Why Wishard Works For Me
For most of the Wishard referendum debate, I’ve basically been neutral. I understand the need for building a new facility, but I also understand the taxpayers have been burned on projects like the Library and Lucas Oil Stadium. I’ve heard arguments on both sides and critically watched presentations by both proponents and opponents. However, it was a letter that came in the mail to my wife the other day that took me off the fence. It was her property tax bill.
She was glad that due to tax caps her bill had virtually been cut in half since 2007. I decided to do a little closer inspection and look at each unit of government and how much they were taking, specifically Health and Hospital. The Health and Hospital portion of her bill has dropped 112% since 2007 and only made up 7% of her current tax bill. When I saw that, I decided the Wishard referendum works for me.
Many opponents of the referendum say they are concerned the bonds Wishard wants to float will be backed by property taxes and if’ Wishard’s revenue stream, which is funded in part by its nursing home revenue, is disrupted it will result in a tax increase. I think the criticism is legitimate, but not fatal.
Let’s assume the worse and there’s a 10% increase in the Health and Hospital portion of my wife’s tax bill to pay for the construction. By my count, she’s forking over an extra $4 a year. She spends $4 a day on Starbucks. A good glass of scotch will cost me $8. I think we can afford it. And to put it in even more perspective that $4 increase comes in the heels of more than $600 in property tax deductions she now enjoys due to the caps.
However, I doubt things would even get that far. In order for there to be a tax increase, Health and Hospital would have to go to the City-County Council and get permission since it is a municipal corporation. And I don’t see anyone on the Council approving a property tax increase for the Hospital. If anything, I see more scrutiny in Wishard’s future as Councilors will be watching closely and monitoring cost overruns. And the public should be there as well, watching and paying attention and holding officials accountable.
Like I said, I started out in neutral and after looking at how under the worse case scenario a 10% increase in Health and Hospital translates into a less than a penny a day from our combined income, Wishard is something we can live with. Now there are some people that taking a penny is too much and they are free to vote their beliefs. But for us, it’s no big deal.
October 31st, 2009 at 5:10 am
What property tax cap? Did you ever read the original one? Article XIII of the Indiana Constitution is one sentance long. Ought not to tax your give away brain to read it in conjunction with the property tax bill you have in your nicotine stained mitts. Then, report back to us if your taxes exceed 2% of the assessed valuation? Double dog dare any of your readers to do the same thing and then to view our Legislature's proposals with the scorn deserved.
October 31st, 2009 at 6:17 am
Pascal,
No offense dude, but you have no idea what you're talking about.
October 31st, 2009 at 6:34 am
Pascal, you should know by now that Abdul has no use for our Indiana Constitution. I had it out with him the other day concerning Article 8 school funding.
Indeed! As I recall, Abdul was reading the Constitution, and remarked that we should be careful when reading the Constitution. Now, why would he, or anyone, make such a remark?
When the Constitution is an annoyance, let's forget about it, huh?
Or, we could find a politician or lawyer to gin up an interpretation that suits their agenda — regardless what the actual words or intent mean.
“If the provisions of the Constitution be not upheld when they pinch as well as when they comfort, they may as well be abandoned. — Justice Charles Evans Hughes
October 31st, 2009 at 8:20 am
Watchdog Indiana recommends a NO vote on the Wishard Memorial Hospital referendum. The reason for this NO vote recommendation is that a prudent homeowner should not approve any referendum that increases the property tax burden above the 1% property tax cap UNTIL the property tax caps are included in the Indiana Constitution.
For the property tax caps to be included in the Indiana Constitution, the Indiana House of Representatives must pass Senate Joint Resolution 1 next General Assembly session and Hoosiers statewide must approve the constitutional property tax caps in a November 2, 2010, referendum.
If the property tax caps are not included in the Indiana Constitution, the 1% homeowner cap will be subject to General Assembly increase and legal challenge. The property tax relief promised in return for the 2008 statewide sales tax increase will disappear just like the property tax relief promised by the 2002 statewide sales tax increase – the 16.3% homeowner property tax reduction promised in 2003 became just 2.4% four years later.
AFTER the property tax caps are included in the Indiana Constitution, it makes sense to consider a future Wishard referendum on its merits. However, homeowners are not protected against runaway property tax increases until the property tax caps are included in the Indiana Constitution. It makes no sense to approve a Wishard referendum that would increase property taxes without constitutional protection against future runaway property tax increases.
Wishard Memorial Hospital Referendum Analysis
NOTE: The primary sources of information for this analysis include Wishard literature, an October 19 Indianapolis Star story, and various documents from Carl Moldthan (Executive Director of Indianapolis Taxpayers Association).
Wishard referendum supporters say “Building a new Wishard will require NO TAX INCREASE.” However, the no-tax-increase numbers DO NOT ADD UP.
Let's start with a basic question – how much would a new Wishard Memorial Hospital cost? Wishard currently estimates that a new hospital will cost $754 million. Wishard has saved $150 million for its new hospital. If you subtract $150 million from $754 million, Wishard is saying that a $604 million bond issue is needed to build the new hospital. However, Wishard is seeking a bond issue that has a $604 million minimum and a $703 million maximum. What this means is that Wishard wants authority to issue bonds for a new hospital that costs up to $853 million. Since Wishard is a government operation – and governments are notorious for cost overruns – it is prudent to assume that a new Wishard hospital will cost $853 million and require a $703 million bond issue.
Now let's answer another basic question – how much will the annual payments be for a $703 million bond issue. Because the anticipated bond issue amount is the $703 million maximum, it is prudent to assume the annual bond payments will be the maximum estimate of $55 million.
Wishard says there will be no tax increase because its current funding resources – including federal reimbursement revenue and Wishard Foundation philanthropy – will provide the revenue needed to make the $55 million annual bond payments. This brings up the next question – how much annual revenue will Wishard have available to make the $55 million annual bond payments?
Wishard's owner, the Marion County Health and Hospital Corporation, estimates a surplus of $25 million at the end of 2009. Wishard Health Services will contribute $12.5 million, HHC's nursing homes operation $10.5 million, and $2 million will come from other sources. Special attention needs to be given to the HHC nursing homes.
Because HHC is a municipal corporation, its 37 nursing homes receives an extra $55 per day for each Medicaid resident above the $125 a day that a private nursing home gets.This type of extra Medicaid payment has been under investigation by the GAO and Congress the past 8 years. Political pressure from private nursing homes and the national push to control health care costs put the extra Medicaid payment in jeopardy. If the extra Medicaid payment is eliminated, the HHC nursing homes surplus will disappear. It is prudent to assume for the long haul there will be no HHC nursing homes surplus revenue; therefore, Wishard will have only $14.5 million surplus revenue available most years to help pay the $55 million annual bond payments.
How will this prudent worst-case scenario affect Marion County property tax payers? It is estimated that a property tax rate of $0.1490 per $100 of net assessed value would be necessary to make an entire $55 million annual bond payment. Therefore, a $0.1097 property tax rate is needed to finish making the $55 million bond payment after the $14.5 million surplus Wishard revenue is used. In other words, a Marion County owner of a $100,000 home would have to pay $109.70 extra in annual property taxes.
Will Marion County property tax payers be hit with extra annual property taxes in the best-case scenario? Under the best-case scenario, the lowest estimated annual bond payment for a $604 million bond issue would be $38 million. After using $25 million in surplus HHC revenue, a property tax rate of $0.0352 would be needed to make up the $13 million annual bond payment shortfall. A Marion County owner of a $100,000 home would have to pay $35.20 extra in annual property taxes.
Wishard referendum supporters are wrong when they claim that “Building a new Wishard will require NO TAX INCREASE.” A Marion County owner of a $100,000 home would have to pay from $35.20 to $109.70 in extra annual property taxes that are exempt from the 1% homeowner property tax cap.
NOTE: By copy of this information to Sarah Parkman, Community Outreach Liaison (sarah.parkman@wishard.edu), Watchdog Indiana challenges Wishard Memorial Hospital to dispute the results of this analysis. There has been no reply
October 31st, 2009 at 8:40 am
First. this is the only case of property taxes going down appreciably that I have heard anyone announce. Conversely, I have found many whose tax went up A LOT.
Second, the 'it's just a little increase' argument has worn quite thin over the years. All the new taxes and increases of existing taxes are promoted as 'just a little increase.' They pile up, though, year after year as new ones come along. (insert the 'frog in a pot' analogy here)
Third, Wishard want's us to vote for the referendum because it's convenient for them, not because it's good for us. they don't NEED it, they just want it. It forces tax payers into co-signing their loan.
Fourth, Wishard is making predictions and promises based on a revenue stream that stands a very good chance of going away very soon. A very, very, very bad idea that greatly increases the risk to the co-signers.
Fifth, this is the first, but won't be the last end-run on property tax 'caps' so we must stand our ground and fight for what little protection we have been granted each and every time particularly when there is an alternative solution, as there is in this case. Property taxe collections ought not be a piggy bank anybody can raid whenever they feel like it, just because its in THEIR best interests.
October 31st, 2009 at 9:07 am
Actually the average Hoosier property taxpayer will see a $500 decrease in their tax bill and 2/3rds of the property taxpayers in Marion County saw a decrease or no change in their assessments. Facts are quite the stubborn thing.
October 31st, 2009 at 10:23 am
I would agree with much said here other then the nursing home part. We may see the IGT go away but doubtful….do you know why? Show me a legislature willing to take funding away from the nations childrens hosptials? They are part of the same loophole as this funding source. If you really look at the HHC deal it's all just on paper anyway….the same owners own the buildings, the same operator runs them for the most part. It's an interesting web if you try to untangle it. If you connect the dot's to current and past HHC folks and where they are today it makes an interesting story.
October 31st, 2009 at 10:52 am
If her HH portion of the tax bill dropped 112% since 2007, that would mean they owe her money, not the other way around. If something goes from 200 to 0, that's a 100% drop. If it goes from 200 to 500, that's 150% increase.
I'm not sure why we should ignore the dishonest approach the H&H people have taken toward this referendum. They intentionally put it in a non election year when they knew the average voter would not be at the polls and they would have a huge organizational advantage. They had their lobbyists put into the budget bill, language that allowed H&H to avoid putting into the referendum question a description of the project or mentioning how much they would be borrowing. They've lied from the beginning about the use of property taxes to fund this project. They're involved in a nursing home Medicaid scam that is unlikely to produce revenue for the next 30 years. The feds are going to crack down on it – everyone knows it is coming. The question is when.
Then we have the Wishard PAC financial report that said only three individuals contributed to the PAC, but two non-profits contributed over $1 million. Clearly they are funnelling money through non-profits to hide the contributor and make political contributions tax deductible. Then the Wishard PAC is using a PR firm to pay the bills, again which conceals who is receiving the political contributions.
You don't even have to get to the merits of the Wishard referendum. If someone is going to lie to you again and again, the answer should be “No.”
October 31st, 2009 at 11:00 am
I'm sure the illegal immigrants will be quite fond of their new emergency room to use for primary care. What an investment!
October 31st, 2009 at 11:12 am
It used to be that it was thought that the whole was equal to the sum of its parts. Modern thought has evolved from there such that a 2% property tax cap, as in Indiana Article XIII, cannot be used to explain that nearly 30% of all property taxes raised in Indiana must now be used to pay down bonded indebtedness. No doubt the martinini and cigar crowd would generalize to the conclusion, “But for us, it's no big deal”. The Legislature, having lied to the people for decades over this very issue can't be trusted (because they are thieves) to enact a property tax cap-or at least a cap that would actually cap anything. More canals, anyone?
October 31st, 2009 at 11:19 am
Abdul, it is my understanding that once the referendum is approved, the finances regarding the new construction will not fall under the oversight reguired by City County Council. Thus, if H & H revenues drop, it is possible for them to reallocate their “profits” to the shortfall and add the construction cost to the property tax bill. Something a city-county councilor will be inclined to allow because it would mean they do not have to authorize a tax increase. The public did so in passing the referendum.
Just a thought.
October 31st, 2009 at 11:32 am
Paul,
I don't know how many times I have to say this, but Wishard didn't put this on the ballot, the Legislature did. This is just like when you posted the wrong name of the police officer who pulled over your niece. Get your facts straight.
October 31st, 2009 at 11:58 am
Or perhaps it's like when you insisted that legally the City-County Council could redistrict in the year before the muni election, a position which you later changed. I'd venture to say you get your facts in your blog wrong a lot more than I do.
Trying to blame the off-year election on the legislature is a cop-out and you, as someone who has worked in a legislative body, knows it. Health & Hospital, i.e. Wishard lobbyists got the provision slipped into an enormous budget bill that contained hundreds of pages. The notion that all 150 legislators knew what the Wishard folks were trying to pull with the referendum provision buried in the budget bill, and approved that stunt of the off-year election and not describing the project or how much is being borrowed, is a stretch.
Don't you think voters have the right to know what they're voting on in a referendum? Certainly you can concede that.
October 31st, 2009 at 12:15 pm
Deja vu is the feeling you've experienced something before, like being hyper taxed. It's the unsustainable trend of excessive government that's the problem.
If the ends justified the means, we wouldn't need laws or credible public process (i.e. equitably drafted referenda, with SEC or better quality disclosure of taxpayer risks). Credible policy doesn't pick winners & losers.
Nor should government operate outside its purpose, or any pretense of being “in business.” The “bigger is better” model for government isn't working. There is a direct connection between higher taxes, lower income & property values. Outside the printing press, government gets its money from that which citizens earn; leaving them with less disposable income, to provide for themselves.
These referenda follow the very quality deficient process, that have driven taxes far beyond governmental purpose or sustainability.
Deja vu is the feeling you've experienced something before, like being hyper taxed.
October 31st, 2009 at 12:31 pm
I doubt that chief. My facts on redistricting were right on the money. Wanna drop down to the Secretary of State's office and see? That's what I thought.
Also, the Wishard lobbyists didn't put in the budget bill, it was Mike Young. They wanted a remonstrance. I was there and saw the whole thing. Where were you? Not there, obviously.
I also have no problem with voters getting more information on the referendum. That's why I've had both sides on my radio program making their case and both will be back on Tuesday to make one last pitch.
Now why don't you go run along somewhere and be relevant to a conversation.
By the way, have you libeled any police officers lately?
October 31st, 2009 at 12:31 pm
That's the first smart thing I've ever heard or read from Phil Hinkle. I investigated, and it's a good question, Rep. Hinkle, but I think the answer is a solid “maybe.” At best. (or worst as the case may be)
As long as HHC is a municorp, the council will have oversight. Unless the legislature, that august body to which you belong, in its infinite wisdom, uses statutes to remove that oversight.
As for amending the Constitution for proptax caps, no. Never. Not if the mighty Missipssippi, the father of all waters, floats with horse turds the size of the Rock of Gibralter.
Our Constitution is a sacred document–state AND federal. You clowns who want to amend it for the latest craze have obviously not read the available writings of the framers of those documents. They eschewed the amendment process, and puposely made it difficult, lest it come under what Judge Isiah Blackford called “the whims of the moment.” Judge Blackford was one of Indiana's first judges, a framer of much of our civil and criminal statutes, and a wise man. He got a county named for him, albeit a small square one.
October 31st, 2009 at 12:48 pm
“No offense dude, but you have no idea what you're talking about.” It is the sort of dismissal one would expect from a brainless TA but no offense taken. Municipal Debt, Section 1. No political or municipal corporation in this State shall EVER become indebted IN ANY MANNER or FOR ANY PURPOSE to an amount in the aggregate exceeding two per centum on the value of the taxable property within such corporatation, to be ascertained by the last assessment for State and county taxes, previous to the incurring of such indebtedness; and all BONDS OR OBLIGATIONS, in excess of such amount, given by such corporations, shall be void……….”. Maybe you should take up pipe smoking so you could stick the above in said pipe and smoke it. Naturally, my source for the language was ISTA who in 1947 were adamant that the language had to be changed. I don't recall any amendments since then, do you? Now, consider doing the assignment and maybe even my buddy, Aaron, can help you with your property tax bill, the computation of 2%, and why he thinks the proposed “caps” will hold any more water than the Quoted Indiana Constitution now in existance, at least on paper. I did capitalize parts of the Article XIII although people who read and understand history and language would not need that sort of reminder. Can I sell you some canal stock since your mouth seems to fit a fish hook?
October 31st, 2009 at 12:48 pm
And averages are poor statistical 'proofs' by themselves. Standard deviation, median, min/max all are needed to draw any meaningful conclusions. I think you have mused about 50% of all students being at or below average.
October 31st, 2009 at 12:48 pm
Your “facts” were that Republicans could redistrict in the year before the muni election in 2011. That was exactly what Council Republicans leadership was claiming during the budget process. You finally backed off of that claim when you found it was not true.
Absolutely, Wishard lobbyists wanted to bypass the referendum and wanted a remonstrance instead. That would have made it even more difficult to defeat the project. Senator Kenley would not go along with that though and insisted on the referendum, but allowed it to be set in a non-election year. That was the lobbyists backup position. They knew an off-year referendum would be in their favor. They also inserted language into the bill that allowed them to avoid the ordinary language that requires a description of the project and how much is being borrowed. That is what legislators have told me.
Come on, Abdul, you and I both have worked in legislative bodies. The notion that the Wishard lobbyists had absolutely nothing to do with this is laughable. You know better.
Why can't you bring yourself to say that voters are entitled to a FAIR referendum process, where the question describes the project and how much is being borrowed? Why can't you do that? You know you can still say it's a good project, while criticizing the dishonest measures they have used to promote it in this referendum question.
You obviously don't know much about libel law. If I were you, I'd get more informed about it though. You're the one who constantly publishes unsubstantiated rumors.
October 31st, 2009 at 4:26 pm
We all know this will fall back on taxpayers as currently proposed in one fashion or another. Either through Wishard's bond default or through an increased taxpayer contribution to Wishard revenue.
Why are we allowing every non profit hospital in central Indiana to shift all their Medicaid, Medicare, and indigent clients to taxpayer funded Wishard.
Why are we allowing them to keep a non-profit status, shirk care to the needy, and hide enormous sums of money in for profit affiliates?
Anyone with a brain knows that IU and Clarian are the driving force behind the taxpayer general obligation bond proposal. If they and their supporters are sooo sure Wishard can pay this bond through revenue, then why don't they back a revenue bond?
Clarian certainly appears more than willing to pay for new hospitals in Carmel, Fishers, Muncie, Bloomington, and Lafayette. Why not downtown Indianapolis?
Answer: Because poor people aren't as profitable.
Isn't that the reason we gave these hospitals non profit status in the first place?
October 31st, 2009 at 4:35 pm
Pascal rarely says anything smart, or funny, but that last sentence was pure magic. Well done.
October 31st, 2009 at 5:08 pm
I do not support most spending but this I will vote yes on because of the medical they perform for the poor or uninsured. BTW my property tax dropped more then 50% under the new statements.
October 31st, 2009 at 6:32 pm
Perhaps in the spirit of Halloween, a “NO” vote this Tuesday, is the taxpayers' best remedy, other than county exodus; to avoid hellfire & referen-damnation.
October 31st, 2009 at 6:59 pm
Can anyone direct me to a website that shows how Wishard is going to spend $754 million on its new campus?
It must be a HUGE hospital considering Clarian spent $284 million for its new 170 private bed only hospital in Carmel, and is only spending $190 million for a new 44 bed acute care hospital in Fishers.
October 31st, 2009 at 7:25 pm
Based upon the price per bed cost of Clarian's Carmel hospital, the new Wishard Hospital would have up to 451 private beds.
October 31st, 2009 at 8:41 pm
I like how Abdul claims others are posting baseless facts, but he still hasn't ever said how he came to the conclusion that the privatization of FSSA saved over $100 million.
October 31st, 2009 at 11:52 pm
Former State Rep. Jon Elrod explaining why you should vote “no” on the Wishard referendum:
As the old maxim says, “The only certainty in life is death and taxes.” So if a governmental entity tells me they need the ability to raise taxes, but promises not to raise taxes, I am skeptical.
HHC must issue bonds to get a mortgage to build a shiny new hospital. In order to get a decent rate, the bonds must be secured by a property tax levy. But they assure us that the money from the nursing homes will pay the mortgage, without a tax levy.
Bull.
These nursing homes were not built or purchased by HHC. They are not managed by HHC. Nor has HHC made any investment in the nursing homes. But there are complicated contracts in place that make it appear that HHC owns and operates the nursing homes. So how does HHC make millions annually off of nursing homes that it does not own or manage?
Well, it’s a scam; er, loophole. Medicare reimburses government nursing homes $55 a day more than private nursing homes. So an enterprising private nursing home owner came to HHC and said if we make HHC the owner on paper, we can split that extra $55 and both make millions.
That works until a president promises to cut $500B in Medicare waste. Oh wait… Just one change in the rules for what constitutes a “government” nursing home, and no more $55 reimbursement. Then HHC’s contracts will terminate. Then property taxes will pay the mortgage on the hospital.
Is this likely? Well, evidently no bank is willing to loan HHC money at a reasonable rate without the property tax levy. If the banks are not willing to risk it, why should taxpayers? HHC knows it needs the property taxes. Why, just two years after the property tax revolt that threw Peterson out of office, would HHC risk another backlash? They want the property taxes.
But let’s say the nursing home money continues to flow for the full30 years on the mortgage. Does HHC have to spend the nursing home money on the mortgage? No. HHC can spend that money however it wishes. HHC can collect property taxes whenever it wants. There is no mechanism to ensure the property taxes will be collected only in the event that the nursing home money dries up. When has government ever declined to spend money when it had the opportunity?
If you vote yes on the referendum, do so because you are willing to pay more taxes for a shiny new hospital, not because you think the hospital will be free.
I admit that a new hospital is a better use of taxpayer money than the Simon Building, Lucas Oil Stadium, or that spaceship that landed behind our Central Library. But that is not a justification.
Property taxes are the most regressive of all taxes. Owners or renters (through rent), pay them regardless of their income. They tax a basic necessity: shelter. At least the sales tax does not apply to necessities (groceries, health care, education). The poor people in the poorest neighborhoods will be most affected by this tax.
If you support the constitutional property tax caps, vote against this amendment. Your tax rate will no longer be capped at 1% for residential.
In my opinion, all of the “free” nursing home money should be saved up. The hospital should be built in phases. But HHC wants a shiny new hospital now, and that little bronze placard that immortalizes the board and officers.
Vote no.
Jonathan R. Elrod
November 1st, 2009 at 1:00 am
Thank you for a carefully considered post!
November 1st, 2009 at 1:00 am
Thank you for a carefully considered post!
November 1st, 2009 at 1:00 am
Thank you for a carefully considered post!
November 1st, 2009 at 1:00 am
Thank you for a carefully considered post!
November 1st, 2009 at 1:00 am
Thank you for a carefully considered post!
November 1st, 2009 at 1:00 am
Thank you for a carefully considered post!
November 1st, 2009 at 5:11 am
The answer for those who don't want to be taxed for Wishard and other wasteful Marion Co. things is simple: Move out of Marion County. When I purchased my first house, the #1 thing I made sure of: The home was no located inside the confines of the People's Republic of Marion County. I do work in the city, and support my minimal use of city resources via local taxes. Not only that, when I stay in my own county to eat, I am still support Marion County. For whatever reason, Marion Co. decided the best use of a regional tax would be to build and pay for business HQs for a few billionaires and their private companies. As such, I laugh whenever someone tells me I am not paying my “fair share” to Marion Co./Indy.
November 1st, 2009 at 5:28 am
The answer for those who don't want to be taxed for Wishard and other wasteful Marion Co. things is simple: Move out of Marion County. When I purchased my first house, the #1 thing I made sure of: The home was no located inside the confines of the People's Republic of Marion County. I do work in the city, and support my minimal use of city resources via local taxes. Not only that, when I stay in my own county to eat, I am still support Marion County. For whatever reason, Marion Co. decided the best use of a regional tax would be to build and pay for business HQs for a few billionaires and their private companies. As such, I laugh whenever someone tells me I am not paying my “fair share” to Marion Co./Indy.
November 1st, 2009 at 5:29 am
John Doe, if you travel and or work extensively in MC, but live in the doughnut, you're probably ,not paying your fair share to our local government.
Aside form that, if you hated it so much, we're glad you're gone.
November 1st, 2009 at 5:42 am
“Our Constitution is a sacred document…” – Think Again
Wow! Who'd a thunk you would take this position, considering your views of property rights.
November 1st, 2009 at 5:47 am
It isn't an inconsistent position, Aries. Please re-read the “offending” comment(s) and the Constitution, then get back to me.
November 1st, 2009 at 7:46 am
Abbie,
The issue is not whether Wishard or the various schools need (or want) more money/higher taxes. The question is whether referendum is an appropriate method of creating/estalishing an intiative, public policy or, in this case, raising taxes. This is why Wishard (and School funding) does not work for me. First, I would like to consider myself educated and well informed about politics and public policy. But truthfully, when it comes to the various/multi-facted/layered (dare I say confusing) hospital and education funding, bonding,taxation,policy implications, operational issues, managment issues, and budgeting, I am at a loss. I personally, do not have the resources, specifically time, to honestly and truthfully assess whether a new hospital is needed or additional school funding is needed. And my guess is that most voting, for or against a referendum, are in the same boat (no insult to those intended). That is why I rely on my elected officials. That is their job. And if I don't like the job they have voted on an issue, I don't vote for them come re-election.
I have read what reckless referenda has done such as Proposition 13 in California and other states. Do I believe that Wishard needs a new hospital and schools need more funding, probably. But I believe that referenda is not the method to obtain these funding. The bottom line is this, whose judgement do you trust more on such issues, your elected officials or your unelected public.
November 1st, 2009 at 7:56 am
“John Doe, if you travel and or work extensively in MC, but live in the doughnut, you're probably ,not paying your fair share to our local government.
Aside form that, if you hated it so much, we're glad you're gone.”
I knew someone would claim I wasn't paying my “fair share.” It is never enough with liberals. As long as it is another person's money, they always want more!! There is absolutely no reason why folks in Marion Co. should be paying any more in property taxes if they had the same assessed value as me. I am not anti-property tax, but I am anti-unfair taxation. I don't hate Marion Co./Indy, I hate all the insiders that do whatever they can to jack up taxes so them and theirs can rake in six-figures a year. Property taxes should be based on one thing: Size of home, size of yard, type of land. That would mean equal and fair taxation to all. There are only a few basic needs for human survival, shelter is one of them…and that shouldn't be taxed to the tune of thousands of dollars. If there should be a need for additional taxation, take it from people's income. The more you make, the more you pay. Folks really only need a small income to cover the basics of life/survival. If you can't stand paying an extra $4,000/year because you make $100K/year, then get another job that pays less. Shifting the property tax to income tax would also nail all these elite insiders who are busy padding their personal bank accounts on the backs of taxpayers.
November 1st, 2009 at 8:54 am
Way too many aspects of the Wishard issue that stink- that treat the voter as needed cattle. I support a state-adopted child, volunteer at schools, was a United Way fundraiser this year, participate in political activism, etc. But, I'm voting NO on this one.
.
Good luck in your deliberations. Please vote.
November 1st, 2009 at 9:12 am
Maybe the government could just map out little reservations in the desert and relocate all of us there so we don't get in their way?
November 1st, 2009 at 9:16 am
And in this scenario, voters make a decision with 30 year long ramifications, vs. a politician, where we have the ability to vote in someone new in 4 years or less to fix something we don't like.
No, a referendum is a marriage with no option for a divorce if it doesn't working out.
November 1st, 2009 at 12:33 pm
I have looked everywhere for the new Wishard Hospital Plans. The only thing I was able to find was a architectural plan from Inside Indiana Business that shows a parking garage and a partial views of two low rise bland boxes.
What are they doing with $750 million dollars.
Keep in mind the Luxury JW Marriott complex will cost $450 million and will have 1,626 rooms. The current Wishard has 353 beds. The new Clarian Hospital in Carmel cost $284 million for its new 170 private bed hospital.
Something does not add up. What is missing?
November 1st, 2009 at 1:05 pm
Just read in the Star what they are doing with $750 million dollars.
They are building a new hospital with about 300 inpatient beds.
The current Wishard has 353 inpatient beds.
Keep in mind the Luxury JW Marriott complex will cost $450 million and will have 1,626 rooms.
The new Clarian Hospital in Carmel cost $284 million for its new 170 private bed hospital.
The number of beds and $750 million cost don't add up. Hundreds of millions are unaccounted for.
November 1st, 2009 at 9:16 pm
Wishard's promotion in the right most column on this page is subject to advertising claims and standards-
“Vote Wishard Yes! A New Wishard With No Tax Increase
http://www.WishardYes.org“
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:30 am
The extra money is office space for IU doctors. One of the benefits of working as a medical prof./researcher for a public subsidized university is that you don't have much overhead. I am not sure of the current set-up, with budget cuts and all, but there are private practice offices all over the city. This is another one of those public-private partnerships where a few get rich and the taxpayers end up footing the bill. The only benefit is that of getting doctors, many of whom do stay in the immediate area. That being said, the days of the average Joe getting some $60K-$120K/year factory job are over. Now folks are lucky to make $12/hour. So while IU administrators have kept getting raise after raise over the years, most average folks in the private sector have been seeing less and less income.
November 2nd, 2009 at 5:09 am
Who gets stuck with the bill when Wishard can't pay?
What happens to all of the people who assured us we would not have to pay for this when they are proven wrong?
For TA: When you promote more government intrusion and regulation of property rights WITHOUT amending our Constitution, then you clearly speaketh with forked tongue.
November 2nd, 2009 at 7:20 am
Aires, it's clear that those of us who revere the Constitutions, don't want them amended for temporary (in historical context) problems. Our founders, state and federal, clearly intended that our elected representatives figure out these problems without amending, save for disasters and matters of urgent need.
I'm not saying that your conclusions about property taxes, or this referenda, are incorrect.
I'm just saying that amending the Constitutions ought to be reserved for more pressing long-term issues. And those of you who advocate amendments really ought to read some of the Founders' writings. More.
I'm also puzzled at the level of govt. involvement you seem to want in our lives. Many who advocate amendments for this or that cause, seem to want more involvement, via the Amendment process. Yet any of those same adovcates scream about govt.'s involvement in our lives.
The consistency thing…bothers many of us who truly want govt. as far removed from our lives as possible.
In matters of public ehalth, national security, safety, education and promoting the general welfare, the govt.'s role is stautorily and Constitutionally mandated.
(New can of worms opened) (Sorry Abdul)
November 2nd, 2009 at 9:06 am
Your attempt to build a modern state of the art hospital to the construction of a hotel is simply laughable. The needs of a hospital infrastructure wise are so different from a hotel. One of the reasons that there needs to be a new Wishard is that much of today's equipment needs to be mobile in the hospital and requires ceilings that are 16 feet tall in the hallways and rooms. When was the last time that you saw that in a hotel? When was the last time that you saw an Emergency Room in a hotel? When was the last time you saw elevators in a hotel that could accomodate large hospital beds? Think about it….your logic doesn't add up!!
November 2nd, 2009 at 9:39 am
Taxpayers are referen-damned if they do, and better off if they don't.
Citizens deserve better from the people who claim to “represent” them.
November 2nd, 2009 at 10:24 am
Ok, if you didn't get it, try this.
Cook County Hospital (John H. Stroger, Jr. Hospital) in Chicago replaced a sprawling 13-building campus, whose main pavilion was opened in 1914. They spent approximately $626.3 million (including cost over runs to replace all the medical equipment) to create a 464 bed hospital that serves the same type of clients as Wishard. It open in 2002.
Now look at the Wishard plan. They plan to spend $750 million to build a new 300 bed hospital. THIS IS $123 MILLION MORE EXPENSE FOR 164 LESS HOSPITAL BEDS.
Don't forget by targeting 300 hospital beds for the New Wishard, they will be reducing their current bed capacity by 53 beds.
How can a low cost state like Indiana spend MORE for LESS in the best buyers market for construction materials and labor in our lifetimes???????
November 2nd, 2009 at 10:35 am
Clarian spent $284 million for its new 170 private bed only hospital in Carmel in 2006.
Based upon the price per bed cost of Clarian's Carmel Hospital, the new Wishard Hospital would have up to 451 private beds.
November 2nd, 2009 at 10:36 am
Gosh Abdul? What about those of us whose property tax bills have INCREASED, not decreased? Should we go along with it to because your wife's bill somehow managed to decrease?
My mortgage payment went up several hundred dollars a month since this property tax problem started. And it will increase even more if Wishard referendum passes.
Abdul, if the referendum does not pass, Wishard can still build its hospital. It just can't use my property as collateral to do it.
How many more government spending increases can I endure before I can no longer afford to stay in my home?
November 2nd, 2009 at 1:13 pm
“How many more government spending increases can I endure before I can no longer afford to stay in my home?”
Why wait for a socialist/liberal government to continue to slowly decimate the fruits of your labor to the point you have to flee to safety? Move _NOW_!! You, Gary, everyone else who is sick and tired of the Marion Co./Indy elites who keep putting their hands in the cookie jar just so they can driver around in expensive cars, and live in fancy, costly homes.
November 2nd, 2009 at 1:54 pm
I don't want to ever move from my neighborhood. Ever since I was a little girl, I wanted to live where I live today. I worked hard coming from where I came to live where I get to live today.
Why should I give up my dream?
It's not just Marion county elites getting rich off Marion county taxpayers, a lot of them live up in Hamilton County. Ir$ay comes to mind. I'm quite sure when you do your homework, you'll learn a big percentage of the people behind the Wishard referendum live up there.
Remember the arts budget? The woman who led the “Save Indy Arts” social media campaign owns Gracie Communications in Fishers (Hamilton County). She sure had a lot to personally lose (contracts) when Marion county taxpayers needed to tighten their belts. That's one of many examples of Hamilton County people who push agendas on Marion county taxpayers because they personally benefit. They are adept at using the sick and disadvantaged to do it.
November 2nd, 2009 at 3:57 pm
Just because a liberal says it doesn't make the “if you don't like it here then you can GET OUT” any better. It was dumb when Bush and co would use it, and it's dumb now.
Believe it or not, people have the right to voice their opinions and live where they wish. Not all of us decide to live based on politics. Sometimes people do so due to professional reasons, sentimental, and personal reasons too. I'd love to live in Boston because the city (and state) is filled with great history, even though I'd probably never agree with most of the politicians in that area.
As someone who's not set in stone in my position, I'd be a lot more comfortable with the referendum if HHC was doing this in an open and honest way, and that the media would give a fair shake to both sides of the issue. But HHC has rushed this through as secretively as possible, during a non-election year giving proponents a huge advantage, and with the huge support from PAC's and use of city property to promote the referendum, opponents of it just don't stand a chance at being heard.
I also find it funny that you are trying to make it seem as if this is a liberal vs conservative issue. In making that the downtown elites seem as if Gary Welsh and co are against them because of political reasons. I have a number of liberal friends who care for the ICVA and CIB as much as Gary does.
November 2nd, 2009 at 7:59 pm
Melyssa,
I'm not telling you to do anything. I'm just telling you the decision made in on our end and why. You're a big girl. Last time I checked, nobody could tell you what to do, and rightly so.
November 2nd, 2009 at 8:00 pm
And for the record, if Wishard uses revenue bonds it will cost you more in interest payments.
November 3rd, 2009 at 5:01 am
“I don't want to ever move from my neighborhood. Ever since I was a little girl, I wanted to live where I live today. I worked hard coming from where I came to live where I get to live today.
Why should I give up my dream?
It's not just Marion county elites getting rich off Marion county taxpayers, a lot of them live up in Hamilton County.”
This will never end. I once thought like you, that people need to have a “home.” I believe this comes from the US governments push that people own land so:
#1: The lending/consumer debt industrial complex will work. Homes are massive debt loads for most people, especially since all those $70-$100K/year factory jobs are gone for the non-college educated types.
#2: This helps with taxation of people more so than if most folks just rented smaller living spaces.
My whole family lives here in central Indiana. However, after traveling out west, I know that major cities could face the worse of the coming crash. A major focus of mine is to pay off my home ASAP, save all that interest I would pay to a bank and put it in my bank account, and have enough money saved to be able to up and move to more stable/better areas if need be. Right now things aren't to that point, so I am comfortable staying here. However, there is no way I would every move to Indy/Marion Co. since I don't have to.
It doesn't matter that all those elites live outside Marion Co. Marion Co. is where the money is, it is where the politics are played. Until Marion Co./Indy resembles Detroit, people who have a desire to get rich on the backs of taxpayers will likely turn to Marion Co. vs. any of the other surrounding counties.
November 3rd, 2009 at 11:01 am
“I don't want to ever move from my neighborhood. Ever since I was a little girl, I wanted to live where I live today. I worked hard coming from where I came to live where I get to live today.
Why should I give up my dream?
It's not just Marion county elites getting rich off Marion county taxpayers, a lot of them live up in Hamilton County.”
This will never end. I once thought like you, that people need to have a “home.” I believe this comes from the US governments push that people own land so:
#1: The lending/consumer debt industrial complex will work. Homes are massive debt loads for most people, especially since all those $70-$100K/year factory jobs are gone for the non-college educated types.
#2: This helps with taxation of people more so than if most folks just rented smaller living spaces.
My whole family lives here in central Indiana. However, after traveling out west, I know that major cities could face the worse of the coming crash. A major focus of mine is to pay off my home ASAP, save all that interest I would pay to a bank and put it in my bank account, and have enough money saved to be able to up and move to more stable/better areas if need be. Right now things aren't to that point, so I am comfortable staying here. However, there is no way I would every move to Indy/Marion Co. since I don't have to.
It doesn't matter that all those elites live outside Marion Co. Marion Co. is where the money is, it is where the politics are played. Until Marion Co./Indy resembles Detroit, people who have a desire to get rich on the backs of taxpayers will likely turn to Marion Co. vs. any of the other surrounding counties.