IBJNews

Lawmakers forge deal to help Indianapolis Motor Speedway

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Lawmakers in the Indiana House and the Senate have reached a deal to help pay for improvements at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway, a key legislator said Thursday.

The plan authorizes the state to loan the speedway $100 million – money it will borrow through bonds – to make the grandstands more accessible to people with disabilities and to install lights for night races.

The House and Senate initially passed different versions of the legislation to aid the track. But one of the sponsors, Rep. Eric Turner, R-Cicero, said Thursday that lawmakers had reached a compromise.

Under the proposal, the loan will be paid back using increased sales and income paid at the track and with a $1 per admission tax for events. Lawmakers estimate those will generate about $5 million per year.

In addition, the legislation requires the Speedway to contribute $2 million per year to help pay for the project.

The language of the bill originally appeared in Senate Bill 91, authored by Sen. Mike Young, R-Indianapolis. However, Turner said the language was moved to House Bill 1544. That bill, authored by Turner, was stripped of its original tax language.

Turner said the proposal that now sits in front of lawmakers is “much like it left the House.” That means it includes $5 million in each of the next two years that other race tracks and motorsports businesses can borrow at loan interest rates for expansions or other projects.

“It’s truly a motorsports bill for the whole state,” Turner said.

He said motorsports is a $3 billion industry and employs 23,000 people.

“We want to continue growing it and we think this is a good way to do it,” he said.

Turner said he expects the House and Senate to vote on the bill on Friday.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • 4 for 4 Burl!!!!
    MVP - MVP - MVP!
  • NASCAR
    The attendance stats for NASCAR are depressed just like Indy. With the issues the teams, drivers and tracks are having with NASCAR mgt. look for a new stock car series to emerge.
  • Fewer Seats and Feets
    Seats are being taken out, not addded. That is because fewer people attend the "500" than twenty years ago, when it was a big deal. The place is being down-sized to reflect the smaller crowds. That is fact. As for the deal with the State, the taxpayers ought to be outraged. An H-G bailout for all of Lord Saggy's horrible, wasteful, fruitless spending on a series that less than 300,000 people in America (sponsors estimations - not mine) follow. It is a sham, a shame, and me thinks the Hulman clan is to blame.
  • Grandstand removal
    Dood, IMS has been tearing DOWN grandstands because they can't fill em anymore. Strangely, that phenomenon started 1996 or so...it's ok though. IMS Place fans will pay mega admission taxes so the 500 can survive on the public dollar. All is good! And, don't forget the $45 bucks to park in the infield....
  • swinbun
    Burl, You must not have been following this story much, or the media coverage over lighting the speedway. Never has there been any mention of running the 500 at night. If a race is to be run at night, it would be the NASCAR race. As for the health of the 500, attendance is growing back every year, and I would challenge that there are more people in the stands than at any time in the in the past 25 years on race day. Most people forget, or do not know that there are tens of thousands more grandstand seats on the backstretch and North end that never existed until the early to mid 90's.
  • Indianapolis 500 At Night
    If the Speedway attempts to hold the Indianapolis 500 at night, it will be the final blow. Hopefully, the rediculous idea if racing at night at IMS in the first place, is for NA$CAR. The Indianapolis 500 is an over one hundred year, Memorial Day/Weekend Spring time tradition, Sunday before Memorial day now for decades. It will be interesting to see if the reckless and inept IMS crew attempts to run the event at night. If so, I predict lots of interest for the first couple, then a ratings and attendance diaster in subsequent years. The only way to "save" the Indianapolis 500 now is to open it up to a deisgners/builders series based around a basic safety spec and modest cap on development so that the sport is not dominated by deep pokcet, America's Yacht-types, who would have a budget the same as a small, Indiana Sprint car team. It would come down to how good a builder are you within this basic safety spec, and how good a driver can you find to wheel it. Speed records do not have to be achieved. Serious racing at 210 is sufficient. Fix the "500" soon or it dies, day or night.
    • Education vs. Sports
      Although sports do play a significant role in education, you are very right. Why don't we add a small fee to every sporting event in the state that goes into an "improve teacher to student ratio fund".
    • Add Requirements
      The 500 has lost significant ground compared to the over-all racing industry. Assuming "sales increases" is a stretch at the least. To return the 500 to its former glory as " the greatest spectacle in racing", they should add requirements like un-restricted engine specifications. Now that would open some eyes.
      • Sports VS Schools
        It would be nice if our lawmakers took more interest in our schools than they do in our sports. This is what will always make Indiana backwards.

        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. 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.

        ADVERTISEMENT