase, but then after he was elected, did NOT. Ballard is part of that GOP agenda that if at first you don't deceive, lie, lie, lie again and again.
    No money for basic services and schools, but money for the pacers? He thinks he upholds family values, but actually he is only upholding and promoting money in his pockets from the big corporations who would have him sell all of the city assets to them. Water company, parking meters, schools, you name it.
    What a liar, what a GOP elected offical.
  • This should be the story
    CIB officials, however, point out that the board also made draconian cuts and maneuvered to resolve a $25.4 million debt insurance issue.
    Why was the CIB involved in what must have been credit default swaps?
  • Ballard Is Responsible
    Mayor Ballard is directly responsible for giving the Pacers $33.5 million of our tax dollars. Ballard promoted that deal publicily and falsely told people that property tax money would not be used. He also went along with a phony "study" showing the value of the Pacers.
  • Recall Now!
    Fleeced Indy residents -- start a recall of any council member who votes to approve $10M per year to the billionaire owners of the Pacers while closing your libraries, cutting your transit and foolishly thinking of selling your parking meters. Where is the outcry about no-one having seen the Pacers books? Why are you not outraged as grand theft on a grand scale of PUBLIC funds is being committed right before your eyes by your elected local officials? Oh, I forgot, it's only the Democrats who are turning us into a Socialist country. Your hypocrisy and utter stupidity is leading Indy to be the butt of jokes across the country. Start the recalls now!
  • Let them eat cake
    Hope this is more than just some theatre for the public.

    Some folks need to be accountable for not listening to the public and defying common sense.

Post a comment to this story

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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.