A Step in the Right Direction

As many know, I have been opposing the use of TIF districts to fund private development since 2007, when the Fishers Town Council pledged TIF funds to a redevelopment of downtown, and a project called Riverplace in the southwest corner of Fishers on 96th between Allisonville and the White River. Both of these proposals, enthusiastically backed by town leaders, were total and abject failures.  And in 2014, I objected to the TIF financing of the existing downtown projects, which are so risky that the developers of the "Depot" and "Switch" projects could not get private financing or bank loans and still make a profit on these deals.

But perhaps they did listen to me and the increasing chorus of voices complaining about these taxpayer handouts, which I had criticized as corporate welfare.  The newest downtown project will go in on Maple Street, buying a lot which had previously been purchased by the Fishers Redevelopment Commission, and will house a real estate company.  Even better, this business is not asking for any TIF funds nor even a tax abatement. They are getting a waiver of some impact and other fees.

So in a complete reversal of prior projects, which gave away public land for free and tens of millions of borrowed dollars to make it work, this project pays for the land, will pay future taxes, and likely create new jobs.

There is only one downside that I can see so far - the property is still in the downtown TIF, so the increase (called an increment) of new real estate taxes will go to pay for the TIF loans for other projects, and not to the general tax base to pay for necessary government operations such as police and fire services, among other things.

I have been strongly critical of TIFs, and I will continue that. I feel that they are fiscally irresponsible, non-transparent, and easily subject to abuse. They create winners and losers, making non-TIF taxpayers fund the bill for basic government services, and subsidize new business over old.

But the members of the Fishers government will hardly give me credit for any of this, but perhaps they are listening after all. And if elected to the City Council, I will continue to voice and fight for the citizens, whether or not anyone else is listening.

Transparency in Fishers?

Fishers government likes to talk about being "transparent".  If they are, and they should be, then it should be easy to find information on the town website about how the town is running, right? Well, not so much.  Just try to find financial information on TIFs (Tax Increment Financing), the tool used to pay the developers handouts to build private projects downtown.

I had a Facebook message debate the other day with Fishers Town Councilman Pete Peterson, who has disagreed with me about almost everything, to the point of incivility on his part more than once.  I kept pressing him for the financial details of the TIFs.  You would think, being a passionate supporter of this form of corporate welfare, that Peterson would be glad to provide that information freely, or at least tell me where it could be found, right?

No. Not at all.  In fact, Peterson refused to do so, and told me to use the Indiana Access to Public Records Act (which he kept calling by the wrong name, but I digress) to get this information.  So I have done so.  This morning (October 23), I went to Town Hall and presented that request for information in person.  Since I presented it in person, they have 24 hours to acknowledge my request. They must actually produce the records within a reasonable time.  Hopefully, this will be prior to Election Day, November 4th.

But why should we have to go through this process?  This is public information, produced by government employees that our taxes pay for.  This is OUR government, and financial information in particular should be easily accessible. But it isn't.  To be fair, there is a lot of documentary information available via the Fishers website, but it isn't exactly the easiest thing to use, and data is not easily organized and visible.  If elected to the City Council, I hope to work on making such information easier for citizens to access, as is their right.

Censorship and Transparency

Recently, the issue of public comment and debate to fully-inform the public has been on my mind. A related term is "transparency", which might be thought of as openly discussing public issues and making those decisions after full debate in the light of public view.

Or so I thought.  Apparently my opponent does not agree.  Last week, after a comment of mine on the "Fishers Indiana Government" Facebook page was deleted by the town's PR person who runs that page, I challenged why they did that.  Apparently it was because it linked to this blog.  So it seems that candidates for public office in Fishers have fewer First Amendment rights than do other citizens.  And the comments were in support of the Sun King Brewery expansion to Fishers, save for my serious reservations about the TIF financing, so that was even odder.  But they allowed the comments without the link to the blog.

That seemed silly to me, even though annoying.  But the hits kept coming.  It was reported to me that comments by others on my opponents Facebook page were deleted, because he did not feel that Facebook was an appropriate place for discussion of issues.  It is public, accessed by thousands of Fishers residents, so why not?  If not there, then where?  And now ALL comments on his page seem to be gone.

Also last week, I publicly challenged my opponent to a series of debates prior to the November 4th election. I even emailed him.  Nearly a week went by, and no response. So I called John.  Despite our political and policy differences, we personally are on good terms. His reply essentially was no debates, except for those which might be hosted by the Hamilton County League of Women Voters and/or the Fishers Chamber of Commerce.  So I reached out to those groups.  Per Dan Canan, President of the Fishers Chamber, they are NOT planning on any candidate debates, despite a record number of council seats being contested in a general election (four).  I have not heard from the League yet.

SO.  No discussion of issues on my opponent's Facebook page.  Candidate censorship on the Town's Facebook page. Either zero or ONE debate for the 4 council seats among 10 candidates running.

Democracy depends on an open and vigorous discussion and debate of issues. My opponent seems determined not to defend his record before the public.  Perhaps he realizes just how many errors of judgment he has made on the council, and hopes the public will remain ignorant.

SO. I will do my best to spread the word. I ask every resident of Fishers to share this blog with your friends and neighbors, so that there will be at least SOME open discussion of issues. And contact my opponent and let him know that hiding behind a curtain of silence is bad politics and worse for democracy.