CIB standing firm against city plan to tap reserves

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Capital Improvement Board hopes a formal proclamation it adopted Monday will deter some City-County Council Democrats from moving forward with a plan to tap its coffers to plug the city’s budget gap.

Council Vice President Brian Mahern is leading a charge among Democrats who want to collect “payments in lieu of taxes” on CIB-operated properties in Indianapolis.

The so-called PILOT fees would be collected on properties that are exempt from property taxes, including the Indiana Convention Center, Lucas Oil Stadium, Bankers Life Fieldhouse, Victory Field, Capital Commons and a Virginia Avenue parking garage.

It's not yet clear how much the payments could raise. City officials are looking for ways to close a $65 million shortfall in Indianapolis' $595 million general fund, which covers daily operating expenses.

The once-cash-strapped CIB expects to have a balance of about $67 million by year’s end. But the municipal agency’s president, Ann Lathrop, insisted that much of the reserve—$52 million—is earmarked for debt payments and improvements to the properties.

“Once you peel those two out, you still have mall investors and a state loan,” Lathrop said of the CIB’s additional obligations.

More than $33 million in Circle Centre mall investor loans come due in 2017 and a pair of $9 million state loans mature in 2019 and 2020, adding to the CIB’s debt obligations. In addition, city tourism bureau Visit Indy needs financial help to replace a $2.5 million grant to market the Indiana Convention Center.

And without sufficient cash reserves, the CIB likely would cut contributions it provides to the Indiana Black Expo, Indiana Sports Corp. and Indiana Arts Council, Lathrop argued.

CIB members voted unanimously to pass the resolution, reiterating their stance against any attempt to tap the agency’s reserves. City-County Council President Maggie Lewis, a CIB member, was absent from the Monday meeting.

The council’s municipal corporations committee, meanwhile, could vote Thursday on the PILOT proposal. If approved, the measure would be included when the full council votes on the city budget Oct. 15.

Mahern said the additional CIB funds could be used to fund a police department recruitment class and to help offset a proposal from Republican Mayor Greg Ballard to eliminate the homestead credit to save $8.1 million in the budget.

Both Mahern and fellow Democrat council member Monroe Gray, who chairs the municipal corporations committee, think it’s only fair that the CIB provide some assistance. They say the city provided the CIB funds from the downtown tax-increment financing district when it needed help.

“Personally, I wasn’t excited about giving the CIB a helping hand a few years ago,” Mahern said, “but we did.”

Gray said Democrats aren’t targeting the CIB’s entire $67 million reserve but declined to reveal an amount that would suffice.

“At this stage, it’s just a discussion,” Gray said. "We haven’t even polled the Democrats on who would be able to support it. But it would probably be a party-line vote.”

Five Democrats and three Republicans make up the municipal corporations committee.

Facing a $47 million deficit in 2009, the CIB recovered financially by cutting millions in operating expenses and getting help from the state that included the $18 million in loans.

Now that the CIB is on better financial footing, members are reluctant to take any risks, especially when it involves skimping on building improvements that could jeopardize the city’s ability to attract large conventions.

“Our buildings are what we win with,” Visit Indy CEO Leonard Hoops said. “People are not beating down the door to get to Indianapolis because we’re Indianapolis.”


  • More Data
    Re: Bob Desautels, since Linkedlin lists Bob Desautels as the Senior Manager, Convention Service at ICVA perhaps he will share with us the percentage of rooms booked over the last few years as that data is not part of the Visit Indiana web site.
  • A Priceless Moment
    The best moment of the last council budget meeting with the CIB was when Councilor Brian Mahern suggested that the CIB had not been good stewards of the taxpayer money. Anne Lathrop, the President of the CIB, looked crushed. I don't think anyone on the council had ever talked to her like that. But the fact is what Mahern said is absolutely true. The CIB has been horrible stewards of our tax dollars. Whenever CIB officials are involved in negotiations on behalf of taxpayers, they act like advocates for the other side seeing how much they can give away. They never stand up for taxpayers. The CIB needs to be disbanded.
  • CIB Rogue
    This organization has been rogue for quite some time. I thought Ballard and Daniels agreed it needed to be disbanded. They are just hoarding $$ and giving them to un-deserving recipients. They need to be accountable to tax payers and Council.
  • Wish I had that option
    I wish as a taxpayer I had the option to say no to property tax because my money is earmarked for other things.
  • Dead Wrong
    Comments that the CIB needs to dial down money provided to Visit Indy (formerly ICVA) to promote the city for conventions, etc. is foolish and dead wrong. Bookings of conventions have gone up significantly in the last two years. In addition, hotels have seen increases in usage. You don't build a 1000 room hotel on a whim. In essence, Visit Indy is a significant engine to bring revenue to the city.
    • Look at the ICVA
      The CIB also needs to dial down the dollars the ICVA receives as well. We haven't noticed an increase in conventions in Indinapolis nor have the hotel had an increase in room rentals.
      • Mayor Ballard 2nd Big Decision
        The other difficult conversation Mayor Ballard and Ann Lathrop needs to have is with Circle Centre mall investors about their "evergreen" loan that has no hope of ever being paid off. CIB will not be able to meet the next balloon payment deadline that keeps being extended. They need to write down their investment and be realistic.
      • Mayor Ballards Big Decision
        Maybe the CIB should collect the $30 million "loan" they gave the Pacers, and have the Colts finally pay their fair share of Lucas Oil Stadiums operating expenses. Ann Lathrop's idea to cut CIB's almost non existent contributions to the Indiana Black Expo, Indiana Sports Corp. and Indiana Arts Council is not only misguided, but doesn't even make business sense. Go ahead and cut that funding. You still have a huge tens of million dollar budget hole that needs to be fixed. Ann Lanthrop and Mayor Ballard need to have a difficult conversation with Mr. Simon and Mr. Irsay about passing along the Payments in Lou of taxes to them as CIB tenants. They both are both on solid financial footings now with new player contracts and TV revenue sharing deals.

      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.