Expansion of Protection from Discharge of Weapons On Council Agenda Monday Night

Up for a vote at tomorrow night's City-County Council meeting will be Prop 6.  This proposal, introduced by Councillor Angela Mansfield yet again, would expand to all of Marion County, the prohibition on shooting off guns.  Mansfield added exceptions to the expansion for agriculture-zoned parcel of 10 acres or more, and for shooting ranges of various types.  It is already illegal to shoot off guns within the old City limits and within the excluded cities of Lawrence, Beech Grove and Speedway.

Curiously enough, it is also illegal outside the old City limits and this ordinance would actually carve out the exceptions noted above.  When the IMPD taxing district was expanded so the City could pull in more tax revenue from the outlying Townships, the ban on shooting off guns was also expanded.  Public Safety Director Troy Riggs unilaterally gave everyone outside the old City limits a pass on obeying the law.  I wonder how he gets such authority to decide which ordinances he will enforce and where.

It is well past time that this Ordinance applies to all of us equally.

It is no less startling and threatening to hear gunfire in the perimeter outside old Indy than it is to hear it inside.  Just because the probability of criminal intent is less, does not make it safer or of less concern for nearby residents.

Shooting in one's own backyard, with or with a target, with or without safety training, with or without the intent to intimidate ones neighbors, still can alarm, frighten, and cause concern to those neighbors.  I know from personal experience that when you hear gunfire you cannot assume it is of benign intent.  You cannot assume that errant aim will not harm you or your loved ones.

Hunters pursuing their hobby, sometimes illegally on others' property, don't always know the many directions that prey may take that also leads in a straight line to a house or playground. 

Bullets can travel 1 to 5 miles, depending upon the gun and other variables.  This substantial radius increases the need for Prop 6 to pass.

It is not enough that few people have been seriously injured by hunters and backyard shooters to keep Prop 6 from passing.  Everyone should have the right to enjoy their own property.  When the threat of guns going off keep you and your children from enjoying your own backyard, then the things have gone too far and need to be righted.  

At the Rule Committee meeting where Prop 6 was sent to the full Council by a vote of 4-2, Councillor Bob Lutz said that he generally supported Mansfield's efforts, but would vote against it lest someone take the issue to court based on his interpretation of the wording of a 2011 Indiana law keeping local government from passing any local laws impeding the right to own guns.  Council Attorney, Fred Biesecker, noted that the word 'discharge' of a weapon was deliberately removed from the Indiana law before its passage.  Noone has taken the ban on shooting off guns within the old City limits to Court, and the City has not removed that ban for fear of losing a potential lawsuit in that geography.  It seems like a straw dog to worry about possible legal challenge to a simple expansion of an existing law.

Councillor Christine Scales notes that some Councillors who advocate a 50 foot safety free zone to protect downtown-goers from panhandlers, apparently do not find protecting citizens from stray bullets of any concern.  Scales makes an excellent point.

Loud music from a neighbor can get the police to show up and restore the peace.  Firing off a gun, with its attendant alarm as well as its loud retort, should also elicit action by the police, not just a 'call us when someone is hurt' attitude.  Given Riggs' curious position regarding the enforcement of an existing ordinance, Prop 6 needs to pass so all of us can get the same protections.

The Insane Priorities of the Ballard Administration

The first half of at least $5.8 million from RebuildIndy funds to be used for the insane cricket/Gaelic sports complex in Councillor Ben Hunter's district was spent yesterday.  This action comes despite no basis in sanity for such a complex and despite no private partner to help with the cost and/or to reap the Ballard fantasize rewards.

Fellow blogger Gary Welsh put it well this morning over on Advance Indiana:

Streets and sidewalks are crumbling, crime is skyrocketing, IMPD has fewer police officers patrolling the streets than the day Mayor Greg Ballard took office in January, 2008 and the budgets of city agencies across the board are being slashed to make up for a multi-million dollar budget deficit, but Mayor Greg Ballard insists on spending millions of dollars intended for infrastructure improvements on a new world sports park on the city's east side that he hopes will play host to international cricketing events.
 

IndyStar reporter, Jon Murray, reports that none of the three Council appointees showed up for the vote.  The three Board of Public Works appointees from the Mayor's office joined with DPW Director, Lori Miser, to vote 4-0 in favor.

The Council appointees need to explain why they were not there, especially given the gravity of the vote.  The Council Democrat leadership wants to say the Council has been cut out of this decision, but that is not entirely so.  Ducking important issues by standing on the sidelines is not leadership.  The lack of votes by the three Council appointees, if left unexplained, leaves the option that the Democrat leadership wants this cricket nonsense to go forward as much as Ballard does, as a reasonable opinion for members of the public to hold.

I do have to note that some Councillors did weigh in - as I cited two days ago -- Councillors Zach Adamson and Christine Scales, in particular.

Meanwhile, the priorities of the Ballard administration continue to spiral out of the realm of an sane policy and have clearly entered the Twilight Zone. 

Let us all remember this come budget time, when the Council Democrat leadership and the Ballard administration join hands to eliminate the Homestead Credit from property tax bills and when they cut services and when they lay off cops and firefighters (either directly or through attrition).  Let us remember the insanity of this cricket crap.

More Cricket Email Eavesdropping - Across the Aisle

Councillor Christine Scales also had her say in an email on Cricket.  Her email was addressed to members of the Council's Public Works Committee.

Due to my concern over the Mayor's spending of Rebuild Indy funds for a cricket stadium, I have reviewed the Public Works meeting and City Council minutes for Proposal 337 of 2011. Council Democrats repeatedly raised concerns  that there was a lack of specificity in the proposal as to the types of projects for which the Rebuild Indy funds would be used. Republicans made comments such as historically, projects were never provided at that point in the budget period.  Also stated was that the passing of this proposal was necessary to insure that the funds would be protected and used for infrastructure purposes, as well as to address abandoned housing demolition costs," as promised"-i.e from the water company sale.

 

As I read over the minutes, I see that the majority of funds were directed to Character 4 into the Rebuild Indy Subfund of the Consolidated County Fund for capital expenses. Has there been an accounting of what funds have been used thus far and for what specific purposes? It appears that Rebuild Indy funds are indeed now being used in a way that Proposal 337 was intended to protect it from being used for.  How can $1.5 million for renovation of the west wing of the City Market be described as an appropriation for roads, sidewalks, curbs, abandoned housing?

 

How does over $6 million for a cricket stadium fill that description?

 

I provided My fellow Republican Caucus members with articles describing the lack of success of the only cricket stadium in the country sanctioned by the International Cricket Association. It is located in Lauderhill, Florida(Broward County). The stadium had all the elements needed for guaranteed success. The metropolitan area it is located in, boasts a population of over 500,000 Caribbean nationals. Cricket is their passion.  The overall population of the metropolitan area is almost 6 million.  There are hundreds of cricket teams and leagues all across Florida.  The climate is conducive to year round play. Yet the stadium hosted few major cricket tournaments. City officials blame the US American Cricket Association for its problems.  Cricket matches and tournaments need to be sanctioned by USACA.  The city of Lauderhill has struggled for years to have their proposals for matches and tournaments approved by the USACA.

 

I uncovered an even more recent article from the Sunday Sentinel than the ones I sent out to caucus members on Sunday.  In it Mayor Kaplan, of Lauderhill Florida, questions why Mayor Ballard would build a cricket stadium unless he has received a firm, long term commitment(contract) from the USACA for a set number of tournaments for a period of years.  It is likely that without such, Indianapolis will guaranteed find ourselves in a similar situation to theirs.

 

In the difficult fiscal times we find ourselves in, I don't believe that spending millions on a cricket stadium should be a budgeting priority. I believe we were"played" by not having the Proposal 337's final language more specific about what types of projects the Rebuild Indy monies could be used for.  It's now obvious that "Capital Outlay" has come to mean whatever one wants it to mean.

 

The Public Works Board meets tomorrow, Wednesday, May8th, to award a contract for the World Sports Park. I urge Public Works Committee members to contact Public Works Board members and ask them to vote against the awarding of this contract with the use of Rebuild Indy funds.

 

I will forward copies of the related articles in another email. 

The names and email addresses of Board members are listed below my name.   

Thank you for your consideration. 

Christine Scales
City County Councillor, District 4 

Current Board Members

Lori Miser, Chair
Lori.Miser@indy.gov
Robert Parrin
robertlparrin@aol.com

Laura Sniadecki
laura@agmaas.com

Dennis Rosebrough
drosebrough@bmv.in.gov

John Charleston
jcharleston3@hotmail.com

Gregory Garrett
Ggarrettjr84@gmail.com

Neil Bloede
Neil.bloede@hotmail.com

Sometimes the Public Process is Just As Important As the Public Policy

The more important a public policy is, the more important it is to have a robust public process to gauge the wisdom and details of that policy.

So it is with SB 621, which would do many things, including taking Council authority over the City budget and giving much of that real authority to the Mayor through his Controller, taking Commission appointments to the MDC and giving them to the Mayor, and eliminating the 4 At-Large positions on the Council - among other things.  This bill, authored by State Senator Mike Young at the behest of Mayors Ballard and Vaughn, passed out of the Senate and is in the House for consideration.

There are legions of folks lining up to oppose SB 621, but whether or not the Legislators will listen to any of them is yet to be seen.

One thread in the comments of the most recent opponents is the public process, or lack thereof.

Commenting only on the elimination of the At-Large positions, former Senator and Mayor, Richard Lugar, told WFYI that the public process used to create Uni-Gov provided protections to all voters.   "This was a good way when we brought together the entire community to make sure that the entire community had a vote."  (thanks to Jon Easter at Indy Democrat for the quote and link).

Ruth Hayes, on behalf of the Nora Northside Community Council, recently sent a letter to House Speaker Brian Bosma:

Dear Sir:

I write as president of the Nora-Northside Community Council, Inc., (NCC) a 46 year old community "umbrella" organization in North Central Washington Township, Marion County.  With a roughly 12 sq. mile area of interest, we have long been active in working with Marion County government on issues of concern to the 25 to 28 thousand citizens of the area. We are nonpartisan in all matters.

This note is to respectfully call your attention to what I consider a reasonable and thoughtful letter in the March 23 Star by Prosecutor Curry regarding SB 621.  I believe that the most important sentence in the letter states:  "I am opposed to a bill  that seeks to permanently alter the structure of local government without a shred of public outreach and input."  The community has been given no opportunity to discuss, approve or not, revise, etc.  this major reorganization of Unigov.  Dr. Beurt SerVaas, Charlie Whistler, and Richard Lugar gave great thought to the legislation which created the current form of Marion County governance, seeking to assure important checks and balances and provide representation for all citizens and areas of the county .  There were public hearings and media coverage to explain the initiative.  No less should be done now.

Trusting in your sense of fairness and commitment to open and transparent government, we respectfully urge you to not call a hearing on what many community leaders consider to be an ill-conceived and blatantly partisan proposal.  If it's a good idea, then it can surely stand the test of summer study.  We will welcome the opportunity to review and discuss the pros and cons of this initiative.

Thank you for your consideration of this request.

"There were public hearings and media coverage to explain the initiative.  No less should be done now....  If it's a good idea, then it can surely stand the test of summer study."

Councillor Christine Scales, a Republican member of the City-County Council, penned a letter to Senator Young which stood up for the power and authority of the Council itself.  It said in part  (Paul Ogden at Ogden on Politics reprinted the entire letter) :

If SB 621 passes in its current form, the fundamental commitment to a system of governmental checks and balances will be severely eroded.  The Council’s oversight and advisement of budgets and departmental appointments and other policy decisions is already compromised by politics. There always exists a tension between what’s good for a political party and what comprises good governance. Votes for desired initiatives can be bartered for with promises of political perks or threats of punishment.  This sort of vote kowtowing already offers undue leverage and control to an executive branch of government- a tighter grip on power does not favor the public that is served. Extra care must be taken to ensure that processes providing accountability and transparency in government are not trampled on.

If there is a determined desire to reset the equation of county governance, then let there be a commitment to more time and input as to what a new city-county government model would look like and what weight voices of elected officials would carry. It is imperative that crafting of new policies doesn't conflict with traditional tenets of a democratic republic, which I fear SB621 does.
 

All of these comments honor and value the public process, especially in crafting or dissembling these proposed changes in policy and governance.  The public deserves to be heard; not just through letters, but out in the open where the pros and cons can be discussed by those who will be affected.  The public is not well served by this power grab by the Mayor ensconced in SB 621.  It is even less well served by the lack of an open and honest public process airing the wishes of the citizens of Indianapolis.

Councillor Scales Reacts to New Funding Mechanism for Avondale-Meadows

Councillor Christine Scales, co-sponsor of the proposed expansion of the Fall Creek TIF she had hoped would be used for the benefit of Avondale-Meadows residents, reacted on Facebook to the news the Councillors Talley and Robinson would introduce a proposal with an alternate funding mechanism.  Scales is a Republican, while Talley and Robinson are Democrats.  Here is her post:

News to Me: Talley&Robinson coming to aid of Avondale Meadows It would have been helpful for any of the committee members who voted against the Avondale Meadows TIF to have shared their concerns with me before the MDEC meeting, when it was voted to be tabled. The co-sponsor, Councillor Steve Talley never shared any misgivings with me. It was obvious through Talley's prepared statement, and the ready agreement by others who opposed the TIF, that they never intended to consider testimony given during the meeting. The decision to oppose was made prior to the meeting's start. Now,Talley and Robinson are sponsoring a new proposal in my district without any discussion first with me, the councillor, representing the Avondale Meadows District. I have to mention that the TIF was needed not just for a grocery store but to advance further revitalization in the area. I don't need to be psychic to know that whatever these two D's propose will pass. There will be no record of them ever having voted against the TIF, as the proposal will die due to tabling. The D's will get credit for "helping" the neighborhood and no Republican will receive any credit for years of committed work in the Avondale Meadows area-which was the D's motive for not supporting the Avondale Meadows TIF all along."

Different Funding Mechanism To Be Proposed for Avondale-Meadows Area

Councillors Steve Talley and Leroy Robinson will introduce a proposal to the Council on January 28, that will include alternate funding to substitute for the failed Avondale-Meadows TIF proposal. 

The Metropolitan & Economic Development committee tabled indefinitely (AKA - killed) Prop 349 Monday night.  Prop 349 was passionately presented and championed by Councillor Christine Scales (see "Case for Meadows TIF")  That proposal included an expansion of the Fall Creek TIF to assist the Avondale-Meadows area in attracting a grocery store.  The TIF would exist for 25 years, even though the grocery store project bonds likely would have a term of only 10 years.  Deputy Mayor for Economic Development/Director of the Bond Bank Deron Kintner, doing financial calculations on the fly, estimated that the $3 million bond would take $10 million to pay off in 10 years.  Why a bond would have to have these terms is totally beyond reason - but that's what Kintner said.

Talley and Robinson, who voted against the proposed TIF, will introduce a proposal with alternate funding to meet the goals of the Avondale-Meadows area residents to attract a grocery store - which is absolutely critical for the residents to have available healthy, normally priced food.  They are now subject to the absurdly high prices and paucity of fresh food from convenience stores and the like.

I look forward to reviewing the new proposal once it is introduced.  And, I am glad that something is being done to provide the good folks of the Avondale-Meadows area with critical tools to lift up their quality of life.

Case for Meadows TIF

At last night's Metropolitan & Economic Development committee meeting, Councillor Christine Scales, sponsor of the proposed Meadows TIF, summarized the work that has been going on in the neighborhood and made the case for a TIF, needed to entice a grocery store that is 'waiting in the wings'.  Here are her opening comments:

Ballard / Vaughn Reneging On Promise

An abrupt reversal has been announced on the fate of ladder truck 21 that currently services Councillor Christine Scales' district.  Lame duck Director of Public Safety, Frank Straub, is the nominal decision-maker on this matter, but it seems more likely that Mayor Ballard and/or new Chief of Staff Ryan Vaughn are the ones actually at the center of this change of policy.  Paul Ogden over at Ogden On Politics has blogged on this recent development (see "Councilor Scales Calls Mayor Ballard Out on Failure to Live Up to Commitment Regarding Keeping Ladder Truck 21 at Northside Station")

Last year it was announced that Washington Township IFD Station 21would lose its ladder truck.  Many residents became concerned and involved their Councillor in the effort to keep their ladder truck and the protection it afforded their families, homes and businesses.  Scales led the charge by immersing herself in national fire protection protocols, best practices, and best standards.

The combined effort worked out well and Mayor Ballard, personally and through his then Chief of Staff, Chris Cotterill, promised that funding for ladder truck 21 would be provided at least through the end of 2012. Vaughn knows all about it, having gotten Cotterill to reduce the promise to writing.  Knowing that their word did not include any funding beyond 2012, Scales continued to ramp up her information base regarding fire equipment placement, response times, and more.

The June 20 announcement that the ladder truck would not be left at Station 21, but removed on July 1, left little time for the community to mount an effective and vigorous campaign to reverse the reversal.   That was probably deliberate.  The way our City budgets work, there is nothing special about July 1.

Scales shot back, sending out three documents that review the importance of keeping ladder truck 21 in place.  I have uploaded them to Google docs ("What do ladder trucks do", "The decision last year to remove ladder truck 21 was fought by firefighters", and "Councillor Scales statement").

Scales notes that Washington Township has more tall buildings than anywhere outside of Center Township, there are only two White River crossings which limits response times, and the current construction on the Allisonville Bridge with its attendant super-congestion makes this an ill chosen time to remove the ladder truck 21.  She also mentions that she had many private conversations with knowledgeable firefighters who side with her on the need for this truck in this location.  And, she asserts that the City could be opening itself up to a lawsuit should it make good on this latest threat and actually remove the truck.

From the public perspective, this looks bad for Ballard and Vaughn.  Even if you find yourself in positions of power, your word is still your honor.  The commitment made to residents and firefighters should be followed through to completion.  If there is any entertainment of not funding this truck at Station 21 in 2013, then it should be thoroughly discussed with the affected community prior to a final decision.  AND the reasons for that decision should be fully explained to the community.

Mayor Ballard still likes to say his is an open and transparent administration.  Yet, there is little evidence of that.  It is instances like this one that makes a running joke of using Ballard and 'transparency' in the same sentence.  Hopefully, the Mayor will follow through on his word, leave the ladder truck where it is, and pursue real dialogue and real transparency with the residents and firefighters affected by Station 21.

Council To Meet Monday Night

The City County Council will meet this Monday night.  The big item for consideration is the extension of Indy's smoking ban (Prop 18).  But there are other proposals of interest.

There will also be the rare hearing of a zoning matter.  This is encapsulated in Prop 303, 2011.  This is petition 2011-CZN-825, which seeks to rezone 1.6 acres from medium intensity commercial uses (C-3) to mixed residential / commercial uses (C-2) to allow for construction of a multi-family building.  The address is 2855 N. Keystone.  Councillor Christine Scales has called the petition down.  It takes 18 votes to overturn a decision of the MDC.

Of the new proposals being introduced Monday night, one in particular caught my eye.  That is Prop 44, sponsored by Councillor Ben Hunter.  Prop 44 would change the ordinance governing the composition of Council Committees to add :

(c) Any councillor who is employed by another agency of local government, whose budgets or salaries are subject to action of the City-County Council, shall not be appointed to, or eligible to serve on any committee which regularly considers the budget or salaries of the agency which employes such councillor.

Prop 44 will be referred to the Rules Committee.

Nasty Politics - A Backlash Maybe?

While they say that negative ads are used because they work, results from yesterday's elections are suggestive of a different paradigm.  Yesterday there was some backlash on the Melina Kennedy campaign because of race baiting tactics undoubtedly initiated by Ed Treacy, Chairman of the Democratic County Party, but likely signed off on by Kennedy herself.

Treacy engaged in a laundry list of gutter politics and attempted intimidation.  He is a stain upon the Party and the good people in it.

Up in the northside, Christine Scales appears to have won reelection as District 4 Councillor, defeating the the enormously funded Kostas Poulakidas by all of 39 votes.  One of the mysteries of this campaign season is why the Star remained silent about the postcard smear tactics used by the Poulakidas' side against Scales.  Well, at least they will be following what anyone would expect now - a recount.

So, for this time at least, nasty politics did not determine the ultimate outcome.  That is a good thing.

The Council and the Mayor are of different political persuasions for the next four years.  Facts are, beyond the political posturing for impact's sake, there is not a huge difference between the 'sides' and there is much room for amicable relations - if hatchets can be buried, politics removed for a while, and clear heads prevail.  Another thing is, there is not much wiggle room to finance any modest, much less grandiose, 'visions'.  The budget I saw passed by the Council for 2012 is likely too 'small' to actually do all the things that were promised, much less accommodate many additional services. 

But, at the end of the day, two honest perspectives offered without hidden agendas can often lead to improved outcomes.  Let us hope that the Council and the Mayor can find their way to move in that direction and lay the best foundation for Indianapolis' future.

Promises And Laddertrucks

At Monday night's City-County Council meeting, Councillor Jackie Nytes made a number of comments during the evening.  Two in particular I would like to address, as I think they are important issues and I hold a very different opinion than Councillor Nytes.  Gary Welsh took up a few of her comments and added his own thoughts over at Advance Indiana Monday night.

What I'd like to address in this blog entry are Nytes' comments made just before the IFD special district tax rate was approved.

Now, Councillor Nytes gets points from me for being quite consistent in the matter of more money for government.  She makes no bones about it and will ignore her caucus' position on matters when those matters will produce more revenue for some component of the City-County government or for downtown.  Her constituents knew her stand when they voted for her and she has not veered from that stand.  So, she gets points for that.  But, I heartily disagree with her comments and the underlying positions, nonetheless.

When then-Mayor Peterson was pushing consolidation of the various fire departments, critics claimed it would cost more, cause layoffs, and lead to township fire equipment and manpower shuffled into the old IFD district.  All that was pooh-poohed as untrue.  It was said that the merger would save money and lower taxes to boot.  When Ballard became mayor, he pushed consolidation even more fervently than Peterson had.  But, he dropped the claim that there were savings to be generated through consolidation, since the proof was abundant that it did not.  In fact, Mayor Ballard began to leave the merging township with the debt from their fire department and took the assets into IFD.

It seemed to me then and it still seems to me now, that the merger was just so township tax resources could be pulled in to help fund IFD.

Now we have the current affair of the proposed removal of ladder truck 21 from Station 21 in Washington Township, and within Councillor Christine Scales' district.  The College Commons neighborhood responded and have posted an informative letter online that I recommend folks read for the details.  One interesting paragraph lists the loss of services located in Washington Township since consolidation:

As stated above, Station 21's primary fire response has gone from 10 to 8, to very soon 4 firefighters. What else has the North-Side lost since consolidation with I.F.D.? Here are the fire/rescue services that were provided on the North-Side of Indianapolis and have since been removed by I.F.D. Remember, these services are now gone: The Hazardous Materials Team from Station 21, Heavy automobile extrication from Stations 4, 6 and 21, (They are still "light" extrication companies, but the heavy extrication comes from Station 14 at 30th and Capital.) Rope Rescue from Station 4, Medic 4 has been marked out of service, Ladder 17 has been marked out of service, The Ice Rescue Sled from Station 6 is gone (taken away the day after it was used to rescue a dog on the ice in a nationally televised story. It is now in storage collecting dust.), all of the engines and ladders in the former Washington Township response area were front line ALS (Advanced Life Support = paramedic) responders, (eight trucks in all) now only 2 are frontline ALS responders, and of course, come this December, Ladder 21 will be gone. Did you know this much has been taken away? Are you paying correspondingly less in taxes for having all of these services removed?

So, its not just a matter of the ladder truck - it is the decrease number of firefighters as well.

Nytes castigated the public and fellow Councillors to get with the new reality of the merged fire department.  Well... promises made were that this would not happen.  Those promises should be kept - not just what was written down in the merger documents.  AND it is the responsibility of a Councillor to advocate for and support the needs of their constituents.  Which is exactly what District 4 Councillor, Christine Scales, did in getting the decision to decommission Ladder Truck 21 reversed.

Here is another paragraph from the neighborhood organization's letter:

District 4 Councilor Christine Scales is working feverishly to try to organize the homeowner's associations in her area to act. She has spent countless hours on researching response times, NFPA standards, insurance ratings, actual driving distances and times between firehouses, and documentation of fire burning rates, as well as many other fire related statistics. She is fully against Ladder 21 being shut down. All of the officials contacted seem to be concerned, but no one is willing to act. She isn't the only person within the City Government working in your favor, but she is the most diligent.

Scales is a well regarded Councillor, not just in District 4, but throughout Indianapolis.  She does her homework on issues, and like Nytes, does not always follow her caucus if she believes it contrary to what is best for her constituents.  I have said it before and I will say it again.  Christine Scales is a gem of a Councillor.  Her work to restore Ladder 21 is just one more example of her indefatigable efforts on behalf of the residents of District 4.  Indy could use more Councillors just like her.

Vaughn Hammers His Caucus

Council President, Ryan Vaughn, sold his soul to the devil, and has been busy hammering the daylights out of his Council Republican caucus to get them to sell theirs as well.

You know, I used to think the driving force was to place Party interests over the welfare of the community. But, now I am inclined to think that Vaughn puts the interests of Barnes & Thornburg, his employer, over the interests of the Party -- and the interests of the community doesn't have one neuron associated with it in his brain. The distinction is slight, I grant you, as B&T owns the Marion County Republican Party, the Mayor's office, the Controller's office, and Vaughn.

Just Tuesday night, the Council Committee on Committees, chaired and unilaterally run by Vaughn, unceremoniously dumped Councillor Christine Scales from the Public Safety Committee. This was a) to punish Scales for not getting in line and casting the same Stepford vote all the other Republican Councillors have been casting, and b) to send a strong signal to all the other Rs that they best stay in line.

Meanwhile, Vaughn has doing backroom deals to ensure that the pork runs to his district first and, if there is any left over, to downtown. And while working the system behind the scenes and out of sight of the public, he refuses to recuse himself in matters where he has a clear conflict of interest.

If any of the other Republican Councillors have any glint of high standards left, they will remember why ran for office in the first place. In doing so, they just might see their old selves in Christine Scales. If they still have any fire for right and wrong, they would stand with Scales and tell Ryan Vaughn that they elected him to his position, and they can unelect him. They can say, that the game doesn't need to be played this way. They can say it is dead wrong to put the community dead last. They can declare that every Councillor should vote in the best interest of the community - not for the best intests of the Party, not for the best intests of B&T, and not in the best interests of Ryan Vaughn.