Editorial: Investment hub idea is a good step toward goal of regional cooperation

We’ve long been advocates of regional cooperation—a concept traditionally viewed as benefiting Indianapolis more than its neighbors. So it’s encouraging that Fishers Mayor Scott Fadness is taking the lead in promoting the latest proposal: the creation of investment hubs that would allow cities and towns to raise and spend money collaboratively on capital projects.

There’s much to like about the idea, which comes from Accelerate Indiana Municipalities, formerly known as the Indiana Association of Cities and Towns.

Two or more municipalities with combined populations of at least 100,000 could join forces to create an investment hub, a 12-year commitment to impose a new sales, income or food and beverage tax to raise money for regional capital projects.

“My goal before I leave this office is to see our region collectively act together,” Fadness told IBJ. We applaud Fadness for being dedicated to regional cooperation. And we agree that the state needs a regional funding mechanism formal enough to survive changes in local political leadership but flexible enough to allow cities to raise and spend funds as they choose.

State legislators should be receptive. It’s a reasonable follow-up to the 2015 Regional Cities Initiative, which split $126 million in tax amnesty funds among three regions. Although it was a popular program that leveraged more than $1 billion in investment, it was funded by one-time source. Legislators shouldn’t be surprised that cities and towns want to replicate Regional Cities’ success and make it available to municipalities statewide.

While we like the investment hub idea, it’s not without flaws.

Only half the revenue collected by the investment hub would go to regional capital projects. The other half would be distributed to the participating municipalities to use as they see fit. Devoting only half the money to whatever regional project the money is being raised for seems to shortchange the program’s potential.

It’s also unclear to what extent the program could be used to address existing problems. Using investment hub money to turn White River into a regional amenity would be a win, but a redeveloped riverfront might not deliver on its full potential if Indy roads are still a minefield.

Indeed, infrastructure needs in Indianapolis have been the flashpoint for recent discussions of regional cooperation. When Indianapolis Mayor Joe Hogsett earlier this year proposed capturing a portion of income tax growth in Marion and eight surrounding counties for infrastructure improvements, the idea was criticized by other mayors in the region, who complained that Indianapolis would get an unfair share of the proceeds. They also felt blindsided by the proposal.

Hogsett might have done a better job of communicating the plan, but no one can argue that Indianapolis doesn’t face the biggest infrastructure challenges.

A truly regional approach would prioritize directing investments where the need is greatest rather than arguing over which city gets the most money.

But we realize that’s wishful thinking. For now, the very idea that suburban mayors are interested in regional cooperation is a good sign. We hope the debate gains traction and delivers a plan that works. What emerges won’t be perfect, but any plan that encourages regional thinking is better than nothing at all.•

__________

To comment on this editorial, write to ibjedit@ibj.com.