IS IT TRUE AUGUST 5, 2015

1. The blight issue is totally underestimate by Winnecke. As Joe Wallace clearly pointed out that Evansville has nearly 10,000 residential structures in need of razing. At a price tag of $5,000 per structure . . well Mr. Elf Kelley, what is the math? Now do not miss a digit . .my, my its only $50,000,000 . . guess when bankruptcy is in the future why not run up your credit cards . .what the hell . .

   • I believe the 10,000 residential structures in need of razing actually came from the former head of DMD under Weinzapfel –the guy that was being paid both by the City and by GAGE. Fitting that I cannot remember his name, he was from Paducah and is now in Florida ?

     • Lime
       Tom Barnett? …

       • press, Bingo !

       • BubbG, correct you are. Here are some DMD stories that may have been forgotten:

         “Barnett said the three houses to be built using the bond money were to cost about as much as other houses put up through Front Door Pride. So far, the homes have cost about $200,000 apiece.

         The city has turned around and sold them for about $130,000, justifying the loss by saying the public sector must take the lead on redeveloping an area when the private sector is unwilling.”

         http://www.courierpress.com/news/local-news/bond-financing-rethought

       • “Since 2005, according to Greg Bryant, code enforcement coordinator, 92 homes in the Front Door Pride area have been demolished, and 47 more are scheduled to be razed.

         Both Barnett and Weinzapfel say the four homes built in the last year on Jefferson and Madison streets are a sign of progress. Two more homes are under construction, and three are undergoing extensive rehabilitations. ”

         http://www.courierpress.com/news/local-news/front-doorcracks-open-nearly-five-years-of-a

       • BubbaG: here’s a very interesting 2010 Courier artice about the Evansville Brownfields Corp. and the DMD:

         “Many of the properties owned by Evansville belong to the Evansville Brownfields Corp., an entity formed in 2003 as a means of protecting the city from lawsuits that might arise from environmental cleanups, as well as pursuing grants not usually offered to local governments. Last year, officials increased their push to buy more dilapidated houses, many of them in the neighborhoods just south of Downtown.

         The Vanderburgh County Assessor’s Office has 192 properties listed as belonging to the Evansville Brownfields Corp. or entities of a similar name. In total, the Department of Metropolitan Development has about 260 properties, owning them either directly or through various affiliates.

         Many were bought at sheriff’s sales. In 2005, Evansville Brownfields Corp. paid $37,243 for 63 properties at a sheriff’s sale.”

         http://www.courierpress.com/news/local-news/citys-demolition-derby

     • I believe his name was Tom Barnett . . .

2. C & P article this morning (Weds., 8/5):

   The bonds for the IU Med School are going to be issued by Brownfields. Why you ask ? A City Attorney says that “a statute” requires the bonds be issued by a non-governmental entity, like a not-for-profit (Brownfields). SHOW ME.

   My guess–just like the Downtown Arena bonds being issued by the Evansville Redevelopment Authority, both ERA and Brownfields will not be audited by the Indiana State Board of Accounts. More secrets, less transparency.

   • County Option Income Taxes are pledges as a second or third level source of funding to pay the bonds if TIF revenue can’t meet the obligation. We have a statute that limits the amount of COIT that can be used to in this fashion. The lease arrangement is to get around that statute. If approved by City Council, there will be no limit on the amount of COIT that can be spent on repaying the bonds. You may recall that COIT along with Riverboat revenue makes up the City’s capital budget. Last year it was about 32 million between the two sources. We buy fire trucks and police cars and replace all sorts of things in the City that are worn out or need repairs. Paving, computers, arena repairs, etc. come out of this budget. I’m sure no one is concerned about the potential to drain COIT from capital expenditures to pay for medical school and arena bonds. This is why the lease arrangement was set up for the arena. Now we all know there’s no way that TIF will run out of money and need money from Riverboat and COIT, I mean except for the 5+ million in Riverboat that is already used annually and is estimated to grow to 7 million over the next few years.

3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfOqXFcycB8

4. There most defiantly must be something wrong with the Brownfields and the past handling of the CDBG fund or there would not be such brazen attempts to reinvent the Brownfields as something it is not – “Issuer of bonds” for the med school? Or reinvent it as something it is – “Land Bank”? No for bailout. Next they will be claiming it is a Church. Time for the Brownfields to play the card they have already been dealt. No more commingling one program into the next to hide the sins of the past.

   • If you want information on what is going to happen with the IU Med School project you might want to ask any of the 24 members of this committee:

     http://990s.foundationcenter.org/990_pdf_archive/030/030408032/030408032_201312_990O.pdf?_ga=1.97376991.1312453563.1438785666

     As you can see they have already expended $49,000. toward their goals for the project. Since their secretary (at the time of this 990 filing) was also the President of the Evansville Redevelopment Commission at the time, and since the membership list is……well you can see for yourself what it IS, one could make the case that they might have great success in steering this project in the direction they would prefer. In their 2012 990 filing they show a $46,400. expense for “special support” to the South West Indiana Chamber of Commerce.

     I note in their 2013 990 filing that there are 24 members listed. The amount listed as coming from “dues” only works out to 22 members. That leaves me wondering to whom the two complimentary memberships belong? If I were to take a stab at it I might pick Jack Pate, Publisher of The Evansville Courier&Press as one. I am not sure he could talk his bosses at Scripps into covering the $10K annual membership, but hey, I could be wrong. Anyway, it is obscene for Publisher Pate to be a member of this committee. He is supposed to be REPORTING the news from an unbiased newspaper, right? Not being the MOUTHPIECE for a group of Evansville’s wealthiest businessmen.

     And that my friends, as Paul Harvey would say, is the rest of the story.

   • @George Lumley: spot on. Brownfields being beefed up as a bond issuer and a blight fighter reminds me of the ERA. It had its last meeting in 2008 before it was “reinvented” to become the rubber stamper of Arena construction invoices as well as the issuer of Arena bonds.

   • Because there is a private developer involved, a non profit instead of the ERA must be used. What other non profit is out there that the City controls? You’re missing the point George. Why is a lease arrangement necessary in the first place? What loophole are we slithering through? It’s always some protection for the community that’s created by statute that must be side-stepped.

     • @LIfe: yes, uh huh. See the blogger ‘Random Thoughts’ above.

5. Where did $5000 price per demolished property come from? Most houses around my fire station could be demolished in about 3 hours by one guy with a hammer and surly attitude – – they are barely standing to begin with. Does the City of Evansville not have daily access to a backhoe, dump truck, and 5-6 laborers who are already on payroll who could do this work?

   • I don’t think 5k sounds all that high when you consider disposal costs, site grading, labor, environmental concerns, etc. Might actually be a bit low.

     • And Bob, don’t forget the campaign contributions to the Mayor so that your demolition firm is chosen ! Since demolition is a “service”, not required to select low bidder.
       Better make it $ 6K now per house !

     • EB; Betcha, that old warehouse their all doing facials at is likely loaded with asbestos contamination, you’ll want to be up wind when that piece of crud comes down. Way up wind.

   • Environmental issues. Lead and asbestos dust must be Any home built before 1970 I think is pretty much a environmental hazard. That is most of the housing stock in the downtown and main city area.
     That is why these homes are so expensive to fix up.

     • Spot on!

     • That, and the homes in those old city areas are firmly situated over the rotten to the core old CSO city combined sewers systems. Thus rendered pretty much useless by this centuries decent habitable standards.
       Of course one could believe the present city governance and accept that even though your health and your loved ones could be at risk. Its ok lets go forward with their short crumby sheet convention motel ,and a medical campus destined to be in one of the most toxic regions in Southern Indiana’s urban balances to date is to your benefit. 😉
       Believe them, ah not!

       They are recovering bad investments from a couple of years back on the original bailout for D-Patrick Motors which simply sat on their lousy locations balance for just to long.

       Anything else is just an compounding lie. Its also why you have the __ord center failure.

       The politicos that rule you poor fools are endeared to them for campaign contributions and support regardless of the well being of the entire community as involved.
       We have the data, about like Arby’s has the meats. We have the data!

6. The number of 10,000 homes and $5,000 per home for demolition came to Mr. Ron Cosby and I directly from Tom Barnett doing an interview for an article in the CCO. I think it was in 2011. We met Tom and were given a very extensive tour around the blighted areas of Evansville. He was both candid and competent. The 10,000 number were the number of homes that needed more than $100,000 worth of work to be inhabitable. The other reality was that after spending $100,000 these homes would be worth less than $50,000 so there is no reason to expect that the profit motive would help out with the blight problem. The most cost effective solution is demolition. The city tears down homes all of the time. Tom knows what it costs and $5,000 is an average. It is not outside the realm of expectations considering the safety issues associated with demolition.

   • Are existing City workers and equipment not up to the task? These guys/gals are already on payroll, and the equipment is already owned by the City. Surely that would keep costs down. Why does this demolition have to be outsourced?

     • Tom did not specify whether the demolition was outsourced or not. The $5,000 number should be accurate whether the City used staff or outsourced the work. In those days the City only tore down 20 – 30 houses per year. Taking on a group of 10,000 houses is well beyond the capacity of the City crew. They would have to hire a number of crews and buy more equipment to take on such a task. The only practical solution is to hire an outside firm unless they want to take 100 years to complete the demolitions. By then there will be another 10,000 houses needing the wrecking ball.

       • Noted, and perhaps the $5000 is more reasonable than I originally thought. Certainly the sheer number of these demolitions would overwhelm current city staffing.

         I do question the “house needs more than $100,000 worth of work to be habitable” angle. I’ve purchased and remodeled several homes in Evansville. Two were in pretty bad shape (one was a hoarder house, the other a crank house rental). No MAJOR structural damage, mind you (like complete foundation replacement, etc.), but basically complete gut jobs as far as electrical, plumbing, floors, roof, windows, etc. They were your basic 1000 sq. ft. Evansville blue collar homes, much like the shotgun houses you find in our more blight stricken areas. I was able to do much of the work myself, but I’m positive I didn’t spend more than about $30,000 apiece on each home.

         I don’t think I could have found any reasonable way to triple my remodel budget (+ $10,000!) on each home, unless I installed granite floors in the garages, gold plated faucets, a hot tub in each room, or built a second story onto the existing first story from scratch. Perhaps I have different ideas about what is considered ‘habitable’ then Mr. Barnett?

         • A house needs 100, 000 but a crappy falling down dump like the Owen Block needs way more. We call BS! That’s valuation is way outta line that old moldy piece isn’t worth a investors $ 100.00 bucks, its shat, ached, and you know it. Knock it down and find valuation in innovation. A policy as such would sure cut to the chase on all those crumby abandonie’s ruins you all must respond to.

         • I have done 7 house flips in Evansville too and typically spent about $30 per square foot. I also did my own shopping and much of the labor myself. Barnett would have been required to pay prevailing wages and buy his materials through the competitive bidding process. Having managed some prevailing wage jobs that required a bidding process I can tell you that $100 per square foot is more in line than the $30 per square foot you and Imdid some flips for. I present the old safe house project at $240,000 per apartment as evidence.

7. Anyone who writes a 47 page report a) has an audience of 7 people and b) is a narcissist.

8. Here’s an idea on how to reduce the number of houses that need to be razed, and the cost to the city. Anyone who wants to own one of the properties can get the title to the land free and clear courtesy of the city, provided they raze the structure, ie pay the $5,000. That means that if you live next door to the property, and would like to add a side yard to your property, you just have to demolish the structure, and you get your side yard.

   In order to create more incentive, waive the property taxes on the added acreage to a person’s property, provided the lot stays vacant, and the property taxes only kick in when new development occurs on the property.

   This would give an incentive to a neighborhood to clear their own blight, and in areas of high blight for developers to start acquiring property that only requires low level maintenance until they can acquire enough to pursue real development, provided the city take the savings and apply it towards improving the local economy, although that’s a huge if, as our city leader only know how to improve their personal economy.

   • Good idea!

     • For instances, the Ford Center bonds were issued by the ERA and as such are not considered on the books of Evansville but guaranteed by our COIT money . . why . . the state statutes dictate the level of debt a community can have in relationship to its income, i.e. property tax revenues . . so, the shell game allows third parties separate from the city to hold the debt . . . why not use ERA . .probably has hit their capacity would be my guess due to the Ford Center . . and BTW the last time the ERA was audited was 2004 . .

     • It’s not going to cure all, but it can make a dent with very little cost to the taxpayer.

9. With the potential of 10,000 structures that should be razed, there is no way the city can do this in an economically viable way. What the city should do is look to the private sector for help.

   Post a list of these distressed houses/properties, and offer them up for nothing to neighbors/developers on the condition that the structure must be razed within 90 days of taking control of the property. Also, in order to ensure this is a good bargain for developers looking to acquire land over time for projects, don’t charge property tax on the land until a new structure is placed on the land.

   This wouldn’t solve the whole problem, but it would reduce the number, as there are plenty of people who would like the blighted house next door as a side yard or even place a pool there. There are developers that have trouble finding large swathes of land for large developments. This gives them the opportunity to purchase that land for cheap, and hold onto it until they can acquire the parcels to make for a large development.

   Like I said, this wouldn’t solve the whole problem, but it could make a little bit of a dent, at very little cost to the taxpayer.

Comments are closed.