County’s investment in Chrysler a poor choice

WE SAY Tipton should have seen it coming.

With an unemployment rate significantly higher than the rest of Indiana, Tipton County was searching for some way to get their citizens back on the job. It’s no surprise that the county was ready to wine and dine Chrysler employees when the automaker was eager to open a new manufacturing plant in Indiana.

The transmission plant was planned to be a joint venture between Chrysler and German-owned automaker Getrag. The plant would have brought about 1,200 jobs to Tipton County – jobs its residents desperately need.

With the price tag of the factory running around $530 million, both Chrysler and Getrag wanted Tipton County to help them finance the project.

Tipton County issued $4.5 million in bonds and out-of-pocket cash to the companies, with the belief that they would be paid back with revenue from the plant.

And then, to no one’s surprise, the American auto industry suffered a series of serious setbacks. When Chrysler decided they wouldn’t need as many transmissions as anticipated, they decided not to complete the plant. Tipton County officials were left scratching their heads, hands in their empty pockets.

Now they want restitution for the funds their local government used to finance a plant that won’t be built – a plant that won’t bring any more jobs to the residents of the county. The Indiana Secretary of State has filed a claim against Chrysler, which asserts that it is no longer responsible for the money it received from the county.

For Tipton County and its 8,500 residents, this plant was a huge investment in what they likely imagined to be the future of their community. And while common sense would suggest it’s unwise to tie one’s future to the success of automakers, Chrysler’s actions have been inexcusable.

In short, it took the county’s money without providing any of the services it promised. With the federal government apparently encouraging Chrysler to file for bankruptcy, we hope it will consider the financial health of communities like Tipton a priority.

As for Tipton officials, their plan to build upon their community’s health by investing in a failing corporation leaves much to be desired. Local governments should be wary about forking over sparse funds to corporations that have far more influence than they do.

Investing in jobs with connections to the community itself – local business and constructing public services such as libraries and schools – is the sort of spending that county officials can oversee and make sure they benefit the taxpayers that finance them.