IBJNews

Indiana county pushes ahead with fertilizer plant

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Pakistan-based developers of a fertilizer plant have won a southwestern Indiana county's initial approval for the project, weeks after the state pulled its support.

Posey County's Board of Commissioners and Council voted last week to give preliminary approval to Midwest Fertilizer Corp. for its proposed plant, including a $1.3 billion bond issue to help finance the project in the county just west of Evansville. That step was needed because construction won't start before the deadline for the original financing pulled by the state, said John Taylor, executive director of the Posey County Economic Development Partnership.

"The company's not prepared to start construction. They're waiting on air permits and some other things," he told the Evansville Courier & Press .

Taylor said the reissued bonds will have a six-month maturity period and will be sold to investors between now and July 1. As was the case with the state-issued bonds, the Posey County Economic Development Commission will be a conduit issuer of the bonds.

County officials are stepping into the same role the state once held when the bonds were originally issued in December by the Indiana Finance Authority to help pay for the project.

Those bonds had a six-month maturity period, after which they were sold to investors and the proceeds put into an escrow account. The idea was that by the time the bonds matured, the plant's developers would be ready to proceed with construction and would receive the bond funding from the escrow account.

But the state funding hit a roadblock in January, when Gov. Mike Pence learned that U.S. military officials were concerned that fertilizer made by Pakistan-based Fatima Group — Midwest Fertilizer Corp.'s owner — was making its way into explosive devices in Afghanistan that have killed American troops.

Pence suspended the state's role in the project, saying his office needed to evaluate the situation.

Since that time, Fatima Group has made several changes to its supply chain and is now working on a new less-explosive fertilizer formula. Lt. Gen. Michael Barbero, a U.S. military commander, last month described Fatima's efforts as "big steps" toward improving product safety.

Those assurances were insufficient for Pence, who announced May 17 that he was withdrawing the state's offer of incentives.

Because Midwest Fertilizer Corp. was unable to meet the July 1 deadline for the original bonds' maturity, Posey County officials stepped up to reissue the bonds.

The Posey County Economic Development Commission will have a public hearing on the proposed bond issuance later this month.

ADVERTISEMENT

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. I'm a CPA who works with a wide range of companies (through my firm K.B.Parrish & Co.); however, we work with quite a few car dealerships, so I'm fairly interested in Fatwin (mentioned in the article). Does anyone have much information on that, or a link to such information? Thanks.

  2. Historically high long-term unemployment, unprecedented labor market slack and the loss of human capital should not be accepted as "the economy at work [and] what is supposed to happen" and is certainly not raising wages in Indiana. See Chicago Fed Reserve: goo.gl/IJ4JhQ Also, here's our research on Work Sharing and our support testimony at yesterday's hearing: goo.gl/NhC9W4

  3. I am always curious why teachers don't believe in accountability. It's the only profession in the world that things they are better than everyone else. It's really a shame.

  4. It's not often in Indiana that people from both major political parties and from both labor and business groups come together to endorse a proposal. I really think this is going to help create a more flexible labor force, which is what businesses claim to need, while also reducing outright layoffs, and mitigating the impact of salary/wage reductions, both of which have been highlighted as important issues affecting Hoosier workers. Like many other public policies, I'm sure that this one will, over time, be tweaked and changed as needed to meet Indiana's needs. But when you have such broad agreement, why not give this a try?

  5. I could not agree more with Ben's statement. Every time I look at my unemployment insurance rate, "irritated" hardly describes my sentiment. We are talking about a surplus of funds, and possibly refunding that, why, so we can say we did it and get a notch in our political belt? This is real money, to real companies, large and small. The impact is felt across the board; in the spending of the company, the hiring (or lack thereof due to higher insurance costs), as well as in the personal spending of the owners of a smaller company.

ADVERTISEMENT