Navistar Clawback Cave Another Mayor Ballard Sellout for Immediate Financial Gratification

Ever notice how politicians who make the most references to doing things for "our children" or for "our future" are often most eager to sell out that future for their immediate political benefit?

Take Greg Ballard. Literally.

The Citizens Gas water deal? You've heard me ad nauseum on how we're mortgaging future water rates for sidewalks now.

But I predict you’ll see a similar story on downtown parking meters soon. The City wants to lease them to a contractor. Such a deal could pay a percentage of total dollars collected each year or a flat fee each year. But I foresee the mayor taking a lump sum up front in exchange for a lease term lasting the remainder of his permissible time in office times two.

(Maybe that’s why the Mayor is so confident that he won’t use the Cit Gas money to pay the $15 million in Conseco maintenance costs for the Pacers. He knows the money train is choo chooing into town).

But there are other indicia of Mayor Ballard's short-term fixation.

A few weeks ago, the Indianapolis Star’s Ted Evanoff reported on the City’s Navistar “clawback.” For the uninitiated, when city officials kowtow to business owners by giving them tax breaks, they do it frequently under the condition that a certain number of jobs will be created.

Indianapolis gave Navistar $18 million. When Navistar tanked and laid off 1,000, the City went to get its money. Navistar said no.

From the story:

When Navistar refused to repay the money, the city faced a long dispute in court. Rather than run up a big legal bill, Mayor Greg Ballard’s administration agreed the city would accept $5 million from the company.

First, the Office of Corporation Counsel is all sunk costs. The City pays the same amount to its lawyers whether anybody in the office works or not. So what the Mayor is admitting is that nobody in his office can litigate a contract case? Yow! That’s scary.

But for the sake of argument, let's run with his idea that his folks are too incompetent to handle this. Say litigating the case could have earned Indy an additional $4 million, or half of what we were promised. If so, eight Indy attorneys billing $250 per hour could each spend 10 hours per week every week for two entire years, and we'd still double our money.

Can any attorney out there conceive of how a contract interpretation case could have required more work than that? I can't envision how one would cost more than $250,000.

In short, the Mayor could have gotten the City a LOT more money, but he took pennies on the dollar. What good would more money do him if it didn't come until his successor occupied the 25th floor of the City-County Building?

Navistar Clawback Cave Another Mayor Ballard Sellout for Immediate Financial Gratification

Barth On Water Deal: "Independent Analysis Needed"; iPOPA on Town Hall: "Well-Orchestrated, Mayoral Pimpage"

Democratic at-large city-county council candidate, John Barth weighed in on the Mayor's water deal this week. (No, that's not him to the right. That's pimp legend Don "Magic" Juan).

Barth, the Compliance and Regulatory Affairs VP for Managed Health Services, takes on the Mayor for not being more transparent about the details (and risks) of the deal and for holding only four public meetings. Barth also calls for an independent, outside analysis of the deal.

It has become a meme among some Democrats that there are few, if any, people who can give the party (and the public) the straight dope because so many of our prominent Democratic attorneys have had their law firms gobbled up in this deal.

After attending the Mayor's presentation at Nu Corinthian Church this week, I can see why outside assistance is needed (and immediately). We are getting snowed and owned by the Mayor's PR might.

Aside from the accoustics being so terrible that it was like listening to Charlie Brown's teacher for an hour-and-a-half, the format was set up to keep us in the dark while giving the appearance of blazing sunlight.

Permit me to explain.

After the presentation, Mayor Ballard and Cit Gas CEO Carey Lykins took every question, including one that asked the Mayor to state point blank that none of this money would go to pay the Conseco maintenance (he did).

But the problem is that the format didn't allow for the follow-up questioning that is critical to understanding the devil-packed details of this deal.

For example, I asked whether Cit Gas had cash reserves, and if not, whether it would be fair to say the purchase would be financed by rate hikes. The part of the response I heard was that no, Citizens Gas didn't have cash sitting around (if they did, they'd have to give it back to rate payers), and something about bonds being issued based on the expected "synergy" savings, yada yada.

To paraphrase, say I own a company and my annual budget is $100 million, and I get $100 million in income from rate payers. Then I do a consolidation that makes my costs $60 million. The next year, I'll have $40 million on the upside. I have two choices that next year and every year thereafter: (1) reduce rates; or (2) keep rates the same as before the consolidation and "monetize" the savings by picking a number of years arbitrarily and saying, "Cit Gas, pay me the savings we'd get over, oh, ten years, but give it to me now in an insanely discounted lump sum because "it's my money and I need it now" to help me get re-elected!"

Because I foolishly phrased my question as "won't we pay for this with higher rates," Mr. Lykins could say "no" and be absolutely right because we'll pay for this through the absence of lower rates, which for crafty word twizzlers like the Mayor, is a completely different thing.

The same thing applies for the Conseco question. The Mayor could say, "None of this money will go to Conseco" because nobody could follow up with, "Are you saying you wouldn't take money already budgeted for, say road construction, and use that to pay the CIB because now you can pay for the construction using these dollars?"

Perhaps the most insane thing uttered was a comment the Mayor made of extreme indifference on whether the due diligence should be completed before the City-County Council would vote to approve the deal. Does that make sense to anybody breathing?

The Mayor also talked about how this deal will create 10,000 construction jobs. (Cough - bovine feces - cough!) He got his number based on some INDOT study that says $x spent equals y jobs "created." But he said at the meeting that some of the dollars will be used for abandoned houses and some will be used for some non-descript economic development venture to lure companies to the city. How can you claim 10,000 unless you know how the money will be spent? The Mayor has no problem using figures that are inconsistent, even within the framework of his own methodology.

Understand that only 10% of my concern about this deal surrounds irrevocably giving up authority over the water company. In this respect, I may be in the minority.

My concern is that it's a completely lousy deal on the financial end. If this is a long-term solution that will save $40 million per year, why not have Cit Gas pay the city $20 million per year in perpetuity and put it into a construction fund? If they know they can get those savings, why couldn't they commit to that?

See folks, all this is about is the Mayor being able to say "10,000 jobs" and "This sidewalk (coming soon) brought to you by Greg Ballard."

And in one of the most cynical ploys I've seen of late, the Mayor's website and the packets at these forums have questionnaires about how we spend the money that we haven't even gotten authorized. "Pardon me, Joe Citizen. Do you want to spend your millions on sidewalks or streets? Rate it for me."

The Mayor wants people to walk out of these meetings salivating over what they'll be getting (just like how my mom used to get me to behave by showing me toy catalogs in March), then those folks will beat up their Councillors if they oppose this.

You don't think these meeting locations are tactical?

George Washington HS Cafeteria,
2215 West Washington Street

Aldersgate Free Methodist Church,
9035 East 21st Street

Nu Corinthian Church’s Family Life Center,
5935 West 56th Street

Lynhurst 7th and 8th Grade Center,
2805 South Lynhurst Drive

Where's the meeting in Perry? Franklin? Decatur? North Central?

No, this is straight up, grade-A mayoral pimpage. Hizzoner is going to get you strung out on the smell of that new concrete in your broken down neighborhood, and you'll forget that you're getting financially back-handed long-term through his payday loan scam.

Barth On Water Deal: "Independent Analysis Needed"; iPOPA on Town Hall: "Well-Orchestrated, Mayoral Pimpage"

Mayor's Citizens Gas Deal: Intriguing Idea Marred by Brazen Hypocrisy & Political Cowardice

If you didn’t hear me on Abdul in the Morning this past Monday morning, let me share that the Mayor’s proposal to sell the city’s water and wastewater companies to Citizens Gas makes sense intuitively.

Who wouldn’t automatically think that a non-profit structure, specifically a “charitable trust” like Citizens Gas, must be more efficient than a private company because they don’t have evil stockholders to placate. (Of course, one would think this mentality might compel Republicans to favor a single-payer healthcare system over for-profit insurance companies, but I guess Republicans only like profit motives on healthcare, not on utilities).

It’s also a PR masterstroke. The phrase “charitable trust” makes you think your grandma will be providing your drinking water now. (Heck, if the City could give Brighthouse to a “charitable trust,” maybe I wouldn’t have my six favorite channels intermittently disappearing while I continuously call to get a four-hour window for “service” at times I’m never home because I have a job).

But the prospect that this deal favors the city is obscured by the fact it is the most brazenly political, hypocritical, and cowardly act undertaken by an elected official in Indianapolis since Unigov was implemented.

The terms are these. The City of Indianapolis will receive $170 million at closing, then $90 million on October 1, 2011. In addition, Citizens Gas will assume $1.5 billion dollars worth of the city’s debt. This is why people keep talking about a $2 billion dollar deal.

Folks, the "$2 billion sale" figure is false, no matter how many times Abdul and the Mayor say it. If you read the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between Citizens and the City, you will see that Citizens Gas will only move forward with this deal if the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission (IURC) permits the assumption of this debt to be figured into its rate structure. In other words, you won’t save dollars because this debt is assumed. You’ll just pay it in higher water and sewer rates instead of in higher taxes.

And this is precisely the Mayor’s goal. Mayor Ballard wants this deal because elected officials won't do the right thing by raising taxes to invest in necessary water and sewer infrastructure improvements if they know they are going to get attacked politically.

From the Mayor at his press conference:

Let me be clear. This solution works for the long term. With this, we will take politics out of running our water and wastewater systems. No more politicians putting off doing what is right for the long term for what is politically expedient today.

He’s wrong about the first part because Bart Peterson in 2005 sought a $350 million bump in water and sewer rates for these very enhancements.

In other words, there are courageous “politicians” who will say, “We need this, and your rates are going to have to go up.” Mayor Ballard just is not one of them, apparently. But his remarks to the Star about how politicians will be attacked for doing the right thing is dead on, and he knows. You know how? Because he did it against Bart Peterson. In 2007, Ballard banged Peterson for repeatedly “raising taxes,” and he included in his list every water or sewer increase sought by the city.

Simply put, Mayor Ballard is the guy who robs the store and then tells the owner, “You better get a security system.” I try to keep this blog analytical, but I can’t contain myself. Among all politicians and strategems I’ve seen at all level s of government, nothing compares to this for pure political cowardice.

Even the underpinning of this deal is based on a distortion of history. The Mayor is fond of saying that Citizens Gas was founded as a public trust to avoid having rate decisions made by politicians. Here’s a term of art for your, Mayor. That’s crap.

According to Citizens’ own website, the trust was founded principally to avoid the city having its natural gas supply taken over by monopolist robber barons. Now, it is true that there was concern about political patronage, but that had nothing to do with retribution for setting rates and everything to do with fear of the mayor’s brother with no background in natural gas systems running the whole show and blowing up the city. But last time I checked, quite a few decade had passed since Tammany Hall. In other words, the concerns about re-election that concern Cowardly Greg aren’t the concerns that animated Eli Lilly back in the day. Of course, Lilly was a leader.

But, iPOPA, you say. This can’t ALL be about politics. Aren't there cost savings?

Sure. Not having to earn a profit is good, and the trust can issue tax-exempt bonds (though the city could also, I believe). But the main alleged advantage to this deal is that by consolidating utilities, we achieve “synergies” (the most hackneyed phrase in management, by the way) of $40 million per year. Again, intuitively, this makes sense. If you fold three companies into one, you won’t need three HR, IT, or legal departments. But $40 million?!? Even the Mayor doubts this.

More from Mayor Ballard’s press conference:

Reporter: Any promises with rates?

Mayor Ballard: Not at the moment. We’ll have to look at that. They’ll be lower than previously forecast. I think we…that’s pretty much in there. That’s one reason we’re doing it.

The Mayor regarding “synergy savings”:

Mayor: If there are some synergies later on, I think you said, I think the Star said today lawyers and IT. Maybe, maybe not. It’s up to them. People still have to do the work. The systems still need to be maintained. So I mean, I hear a lot of that when we do things within the city, but you never see it happening. It’s just all speculation.

In other words, Mayor Ballard is only able to speculate that rates will be lower than they would be without the deal (though still going up massively), but he can’t tell you how they got to the $40 million in savings per year, nor does he even believe it. Do you?

But here’s the most troubling part. How did the City get the $262 million purchase price? Why isn’t that report on-line, Mr. Mayor? How do we know we’re not getting rooked for turning over our water supply in perpetuity?

Also, why the lump sum? The Mayor repeatedly called this a long-term solution. So why aren’t we having the savings paid out over time, like over the 50-year period the Mayor referred to at his press conference? If Citizens will save us $40 mill per year, why don’t we have them pay us $35 million per year indefinitely? They’d still save $5 million off their operating costs, wouldn’t they?

Or how about this. Why don’t they just assume the debt and forget the $262 million? We all know the cash is just an advance against a higher future rate increase. Why not forget the cash and have lower rates in the future, Mr. Mayor?

Here’s why. If Citizens Gas doesn’t give up the $262 million, Mayor Ballard can’t put up little signs telling you about the new sidewalks he’s going to start building in your neighborhood right before his re-election. That’s what this is principally about.

From the Mayor’s press conference:

We will use the cash from this deal to make a transformational investment in our city’s infrastructure. Roads, bridges, and sidewalk needs, many of which have been neglected for a generation, would be addressed.

A true leader would have not permitted this neglect to continue once he took office. And a true leader would ensure a revenue stream from this sale for 50 years and beyond. But Mayor Ballard has never been that.

I promise you that if members of the City-County Council said, “Mr. Mayor, we’ll vote for your deal, and in exchange, you forego the lump sum and spread the benefits out over time,” he wouldn’t do it. He wants to finance his re-election on your future rate hikes, folks.

But, iPOPA, you say, “If the Mayor does this deal and rates go up now so Cit Gas can pay for the $262 million, the Mayor will get creamed in November, 2011."

Oh, did I forget to tell you about how the Mayor ensured that wouldn’t happen? Here’s another quote from the the Mayor's press conference:

Additionally, after acquiring the water system in 2002, the city flat-lined water rates for five years while simultaneously taking on more debt than the system is worth.

Sentient beings might conclude that the Mayor is faulting his predecessor for negotiating a deal where rates stayed the same for five years while debt went up from necessary improvements. But do you know the MOU has a two-year rate freeze following closing on this deal?

Think about that.

While saying how bad rate freezes are, the Mayor’s deal includes one, and a two-year freeze specifically means there will be no more rate increases in 2010 or 2011, which – well, what a surprise! – would mean no rate increases until after the November 2011 election. To quote The Church Lady when she referred to Satan: “How conveeeeenient!”

Of course, it’s probably not all that likely that a rate increase would be needed in 2011 though. Look at this exchange from the press conference:

REPORTER: Do you support the current rate increase that’s before the IURC?

CAREY LYKINS (Cit Gas CEO): No, I’m not a part of it, and I’m not familiar with the details of it. I would presume that it’s all necessary and required, but I have not seen the case.

Doesn’t it seem like Mr. Lykins is disinterested? So why does the MOU state that this deal only moves forward if the IURC outcome is one that Citizens Gas views as “favorable?" "And which outcome IS favorable to Citizens?" I ask in jest, knowing they want that 35% increase in rates because it will probably cover a huge chunk of the $262 million.

Not convinced yet that your Mayor is out to lunch? Here’s another great line from the Mayor’s press conference:

In 2008, the water system proved unable to correct itself without huge rate increases.

I’ve heard of anthropomorphism before, but is anybody else surprised to learn that water systems have the ability to correct themselves without any humans, especially a mayor, being involved? Unfortunately, this “little water system that could” just couldn’t correct itself without first imposing a huge rate increase on itself.
Another classic:

REPORTER: Mayor, you mentioned taking politics out as a positive thing. How can you insure accountability and any guarantee for ratepayers under this deal?

MAYOR: Utilities were created, just as Carey said, utilities were created for a certain reason in cities and municipalities across the country. A lot of that reason was to take politics out of it, so that the interest of the municipality, the city, is looked after in the long term. They are extremely accountable. Extremely accountable. You talk to any utility, and they will tell you, they’re accountable, and they will be.

I bet if you talk to Bernie Madoff, he’d tell you investment brokers are very accountable, too.

Another zinger:

We will look at greatly enhancing our connectivity with greenways and bike lanes and may look at addressing unsalveagable, abandoned homes.

Silly me. I thought the Mayor made abandoned homes one of his campaign priorities. Now he's letting you know that he might look at it now if he gets this $262 million. What happened to "cutting the fluff," Mr. Mayor? Can't you use all of the efficiencies that you boasted about being able to find for abandoned homes?

Finally, let me ask a simple question. Mr. Mayor, the contracts with Veolia and United Water both had minority business enterprise and women business enterprise mandates. I didn't see that in your MOU. Are you turning your back on MBEs and WBEs?

If the devil is in the details, this deal isn't getting my blessing until the Mayor exorcises its craven and hypocritical political components. I'll let the cowardly ones slide. I've come to expect them.

Mayor's Citizens Gas Deal: Intriguing Idea Marred by Brazen Hypocrisy & Political Cowardice

Burns Needs No Spin on Ballard Administration's Revolving Door

Terry Burns at Indianapolis Times raises some interesting questions about the exodus from the Mayor's Administration following announcement of the Citizens Gas deal. This is a must read for anybody concerned about whether the prospect of future employment can conflict with a current duty to the public.

Burns Needs No Spin on Ballard Administration's Revolving Door

Ballard Goes J.G. Wentworth on Us, But Does Deal Hold Water?

It seems these days that no Republican politician can avoid "the lure." They get offered lump sum cash for an asset now, and they sell out control, which is ironic because it runs completely contrary to all their smug talk about accountability and the Shepard-Kernan Commission's report as well.

Just like Governor Daniels did with the Indiana Toll Road, Ballard has worked a deal to sell the city's water operations to Citizens Gas for $1.9 billion with promise of infrastructure improvements. (Actually, the Toll Road was a 99-year lease; this IS an actual sale).

From the outset, because the Mayor has kept everybody in the dark until the deal was done, I haven't had time to really study it yet.

But here's what I already don't get. I'm told that the upside for Citizens Gas is that it's a charitable trust, not a company that has to appease stockholders. This means that IF it makes profits, the result is either reduced rates or reinvestment in infrastructure. I'm also told the Board members are fiduciaries, which means they have to act in the best interests of the ratepayers. Yaaaay!

Except what happens when Citizens makes a bad business decision? Say for example that something that seemed a good idea at the time, such as Coke Manufacturing, turns out to be a huge error (p. 62) and the company has to take a substantial hit because it can't find a buyer for the dismantled enterprise and now it has ongoing remediation costs? Did the fact it's a charitable trust ensure that mistakes don't result in rate increases? Well, no.

Can the Mayor fire anybody? Not anymore.

So can we hold someone responsible at a charitable trust if the trustees go completely outside of their core competency, for example, by taking control of a completely mammoth and unrelated enterprise? How could they? The public has no say in who the trustees are, nor in who they appoint to the Citizens Board, nor in who that Board hires or fires.

At least with the Mayor, there was a modicum of accountability if things got screwed up.

Harry S. Truman had a plaque on his desk that read: "The Buck Stops Here."

Greg Ballard just auctioned off that entire spirit so that he can fill the potholes he's left gaping and the sidewalks he's left crumbling.

He might even use some of that as a parlor trick to tell you he achieved the 10% cut in spending that he pledged he would achieve as a condition to his seeking re-election.

The real tragedy is that if the Democratic City-County Council voted as a block, this deal could not pass. But my prediction is that when somebody is told they can get some new sidewalks and look like heroes at re-election time, one or more D's will fall off the wagon and join the Mayor in selling out because, just like the Mayor, they probably won't even BE in office when the excrement hits the oscillating unit.

Hey, Mayor, have you thought about selling the Health & Hospital Corporation to Clarian?

Ballard Goes J.G. Wentworth on Us, But Does Deal Hold Water?

Mitch Daniels & Greg Ballard: Ingenious Republican Strategems - Part II

Last week I talked about Todd Rokita's disingenuous pursuit of legislative districts that are not drawn by "politicians." I got great feedback, but I haven't heard from Rokita's camp in response to my challenge for him to prove his "concept map" creates more competitive districts than currently exist.

Today, I do a two-for-one and talk about Governor Daniel's decision to lease the toll road and Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard's decision to lease Indianapolis parking meter collections and operations.

Probably the greatest failing of democracy is its ineptitude at stopping politicians from mortgaging our children's future. It's easier to push expenses into the 2030s then make us square up now because the people who will ultimately pay the tab are too enthralled with Handy Manny and his screwdriver to notice they're the ones being screwed. Buying now and making people who can't vote pay later is a tried and true political gambit.

But what if, instead of pushing expenses into the future, you could bring money you were going to earn...back from the future like Marty and Doc Brown?

Oh, the political brilliance of this idea is so profound, you'll be amazed to know the Governor and Mayor Ballard were probably inspired to adopt it by a J.G. Wentworth commercial.

Here's a typical script, if you haven't seen one of those:

A J.G. Wentworth success story. Felicia and the annuity.

Felicia: A few years ago, I inherited an annuity from my grandfather. I started receiving monthly payments from his insurance company. Then everything seemed to happen at once.

Narrator: Felicia's employer moved to another state, and she was left unemployed.

Felicia: Your money starts to go pretty fast when there's no cash coming in.

Narrator: J.G. Wentworth knows that a big change in life's circumstances can change how you view your annuity.

Felicia: I heard about J.G. Wentworth through TV ads.

Narrator: If you have an annuity that is no longer serving your needs, and you need cash now, call J.G. Wentworth. You'll get a free appraisal and have all your questions answered. Don't wait. The sooner you call, the faster you'll have your money.

The premise of annuity conversion is pretty simple, and politically-speaking, breath-takingly shrewd. Say you have an asset that will create revenue for you into the indefinite future, like a toll road or a ton of parking meters. You could wait and get the money year to year, but if you're a Governor or Mayor, wouldn't it be more fun to get all the money for the next 10 to 90 years or so right now? All you have to do is enter into a long-term lease with a company that will give you a big lump sum now because, unlike you, they'll be around after eight years still making money hand over first.

If you do this, not only will you have more money for roads or billionaire sports owner prop-ups, this tactic is also a handy middle finger to the guy or gal who unseats you. That's money they won't get! Heh heh.

You think I'm wrong? Tell me this script wouldn't have worked as well as the original:

A J.G. Wentworth success story. Mitch and the toll road.

Mitch: Back in 2004, I inherited a state in pretty good fiscal shape. I started receiving monthly payments from the toll road. Then everything seemed to happen at once.

Narrator: Mitch's Indiana employers moved to other states, and Mitch was left with growing numbers of unemployed.

Mitch: Your money starts to go pretty fast when there's no cash coming in.

Narrator: J.G. Wentworth knows that a big change in life's circumstances can change how you view your toll road revenues.

Mitch: I heard about J.G. Wentworth through TV ads.

Narrator: If you own a toll road that is no longer serving your needs, and you need cash now, call J.G. Wentworth. You'll get a free long-term lease appraisal and have all your questions answered. Don't wait. The sooner you call, the faster you'll have your money from an international conglomerate.

I rest my case.

Also, you notice how Mayor Ballard won't tell us how many years the contract for parking services with be? He'll just say that it will be long enough that the company can recover its investment. I promise you it will extend beyond his term.

Why should this concern you? Right after the toll road transferred hands, the rates went up big time. Expect the same with parking downtown, friends.....because (in their minds)...it's "their money and they want it now!"

Mitch Daniels & Greg Ballard: Ingenious Republican Strategems - Part II

Will Mayor McCheese Demand KFC Pull Racist Ads?

As most people know, our Mayor has accepted $5,000 worth of fire extinguishers and smoke detectors from Kentucky Fried Chicken in exchange for appearing in some press photos and letting KFC put its logo on the extinguishers and some Indy fire hydrants.

As the Indianapolis Business Journal story notes, this money comes as a promotion for KFC's new "fiery" chicken wings.

I'm sorry, but when did $5,000 become the sales price for our city's dignity, Mr. Mayor? Even if we are hard up for cash, why would you negotiate such a crappy deal? Don't you see how much free press KFC gets just from the story about the deal? They probably saved $20,000 in regional advertising costs, and since this story is being churned by KFC nationally, well, who knows how much else they saved on marketing by getting two tool-for-mayors (the other city is Brazil, Indiana) to sign off on this reputation-crushing venture.

And if we're going to rent space on our hydrants, why give it to a company that authorized one of the most racist television ads I've ever seen.



Yes, the ad, which tells white people to offer a bucket of chicken as the cure for black loudness, only runs in Australia. But we're suppose to accept they've never heard of the stereotype? They know. And so does the Mayor.
So will he step up and demand a change in KFC policy, or will he take the hush money (and bisquits) and, once again, disappear.

Will Mayor McCheese Demand KFC Pull Racist Ads?

BAD INTEL! So Deputy Mayor's son is NOT Independent!

Okay, so Deputy Mayor Olgen Williams' son IS running as a REPUBLICAN. I posted that he was running as an Independent, and this is obviously not accurate. Williams' comment may have been describing his political m.o., not his party, when he said he was an independent.
IPOPA apologizes for the error.

(Next time I'll wait for the declaration of candidacy!)

BAD INTEL! So Deputy Mayor's son is NOT Independent!

The Ballad of Ballard - A Dramedy In One Scene

Scene 1.

Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard sits in his office drinking a supersized, diet Mountain Dew while reading over a stack of papers. Two advisors lurk over him, one holding the Mayor's Quarterpounder and the other holding his supersized order of fries.

Mayor: I tell you, boys, the Corps was a lot easier. Semper Fi! (SLURP!) See, back then, people would tell me what to do, and I was a whiz following their notions and whatnot. I was an implementer, not an idealator. But now I've got to figure things out all the time. I haven't had a lot of practice at that. (SLURP!)

Advisor 1 (emphatically): We know!

Mayor: 'Member when I let Senator Kenley try to solve our CIB problems with some of these so-called "ideas" while I hid under my desk? He shore got beat like a rented mule. That plan got blown up like a watermelon in Dan Burton's back yard! And 'member when I thought it was a good idea to let my donor buddy at the country club have an IMPD squad car? Look what that got me! An ethics complaint! Ideas are dangerous, so it's best not to have any. That's why I'm glad you guys invented all those Requests for Proposals, Requests for Information, and Requests for Ideas!

Advisor 2: Well, we didn't create Requests for Prop...

Mayor: They're awesome! (SLURP!) Like, you know how we still don't know what to do with the CIB, so we just said, "Here ya go, private sector boys! Tell us what you'd do, and maybe we'll let ya!" Know how we've got a City Market as productive as a Steve Buyer scholarship fund? If it weren't for consultants, private sector input, and that Board, I'd have to come up with an idea. And remember when I didn't have any ideas for neighborhood-based, crime-fighting strategies for our police, so we just privatized it by cutting some checks to neighborhood groups and ministers and telling them to use the money for idea-lizing the crime problem?

Advisor 1 (rolls eyes): Mr. Mayor, we're getting roasted on violent crime!

Mayor: Homicides are lower than ever, at least that's what somebody on Abdul in the Morning said I should be saying.

Advisor 2: We should tell people to take solace that they're only getting robbed and shot but not killed?

Mayor: That's right, they need to know that they probably won't die under my administration...because Wishard does such a great job. Good thing we're getting a new hospital. That right there....that's another good idea that I had nothing to do with. (SLURP!) See how awesome it is when you don't have ideas? You can jump on at the very end and have everybody treat you like the hero!

Advisor 1: Mr. Mayor, this is all fascinating, but we need to focus. We still have a budget shortfall, and you pledged a ten percent across-the-board cut, so we're going to have to come up with another idea for making or saving some money. We need ideas.

Mayor: Didn't you ever read Shakespeare, son?!? Remember Julius "Dr. J." Caesar? Remember when the seer warned, "Fear the Ideas of March?"

Advisor 2: Mr. Mayor, that was the Ides of M...

Mayor: Whoo hoo!!! I've got it, boys! Privatizing and selling assets is so cool, let's issue an RFP to see what ideas the private sector can come up with for my office. I bet if we talked to IBM, they might be able to figure out ways to do what I do better than I'm doing it now. I bet we could get them for a song, too, 'cause I heard they're looking for government work. Maybe if there wasn't a mayor's office here, we could do something really cool with it, like having a little Chinatown on the 25th floor with fortune cookies that read "Help! I'm trapped in a government bureaucracy!" Ha ha ha! Boy, I tell you, that'd be awesome. (SLURP!)

Advisor 2: I'm sorry, are you saying you want to privatize your entire office?

Mayor: Why not? I'm not using it all that much, am I?

Exeunt.

The Ballad of Ballard - A Dramedy In One Scene

Tew for One! Kennedy Picks Up Kip, iPOPA Quotes "The Wire"

Here's a message for my fellow Marion County Democrats.

Kip Tew, President Obama's state campaign chair, has shelved his mayoral ambitions and endorsed Democrat Melina Kennedy for Mayor. Kip states that Melina's work ethic and ability on the campaign trail convinced him she's the best candidate for the Democratic Party.

Embracing the Kennedy talking points, Kip notes, “Melina is an experienced job-creator, she is passionate about all of our families’ futures, and her vision of an Indianapolis that reaches higher is something--as a father--I believe in.”

While iPopa is a fan of Kip's mavericky ways, objectively, I knew his vocation ("lawyer-lobbyist") wouldn't bode any better for his candidacy than the media's labeling of Brian Williams as a "venture capitalist." (Yow! Way to morph a thoughtful idea man into a cigar-chomping, Republican archetype!)

By stepping out now, Kip furthers the coalescence that has been building around Melina among Democratic Party regulars since Joe Hogsett stepped out.

Part of being painfully objective means you give both sides of a story, even when it pains you. So here it is.

It will be difficult to convince me the Kennedy campaign operation isn't getting smarter. Her press release bio footer no longer starts with her employment at a (gasp!) big, Indianapolis law firm. Instead, it centers on Melina's job growth efforts, both as deputy mayor and as co-owner of what, for my money, is the best athletic shoe store in Indy. The bio footer also highlights Melina's notable civic engagement. While this footer should have been done from the outset, I'm fond of the saying, "Don't complain they showed up late to the party; celebrate the fact they got here."

On the downside, while Melina has an endorsement from the Laborers, I'm hearing that she's got some selling to do in the labor community (which wasn't all that eager to cough up for her prosecutor's race until an eight-hundred-pound gorilla-mayor sat on some folks). Also, I've talked to too many people who, while acting certain Melina is going to be our consensus candidate, do so with an air of startling ambivalence. It reminds me of a guy whose crotch is sideswiped by a football toss - he knows the pain is coming, and so he just accepts its inevitability.

I'm sorry, but I'm just seeing too much muted enthusiasm for my tastes, but what galls me is that nobody will express reservations publicly (or for attribution).

I'm praying I'm reading this all wrong because Melina is amazingly talented and prepared. She's legit, not faux mayor dressing. But soon it won't matter because the window will close on everybody who thought about saying the Empress has No Clothes but didn't.

To paraphrase Slim Charles from the greatest show of all time, The Wire:

"Fact is, we went to war, and now there ain't no going back. Once you in it, you in it. If it's a lie, then we fight on that lie. But we gotta fight."

If you think our best hope to reclaim the 25th floor is Brian Williams, Jose Evans, or Melina, get off the fence and speak your piece urgently because when this moment passes, whoever emerges (smart money says Melina) will need your full-throated support and donations.

And anybody who thinks Mayor Ballard will not be formidable is delusional. Look at his bank account. Too many people that spit on him four years ago have a vested interest in him now.

We can win the Mayor's office, but only if all the good soliders are ready for battle. If Melina is our General, are you?

Tew for One! Kennedy Picks Up Kip, iPOPA Quotes "The Wire"

Mayor Ballard Plays Cloak and Dagger

Matt Tully has a great piece today in the Indianapolis Star on how Mayor Greg Ballard leaned on Republican city-county councilors in a secret cloakroom meeting to ensure that no smoking ban ordinance would ever reach his desk. He did this because he didn't want to have to veto the measure.

Many Republican bloggers contend Mayor Ballard had no ultimate hand in the measure not passing, as he didn't influence any votes.

That's really your defense?!?! That, yes, the mayor did put a dagger in the back of public health advocates by pressuring counselors to vote against the ban that he publicly supported during his campaign, but it's okay because he's so ineffectual as a leader that he couldn't persuade a single member of his own party to do an about-face?!?!

If I were City-County Councilor Ben Hunter (R), I'd be irate. Nothing is worse in politics than getting beaten up for a tough stand when you don't get the positive result. Had Hunter known the Mayor would veto the measure, does anybody think he would have been carrying the water for so long and taking arrows from every bar owner in Indy? Way to leave your guy hanging, Mayor!

At least now we know the Mayor's position on a full ban. There was some ambiguity before Tully's investigation. On WTHR-13, the news reporter actually said the following:

"The Mayor had previously stated that he was not sure if he was ready to sign such a bill (a full ban) into law. He said tonight that his position on the measure has not changed."

I laughed out loud. He actually told a member of the media that his position, which was to not have a position, remained the same. Way to remain fully committed....to your own ambivalence.

Mayor, let me introduce you to a well-known phrase from Congressman Andre Carson: bold leadership. Try it sometime. If you had done so, you wouldn't have public health advocates and Ben Hunter at your throat now, and Luke Kenley wouldn't be sore at you for disappearing into the rabit hole while he was taking political shrapnel for you with a CIB bailout proposal.

Mayor Ballard Plays Cloak and Dagger

IPOPA'S Open Letter to Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard - Don't Go!

Mr. Mayor:

I've never seen an incumbent mayor facing such swirling discontent about his administration without an accompanying scandal. The general tone of the criticism isn't that you have done something wrong, it's that you haven't done anything at all, or to the extent you have, it's been mishandled. Rumor is that you might not have the sea legs for the 25th floor and are looking to jump ship.

I was glad when I heard your press secretary denounced the rumors as "utterly ridiculous." He also said Democrats were spreading them, trying to weaken you. Oh, Caesar! You cannot see the Brutuses among you! Sir, my party would love nothing better than to have you on the ballot in 2011. You should ditch the partisan paranoia and start getting rough-and-tumble with the enemy within.

Because we Democrats would so very much much enjoy it if you stayed, can I offer a few thoughts?

Don't listen to the sirens who whisper that you need to resign for the good of the Republican party. Here's why. They will tell you that you can save face and say you needed to resign for health reasons. They will tell you that you can save face by looking like a stand-up guy when you say you needed to resign because you pledged to cut 10% of the budget or be a one-termer, and you won't reach those cuts. They will tell you that you can save face by saying you got a great offer to work in the philanthropic or up-and-coming life sciences industry, and they might even GET you that type of job.

BUT at the end of the day, any incoming Republican must distance him or herself from your mishandling or non-handling of a great many things. That means leaks regarding how they REALLY orchestrated your ouster. While you would have front-page quote friendliness, these same people will be absolutely destroying you behind your back out of political necessity. They MUST distance themselves from you; you will be treated no better than an outgoing Democratic administration. You will eat every mistake twice over "on background."

I would think a Marine would rather go to the bell in a fight. At least if you did that, you could control how your story is written. But the other road? As soon as you step out of that office and hand it back to the very people who savaged you during your campaign - those same wealthy, fat-cat Republicans who detested your populism and had the audacity to act like they were with you all along when they made their first appearance during your victory speech - well, sir, they will turn you into one of those blow-up punching bags, except you'd be the type that never bounces back up.

All the microphones and cameras you once had at your disposal to defend yourself will disappear, and you'll just be a man in front of blowing tumbleweeds, returning to the obscurity that started as your greatest political asset. Is that the legacy you want?

IPOPA'S Open Letter to Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard - Don't Go!

Mayor Ballard is a Coward!

Yes, Your Honor. I'm calling you out. By name. You are a coward with a logic deficit.

In the most insane example of having your cake and eating it, too, you had the audacity to glamour shot your way into Luke Kenley's press conference about the CIB bail out proposal only to offer the following, which comes from today's Indianapolis Star:

Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard, who joined Kenley at a news conference Wednesday at which the plan was outlined, wouldn't say he endorsed the details but said he supported the need to preserve the convention and entertainment business in Downtown Indianapolis.

WHAT?!?!?!?

If you're not there to endorse THIS deal, what deal are you there endorsing? We don't know. Because you won't say. And you won't say because you're a coward. You KNOW you came into office on a platform of lower taxes, and here you are, ready to stick it to us already to make sure we take care of billionaires who pay millionaires to play a game.

Let me be fair, you also said the following:

"This is not about any individual teams or anything. This is about Downtown Indianapolis. This is about the convention business. This is about $3.5 billion worth of convention business, 66,000 jobs in Central Indiana related to hospitality -- that's what this is about," Ballard said. "We must maintain this economic engine."

That's the illogical part. We COULD make up the entire deficit by raising admission per ticket at Conseco events. You know why we won't do that? We're told it would be too costly. People will stop going to Pacer games. But isn't this Republican Party orthodoxy? Raise taxes, lose voters? Raise prices, lose customers? And yet, here sits a Republican Mayor saying that by RAISING hospitality taxes to one of the highest IN THE NATION, somehow we're going to save our convention employees. (In fairness to the Mayor, his non-approach benefits millionaires primarily at the expense of average folk who will take the hit on these regressive tax increases, so that part is consistent with Republican philosophy).

NO convention group books here because they want to go to a Pacer game. They book because we have a lot of low-cost but nice hotel space, nice restaurants and nightlife to enjoy, proximity between hotel and convention space, and a clean and interesting cityscape (a/k/a "ambiance").

But, Mayor, you let Luke Kenley take the largest competitive arrow out of your quiver and break it over his knee before your very eyes. (Seriously, if you're currently in high school taking your first economics class, can you PLEASE call the Mayor's Office?)

You see, Mr. Mayor, in economics we have a notion called "competition." If person A can get something CHEAPER from city B than from City I (for incompetent), they will. This means And the 66,000 people you claim to protect are all laid off because NOBODY is coming here.

Here are two other concepts you might find "neat." Demand for a good can be "elastic" or "inelastic." If demand is "inelastic," people will buy even if the prices rise insanely. Medical care is a great example. Most people like to live, so they'll sell their second-born to finance a life-saving surgery, even if you double the cost. But if demand is "elastic," an increase in price means people won't buy the good or service anymore even with a slight increase. You know what makes demand "elastic?" Having options to do other things.

So, say for instance I'm already thinking about not eating out anymore because things are tight, and NOW I'm going to have to pay even MORE, not only in downtown but everywhere in Marion County. Guess what I'll do? Eat out less. So NOW your expected new tax money never shows up, and all you've done in the mean time is hurt the very restaurants you claim you're trying to help by keeping the Pacers downtown.

See what you've done? You've stood silent while the most powerful Republican at the Statehouse save Mitch Daniels constructed a fix on a shaky foundation. But the truth is, this is what Kenley and you wanted to do all along. You'll put this ill-thought out bailout into play, SAY "Mission Accomplished," and you'll pray that President Obama gets the economy moving. Then if it happens, you act like you're geniuses. If it doesn't, you'll blame Obama for the "sluggish national economy," though we'll all know the truth. Whatever protection of, or growth of, our "hospitality economy" you could have afforded RIGHT NOW was stagnated because one of your top advisors runs in a millionaire boys club. How grand. How Bob Grand.

Mayor Ballard is a Coward!

Public Safety Mayor Diverts Funds, and I Know Why!

The Indianapolis Star reports today that money for 100 new IMPD officers has been diverted by Mayor Ballard to pay for "needs not covered in the 2008 budget: retirement benefits, contractual raises, overtime, and fuel.

Retirement benefits are unavoidable, but a Mayor not beholden to the FOP would grandfather in existing officers (if this hasn't already been done) and ditch pensions for all new classes just like private sector employers have done in favor of individual savings retirement accounts. Contractual raises are the same. You have to pay them through the contract term, but mayors not beholden to the FOP need not keep offering them every election cycle as a quid pro quo for an endorsement.

But overtime and fuel are things you CAN control, and I learned something fascinating the other day talking with four IMPD officers. Last year, IMPD officers would attend "roll call" every other month. Now these officers attend EVERY DAY. These officers disclosed that these roll calls are at least 30 minutes in length, and they have to drive THROUGH their particular beats to get to the roll call, meaning there are additional fuel costs. None of these officers could explain why they have roll call every day, though two offered that they believe the higher ups think closer eyes make it less likely that they'll get in trouble. Great! Now we're paying overtime and fuel so IMPD can be babysat? One laughed that higher ups think an officer might confess to a rape or disclose that he's tipping off drug dealers if they have to go to roll call every day.

Having grown up with Hill Street Blues and having watch "muster" on The Wire, I asked whether they received some real good "intelligence" at these meetings. All the officers said no. They said they are more likely to get a report about lady whose cat keeps running away than they are to get substantive information that assists "crime fighting." All the officers stated that there is no information they receive that they can't get by e-mail.

These officers stated that this daily roll call requirement is uniformly viewed as pointless and has caused a huge decrease in morale. As I sat there, two of the officers talked about going to other police departments.

My thought is this. Maybe we could hire a few more officers if we didn't have so much time wasted with mandatory roll calls and so much gas wasted getting there. Also, if we relieved our officers of pointless administrative burdens, maybe we wouldn't need to keep raising the salaries to keep them. If the Mayor is worried about his officers' honesty, increase the polygraphs and let the rest of the force get back on the street.

Public Safety Mayor Diverts Funds, and I Know Why!

O'Connor's Mayoral Mishaps

Say you are managing an incumbent mayor's campaign. You have a staggering financial advantage, and you're running against a guy who can't get a return phone call from his own party leaders. What does conventional wisdom tell you to do?

Ignore the man. Don't appear anywhere with him. Don't debate him. Don't say his name because it will give him free press he can't get on his own. Don't respond to anything he does. Don't even acknowledge his existence, if at all possible.

The problem with conventional wisdom is that it's worthless for incumbents in "tsunami years." Every so often, a wave of outrage revs its head, and voters descend upon their elected officials with vengeance. On the national scene, it happened after Watergate, with Reagan in 1980, and with Gingrich in 1994 (though it flipped back with Clinton in 1996).

In Indianapolis, 2007 was definitely a tsunami year. O'Connor should have thrown the text-book for re-election out the window early on. Anybody that drove the city could see it. Almost as a lark, I started trolling property tax protests, and I immediately saw that this was no fringe group, like the Freemen affiliates who are always trying to invalidate our elected officials based on their failure to sign oaths.

These protests had young and old, black and white, liberal and conservative, blue collar and white collar, gay and straight, and most importantly angry and more angry. After one rally, I remember driving back telling myself, "The Governor is toast!"

I said this because the Mayor of Indianapolis has no real control over property taxes. That's a Governor's fix to make. I know this because the Governor can't stop telling me how he "fixed" property taxes. As an aside, Quicken tells me I'm paying more in sales tax than I'm saving in property taxes, so I sure hope Governor Daniels doesn't fix anything else. If I asked him to fix the creaky knob on my bedroom door, I might come away with no door or bedroom furniture.

But I digress. Given the intensity of the property tax protests, a great commercial would have shown Mayor Peterson opening up his property tax bill, yelling an expletive, and telling everybody to grab their pitchforks because, "I'm a taxpayer just like you, and I'm not going to stand for this! TO THE STATEHOUSE!"

Instead, soooomebody signed off on an ad that had the Mayor saying how we would "work together" to solve the city's problems. In other words, he took ownership of a catastrophe...ON FILM. THEN THEY SHOWED IT TO PEOPLE! There was no frothing at the mouth Mayor. There was just nice guy Bart, the coalition builder. And in the back room, a decision was made to NOT say anything about the Governor for fear that he would get interested in the Indianapolis mayoral race and put money into it. This thinking, quite frankly, was perplexing, which is my polite way of saying "batshizzle insane."

Mitch Daniels hardly acknowledged Greg Ballard as a candidate until after his victory. Daniels had NO interest in putting money in the race because he did not believe, under any circumstances, it could be won (which is another way of saying Daniels read the tea leaves as poorly as did O'Connor).

Ballard then goes out and gets the most succinct and deadly yard sign in political history: "Had Enough?" Of what? It didn't matter. Whatever evil irked you at the moment is what you used to fill in the blank with your mind. Were you a police officer angry about consolidation? Ballard was talking to you. Were you angry at the way the Mayor was silent on Monroe Gray's behavior? Ballard was talking to you. Were you upset that you were shut out of a city-county council meeting packed with the Mayor's supporters? How about the trash that got left on the curb the week before? All of it was Ballard talking to you while not really saying anything concretely.

The entire Ballard campaign was "fresh-roasted coffee." Doesn't that sound delicious? Mmm hmmmm. But nobody knows how "fresh-roasted coffee" is made. We just envision in our minds what we THINK it means, and our imaginations are always more appetizing than reality.

I called a higher up in the Peterson camp (not O'Connor), and I told them two-and-a-half months out that they would lose. Boy, did that make me unpopular, and I got a hearty laugh when I said they needed to attack Ballard immediately.

You see, when you have a tsunami election, you can only survive by diverting the wave because it will crash down somewhere. And if you're running against a nobody, voters go into that booth looking at two options: you or not you. By not engaging Ballard and forcing him to expose himself as a guy who had no real plan early on, Peterson turned his campaign into a referendum election that he could not win. Peterson needed to legitimize Ballard by going at him and building up the strawman that he could then set fire to by exposing Ballard as being unready, a condition that doesn't seem to have improved six months into the job.

Instead, the Peterson camp did nothing but continued to run ads that they knew from their focus groups wouldn't work. Why any manager would sign off on spending money to continue to produce a broken product is beyond me. Only after all hope was lost, did Peterson go negative, and the late hour made him come across as supremely desperate.

Here's the interesting part. I had several friends who are Democrats who voted for Ballard. Then they heard him talk after his election, and they called me and said, "Ooops!" That was maddening. Had Peterson advanced the engagement between voter and Ballard, Peterson might have survived.

But why would O'Connor do something like that? The Mayor wasn't in trouble.

COMING SOON....

...Peterson and O'Connor's Monroe Gray Doctrine...

...the long-awaited race test.....

...how Pam Carter got it right in 1992

STAY TUNED!

O'Connor's Mayoral Mishaps