Zionsville land swap could give schools, town a financial boost

February 20, 2014
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share


Less than a year after Zionsville Community Schools and the town of Zionsville joined forces to buy property for commercial development, they’re finalizing a land-swap that could result in more money for both entities.

The school district in May used $3.4 million from an old bond issue to buy 91 acres of prime Dow Chemical Co. property along 106th Street east of Zionsville Road. It planned to use about 10 acres for a new warehouse and maintenance facility, and sold the rest to the town for $3 million—payable over 25 years—plus the promise of a 50-50 split on any additional tax revenue resulting from the development.

Full build out of Creekside Corporate Park is expected to take about five years.

As planning efforts began in earnest, though—and Indianapolis-based Hat World Inc. snapped up about a fifth of the property for a new corporate headquarters—officials began questioning whether a tax-exempt use made sense there.

This month, officials came up with an alternative.

A tentative agreement calls for ZCS to give the town its Creekside land , along with about 10 acres on the northern portion of district-owned property on County Road 875 for a future public park.

The town, in turn, would hand over Jennings Field northwest of downtown (which will continue to host sporting events under school ownership), and agreed to make intersection improvements that would allow the school district to build its maintenance facility on the southern portion of the CR 875 land.

Adding 10 acres of developable land in Creekside should boost the expected increase in property-tax revenue, already expected to be about $1 million per year once construction is complete.

Every little bit helps the cash-strapped school district, which has struggled in recent years due to state property-tax caps and a new school-funding formula. Although it could not use the 2005 bond proceeds for anything other than land acquisition and construction projects, payments from the town are likely to be directed into the schools’ largely unrestricted General Fund.

Zionsville, meanwhile, is looking to draw commercial investment to diversify its largely residential tax base—another consequence of tax caps.

What’s your take on the creative collaboration, now that the development is taking shape?

ADVERTISEMENT
  • Good move
    I'm not familiar with this project in particular, but I think its a good thing that school districts are having to get move creative in order to keep funding themselves. For too long districts built without any sense of consequence, leading to the school funding problems we have today. Hopefully this teaches districts to act a little more reasonably with their money.
  • Error
    You may want to check, but I believe you are talking about 875 EAST and not 875 N.
    • Just 875
      Thanks for the note, Dave. Turns out it's just 875. Fix has been made.
    • South CR 875E
      The subject ZCS property is located at 4400 East CR 875E.
      • Correction...
        Sorry... 4400 South CR 875E.
      • Any Tax Benefits?
        1. Don't blame schools being cash strapped on new property tax formulas. Look also at the proliferation of TIF Districts that are moving funds from schools, parks and libraries and putting them in slush funds that local pols can use to reward their friends and benefactors. 2) Isn't this area in a TIF district meaning that tax benefits to the schools will be minimal?

      Post a comment to this blog

      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
      1. Aaron is my fav!

      2. Let's see... $25M construction cost, they get $7.5M back from federal taxpayers, they're exempt from business property tax and use tax so that's about $2.5M PER YEAR they don't have to pay, permitting fees are cut in half for such projects, IPL will give them $4K under an incentive program, and under IPL's VFIT they'll be selling the power to IPL at 20 cents / kwh, nearly triple what a gas plant gets, about $6M / year for the 150-acre combined farms, and all of which is passed on to IPL customers. No jobs will be created either other than an handful of installers for a few weeks. Now here's the fun part...the panels (from CHINA) only cost about $5M on Alibaba, so where's the rest of the $25M going? Are they marking up the price to drive up the federal rebate? Indy Airport Solar Partners II LLC is owned by local firms Johnson-Melloh Solutions and Telemon Corp. They'll gross $6M / year in triple-rate power revenue, get another $12M next year from taxpayers for this new farm, on top of the $12M they got from taxpayers this year for the first farm, and have only laid out about $10-12M in materials plus installation labor for both farms combined, and $500K / year in annual land lease for both farms (est.). Over 15 years, that's over $70M net profit on a $12M investment, all from our wallets. What a boondoggle. It's time to wise up and give Thorium Energy your serious consideration. See http://energyfromthorium.com to learn more.

      3. Markus, I don't think a $2 Billion dollar surplus qualifies as saying we are out of money. Privatization does work. The government should only do what private industry can't or won't. What is proven is that any time the government tries to do something it costs more, comes in late and usually is lower quality.

      4. Some of the licenses that were added during Daniels' administration, such as requiring waiter/waitresses to be licensed to serve alcohol, are simply a way to generate revenue. At $35/server every 3 years, the state is generating millions of dollars on the backs of people who really need/want to work.

      5. I always giggle when I read comments from people complaining that a market is "too saturated" with one thing or another. What does that even mean? If someone is able to open and sustain a new business, whether you think there is room enough for them or not, more power to them. Personally, I love visiting as many of the new local breweries as possible. You do realize that most of these establishments include a dining component and therefore are pretty similar to restaurants, right? When was the last time I heard someone say "You know, I think we have too many locally owned restaurants"? Um, never...

      ADVERTISEMENT