ILNews

$500M Marion County Justice Center relies on novel funding

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A mainstay of the travel industry, all-inclusive packages are gaining traction with governments that want a simpler way to deliver new public facilities.

For an annual fee, a private-sector consortium will design, build, finance, maintain and operate a new road or building. The model is common around the world and in the U.S. transportation industry but still rare for buildings.

Indianapolis could become one of the first U.S. cities to ink such a deal with a new jail and courthouse on the former site of the GM stamping plant.

The project could cost as much as $500 million, but it won’t require a tax hike, and the annual fee won’t be any greater than the $122.6 million a year the city now pays to operate courts and correctional facilities.

At least, that’s the promise of Mayor Greg Ballard. Whether that promise is realistic is impossible to gauge because the mayor’s deputies won’t reveal details of their analysis.

Director of Enterprise Development David Rosenberg declined to state the maximum annual fee, which the city already has shared with three pre-qualified bidders. The mayor’s office also refused to release the request for proposals, a type of document typically considered a public record.

Indiana Public Access Counselor Luke Britt said he couldn’t think of an exemption to open-records law that would apply to the RFP. The city still had not cited an exemption as the story went to press.

Former city controller Jeff Spalding said the administration’s unwillingness to walk through the math behind its conclusions makes him skeptical the new facility won’t end up requiring more public dollars.

“I want the criminal justice center to happen,” said Spalding, who left the Ballard administration in April 2013 to become director of fiscal policy and analysis at the Friedman Foundation. “There’s more potential downside if you don’t do it the right way.”

Several other cities are considering the all-inclusive model for justice facilities. Houston issued a request for information but pulled it back after Indianapolis entered the market, Rosenberg said. He presumes Houston officials are waiting to see how Indy’s deal works out.

“We certainly have a lot of eyes on us,” Rosenberg said. “If this model becomes successful, a lot of other cities in the country will start to adopt it.”

Proposals from the three bidders are due in October. Rosenberg anticipates working with the preferred bidder on 35-year contract, which would be presented for the City-County Council’s approval in early 2015.

Eliminating inefficiencies

The city and Marion County currently spend $122.6 million on jail operations, rent for offices, rent for disparate correctional facilities and inmate care at Eskenazi Health, the county charity hospital, Rosenberg said.

That figure reflects inefficiencies like transporting inmates, much of which would be eliminated with a new, modern jail sharing a campus with criminal courts, Rosenberg said. He declined to go into detail about the expected savings on operations.

Spalding said he wonders whether the assumed savings are too optimistic.

Current spending includes an $18 million-a-year contract with Corrections Corporation of America, which operates one of two county jails. That contract expires at the end of 2017, and it won’t be renewed.

“I don’t disagree that they’ll end the contracts, but all of the expense for the services delivered under those contracts will not disappear,” Spalding said.

The annual fee won’t be the city’s only expense once the justice center is built. The sheriff will continue to provide jail security, food and laundry service, and the city will have to pay the utility bills.

Performance requirements

The certainty of predetermined annual payments from a government entity is attractive to private-sector players because it helps them find investors or lenders, said Allan Marks, a partner in the Los Angeles office of law firm Milbank Tweed Hadley & McCloy, which has a large practice in global finance.

Carrying the debt and turning a profit are up to the consortium of finance, construction and architecture firms. “A lot of these deals don’t work,” Marks said. “There are some that do. The private sector thinks they can manage the risk.”

Marks said the deals don’t mean lower costs across the board, but construction, financing and long-term maintenance, taken together, should be less expensive than if handled separately.

All-in-one contracts are less common for public buildings, but Indianapolis found examples in Ontario and California.

A new courthouse in Long Beach, California, cost $346.7 million, and the state will pay an annual fee to a consortium called Long Beach Judicial Partners, according to the state Administrative Office of the Courts.

The service fee for the 2014-15 fiscal year is $51.8 million, a courts spokeswoman said. That includes a capital charge of $35.9 million for the design, construction and financing.

The operations and maintenance portion of the fee is subject to inflation-based increases, and it can be reduced if LBJP doesn’t meet certain performance requirements.

One of the attractions of “performance-based infrastructure,” Rosenberg said, is that it requires the private-sector partner to periodically replace or refurbish things like heating and cooling systems and roofing.

Because of those life-cycle upgrades, the justice center should be in good shape when it’s turned over to the county after 35 years, Rosenberg said.

“We don’t get back a building that’s 35 years old. We get back a building that’s seven, eight, nine years old. We can operate it again for an additional 20 to 30 years,” Rosenberg said.•
 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. On a related note, I offered the ICLU my cases against the BLE repeatedly, and sought their amici aid repeatedly as well. Crickets. Usually not even a response. I am guessing they do not do allegations of anti-Christian bias? No matter how glaring? I have posted on other links the amicus brief that did get filed (search this ezine, e.g., Kansas attorney), read the Thomas More Society brief to note what the ACLU ran from like vampires from garlic. An Examiner pledged to advance diversity and inclusion came right out on the record and demanded that I choose Man's law or God's law. I wonder, had I been asked to swear off Allah ... what result then, ICLU? Had I been found of bad character and fitness for advocating sexual deviance, what result then ICLU? Had I been lifetime banned for posting left of center statements denigrating the US Constitution, what result ICLU? Hey, we all know don't we? Rather Biased.

  2. It was mentioned in the article that there have been numerous CLE events to train attorneys on e-filing. I would like someone to provide a list of those events, because I have not seen any such events in east central Indiana, and since Hamilton County is one of the counties where e-filing is mandatory, one would expect some instruction in this area. Come on, people, give some instruction, not just applause!

  3. This law is troubling in two respects: First, why wasn't the law reviewed "with the intention of getting all the facts surrounding the legislation and its actual impact on the marketplace" BEFORE it was passed and signed? Seems a bit backwards to me (even acknowledging that this is the Indiana state legislature we're talking about. Second, what is it with the laws in this state that seem to create artificial monopolies in various industries? Besides this one, the other law that comes to mind is the legislation that governed the granting of licenses to firms that wanted to set up craft distilleries. The licensing was limited to only those entities that were already in the craft beer brewing business. Republicans in this state talk a big game when it comes to being "business friendly". They're friendly alright . . . to certain businesses.

  4. Gretchen, Asia, Roberto, Tonia, Shannon, Cheri, Nicholas, Sondra, Carey, Laura ... my heart breaks for you, reaching out in a forum in which you are ignored by a professional suffering through both compassion fatigue and the love of filthy lucre. Most if not all of you seek a warm blooded Hoosier attorney unafraid to take on the government and plead that government officials have acted unconstitutionally to try to save a family and/or rescue children in need and/or press individual rights against the Leviathan state. I know an attorney from Kansas who has taken such cases across the country, arguing before half of the federal courts of appeal and presenting cases to the US S.Ct. numerous times seeking cert. Unfortunately, due to his zeal for the constitutional rights of peasants and willingness to confront powerful government bureaucrats seemingly violating the same ... he was denied character and fitness certification to join the Indiana bar, even after he was cleared to sit for, and passed, both the bar exam and ethics exam. And was even admitted to the Indiana federal bar! NOW KNOW THIS .... you will face headwinds and difficulties in locating a zealously motivated Hoosier attorney to face off against powerful government agents who violate the constitution, for those who do so tend to end up as marginalized as Paul Odgen, who was driven from the profession. So beware, many are mere expensive lapdogs, the kind of breed who will gladly take a large retainer, but then fail to press against the status quo and powers that be when told to heel to. It is a common belief among some in Indiana that those attorneys who truly fight the power and rigorously confront corruption often end up, actually or metaphorically, in real life or at least as to their careers, as dead as the late, great Gary Welch. All of that said, I wish you the very best in finding a Hoosier attorney with a fighting spirit to press your rights as far as you can, for you do have rights against government actors, no matter what said actors may tell you otherwise. Attorneys outside the elitist camp are often better fighters that those owing the powers that be for their salaries, corner offices and end of year bonuses. So do not be afraid to retain a green horn or unconnected lawyer, many of them are fine men and woman who are yet untainted by the "unique" Hoosier system.

  5. I am not the John below. He is a journalist and talk show host who knows me through my years working in Kansas government. I did no ask John to post the note below ...

ADVERTISEMENT