Home

Join

Main Menu



blog advertising is good for you
Powered by Disqus

Links

Like IB

«
»

A New Deal?

Indianapolis City officials are announcing a new parking deal with ACS.  One  they say will be a better deal for the city and address concerns by critics of the original proposal.  The original 50-year deal would have paid the city $35 million up front and some revenue sharing,  however the deal would be binding for the entire term.

Under the new proposal announced Wednesday,  Indianapolis would get $20 million up front, but it would also be able break the lease every 10 years.   The city would get an increase in its share of revenue which is now estimated to be between $515 million and $600 million over the 50-year term.

In exchange for the city’s ability to terminate the lease every 10 years, Indianapolis agrees to pay a  termination fee.  $19.5 million after the first 10 years, $12.8 million after 20 years, $9.8 million after 30 years, $6.9 million after 40 years.

There is also more revenue sharing between the City and ACS when it comes to revenue sharing programs from residential parking permit programs.  However the city has the option of sharing advertising and signage revenue with ACS.

Proceeds from the parking deal would be used for infrastructure repairs and maintenance.  The deal must now have approval by the City-County Council.

Posted: 10|20|10 at 10:30 am by Abdul Hakim-Shabazz
Follow this entry via RSS 2.0. Comment | Trackback

  • Pascal

    Stupid is as stupid does.

  • http://twitter.com/IndyStudent Matthew Stone

    Who fed you that 515-600 million number? The IBJ is reporting that the city estimates their revenue over 50 years will be between $268 and 515 million, ACS estimates say the city will bring in $620 million.

    This contract fails to address several concerns that Renn and others have mentioned. All it really does is untie the city’s hands a LITTLE bit in breaking the contract, and theoretically rakes in more money. It’s still rotten, and we should start the whole process over again if the 25th floor will continue to refuse to upgrade the meters themselves.

  • Anon
  • pascal

    I “estimate” the revenues over the next 50 years to be quite a bit less. My models come from the global warming folks over in England with all their famed accruacy. But, as a downtown shopper I’m pretty sure that I won’t be in the future. I already look to dine out of county.

  • Think Again

    For the Ballard administration, this is a huge step. It’s not enough, but it demonstrates the utter failure of the initial proposal. I mean, really…they’ve re-dealt their own hand. It’s the equivalent of drawing four cards in 5-card stud. In poker, they’d be fools.

    But hey, we take our victories where we cna get them withi this mayor.

    Penalties? LMAO. There should only be penalties to cover the actual administrative costs (unamortized or un-depreciated value of new equipment) to leave the deal–and perhaps a modest return. The concept that we’d need to pay any penalties is a joke, and demonstrates a complete lack of good negotiating skills.

    Again–send in a good small businessperson, or a good commercial Realtor, or a good homemaker, to give these clowns some negotiating parameters. Folks who know what it’s like to balance a checkbook, pinch a penny, get good value…or negotiate like mad men.

    Somehow, when amateurs get their hands on city money, their eyes glaze over, and they check their common sense at the door. The ACS folks would say “this is the market for this kind of deal,” which ignores one basic fact:

    For the most part, they MADE this market. This is Econ straight out of the Halliburton School.

    Hint: that school fails at anything requiring common sense economics.

  • Nick

    Remind me what ACS is doing that Dennision parking and the city can’t do today?

    Huber/ Ice Miller/ACS, & their lobbyists must think the public is uber stupid.

  • Think Again

    Well, uh, sometimes, Nick, we are. Look around. Plenty of examples on both sides of the political fence. Sadly.

    As far as crazy municipal deals go, Indy is low-hanging fruit to these Bizwhores.

  • Nick

    The difference this time is that the media and public have caught them with their hand in the public’s cash register, and the perps have the balls to want to negotiate how much they wont steal.

  • Pascal

    Presumable there is a Dumbocrap interested in being Mayor but said Dumbocrap sure has a powerful case of lockjaw? Maybe the silence is coming because said Dumbocrap thinks 100 years of thieving is better? When one thinks about Democrat leaders in Indianapolis don’t the three monkies come to mind? The one can’t see. The other can’t hear. And, their candidate for Mayor can’t speak?

  • Jackie

    The new parking proposal still favors the vendor far more than makes sense. This is not brain surgery so I don’t see why we need to sell our souls for 50 years! And the clause to get out after 10 years would require us paying back nearly the amount of the upfront payin so of course no one will do that! How disingenuous!

  • Pascal

    Good Observation. If Mayor Dumb Dumb wants his dollars to go further then appoint Libertarians and libertarians only to his prevailing wage settings on each and every project that he is pissing away tax dollars on. If Indiana homes and businesses are to be taxed on market value then fat, dumb, and happy construction workers can get along on market value wages instead of what Mayor Dumb Dumb has been paying (And, Mitch, too, for that matter). Anyone with a calculator can see that those cost reductions on streets, sidewalks, infrastructure, would save more money than some deal cooked up in the back law offices and sold to a fiscal nincompoop. Schools, for instance, cost about 30% more than they need to….probably more if you ashcan anti-public work rules. Dumbocraps like those artificially high wages since some of the differences come back to them as political contributions and endorsements.
    Stupid is as stupid does and the council really does have too many fools on it.

  • Lenore Hanick

    City-County Council, Ballard, Daniels, Hubard, Roob, Vaughn, Barnes & Thornburg, and the other 20 or so I didn’t mention need to READ Title 18, Chapter 11, Section 211 of the United States Code.
    Memorize the definition of RECUSE is “Those with a conflict of interest are expected to recuse themselves from (i.e., abstain from) decisions where such a conflict exists.”
    REMEMBER Sworn in for the People, Elected by the People, to Serve the People. Oath? What Oath? ‘I think the Real Housewives of Orange County was on during my swearing in ceremony.’
    Obama promised to “tell the corporate lobbyists that their days of setting the agenda are over.” Someone needs to tell Obama that ACS buys up companies, chops them up in little pieces, lays off a bunch of people, and sells off the body parts for profit. How’s that for being “over?” How about the City of Indianapolis is ‘Bent Over’

  • Think Again

    I heard Huber on your show this morning, Abdul. What a sorry sack of hog manure he peddled.

    Prediction: Huber will work for ACS, B&T or some other city-contract-rich firm soon. He can’t be “out-front’ on another stupid deal that favors the vendor, without getting a job offer from them.

    He was whining the company line this morning, Abdul. DO the math. If we have to pay ANY penalties, it ought to be for: the unamortized or non-depreciated capital cost of the initial improvements. With maybe a small fee thrown in. Period.

    Hint: IRS allows the depreciation of that new equipment, and perhaps the city ought to investigate just how the vendor is going to depreciate.

    Damn I need to find something I can lease to the city. Fast. These clowns only have 14 more months in office.

  • Pascal

    “Proceeds from the parking deal would be used for infrastructure repairs and maintenance.” Since dollars are fungible and bait and switch are long established past practice, only a fool would state the quoted remarks. The nature of fungibility is that the money from the parking thefts would be used to subsidize billionaires-either Pacers sorts of “civic minded businessmen” or Colt’s style “risk takers”. Just a guess, there are plenty of other ratholes this Mayor is dumping taxpayer money down for no good reason.
    Interesting to observers that neither Abdul or Garrison can ever lay a glove on the Mayor…are they both aspiring for the Ryerson Award?

  • Lenore

    Xerox profit doubles, but company to cut 2,500 jobs
    Published Thursday October 21st, 2010