City's Revolving Door Continues to Spin; Two Ballard Administration Officials Take Positions With City Contractors

The last several months, readers of the Indianapolis Star have been inundated with stories and editorials regarding the legislative/lobbyist revolving door. Readers of this blog know that I have been critical of the Star's ignoring an even worse revolving door between the the Indianapolis Mayor's Office and businesses that do business with the City. For example, I pointed out that Mayor Greg Ballard's Chief of Staff Paul Okeson left the Mayor's Office to immediately go to work for Keystone Construction, a major city contractor which had given the Mayor $25,000 in campaign contributions this year.

Yet other examples of the city revolving door appeared in the news today. The Indianapolis Business Journal reported today that Deputy Mayor for Economic Development Nick Weber is taking a position with the law firm Baker & Daniels, a frequent city contractor. According to the IBJ, Weber will be "engaged in government relations, strategic communications and economic development" at the Indianapolis law firm.

Let me translate that for you: Baker & Daniels is hoping that by hiring Weber, who is not even an attorney, the firm can get legal work from the city. How exactly is this good for taxpayers?

The IBJ also reported that Indianapolis Bond Bank Executive Director Kevin Taylor will be leaving the Ballard administration to take a job with City Securities, a private investment firm that gets millions in municipal investment from, you guessed it, the Bond Bank.

Earlier on this blog I reported how then President of the Bond Bank Board, John Dillon, in 2003 received a contract from the Bond Bank Board to provide part-time consulting services for the Bond Bank with regard to the plans for the new convention center. In less than a two year period, Dillon submitted invoices to the Bond Bank Board he chaired for over $354,000 for this consulting work (pretty sweet "part-time" job, eh?), which invoices reflected Dillon did little more than attend numerous, vague, non-descript "meetings." The minutes do not reflect that the Dillon-lead Bond Bank Board ever questioned the legitimacy of the Dillon invoices.

Where did Dillon go to work after leaving the Bond Bank? Well, after a brief stint as Chief Deputy Mayor and Chief of Staff for then Mayor Bart Peterson, Dillon left to become a highly-paid executive with ...drum roll please...City Securities. Of course, City Securities was doing business with the Bond Bank during Dillon's tenure and continues to do business with the Bond Bank. Now with another President of the Bond Bank on the payroll, City Securities knows the municipal money train will keep on coming.

The City's revolving door continues to spin.

School Boards and The Role of Attorneys

Last night I attended the Pike Township School Board meeting. The meeting provided some high drama - or what counts for high drama in school board meetings. It seems the Pike administration wanted to change one of the flex days in the upcoming calendar from what had been agreed to in the teachers' contract.

According to administration officials, their attorney had offered the legal opinion that the administration had the authority to move the flex days as calendar matters were not subject to union negotiation. A Court of Appeals case was trotted out which officials said, according to their attorney, trumped the terms of the teachers' contract which by operation of law was to continue in effect until a new contract is negotiated.

Unfortunately, the Board did not have anyone to offer legal advice. They were stuck with the administration attorney's opinion. As I told people afterwards, that attorney is an advocate for the administration. His job is not to offer objective legal advice to the Board but rather to find a legal argument to support the administration's position. The Board is the legislative branch, a check on the administration. The Board needs to have its own counsel in situations like this

When I arrived home, I looked up the court case. The court case said that only under certain circumstances are calendar matters mandatory negotiation items for a collective bargaining. The case doesn't say that those calendar items can't be negotiated. Most importantly, the case's holding regarding negotiating calendar issues also certainly doesn't trump the terms of an existing contract as was represented to the teachers union representatives at the meeting.

While the flex day issue is not a major one for the teachers, the conflict could have been avoided with a better working relationship between the administration and the teachers' union. It is amazing what treating others with respect and honesty can do to create a better working environment. Misleading teachers about what the law says about school calendars and their contract is not a good start to collective bargaining.

Council President Vaughn Says that Republicans Will Be on Board on Selling Water Company - Before Council Republicans Have Reviewed Details of Deal

A lack of independence is one of my biggest gripe about the Republicans on the City-County Council. In the Indiana General Assembly, Republican legislators act as an independent voice in reviewing proposals by Republican Governor Mitch Daniels. While they usually go along with what Governor Daniels wants, they will ask tough questions, modify proposals, an even vote against those proposals. They do not believe their role is to simply rubber stamp the Governor's agenda because he is a member of their party.

On the other end of Market Street, you have a totally different situation. Council Republicans are expected to rubber stamp whatever the Republican Mayor Greg Ballard wants done, including his most recent proposal to sell the water company. Even expressing a word of dissent or asking a tough question, can set a councilor to be ostracized, even sanctioned. Former Republican Ed Coleman's "sin" was asking questions about the functioning of the Capital Improvement Board and wanting documentation to back up the numbers. One would think Coleman was simply doing his job as an elected member of the legislative branch. But to some in the party, his unwillingness to be a rubber stamp for Mayor Ballard was tantamount to treason.

The concept of the rubber stamp Republican majority was brought to mind when I heard Republican Council President Ryan Vaughn interviewed on the news. Even though the administration had not yet briefed members of the Council about the proposal, Vaughn was on the news declaring that all Council Republicans were going to support the plan.

If Republican councilors want to retain their seats in 2011, being a rubber stamp for an unpopular mayor who consistently betrays Republican principles is not a good way to do it.

Traffic Court Bill Heading to the Governor

The Traffic Court bill cleared the final legislative hurdle yesterday when the compromise version of the bill was approved yesterday by the Indiana House by a 98-0 margin. It is now on the way to the Governor's desk.

A few weeks ago, I ran across a letter from a northern Indiana judge complaining that the bill takes away the discretion from a judge. He mentioned that he sometimes only fines the person a few dollars depending on the case.

The bill doesn't take away discretion. Rather it caps discretion and prevents judges from punishing a motorist by fining him or her an additional sum because that person dared ask for a trial on their speeding ticket.

It's the same old story...whether it is a police officer or a judge - that person always want maximum "discretion" to do whatever they think is appropriate in doing their job. Just give us a blank check, it is argued, and that discretion will be used wisely. As was seen with the Marion County Traffic Court, where fines were upped across the board for people who challenged their tickets, that was not the case.

I'm reminded a bit of the City-County Council debate on the panhandling bill. It was pointed out that the then current panhandling ordinance wasn't being enforced. Councilor Ben Hunter argued though we should give even more discretion to police officers by giving them the additional "tool" of arresting panhandlers within 50 feet of an intersection. The other day, while walking to the City-County Building, I noted panhandlers at three of the four corners of the intersection of Delaware and Market, right next to the City-County Building which houses the city police.

That's why I roll my eyes when people start talking about the need for "discretion" in enforcing the law.

The Politics of the Water/Sewer Deal for Mayor Ballard; Little Upside With Landmines Everywhere

Today Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard officially announces backroom deal the City cut with Citizens Energy Group to buy the city's water and sewer systems. Now the deal gets trotted out to the Council and the public to approve the deal city leaders cut behind closed doors and to work out the details.

Keeping true to the title of my blog, I am most interested in the "politics" of the deal. That brought me to Matthew Tully's column this morning when he analyzes the impact of the deal and suggests it could be a make or break moment for the Mayor politically. I disagree with the "make" and agree with the "break."

First, of all, one thing the media has missed is that the luster has been off privatization for quite some time. To give you an example, last night I stopped by a county Libertarian event to promote my candidacy for Pike Township School Board. (I am running as a team with Allison Maguire, the wife of Libertarian County Chairman Tim Maguire.). During a get together after the meeting, the issue of privatization as policy was raised. You would think that this group more than any other, would greet privatization with enthusiasm. Instead skeptics abounded. They had seen the failures of privatization in practice. (FSSA is but one glaring example.) One Libertarian made the comment that if it was going to be a service that had to be provided by government, he would rather have government workers provide the service than have it contracted out to a private company that is given a monopoly.

If you can't sell privatization to a group of Libertarians, how is Mayor Ballard going to sell it to the general public? The toll road lease brought in billions to be used for infrastructure repairs, but did Governor Daniels campaign on the issue? Absolutely not. It was the biggest such deal in the history of the state, but the Governor wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole on the campaign trail.

No, the reality of the political equation for Mayor Ballard is that, at best, there is very little political upside from doing the water/sewer deal and to do so requires that he walk through a field filled with land mines Democrats will gleefully plant. In addition, there is another political problem - the sale of the city's water and sewer utilities plays perfectly into the negative perception that Mayor Ballard is selling off the city to political insiders and campaign contributors.

Yes, there could be a building boom result out of selling these assets that might help his popularity somewhat, but those construction projects won't take place until months after the unpopular Mayor Ballard loses his bid for a second term, should he even decide to run for a second term.

Of course, this is not the first occasion this Mayor and his staff have a tin ear when it comes to politics.

Congratulations to Our "Clean" Legislators: Sen. Mike Delph and Rep. John Day

Media Advisory for Tuesday, March 9 @ 11:30 a.m.

Contact: Julia Vaughn, Common Cause/IN
(317) 432-3264

Common Cause/Indiana to Honor Rep. Day and Senator Delph for Being Ahead of the Pack on Ethics Reform

What: Ceremony to give the 2010 Mr. Clean award to Rep. John Day and
Senator Mike Delph.

When: Tuesday, March 9th at 11:30 a.m.

Where: Rotunda, State House

Why: The Common Cause/Indiana Governing Board recently established the Mr. Clean award. This award will be given annually to a member of the Indiana House and Senate who exhibits strong leadership in support of open, honest and accountable government and who works to reduce the influence of big money and special interests on the legislative process.

The Mr. Clean award is an engraved scrub brush and will be presented to the state legislators at the ceremony.

“Long before ethics reform passed the House and Senate by unanimous votes, Rep. John Day and Senator Mike Delph were filing bills to reform Indiana’s lobbying and legislative ethics laws and often running into brick walls” said Robin Olds, a member of the Governing Board. “They are not newcomers to the lobbying reform debate and deserve our thanks for being ahead of the legislative pack on this issue. We look forward to working with them next session to build on this year’s reform effort.”

City of Indianapolis Ready to Announce Water, Sewer Deal?

From the Indianapolis Star:

Mayor Greg Ballard will hold a news conference tomorrow morning with the chief executive officer of Citizens Energy Group, according to a news release issued by the city today.

Citizens Energy Group, a public charitable trust and local natural gas operator, is among the entities that have been in discussions with the city about a potential merger of Indianapolis' water and sewer utilities.

About two dozen companies, including Citizens, responded last summer to a request for ideas about how to combine the utilities and generate savings that could go towards minimizing rate increases and improving roads, bridges and sidewalks.

The news conference will be at 9 a.m., at the City-County Building.

When is the time for public input on this deal? After the deal is cut in the backroom?

These long-term privatization deals are never about what privatization is supposed to be about - leveraging market competition to provide quality services cheaply. They are usually about some big fat cat political contributor being granted a monopoly over the provision of a service and the taxpayers suffer the consequences.

Former Student of Mine, Councilor Jose Evans, Running for Mayor

The Star is reporting that a former student in my University of Indianapolis state and local government class is running for Mayor:

City-Council Councilman José Evans announced today that he will file documents Tuesday to form an exploratory committee to run for Indianapolis mayor.

Evans was raised in the Haughville area and graduated from Cathedral High School, according to a biography on the city's Web site. He earned a bachelor's degree from the University of Indianapolis and a masters in business administration from Indiana Wesleyan University in Marion.

Evans is one of four Democrats who will try for the city's top job.

Republican Mayor Greg Ballard hasn't said publicly whether he will seek a second term, but recently filed documents showed he had a little more than $1 million in campaign money.

Contenders file exploratory committees to begin testing the waters for fundraising purposes.

Other who are in the running: former City-County Council member Ron Gibson; Melina Kennedy, a Baker & Daniels attorney and deputy mayor under former Mayor Bart Peterson; and local entrepreneur Brian Williams.

Good luck to Jose. It's hard not to like Jose considering his friendly personality and his interest in public service. While he is a long-shot at this point, I think Jose would bring fresh blood to the 25th Floor - an outsider who unlike Ballard would remain an outsider after elected. Just wish Jose were a Republican.

Sheriff Frank Anderson Continues to Ship Violent Inmates to Low Security Jail #2; Looks The Other Way While Dangerous Situation Continues

Marion County Jail #2, located on Washington Street, is run by Corrections Corporation of America (CCA). Marion County Sheriff Frank Anderson is responsible for overseeing the medium security jail and making sure the private vendor (and his campaign contributor) complies with its contract and runs a safe facility. For Sheriff Frank Anderson the best way to fulfill that job responsibility is to look the other way.

The other day, I spoke with a former CCA inmate who just left the facility. He told me that he had bunked next to someone who had strangulation charges against him. He said that when the lights go out at the facility, the inmate dormitories erupt into chaotic violence, inmates regularly attacking one another. He said that CCA guards are nowhere in sight. He was personally attacked and received two black eyes. None of the attacks and acts of violence is documented by CCA officials and any videotape of incidents won't last long before being erased. After all, the facility's rating and staff bonuses are based on their not being "incidents" at the facility. Everyone has an incentive, including the Sheriff, to keep things quiet.

The former inmate told me that the CCA corrections officers were hanging out the the other day smoking pot. He said the turnover among low paid staff is incredible. Many of the corrections officers come from the same neighborhood as the inmates and know them. Trafficking and sexual relations between staff and inmtes are common. The inmate told me that none of the inmates take the CCA correctional officers seriously because they know they are not deputy sheriffs and won't turn them in.

Inmates continue to be denied medical care and medicine despite CCA's contractual obligations. Inmates get hurt and sometimes die. The facility remains a security nightmare - radios and tv monitors not working, unarmed employees who are not trained to do so are required to escort inmates throughout the facility. Razor blades are left in open wastebaskets where they are fished out and fashioned into weapons. Dormitory windows have holes through which inmates can lower strings to the ground to pull up contraband from friends on the outside.

None of this is exactly news. Sheriff Anderson has known about these problems at the facility for years. His response? To look the other way. In nearly eight years, Sheriff Anderson has not done a single audit of the facility or investigated a single wrongful death or injury at the facility. He has not ordered the first CCA employee fired for not doing his or her job, though doing so is within his contractual authority. Sheriff Anderson's tenure has been one of complete neglect of his oversight responsibilities. He does love the commissary and inmate telephone money he's gotten from the jail though, which he's used for an assortment of expenditures not authorized by law including paying his law firm (and political contributor) millions of dollars.

One of the things Sheriff Anderson is supposed to be doing is ensuring that people who might be violent or a security threat are housed at higher security Jail #1 rather than sent to stay at the much lower security dormitories of Jail #2. I did a sample search of surnames housed at CCA Jail #2 to see if this was true. Here's a sample of CCA/Jail #2 inmates and their charges:

Inmate J. Johnson: criminal confinement, robbery, and intimidation. 11 charges pending, of which 7 are felonies.

Inmate A Smith: robbery and criminal confinement; 4 felonies pending.

Inmate J. Davis: battery w/injuy, strangulation; 11 charges pending, including 7 felonies.

Inmate C. White: criminal confinement, robbery

Inmate J. Robinson: rape, strangulation, criminal confinement, battery w/injury

Inmate Allen: strangulation, battery w/injury

Inmate R. Wilson: robbery, battery w/injury; 9 charges pending, 7 are felonies.

Inmate J. Williams: strangulation, battery w/injury, criminal confinement; 5 pending felonies

Inmate Young: strangulation, criminal confinement, domestic battery, sexual battery; 5 pending felonies

Inmate Ruiz: robbery, intimidation, criminal confinement; 5 felony charges

Inmate Daniels: robbery, criminal confinement, battery w/injury; 10 pending charges, 9 of which are felonies

Inmate Viha: battery w/injury, strangulation, criminal confinement; 19 charges, 9 are felonies

Inmate Vanderburg: strangulation, battery w/injury, sexual battery, criminal deviate conduct; 22 charges, 10 are felonies.

Obviously Sheriff Anderson is not doing his job to ensure that potentially violent inmates are not not housed at Jail #2.

Whoever is elected Sheriff needs to clean up the problems at Jail #2 caused by Sheriff Anderson's for eight years neglecting his responsibilities.

Cultural Trail Will Create 11,000 Jobs? Absurd Claim Made by Congressman Carson and Mayor Ballard

I found this over on the Bart Lies blog. I could have said it better myself. 11,000 people employed by this project? How stupid do they think we are?

The following is part of a press release on receiving stimulus money to complete the Cultural Trail:

On Wednesday, Rep. Andre Carson and Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard announced $20.5 million in stimulus money will be used to finish the remaining 4.5 miles of the Cultural Trail downtown, creating an additional 11,000 jobs.

Here we see the idiocy of the President’s stimulus program. 4.5 miles of glorified sidewalks is somehow going to employ 11,000 people. Yeah, sure.

Anyone who observed the work done to date will know there were at most a dozen or so people EVER working on the project. And that was a few days here and there, with barricades and orange barrels sitting and waiting the rest of the time for someone to return and do a little more work.

11,000 people are going to be employed by this? Can you even imagine 1,000 people working on it? ELEVEN THOUSAND PEOPLE? That works out to 1 person every 2.2 feet of trail. That works out to $1818 per person.

So I guess the trail will be done in, oh, about 3 days with that many people? Unless it rains a lot. Then maybe 2 weeks.

Then we’ll have spent $20 million dollars, but still have all those unemployed people unemployed again 2 weeks later.

Oh, maybe it will employ just 100 people to build it and 10,900 people will suddenly be hired by companies going all gah-gah over the new sidewalk out front of their building.

C’mon, seriously? You expect us to believe this will create 11,000 jobs?

Wow.

Now I understand how you expected to accomplish this health care reform thing. You believe we are all really, really, REALLY stupid and/or gullible and will believe anything. ANYTHING! No matter how absurd.

Perry Township Constable Roy Houchins Found Dead

The Star reports:

Perry Township Constable Roy Houchins, 70, was found dead in the parking lot of a Southside restaurant shortly before noon today.

Police do not suspect foul play, said Lt. Jeffrey Duhamell of the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department.

“He had his keys and cell phone in his hand,” Duhamell said. “There was not sign of trauma to his body except for where he had hit his head when he fell.”

Bystanders flagged down a police officer at 11:38 a.m. outside LJ's Pub & Eatery, 3652 S. Meridian Street, police said, to report finding Houchins unresponsive. Medics from the Indianapolis Fire Department later arrived and pronounced Houchins dead.

An autopsy is planned for Monday, Duhamell said.

At the time of his death, Houchins was awaiting trial on racketeering charges in state court related to a separate accusation. In June 2008, he was charged with corrupt business influence and two counts of conspiracy to commit theft over his role in a plan to retrieve a former employee's valuable guns from Indianapolis police.

I am not sure why they would do an autopsy. Autopsies on 70 year old men who appear to have died by natural causes are not the norm. Probably, given the charges hanging over Houchins head and his being in a position to "rat out" other people, they just want to be safe.

Marion County Sheriff Candidate Bart McAtee Whips David Brooks At Marion County Election Board; Has Dennis Fishburn Figured Out He Was Bamboozled?

On Thursday, Hamilton County resident and Marion County Republican leader David Brooks argued before the Marion County Election Board that Bart McAtee should be prohibited from being a candidate for Sheriff in the May primary because his job with the Sheriff's Department was funded by federal funds when McAtee's then exploratory campaign committee raised money in 2007. The Little Hatch Act prohibits government employees whose salaries are paid for with federal tax dollars from being a candidate for public office.

Brooks probably had little chance to win the argument going in. First, I'm sure the majority Democratic-Marion County Election Board School Board would like nothing more than to see Republicans fight for the Sheriff's nomination. Second, it's just a bad argument. McAtee's job was in the past, before he filed to run for Sheriff. An exploratory campaign is just that - an exploratory campaign. McAtee wasn't prohibited from being a candidate by the Little Hatch Act when he filed to run for Sheriff. That was the question before the Board.

It shows though to what lengths Tom John and Brooks will go to try to control who is nominated. They do not want the voters determining the nominee and they don't want regular party workers determining who is endorsed at slating. They think this is their party and they can do whatever they want with it, including selling it down the river which is what they are of course doing.

Poor Dennis Fishburn. Being as naive about politics as Mayor Ballard remains to this day, Fishburn undoubtedly thought the Marion County GOP leadership would help him over the top in the primary like they helped him win the slating. Think again. When it comes to the primary, John and Brooks are shooting blanks. They no longer have an active, dedicated GOP organization that is able to win a contested primary against an opponent who is fully funded. Also, the GOP organization certainly doesn't have any money. So Fishburn shouldn't expect any help on that front.

Expect McAtee to slice up the underfunded Fishburn in the primary. I can't say I will be that disappointed. Fishburn's unapologetic involvement in the Wishard campaign, a campaign aimed squarely at lying to voters about the project and how it will be funded, won't be forgotten by many conservatives. Then you have the fact that Wishard supporters deliberately concealed campaign expenditures from public disclosure by using a PR firm to pay its bills. I'd like to think that given his role in the campaign and the office that he is running for, that Fishburn would see fit to criticize the lack of public disclosure. But, hey, I won't hold my breath.

Councilor Plowman Resigns from IMPD; What About $3,250 Donation from the Marion County GOP?

It is being reported that Indianapolis City-County Councilor Lincoln Plowman will be resigning from the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department in the wake of a federal probe. Fox 59 reported that Franklin Township Republicans have been told to have candidates ready to go to fill Plowman's seat. So apparently Plowman may be resigning from his council seat too.

It is still not clear what the federal investigation is about. One democratic blogger has speculated about it, but since it seemed nothing more than pure speculation I won't repeat it here.

One thing that was clear though was that Plowman's financial report last time raised some questions There seemed to be a lot of loaning money by Plowman to his committee and then repaying himself. That's not illegal though but the amount and number of times is strange. What raises more red flags was the use of campaign money to apparently buy electronic equipment from Fry's Electronics. Not sure how that could be campaign related.

The biggest red flag for me though is a receipt by the Plowman campaign of $3,250 from the Marion County Republican Central Committee. MCRCC reported $2,000 in the bank at the end of 2008. Yet in 2009, they gave $3,250 to a councilor whose district is so safely Republican he did not even have an opponent last time? In an off-year no less? Someone should be asking Tom John why he authorized Plowman to be paid $3,250. I'm pretty sure other Republican councilors in safe seats did not get a penny from the MCRCC even during election years.

My Letter Asking Secretary of State Todd Rokita to Address Decision by Marion County Election Board to Allow Wishard to Conceal Campaign Expenditures

Going out today.

March 5, 2010

The Honorable Todd Rokita
Secretary of State’s Office
Room 201, Indiana Statehouse
Indianapolis, In 46204

Re: Complaint Against Citizen for Wishard Political Action Committee

Dear Secretary Rokita:

Recently I filed a complaint with the Marion County Election Board asking that the Board investigate Citizens for Wishard’s (C4W) campaign finance reports which contain only two expenditures, both to Hirons & Company (hereinafter “Hirons”), a local public relations firm. Those expenditures are as follows:

9/27/2009 to 10/9/2009 $284,871.36 to Hirons & Company
10/9/2009 to 12/31/2009 $510.316.23 to Hirons & Company
Total .............................$845,187.59

My allegation was that C4W used Hirons to pay its campaign bills and thus conceal expenditures that should have been listed in the report. Interestingly the response to my complaint by Ms. Hebenstreit, an attorney and treasurer of C4W, does not deny that is what C4W in fact did.

The Marion County Election Board never considered my complaint at a meeting or voted on it. Rather I received a letter from a Laurel Judkins, Director of Elections, saying the Election Board had summarily dismissed my complaint without an investigation. In the letter, Ms. Judkins came to the astonishing conclusion that it is perfectly acceptable for campaigns to have an entity like a PR firm pay its bills and the campaign only show the payments to the entity on the finance report. According to Ms. Judkins the law only requires the “direct expenditure” to the entity paying the campaign’s bills be listed on a campaign report.

I’m sure you will agree that Ms. Judkins’ opinion, which apparently is shared by the entire Marion County Election Board, flies in the face of the obvious legislative intent (not to mention common sense) in enacting requirements that campaigns report their expenditures. Now armed with the Wishard precedent, campaigns can simply have a PR firm or a person pay the campaign bills and only report the “direct” expenditures to the PR firm or the person who paid the bills.

I would ask that you take a look at this matter and send a strong message to the Marion County Election Board that campaigns indeed have to report who is receiving campaign expenditures even if those expenditures are paid by a third party. Further, I would also ask that you let the Marion County Election Board know that dismissing complaints before the Board even considers them at a public meeting is not an appropriate way for an Election Board to function as an administrative body.

I have enclosed the original complaint letter, Ms. Judkins’ response and my reply to that letter. Please let me know if you need anything else. Thank you for your consideration of this matter.

Sincerely,

Paul K. Ogden

cc. Marion County Election Board Chairman Mark Sullivan
Marion County Clerk Beth White

My School Board Heroes: Greg Wright & Kelly Bentley

It was the work of two school board members, Washington Township's Greg Wright and IPS's Kelly Bentley who inspired me to run for Pike Township School Board. Should I prove successful in the election, I would hope represent my constituents as well as Wright and Bentley did. Unfortunately I'm using the past tense as Wright and Bentley are both stepping down from their respective boards this year.

Wright and Bentley squared off against school administrators who were used to doing things behind closed doors and having the elected school board rubber stamp the decision. Both Wright and Bentley refused to be rubber stamps. They asked tough questions and expected the administration to be forthcoming with information when they requested. Very often Bentley found Superintendent Eugene White was withholding critical information while asking for Board approval. For example, White asked the Board to approve his budget although details of the spending was missing. Bentley refused to give White her vote without the information. She did her job, stood up for her constituents. Unfortunately the rest of the IPS Board is not cut out of Bentley's cloth.

Wright recently squared off with Superintendent James Mervilde and other Washington Township officials over the school district's contract with Securatex. It seems that contract was never properly approved and security services had never been let out for bid. The school district has paid out millions to the politically-connected security firm. Wright, with the assistance of blogger Diana Vice and members of the media, asked tough questions about the contract and asked for information. Recently Wright asked for an investigation of the contract.

How did the administration respond to the exposure of the illegal contract? By asking that school board members sign a "Compact" in which members would have to submit requests for public documents to the Board for approval. According to the "Compact," the Superintendent wouldn't have to provide the documents (have I mentioned these are PUBLIC documents?) unless a majority of the Board agreed with the Request. The "Compact" also would prohibit the elected board members from talking to the media.

You would think no elected official in his or her right mind would sign such a Code of Silence. Think again. Amazingly four of five Washington Township Board members have apparently agreed to sign. Only Wright had the courage to stand up for his constituents and say "No."

The Code of Silence is meant to implement the "Don't Air Your Dirty Laundry in Public" Philosophy. It works like this: Airing dirty laundry publicly undermines the "team." So if someone on the team is doing something bad, don't expose what that person is doing. Simply go to him or her and ask that person to stop. That person will be convinced by your arguments, relent and reform. Problem solved...the team remains strong.

Of course that philosophy doesn't work in practice. In the real world, people do bad things exactly because they know they can do it behind closed doors, that their actions are not going to be exposed. Simply having someone go up to the bad actor and ask that he or she change accomplishes nothing. For that bad actor, the only reason to change the behavior is when there is fear the door is going to be open, that the light of day is going to shine on the bad act.

That is exactly why we have open records laws. It is why we don't allow governmental bodies to make decisions behind closed doors, and then trot those decisions out to the public. It is the sunshine that acts as the disinfectant, the way we stop the bad acts from happening.

Wright and Bentley refused to play the typical School Board role of rubber stamp for administration decisions. They are heroes to me for their courageous public service. As their terms draw to an end we should thank them for all they did for the schools and the people they were elected to represent.

Voter ID: Why Can't We Reach a Reasonable Compromise?

Today the Indiana Supreme Court heard arguments on the Voter ID case.

This is one issue on which I think both parties are being unreasonable and compromise should be reached.

Democrats: Don't tell me how it's a horrible burden to show photo identification when you vote You can hardly walk out the door of your house without being asked to show ID. It's not this huge burden you're making it out to be. Simply signing the Clerk's book, not even under oath, to vote is not enough assurance to prevent fraud. The sample signature in the poll book for me is from when I signed my social security card at 15. My signature today looks totally different. Thanks to removing the ability to purge voters for non-voting, poll books are filled with scores of people who are dead and have moved. It would be a piece of cake for someone to walk in and simply sign in to vote for one of those people. Of course, you will point out that there haven't been instances of that happening. Well, couldn't that be because that's because it is virtually impossible to detect? If you don't have poll workers who know the deceased/moved voters and are willing to turn that person, you have no way of catching that individual.

Republicans: Stop being so insistent on "government-issued" ID and no affidavit opportunity. The issue is whether poll workers are provided with satisfactory proof that the voter is the person listed in the poll book. There are plenty of other photo IDs that would provide the same assurance. The notion that people will create all sorts of fake photo IDs to go from polling place to poll place to vote is ridiculous. The list of IDs poll workers accepted should be expanded. And stop opposing the affidavit backup. If someone misplaced his ID and wants to vote, let that him sign an affidavit. If the voter is willing to sign under oath that he or she is who the voter claims to be, I have no problem with that person voting. Do we really believe people will go from polling place to polling place signing affidavits in order to vote several times?

Again, let's be reasonable. Republicans are right to be concerned that people are who they say they are when they vote. Democrats are right that the current rules are too restrictive. Let's find a reasonable compromise rather than continuing this partisan food fight.

My Idea for a Political Cartoon Spoofing Indianapolis Star Editors: Ethics in Government

After reading the hundredth Indianapolis Star article and editorial on the need for the General Assembly to address legislative ethics, I came up with good idea for a political cartoon. Unfortunately I can't draw, so I'll just have to describe it.

Two boats are on a lake. One boat is filled with legislators. Holes in their boat have been patched up. On the side of the boat is "State Ethics."

In the other boat are Indianapolis Star editors. Their boat says "City Ethics" on the side. The boat is clearly leaking, filling up with water fast. The Star editors though are oblivious to what's going on instead yelling across the lake to the State legislators telling them it's about time they patched the leaks in their boat.

The idea behind the cartoon is that the Indianapolis Star has been all over the legislative ethics issue, while completely ignoring the more serious governmental ethic problems in the very city in which the newspaper is based. When Paul Okeson, Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard's Chief of Staff, left this position and immediately went to work with Keystone Construction, a city contractor who gave the mayor $25,000 last year, the Indianapolis Star responded by saying absolutely nothing. When Mayor Ballard reported receiving hundreds of thousands of dollar in political contributions by companies and law firms receiving no-bid city contracts, the Indianapolis Star editors let out a collective yawn. When the City-Council elected Ryan Vaughn, a lobbyist from Barnes & Thornburg, a law firm that has received millions in no-bid contracts from the City, the Star wrote a puff piece on the lobbyist suggesting he would bring new ideas to leadership.

Late last year AT&T worked behind the scenes with B&T attorney, lobbyist and paid advisor to the Mayor, Joe Loftus, to get the head of the Indianapolis telecom agency fired by cutting him out of the budget, Why? Because the agency chief had argued that Loftus' client AT&T should have to pay rights of way fees (as is mandated in other cities) and the company should be required to follow telecom regulations. How did the Indianapolis Star respond to Loftus' complete abuse of his authority in favor of his client AT&T? The Star ignored it.

The ethical problems in Indianapolis City government are far worse than are at the state level. Yet the Star has not written one word about those issues. I have one message to the Star's editors: Take a look at the City's ethical boat. It is leaking. You might want to write something on the subject someday.

Mayor Packs Bags, Off to Brazil Again

The Indianapolis Business Journal reports that Mayor Ballard will be soon on his way to his trip.

"Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard is headed to Brazil for his second economic development mission to the country in nine months

Ballard will visit Sao Paulo from March 13-15 to meet business and government leaders. Last July, he went there attempting to broker business related to the clean-technology industry.

His second trip has a similar mission, and Ballard’s top economic developers will pave the way for his visit. Indianapolis Economic Development Inc. CEO Scott Miller and Michael Young, IEDI’s energy industry director, will be in Brazil from March 8 to March 16. The pair have stops planned in Rio de Janeiro and Porto Alegre in addition to Sao Paulo.

“We are targeting Brazil for investment and job opportunities because of its leadership in the utilization of alternative energy and energy conservation, and our desire to help grow the Indianapolis energy industry,” Miller said in a press release. “However, this trip will not only focus on the energy industry. We will also be meeting with business leaders from other key sectors to establish relationships we hope will someday result in new jobs in Indianapolis.”

Ballard, Miller and Young intend to attend the Sao Paulo Indy 300 as guests of the Indy Racing League. The race is the series’ first championship event outside North America and Japan.

The cost of the team’s trip is being funded by private donations."

Four unrelated points.

First, the media should do a better job of asking about these "private donations" funding the trip. Private groups like the Indianapolis Economic Development Corporation probably are picking up the Mayor's tab. But what is missed is that those entities have also received several million dollar in grants from the City. So while "private dollars" might be paying for the trip, the fact is those "private dollars" originated as taxpayer money. The media though never asks the hard follow-up questions though - they just simply ask if public or private dollars are paying for the trip and accept (and publish) whatever answer they are told.

Second, while at a Pike Township Republican meeting last month, the Mayor talked glowingly of Brazil's alternative energy program which is fueled almost entirely by ethanol derived from sugar cane. The conversion of sugar cane to ethanol is highly efficient as opposed to corn-based ethanol which takes about as much energy to create as it provides as a fuel source...and of course drives up food costs. At the meeting, Mayor Ballard acknowledge that fact, but then talked about how someone in Brazil had told him that possibly some day it would be possible to grow sugar cane in colder climates. I'm sorry but I'm pretty sure 500 years from now, central Indiana still will not be growing sugar cane. Sugar cane as a basis for ethanol production is never going to happen in Indiana.

The third is a political point, which I would address to the Mayor's overpaid political advisor, Jennifer Hallowell, who by last report received about $10K a month to advise the Mayor on politics. (Given the Mayor seems totally clueless when it comes to political strategy, I can't imagine he is actually receiving any sort of professional advice on the subject.) Dear Jennifer: What the hell are you thinking advising the Mayor to take this trip? The Democrats are going to wrap these trips around the Mayor's neck next election. I can see the TV commercials now. It's a humorous spot showing all the places Mayor Ballard has visited while in office. The message will be that of a jet-setting politician, overwhelmed by the perks of his position as the city's chief executive.

Republicans will scream in defense the trips are about "economic development" and were paid for with "private dollars." I'm telling you that's not going to cut it as a defense. If given two choices, believe something good about a politician or something bad, they'll always go for the bad. The image of the jet-setting Mayor is and easy one and the Democrats will knock it out of the park.

Fourth, I also hear that the Mayor is supposed to be going to India in April. So it's Brazil in March, India in April. Haven't heard where the Mayor is going in May.

Judge Refuses to Disqualify Allen County Prosecutor's Office in Todd Leary Case

The Associated Press is reporting that an Allen County Superior Court Judge has ruled that there is no reason to disqualify Allen County Prosecutor Karen Richards from prosecuting former IU player Todd Leary for mortgage fraud even though Richards' chief deputy at the prosecutor's office was allegedly a victim of that fraud and one would suspect could well be a witness. Prosecutor Richards testified that her deputy had not been involved in the Leary investigation.

Okay, I haven't read the opinion on this one, but I cannot imagine the scenario by which the Allen County Prosecutor's Office should not be recusing itself on this case and turning the matter over to a special prosecutor. Prosecutor Richards' chief deputy and very likely close friend is an alleged victim of Leary. It is human nature that that close relationship will cloud otherwise objective decisions made about the prosecution. I would think that Prosecutor Richards has an ethical duty to step down from the prosecution.

Whatever happened to public officials like Richards avoiding an "appearance of impropriety?" I have no sympathy for what Leary, allegedly, did, but his attorney appears 100% right on this one.

Blogger "Raoul" Defends Rigging of Council At-Large Vacancy Election

Each morning I try to check in with the local apologist for GOP Chairman Tom John's operation of the party, a blogger whose name rhymes somewhat with "Raoul." Raoul is a good buddy of ToJo. Here is, in part, Raoul's take on the vacancy election which culminated Monday night:

"There had been chatter that some candidates for the at-large GOP seat saying they couldn’t get lists or that the establishment had the fix in for Rivera. While party leaders, Rs, Ds and Ls have their preferences there’s nothing written down that says a candidate is entitled to anything. Political parties are not democracies nor open government. It behooves them to keep their processes as transparent as possible, but it’s not mandatory and there are consequences if you stray too far off the reservation.

However, I always tell people, if you don’t like like the system, pull a Brian Williams. Get enough of your people together, get organized run at the precinct committeemen level, hopefully win and expand your power base and then make the change you want. It’s hard, it’s tough, it’s a long shot. It’s politics."

Let me do the translation for you: "Yes it is true that Tom John and (Hamilton County resident) David Brooks tried to manipulate the process to get a certain person elected, but hey that is okay because the rules allow it! If you don't like it, get a bunch of people together and do the same thing!"

Gee, I don't know, maybe we wouldn't want to do what John and Brooks are doing because some of us believe in treating hard-working party workers and candidates with decency, respect and fairness? Maybe because some of us believe in honesty and treating others as we would like to be treated? Raoul's comments are a remarkable concession that ToJo never had any intention of allowing the 10 candidates a fair and open election with the rules applying the same to all candidates. The admission by Raoul also highlights the problem with Chairman John's leadership. He clearly does not grasp that the power in a properly functioning political organization flows from the bottom to the top. (Or possibly he simply doesn't care.) When you strip grass roots party workers of their power, you weaken the foundation of the party.

Weakening the party long-term though is not the concern of people like Tom John and David Brooks. They are about exercising their power now and do not care about the future of the Marion County GOP. Thank you Raoul for looking beyond John's BS about fair elections and respecting the power of precinct committeemen. Thank you for telling the truth about what they are doing to my party.

School Board Member Greg Wright Calls For Investigation of Washington Township School Administration

Monday, March 01, 2010

Dear Superintendent Whitesell, Mr Hartman, and Honorable Zoller,

This letter is the official request of an elected member of the MSD Washington Township Board of Education.

Please investigate allegations that MSD Washington Township school administrators have intimidated and obstructed school police officers from carrying out their lawful duty to report.

Further, it is my request that you assist in the return of $5,493,868 to the taxpayers of MSD Washington Township. This is the amount of money paid to Securatex, an Illinois Corporation, by MSD Washington Township since 2001. An agreement between MSD Washington Township and Securatex dated 9/13/02 and amended 7/24/03 and 8/24/04 appears to never have been approved by the MSD Washington Township Board of Education. Since payments were made to Securatex for at least a year prior to the 9/13/02 date of this agreement, there may be other unauthorized agreements and payments.

A Citizen has informed me that several firms have approached the MSDWT Administration requesting permission to bid on its security guard business and have been denied that opportunity. In 2009 alone, MSDWT paid Securatex $870,828.

Further, last Thursday February 25, 2010, I informed MSDWT Superintendent James Mervilde that a Citizen approached me and offered concerns that Securatex was not licensed to provide security and guard services to our school district. Mervilde assured me the following day that Securatex was properly licensed. However, a Citizen informed me that she has filed a complaint alleging that Securatex, an Illinois Corporation, does not meet the Indiana requirements of law to conduct business as a security guard service provider because, since 2007, it has not have a “resident licensee” as required by Indiana Code 25-30-1-14.

Therefore, since the safety of our children and teachers depend in large part upon having qualified and properly licensed security personnel, and because the taxpayers need to be treated fairly, particularly in these difficult economic times, these matters require your immediate attention.

Although this is an election year, I have not chosen to run for re-election to the MSD Washington Township Board of Education, and I am not a candidate for any public office.

Sincerely,

Gregory Wright, Elected Member
MSD Washington Township
Board of Education

Marion County GOP Chairman Says At-Large Councilor Should be "Partner" For the Mayor, Highlights Problem With the Republican Caucus of the Council

Today's Indianapolis Star has a brief recap about the candidates for the at-large council seat. Marion County GOP Chairman Tom John is quoted as saying that the "ideal pick" would be someone who is a "partner" for the Mayor.

John has highlighted a fundamental problem with the Republican Caucus of the City-County Council...a lack of independence. Republican councilors should not be there to rubber stamp the Mayor Greg Ballard's agenda on the Council. They are on the Council to represent constituents and exercise independent judgment. They should be leaders on issues in their community, not simply followers of the Mayor.

Republican councilors have about 20 months before the next election. They need to be displaying independence from the very unpopular Mayor Ballard. If they don't, their "partner" is going to be leading them off a political cliff in November 2011.

Marion County GOP Leadership Continues Effort to Rig At-Large Council Vacancy Election; Includes Update

Marion County GOP Chairman Tom John and his sidekick, Hamilton County resident, David Brooks, are at it again.

First, John decided he would only give the list of precinct committeemen list to Angel Rivera, one of several candidates running in the vacancy election for Council at-large representative. That idea got scuttled when the move was loudly protested.

But Chairman John and Brooks were not finished. Thursday night they held a candidate forum for the at-large candidates with about 100 precinct committeemen attending. Brooks and John would only allow Rivera and Chino Reeves to speak at the forum. None of the other 9 candidates were allowed to address the crowd. That is the first time I have ever heard of forum in which eligible candidates were not allowed to address the PCs at a party function.

Tom John's actions continue to undermine the grass roots of the Marion County GOP, the hard-working men and women who do the grunt work for the party. As a chairman, he expects the absolute right to dictate who the candidates will be and the wishes of the precinct committeemen and the Republican electorate are merely obstacles to his getting what he wants.

As far as Brooks goes, the idea that he continues to serve in a leadership role in the Marion County GOP organization when he doesn't even live in the county, is an insult to every member of the Republican county organization who might otherwise be serving as Area Chairman instead of Brooks.

Enough is enough. Tom John needs to go and David Brooks needs to be given a permanent ticket out of the Marion County GOP. They have inflicted enough damage on my party.

As I understand it, these are the candidates who will be competing on Monday:

Jacqueline Cissell
Gary Conner
Kevin Green
Dorothy Henry
Michael Jezierski
Michael Kalscheur
Avachino Reeves
Angel Rivera
Bruce Schumacher
Eric Smith
Aaron Williams

I have heard from a PC that Dorothy Henry's boss at the Indiana Health Care Association sent out a letter to PCs on IHCA stationary supporting her candidacy. I would very much like to know if that is true and would like a copy of the letter. In a previous post, I explained my strong opposition to Dorothy Henry given her rubber stamp, anti-taxpayer performance while serving on the Capital Improvement Board. If her boss at IHCA is violating IRS rules limiting non-profit corporation's involvement in politics, I'd like to know that. I saw enough of that stuff during the Wishard and school referendums last year. The IRS really needs to reign in these non-profits which are getting away with so much.

UPDATE: Apparently David Brooks is promoting the need for "diversity" in the party in support of his choice for Chino Reeves or Angel Rivera. I know David Brooks very well. He was Pike Township Chairman when I was a ward chairman underneath him. In the 1990s I met with Brooks to discuss with him the need for more diversity in the party. Brooks' response? I'll never forget it - he said said that the Marion County GOP is wasting its time reaching out to African-Americans and other minorities and to simply forget it. Now Hamilton County resident David Brooks is playing the "diversity" card in support of his preferred choice? Has Brooks no shame?

Washington Township School Administration Asks School Board Members to Sign Code of Slience

After blogger Diana Vice recently exposed in a series of posts the illegal Securatex contract the Washington Township School Administration had entered into years ago, the administration immediately took action. Did the story prompt the administration to adopt a new policy to ensure this mistake didn't happen in the future? Nope. The administration adopted a code of silence to try to ensure the mistake would not be exposed in the future.

At the bottom of the page is the "School Board Compact" aka Code of Silence that adminstration is trying to get elected Washington Township School Board members to sign.

Paragraph #1 would violate the open records law. The Superintendent has no power to override state law and impose limits on requests for public records. As far as Paragraph #2, I'd be highly suspicious of what the administration labeled as "confidential." It could be used as a pretext to violate free speech. Paragraph #4 is a direct violation of school board members free speech rights.

Any elected school board member who would sign such a document does not deserve to be in office. I am stunned to read on Diana Vice's blog that four of the five members (not Greg Wright) have agreed to sign the document, including Vice President Don Kite, who is an attorney. Those members should resign their office as it is obvious that they are not putting their constituents first.

As a candidate for the Pike Township School Board, I pledge that should Pike administration officials try to get me to sign such a code of silence like that below, I will gladly tell administration officials where they can stick their document.

MSD Washington Township School Board Compact

The Board incorporates by reference Policy 0144.2 entitled Board Member Ethics. The Board adopts this Board Compact in order to address gaps and ambiguities in current Board Ethics Policy

Individual board member requests for specific documents or information from the Superintendent, whether denominated as a “citizen”, “taxpayer” request or otherwise, shall only be made during regular board meetings. This shall be done so that all board members will understand the rationale behind the request and have the opportunity to agree or disagree with the request. The Superintendent shall comply with the request only if the request is supported by the majority of the board[C1] .

Board members must respect the confidentiality of the executive session. Board members shall not publicly discuss either verbally, in written form, or electronic form about any discussion, confidential documents reviewed or discussed or any decision made in executive session.

Board members in the minority of a split decision will not sabotage the action; individuals on both sides of an issue will respect their Board colleagues. Individual opinions on matters being considered can and should be defended, but once a decision is reached, it should be accepted gracefully and implemented wholeheartedly.

Individual Board members will refrain from independently engaging the media or the public in matters that currently are or may come before the board. The Board reaffirms the notion that the Board speaks only through its President[C2] .

We hereby attest that we have read, understand and agree to adhere to this Compact and that we have reread, understand and agree to abide by Policy 0144.2, entitled Board Members Ethics, in the performance of our duties as members of the MSD Washington Township School Board.

_____________________________________________
Cheri Harris, President

_____________________________________________
Don Kite, Vice President

______________________________________________
Anthony Dzwonar, Secretary

______________________________________________
Wanda Spann Roddy, Member

______________________________________________
Greg Wright, Member

Date: ___________________________________

ICVA President Don Welsh Pushes for State to Enact Smoking Ban; Decides Entire State Should Have to Suffer From His Involvement in Politics

Indianapolis Convention & Visitors Association CEO Don Welsh, who annually receives about $400,000 in salary and benefits from Indianapolis taxpayers, apparently for the purpose of fleecing yet more money from taxpayers, has decided that sticking his nose in local politics is not enough...he wants to extend his influence to all areas of the state.

The Indianapolis Business Journal reports that Welsh is pushing for the Indiana General Assembly to adopt a state-wide smoking ban:

The smoking-ban debate in this city and state is getting a new spark from a fired-up group of tourism and convention officials.

They’re trying to light a fire under lawmakers, who have been reluctant to approve the kind of comprehensive smoking ban that health—and now tourism—officials say is needed here.

On the state level, the Indiana House on Feb. 24 passed a measure that would ban smoking in all enclosed public places except casinos and horse tracks. Several local tourism officials said they plan to get in the ear of state politicians as the bill progresses through the General Assembly.

A number of cities in the United States and abroad have passed legislation outlawing smoking in all public places, including hotels, restaurants and bars. Welsh said he recently heard from visitors from New York who were disgusted by Indianapolis’ policy.

“When Paris passed their anti-smoking legislation 18 months ago, that set the tone globally,” Welsh said. “It’s what people come to expect, and Indianapolis is being left behind.”

Welsh is far from alone in his concern.

Jeff Sweet, president of the Greater Indianapolis Hotel and Lodging Association and general manager of Hilton Indianapolis Hotel and Suites, said the complaints he hears from visitors about Indiana’s smoking policies are becoming louder and more frequent.

“Our guests, quite frankly, are taken aback by the smoking in our city,” said Sweet, whose hotel is in the process of going completely smoke-free. “There’s no getting around it. It’s starting to affect the city’s image, and not in a good way.”

Dirk Ebener, CEO of Atlanta-based NuernbergMesse North America, which represents more than 100 trade shows globally, said a city’s smoking policy has a major impact on its image. Ebener, who recently conducted a site inspection in Indianapolis, said the smoking in entertainment hot spots here is a definite drawback.

“There are a growing number of conventions in various sectors that definitely prefer a non-smoking city,” Ebener said. “A city’s smoking policy says a lot about it. It speaks to cleanliness of the city, demonstrates the health awareness of the city, and calls attention to its overall progressiveness.”

In 2006, the City-County Council enacted an anti-smoking law, but there are several exemptions, including bars and other establishments that don’t allow anyone under 18 and businesses that don’t employ anyone under 18.

In October, the City-County Council voted against an ordinance that would have strengthened the existing smoking ban to include bars and the vast majority of workplaces. Council members then decided in a 14-13 vote to table the legislation, which means it can return to the council agenda at a future meeting.

Local patrons like Kenneth Fegett still enjoy a smoke at the Front Page and other area bars. (IBJ Photo/ Perry Reichanadter)Mayor Greg Ballard has said he would veto such an ordinance if it reaches his desk.

That stand, Welsh said, is endangering a critical sector of convention business the ICVA is trying to develop.

“Many in the life sciences, bio and medical fields are vehemently against smoking in
public places,” Welsh said. “I’m not sure it’s always a show stopper, but it’s certainly an unnecessary worry and concern that we shouldn’t have.”

Medical and life sciences conventions and corporate meetings are key to the city’s plan to grow downtown and its convention business, Sweet said.

“Bio and life sciences is a premium-rated business,” he said. “There’s a huge benefit to getting a foot in the door with that industry. Since that sector is growing rapidly, now is a critical time for this city to put its best foot forward with those organizations.”

Sweet said the current policy hurts the city’s otherwise pristine reputation among convention-goers.

“In order to be perceived as being a more progressive city, we have to have a smoking ban,” he said.

The city’s rapidly growing tourism and convention business means there’s plenty at stake.

A 2006 study by Washington, D.C.-based industry analyst D.K. Shifflet and Associates showed the city’s annual visitor spending hitting $3.6 billion.

Life sciences currently generates 4 percent of Indianapolis’ convention and visitor business, but within a few years, Welsh said, it could account for 20 percent. Sports is the city’s largest convention and visitor moneymaker, he said, making up 24 percent of the pie.

While the money spent on life sciences and medical conventions is considerable, it’s just part of the benefit. ICVA and its partners in the endeavor to grow that sector hope exposure from the medical and bio gatherings gives the region further gravitas as a life sciences hub. That, BioCrossroads President David Johnson said, will help build the credibility of companies located here.

“If we could make Indianapolis ground zero for these types of meetings, that would be a tremendous way to show the strengths of this community in a way others in the industry don’t normally think of,” said Johnson, whose organization heads economic development for Indiana’s life sciences initiative.

Not everyone in the local convention and tourism sector favors strengthening the city’s anti-smoking law. John Livengood, president of the Indiana Restaurant & Hospitality Association, said there’s an intense divide among members of his organization.

While some agree with Welsh and Sweet that Indianapolis’ smoking laws are scaring off certain visitors, he said others fear an all-out smoking ban will hurt the city with
other patrons.

“There’s only one policy that works for everyone,” Livengood said. “To have no policy and let each company decide for itself. It’s a free enterprise issue.”

Waiting for local businesses to conclude that smoking must be banned, Welsh said, could have detrimental consequences.

“I understand civil liberties, but there’s enough medical documentation to know smoke—firsthand or secondhand—is bad for you,” Welsh said. “Our current policy makes this city look not very progressive.”•

Indianapolis Convention and Visitors Association CEO Don Welsh and other area tourism and convention officials say Indianapolis officials’ unwillingness to strengthen anti-smoking legislation is imperiling the city’s growing tourism trade.

“In many cases, the ordinances have been driven politically or solely due to the desires of local citizens,” Welsh said. “While I understand that, the desires of visitors who spend billions of dollars in our community every year have not been considered.”

Once again the siren of economic development is used as a pretext for passing a law. (How is that adopting DST will bring business to the state working out?) Last year Welsh was arguing for the City-County Council to vote to give Indianapolis the highest combined sales/hotel tax in the country...for the purpose of helping the hotel industry and, of course, giving his group more money so they can hire more six figure salesmen. (Since when are salesmen paid salaries instead of having those salaries based on performance, i.e. commissions?)

Many Indianapolis residents have this weird inferiority complex, a belief that the City is "backwards" or not "progressive." People like Welsh learn to exploit that complex when arguing for more money from taxpayers or Big Brother laws such as those that tell private businesses they can't allow smoking on their private property. It's unfortunate that we can't trade Welsh back to Seattle from which he came. I'm pretty sure though Seattle wouldn't want him back though.

Update on Traffic Court Bill

The Indiana House last night voted 98-0 to clamp down on moving violation fines being imposed by Marion County Traffic Court and other traffic courts in the state.

Senate Bill 399 had previously passed the Senate 45-5. Because there was an amendment made in the House Committee that heard the bill, the Senate will have to agree to the change or it will go to the conference committee to resolve the differences.

Kudos to our legislature for addressing forcefully what is going on in the Marion County Traffic Court. I only wish our local elected officials had not completely ignored the situation for fear of stepping on political toes.

Mayor Ballard Refers to Gun Owners' Rights As "Distraction": Update: President Obama More Pro-Gun Rights Than Mayor Ballard

Last night at the Pike Township GOP Club meeting, Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard referred to certain issues being "distractions" to his agenda.

Make no doubt about it, his comments were aimed directly at those of us who support gun rights, including the proposal by Libertarian Councilor Ed Coleman to allow people to carry guns into city parks, just like they are allowed to do in national and state parks.

Yep, the Mayor said your Second Amendment rights are a mere "distraction" to his agenda which, by the way, apparently consists of handing out corporate welfare, insider deals, tax/fee increases and jetting around the globe on taxpayer-funded junkets.

Will someone tell me what we Republicans won on November 6, 2007?

Update: Councilor Ed Coleman's bill was tabled tonight by a majority of Republicans, supposedly because the bill needed work. It is difficult to understand what possible amendments need to be made to such a simple concept that the city law on guns in parks should match what is done at the state and federal level.

A gun rights supporter today pointed out that President Barack Obama signed the guns in national park legislation. True it was attached to the credit card reform legislation, but President Obama could have insisted Congress split the bill up under threat of veto. Unlike Mayor Ballard though, President Obama didn't threaten a veto when faced with a gun rights measure. President Obama signed the bill into law. Why do we have a Republican Mayor who is more hostile to gun owners rights than President Obama?

Why This Pike Township Republican Won't Be Supporting Dorothy Henry for Council

Tonight when I attended a Pike Township Republican meeting, I was reminded of a meeting a couple years ago where party leaders were speaking about supporting a certain judge. We committeemen were assured the legal community viewed him/her as an outstanding jurist. As an attorney, I knew that, contrary to the claim, the judge was viewed by attorneys as one of the worst on the bench and, in fact, attorneys regularly took a change of judge when a case unfortunately landed in the judge's court. Finally, I couldn't take the praise any longer, and offered a mild reality check based on my knowledge of the judge's poor performance.

During the tonight's meeting the issue of who the Pike precinct committeemen should support for the at-large vacancy on the Indianapolis City-County Council came up. It was strongly urged that Pike support the township's very own Dorothy Henry. It was pointed out that Henry served on the Capital Improvement Board trying to clean up the mess of the previous Mayor and she is opposed to tax increases.

When I started this blog, I decided I was going to be, as a law school classmate of mine used to say, "brutally frank." In light of that committment, I could not long bite my tongue on the suggestion that Pike Republicans support Dorothy Henry.

Actions speak louder than words. Contrary to the claim that Henry is against tax increases, she in fact last year participated in neighborhood meetings in which she promoted the CIB tax increases. While on the CIB she never once spoke out against giving the Pacers $15 million more per year of OUR money to run Conseco Fieldhouse, even though the Pacers contract gives the team no leverage to demand that money from taxpayers. Henry also did not speak out against giving the ICVA millions more of our tax money nor did she demand accountability from the ICVA despite the fact the organization is flush with six figure salaries. Not once did Henry suggest the horribly mismanaged CIB needed to change how it did business before we give the Board millions more of our tax dollars.

In all the CIB meetings I watched, I never once saw Henry ask a tough question. Her job seemed to be to rubber stamp whatever then CIB President Bob Grand wanted done and she never failed in that job.

Republicans desperately need fewer followers on the Council and more leaders. We need councilors who will exercise independent judgment and ask difficult questions. We need councilors who will put taxpayers and not party bosses and insiders first. Henry completely failed to stand up for the taxpayers and conservative Republican values while on the CIB. She was a rubber stamp for the insider corporate welfare measures and tax increases that City and CIB's leadership wanted. There is no reason to believe that Henry will suddenly become an independent-minded, conservative friend of the taxpayers on the Council. Her track record on the CIB strongly suggests otherwise.

I realize that honesty about a popular fellow Pike Township Republican won't be appreciated by many Pike Republicans. So be it. Henry clearly is not the right person for the Council and the fact she lives in my township does not change that fact.