Showing posts with label redevelopment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label redevelopment. Show all posts

Friday, February 15, 2019

Why Young People With Options Go Elsewhere (and what we can do to stop it)

Ah, my "hometown." Fort Wayne, IN.

I have lived there four (4) separate times in my life. The first time, I moved there in 1985. The last time, I moved there in 2013. I was happy to leave all four times I left.

Today, I read this in the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette about a branding effort to get young people to move to northeast Indiana. Here is the new logo they came up with.


From the article:
Business leaders are hoping a new branding effort will help lure people to live and work in northeast Indiana.
The Northeast Indiana Regional Partnership today unveiled "Make It Your Own," a marketing effort designed to attract people ages 21 to 45 to the 11-county region. The partnership, which is made up of business and civic leaders, worked with national and local marketing agencies to produce the tagline and a "brand strategy," according to a news release.
"Northeast Indiana's number one business need is increasing our talent pool," Michael Galbraith, director of the partnership's Road to One Million initiative, said in a statement. "On average, we have more than 6,000 unfilled jobs in the region in our jobs portal. For our region to thrive in today's global economy, we must grow our population to one million people by 2030."
Don't get me going on this "unfilled jobs" red herring. I've discussed this ad nauseum and my thoughts on it are well known.

As much as I appreciate the optimism of those who are trying to help the area, the fact of the matter is that people don't go there because opportunity is hoarded. It's not because Ft. Wayne lacks a "brand strategy," it's because Ft. Wayne lacks "opportunity."

I moved to Ft. Wayne after college and couldn't get a job that required a college degree. Is it any mystery why I left? I moved there after law school and left as soon as a law firm (as opposed to the company I was working for as an "in-house" lawyer . . . who performed precisely zero legal work) offered me a job in Indianapolis. Any mystery why I left?

That company I worked for had me purchasing right-of-way for utility lines. Boring, but decent work. I met a lot of "successful" people in the area and, to a disconcerting degree, most of the "successful" people I met were "successful" because they "won the sperm lottery" and were born into "successful" families. It had very little to do with these peoples' intelligence, motivation, innovation, or other such quality. Rather, it had everything to do with "my family started farming here in 1870" or "my grandfather started this warehouse company back in the '40s" or "my dad locked down the auto dealership market in this town in the 1950s." Pretty much everyone else in Ft. Wayne who is "successful" was raised, educated, and first hired and nurtured elsewhere. It was only after achieving professional success that they were "bribed" to move to Ft. Wayne and work for the large incumbent companies.

Maybe there was opportunity there in 1950 or 1920, but there sure ain't much opportunity there in 2019.

I write about this for two reasons. First, this is, to a large degree, my "hometown." I graduated from high school in Ft. Wayne. Second, and much more important, however, is that I want to see Speedway be a place where opportunity is planted and nourished, as opposed to hoarded by the incumbents. Is Speedway going to be a dynamic place, or is it simply going to be the place where the underwhelming offspring of the natives simply stay because they have no other opportunities? I'd prefer the former, but I fear the latter and can't help but notice how difficult it is for Indianapolis natives to break in with the large incumbent employers. Until and unless that changes, there will be a constant brain drain as the natives who can go where the opportunity is, and the large incumbent businesses are left trying to bribe mid-career professionals to return, just like in Ft. Wayne.

Wednesday, February 13, 2019

For Those Who Missed It

WTHR Reports:
SPEEDWAY, Ind. (WTHR) — A former town executive of Speedway is taking a plea deal after being accused of misusing the town's money.
Kenneth Scott Harris served as a redevelopment contractor and stepped down in 2015 after the start of a state inquiry.
He was accused of owing the state of Indiana nearly $20,000.
In 2017, he told Eyewitness News he had made some mistakes and would be able to clear it up.
Now he's agreed to plead guilty to counterfeiting for submitting an altered invoice to the Speedway Redevelopment Commission. It was for a payment for a service at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway.
The plea include no jail time according to court records obtained by Eyewitness News.
I have questions:

  • Who put this guy in charge? I presume it was the Speedway Town Council; which of our current members were members when the decision to put him in charge was made? Who voted in favor of putting him in charge? I believe that an answer to these questions would allow me to make a determination as to the judgment of such Town Council members.
  • He is only charged with wrongdoing from March - May of 2015; he is charged with forging invoices on behalf of the Redevelopment Commission. It was not until December of 2015 that he stepped down. Who on the Town Council knew of his actions and allowed him to remain in his position?
  • What qualifications did Scott Harris present to the Speedway Town Council that would justify the trust they put in him?
  • Were those qualifications ever vetted?
  • To what degree was there any oversight exercised as to Mr. Harris' activities running the Redevelopment Commission?
  • I have noticed that the Town of Speedway has an enormous environmental liability for land purchased from PraxAir during Mr. Harris' tenure; where was the oversight on that? Where was the Town Council?
It may seem as though I am being overly harsh on our Town Council. I certainly don't mean to be. I am a supporter of the Redevelopment Commission generally. However, actions like those of Scott Harris engender mistrust from the community and undermine the effort as a whole; officials who enabled such actions should be called to count for their acts and/or omissions. It is not lost on me that Town elections are coming up. These questions, and many more, should be presented to our incumbent Town Councilors who seek re-election. 

If they are worthy of our trust, then they owe it to us to answer these questions.

Friday, November 9, 2018

Economic Development Question

I hear often about "economic development" plans from localities that are essentially subsidizing private projects via tax dollars, either directly by backing bonds or indirectly by giving tax deferrals. Either way, these subsidies amount to millions of dollars spent by localities in furtherance of private industry.

Two examples of taxpayer-subsidized projects come to mind: Lucas Oil Stadium and the Wilshaw development. I have said before that if the Town of Speedway wants public parking, it should just build a parking garage instead of borrowing the money to build one, lending that money to a developer, then leasing the garage to the developer in exchange for revenue from the garage. It's a rube goldberg device.

I also hear justification for Lucas Oil Stadium in the form of "look at how many jobs it creates" with all of the hotel, restaurant, convention, etc., traffic created by the facility.

I suppose my big question is this: Why don't we just directly invest in those jobs by doing things like hiring teachers? Paying for their health insurance? Hiring construction workers to build better roads? (the NW corner of 465 comes to mind, but that's just because I commute past that area every day).

In a nutshell, it appears that there is a bipartisan consensus that government spending to create jobs is OK. In that instance, why settle for low-wage ALICE ("asset limited income constrained employed") jobs? Why not go for good middle-class jobs with benefits? It seems that we could do so if we cut out the middle man, i.e. Jim Irsay or Loftus/Robinson.

Just a thought.

Saturday, August 25, 2018

Never Overlook Progress

Speedway has come a long way in recent years. While it is very easy to point out shortcomings and lament imperfections, I was reading through some old case archives and came across this:
A man was sentenced Wednesday to 85 years in prison for killing and robbing a guest at a motel where he worked.
Joseph Pryor had been convicted of murder and robbery in the October 2005 death of James Santelli in the Super 8 Motel in Speedway.
Police said Pryor, a maintenance worker at the motel, used a wooden coat hanger to stab Santelli, 45, of Palatine, Ill. A wooden coat hanger was found sticking out of Santelli's neck, authorities said.
Pryor admitted to stealing cash and tools from Santelli, a construction worker, police said. Pryor tried to cover the crime by pouring Listerine over evidence and sold the tools to a pawnshop, police said.
I note this particular matter because the civil suit that followed this crime wound up setting a rather important precedent in Indiana law.

May Mr. Santelli rest in peace, and may Mr. Prior find forgiveness some day. However, may Speedway work diligently to ensure that it never again becomes a home to dodgy "hooker hotels" that wind up having these kinds of violent crimes therein.

Friday, July 13, 2018

Taking the Ball and Running

I love Indianapolis as a whole nearly as much as I love Speedway. It constantly perplexes me, however, that there isn't much that's particularly memorable about Indianapolis, food wise. For a long time, I have believed that perhaps that is because Indianapolis is a test market for regional or national restaurant corporations; they test new concepts here and have sufficient budget to both be able to fail without financial catastrophe while simultaneously setting an artificially high bar for survival for local concepts.

Recently, I read a great piece in the Urbanophile that made me question whether I had thought this entirely through. The piece discusses the diverging fortunes of Nashville Hot Chicken and Hoosier Breaded Pork Tenderloin.  I highly encourage anyone to click through and read the entire article. A few snippets should you forego the opportunity to click through:

First, about Nashville "Hot" Chicken:
In other words, it’s possible that this dish has been around a while in some form in the local black community, but what we know today as the Nashville hot chicken is from the 70s or 80s. A Midwestern reader with longstanding family ties to Nashville told me a while back that at least through the 1990s he never heard hot chicken mentioned there. I read that Nashville hot chicken is now supposedly popular around the south, but having spent extensive time in Alabama 10-15 years ago, I never once came across it there.
I have no reason to doubt this analysis, but then again I'm not from the South. I don't recall ever hearing about Nashville Hot Chicken until just a few years ago, though.

Now, as to the Hoosier Tenderloin:
the pork tenderloin is fairly ubiquitous in Central Indiana, where it is on practically every bar and grill menu. 
I can attest to that. I don't know how long the pork tenderloin has been ubiquitous in Indianapolis, but it's been at least the entire time I've lived here (since 2003).

The question, of course, is:
Why was Indianapolis unable to do with the tenderloin what Nashville did with hot chicken?
His answer, essentially, is that Indianapolis doesn't even try.
I again and again see that Southern cities start with little to nothing, and yet what they do have they treat as the greatest things of all time. As illustrated by Nashville hot chicken, they’ve also looked at their often neglected black community as a source of local cultural identity.
The Midwestern cities not only fail at this consistently, they typically don’t even try. There are tons of regional food products in the Midwest – Chicago style dogs, St. Louis pizza, etc. – but other than Chicago’s deep dish pizza, they have been dramatically underexploited in the marketplace even as these cities say that they are very keen to raise their brand profiles.
Interesting.

Being a litigator (and thus having nothing whatsoever to do with tourism, or the friendlier side of humanity generally) I don't really know what to say about this. Nonetheless, it is worth considering. It also gets me a-thinking about what it is, aside from racing, that Speedway hangs its hat on. I get that the 500 is, in the immortal words of Joe Biden, "a big f**kin' deal." Nonetheless, what is the "thing" about Speedway during the other 350 or so days per year? Food? Festivals? Sport? Music?

Sunday, June 3, 2018

Speedway Super Center: Horrible Design = Horrible Traffic

Anyone who lives in Speedway knows that the Speedway Super Center (home of Kroger et al) seems to be custom designed to simultaneously waste space and create traffic jams. As I've noted before, I live in the Meadowood Park area, and the access point to this shopping center (Parkwood Dr.) probably could not be designed worse even if you tried.

Of course, I (quite clearly) do not own this property, nor am I an elected official, so my input on what happens there is minimal (if it exists at all). Nonetheless I recognize that the Speedway Redevelopment Commission will sooner or later have to tackle this property and, as such, I have a few suggestions.

First, let's recognize that the Speedway Super Center will not ever look like Main Street. It was originally built in a different era, for different needs. Main Street was designed to be just that: a main street, where commercial activity could be centrally located for those who lived in the immediate vicinity. The Speedway Super Center, on the other hand, was designed to be a shopping center to which people would drive from many miles. If you ask me what the best-case scenario of the Speedway Super Center is, post-redevelopment, I would point to Clay Terrace in Carmel or Metropolis in Plainfield.

These endpoint goals are for another day, though, because I just want to discuss traffic. Here is an aerial view of the area I'm referencing:
Aerial view of Speedway Super Center. 25th Street, more or less, runs  across the top; Lynhurst is on the right, and you can't see H.S. Rd. on the left.
A few things about this design stick out to me:

1. The parking design is really terrible.

Here is what I'm talking about:
Notice that this is essentially the main artery going East/West through the north end of this shopping center. It is important for traffic to move freely through there, yet it is designed to require pedestrians to cross the artery.

Another view of the same general area:
This is a bit further down. Note that one can't get to the nearest grocery store without driving along this route; again, it's not thoughtfully designed.
It doesn't have to be this way. Some thoughtful redesign of this parking/traversing area would vastly improve the experience there.

Below is a picture of one random portion of Clay Terrace:
Note that there is parking along the building, and the degree to which that seems to change the character of both the walkways and the driving lanes.
The "traffic" through the mall is less obstructed, parking is easier, and the walkways are friendlier. In fact, we have already deployed this tactic in Speedway:
So, my point as to the parking and the layout of the Speedway Super Center is that the buildings themselves don't need to be rebuilt. I am agnostic as to their condition, but I believe that their location lends itself just fine to some redesign that would make the area considerably nicer.

2. The streets are poorly designed.

The thoroughfares of the area should cross at different points. Again, here is an aerial view of what I'm talking about.

You can see that I've superimposed on the area where the major intersections are. I think that the middle one, especially, needs work.

Imagine for a moment if the traffic flowed through the area like this:
You can see, in orange, where I've superimposed a roundabout within the existing area. The part of Parkwood Dr. that goes through the shopping center would be transformed by a roundabout, further south. This would enable more of the curbside parking discussed in point #1 above, and would render this thruway considerably more pedestrian friendly.

3. Green Space Helps

I note that nearly every place in the world worth being has something growing there; perhaps the plants and trees know something we don't. Anyway, given that the parking lots there are, quite literally, never full, wouldn't it be worth it to put some green space in there? Some place where the citizens of Speedway could enjoy a cup of coffee and a book, or perhaps simply read the newspaper or have lunch? Green space makes everywhere better,even the Speedway Super Center.

So there it is; three things that could be done on the "reasonably" cheap that would make a world of difference for the Speedway Super Center. I have heard that the property owner is a pretty good corporate citizen; I see that they've dumped a bunch of money into the eastern portion of this development.

Here's to hoping for the best!

Sunday, March 25, 2018

More on Speedway Public Transportation

And I don't mean a train or even a bus system going through Speedway.

Rather, and I've talked about this before, I think that designating Winton Ave. as a pedestrian-friendly, bike-friendly corridor, from Lynhurst to Crawfordsville, would do wonders for connecting each end of Speedway to its counterpart. In addition to the basic designation, I think that painting the actual roadway, as well as some signage, would be beneficial as far as notifying motorists. Finally, it would be absolutely essential to have some manner of controlling the traffic light on Crawfordsville from a bicycle on Winton . . . something akin to a pedestrian button.

To ride a bicycle from Meadowood Park to 10th/Main doesn't take much more than 10 minutes, tops. It is a simple ride, and there is no reason that someone should have to drive from the Meadowood Park neighborhood to Big Woods. This is easy enough to accomplish, would barely require any public funds, increases quality of life for Speedway residents (and is a targeted measure to improve the quality of life for Speedway residents, i.e. we aren't spending a bunch of money to make someone else's life better without any return thereupon), and as a bonus just happens to promote public health and be good for the environment.

I fail to see the downside.

Friday, February 23, 2018

Georgetown Rd. Closure

I don't really care. There, I said it. I don't care . . . largely because it does not affect me.

Perhaps I should clarify the above statement. I don't have any problem with the closure of Georgetown Rd. In fact, I am happy that it happened, not so much because Georgetown Rd. is now closed to thru-traffic, but because it has enabled the development of the roundabout at 16th/Main/Crawfordsville and the entryway to to the Indianapolis Motor Speedway.

For the Russian trolls reading this site (f*** you for messing with our election and saddling us with Donald Trump), Georgetown Rd. is a north/south road in Indianapolis that used to run from 16th Street on the south end to Lafayette Rd. on the north end; it ran right next to the west end of the Indianapolis Motor Speedway and enabled traffic to go from 30th Street to 16th Street. It is now a dead end just north of 16th Street.

Here is a map as Georgetown Rd. used to be, with a big red arrow showing the part that is now a roundabout:
Please note that the picture is not perfectly oriented. Where the arrow points is now a roundabout and is actually at the southwest corner of the track. Note also that the road running parallel with the north end of the track is 25th Street. For a map (which I had problems embedding today for some reason), see here. That intersection, which used to rank as one of the worst and most dangerous intersections in Indianapolis, is now a roundabout (which, if the research in Carmel is to be believed, renders the intersection considerably safer than it once was.

(Gratuitous picture of Georgetown Rd. on race day):


Anyway, many people in Speedway seem upset about this closure of Georgetown Rd. I've noticed that the anger over this development is largely concentrated in two camps:

Camp 1: These people generally reside on Auburn Street, which is the next street to the west upon which traffic can get from 25th Street down to Crawfordsville Rd. This was previously (and still officially is) a "side street." Traffic that would otherwise have gone down Georgetown Rd. now goes down their street. I find Camp 1 to have a legitimate grievance that is eminently solvable. All one needs to do is have Auburn Street go one way north from 21st to 25th, and one way south from 21st to Crawfordsville Rd. Problem solved. Of course, this would require a little bit of change for the residents of Auburn St. I don't blame people for wanting things to not inconvenience them, but this is a very solvable problem.

Camp 2: I find Camp 2 to be considerably more difficult to stomach. Generally, Camp 2 is populated by people who seem, to me at least, to be contrarian by nature and believe that by being contrarian to and nitpicking at the Speedway Town Council and the Speedway Redevelopment Commission, they are somehow "sticking it to the man" or "looking out for the little guy." Newsflash Captain Contrarian - your constant complaining doesn't help anything. If you have such a problem with what the Speedway Redevelopment Commission has done in the past decade, go ahead and sell your house (in this white-hot housing market). Go ahead and pocket the tens of thousands of dollars in appreciated real estate from which you have benefitted, largely thanks to the forward-thinking members of the Town Council (reminder, not all of them are forward thinking) and the Speedway Redevelopment Commission (which is certainly fallible but not worthy of the derision heaped upon it).

Bottom line: change is hard. I'm certain that when the Meadowood Park neighborhood was built back in the mid 1960s, plenty of people had a problem with it. "It's gonna destroy the character of the Town!" However, if Speedway refuses to change, Speedway will only deteriorate.

Again, if Speedway refuses to change, Speedway will only deteriorate.


Sunday, February 18, 2018

Self Dealing

As any reader of this blog knows, I am a supporter of the efforts by the Redevelopment Commission. Full stop.

I am also a fan of using government to make its citizens' lives better. Full stop.

However, as to both topics (really, the Redevelopment Commission is a sub-topic of the "use government to make peoples' lives better" topic), it is entirely destroyed if one uses such interventions for personal enrichment.

I do now know the veracity of this, but I have heard that a former member of the Redevelopment Commission has bought as many liquor licenses as possible in Speedway through his participation in the commission. As I said at the outset, I don't have an opinion on the veracity of this rumor, and I know that rumors can spread through this small town quicker than wildfire.

Nonetheless, my point is that we live in a time of such cynicism toward our own government that a significant plurality of the society sincerely believes that "government is the problem," and would rather turn our labor laws over to the roofing subcontractors of the world, our environmental laws over to the oil refiners of the world, and our financial laws over to the payday lenders of the world. Self dealing, as described above, only makes this cynicism worse.

If you know about public officials' self dealing, please let me know and I will do my best to publicize it insofar as I am able. I believe we are fortunate to have ethical leadership here in Speedway. However, I am troubled by this rumor and sincerely aim to be vigilant with respect to the government's fulfillment of duties toward the citizenry.

Tuesday, February 13, 2018

Air BnB

There has been an ongoing "discussion" of sorts regarding Air BnB on Nextdoor of late. Leaving aside the ad hominem attacks that are the hallmark of any discussions among neighbors, I believe that there is a genuine controversy within this discussion that could use some fleshing out.

The fact of the matter, as with so many other matters, is that any policy regarding Air BnB will require trade-offs. Always remember: no matter how it is couched or how good it sounds, there is no such thing as a free lunch.

On the one hand, the Town of Speedway could take a complete "hands off" approach*. The upsides to that include a community affirmation of property rights, i.e. you can do whatever the hell you want with your own property. Also included as an upside is the opportunity for residents of Speedway to turn their own homes into profit centers by renting same out to visitors; it would also provide new customers for the retail businesses on Main Street, most notably the restaurants. These are all good things.

Of course, with the good comes the bad. It's a package deal. While people would be free to use their property as they see fit, that "as they see fit" could (and likely would) entail some pretty annoying stuff. Today that "as they see fit" might be renting to Air B n B travellers; tomorrow that "as they see fit" might be a brothel or CAFO. I would sincerely prefer to keep either of those uses out of my neighborhood. Also, what is the impact on real estate values? It is certainly possible that owning Speedway houses as Air B n B properties would be very profitable, encouraging others to buy such houses in the community. I'm all for my own home increasing in value, but if we're talking about a quick run-up followed by a precipitous crash, thanks but no thanks. Another potential problem would be with the tenants of these homes. Everybody likes visitors until the stereotypical obnoxious tourist shows up, partying all night, parking on people's yards, littering, etc. (If you're thinking of coming to Speedway to trash the place, and there is no 500-mile race going on this weekend, please go elsewhere.)

There are two sides to the "no regulation" coin. There are also two sides to the "full regulation" approach.

Hypothetically, Speedway could still allow Air B n B properties yet regulate them to the gills. This would include such things as posting a bond for each and every time that you rent your home, to cover the possible cost to the town of responding to nuisance or other calls associated with these guests. The town could require that a home be subject to inspection each time a new "renter" signs a new "lease." For the owners of long-term rentals, this would impose a hassle at least once per year. For an Air B n B owner, this would be a hassle as often as a few times per week. If the Town forced the property owner to pay for these inspections, the hassle would also be a financial obligation. There are numerous other ways that the Town could regulate these properties, but they all have their down side.

For starters, as to the bond, enforcing the collection of it would be nearly impossible and the Town would spend more attempting to enforce such collection than it would likely ever recover. Further, there are moral dilemma problems with this: if you've already paid for breaking something that is unbroken, perhaps you are more willing to break that thing. If that thing is our community, I don't want visitors to act as though they've already paid for breaking it. As far as the inspections, this could drum some of the smaller landlords out of business right along with Air B n B houses. It could scare off potential real estate investors that want to develop areas, such as the area north of Crawfordsville Rd. near I-465. Why would you invest in Speedway if the town has shown that it will essentially destroy your investment via regulation?

Anyway, I believe that the discussion is a healthy one for the Town of Speedway. I ask that my neighbors consider the larger issues when they decide where they stand on this issue, and attempt to consider the possible side effects of any purported action. Just because it annoys you does not mean that it is bad for Speedway; just because it lines your own pocket, consider that it may be problematic for your neighbor.

Once again, I find myself returning to the latin phrase: sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas.


*I am speaking hypothetically here, of course, because I for one believe that such an approach would violate the due process clauses of the 5th and 14th Amendments, the takings clause of the 5th Amendment, and the dead letter "privileges or immunities" clause of the 14th Amendment . . . but that Constitutional law discussion is for another day. Further, these extremes are taken outside of the context of other laws, such as nuisance laws. Today is about policy, not law.

Monday, February 5, 2018

Amazon Finalist - Indianapolis

I am of course torn as to how I feel about Amazon moving to Indianapolis. Some thoughts, in no particular order:

1. I have, once again, heard the usual trope about how it remains questionable whether there will be enough "skilled applicants" to fill all of the jobs that Amazon would bring. Once again, my response is that if you can't find someone willing to sell the thing you need for the price you offer, you should offer more for that thing and not spend your time whining to the government about some supposed "skills gap." I also note that the Chamber of Commerce types who like to bemoan the "lack of qualified workers" conveniently refuse to note what "qualifications" they're looking for. Again, my law firm has an immediate opening for a litigator who is 12-0 in front of the United States Supreme Court, has a portable book of business worth $1m/year, and is willing to buy me a Ferrari. We will pay that litigator $15,000/year. Any takers? No? Must be a skills gap!

2. Taking at face value the notion that at least some of the people who work at the Amazon HQ would have to be imported, I think it is important to review the image of Indiana that our state government has blasted out to the world. Who can forget RFRA, or Mike Pence walking out of the Colts game, or Milo Smith's bill allowing people offended by National Anthem protests at NBA and NFL games (but not at the Indianapolis 500, baseball games, Indy 11 soccer games, or Indy Fuel hockey games) to get a refund? I mean, all three of those are examples of pandering to your base of intolerant voters. If I was not from Indiana and had professional options, it would take a lot more money to get me to move here than to, say, Denver. If I was an outsider, I would wonder what it was about me that the locals would determine was sub-human? Is my choice of romantic partner going to be acceptable? What about my religious choices? The books I read? Will those make me an outcast? A target? Essentially, this is a plea for tolerance here in the Hoosier state. Most citizens of this state are remarkably tolerant and warm-hearted people; it continually baffles me that the citizens of Indiana elect legislators who are so profoundly anti-Hoosier in this element of their behavior.

3. I question whether Indianapolis would respond positively to an Amazon HQ even if we got one. With that size of a corporate headquarters and that many jobs moving here, more housing would have to be built. Is anyone confident that these houses would result in increased density in Indianapolis as opposed to more sprawl in Hamilton, Boone, and Johnson counties? I'm not. I have witnessed the NIMBYism here in Speedway with respect to the Redevelopment Commission and the NIMBYism in Indianapolis writ large with respect to the old Coke bottling plant, and it has been disheartening.

4. I am also reminded that obtaining a "thing" (a "res" in legalese) is only worthwhile so long as you don't overpay for that thing. Remember when the Chicago Cubs really hit a home run (pardon the pun) by signing Alfonso Soriano? How did that one work out? My point is that sometimes we overpay for things and when we do so, the result is worse than if we had simply walked away from the deal.

Sunday, January 21, 2018

YIMBY

I think that most people have heard of the term "NIMBY." This stands for Not In My Back Yard and generally refers to those who want to remonstrate or otherwise impede development. Further, it reflects the idea that many people are perfectly fine with developing property so long as that property is not to close to their own homes.

There is a movement in other cities, in response to NIMBYism, called YIMBY, i.e. Yes In My Back Yard.

Count me in. I would like to see development in my backyard. I want to see Wilshaw built, particularly if it is not dominated by parking structures. I want to see increased bus routes between Speedway and every other part of the city. I want to see a train connecting the airport to downtown via Speedway. I want to see condos built around IMS for wealthy racing team owners to stay in, hopefully for more than just a few weeks in May. I would like to see more bars and restaurants open throughout Speedway, not just on Main St. I want to see the Speedway Supercenter (i.e. the Kroger development) grow like gangbusters. I would like the McGilvery's development to fill in, whether it is with liquor stores, bible stores, health clubs, or whatever.

Along those lines, I love the International Marketplace on W. 38th Street! In a city that is dominated by chain franchise restaurants and stores, it is so refreshing to see all of those independently owned and operated restaurants and other businesses. I try to patronize them as often as I reasonably can.

As I wrote a long time ago, the traffic that comes along with these developments is evidence that people actually want to be here. That is a good thing. If there is no traffic and considerably more parking than would ever reasonably be required, that is evidence that our home is not worth visiting to those who don't live here. That is a bad thing!

PLEASE in my backyard! Maybe instead of YIMBY we should call people like myself PIMBYs.

Saturday, January 6, 2018

Why I Support Transit Innovation

Speedway has been around for a long time. The houses are old. The land has a lot of history, to put it kindly. While my neighborhood was initially seen as green field development at the edge of Indianapolis, that is no longer the case. Some 40 years after my house was built and 100 years after Main St. and IMS were built, these things are about as near Monument Circle as much of anything else. Don't forget; Monument Circle is the spiritual, if not physical, center of the State.

Speedway will never again be the newest suburb with the newest houses. That ship has sailed. I tend to believe that Speedway must, imperatively, capitalize on its assets while it still can. I read an old piece in the Urbanophile that discussed the life span of suburbs:
When you offer an older, inferior version of the same basic auto-oriented product as the suburbs, but with higher taxes, don’t expect many takers.
I think that is the essence of it; Speedway can either be the "older, inferior version" of Carmel, Avon, etc., or it can be the place where you can live and be connected with the remainder of Speedway as well as downtown Indianapolis. Frankly, I could not care less if they construct something out to the east side; I don't live there and rarely go there (if I can help it).

This goes along with my previously expressed beliefs and thoughts about golf carts and bike paths through Speedway. Urbanism is the key, people. We are not a green field suburb anymore. We can either be a part of "slumburbia" or we can remain a bona fide neighborhood set inside of a great American metropolis. We can embrace our urban nature or fight and deny it. As I say with so many things, the choice is ours. We get the future we deserve.

Thursday, January 4, 2018

Aspirations for 2018

I hate resolutions. I'm not generally a resolute individual. However, I do like to believe that I am an aspirational person. With that in mind, I offer aspirations for 2018:

1. Reform of Occupational Licensure Requirements

I am not a conservative, so I am told, but nothing erodes freedoms more than economic regulations that can deprive one of his ability to make a living and feed his family. It matters not to me whether one makes his/her living braiding hair, making dog treats, doing paralegal work, or coding medical bills. I don't see that a license is necessary to do any of this, much less a license that necessitates thousands of dollars in training that an employer used to provide(s).

Instead of having a highly trained and mercenary work force, we instead have the same work force with large tuition debt hanging over them; we have made society worse. Let's stop doing that. Instead, how about we allow people to pursue a livelihood without throwing up gratuitous barriers.

As a final note on this point, I can't help but think that so many occupational licensure requirements are simply "incumbent protection rackets." For example, the fact that an English teacher who is fully certified in Michigan has to sit through a battery of tests in Indiana to teach English is nothing but a protection racket for IN English teachers (a member of such group as I used to identify). Requiring thousands of dollars in gratuitous and unnecessary "training" to become a hair stylist merely serves to limit the universe of hair stylists and drive up the cost of stylist services. This makes everyone except incumbent stylists poorer: consumers pay more, aspiring stylists can't get into the industry. I could go on and on about this, as there are so many useless occupational licensing requirements it makes one's head spin.

2. Minimization of Land Use and Zoning Regulations

I view land use and zoning regulations, to a lesser extent, in a similar vein as occupational licensure requirements. Zoning does nothing but make incumbent landowners wealthier in most cases. Why can't someone who owns a home on Lynhurst open a public business there? What about on 15th St?* I also think that if someone is so inclined, he should be able to buy a parcel on Main St. and build whatever the hell he wants on it so long as he is not bothering others with his use of his own property. Sic utere tuo ut alienum non laedas. I fully recognize that some in this community don't necessarily see eye to eye with me on this. I do sincerely hope we can all agree to disagree.

3. Decriminalization of Harmless Behavior

There is a concept in the law known as "standing." It essentially says that you can't bring a lawsuit unless you can show a few things, including that you, the complainant, have been harmed. Generally, the enforcement of a law is presumed to be in the public interest, conferring standing on the prosecutor's office.

What if the elimination of the criminalized behavior is not in the public interest? What if enforcement of certain laws creates more of the undesirable behavior that we seek to eliminate in the first place?

The War on Drugs is the first thing that comes to mind. Unless a prosecuting authority can demonstrate that an actual human being was harmed, the prosecution should fail as a matter of policy. If there is an arms-length transaction, who really cares what is exchanged? Particularly with respect to marijuana, who cares? If an adult, who has full agency and freedom, decides to spend his hard-earned money on some pot, who cares? Why do we then tax that same adult to hire police and build prisons so that people who participate in this exact same behavior can become wards of the state? What in the hell are we doing?

Another example is prostitution. I certainly have a problem with human trafficking and the like, but again with the arms-length transaction . . . if a woman wants to sell an hour of her time doing "whatever" for a considerably larger amount than she could otherwise command for an hour of her time, who am I to say that I know better? I grant you that if there were "ladies of the night" "plying their trade" in Meadowood Park, my position would be different, as the entire community would be harmed in such an instance. However, if she sells her goods for three hours per night, out of her own home, what business is it of mine?

I could go on, but I think that the point has been made. Enough expenditure of public resources on morality crusades, which brings us to the next point . . .

4. Judicious and Equitable Use of Public Funds

I could go on for some time about this, whether we are talking about using public money to finance a private developer's parking garage or using public money to finance enforcement of some theocrat's version of morality, enough is enough.

Along those same lines, I know that there has been considerable discussion of late of the antics of Scott Harris vis a vis the Redevelopment Commission and the State Board of Accounts. Is it too much to expect to have the system, from which Mr. Harris repeatedly embezzled thousands of dollars, to institute reforms? Is it too much to require that anyone who handles public funds post a performance bond? I don't think so, but I'm not on the Town Council. Perhaps we should ask them.

Additionally, as pertains "equitable" use of public funds, can we think long and hard about who benefits from public expenditure and whether they need it? Don't get me wrong, I am thrilled that IMS is here and I recognize that it is the lifeblood of Speedway, if not Indianapolis. Nonetheless, I don't think that IMS needs taxpayer handouts any more than Mr. Billionaire/3 and 13/$750m stadium Jim Irsay needs our money, or the Simon family needs our money. Somehow, they all manage to get my tax money; I guess they need that money more than I do? I am perfectly happy to see my tax money spent to maintain and improve Speedway's schools, roads, sidewalks, parks, etc. I'm happy to see public money go to having free meals for poor kids when school isn't in session. It grates me a bit when those who are wealthy beyond my wildest dreams have their hands in the public till. Have you no shame?

5. Forward-Looking Use of Public Resources

This is the flip side of the "use of public funds" wish. I am given to understand that the Speedway Redevelopment Commission presently owns approximately $5m worth of real estate, primarily near the intersection of Crawfordsville Rd. and I-465. To those on the SRC, PLEASE think ahead when you determine what to do with this property. I do not believe that time is of the essence when it comes to alienating and developing that property; getting it right is of primary importance.

I am sure that a developer is more than willing to put a medical office park there. Woo frickin' hoo. Isn't that what was initially at the development just northwest of Crawfordsville/Lynhurst? Look at what a blight that is now. If you want to see more examples, just drive around Indianapolis and look at all of the initially-profitable-but-now-blighted medical office parks around the city. They're useful for perhaps 10 years as Class A office space, then they become Class B, eventually turning into essentially garbage office space, suitable for very little except for exceedingly cheap rent.

I am similarly sure that a developer would be willing to build a regular office park there. I believe that the same dynamic applies that applies to medical office parks. Office buildings retain their value when they are in desirable places, i.e. on the Circle, on Mass Ave., etc. Perhaps an office building would retain value on Main St., but even that is questionable.

I could sit here for hours and list all the things I don't want to see there. What would I like? Frankly, I don't know; an outdoor concert venue would be wonderful but I question whether it would be viable.

CONCLUSION

I write this post not as a rant but as an aspiration for the new year. As I am not an elected official in any capacity, there is very little I can do about these things other than apply pressure to public officials. That is one of the beauties of Speedway. I am one of only about 12,000 people who live here. Compare this to a citizen of Indianapolis, who is one of roughly 864,000 people who live there. As far as I can calculate, that means that I have 72X the influence in Speedway that I would have in Indianapolis.

As 2017 (a truly horrible year that I am happy to see close) fades into memory, I can reflect on my good fortune to live in a community such as this one and do my best to see to it that Speedway continues to thrive and improve. Here's to 2018; Cheers!





* As with most of these ideas, there is a legitimate end point even if I can't explicitly state where that is. I do not believe that food regulations should be eliminated, nor do I think that someone should be able to open another Crystal Clean in the middle of a residential area. I do, however, think that people should be able to do business in more places than they currently can. Also, I believe that some occupational licenses are necessary. I prefer that my healthcare provider be trained in providing healthcare. Unfortunately, however, so many of these licensure requirements have become rackets designed solely to protect the incumbents in the market at the expense of new entrants and a dynamic market.

Sunday, December 24, 2017

Roundabout Musings

A few thoughts on roundabouts:

1. I saw a news story about all of the roundabouts in Carmel. Apparently, the number of automobile accidents where someone is hurt and requires ambulance transport has decreased by 75%, in real terms, since the late 1990s. By way of comparison, recall that the population of Carmel has increased significantly, yet the number of serious injury accidents has decreased significantly. Anyone who says that roundabouts don't increase public safety is making an assertion that is at odds with the evidence.

2. I think that the Speedway roundabout has significantly improved the intersection of 16th/Crawfordsville. Now, I fully recognize that there are those in the neighborhood bounded by 25th/Lynhurst/Crawfordsville/Georgetown who lament the closure of Georgetown Rd. For two reasons, I can't really speak to the merits of their concerns: I don't live in that neighborhood and thus don't experience their concerns firsthand; and I did not live in Speedway prior to the closure of Georgetown Rd. What I can say, however, is that prior to the closure of Georgetown Rd., the 16th/Georgetown/Crawfordsville intersection was approximately the least desirable place one could think of to go. That intersection is now considerably more aesthetically pleasing and presents a much more favorable and positive image of Speedway.

3. I have heard that the OSCNA is lobbying to put a 40' flag pole in the middle of that roundabout. Really?!?! Do we need another large American flag flying in Speedway? Don't we have enough of them? By my count, we have such flag poles in front of every one of the six schools; in front of the Town Hall; at the track; in front of Allison Transmission; etc. Why not try to do something a bit unique and/or creative? Perhaps we could do a joint deal with IMS and put a huge replica of the Borg-Warner trophy in there? How about a large piece of public art? I used to live in Grand Rapids, MI, and they have "the calder" downtown. These are the kinds of things that make cities and towns unique places to go or generic places to go through. In my own opinion, yet one more 40' flag pole makes that roundabout the kind of generic unremarkable place that one simply goes through; a representative piece of art that embodies Speedway would go a long way towards announcing to the world that Speedway is a unique place to spend time and money.


Tuesday, December 5, 2017

He Spent YOUR Money on WHAT?

I am sure that I am not the first person to see this:
A former Speedway official is accused of misappropriating thousands of dollars’ worth of city funds.
A special investigation report filed Monday by the state cites dozens of instances between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2015, where Kenneth Harris had used or not correctly recorded the use of city funds. 
According to the audit, Harris owes the city of Speedway almost $20,000 for undocumented purchases, cell phone bills and other expenses. Harris is also being charged for the cost of the investigation into his charges.  
The report includes undocumented credit card purchases cell phone, travel and reimbursement expenses and over-contributions to his Health Spending Account. 
I have heard general rumors regarding Mr. Harris before, though I have refrained from discussing them on this blog for a variety of reasons. First, I do not know Mr. Harris; I've never met him; I've never had any dealings with him; I don't know much of anything about his policies. I am absolutely willing to trash an elected (or appointed) official because of his/her policies. I am absolutely willing to trash someone because of his/her behavior. I try not to trash people based on rumors I have heard about them. So, I have refrained discussing Mr. Harris' doings on this blog.

Additionally, while I had heard about this particular at least a year ago, I know that accusing someone of illegal activity is defamation per se, and the last thing I need is the Speedway Old Boys Network (TM) reigning misery down on me in the form of a lawsuit.
Credit

Thank you to the astute commenter who pointed this out. The people of this Town need to know what is being done in their name, and what those who purport to act in their name are doing. This is your tax money that they are spending, whether it is on "undocumented and unsupported credit card purchases," large pieces of property near Crawfordsville Rd. and I-465, or parking garages that they finance for wealthy developers.

While I have significant differences with the publishers of the Speedway Town Press, I applaud their efforts to engage people in Speedway politics. As I've said before, when we mindlessly vote our national party preference in local elections, we wind up with "representatives" who could, literally, not care less about what we as voters think; our "representatives" only care about what the party insiders and donors think. While I don't know this for a fact, I presume that Mr. Harris maintains some pull around Speedway; I believe his wife is the head of the Speedway Chamber of Commerce. I can't help but speculate as to the level of influence he continues to exert on our public policy in Speedway.

As a final note, I have heard additional musings regarding Mr. Harris' past dealings. I will not, however, divulge what I have heard, as it is no more than a rumor. See above.

Friday, November 17, 2017

On leaving people the hell alone

I see that once again, the Speedway conservatives vocal minority has decided to protest yet another piece of progress, this time Big Red Liquors' attempt to open a store at the development at 30th and High School.

Some thoughts:

1. The owners of that property, much like the owners of other property, should be allowed to use their property as they see fit so long as such use doesn't bother others' use of their own property. I see nothing in a liquor store that would "hurt" the area any more than having (a) a bar (McGilvery's, an establishment of which I am a modest fan) and (b) empty property (that attracts blight, squatters, etc.).

2. I thought that Speedway was die-hard Republican/Conservative. It's not exactly the same thing anymore, but it is a pretty good overlap. Where are all of these small-government "conservatives" when it comes to their own neighborhood? Is small government only something that is imposed on others? I see that they all want to "remonstrate" against this proposal, much as many of the same culprits "remonstrated" against Wilshaw.

NEWSFLASH: when you "remonstrate," you are merely asking that the government intervene on your behalf to prevent others from doing as they please with their own property.

I am not entirely against remonstrations, by the way. If someone wanted to put a fracking compound in to replace Meadowood Park, I would be concerned, as that use would disturb my use of my own property by, among other things, polluting the air and water in the immediate vicinity of my home. However, if someone wants to put a porn shop in next to Kroger, who am I to complain? My recourse is to not shop there.

Bottom line here is that this little song and dance routine gets very old, very fast. You can't call yourself a "small government" "libertarian minded" "live and let live" "conservative" and turn around and remonstrate against every little change/development because "it impedes on my 'free' parking" or "it is in an inappropriate place" (i.e. too close to my house). If you want the government to intervene on your behalf, you are not a "small government conservative."

Of course, the biggest irony I can see is that some of the same vocal minority protesting everyone else's use of their own property are the same ones that believe that additional Wall Street regulations or health insurance subsidies are an enormous and unacceptable infringement on FREEDOM.

Tuesday, November 7, 2017

Bike/Golf Cart Route - An idea

So, here is the image that I have come up with that is a first-stab effort at a bike/golf cart route going through Speedway. As I've said before, this is essentially a suggestion that we mark certain roads that key people into the idea that they're "on the path" and won't get lost.

Admittedly, it is not perfect. However, all great ideas start off as partially formed, so-so ideas.


The comically oversized line represents where I would suggest we mark a bike/golf cart lane. You'll notice a few things about this map:

1. This is clearly a rather outdated map, as it does not show the development on Main Street, the roundabout (though it's covered up by my comically oversized line), the 10th Street "swerve" or various other developments in Speedway.

2. You'll also note that Main Street and the "main" network are not connected. This is by design, as 11th through 15th Streets are perfectly acceptable for bicycle/golf cart travel.

3. The routes through the Meadowood Park area are the most thought out, as I live there and think about this often. Along those lines, the area around Leonard Park is not all that well thought out, as I spend very little time in that area. This is by no means a slight of that neighborhood; it is merely a recognition of my limited understanding. Any and all suggestions are welcome.

4. I still haven't figured out the best way to connect the route across Crawfordsville Rd. on the western edge of town. Again, any and all suggestions are welcome.

5. The "Winton Corridor" is probably the main artery going north and south; I chose this as it crosses Crawfordsville Rd. at a light already, and that intersection could probably be adapted to handle golf cart/bike traffic.

6. The route also cuts through the high school parking lot. This is by design to attempt to keep bicycle traffic off Lynhurst Ave.

OK. There it is. If Speedway had a parking problem, this would be one suggestion to solve it.

Monday, November 6, 2017

On Bike Lanes and Neighborhood Connectivity

As much as I would like to advocate to have some sort of a shuttle that takes residents of Speedway from one end to the other, I fully recognize that such a service is likely prohibitively expensive. I would, in its place, like to advocate for a bike "thru-way" through our town. Such a thru-way could be done for a fraction of the cost and would provide a wonderful amenity for the people of Speedway.

First off, I think that the goals of the thru-way need to be clearly defined. I, for one, don't think that this bicycle trial should necessarily be built for the fitness gurus of the world. While it is great that some people slather on the spandex and want to go riding for scores of miles, I think that a lot more people simply want to ride their bikes down to Main St. or over to the grocery store.

Thus, Tabletop Joe's Principle #1: the thru-way is primarily for transportation.

The second thing is that it has to be inclusive. The way I figure it, there are essentially four (4) Speedway "neighborhoods" (for lack of a better term). I live in Meadowood, and I believe that Meadowood is one neighborhood. Some good friends live by Main, and I believe that the Old Speedway neighborhood (10th - Crawfordsville; Main - Lynhurst) is a second neighborhood. I think that the Allison neighborhood (Lynhurst - Georgetown; 25th - Crawfordsville) is a third neighborhood. I think the last neighborhood in Speedway is essentially the area that is from the River to Lynhurst, and 10th to Crawfordsville.

Tabletop Joe's Principle #2 is inclusivity. The bicycle thru-way should go through, and connect, each of these four neighborhoods.

The third thing is cost. I don't want boondoggles. We already have roads that go through Speedway's neighborhoods. I see no reason why some of these roads can't be painted something uniquely Speedway (probably checkered flags, or some sort of racing theme) to let people know what roads the bicycle thru-ways are on.

Tabletop Joe's Principle #3: Don't overspend. We don't need newly built trails a la Carmel. Simply paint the bicycle thru-way on the existing residential streets.

The fourth thing is access. I don't want to ride a bike on Crawfordsville Rd. or Lynhurst. I don't imagine many of my fellow townspeople do either. Keep the thru-way focused on the residential streets. Also, people generally don't want to ride a bike in the dark, as they're afraid they'll get run over. Keep the thru-way well lit via street lights.

Tabletop Joe's Principle #4: Access. Make it something that as many people as possible can use as often as possible.

My suggestion would be to ensure that people could get to the main commercial "hubs" at the four corners of Speedway: 30th/High School Rd.; IMS; Crawfordsville/High School Rd. strip mall; Main St.

I will post more in the future regarding proposed routes.

Thursday, November 2, 2017

A Modest Proposal

I remember during my first year of teaching that I had one rule in my classroom: don't misbehave. Unsurprisingly, my students found that rule confoundingly difficult to follow. In years subsequent, I defined the rule a bit better: turn your homework in on time, be in the classroom before the bell, don't talk when I'm talking, do what I tell you to do promptly. Again, unsurprisingly, compliance with my rules got a lot better. I made it easy to be "on the right side of the rule."

Anyone who has read much of this blog knows that I am not some small-government ideologue. I don't want to shrink government out of some hostility to the common good, and I do not believe that freedom and the size of government are inversely proportionate or correlative. I do, however, believe that if you want people to follow the law, people should be able to simply and easily understand the law.

In particular, I am talking about the Fair Housing laws and the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The law says that buildings must be designed and built such that they are handicap accessible. Who knows what that means? I sincerely doubt that there are any developers out there today (who are not named Donald Trump) who want to stick it to people simply because of their disabilities. However, if you are a developer, chances are that you're not a general contractor or an architect. You hire these functions out.

If an architect designs a building to local building code, and the contractor builds the building to local building code, doesn't it seem as though the building ought to pass muster with respect to handicap accessibility? Should the developer really have to hire one more "consultant" to "opine" as to whether the building complies with the Fair Housing Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act? Don't you think that passing local building code, passing inspection, and properly getting your permits ought to shield you from charges, after the fact, that the building does not comply with the FHA, ADA, etc?

As it presently sits, the answer is that a developer can fully comply with every local zoning law, get all the proper permits, pass inspection, and still get hit with a big nasty lawsuit for failure to follow the Fair Housing Act and its Americans with Disabilities requirements, all because the architect and contractor built the building according to what the law requires. Any guess on what this does for the cost of housing or the willingness of developers to build multi-family housing? Anyone wonder why the cost of housing has soared past inflation in the past 50 years? Perhaps this has something to do with it (though admittedly, the cost of housing is a very complicated story that involves many moving parts).

Again, I tend to default to simplicity. I've said until I'm blue in the face that if your policy ideas are so great, you shouldn't have to lie about them (see Trump, Donald; Ryan, Paul; Price, Tom). Along those lines, if laws are important enough to enforce, shouldn't they be important enough to be written in such a manner as those against whom enforcement is sought actually have the opportunity to understand what the law requires and how to comply with it? Stated another way, if you want people to comply with a rule, you should tell them what the rule requires.