iPOPA Schools You on "Expectations Game" and Greg Ballard's Thin Line Between Hero and Con Artist

People who follow politics know the most consistent foe for an elected official or candidate is the “expectations game.”

If expectations get set high, the best case scenario is an “as good as expected,” which means you can never actually “win.” If they get set low, you might hold your own with a seasoned opponent just by asking him, “Can I call ya, Joe?” winking, and uttering a complete sentence.

In other words, as paradoxical as this sounds, having people expect nothing from you is great. But here’s an iPOPA corollary. If done right, playing up a catastrophe that isn’t is just as valuable.

Think about it.

You go to a restaurant, and they say you can’t be seated for an hour. But the next thing you know, your little chimichanga-shaped beeper is lighting up 30 minutes later. Or your auto mechanic says, “This will cost $600,” but when the works gets done, it’s only $425. Awesome, right?

Now imagine the scenario where a 3rd party, the manager, steps in at the restaurant and says, “Your wait is an hour? That’s won’t do at all. (To hostess) I want these folks to be seated within 30 minutes!” Or the body shop chief says, “We’re going to cut this bill to $425!” You’d love those people, right? But what if you found out later that the restaurant knew the wait was really probably going to be around 15-20 minutes and the mechanic really had the cost pegged at $350? Wouldn’t you feel suckered?

***

So I’m with my little man at the Marion County main library about two months ago, and as we're walking out, I see somebody I know on the library board photo. Two days later, I see this person, and I mention I was just at the Glendale branch, and that I hoped they could avoid closing it because it was jam-packed. The person responds that (s)he looked at the books and so has another "well-informed individual" and there are cuts to be had to keep the libraries open. I ask for confirmation, and I got what I felt was a pretty resounding expression of confidence.

That was a staggering revelation to me because I’d read the horror stories just like you all about the impending doom. I started wondering about who has a vested interest in claiming impending tragedy that really isn’t? My first thought was that this was an effort to sway referendum voters on whether they really want permanent property tax caps (more on that coming to you later). But then the Mayor swoops in with a solution that isn’t really, and as Democratic mayoral candidate Melina Kennedy pointed out, the financial pinch won't hit until 2014, so it's not like we're going to turn Keystone Avenue in front of the Glendale branch into to a Half-Price Books.

***

So next I hear Indygo is about to be reduced to apparently one bus that just drives in circles from 10th and College to West and Washington. [Okay, it wasn't really that, but it sounded equally cataclysmic.] The next thing I know, the Mayor swoops in with "solutions" that aren't really. I kid you not, his ideas are: (1) tap a $5 million Indygo line of credit without knowing how it will be paid back; (2) shift $1.6 million that has been set aside for insurance to cover lawsuits; and (3) take $3 million from capital improvements (i.e., making the buses less rickety) and use it for operating costs. And for this, the Star gives Ballard the headline: "Ballard Says City Will Help Indygo Pay Expenses." Wow.

My first thought was that Indygo must really know its drivers to put aside that kind of cash for liability. But here's the Mayor, deciding they’ll use this cash to keep the company operational instead of waiting for lawsuits that might never happen. Brilliant! Thank God Ballard is on the 25th Floor because certainly nobody associated with Indygo could have ever come up with "borrow, raid the reserves, and spend our legal funds and pray we hit fewer pedestrians this year."

My point is this … even though I know the economy is bad and dollars are probably tight in most places, after the Mayor's CIB inflated its deficit figures, because of most likely inflated Pacer operating losses, and because of the episodes above, I now find myself suspicious of the books of any entity that the Mayor controls directly or by appointment power or for whom he shills. They keep, curiously, putting him in a position to "save the day" only for us to later learn the day didn't really need saving to the degree claimed or that the saving was just for a day, not a long-term solution.

Conspiratorial? Alright, I admit it. But explain this. Mayor Ballard said he would go into the city and cut 10% of its budget. He hasn't come close. He smashed Bart Peterson for passing an increase in the County Option Income Tax (COIT). But notice he kept the money. Insiders will tell that if Peterson wouldn't have done the COIT, the Indiana General Assembly (cough - Luke Kenley) wouldn't have authorized a state takeover of police and fire pensions, which unloaded a huge burden on the city's finances. In addition, you have a massive federal influx of dollars, which I would wager means that if you add all revenue streams, Greg Ballard has more dollars at his disposal than any Mayor in Indianapolis history. (I'm going to get these numbers!)

So why is the Mayor raising taxes on almost every service provider in the county, and why do we need an imprudent, back-door tax increase in the form of a $170 million bond issue just to fund sidewalk repair? (I still don't know anybody who can say specifically how the separate $262 million from the back-door-tax-hike Cit Gas purchase of the water and wastewater operations will be spent).

Sorry, but, yet again, something doesn't add up here.

In the Ballard Superman story, maybe truth is the kryptonite, which is exactly why the administration, quite frequently, seems to have it tucked away in a lead box.

iPOPA Schools You on "Expectations Game" and Greg Ballard's Thin Line Between Hero and Con Artist

Clarification on Kennedy Firm Status, Ryan Vaughn, and Attorney Silence

I reported last week that Melina Kennedy is a partner at the Indianapolis law firm of Baker & Daniels. In addition, when a commenter stated (preposterously, in my opinion) that Kennedy was mum because she was looking forward to her cut from the legal fees generated by the Citizens Gas deal, I rebutted by stating that she'd be lucky to make $1,800 given the total number of B&D partners.

Here's the problem. She's not a partner. Her relationship with Baker & Daniels is "of counsel," which means she doesn't get a cut. People can pick whatever reasons they want to vote for or against a candidate, but they should be factual, and if I get it wrong, I make amends. My apologies to Ms. Kennedy.

Many have asked about what makes an attorney unable to speak against a government action like the Cit Gas deal, and there are many prohibitions at play in the Rules of Professional Conduct for Indiana attorneys.

Rule 1.6 makes confidential information disclosed in the attorney-client relationship. Rule 1.8(b) states that a lawyer "shall not use information relating to representation of a client to the disadvantage of the client unless the client gives informed consent." Rule 1.9 makes the prohibition in 1.8 apply to former clients as well, and these prohibitions are imputed to all personnel in a firm.

What does this mean?

Attorneys such as Republican City-County Council President and Barnes & Thornburg attorney Ryan Vaughn (go Wabash!) may find themselves unable to engage the bully pulpit to speak out against a deal that would be bad for their constituents, even in cases where the firm had created a "Chinese wall" to keep information out of that particular attorney's hands. On the flip side, if some unknown positives for the Councillor's constituents were in the details, he couldn't go out publicly to sell it in a way he might without the ethical prohibitions in place).

(I asked Vaughn via Facebook if B&T has any connection with the City's water deal as counsel or if it anticipates becoming involved on the bond work, financing, etc., and if so, whether he would recuse himself from voting on the deal. He has not responded yet, but as soon as he does, I will let everyone know his reply).

Not to give fuel to people who are harsh about lawyers, but because we have a stronger obligation to our clients than most professions, we have a higher burden to bear. We can only hope that our elected official reach the right balance and recuse themselves when a conflict exists between their professional duties and their electoral ones.

Clarification on Kennedy Firm Status, Ryan Vaughn, and Attorney Silence

Brian Williams' Lonely Voice On Water Deal

Let me start off by saying that I obviously can't read or hear every TV news segment, radio interview, newspaper story, blog post, or even press release, so this might be a case of selective reception on my part. But when I try to list elected or want-to-be-elected Democrats opposed for any reason to Mayor Ballard's effort to sell our city's water assets, the inkwell dries up quickly.

As of yet, no opposing voice has emerged from the City-County Council, which is strange given that the Mayor will wrap up his four "town-hall meetings" with one this Tuesday (6:30-8:00 p.m., Nu Corinthian Church's Family Life Center, 5935 West 56th Strett) and the last the Tuesday thereafter (6:30-8:00 p.m., Lynhurst 7th & 8th Grad Center, 2805 South Lynhurst Drive). Actually, City-County Councillor Jose Evans was the first to get "into the water" by twice questioning the management of the city's water, and he questioned the deal generally on the Amos Brown show.

But when it comes to what I'd call a thoroughly substantive critique, there's one name in the game - mayoral contender Brian Williams.

Williams tells specifically why the deal is perilous, and he continues to raise the right unasked questions. If you want to see Williams' most recent tug on the curtain of Ballard's faux financial wizardry, read below.

April 8, 2010 Statement[1]

By virtue of his opposition, Williams is garnering media attention.


My fellow Democrats might ask how Melina Kennedy, our party apparatus's perceived frontrunner, can cede this much mic time to her most formidable rival?

She has no choice.

This is one of the tragic drawbacks to being an attorney at Baker & Daniels, one of, if not, Indy's largest law firm. By virtue of being an attorney there, and by virtue of B&D representing one of the principals, she is bound by the rules of professional conduct, and she cannot speak ill of the deal, even if she were so inclined.

Williams clearly knows this, which is why he has repeatedly referred to this deal as the most significant enterprise Mayor Ballard has undertaken. Call it self-serving if you will, but Williams is right, whether you view this as being the result of the enormity of the water company deal or the paucity of other sizeable mayoral accomplishments. What we can say is that every time Williams publicly talks about the deal, somebody unaware of the Baker & Daniels/Melina conflict might think, even if just subconsciously, "Where is Melina?"

And what makes the forced silence more intriguing is that one of the board members for Citizens Gas is Anne Nobles, a senior VP at Eli Lilly who also serves as Melina's campaign chair. (In the interest of full disclosure, Anne was also my mother's boss when she worked for then Governor Evan Bayh, and Anne is one of the most brilliant people you'd ever meet). Because of Melina's current employer, we don't know whether Melina would have shown her moxy and gone womano-a-womano with a powerful friend. I think Melina could have held her own in such a debate, but we'll never know.

This is maddening, mostly because I always get wanked when I see Republicans do something to us that we've done to them.

You see, back when Bart Peterson was Mayor, the expression "getting Keelered" was ushered in. The Marion County GOP Chair, John Keeler, was working as an attorney at Baker & Daniels, and because the city had the firm on retainer, Keeler couldn't chastize Peterson. It was like having a political criticism immunity card card for two years.

We see the same thing here. Whether it was driven by shrewd politicking or simply the natural outgrowth of having so many big players in the Cit Gas deal, every big firm in Indiapolis with anyone inclined to say "Wait a minute," including my party's perceived frontrunner, has been gobbled up.

Let's just hope Melina can get out of the stomach of the beast before the Mayor cooks up his next big idea for public consumption.

UPDATE: I did not wish to imply that the Democrats on the City-County Council have done nothing, as Minority Leader, Joanne Sanders, submitted a resolution on behalf of the caucus requesting an open and transparent discussion of the sale. But this resolution can be fairly described as a "process" resolution, not a substantive critique akin to what Williams has provided. It is curious that the hearing of the resolution before the Rules & Public Policy Committee is set for 5:30 p.m. on Tuesday (Room 260 of the City-County Building). This is one hour before the townhall on the far Northwest side. Great way to guarantee maximum participation by Democratic councillors at the Mayor's little forum - creating a potential scheduling conflict for the caucus members.

Brian Williams' Lonely Voice On Water Deal

The Brizzi Chronicles Continue; iPOPA Asks, "Where are Mayor Greg Ballard and Governor Mitch Daniels?

Russ McQuaid with Fox 59 reported yesterday that Carl Brizzi sold out an alleged rape victim, Amy Lindsey, by giving her assailant a beneficial plea deal because he worked for attorney Paul Page, Brizzi's business partner.

According to Ms. Lindsey, Brizzi worked out a plea deal over lunch with the alleged assailant, Robert Odendahl, along with Mr. Page and attorney Carolyn Rader.

Here's the story from Lindsey:

 
It is critical to note that former Deputy Prosecutor Courtney Curtis, who was on the case, told McQuaid she never told Amy Lindsey that. Instead, Curtis said Lindsey's story was suspect, which is why the office agreed to the reduced charge of criminal confinement, which would keep Mr. Odendahl off the sex offender registry and permit him to later petition for modification of his sentence to a misdemeanor.

Regardless of whether Ms. Lindsey's story is true, this case is disturbing on many levels.

First, Ms. Curtis's phrasing is interesting. She doesn't say the lunch meeting never happened. She says she never told Lindsey that the meeting happened. Wouldn't that be simple enough to check out by asking Page or Brizzi? (I'm thinking Brizzi might not return my call, so can somebody else check?)

And if this meeting happened, how can Brizzi say he's not playing favorites with Page? Breaking bread with the alleged criminals you're prosecuting is what he does with everybody? That's hardly the right signal for a guy supposedly advocating for victims. (If you do criminal defense and you've met Brizzi for lunch with your client, please contact me...because I want to see if you're on Brizzi's donor list).

Also, if the rape story was so suspect, why was Odendahl charged? Didn't the prosecutor screening the case talk to the victim, or does Brizzi's office just charge people with rape willy-nilly to let them correct any mistakes on the back end, provided they have the right counsel?

Elsewhere in the GOP nightmare known as the Brizzi Administration...

The Indianapolis Star joined the chorus of folks asking for Carl Brizzi's resignation. Here's the read:

One of the saddest aspects of the Marion County prosecutor's financial ties to defense attorneys is that they're legal.

The law, however, only opens the door to conflict of interest. Prosecutor Carl Brizzi has walked through, more than once. Two key members of his party have said "enough," and so should Brizzi.

Mark Massa had plenty of strategic reason for demanding Brizzi's resignation Wednesday in the wake of revelations by the Indianapolis Business Journal of Brizzi's intervention in a criminal case on behalf of a client of his business partner.

Massa is the GOP candidate to replace Brizzi, who is not seeking a third term. Democrats will run against Brizzi, in effect, so Massa needs to distance himself.

That said, there is no way Massa's criticism -- seconded by GOP County Chairman Tom John -- can be dismissed as "a political stunt" by an obstinate prosecutor.

It was at best abysmal judgment for Brizzi to have become half-owner of an office building with a criminal defense lawyer. It raises red flags that Brizzi had to put up no money toward the $900,000 investment with Paul J. Page.

Then to personally push through a lenient plea deal for an accused drug dealer who was a Page client, over the objections of the deputy prosecutor, and to order the return of $10,000 confiscated from the defendant, takes observers beyond skepticism to cynicism.

Nor is it the first time.

There is the continuing FBI scrutiny of Brizzi's ties to financier Tim Durham, his 2006 campaign finance chairman and the target of a securities investigation.

And there's the case of Paula Willoughby. Sentenced to 110 years in prison in 1991 for hiring a man to kill her husband, Willoughby walked free in 2009 via a sentence modification Brizzi's office supported. Her father, businessman Harrison Epperly, along with defense attorney Jennifer Lukemeyer and Lukemeyer's law partner James H. Voyles Jr., were election campaign contributors to Brizzi. Brizzi gave back Epperly's $28,500 -- after the sentencing change -- and said it played no role in his decision.

The public should not have to trust him on that, because the entanglements Brizzi has indulged in should not exist in this critical office. Laws and rules, not just personal behavior, should skew toward credibility and independence at all costs. Massa's pledge of a batch of reforms, including eschewal of outside business dealings, sounds bold, if a bit self-serving, in the current atmosphere. It ought to be moot. The old temptations must go, and so must the man who has succumbed to them.

Lucky Carl Strikes Real Estate Gold

First, I'm not sure why people keep reporting Brizzi's Elkhart buildling buy was for $900,000; it was for $825,000. (Look at 1659 Mishawaka Street for the Abnikcar sold to L&BAB LLC entry).

Second, isn't anybody curious about how Brizzi just happened to come upon a property which had 13 of its 15,000 square feet rented by the Indiana Department of Child Services within five months for $248,000 per year on what I'm told (and still trying to confirm) is a "triple net lease"? Under this type of lease, not only does the landowner get a lease payment for the space, renter (in this case, the State of Indiana) would also pay for the real estate taxes, utilities, and maintenance, which means there is literally no risk for Brizzi and Page. At that rental rate, the two would own the building free and clear in just over three years.

Can I ask a question?

Why wouldn't the State of Indiana have just bought the building, which the Department of Administration could have done under Indiana law. Obviously, DCS was in the market for a lot of space. Wouldn't somebody have looked around and said, "Hey, here's a building we can buy for $825,000 that's just the right size! That would sure be cheaper than idiotically leasing that same space for $248,000 a year for ten years!"

Maybe somebody with the state did know DCS was looking. Maybe they were the person looking. And maybe somebody told somebody else about it. Is this conspiratorial supposition? Maybe.

Don't you have to ask how Brizzi got so lucky? What compelled him to look at commercial properties in Elkhart? Was it the thriving Elkhart real estate economy? I bet if you asked, he couldn't answer any better than he could tell you why he bought Cellstar stock.

Also, how does Brizzi get away with listing a 50% interest in an $825,000 building as being worth $50-$100,000 on his Statement of Economic Interests?

First Place Media Strategy

On the politics end, there's been a robust debate in Democratic circles about whether D's should have been first to call for Brizzi's resignation, and I apologize to the Democratic candidates for prosecutor, Terry Curry and Greg Bowes, if anybody took away from my critique the idea they were comfortable with what was going down in Brizzi's office.

I've heard Curry "on the stump" quite a bit, and what this office has become sickens him. But until Massa spoke, nobody had called for Brizzi's resignation publicly or weighed in on Brizzi as strongly as Massa did. Once the dam broke, Curry then took it up a notch and asked for a special prosecutor to investigate Brizzi. Fortunately, this angle got covered by Channel 13. (Well played, sir).

Greg Bowes also took a swing at Massa after the fact:

Yesterday, the Republican candidate for Prosecutor announced he would establish a "Public Integrity Unit" to investigate crimes committed by public officials. On February 12, 2010, when I filed my candidacy papers, I announced to the press that I would establish a public integrity unit. I am glad to see the Republican candidate likes my idea.

Bowes also pointed out his long-standing suspicion of Brizzi's estranged relationship with truth. Bowes reminded voters that in December of 2006, he filed an extremely detailed complaint with the Indiana Disciplinary Commission in which he argued that Brizzi knowingly lied at a public hearing. Bowes wrote:

On July 19, 2006, Carl Brizzi . . .in his capacity as Marion County Prosecutor, gave testimony before (the City-County Council's Public Safety and Criminal Justice Committee) regarding Marion County’s collective efforts to manage the problem of overcrowding in its jail.

While discussing the high-profile release of an detainee, James Stewart, who was later accused of murdering seven people, Mr. Brizzi stated, “He was asked to be held, and the judge made a decision not to hold him.” Mr. Brizzi went on to say, “it was his record that caused my front line deputy to ask that henot be released.” He later said Stewart “was OR’d over our objection.”

These statements were false.

The transcript of Stewart’s initial hearing where he was released shows that no deputy prosecutor asked that Stewart be held, and no deputy prosecutor objected to his release, because there was no deputy prosecutor present.

Now, there is a school of thought that cannot be easily discounted that Democrats ingeniously and intentionally kept silent. The theory goes that by waiting for Massa to ambush Brizzi, Democrats ensured that Brizzi's reaction was to lash out, which, sure enough, he did immediately. Brizzi called Massa's press conference a "political stunt," and then referred to Tom John as one of the most "ineffective chairmen Marion County has seen in decades." I dare say we should expect the "payback is a (expletive)" bud to go full bloom before we leave Spring, and Republicans will devour each other for months to come.

But, reasonable minds can differ, and tactically, I still think Democrats missed the boat on this one.

Here's why.

If Democrats had gone out first, Massa absolutely gets an ostensible out for his action. He can say to Brizzi, "Hey, I want to let you know I have to do this because the Democrats put me in a box." But I can't fathom any universe where Brizzi's anger is lessened when Massa craps all over him, and folks, he was going to haveto do it. Whether you agree with me hinges on whether you think a deep cut from within the family shallows if you see it coming and you can blame somebody else for it having to happen. On that score, I just feel certain we would have seen the "Brizzi backlash" even if Dems had gone first, and we would have picked up the PR bump in the process.

One comment posted on this blog today said I'm wrong because:

(1) Democrats would have been accused of "pulling a stunt" in asking for Brizzi's resignation; and

(2) Republicans are in a circle shooting at each other, and it's best to let them be.

With all due respect to Councillor Jose Evans, a political stunt is when you go to the Mayor's Office and hand him a letter asking for the resignation of the water department director. That's grandiose political theater that everybody knows won't change anything. But here, Brizzi had gone so far over the line, there's no way it would have played like a stunt foremost. If you think I'm wrong, go back up and read the portions of the Star's editorial I italicized.

On the GOP self-slaughter, yeah, once a fracas breaks out among all the principles, you can step back. That's conventional wisdom. But until it broke out, we had the chance to impress upon independent voters that D's were leading the charge to clean up the pervasive Durham-Brizzi-Plowman-(Massa?)-(Daniels?) axis of corruption.

Terry Curry, Greg Bowes, Ed Treacy, and Melina Kennedy all made public statements about Brizzi/Massa, but not before Massa stepped to his microphone. Did you see any of their names in the Star editorial?

Why are Ballard and Daniels Tight-Lipped?

Two big names we haven't heard from on Brizzi are Mayor Greg Ballard and Governor Mitch Daniels.

As I previously reported, Kennedy called on Ballard to ask for Brizzi's resignation as well. The Mayor hasn't replied, and I think I might know why. Ballard's campaign consultant (to the tune of $10,000 per month) is Jennifer Hallowell, the political strategist who got Brizzi elected twice and, by quite a few accounts, either had or currently has a social relationship with Brizzi. That's gotta make things dicey for Hizzoner. How do you publicly bust the chops of your political consultant's boyfriend?

And where is Governor Daniels on this? Does he support Massa's call for Brizzi's resignation? If so, why hasn't Mitch publicly conceded that his biking buddy is "riding dirty?"

Does it have anything to do with the fact that the Governor's Office has to approve leases under Indiana law? I'm sorry, who approved the Brizzi building lease?

The Brizzi Chronicles Continue; iPOPA Asks, "Where are Mayor Greg Ballard and Governor Mitch Daniels?

Massa Marks Up Brizzi, Shows Democrats How It's Done

Last Friday, I wrote this:

...the Brizzi reign has reached such cataclysmically embarrassing proportions, I keep expecting an avalanche of high-ranking Republicans to ask publicly for Brizzi's resignation in concert. But nobody asks. Not Tom John, not Mark Massa, not Murray Clark, and not Governor Daniels. I can only conclude by their complete silence that they are okay with all of this.

Five days later (a/k/a "this morning" for the mathematically-challenged among us), Massa called for Brizzi's resignation, and he was joined shortly thereafter by Marion County GOP Chairman Tom John, to both their credit.

From my good friend, Jon Easter, at Indydemocrat:

Little did we know that the first to break the silence on the issue would be the guy trying to replace him from HIS OWN PARTY, Mark Massa.

Can I ask my own party and its candidates a gentle question?

What in the world were you waiting for?!?

Why were you all acting like you needed the Republicans to make it safe in the political water? Was there any doubt that the Brizzi administration was charting a path strewn with public confidence-crushing scandals?

To her credit, Democratic mayoral candidate Melina Kennedy today asked Mayor Ballard to show leadership and ask for Brizzi's resignation. (Technically, Hizzoner would be joining others again after-the-fact, but we'll take his "leadership" in whatever form we can get it).

Kennedy writes:

On election night in 2007, as television stations and thousands of viewers at home looked on, Greg Ballard chose one person to introduce him as the next mayor: Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi.

The rule of law is the basis of our system. If we lose confidence in the very person who is supposed to prosecute our laws, then our community's respect for the rule of law is deeply compromised. We are at a dangerous moment in the history of our city and we must take public corruption seriously.

Mayor Ballard is uniquely positioned to influence Brizzi given the close relationship described above. Indeed, as Marion County’s top Republican, and Indianapolis' top elected official, Ballard has both the ability and the duty to personally ask Brizzi to resign.

Without delay, Ballard should make every effort to end the reign of unethical and corrupt behavior in positions of public trust.

Now, some Demos have retorted that if Brizzi resigns, Governor Daniels gets to appoint his predecessor! You know he'd pick Massa, his former chief-of-staff, and he'd have eight months as an incumbent and all the perks of the office.

Folks, Democrats calling for Brizzi's resignation first wouldn't have made him leave, it would have emboldened him while giving all the Dems the PR benefit of the moral highground. Then Republicans would have had a harder time making the call themselves because they'd be following Democrats' lead. It could have been a win, win, win.

Instead, Republicans can say they lead the charge to clean up their own house while a lot of Democrats watched from the sideline. Are they wrong?

My kingdom for some Democratic media tacticians.

Massa Marks Up Brizzi, Shows Democrats How It's Done

Evans Mayoral Bid Curious, But His Water Company Meddling Dead-On

Democratic City-County Councillor, Jose Evans, will file paperwork at 2:30 p.m. today that establishes his "exploratory committee" to run for Mayor of Indianapolis, a move that will surely have people shaking their heads.

With a clearly-established candidate among party faithful in Melina Kennedy, a formidable "outsider" candidate in Brian Williams, and even an African-American candidate in former At-Large City-County Councillor Ron Gibson, one may ask, "What's the play here for Evans?" Is this what iPOPA has dubbed a "Braveheart maneuver" (trying to get concessions from your opponents to force you off the battlefield) or just an effort to elevate profile, as Jim Shella with WISH-TV suggests.

Before Gibson's entry, Evans had a hail mary-type long-shot chance at potentially garnering support for a plurality in an inverted Thomas Carcetti/The Wire scenario. But now that Gibson stepped in, he forces Evans to fight to preserve the segment of voters with no real connection to political folk but who think it's time for Indianapolis to have an African-American mayor.

Also, it's not clear who supports Evans' bid yet, nor will we find out immediately. Evans is not announcing his candidacy like Gibson, who drew at least 50 supporters to a rally; he is only handing over paper for said "exploratory committee," which makes it sound like Jose is two-stepping his way into the race. This late in the game, Evans cannot afford to be coy, and he should expect some political blowback from this effort. To paraphrase sage words once uttered by Democratic Party Chair Ed Treacy, "We need fewer candidates, not more."

But when praise is do, I give it, and here it is.

For months, Evans has been criticizing the Ballard Administration's handling of the water company, and he's been trying to publicly force the Mayor's Office to discuss what plans its has for a sale to Citizens Gas. I've seen at least three separate press releases for such calls that went unheeded and, perhaps in part because council Democrats just assumed Evans was seeking the limelight and going rogue, nobody signed on.

This is not to say none of the D's on the council weren't paying attention. Democratic City-County Council leaders have been working behind the scenes collecting information, believing that the Mayor would let them know before any real progress was made, and last week, the caucus introduced a resolution seeking that the mayor ensure a public process. That resolution was sent to the rules committee by Republicans, and the meeting at which it was to be heard last Tuesday was cancelled.

Now guess what? Democratic blogger Terry Burns reports there is now a "deal" that will be presented to the caucus this evening. The presentation was already made to Republicans on Monday, and I'm told that, but for Citizens and its attorneys, no presentation would have been made at all to Democrats.

There are all kinds of "teachable moments" here for my fellow Democrats, so absorb them:

1. You can't trust anything Mayor Ballard says about "transparency."

2. There's a fine line between paranoia and political astuteness. We like to believe when people say, "I'll let you know," and that's fine. But on this one, Jose Evans fell on the right side on the line. I admire the council resolution, but I can't help but wonder. If the entire caucus had "gone public" to the media, might an enterprising TV reporter have gone to the 25th Floor and asked, "Is city legal and/or an Indianapolis law firm representing Citizens Gas negotiating and/or writing up a purchase agreement as we speak? Doesn't the public have a right to be heard on this?"

3. We should remember to check our human nature, which often lets our feelings about the "who" prevail over our logic surrounding the "what." Even if Evans' critics think he got information wrong or did this for all the wrong reasons, he rightly saw a ram-rod coming.

4. The Ballard administration is ingenius at buying off individual Dems. Now that a deal seems to be a fait accompli, expect it to chisel off individual D councillors by offering a cut of the pie. Hopefully, D councillors will not fall for the siren song and completely fail to recognize potentially catastrophic long-term implications.

5. Finally, remember Luke 12:24: "You cannot serve two masters at the same time. You will hate one and love the other, or you will be loyal to the one and not care about the other." Every elected official or party with the mind to take advice from an attorney better memorize the attorney's client list because the Rules of Professional Conduct require allegiance to the client's interests to trump any political friendship you think you have.

As two of the Marion County Democratic Party's most prominent advisors and financiers serve with the law firm representing Citizens Gas, the effort to persuade D's to vote in favor might actually be led by my own party's consiglieres, bringing with them, not horse heads in beds, but statements like, "This is going to happen, so you need to get what you can as quickly as you can before there's nothing left."

Ahh, my kingdom for a modicum of Democratic solidarity even when the Mayor deals a bad hand. But, hey, politics isn't pretty, and somebody has to pay for the re-election campaigns.

Evans Mayoral Bid Curious, But His Water Company Meddling Dead-On

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"

Kennedy Endorsement Raises Question: Personal Gratitude or Inside Information?

Yesterday, Laborers Local 120 endorsed Democrat Melina Kennedy's mayoral bid, citing her "experience as a proven job-creator."

Laborer's business manager David Frye also complimented Kennedy's "passion for working families" and her vision and leadership which he states will get "this city moving forward again."

What is notable about this public endorsement is that...well, it's public.

Folks around the two front-runners' camps (sorry to the others, but I'm talking about Melina and Joe Hogsett for the moment), both believe they will have Congressman Carson's endorsement, and they are not afraid to make the prediction. Maybe neither of them is saying it directly, but, boy, an awful lot of their emissaries are talking like they have "inside information."

If the Congressman is leaning, he's holding the cards close to the vest, which makes the Laborers the first "smart money" entity to go out on a wing.

Every union endorsement is a momentum generator, but how huge it will be remains to be seen. Local 120's website states it represents 2,000 workers, but this number includes "Central Indiana," not just Marion County. Also, going back to 2001, Local 120 has only donated $54,000 combined to all state representatives, senators, statewide candidates, party committees, and party caucuses, with the latter two getting the lion's share. Local 120 largest donations to any candidate during that time were checks totaling only $6,000 to Jim Schellinger in the 2007 and 2008 election cycles.

Of course, as with any organization that has larger bodies to which it belongs, if the Local 120 guys can convince the guys in Terre Haute who preside over the state Laborers PAC, or even the national in D.C. to get interested, Kennedy could see a good-sized faucet open (Laborers combined donations equal $734,000 in donations since 2001, though, again, most large donations have been to party and caucus committees).

But I wouldn't be too optimistic at this juncture. I cannot see any state or national union PAC wanting to throw in on a Democratic Party primary for Mayor of Indianapolis until it's closer to a fait accompli. Right now, most people are waiting for the first reporting period, which is going to shock some folks.

But I promise this. If Kennedy can string together more key labor endorsements from unions like SEIU (which was tight in the Obama camp Melina belonged to), AFSCME, the IBEW, or the UAW, people are going to definitely start thinking that the Congressman has let slip a preference. I just can't envision any politically-astute union standing in the way of the Congressman's wish, and those who don't know his preference, wouldn't likely move. Of course, endorsements can be "personal," and if the Laborers benefited from projects overseen by Kennedy, this may be as simple as well-earned gratitude, not an effort to challenge the Congressman's ultimate choice. But not knowing the political calculus will make people wonder.

This Democratic primary is equivalent it is to stock market trading, with one key exception - there's no prohibition against insider information in politics. Think of the Congressman as the upcoming press announcement on what entity will take over Indy Mayor, Inc. When the "institutional investors" like Laborers 120 start buying up shares in Kennedy Co., people on the street want to know what they know.

Kennedy Endorsement Raises Question: Personal Gratitude or Inside Information?

Democrats Won't Clear Up Gray Skies

I love my county party. Anybody who says otherwise should expect words. But I am looking for someone - anyone - who has the cajones to make it act right. I started this blog because I was tired of waking up embarrassed by the latest idiocy of a D elected local official. Two years and 328 blog posts later, and the hits keep coming...

WRTV-6 reports yesterday that Democratic City-County Councilor Monroe Gray hasn't registered his automobile in three years. This follows the past two years, during which he received a censure for failing to disclose conflicts of interest, shut down an investigation of his alleged ghost employment, and was hit with a slew of lawsuits filed against his construction company. Oh, he also said he didn't know anything about the 300 East project, even though his wife was a principal investor. There's nothing illegal about that, but, boy, it sure tarnished his credibility across the board.

The Gray news follows a police report last month that Democratic City-County Councilor Doris Minton-McNeil, who was recently acquitted on battery charges, had a neighbor complain on a 9-1-1 call that she was intoxicated and nearly hit somebody with her vehicle. I'm not one who sides with police automatically, and I thought from the outset they exaggerated the battery charge. (As an aside, I would have loved it if Judge Christ-Garcia would have entered findings because I'm almost certain the element the prosecution didn't prove was intent. I bet the contact with the officer was the kind that happens when somebody hammered is trying to navigate through a crowded bar on the way to the bathroom).

I also wouldn't automatically rule out a police vendetta. But now I'm supposed to believe police co-opted a neighbor on the scam? Seriously, what kind of adult beefs with a neighbor to the extent the neighbor calls 9-1-1? Are we running a city or auditioning for Jerry Springer?

Here's my question. When does Democratic Party Chair Ed Treacy, Congressman Carson, the other Democratic members of the city-county council, or anybody else who wants to lead this city from the Democratic aisle say, "Enough is enough!" When do we stop enabling?

The notion that significant party heavyweights have not already asked for these folks' resignations, even if behind closed doors, is inexplicable to me, but I cannot find any evidence anyone ever has. (If somebody out there knows otherwise, feel free to correct me).

Mayor Peterson came close. He was livid, and he wanted to distance himself from Monroe. But some in Mayor Peterson's circle told him he couldn't because he would alienate an African-American constituency he was going to need on election day. By the way, how funny is it that the advisors were white guys? Also, anybody know how that strategy worked out?

Anyway, I wanted to see if any of our would-be mayors (Jose Evans, Brian Williams, Kip Tew, Melina Kennedy, and Joe Hogsett) would close the deal on a wayward councilor, so I sent them all inquiries on their Facebook accounts and/or to their e-mails to see if they would ask for McNeil's resignation either publicly or behind-the-scenes. (I would have kept the responses confidential if they said "behind the scenes," of course.)

Two never responded, and three offered comments that required a bit of "reading the tea leaves." For example, while not answering the question directly, Brian Williams reminded me that when former Colts Mike Vanderjagt got liquored up and said some things he shouldn't have, Peyton Manning called him our "idiot kicker."

Williams' remark serves the point nicely. That's leadership folks. Peyton could have had a private conversation with Vanderjagt, but he wanted to remind the public that Vanderjagt's conduct wasn't Colts conduct. Who is the quarterback for our team who will make that point publicly?

What makes it hard for any of these five to step up in a visible way?

First, for a lot of influential Democrats, Monroe Gray is like family and his associations run deep. If you call for putting him out to pasture, you alienate a multitude of political and business folk for whom he's done favors (and as many have done favors for him). Of course, you would get the gratitude of a staggeringly higher number, but you'd never know this because nobody will tell you out loud for fear of retribution. Politics is peopled with the self-interested and terrified.

Ms. Minton-McNeil is equally perceived as "protected." She was widely-regarded as the Congressman's favored choice for filling his former council seat. Anybody want to cross the Congressman when he's swinging the big bat in the mayoral slating contest? Didn't think so.

I know both Gray and Minton-McNeil are party "friends," and I generally subscribe to the notion that if you don't stand with your friends, you stand alone. But I've also heard the saying "with friends like these...."

Some may say, "They haven't done anything illegal, or seriously illegal. Let the voters decide. If the voters want to keep them, who are we to interfere with democracy!?!"

First, I can't be content with my party using "Anything Not Illegal" as it's guidepost for acceptable conduct. Second, the "let the voters decide" approach is so staggeringly naive that no serious person could say it if (s)he cared about his or her party. I don't want to rehash my "brand" speech, but a stain on one on the Democratic ticket is a stain on all.

Don't believe me? Ask South Carolina Republicans how they're doing waiting for Mark Sanford's term to end. Do you think their fund-raising is up this year?

Of all the mayoral candidates, the one whose response gave me the most confidence that he would take action was Jose Evans. He seemed most invested in reforming the image of the party. This makes sense because as a member of the council, he's probably tired of being in the WRTV B-roll for every scandal, and he's probably tired of fielding questions about whether he stands by scandal-plagued colleague x or y. It has to be exhausting.

Also, Jose is the only one who can ask for Monroe Gray and Doris Minton-McNeil's to step down without looking like a racist, though I'm sure some wouldn't be above accusing him of being a white sock puppet were he to do so.

Why would a call for a step-down be viewed in racial terms? Because the replacements would be uncertain, and while you shouldn't expect anybody to say this out loud, a core group of the Democratic movers and shakers in the African-American community have done a sterling job hoisting an unspoken edict on the Marion County Democratic Party, and it is this: no depletion of African-American political power. Were I a historically disenfranchised minority, I'd see this as both understandable and shrewd bargaining.

But what I'm talking about doesn't require a depletion of African-American political strength. It just requires better African-American talent. Were I Ed Treacy, I'd go through every poll book in Gray and Minton-McNeil's districts, and I'd find African-American replacements who I'd then vet on every conceivable issue. Once I was convinced of the reasonable likelihood they wouldn't humiliate the party, I'd commit every resource available to ensuring their victory. I would do everything I could to convince every African-American elected officer in the county - be it a township trustee, judge, auditor, state representative or state senator - that none of this was racial, and all of it was practical and prudential. I might even spread contributions to those elected officials to emphasize the point.

In other words, I'd put my money and organizational heft where my mouth was, and if somebody of another race came out of the woodwork to challenge the natural order of things, I'd put him or her down. You have to give something to get something, and getting rid of this bad PR will pay for itself three times over.

I've now heard repeatedly about a meeting of influential Democrats during which a suggestion was made (and, no, I'm not going to say by whom) to have Democrat PR experts and attorneys on the ready in case someone got into trouble again.

Tell me, dear IPOPA reader, isn't your reaction to this suggestion precisely the same as every other human being's reaction...except for some of those in the room that day? Weren't you thinking, "Wouldn't it be easier just to NOT get in trouble?" If so, welcome to the surreal world that is not very often, but still far too many times, the mentality of some key personnel within the Marion County Democratic Party.

Democrats Won't Clear Up Gray Skies

Memory Lane for D Activists and Godfather Fans: Mayor's Race and Thoughts of the "Good Old Days?"

I suppose since many Republicans are plotting the ouster of their incumbent mayor, I should be grateful my current struggle is limited to not wanting to disappoint my friends.

In my informal polling of precinct committee people in Indianapolis, none of the most widely-touted Democratic contenders for Mayor - Jose Evans, Joe Hogsett, Melinda Kennedy, Kip Tew, or Brian Williams - are gaining "knock out blow" momentum. Most precinct folk are "watching," not "buying." Republicans will contend this is because even Democrats don't believe those in the field are electable. I think there's something simpler at play for many -- friendship.

Things were easier for Democrats in the Evan Bayh "golden finger" era. Following his election as Governor, Evan Bayh was the party. He would say "Pam Carter for AG" and "Stan Jones for Superintendent of Public Instruction," and all others stepped down quietly or went down noisily. Anybody not think former Court Clerk Dwayne Brown's career was toast (even before his foot fetish scandal) when he waged an aborted convention fight against Pam Carter (and, by extension, Ann Delaney) in 1992?

Was this approach heavy-handed? Absolutely. But did it preserve party unity? Absolutely. Evan Bayh said Joe Hogsett takes my place for Secretary of State, and there it was. A united party helped Joe keep the S0S office in 1990.

All Democrats aligned in unity behind Governor Bayh's golden children. Other candidates would make noise, then get stabled. They would make nice with the Governor, and their supporters would fall back into the fold. Up to this year, the greatest interparty "clash" Evan Bayh has had was with Frank O'Bannon, whom he made his Lieutenant Governor.

When Governor O'Bannon took the reigns, the same model prevailed. If you sought an office, you had to go through Room 206. (Yes, it was like going to see the Godfather to ask for your own family). Sure, the Governor might not tell you himself, but people like Bill Moreau and Tom New made sure you got the message. (No, they didn't put horse heads in your bed).

Fast forward two decades, and Don Corleone has left the building. There is nobody who will "make the peace," so we have a world where friends run against the friends of friends.

Joe Hogsett was literally the first man I met in politics, and I like to think we've been friends since. While his political record might not show it, Joe is one of the most gifted politicians of this generation. He simply waded into a few Republican tsunami years.

I met Brian Williams shortly thereafter when we worked together in Governor Bayh's Office and at the Indiana Democratic Party. I liked Brian because he was soft-spoken. I learned this wasn't because he wasn't passionate about his ideas. He just put substance over bluster, which explains why he cranks out ideas like a machine for the IBJ.

I knew of Kip Tew prior to 1996, but that was the year I got to work around him daily. Kip was a tenacious political fighter for Frank O'Bannon. The way he and Steve Bella hunted down information on the Goldsmith administration was a thing of beauty. Kip has always been "mavericky," too, which helped him earn my respect, even though he has irritated some folks during his career. (More power to you, my brother!)

I met Melina back in 1992 when I was working with Pam Carter. I liked her instantly, and she's done nothing to make me second-guess that assessment. She is one of the most genuine people I know, and I always enjoy talking with her. Nobody can say she doesn't know how this city runs.

I've known Jose Evans for the shortest period of time, but his mentor, former IDP chair Robin Winston, is one of the most underrated political talents in Indiana, and that alone puts Jose in good stead with me. I see Jose shrewdly and skillfully elevating his profile. Also, Jose and I share an abiding love of positive hip hop music, which has nothing to do with running a city, but everything to do with signaling that our next generation of leaders is standing on a real short horizon, folks. Watch this man.

In short, this is a formidable field...and I have to pick just one?

This is when politics gets "real." Assuming you have the cajones to say it directly, you now have to look a friend (or four or five of them) in the eye and say, "I am sorry. Nothing personal. This is just business." This is what Democratic politics now demands, and it's not pleasant. (Certain members of Congress are still catching hell from their own party over who they favored for President in 2008, and you know who you are, Baron Hill.)

In 2010, Democrats also have two extremely well-credentialed and personable men - Tom McKenna and Vop Osili - vying for Secretary of State. In 2012, we'll have at least three Democratic candidates for Governor, and I expect this list to grow before it shrinks.

Sorry, but people who are jumping early into any of these races have either worked for one of the candidates or are looking to get "bumped off"....a lot of Christmas card lists. Most activists are hoping if they wait long enough, they'll get the return of the "Corleone influence." They are like Tessio when he's about to get wacked, asking Tom Hagen:

"Tom, can you get me off the hook....for old times sake?"

And our party's leaders all say in unison: "Can't do it, Sally."

(For a profile of the current D mayoral field, check out this article from the IBJ).

Coming soon....."Memory Lane Part II: Where are Our Corleones?"

Memory Lane for D Activists and Godfather Fans: Mayor's Race and Thoughts of the "Good Old Days?"