http://www.dailyjournal.net/ftp/_Election_Central/2012/JCPrimary.htm

One Click Ventures plans to hire up to 109 more employees over the next five years at its new Greenwood headquarters. The fast-growing company spent $2.25 million to buy and remodel an existing 68,000-square-foot building on Windhorst Way.

Gov. Mitch Daniels visited the Greenwood office Thursday to announce that the company would receive up to $950,000 in tax credits and up to $50,000 in training grants. The company can deduct part of its payroll taxes from its corporate income tax, so the incentive will reward the company for the jobs it creates and keeps.

Daniels said the state was making a sound investment in a fast-growing high-tech company.

“We consider this the best, smartest investment the state can make, in people like you who give rise to companies like this,” he said.

One Click operates niche retail sites such as SunglassWarehouse.com and TheFedoraStore.com that sell mainly discount fashion and travel goods. Owners Angie and Randy Stocklin founded the company in their bedroom of their Perry Township home in 2005.

“What exciting things happen in Hoosier bedrooms,” Daniels joked. “I mean really, all the great births that start there: Bill and Gail Cook put their first catheter together in the bedroom of a little apartment down in Bloomington. Dave and Jessica Lindsey started a little dream of theirs in the bedroom of some other apartment and now it’s Defender Direct, the biggest company in their space. And now we’re got the Stocklins and what they’ve done here.”

Young businesses such as One Click Ventures are the heart of the American economy, Daniels said. New companies create new jobs and opportunities when they work out, he said.

One Click is just the latest business to help make central Indiana a high-tech hub, Daniels said.

“Central Indiana is becoming a genuine IT center of innovation and new companies and therefore new opportunities,” he said. “You couldn’t really say that a few years ago. When our administration started, we concentrated on advanced manufacturing and life sciences and logistics and distribution. IT did not make the list, which is proof you can’t outsmart the market, because it’s growing.”

That sector has been growing in the Indianapolis area because companies such as Angie’s List, Aprimo and One Click attract skilled employees, who sometimes start new business ventures of their own, Daniels said.

Greenwood Mayor Mark Myers said the hope was that One Click would attract more high-tech businesses to the city. The city could become a high-tech headquarters for the state of Indiana, he said.

“This is something Greenwood needs,” he said. “This is something that Greenwood wants, and this is something that’s going to benefit our community. I’m so excited that they’re here.”

One Click Ventures currently employs 50 people, include 26 workers who were hired this year. The company has been hiring information technology, marketing, finance and human resources employees.

New employees will earn an average of $17 per hour, not including benefits. They’ll work in both office and warehouse positions.

One Click buys and runs e-commerce sites that sell specific items such as socks or neckties. The company markets those products online, takes the orders and ships the products from its Greenwood warehouse.

Sales have grown from about $90,000 in 2007 to $5.3 million last year, Randy Stocklin said.

“Thanks to our fabulous team, One Click has experienced amazing growth,” he said. “Because of the growth we’ve experienced and more importantly our future growth, I’m pleased to announce we’ve made a $2.25 million investment in our new home.”

Greenwood offered One Click $495,000 in cash and up to $336,000 in hiring incentives to move into a former M&I Bank call center near Emerson Avenue on the city’s eastside

But members of a city board are looking at whether that contract, which gives the library district $3.5 million and more than an acre of land, can be changed.

Members of the Franklin Redevelopment Commission said they want to research the contract, which was signed in December, to see if changes can be made to the time frame allowed for the library to get a referendum approved.

The contract approved by the redevelopment commission gives the library until November 2014 to get a referendum approved and allows until June 2015 to finalize an agreement to give the library the land and money for a new branch.

But members of the board said voters spoke loudly in the recent referendum, resoundingly rejecting the library project, and that the city board wants to use that money and land in the next two years, rather than letting it sit.

If the library plans a future project, then both the library board and the city could discuss possible assistance from the city at that time, board members said.

The next step is for both boards to have their own meetings to discuss what to do, said Bob Heuchan, president of the redevelopment commission.

The city board meets next week, and Heuchan said he is sure the referendum and the contract will be a topic of discussion. The library board also is set to meet next week.

Members of the redevelopment commission said both the money and land promised to the library could be used in other ways. But they want to learn more about whether the city can get out of the contract. The board’s attorney, Rob Schafstall, could not be reached Thursday, but in the past he has said he didn’t know the answer and that he would research that issue when the board asked him to.

When the contract was signed, the makeup of the city board was different. In January, Joe McGuinness took office as Franklin mayor and named three new members to the city board.

Two of those members have spoken out against the agreement with the library in the past.

Board member and city council member Rob Henderson said he stands by his past comments that the land and money should go to another governmental entity and should instead be used for redevelopment and attracting new companies and jobs.

Now, the city board needs to see what the library’s next steps are, and hopefully library officials will agree to end that 2011 contract, he said.

“The results were overwhelming. There is strong indication there is not enough support for a project of that scope and size. We need to start over. Any incentive or arrangement needs to be reconsidered in light of Plan B,” Henderson said.

Board member Richard Wertz in the past said he believed the library should get one shot at approval for a referendum. This week, Wertz said he wanted to know more about the legal ramifications if the city tried to end the contract now.

“Right now, the voters have spoken about the library; and I think the redevelopment commission needs to readdress and look at the property and the money,” Wertz said.

“I am trying to get some information in order to make an intelligent and rational decision.”

McGuinness said he would like the city to have the land and money to use for future projects. For example, when the city was trying to land Abbott Laboratories earlier this year, that deal included a large amount of cash incentives. The $3.5 million promised to the library could be very helpful in a future deal, he said.

Also, the land could be used in a future development, such as if a business wants to locate there, McGuinness said.

“It hamstrings us if that land has to sit for years as is. What happens if another developer wants to do something, like put in a business? And $3.5 million is a lot of money to be earmarked for that period of time, particularly if a big project comes in,” McGuinness said.

City council member Steve Barnett would like to see the money and land available to the city and said he was against the city’s agreement last year. He believed the contract was signed quickly, by board members who were going to be replaced.

“Let’s start over, get out of this agreement and start over clean,” Barnett said.

The money could be used for multiple projects city officials are pursuing, including the second phase of improvements to North Main Street, redeveloping gateways into downtown and to help with flooding on the north side of the city.

“There are just a lot of big expenses that we need to be moving forward with, and that $3.5 million not being committed will help us with that,” Barnett said.

“We need that money.”

Greenwood City Council member Thom Hord is putting together a plan for a new pool, and could present a proposal later this month.

“We know how inconvenient it is and what bad timing,” Hord said. “My number one goal is to build a new pool, and I’m going to put 100 percent of what I have behind it.”

Council members said nothing has been decided except that the city needs to replace the 55-year-old pool that’s being demolished. They said they welcome input on the size, features and location of a new pool.

“Everything is on the table,” council member Mike Campbell said. “Everything is up for discussion, and the only thing we’ve agreed on is that we need a new pool.”

Residents have been telling council members they’re upset that Greenwood no longer has a public pool. Council member Linda Gibson said she’s largely stopped going out to eat because of all the comments she’s gotten at restaurants.

All nine council members have gotten comments and phone calls, and all have said during the last campaign that they’d like to see a new pool, council member J. David Hopper said. The only questions to be resolved are how big it should be, what it should include and where it should be built, he said.

Residents have been saying they would prefer that it be built in the Old Town, but that might not be possible, council president Bruce Armstrong said. The parks department estimates that at least 10 acres of land would be needed for a new, more modern pool and parking.

The current location has about three or four acres, planning department director Ed Ferguson said.

Other major concerns are that the current pool was built on a landfill that’s already causing sinkholes and IS? in the floodplain of the nearby creek, Armstrong said. Building another pool at that site just isn’t feasible or cost-effective.

“It’s a practical issue,” he said. “It’s not possible to put it in the same place.”

Greenwood has considered other Old Town sites, including the Little League fields across the community center, he said. But that property is privately owned and Greenwood would have to do a land swap in order to get it.

The problem is that the original owner donated the land on the condition that it would be used as Little League fields, the league would have to build new facilities elsewhere and install new aluminum light poles, Armstrong said.

“We run against those issues anytime we discuss building there,” he said. “We just need 10 acres. If anybody in Greenwood knows where we can find 10 acres for a modern pool, please let us know.”

Armstrong said he couldn’t think of any other Old Town locations, other than the old pool site on Lincoln Street and the Little League fields in Craig Park. He said he’d be open to any suggestions that residents had.

The council will ultimately decide what pool the city builds and where, since it controls the money, city attorney Krista Taggart said. Council members would have the final say over what the city would spend on any pool project, she said,

Council members should be open to any proposals from residents, Campbell said.

“We’re committed to a new pool, but not to what kind of amenities,” he said. “We’re not sold on any one location. Everything’s a possibility and everything’s on the table.”

People who have ideas about a new pool should contact the parks department, Hord said. They may have already considered the ideas or could take them under consideration.

He hopes to finish work on the pool proposal this month and finalize a plan by as soon as the city council’s next meeting.

In four years, local voters have decided on the future of four local government projects in a referendum — building projects at Nineveh-Hensley-Jackson schools, a jail expansion, more money for Center Grove schools and a new Franklin library.

Last year, a project to build a pool and city building in Greenwood was slated to go on ballots but was removed before the election. And Greenwood could be considering a referendum this fall to build a new city pool.

Each time local residents have been asked to vote on a project and to increase their property taxes, the answer has been no.

The same was true in this election, when voters resoundingly defeated a proposal to spend $29.9 million on a new downtown Franklin library branch and parking garage, renovations to turn the current branch into administrative offices and work to the White River Township library branch.

According to the Indiana Department of Local Government Finance Web site, which tracks referendums, only three other counties have had four or more referendums — Marion, Hamilton and Boone.

And in each one of those, at least one referendum was approved by voters.

Local governments began having referendums in 2009 after state lawmakers approved legislation with sweeping property tax reform, including caps on property tax bills and referendums on government building projects that cost more than $12 million.

If voters approve a project, the taxes they pay on that project would be outside of the caps. For example, the owner of a $150,000 home would have their tax bill capped at $1,500, but if voters approved a referendum, that homeowner would pay that $1,500 tax bill plus any tax rate increase for that project.

Since then, Johnson County voters have turned down more than $100 million in proposed additional government spending in four referendums.

More referendums have been proposed, with some making it through multiple steps in the process of going on the ballot, including $12 million for a new city building and pool in Greenwood and a proposal that would have allowed voters to decide on whether to merge the Center Grove area into Greenwood.

Center Grove school officials also at one time discussed a referendum on a planned a $142 million construction project that included high school renovations and a new elementary school but called off plans for a public vote.

In other communities, previous referendums have come back to voters again. State legislation allows a local government to bring a project back to voters a year after it is turned down.

For example, voters turned down a request for a 29-cent increase in the operating fund for Zionsville Community Schools in 2010; but when the proposal came back for a 24-cent increase in this election, the request was approved.

That possibility has been discussed locally, such as with the Nineveh-Hensley-Jackson schools project; but no plans have been made to revive the proposal.

HOW YOU VOTED

NHJ schools

When: May 2009

What: A plan to build a 500-student elementary school for about $15.7 million and renovate and expand the high school and intermediate school for about $10.2 million.

Total cost: $26 million

County jail

When: May 2010

What: A two-story expansion that would have added 400 beds to the current capacity of 304. The expansion would have immediately added 200 beds, with a second level left unfinished that would have had space for another 200 beds. And the county could have added another 128 beds in the future with minimal construction.

Total cost: $23 million

Center Grove schools

When: November 2010

What: Center Grove schools asked for a tax increase for seven years that would bring in about $3.16 million in revenue per year. School officials planned to use the money for operating costs and to avoid making significant cuts, including layoffs.

Total cost: About $3.16 million per year for seven years

Greenwood city

When: November 2011

What: The city proposed borrowing $12 million to build a new pool and build a new city building.

Total cost: $12 million

What happened: The referendum was pulled from the ballot before the election.

Johnson County Public Library

When: May 2012

What: A plan to build a 70,000-square-foot library and a two-level parking garage downtown, turn the current branch into administrative offices and renovate the White River Township branch.

Total cost: $29.9 million

About 74 percent of those who cast ballots during Tuesday’s primary election voted against the referendum for a $29.9 million library project.

A total of 13,441 people, or 74 percent of the voters who cast ballots, said no to the referendum. The project received 4,668 yes votes, or 26 percent of the total.

A group of taxpayers had opposed the library project on the grounds that it was too big and too expensive. Voters agreed that the overall project cost was too high and the proposed building was too big, Citizens Opposed to the Library Project spokesman Kyle Kasting said.

“The voters sent a pretty strong message that the proposed project was too big and too expensive,” he said. “They sent a clear message not only to the library but also to elected officials that they want more accountability and oversight over how their tax dollars are spent.”

Opponents heard repeatedly that the library didn’t do its homework and learn what the county taxpayers thought its needs were. The library’s leadership was out of touch with the public, he said.

“They overreached and tried to build a $30 million brick-and-mortar library without a clear vision for the future, and the voters resoundingly rejected it,” he said. “It was misguided, and they spent a lot of taxpayer money trying to convince people that they needed a 70,000-square-foot, $30 million library.”

The project also included building a two-story parking structure, remodeling the current library into administrative offices, and some changes to the White River Township branch.

Kasting said the project was off base from the start.

Library director Beverly Martin said in a written statement that the library was disappointed with the outcome and that it had gotten public input while planning the project.

“We will go back again and ask the public what they want their library system to look like for the next 20 years,” she said. “We will continue developing long-range plans and implementing them in order to meet the needs of our community.”

She could not be reached late Tuesday.

Library board president Diane Black said in a written statement that the referendum was a missed opportunity.

“This is especially sad for the city of Franklin,” she said. “A new library branch in Franklin will provide so much socially and economically. We are determined to still make this happen.”

The board’s goal is to build a branch that will serve the Franklin community for the future, Black said. That goal has not changed, she said in the statement.

The Johnson County Public Library district had planned to build a 70,000-square-foot library building and a 250-space parking structure at Jefferson and Jackson streets in downtown Franklin. The cost of the entire project was $29.9 million.

The library was to receive $3.5 million from the Franklin redevelopment commission to help pay for parking, and another $1.4 million in money it had already borrowed but not spent.

To pay for the project, the library would have had to borrow $25 million and repaid that amount over 20 years. With interest, the total cost of the loan would have been an estimated $38.7 million.

A resident who owns a median-priced home in Johnson County would have paid $25.64 a year in order to repay the loan.

Replacing the Franklin branch was part of a master plan that the library has been working for nearly a decade. The plan included moving the Clark-Pleasant branch into its own space, building a Trafalgar branch, replacing the Franklin branch and doing a project at White River Township branch.

Martin has said a new Franklin library was needed because the current Franklin library on State Street is too small. The library has to turn down meeting requests because it doesn’t have enough room, and there’s sometimes a waiting list to use computers during the peak evening hours.

A new Franklin branch would have included more meeting rooms, more computer stations, quiet study areas and a digital production area for small business owners.

The library also would include nearly twice as much shelf space for its children’s and teen’s areas.

The current 21,500-square-foot branch on State Street was built in 1987.

Under state law, the library could not pursue another referendum for a library project for at least a year.

A special election would be required if they wanted to try another referendum next year, because no regularly scheduled election will take place. A referendum would only be required under state law if the library planned a project that cost more than $12 million.

The referendum is just the latest in Johnson County to fail. Voters already rejected a jail expansion, more funding for Center Grove schools and building improvements to Nineveh-Hensley-Jackson schools. Greenwood also withdrew a referendum on a aquatic center and land for city buildings last year, because of its unpopularity in a poll.

A total of 25.2 percent of registered voters came to the polls during early voting and on Election Day, tying predictions for this election.

The turnout was lower than the most recent presidential primary in 2008 but higher than presidential primaries in 2004 and 2000.

With a change to a new system of voting and a higher than expected Election Day turnout, some voters were met with lines when they went to cast their ballot.

Clerk Sue Anne “Susie” Misiniec had predicted a turnout of 25 percent this election, but the number of voters who came to the polls Tuesday was more than election workers had expected and prepared for. Voters reported waiting in line for up to an hour, and election workers sent more voting machines to multiple polling sites.

County officials hoped a new system of voting along with multiple contested races and a public referendum for a new Franklin library would entice more voters to come to the polls. But they believed more of those voters would cast ballots early.

The turnout appears low when compared to the 2008 primary, which brought out an unusually high turnout of 38 percent of voters interested in the race between Democrats Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

This election was the first time the county used vote centers, a change from the traditional system of voting, allowing voters to cast ballots at any of 19 voting sites around the county, instead of sites based on where they live.

Because a lower turnout was expected, the primary election was meant to serve as a test run before the more popular general election, when a turnout of 50 percent or more is typical for the county, Misiniec has said.

And election officials learned that they needed to prepare for more voters than expected, with more machines and potentially more vote centers in the future, Misiniec said.

“We are happy that we have gotten such a great turnout, but we hate that people were disgruntled and there were lines,” she said.

Turnout had been low in early voting, and election officials used those numbers to prepare for Election Day. So they decided to send fewer voting machines to each vote center than originally was planned.

But on Election Day, some vote centers had lines and waits of up to an hour, especially in Greenwood and White River Township, and election workers sent more voting machines to those centers throughout the day.

“We just should have supplied more to begin with. I apologize for that. It was not our intent to have anyone stand and wait,” Misiniec said.

The county’s turnout for early voting was higher than in past elections, with more than 3,600 casting ballots early, but lower than expected. In other counties that have switched to vote centers, as many as a third of the turnout for each election is during early voting before Election Day.

That didn’t happen in Johnson County, Misiniec said. She believes that could be because voters still are getting used to and learning about vote centers, she said.

The county opened six additional early voting sites in Edinburgh, Franklin, Greenwood and Trafalgar, in addition to the courthouse, in the week before the election and two of those sites were open the two weekends before the election.

But early voting turnout was less than 20 percent of voters who cast ballots in this election.

Many voters still are used to the tradition of casting ballots on Election Day, Misiniec said.

But she added that she hopes more voters will use early voting sites in the future.

The former Indiana University basketball coach will be joined by retired NBA player and Greenwood native Tom Van Arsdale at The Gathering Place, 1495 W. Main St., on Oct. 18, library Director Cheryl Dobbs said.

“This is a fundraiser that was conceived by our patrons and our community, and we are very grateful for their support,” Dobbs said in an email. “It will honor two hometown heroes (Van Arsdale and his twin brother, Dick) and their mother, who had a great passion for the library.”

Tickets range from $100 to $250 and should be on sale by mid-May. The event, organized by the library’s development director, Jane Weisenbach, is expected to raise as much as $500,000 for the Hilda Van Arsdale Library Fund.

The library laid off staff and cut hours last year to close a $400,000 budget shortfall.

Written by
Star report

As usual, voters are able to cast ballots at the county courthouse. But this year, as part of the county’s switch to vote centers, voters will have more places to vote early.

The county added locations in Greenwood, Edinburgh, Trafalgar and more sites in Franklin where voters can cast their ballots early.

Starting April 28, voters will be able to cast ballots at new sites. Voting hours will be from 10 a.m. to 7 p.m. weekdays and 8 a.m. to

3 p.m. Saturdays.

Here is a look when those sites will be open.

April 28, and April 30 through May 5:

• Mount Pleasant Christian Church, 381 N. Bluff Road, Greenwood

• Trafalgar library, 424 S. Tower St.

April 30 through May 4:

• Jonathan Byrd’s Cafeteria, 100 Byrd Way, Greenwood

• Franklin Church of Christ, 3600 N. Morton St.

• Franklin Cultural Arts and Recreation Center, 396 Branigin Blvd.

• Edinburgh library, 119 W. Main Cross St.

Early voting began previously at the county courthouse, 5 E. Jefferson St., Franklin. Voters can cast ballots from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Monday through Friday and from 8 a.m. to 3 p.m. on the two Saturdays before the election, April 28 and May 5.

All the sites, except the courthouse, also are open on Election Day.

Daily Journal staff report

In March, the local unemploy­ment rate was at 7.3 percent, down from 7.5 percent last month and 7.8 percent a year ago.

The county followed the state’s trend of a declining rate. The state unemployment rate last month was 8.2 percent. The unemployment rate in Indiana has not been below 8.2 percent since December 2008, according to a report for the Indiana Department of Workforce Development.

“Indiana has seen steady job growth since the beginning of the year, with manufacturing leading the way, adding almost 8,000 jobs,” state workforce development commissioner Mark W. Everson said in a news release.

The state’s unemployment rate has been improving as the size of the labor force has grown.

The improvement will cause a change for unemployed workers getting extended benefits.

Under federal law, unemployed workers cannot receive the final six weeks of the 79-week unem­ploy­ment insurance because the state’s three-month unemploy­ment average is less than 8.5 percent, the release said. Residents already receiving those benefits will be able to continue, but others cannot file a claim for those benefits starting May 20, the release said.

CENTRAL INDIANA MARCH JOBLESS RATES

Johnson County: 7.3 percent

Marion County: 8.9 percent

Bartholomew County: 6.6 percent

Boone County: 7.4 percent

Hamilton County: 5.8 percent

Hancock County: 7.5 percent

Hendricks County: 7 percent

Morgan County: 8.9 percent

Shelby County: 8.5 percent

Statewide: 8.2 percent

Note: State figure seasonally adjusted; county rates are not.

SOURCE: Indiana Department of Workforce Development

Daily Journal staff report