iPOPA Thanks Mainstream Media, Fellow Bloggers for Catching Up; Speaks on City-County Councillor Folly

When I tell my wife she looks amazing, she thanks me, but I’ve noticed it's only when her friends tell her the same thing that she finally believes it. I guess if you expect compliments as part of the marital pact, it's only when "outside validation" occurs that something becomes really true.

Bloggers have that same kind of relationship with the mainstream media.

Earlier this week, the Indianapolis Star's Francesca Jarosz wrote a stellar analysis yesterday detailing how the Mayor's funding for sidewalks and roads through the Cit Gas transfer is basically a hidden tax increase because it would necessitate higher future rates.

Both of my closest blogger buddies, Terry Burns at Indianapolis Times and Jon Easter at Indydemocrat, posted praises here and here and Advance Indiana, my colleague from across the aisle, followed suit, as if Jarosz had discovered the rosetta stone of MOU's.

I'm green with envy because here's what I wrote about Citizens Gas and the Mayor’s water deal on March 20, 2010:

Or how about this. Why (doesn't Citizens) just assume the debt and forget the $262 million? [Ed. Note: I never bought the $425 million]. We all know the cash is just an advance against an even higher, future rate increase. Why not forget the cash and have lower rates in the future, Mr. Mayor?

One day you all will believe me when I say your shoes look nice. Sniff.

For his part, Democratic Mayoral candidate Brian Williams continues to raise pertinent questino about the deal, and the one that's captivated my imagination at the moment is the fact that City-County Councillor Mike Speedy's resolution has the council voting on a memorandum of understanding (MOU), NOT the final agreement. What is the difference? An MOU is how the parties hope things will work out. A definitive agreement contains the actual, final terms, so we'd know what we're actually getting, not a guess.

Think about that. There are members on the City-County Council who are voting for a "general idea." Can you imagine a Republican member of Congress voting for "healthcare reform" generally with all the actual details to be worked out later by the Obama administration? Of course not.

You say, yeah, but iPOPA, I'm sure votes were definitely cast with an intent of changing the reform bill later. Fair enough, but you prove my point. Congress can always make a law better. Once the City-County Council says, "Do the deal," they lose authority to say anything. What Councillor in his or her right mind would totally abdicate his or her oversight role by voting for something that is NOT the final product?

Stay tuned for...

...who in the Democratic caucus is looking to jump the fence on the Mayor's water deal; and

...iPOPA's Weekend Political Round-Up (an overview and commentary of all pre-primary political activity at all levels)

iPOPA Thanks Mainstream Media, Fellow Bloggers for Catching Up; Speaks on City-County Councillor Folly

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

Dizzy on Brizzi Improprieties Yet?

Fox 59 reports that "there was dicussion" about relocating the Metro Drug Task Force two years ago, and the location pushed was owned by John Bales, Carl Brizzi's business partner and campaign donor. The story notes that Bales has a contract that provides him 3% of any lease he negotiates for the City, so he would apparently have double-dipped as owner and negotiator. The other tenant already at that location? Tim Durham.

The move did not happen because law enforcement and a female prosecutor who would have worked there thought it was an unsafe dump. (Fox reports that the prosecutor who opposed the move was demoted and reassigned by Brizzi).

Hamilton County Sheriff Doug Carter stated, "There was discussion early on about the possibility of a move northeast and there was discussion about a specific piece of property on the westside," said Hamilton Co. Sheriff Doug Carter.

Lawrence Police Chief Paul Whitehead: "Well, unfortunately, the particular facility we looked at..." started Lawrence Police Chief Paul Whitehead.

Kudos to Russ McQuaid for breaking this story, but it doesn't go deep enough for my tastes.

Who set up the viewing of the property? Who pushed it? To whom? Are there letters or e-mails? Is it a coincidence that Lawrence Police Chief Paul Whitehead was involved? He works for Lawrence Mayor Paul Ricketts, to whom GOP bagman Tim Durham donated a staggering sum in excess of $80,000 over the past few years and to whom Brizzi donated $1,000 in 2008.

As a quick aside, Ricketts donated $250 of that money back to Brizzi in 2008. To all the newbies out there, passing the same money back and forth between political friends is a great way to inflate the value of your political stock because it looks like you've raised more money than you really have. (You can also do this with actual stock, but you might go to prison).

Here's another sidebar Fox missed. Why would a GOP Hamilton County Sheriff air Brizzi's dirty laundry? Does it have anything to do with the fact Brizzi's campaign committee donated $200 to Scott Baldwin, who is opposing Sheriff Carter's hand-picked successor in the May primary?

Of course, despite the GOP's efforts to run from Brizzi/Durham money, it permeates all levels of GOPdom. In the past two years, Brizzi has given $1,650 to the Hamilton County GOP, $1,250 to the Wayne Township GOP, $800 to Washington Township, $500 to Perry, $400 to Warren, and $250 to Lawrence.

Brizzi has given to GIRFCO ($2,500), the Marion County GOP ($2,250), City-County Council President Ryan Vaughn ($2,000), Hamilton County Prosecutor candidate David Wyser ($2,500), City-County Councilor Mike McQuillen ($250), Friends of Todd Young ($500), Mitch Daniels ($1,000), Tony Bennett ($1,000), Hupfer for State Rep ($1,000), Friends of Jim Banks ($1,000), the House Republican Campaign Committee ($5,000), Mike Murphy ($500), and the Committee To Elect Lisa Bentley (Township Board)($250). Brizzi even in-kinded a campaign worker to Attorney General Greg Zoeller. (Who knew indentured servitude still existed in the 21st century?)

GOP Secretary of State candidate Charlie White donated to Brizzi (who also donated to White), and Vaughn gave to Brizzi, who, as mentioned above, gave to Vaughn. (Though we are fellow Wabash men, I don't mind telling Vaughn and White that they both need to pick better company).

Every time I look at Brizzi's campaign finance reports, I get more discomfited. I previously reported that Brizzi was using his campaign committee as his personal bank account. Today I noticed that attorney Mario Massilamany received $1,900 from the Brizzi Committee for reimbursements, mostly for a call phone. Why is the Brizzi campaign reimbursing an attorney for his cell phone to the tune of several hundred dollars per month?

I'm THIS close (holding fingers millimeters apart) to filing a complaint with the Indiana Election Commission. Not only has Brizzi sullied his office, he's making a mockery of Indiana election law. Indiana Code 3-9-3-4 states:

Money received by a candidate or committee as a contribution may be used only:

(1) to defray any expense reasonably related to the person's or committee's:

(A) campaign for federal, state, legislative, or local office;

(B) continuing political activity; or

(C) activity related to service in an elected office;

(2) to make an expenditure to any national, state, or local committee of any political party or another candidate's committee; or

(3) upon dissolution of a committee, in a manner permitted under IC 3-9-1-12.

(b) Money received by a candidate or committee as a contribution may not be used for primarily personal purposes by the candidate or by any other person except as described in subsection (a).

Kudos to Terry Burns at Indianapolis Times for bringing this story to my attention.

Dizzy on Brizzi Improprieties Yet?