IBJNews

CIB may accept $27 million state loan after all

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Indianapolis Capital Improvement board likely will accept a state loan providing $27 million over three years to help shore up its fragile financial situation.

Members of the not-for-profit that operates the city’s professional sports venues and the Indianapolis Convention Center will vote next month on whether to accept the assistance, or risk losing the initial $9 million installment this year.

“We ought to go ahead and borrow it,” CIB Treasurer Ann Lathrop told the board Monday afternoon.

Lathrop last month hinted that the organization’s bleak financial situation had improved to the point that it may not need the initial $9 million, which would save the CIB from paying 5.25 percent in interest charges.

The not-for-profit is on target in 2010 to turn a $47 million budget deficit into a surplus—additional money that could be used in negotiations with the Indiana Pacers over Conseco Fieldhouse operating costs.

The CIB expects to improve its finances by making $26 million in cuts this year. It also is poised to collect roughly $11 million more in annual revenue, and it avoided payment on $25.5 million in debt-service reserve payments.

Yet, it’s still unclear whether the CIB, which operates the city’s professional sports venues, as well as the Indianapolis Convention Center, will absorb $15 million next year in Conseco Fieldhouse operating costs.

A provision that allows the Pacers to terminate their lease after 10 years could trigger additional costs under a renegotiated lease. An agreement has yet to be reached, although CIB officials continue to negotiate with the team, CIB Vice President Pat Early said.

“We’ve done nothing to deal with Conseco Fieldhouse yet,” he said. “One way or another, that may require money we don’t have in the budget. We still haven’t resolved all the open issues.”

Also, Lathrop told members the additional revenue the CIB will capture from an expanded Professional Sports Development Area is falling short of projections.

Lawmakers last session approved the expansion, which was expected to generate $8 million in sales taxes next year generated within the area that includes the new downtown J.W. Marriott hotel.

But Lathrop said the figure will be closer to $6.6 million, largely because occupancy during the economic downturn has fallen at the downtown Westin and Hyatt hotels, which also are within the tax district.

“I don’t think this is cause for panic, but I did want to reflect on what we’ve found so far,” said Lathrop, who expects the CIB will capture the full $8 million when the J.W. Marriott opens in 2011.

The General Assembly also approved a 1-percent increase in the innkeepers' tax, allowing the organization to capture an additional $3.4 million in annual revenue.

The extra tax money, as well as $26 million in cuts the CIB has made this year, has helped it to erase the $47 million deficit.

In addition, the CIB avoided paying $25.5 million in debt-service reserve payments in September by persuading the city and state to back up its insurance policy on more than $200 million in bonds.
 
Meanwhile, if the CIB accepts the state loan, its cash reserve could grow to $38 million in 2011.

In other CIB news, members on Monday agreed to support the CIB’s bid for Indianapolis to host World Cup soccer games in 2018 and 2022, if the United States is selected as a host country.

The 27 U.S. cities vying for the games will be cut to 18 next month. If chosen, Indianapolis would most likely host a preliminary pool-play round.

Most sports economists agree that even a preliminary round of the World Cup could carry an economic impact similar to an NCAA men’s basketball Final Four. Studies show that direct visitor spending for a Final Four is between $45 million and $50 million.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Pacers renegotiation?
    According to previous IBJ coverage, Flynn is correct. The Pacers current lease does not give them the right to renegotiate.

    http://bit.ly/12t2vL
    "Another misconception is that the fieldhouse contract gives the team the right to renegotiate its lease after 10 yearsââ?¬â??it actually gives the team the right to cancel the lease after the first 10 years if it doesnââ?¬â?¢t reach certain profitability targets. Voiding the lease, though, would cost the team dearly. It would be obligated to pay CIB a termination fee ââ?¬Å?based on a formula sufficient to reimburse the city for the economic effects of such early termination,ââ?¬ï¿½ the contract says. The minimum penalty is $50 million, but the contract says the Pacersââ?¬â?¢ cost for terminating the lease in 2012 could be as high as $144 million."

    City leaders need to consider the Pacers financial situation is more of a league issue than a city issue, as more than half of NBA teams are losing money.

    http://bit.ly/38ZkWo
    "Saying that less than half the teams in the league made a profit last season, Stern spoke at length Tuesday about the financial difficulties facing the league's 30 franchises."

    The NBA has actually offered some assistance to their struggling teams but he Pacers turned it down.

    http://bit.ly/CtUjX
    "12 of the league's 30 franchises plan to borrow between $13 million and $20 million a piece."
  • No Right to Renegotiate
    Mr. Olson needs to go back and read an earlier IBJ article that discusses the Pacer contract. There is no "right to renegotiate" after 10 years. It is instead a right to terminate which requires that the Simons be selling the team out of state. The penalties to exercise the option is enormous.

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. The $104K to CRC would go toward debts service on $486M of existing debt they already have from other things outside this project. Keystone buys the bonds for 3.8M from CRC, and CRC in turn pays for the parking and site work, and some time later CRC buys them back (with interest) from the projected annual property tax revenue from the entire TIF district (est. $415K / yr. from just this property, plus more from all the other property in the TIF district), which in theory would be about a 10-year term, give-or-take. CRC is basically betting on the future, that property values will increase, driving up the tax revenue to the limit of the annual increase cap on commercial property (I think that's 3%). It should be noted that Keystone can't print money (unlike the Federal Treasury) so commercial property tax can only come from consumers, in this case the apartment renters and consumers of the goods and services offered by the ground floor retailers, and employees in the form of lower non-mandatory compensation items, such as bonuses, benefits, 401K match, etc.

  2. $3B would hurt Lilly's bottom line if there were no insurance or Indemnity Agreement, but there is no way that large an award will be upheld on appeal. What's surprising is that the trial judge refused to reduce it. She must have thought there was evidence of a flagrant, unconscionable coverup and wanted to send a message.

  3. As a self-employed individual, I always saw outrageous price increases every year in a health insurance plan with preexisting condition costs -- something most employed groups never had to worry about. With spouse, I saw ALL Indiana "free market answer" plans' premiums raise 25%-45% each year.

  4. It's not who you chose to build it's how they build it. Architects and engineers decide how and what to use to build. builders just do the work. Architects & engineers still think the tarp over the escalators out at airport will hold for third time when it snows, ice storms.

  5. http://www.abcactionnews.com/news/duke-energy-customers-angry-about-money-for-nothing

ADVERTISEMENT