Capital Improvement Board Budget Passes Council

Just a quick note for those that didn't tune in to the Council meeting on Channel 16.

The Capital Improvement Board was the main point of contention in the budget hearings tonight. It passed 15-14, mostly along party lines.

Christine Scales, a Republican, voted no. Jackie Nytes, a Democrat, voted yes.

This was similar to what happened a year ago, where Ntyes and Scales were in a similar position over the CIB bailout which raised the hotel tax and let the CIB take a $27 million loan from the state of Indiana.

Terry Burns, who posted about FIVE Republican council representatives who might vote no, ended up being off about all except Scales. This is rare, because Burns, though partisan, is usually pretty dead-on as far as predicting votes.

Some posts on Twitter and Facebook noted a packed room. I'm guessing the Unite Here pro-union crowd turned out most of that crowd. They're good with that, and I find it odd that liberals and fiscal conservatives can align on this issue. It's good, but still odd.

Get Ready to Hear About the 80 Gazillion Hospitality Jobs...Again

One of the figures that is often cited when discussing the Capital Improvement Board and corporate welfare for the Indiana Pacers is the 66,000 jobs related to the hospitality industry, the implication is that the Pacers being there help draw people to use the facilities that employ these people and thus keep them employed. And that without the Pacers, many of these jobs would just up and vanish.

I have difficulty accepting that premise on two fronts.

Last night, I talked to a few hospitality workers who are with Central Indiana Jobs with Justice and Unite Here, both organizations that are pro-union and are currently attempting to organize at the Hyatt Hotel in downtown Indianapolis. I asked them about the 66,000 jobs figure, where these jobs exactly are, and how they feel about them being cited by politicians.

They explained to me that they do believe that these 66,000 jobs are a downtown Indianapolis figure and not a regional figure. But they also noted that these jobs are low wage jobs, mostly paid by the hour with probably some tip-based jobs mixed in as well. Many workers who are employed in these types of jobs work two or three jobs to get by, and their concern is that these figures are heavily inflated. Even City-County Council representative Barbara Malone (R-At Large) said, during the council meeting:

"I agree that there are not 66,000 jobs in the hospitality industry. If anything, its 22,000 working 3 jobs"

The hotel workers didn't really seem to like being held up as talking points to support political actions that seem to work against their self-interests. I mentioned to them that a group of hotel workers were in attendance at a meeting I attended about a year ago as representing the 66,000 jobs, and they didn't seem pleased.

If you ask me, this is something that libertarian minded folk and the pro-union crowd can agree on. We need to stop subsidizing everyone with a few million bucks in their pocket and just let these hotels stand or fall on their own two feet.

The other premise I have trouble accepting is that these jobs would be negatively affected by the lack of the Indiana Pacers in Conseco Fieldhouse.

Personal economics teaches us about disposable income. This is money that people earn that is not being paid to a necessity such as utility bills, shelter, food, and so on. It is money that they'll spend, save, or invest. But they will use it in one way or another. The vast majority of the Pacers' audience are local residents. So if the Pacers do vanish as an option for one's entertainment dollar, it'll simply be spent elsewhere in the city. A small fraction of those who travel in from the donut counties to see the games might be a loss, but a small loss.

The other assumption is that if the Pacers leave, Conseco Fieldhouse will essentially be boarded up and vacant. Several companies responded to a recent request from the CIB asking for outlines of who would be interested in managing the CIB's various facilities, but the plans to push for privatization were abruptly dropped. Though I can't find the article, I remember one large concert promoter and venue manager seemed excited about managing a venue such as Conseco Fieldhouse. He obviously saw a lot of potential. This means that if the Pacers do leave, there will be more room available for events such as concerts. Most of the normal National Basketball Association's regular season occurs during colder months where outdoor music venues such as Verizon Wireless Music Center in Noblesville and the Lawn at White River State Park are not viable. Freeing up a large indoor venue would make it easier to schedule musical tours, among other events. It is not at all uncommon to look through a musical act's tour schedule and notice that they'll criss-cross the Midwest but all too often will skip over Indianapolis, and sometimes the entire state.

And before someone talks about the $57 million in economic impact the Pacers have, that number is even disputed by the unofficial cheerleader of Mayor Greg Ballard, Abdul Hakim-Shabazz. Shabazz says in this post that the number seems to be based off of when the Pacers had a winning record. Based on his conversations, there isn't much of an increase in business on game nights nowadays.

For those that haven't had the chance to see the tape from last night's committee meeting, Pat Andrews had several excellent public comments. Just fast forward to that. Everything else is just the council self-congratulating for a band-aid well patched in relation to the "fixed" budgets of the library and IndyGo.

On an unrelated note, kudos to Francessca Jarosz. Jarosz was the local government reporter for The Indianapolis Star until recently where she started at the Indianapolis Business Journal. She was the only one in the traditional media to show up.

City-County Council's Municpal Corporation Approves CIB Budget 5-2

The City-County Council Muncipal Corporation Committee voted to approve the City-County Council's budget with a do-pass recommendation 5-2. The votes were as follows:

Yes:
Chairwoman Barbara Malone (R-At Large)
Angel Rivera (R-At Large)
Robert Lutz (R-13th District)
Jeff Cardwell (R-23th District)
Jackie Nytes (D-9th District)

No:
Dane Mahern (D-19th District)
Maggie Lewis (D-7th District)

To Mr. Lutz's credit, he asked in a joking manner if the committee could pass it without a do-pass recommendation. He has previously voted against CIB budgets.

I will write about the meeting more in depth later in the week.

At-Large Councilor Angel Rivera will also be posting a counterpoint to my open letter. That will be posted Thursday morning.

An Open Letter to the City-County Council's Municipal Corporation Committee

Editor's note: It is my understanding that this committee won't be taking public comment at tonight's meeting. If you would like to add your thoughts and want them heard, or more precisely, read, then post yours in the comments section. I'll be printing them out and I'll attempt to get them in the packets the council representatives get when they go to committee meetings.

According to blog comments, Central Indiana Jobs with Justice and Unite Here will be rallying at the City Market at 5pm. The meeting takes place at 5:30pm in 260 of the City-County Building.

Other posts on the same subject:
Advance Indiana: Councilors Wave Magic Wand And Find $2.5 Million For Libraries And IndyGo
Pat Andrews at Had Enough Indy? Weighs In.

Chairwoman Malone, my council representative Maggie Lewis, and to all others sitting on the Municipal Corporation Committee,

My name is Matthew Stone. I've been periodically attending City-County council meetings since about this time last year. Tonight, you'll be taking up an item that relates to the main agenda item of the first committee meeting I attended: the Capital Improvement Board and it's budget.

Early in 2009, the CIB cried poverty. The numbers seem to fluctuate between $30-something and $47 million that was needed to cover a huge hole in their budget, and it was never quite certain exactly what was included in those numbers. Their story seemed to change often, specifically in regards to if this projected deficit included $15-18 million (another fluctuating figure) in operating costs for Conseco Fieldhouse, which by contract is supposed to be covered by the primary tenants of the Fieldhouse, the Indiana Pacers.

So they rushed off to the General Assembly and several plans were proposed and went nowhere. In the budget drama that was ongoing in the General Assembly, the CIB got permission to ask the council to raise a few taxes and take three $9 million dollar loans over three years from the state, because I guess the state has enough money to spare. In the subsequent board meeting where the CIB accepted the first loan, it was admitted that the loan wasn't needed to cover their budget at that time but they were going to take it anyway. Of course, no plan was proposed on how to pay back the loan in a few years since it is, after all, a loan and not a gift.

Since then, the CIB has slashed several jobs and claims they've really toned down their expenses. When I've attended CIB meetings, they often have the lights in the hallways dimmed or turned off. Man, it really looks like they're trying to pinch every single penny!

So what's the first thing they do when the CIB is finally on it's way to not losing a ton of money?

They fork over $30 million (in operation costs and capital improvements) to the Indiana Pacers over a period of three years, including a shiny new scoreboard. And in typical boneheaded CIB fashion, they let the Pacers keep all non-game revenue made from concerts and other events hosted at Conseco Fieldhouse.

Since this whole drama started in early 2009, you often see the headlines juxtaposed in an interesting fashion. In one article, you might read about the CIB asking for taxes to be raised or detailing the new contract between the Pacers and the CIB or the Pacers getting a new, shiny scoreboard. And in another article, you'll read about our city-county libraries reducing hours for employees and branches, or the worst bus system in the entire country struggling to keep what little they have going.

And yes, I understand that taxes are used in different ways and often in Indiana, city-county legislative bodies can't easily re-direct revenue to feed into different services. But they CAN go to the general assembly and ask for more flexibility in how they direct these funds.

In the worst economy since the Great Depression, I recognize that all government services and programs will probably take a hit. I'm just asking that all programs are treated fairly. Because right now, it seems like our public transit and libraries are taking most of the burden, while the sports stadiums get every request they demand.

It is for this reason that I urge you to vote down the Capital Improvement Board's budget. The Indiana Pacers had a contract that they knowingly signed that requires them to pay operational expenses and in return they get 100% of all revenue from games and non-game events. If they're losing money (and I say "if" because they've never provided any proof that they're losing money) and can't afford the expenses, then too bad. The public has had to make sacrifices these past few years, and they should as well.

--
-Matthew Stone

Firehawk Technologies

mamstone@firehawktechnologies,com

Blog: http://indystudent.blogspot.com

CIB Bailout: How will the Democrats Use It?

With Chris Worden's iPOPA blog on indefinite hiatus, I think I'll try to put on my analyst/reporter cap and leave my opinions at the door. You can pretty much go to any of the other blogs in town and find some excellent opinions and analysis, but I've been pondering something else.

How will the Democrats play this issue? The leading candidate in the Mayoral race on their side, Melina Kennedy, has been quiet on the utility transfer due to her day-job at the law firm of Baker and Daniels (who is representing the city in the deal). And Democratic candidates who haven't even gotten the nomination wouldn't dare talk trash to Herb Simon, a long time supporter of Democrats (though like many of the movers and shakers of this town, he contributes to both parties locally). So what will they do?

I thought that they might criticize some of the finer details of the deal. Gary Welsh has already started their homework for them in two excellent posts. Someone like Brian Williams, who sunk his teeth into the water utility sale, could get in on the ground floor and point out specifics of the deal that could be played as bad, and what a Democratic administration would've done differently. A Democrat could also note that the deal won't have any City-County Council over site because it allegedly is coming from within the Capital Improvement Board's budget, and the Council only would need to review if it requested new spending. Finally,they could go after the short-term fix, since it just leaves a new deal for another administration to handle if the current one doesn't get re-elected.

And to prove how right I am, I had an e-mail exchange on Facebook with Jon Easter, one of the writers over at Indy Democrat. He basically confirmed my suspicion, and these points appeared in his latest post.

But there's one final viewpoint I'd like to cover: the viewpoint of the public. It really does seem like this bailout is getting overtly negative reviews, but what impact will it have on the average citizen in 2011 and their decision of who to vote for? As bloggers, sometimes we have more of a long-term memory or tend to focus in on certain subjects. That isn't true for everyone, and what is an issue now might be forgotten in a week, month, or a year from now.

A Brief History of the Capitol Improvement Board: When Will We Learn?

I regular read the blog Indy Tax Dollars written by Fred McCarthy. As the name suggests, he focuses on local tax issues. He, like many other local bloggers, is against the bailout of the Pacers by we the people. But is this a new phenomenon, or have we just not learned from our past?

I know it's long, but read the whole thing:

I took out a half page ad in our local paper regarding public funding of private sports teams. A recent IBJ Editorial titled “Shed More Light on Pacers’ Plight” regarding the possible increase of public funding for the Indiana Pacers, the Editor states factually that “the franchise has been an economic engine for downtown” as if that was an indisputable fact.

I had a business in downtown Indy and was President of the Downtown Restaurant Association, and had plenty of problems with the teams, the taxation on my business to support them and finally left town for greener pastures after 15 otherwise successful years at that location. I thought you might appreciate the following information.

If that is true, then the Pacers are the only sports team that has ever been an economic engine for any city……as every independent academic study every done comes to just the opposite conclusion. So let me shed the real light……

By way of example, Jim Irsay thought the Colts were an obvious economic engine and hired the Kelly School of Business at IUPUI to document it. So anxious was he to demonstrate this fact that he scheduled a press conference to tout the study to the tax-paying world. Problem is, he hadn’t read the report and when he did, the results so clearly demonstrated there was no significant economic impact that he cancelled the press conference and the study never saw the light of day. The chief author of that study later released a book titled “Major League Losers” using the Colts as one of the primary examples where he documented that any team’s effect is “minuscule on the economy of a city or even a region” and that “they produce few jobs, little tax revenue, and a negligible positive impact even on their own immediate neighborhood”. That was also a book produced by the Brookings Institute called “Sports, Jobs, and Taxes: The Economic Impact of Sports Teams and Stadiums” which I purchased and sent to Peterson and every sitting City Council Member. Quoting from the Brookings summary; “15 collaborators from universities across the nation, examined the local economic development argument from all angles: case studies of the effect of specific facilities, as well as comparisons among cities and even neighborhoods that have and have not sunk hundreds of millions of dollars into sports development. In every case, the conclusions are the same. A new sports facility has an extremely small (perhaps even negative) effect on overall economic activity and employment. No recent facility appears to have earned anything approaching a reasonable return on investment. No recent facility has been self-financing in terms of its impact on net tax revenues. Regardless of whether the unit of analysis is a local neighborhood, a city, or an entire metropolitan area, the economic benefits of sports facilities are de minimus.” (For more info check out www.brookings.edu/articles)

Later, the Capital Improvement Board purchased a study at a cost of over $100,000 from Coopers Lybrand whose task was not to produce an independent analysis but rather was told by the Peterson administration to prove there was a big positive impact. That firm dutifully saluted and at an average taxpayer cost of $13,000 per page most people would take dictation. It is just a shame the press did not actually read it. The primary basis for their assertion was an exit poll of over 800 Colts ticket holders at a winning game asking the probing question, “Do you think there is a positive economic impact by the team on Indianapolis?” and the resounding answer was “Yes”! I don’t know how anyone can call a public opinion survey of the attendees an econometric study, but it sure shows you can fool all of the people at least some of the time. Unless the economic benefit the ticket holders were referring to was having the cost of a ticket subsidized through the public coffers. Never once did the study group ask any hotel, restaurant or retail establishment who was paying taxes to Irsay what their opinion was and I hope everyone remembers that Irsay also refused to open his team’s books at the same time he was holding his hand out.

Even though receipts were truly smaller than other NFL franchises, it was widely reported (except here in town) that since his team was not carrying any major long term debt load, that the Colts were actually one of the most profitable teams, if not the most profitable team, in the league.

Now after the Conseco Fieldhouse was built, Indianapolis Downtown Inc reported in their annual reports about downtown that sales at the Top Ten downtown restaurants declined for the next three years by an average of 10% each year (they checked sales tax records) which amounted to millions of dollars in lost tax revenue to the Tax Increment Financing District.

IDI then blamed the downturn on the economy after 9/11, but when I pointed out that in the same period the industry enjoyed an average 4% annual growth in sales nationally, in our state, and even in Marion County (according to the increases in the food & beverage tax collections), IDI had run out of excuses and got right on solving the problem – they stopped checking and reporting on the sales decreases in their annual report. Their answer was the traditional see no evil, hear no evil, so don’t report about the evil. This, despite the fact that over 3 dozen downtown restaurants, the ISO and the IRT signed a petition to the Mayor listing all the problems, many related to parking and traffic, the Fieldhouse had created for downtown which was causing a net loss of business. IDI was well aware that the neighborhood knew what the problem was and their own expert on parking agreed with us, so they fired him and got a new guy who would respect where his paycheck came from. IDI was a major roadblock and, along with the Pacers themselves, had a fully funded, independent study on the problems created by the Fieldhouse killed by Peterson’s Economic Director, (that would be Melina Kennedy). As an aside, will somebody please tell me why a neighborhood group like IDI continues to get $1,000,000 annually in taxpayer subsidy, especially in these times, instead of relying on the membership like for instance the Chamber of Commerce?

The Pacers smiled politely at neighborhood meetings and said they would do anything the Mayor wanted them to do to solve any problems, while all the time insisting there was no problem and having the clout behind the scenes to make sure nothing was done, especially about some nasty parking situations they had created. To add insult to injury, this was at a time they were not paying the contracted for $3.45 million per year for the Fieldhouse parking garage so they had a free parking garage and lots of unwarranted parking profits which they somehow did not disclose and for which they are now in arrears for almost $40 million dollars. And to further add insult to injury, Melina Kennedy made sure the Simons got their own parking garage at their new headquarters so they would have free parking at a tax payer cost of another $14 million dollars. The Simons were also claiming at that time they would leave Indianapolis if they did not get a free parking garage for their employees. Will Indianapolis never learn?

And what do you want to bet that if the team’s books were examined as the IBJ suggests a big part of the losses the Pacers say they are experiencing is a line item for a $3.45 million annual cost they should be repaying to the taxpayer for that parking garage but never will? Some pretty good sums of public money have already been paid out for bouncing that big rubber ball.

And when I pulled out of Indianapolis 4 years ago I was generating over $250,000 annually in taxes, some of which went to the Tax Increment Financing District. Many others left the district for greener pastures too, revenue the CIB could now surely use and would have had if they had listened to the neighborhood.

I and over 20 others closed their downtown businesses citing Fieldhouse related problems as a primary reason. As a matter of fact, the IRS code provides tax relief to businesses if there is a catastrophic occurrence, such as a flood, earthquake, or Katrina like hurricane. In my filling for that relief, I extensively detailed those problems and the lack of any net positive economic benefit, and conclusively proved the many negatives in a report so thorough and complete the attorneys said it was the best documented case they had ever seen and later the hearing officer did not even question if the relief should be granted. It was just a matter of “how much”. In the proverbial “Miracle on 34th Street” tradition, an official agency of the US Government pronounced that the Capitol Improvement Board and its facilities had the same catastrophic economic affect on downtown Indy as a hurricane did to New Orleans. It took three years, but I got the refund checks just last month.

Now don’t get me wrong, I do understand there is a big bonus to a city through any team’s publicity value (at least when the team members are not pulling guns or throwing punches) but the public cost of that publicity is very, very, high. It is great to have the team’s name on TV and T-shirts. A population, or at least its sports fans, can all come together and cheer, feel warm and cozy and sing kumbaya. All a public subsidy really does is free up cash for a team’s owner and whichever franchise has the most free cash can afford the highest priced players. That’s it. It has been proven time and time again by every single truly independent study ever done.

So if the publicity is really worth the price tag, pay it. If it’s not worth it, don’t. But to say that the public cost is really an ‘investment’ that pays for itself due to some big economic benefit is a big lie.

You can fool some of the press all the time, and you can fool all the public some of the time, but you can’t fool all the Hoosier’s all the time, can you? I hope not, because if ever there was a big lie, this is it. Don’t get fooled again.

Ted Bulthaup
Former owner, Hollywood Bar & Filmworks
Former President, Downtown Restaurant Association

UPDATE: I'm attempting to investigate these claims.

CIB fires 11 low paid employees, wants more money for ICVA

The Capital Improvement Board continues their manufactured PR campaign to seem like they are REALLY tightening their belts by firing 11 employees. The Star reported that the first 9 would save $325,000, but didn't specify how much the other 2 would save a few days later.

Doing the math, 325,000/9 gets us to about $36,000 a year. Add that twice into $325,000 and we're up to $361,000. Divide that by 11 and we're just below $33,000 a year.

Mr. Ogden over at Ogden on Politics makes a reasonable assumption that the total cost-saving also includes benefits. So we're really talking about jobs in the $20,000-30,000 a year range. These are not well paying jobs, but are jobs that normal folks do.

What should also be said is that, earlier this year, WTHR reported that the CIB gave across the board raises to almost every employee except Barney Levengood. These raises range from the standard 3% cost of living, all the way up to 14%. Don't worry about Mr. Levengood, he makes $221,000.

As I originally reported back in August, I overheard a CIB board member before a board meeting say "Fire half of those union employees and it'd save us tons of money." Looks like they're going forward with this plan.

Mr. Ogden also writes very in-depth about how Indianapolis Convention and Visitors Association is lobbying for more money, despite most of it being wasted on salaries.

Fortunately, since municipal corporations are "separate" from the overall city-county budget, Mayor Greg Ballard can continue to say that nobody has to be fired due to cost cutting measures. I guess they also aren't counting the huge budget slash at the parks department, Doug Rae and two other animal control workers. Great job, Mr. Mayor!

Quick thoughts on CCC meeting + CIB meeting

The CIB meeting was generally uninteresting and no one without a press badge (or being on the board itself) would have a point in actually going. Unfortunately, my observation of the news media only leeds me to conclude that most are out of touch with what being a journalist is about. One reporter (not a commentator or anything like that, an actual reporter), in a conversation with Abdul Hakim-Shabazz, triviliazed the situation with "What's the big deal?", not getting that the CIB's solution to debt is to borrow more money, and that they'll have even LESS revenue in the future than they do now. As mentioned in the meeting, they sold off the parking lot where Market Square Arena used to sit.

After Don Welsh left the room, one reporter threw him a softball to so he could trott out the talking point of the supposed horros that could befall this city if taxes aren't raised and more money isn't thrown at the proble...err, CIB. The question was "What kind of devastating effects could this have on the city if the council doesn't pass the tax increase?"

Another interesting note was that they had the numbers for the rejected tax increases on hand at the CIB meeting (alcohol tax, car rental tax, etc...). I'd bet a breakfast at The Donut Shop that those same taxes will be proposed again, and soon.

The same tired line of "no formal discussions" concerning the $15 million to the Pacers was again trotted out, despite the IBJ reporting that the $15 million was on the table, the CIB confirming it verbally at the Pike Township townhall meeting. It's not in the annual budget, which is factually true, but there is nothing stopping that proposal from moving forward. As it is now, the $15 million is in the same place it was in January: Talked about, not voted on, and nobody in authority (legislature, CCC) has done anything to ensure it won't be proposed. Of course, I don't see the current makeup of the CCC rejecting a gift to the Simons. I think they could easily get all Democrats plus a few Republicans to give it to them.

Abdul asked where the revolutionaries/activisits/coffeehouse crowd was, in reference to the 2pm CIB meeting. While I know there's no secret club (and I've never even met a number of them), I understand that they all probably have jobs that keep them busy 9-5. I have a job that's flexible enough with hours, and Abdul has a job that actually pays him to go to these things. He responded with "the revolution doesn't sleep" or something like that. Yes, I was the lone "activist" he referred to via Twitter.

One last thing, the CIB really made a case of "poor me". The lights were shut off in most places, and the air conditioning wasn't turned on in many of the rooms, including the last minute switch to the larger room. I overheard one board member before the meeting say "Fire half of those union employees and it'd save us tons of money." We all can go back and forth about the unions and their place in today's business world, but to suggest that those working at the facilities should be pink slipped while every CIB member got a fat raise (except Levengood, who got a 30+% raise last year) this year is ludicrous.

The CCC meeting was surprising on so many levels. The city's attorney, who doesn't look much older than me, clearly had no idea what he was talking about in regards to Constitutional law and First Amendment rights, in relation to the proposed panhandling ordinance.

Councilor Lutz introduced the CIB bailout. During it, he read the summary of the talking points he was presented with during the committee meeting. With snarky comments referring to the committee meeting running four hours long ("what seemed like forever"), it's almost like Lutz forgot that 3.5 of those 4 hours were from suits lobbying for the bailout that HE scheduled himself. He also made sure to list every single supporter of the CIB bail out, but didn't mention a single member of the public who voiced their opposition to the bailout.

Of course,who could blame him? He put the comments from the public dead last on the Rules and Public Policy Committee. I was barely listening, and I was at the microphone stand for 2 minutes. I'm sure Lutz wasn't listening at all.

Both Democrats and Republicans used the panhandling ordinance and the CIB bailout to take cheap political shots. I kind of got the feeling that MAYBE the votes against the panhandling ordinance were made, overall, for the right reason (questionalbe legality, though "is this really necessary?" would've been nice too). But it's clear that the Democrats weren't in opposition to the tax increase on principal, and the Republicans wouldn't have been either if the shoe was on the other foot. Both were doing it for politics and the downtown elite. It's just that those who voted for it, it'll come back to haunt them.

Larry was dressed in black face. And just as I suspected when I first met him July 28, he's an Alex Jones follower. Nevertheless, I understand that he's logged endless hours at council meetings, and for that he should be applauded. If only a fraction of our fellow citizens were as passionate and dedicated as Larry, our city would be better off.

I haven't had the time or the energy to look through Ballard's budget yet, but I question how balanced it really can be. Federal stimulus money ($11 million) is being used to hire new police officers. I don't have the exact # to be hired, but where is this money going to come from after the fiscal year? If my memory is correct, that 50 new officers will be hired, that's $220,000 per officer. The average IMPD salary certainly isn't $220,000, so where is the rest of that money going? Is training really that expensive (Assuming they aren't rookies)?

And just looking at all the media reports shows how confusing the CIB has made it to see how much in debt they are. The Star has $47 million, the same figure quoted during the beginning of the year that includes the $15 million to the Pacers. Last week the Indinapolis Business Journal said they'd be $5 million in debt, and that does not include the Pacers' gift. At no point has it been suggested to find out how we got into this debt in the first place (not counting the $20 million cost for Lucas Oil Stadium and the aforementioned Pacers gift).