Martin DeAgostino, writing for the South Bend Tribune, has an article entitled Lease said to lack impartiality. I probably would have chosen a different headline, but the jist of the article is that the State is operating blind when deciding whether to enter into this deal.
Public and legislative debate on a proposed lease of the Indiana Toll Road probably will occur without any detailed, independent analyses of the proposal, according to economists and public policy experts.
In their view, the only private-sector analysis that is likely to occur already has been done by the four bidders, and no publicly accessible studies have been commissioned.
While the broad outlines can be weighed by legislators and the public, an in-depth study would “involve a web of assumptions and data that are beyond the scope of most individuals or organizations.” Professor Mikesell, professor of public finance and policy analysis at IU expresses reservations I share about the deal when he says that the proposed lease involves major policy choices that require broad discussion.
“The strangest thing about the whole adventure is that the governor would advertise for bids before he had clear legislative authority to enter into the lease,” Mikesell said.
Although many lawmakers have said they could not OK a lease without specific bids on the table, Mikesell said most good economists could have “ballparked” a value for them.
Yet no economists have entered the fray with any detailed analyses, including Mikesell, who said he favors the privatization of government functions “whenever possible.”
“But,” he said, “when we’re dealing with a core state function, like intercity transportation and a valuable asset … I want a whole lot more reflection on essentially selling the property.”
This is a big deal, and there is no need to rush. The Governor’s attempts at a hard sell are counterproductive, in my opinion. Absent those tactics, legislators could be gathering information which might ultimately lead legislators on both sides of the aisle to conclude that this is a good idea and a good deal. Instead, time and resources have to be spent fending off Governor Daniels frantic attempts to close the deal immediately.
Meanwhile, we get some insight into why the Indianapolis Star is so enthusiastic about the deal. As a regional matter, it’s a great deal to sell lease for the next 3 generations a road that primarily serves northern Indiana in exchange for improving the transportation infrastructure in and around Indianapolis. The Star singles out improvements on the northeast side of Indianapolis to relieve congestion from Fishers to Castleton as well as U.S. 31 from Indy to Kokomo, and finally, I-69 from Indy to Evansville.
The Republic (Local Columbus, IN paper) also had an editoral favoring the deal, and also quoted local improvements to HWY 31 as a project that would be allowed to continue as a result.
I personally don’t yet know how I feel about this issue. I do agree with your confusion about the rush. Won’t that company that wants it be there later? It sounds like the “I’ll sell it do you for $1000 less, but only if you buy it today” line from a car dealer. It usually works out that when there is that much pressure, someone is hiding something that would sour the transaction if it were looked at closely.
However, I also do understand the reluctance to go through all the crap that a full review entails. I feel Daniels really just thinks that this is a good deal for MOST of the state, and he doesn’t want to waste even more time and money in redoing in public the same eval his crew has done in private.
It is a common corporate world practice that saves money. However, that way of doing things allows for corruption, so we have to have it open. But, making it more open causes more money / time waste and more red tape. Hence the reason the state has to outsource, since it costs to much to run internally. But then, the outsourcer is just doing the same thing the state could have done if it didn’t have to be so open…
My head hurts…