What thing do you think Indy needs the most? (Indianapolis: houses, schools)

[bum fugly]

What we don't need: that new colts stadium (aka corporate welfare)...shoot the RCA dome isn't even paid off yet.

What we do need: mass transit. This is the only city I've ever lived in (of this size) where there are no bus routes to the suburbs (like the park and rides).

[jeff3166]

Originally Posted by jrod2828

We need to drop the Indians and get a professional baseball team.

The cure for the bad schools?.. Privatization.. plain and simple.

The idea of an MLB team in Indiana was floated in the 80s, and it sunk spectacularly soon thereafter (Google: Indianapolis Arrows). With four MLB teams located within a short drive to Chicago, St. Louis, and Cincinnati, not to mention teams also nearby in Cleveland, Detroit, and Milwaukee, the central-midwest is pretty much saturated with MLB teams, and it was determined that a team would never survive or be economically viable in Indy.

Think about it though- Indianapolis is a small market, and knowing how small market teams fare in MLB, would you want that for your team? I wouldn't. The only way a small market team can be successful on a regular basis in MLB is if it's in a 'baseball town' (ie: St Louis), and Indianapolis will/would never be a 'baseball town', it would always be 5th best, behind football, basketball, auto racing, and college sports.

[jeff3166]

Originally Posted by bum fugly

What we don't need: that new colts stadium (aka corporate welfare)...shoot the RCA dome isn't even paid off yet.

What we do need: mass transit. This is the only city I've ever lived in (of this size) where there are no bus routes to the suburbs (like the park and rides).

Yes, we do/did need "that new colts stadium". Without it, the Colts would soon be gone, the Final Four in Indy every five years would soon be gone, and many of the conventions that bypassed Indy for larger facilities would continue to be gone. Do you know how many conventions the city of Indianapolis has lost, in the past 15 or so years, due to insufficient convention space? Well, neither do I, but it could be measured by the dozen. Do you know how much community spirit and civic pride is provided by the Colts calling Indy home, and by the Final Four being in Indy every five years? Well, neither do I, because it's immeasurably high.

As far as tax dollars being raised to pay for the facility (aside from the 100 million that the Colts paid), the generation of those tax dollars are reliant upon people like me, one who frequents the city, but doesn't live there... and I'm all for it!

I was born in Indy and lived there many years. I go back there a couple times per year or so to visit family, and when I do, I stay at hotels and always eat at restaurants, and if I fly into town, I rent a car. The tax money I pay in paying for those services is helping to pay for "that new colts stadium".

I've made two trips to Indy so far this year, and have stayed a total of four nights in hotels. At a penny on the dollar (1%), for a total of about $400 worth of lodging costs, I paid $4 towards "that new colts stadium". In maybe $300 worth of eating-out costs while in town, I paid $3 towards "that new colts stadium". Truth is, although I didn't even notice it in my expenses, I was more than happy to do it, because I see the big picture.

The fact of the matter is, is that the amount of money local's will pay towards "that new colts stadium" is miniscule annualy, and miniscule in comparison to the percentage that out-of-towners will be paying towards it. It's not the local's income taxes that were increased, or the local's property taxes that were increased to pay for "that new colts stadium", and the locals aren't paying more for groceries, gas, or utilities to pay for "that new colts stadium". It's primarily folks like me paying for Lucas Oil Stadium, and I'm more than happy to do it.

[ImGibby]

Originally Posted by jeff3166

With Lucas Oil Stadium, Conseco Fieldhouse, and Victory Field all being among the best facilities in their respective sports/leagues, all being fan-friendly, and all either new or near-new, I don't really see the need for another stadium for a while.

I didn't see the need for a new one now, except for maybe the desire to land a super bowl bid...which is all good in of itself, but does it really make sense to tear down a 20 yr old building that wasn't even paid off? Maybe I'll tear down my house an build a newer one even though the first one is not paid for. I would really like to host a giant party some day and my current home just is not quite large enough to accommodate the amount of people I would like to host for that one time event.

[ImGibby]

Originally Posted by jeff3166

Yes, we do/did need "that new colts stadium". Without it, the Colts would soon be gone, the Final Four in Indy every five years would soon be gone, and many of the conventions that bypassed Indy for larger facilities would continue to be gone. Do you know how many conventions the city of Indianapolis has lost, in the past 15 or so years, due to insufficient convention space? Well, neither do I, but it could be measured by the dozen. Do you know how much community spirit and civic pride is provided by the Colts calling Indy home, and by the Final Four being in Indy every five years? Well, neither do I, because it's immeasurably high.

As far as tax dollars being raised to pay for the facility (aside from the 100 million that the Colts paid), the generation of those tax dollars are reliant upon people like me, one who frequents the city, but doesn't live there... and I'm all for it!

I was born in Indy and lived there many years. I go back there a couple times per year or so to visit family, and when I do, I stay at hotels and always eat at restaurants, and if I fly into town, I rent a car. The tax money I pay in paying for those services is helping to pay for "that new colts stadium".

I've made two trips to Indy so far this year, and have stayed a total of four nights in hotels. At a penny on the dollar (1%), for a total of about $400 worth of lodging costs, I paid $4 towards "that new colts stadium". In maybe $300 worth of eating-out costs while in town, I paid $3 towards "that new colts stadium". Truth is, although I didn't even notice it in my expenses, I was more than happy to do it, because I see the big picture.

The fact of the matter is, is that the amount of money local's will pay towards "that new colts stadium" is miniscule annualy, and miniscule in comparison to the percentage that out-of-towners will be paying towards it. It's not the local's income taxes that were increased, or the local's property taxes that were increased to pay for "that new colts stadium", and the locals aren't paying more for groceries, gas, or utilities to pay for "that new colts stadium". It's primarily folks like me paying for Lucas Oil Stadium, and I'm more than happy to do it.

You raise some valid points, however I did not realize that our continuing to host the final four was dependent on a new stadium??? Was there talk about that that I missed? And as far as conventions, why would it not have made more sense to build convention center at a fraction of the cost?

Don't get me wrong, I'm pretty stoked about going to my first game in the new state of the art stadium, but was this really good economic sense?

And as far as the colts leaving, as much as I love them, they started their demands for a new stadium before they were even capable of making past the first round in the play offs. My thought at the time...."Get to the big game, and THEN we will talk about what we need to do as city to keep you here". Shoot, I wasn't even saying win the big one, but just get there at least for petes sake before you start crying about a new stadium and threatening to go somewhere else.

But, that is all a null point now, because the DID win the big one and they are gettting a new stadium.

Oh yeah, and don't fool yourself by saying the locals property taxes did not get increased to pay for the new stadium...did you forget or not hear about the huge tax debacle in marion county last yr? Kind of Ironic that all came after the city lost their bid for the 2011 super bowl, don't you think?

[grmasterb]

Originally Posted by ImGibby

Oh yeah, and don't fool yourself by saying the locals property taxes did not get increased to pay for the new stadium...did you forget or not hear about the huge tax debacle in marion county last yr? Kind of Ironic that all came after the city lost their bid for the 2011 super bowl, don't you think?

Property taxes don't fund the Capital Improvements Board, the government agency that owns Conseco Fieldhouse and the RCA Dome, and will own The Luke once the state turns it over. The issues are unrelated.

[jeff3166]

Originally Posted by ImGibby

I didn't see the need for a new one now, except for maybe the desire to land a super bowl bid...which is all good in of itself, but does it really make sense to tear down a 20 yr old building that wasn't even paid off? Maybe I'll tear down my house an build a newer one even though the first one is not paid for. I would really like to host a giant party some day and my current home just is not quite large enough to accommodate the amount of people I would like to host for that one time event.

I was really just kidding, and knew that you didn't mean a new one was needed now, but that you were referring to Lucas Oil Stadium.

As far as tearing down the RCA dome after just 24 years of use, while a SMALL portion of the 'mortgage' still remains, it actually does make sense. It's economically viable and advantageous for the city to do that because the land area that the RCA dome sits on, after it's gone, will not be an empty lot, a park, or some sort of parking lot that brings little-to-no revenue into the city's cash pot. The land area that the RCA Dome sits on, after it's gone, will be used for something that the city needs, something that will allow more revenue to be generated by the city: convention center expansion that will about double the square footage of available convention space, allowing the city to win bids for large conventions, and have the ability to host multiple conventions simultaneously.

As far as the possiblity of the convention center expanding a different direction, the way that the area around the convention center has been privately developed over the past 25 years, the only direction that the convention center can expand is to the south, where the RCA Dome currently sits.

The "Hoosier Dome" was great when it was built in the early 80s. It very well served it's purpose, as Market Square Arena did in it's 25 years of existence. Both facilities were similar to a 'starter-house' for a newlywed couple. Nearly 30 years later though, like MSA, the RCA Dome is outdated and insufficient, just like that starter-house would be for a newlywed couple after they were married for 5-10 years. As for the convention center, it was considered large 30 years ago, especially for a city the size of Indianapolis. Conventions are much bigger in scale than that of 30 years ago though, making the current convention center square footage insufficient, and therefore, making for an outdated convention center for a city the size of Indianapolis.

As far as the analogy of you tearing down your house to build a new bigger one, to host bigger parties, I wouldn't suggest doing that. Unless, that is, you plan to charge admission fees to the guests attending your parties, so that it's economically viable for you to tear down/rebuild your house, like it's economically viable for the city to tear down the RCA Dome, expand the convention center, and build Lucas Oil Stadium.

[jeff3166]

Originally Posted by ImGibby

You raise some valid points, however I did not realize that our continuing to host the final four was dependent on a new stadium??? Was there talk about that that I missed? And as far as conventions, why would it not have made more sense to build convention center at a fraction of the cost?

Don't get me wrong, I'm pretty stoked about going to my first game in the new state of the art stadium, but was this really good economic sense?

And as far as the colts leaving, as much as I love them, they started their demands for a new stadium before they were even capable of making past the first round in the play offs. My thought at the time...."Get to the big game, and THEN we will talk about what we need to do as city to keep you here". Shoot, I wasn't even saying win the big one, but just get there at least for petes sake before you start crying about a new stadium and threatening to go somewhere else.

But, that is all a null point now, because the DID win the big one and they are gettting a new stadium.

Oh yeah, and don't fool yourself by saying the locals property taxes did not get increased to pay for the new stadium...did you forget or not hear about the huge tax debacle in marion county last yr? Kind of Ironic that all came after the city lost their bid for the 2011 super bowl, don't you think?

I'd say that the property tax issue, occuring at the same time Lucas Oil Stadium is being built, is purely coincidental. There's too many people involved on the state government for property tax money to secretly find it's way into the tax pot that will pay for the new stadium... someone would talk.

As far as the deal with the NCAA regarding hosting Final Fours every 5 years for the next 30 years, there was an agreement that the RCA Dome needed renovation (which it's already had atleast once), or a new stadium needed to exist for Final Fours beyond 2010. Here's an article that speaks of that a little bit: USATODAY.com - Indy to host men's Final Four every five years through 2039

As far as building a new convention center, at a different location I assume you're talking about, I don't know. I would guess though that it's economically viable to double the size of the existing convention center, as opposed to attaining the land and then building an entire new one twice the size as the current one. What's more though, is that the current convention center is in a prefect location, surrounded by hotels and connected to the Dome/Stadium (via underground to Lucas Oil Stadium, I think). If they built another one, there's no way they could come close to duplicating that location, another thing that's attractive to corporations when deciding where to hold their convention at.

I understand what what you're saying though, about the Colts wanting a new stadium before even putting a longstanding quality product on the field, like they have now. It's a business though, unfortunately, and when the Irsay's see other cities getting new stadiums or asking for new stadiums, in order to increase revenue, they followed suit.

I'm just glad that the city did the right thing (in my opinion) and got the stadium deal done and the Colts are staying. Some people in Indy probably tend to take the Colts for granted and don't fully realize their importance within the community, like the cities of Baltimore, St. Louis, and Cleveland did with their former NFL teams. Once their teams were gone though, it hit home for them and they realized it, and then jumped through their you know whats to get another team. If Indy ever lost the Colts, I just don't think they'd be fortunate to be able to get another team, ever.

Oh, and by the way-- do know that I'm extremely envious of you, that you'll be going to a game at the new stadium! Enjoy, I'm sure you will!!

[bum fugly]

Jeff3166, it was and still is a hard pill for many to swallow to give such a large amount of corporate welfare to an organization. Have you read the lease on the stadium, it's very lucrative to Irsay while the public who is footing most of the bill gets very little.

The city is crumbling in many areas (economic, crime, infastructure) but hey, there's an awesome new stadium built so that Irsay didn't follow through on his blackmail threat of taking the Colts out of Indy (remember what he did in Baltimore). Sorry, I have little respect for that guy, especially after hearing from some of my police buddies who have many stories to tell of how he and his wife get an immeasurable pass from city brass for their (alleged) less-than-legal alcoholic/prescription activities.

The ONLY good thing about how they paid for that stadium is by doing it with hotel and restaurant revenue, that gives me the option of not paying one red cent to that multi-millionaire who stamped his feet threatening to uproot the colts (again) until he got his way.

[jeff3166]

Originally Posted by bum fugly

Jeff3166, it was and still is a hard pill for many to swallow to give such a large amount of corporate welfare to an organization. Have you read the lease on the stadium, it's very lucrative to Irsay while the public who is footing most of the bill gets very little.

The city is crumbling in many areas (economic, crime, infastructure) but hey, there's an awesome new stadium built so that Irsay didn't follow through on his blackmail threat of taking the Colts out of Indy (remember what he did in Baltimore). Sorry, I have little respect for that guy, especially after hearing from some of my police buddies who have many stories to tell of how he and his wife get an immeasurable pass from city brass for their (alleged) less-than-legal alcoholic/prescription activities.

The ONLY good thing about how they paid for that stadium is by doing it with hotel and restaurant revenue, that gives me the option of not paying one red cent to that multi-millionaire who stamped his feet threatening to uproot the colts (again) until he got his way.

I feel your pain regarding the crime, economic, and infrastructure issues within the city. While we're at it, we can throw education in there, too. I no longer live there, but it'll always be home, so when I read the Star online and read about those issues in a negative way, it bothers me. You and my relatives there are living it though, so I do feel for y'all.

With that said though... those are issues that need to be addressed with property taxes, income taxes, and sale tax. Had any of those been used to fund the stadium, I would totally oppose it as well, even though I don't live there and therefore don't pay any of those taxes in Indiana.

People like me, out-of-towners that visit the city for whatever reason and , rent cars, stay at hotels, and go to local restaurants for most meals, will be the ones that pay for probably 80% of the stadium, and like I said earlier, I'm ok with a few bucks being added to my lodging costs or my restaurant tab.

As far as Irsay goes, I don't know him of course, and don't know of all you talked about regarding the 'passes' he supposedly receives, but I can tell you that the bottomline is that he's a businessman, and he has to do what's best for his business. I didn't see the way the lease is written up, but no doubt he's making his money, but in my opinion, the city of indianapolis has an indespensable commodity and asset in the Colts, one that 99% of us wouldn't fully realize unless the Colts were actually to relocate.

As far as that goes, the ugly side of sports is that it is a business, and Irsay had to tighten the screws a bit on the local governent to meet the needs of his business. He did the same thing in Baltimore, and I can't blame him, really, as that old Memorial Stadium in Baltimore was old, decrepit, made for baseball, and was a horrible venue for football. Shame on the politicians in Baltimore for calling his bluff. Oh, but then after the Colts left... their mindset was, "Let's build a new stadium and get a football team back in this town." That's lunacy.

As far as needing a new stadium now, I don't believe that's asking too much, based on the way that it will be financed. When the RCA Dome opened in the early 80s, it was mediocre, by NFL standards, at best. Since the RCA Dome was built, look at the new stadiums that have been built throughout the league in Pittsburgh, Philly, Cleveland, Atlanta, Seattle, Phoenix, Houston, New England, Chicago, St. Louis, Tampa, Charlotte, Washington D.C., Denver, Cincinnati, Nashville, Miami, and Detroit. The RCA Dome went from mediocre, to one of the worst venues in the league. It was time for a new stadium.

That's only part of it though. The city is and has been losing money by not being able to host large conventions, but could not expand the convention center because the only direction that the convention center could expand was to the south, where the RCA Dome currently sits. As far as the possibility of building a brand new convention center somewhere else downtown, rather than tearing down the RCA Dome and expanding the current one, that wouldn't be a good idea, in my opinion, due to the prime location of the convention center (centrally located and surrounded by hotels), not to mention having to deal with attaining the land.

Anyways, it is what it is, and I for one am happy about it, and next time I go to Indy, I'll gladly pay an extra $10 or so total during my weekend there to help pay for Lucas Oil Stadium.