Letters to the Editor do not reflect the opinions of The Reporter, its publisher or its staff. You can submit your own Letter to the Editor by email to News@ReadTheReporter.com.
Dear Editor:
A year and a half ago, Carmel progressive elites hired consultants to calculate return-on-investment on portions of the $1.4 billion municipal debt that bought roundabouts and that were used to finance dozens of Tax Increment Financing projects (that allegedly pay for themselves).
Both studies would silence critics who cite police data showing Carmel streets were safe before roundabouts and have remained safe since.
And silence those who wonder why government funds should be used to replace vacant lots with vacant buildings.
The projects were managed by the mayor’s speechwriter, which seems odd.
Odder still is the absence of any results a year and a half later.
When this citizen filed a “written record request” with the city attorney’s office, asking for at least the results of a public opinion survey the mayor invited us to fill out, the reply was:
“The survey results are still in draft form and will not be released at this time . . .”
Since the whole charade is a PR stunt, it is likely the results in draft form show the people who did respond didn’t think a whole lot of the CRC projects.
Fortunately for the progressive elites in city hall, no surveys have been taken as to public views of vapid roundabout statuary or the increasing congestion the CRC projects have created.
Bill Shaffer
Carmel
For years in the annual Carmel Chief of Police Report they would show a map of the “Carmel Accidents Top 20 locations.”
2014. Page 23
http://carmel.in.gov/Home/ShowDocument?id=5712
As you can see Number one was the RAB at 116th and Keystone with 68. That intersection had approximately 23,000 vehicles per day.
The stoplight at 96th St had 83,000 vehicles per day. It had 38 accidents.
Around 2015 or so they quit putting that in the Annual Report. Curious?
I went to the Police station and asked for the “Carmel Accidents Top 20 Locations.” The next day I received an email from the City Attorney saying I had to pay for that information.