For the past few days, we’ve been considering local election matchups. Yesterday, readers even struck a nerve, but more about that in a moment.
NAC’s pants-down editorial board hasn’t been able to agree on a place and time to drink the amount of progressive beer necessary to reach firm election conclusions or make endorsements. We’ve been way too preoccupied poring over ancient texts by Marx and Engels looking for Barack Obama’s fingerprints.
Consequently, we're randomly tossing out local contests for discussion, and today, the races for County Council, at-large. The Tribune's hard work is more than sufficient to set the table. The newspaper’s questions and answers are extensive, and there’s much to be digested.
ELECTION Q&A 2008: Floyd County Council At-Large
Speaking personally, I’ll not be voting for Ted Heavrin even though the man ran one hell of a meeting during his previous tenure as council president. It’s because Heavrin was rejected by Democratic Party primary voters in 2006, then restored to power by being appointed by the party in 2008 to fill Randy Stumler’s vacated county council seat and the seek a new term. This blatant reversal of the electorate’s will was an indication that the party’s traditional Luddite instincts haven’t been purged entirely. See: Don't forget to cut the cards (August 12, 2008).
Also, neither Heavrin nor perennial candidate Harry Harbison (R) returned their Tribune questionnaires in time. That’s two down in a “vote for three” scenario, with the remaining hopefuls being Brad Striegel and Carol Shope (Democrats, with Shope an incumbent), and Larry Summers and Dana Fendley (Republicans, with Fendley the incumbent).
Prompted by Bluegill, NAC’s ever insightful readership uncovered a suitable political vein during yesterday’s discussion of the County Commissioner, and it is one better pursued today. Here’s the unedited transcript of the exchange.
----
bluegill said...
I wonder for whom each candidate is voting for President. The difference in the choices is striking and their choice could be very revealing in terms of their vision and judgment.
Were it not for just a couple of candidates in relatively benign positions, I'd seriously be considering voting straight ticket for the first time- something I usually caution against.
edward parish said...
I wonder for whom each candidate is voting for President. The difference in the choices is striking and their choice could be very revealing in terms of their vision and judgment.
Were it not for just a couple of candidates in relatively benign positions, I'd seriously be considering voting straight ticket for the first time- something I usually caution against."
I have never voted a straight pull. Why should it matter Jeff how a candidate for any office aligns themselves with the office of US President? It is all about local very small town politics that matters and hopefully nothing more. Word....
bluegill said...
Why should it matter Jeff how a candidate for any office aligns themselves with the office of US President?
It would tell me something about their worldview, Ed, and I would hope provide some insight into how they approach government and what they want the U.S., regardless of which slice, to look like.
Under current circumstances, a vote for McCain/Palin would show a lack of judgment that I'd have a difficult time overlooking in the polling booth.
ecology warrior said...
i disagree bluegill who you are voting for president sometimes is a vote against the other guy not a vote for who you are voting for, there will be clinton democrats voting McCain as a protest to obama
edward parish said...
Each person has his or her vote, not by party equality. When, will this area/nation see through old school ways of voting? I vote for the person, not the party. Many of "my(1950's)" age group does the same; get the drift dude?...Give some of us, a small bit of chance of thinking on our own, instead of thinking we are braindead on politics. Only so many of ones suggestions actually sink in.
Think.....For mega change.
The New Albanian said...
there will be clinton democrats voting McCain as a protest to obama
Which is precisely Bluegill's point. A "Clinton Democrat" voting for John McCain is like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders. If that's not an indication of something ...
bluegill said...
As I mentioned, I generally agree that voting straight ticket equates to a lack of thinking. I'm not voting straight ticket.
But, with so little to separate most local candidates in terms of actual stated goals or ideology, I just keep getting the Palin question shoved through my head.
Do I really want to support anyone's ascendancy to power who would consciously put her in a position to be President? It's certainly not the judgment I'm looking for.
Bayernfan said...
Voting for person over party nationally doesn't make sense to me at all. A national candidate is going to help push a party's ideas through and will agree, most of the time, with those ideas. Party matters little in local elections, which is why there may be Republicans I will consider voting for. I understand Jeff's contention, the 'Palin Effect' works on me as well. I'll try to put that aside as I head into the voting booth on Tuesday next as I vote for local offices.
The New Albanian said...
Permit me to note that given the public utterances of Dana Fendley (for McCain) and the enormous McCain/Palin sign in Larry Summers's front yard, tomorrow's county councl thread might benefit from more discussion as to national ticket preferences.
Is Ted Heavrin going for Obama?
Larry M. Summers said...
I might add that that sign was stolen. I was going to wait until tomorrow when someone attacked my Presidential vote to defend myself; however, I must state that I am not voting for McCain because he is perfect.
I am voting for McCain because I believe he is less flawed than Obama. I am only supporting the least, I my humble opinion, flawed candidate.
Barrack Obama is the master of saying nothing and making it sound like he is masterfully changing the world. I have looked at his record and it does not match his rhetoric.
As for what I would like to do, my support for a Presidential candidate does not change the policies that I will work on during my term on the County Council. We need new leadership. We cannot recycle the ideas of the previous council and hope that we will get a new result.
Is that not the definition of insanity?
"Insanity: the belief that one can get different results by doing the same thing." -Albert Einstein.
bluegill said...
I keep reading all the conservative pundits' scenarios of what will happen if Obama is elected. My general response to their "what if" lists is "Boy, I hope so."
Larry obviously feels differently. That's fine. It just means that I need to find someone else to vote for on the local level because he apparently doesn't represent my views.
Larry M. Summers said...
There is nothing that I can do on the local level to implement the socialist agenda.
Whether I vote for Obama or McCain, I simply cannot institute socialism like a Democratic super majority in both houses of congress and the white house could.
bluegill said...
My point, proven.
Marcey said...
I am so sick of the "socialist" rhetoric. Obama is not a "socialist", he is a democrat.
Giving tax cuts to the middle class has been a democratic policy for many years. The reason for this is because the middle class has always been the majority in this country and when the majority has more money in their pockets the spend. When the majority of your population is spending it stimulates your economy. When you stimulate the economy then you have a strong economy. If we continue to over tax the working class of this country you will push them closer and closer to the poverty line and the economy will continue to tank. Now if you still think that is a socialist policy, lets talk about Sarah Palin giving every resident in Alaska dividends from the oil company.
Ecology Warrior, I was a Clinton supporter in the Primary and if someone was supporting Sen. Clinton because of her positions on Health Care, the economy, the war, etc., etc. etc., there is no way in hell they can tell me that McCain is a better substitute for Sen. Clinton. McCain and Palin are the polar opposites of Hillary Clinton and in my mind the only reason they are supporting them is because of "sour grapes".
Larry M. Summers said...
Obama's policy of raising taxes on the wealthy to give money to individuals not currently paying taxes is income redistribution (i.e. Socialism). To say that that is not socialism is to stick ones head in the sand.
The Bookseller said...
Larry, I don't dismiss your doubts. To say you don't have doubts would be insane.
But if the difference between capitalism and socialism is the difference between a marginal tax rate of 35% and 39.6% for that portion of ordinary income above $250,000 a year is absurd.
As one who wishes you well, may I suggest that you already have 100% of the McCain voters. Oughtn't you be courting Obama voters now?
Bayernfan said...
Larry, your words are a bit disappointing to me. Not that I expected you to vote for Obama, we had that discussion. It's just that you've picked up the rhetoric of calling Obama a socialist which McCain/Palin and the RNC are using to try and scare people into voting Republican because it's become obvious their ideas aren't working, the constant references to Bill Ayers hasn't worked so now we move into the "Obama is a socialist/communist/Marxist" phase. I remember the Reps saying the same thing about Bill Clinton as well.I thought you were a little more level headed than that.
Larry M. Summers said...
I understand why people are voting for Obama. He seems to have the country's best interest at heart. I do not believe he is secretly trying to hurt this country.
I do not want people not to vote for Obama just because of something I said. I just wanted to give you a couple reasons I am not voting for Obama.
The main problem I have is that someone would dismiss me without regard to the changes that I have proposed just because I do not support the same Presidential candidate as them. That seems absurd.
Larry M. Summers said...
Throughout this election, I have done my best to seek out the people with whom other Republican candidates have not spoken. As far as I know, I have been the only candidate, Republican or Democratic, that has put his/her neck on the line just to discuss issues with you.
I have continued to come here even when I have been attacked for whom I am voting for President. If I were not the precinct committeeman for New Albany 5, I probably would only have my signs in front of my house; nevertheless, I offered my services, and I must not shirk my duties.
Is it difficult to discuss national issues with which we may not agree and that I will not be working on at a local level? Yes. Is it fair that other local candidates, Democratic ones included, do not discuss why they are voting for whom they are voting while I am required to defend my positions? I wouldn't say that it was unfair; however, I would hope that others would step up to the plate.
Alas, I have been pretty much the only one in the fray on a regular basis.
B.W. Smith said...
Here's a sweeping statement for Wednesday:
To say that Obama is a socialist is to say that our income tax system (pay in brackets according to income), the purpose of which is to theoretically keep too much wealth from concentrating at the top, is socialism. That's absurd and shows a fundamental misunderstandnig of American history and economic theory. If you listen to the ENTIRE Joe the Plumber clip, Obama's comments about redistributing wealth are in the context of comparing flat tax to progressive income tax, which makes complete sense.
But, as they sharply pointed out on SNL, you can't expect folks to understand nuance when plumbers make more than teachers.
----
Here are the nuts and bolts:
ELECTION Q&A 2008: Floyd County Council At-Large
Dana Fendley (R)
Harry Harbison (R)
Larry Summers (R)
Ted Heavrin (D)
Brad Striegel (D)
Carol Shope (D)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
54 comments:
Larry, you talk as if all the tax cuts for the middle class will be given to people on welfare. Comparing the plans on electiontaxes.com, my family does MUCH better under the Obama plan. My wife and I both work, pay taxes, pay for my wife to finish grad school, etc. I think that it's high time I get a little more back instead of giving more and more tax breaks to the big corporations who have been turning record profits.
You keep saying that you don't want the tax breaks to go to those who don't pay taxes. I pay taxes, Larry. I want the tax breaks and deserve them just as much as Exxon/Mobil. I don't see how you can disagree with that.
It is my ultimate goal to represent everyone in this county to the best of my ability. Throughout my time here, I could have politically tap danced around questions that have been posed to me, but I refuse to be the normal politician.
I want to be something new and different. I may not always be exactly what you want, but at least I will hear what you want. It is my goal to hear everyone out and determine what course of action is best for this county.
I am not running for this office solely as a Republican, I am running for this office as a Floyd County Citizen that is concerned about his community.
I am running because I feel I offer new, practical solutions to problems that have existed for years. These problems have either been ignored or the old ideas have not worked.
We need new leadership, new ideas, and fresh insight. I am the best candidate to offer all of these.
Please, this November 4th, vote for me. I will work for you to better this county.
I do not mind if he lowers taxes for people like you or me that pay taxes and would benefit with lower taxes; however, I do think it is appropriate to give tax credits to individuals that do not pay taxes.
While I worked at Wal-Mart as a cashier, I got everything that I paid in federal taxes back. Is it fair that I would get an additional $1000 that I did not pay in? No.
Do you believe it is fair to keep giving the Exxon/Mobil's of the world huge tax breaks when they're already making record profits? I sure as hell don't and that's the McCain plan (not to mention taxing health care benefits for the first time to help fund his tax credit for health insurance...wait...is that redistributing? McCain's a socialist??)
Larry deserves a lot of credit for participating. As he notes, such participation has been a rare commodity on the part of local politicians (Marcey Wisman and John Gonder stand out as examples on the other side of the aisle).
To me, the thing that stands out is that although Larry seems more reasonable than certain others on the topic of Barack Obama's alleged socialism (for the flip side, gaze upon Healthblogger's recent screechings), he repeats the pattern in that he offers nothing by contrast in support of McCain/Palin, except to suggest that he's voting for the lesser flawed candidate.
I understand this, having practiced the same wisdom myself. However, recall that Larry brought all this on himself by his early response:
There is nothing that I can do on the local level to implement the socialist agenda.
Ignoring the veracity of "socialist agenda," which is dubious, wouldn't I be correct in wondering if even the lowliest of local council persons might be able to create havoc by attempting to implement, say, a radical Norquist conservative agenda, re: taxation?
Wouldn't such beliefs directly impact the discussion of whether to substitute local taxes for the monies being withdrawn at state and federal levels?
I will discuss the issues pertaining to the position for which I am running. We can continually debate the merits of McCain and Obama, but it will not give us any insight into the local issues.
Exactly @ Roger, which is why I'm pretty disappointed in hearing Larry talk about the "socialist agenda".
Trust me Roger, I would much rather have a local tax that we could implement that would directly benefit the local citizens than having taxes from the state sent back to us.
Also, I will apologize for the wording of the quote that you have listed. After staying up two hours past my bed time to defend my support for McCain, I became somewhat testy with the reproach that I was encountering.
Also, I support McCain not necessarily solely based on him being the least flawed candidate. I believe that McCain would provide much better military leadership during time of war than Obama. I could continue, but I will try to stick to local issues hence forward.
Andy, I was disappointed with the premise that my Presidential pick would influence what people thought about me on a local level.
I could have stayed out of the discussion; nevertheless, I jumped in because I did not think it was fair to critique me on local issues based on my selection in the voting booth.
Larry, for what it's worth, your sign remains in my yard.
Speaking only for myself, the most important thing to me is that you've been accessible to discuss the differences. I agree with Bluegill that your opinions on a national level are relevant to the chat. That doesn't mean I'm rejecting you because we disagree.
It does mean that I'll be watching. So long as you don't introduce something like a school prayer requirement in county council ...
Larry, I know how you feel. I have often been in the middle of the tag team effort here with no one to tag out to myself. I admire your effort to explain your position, and I agree with it. I won't go into the national elections because I feel it has no bearing on our local elections. On the flip side, anyone, and I mean anyone that likes your ideas on how to help Floyd County Indiana become all that she can be, but won't vote for you because you back McCain for president is ignorant to what your new job will be. Larry, I know you would love to be in daily contact with the president and advise him on issues, but that simply won't happen. However, you will be in daily contact with citizens of Floyd County. That is what matters in this thread and this election. What are you guys going to do in off year elections? Maybe you could question who candidates voted for in the PTA elections.
What are you guys going to do in off year elections? Maybe you could question who candidates voted for in the PTA elections.
There are four years of archives avaiable at right. You can see for yourself.
Larry,
Like Roger said, for what it is worth, you still have my support. You have been willing to engage and discuss. You "think".
The "socialist agenda" comment is beneath your intellegence level. Way below. You have avoided tag lines and now is not the time to start using them. Actually, never would be good time to start.
Vote Larry Summers!
Mark
There are four years of archives available at right. You can see for yourself.
I.E., take more positions and offer more alternatives than the sum total of current candidates and parties.
I give Larry full credit for engaging. What I don't give him credit for is outlining a vision or general sense of direction for the county, because I haven't seen it yet.
That lack of information naturally leads me to consider other factors, both with him and other candidates.
And I would add that, in terms of vision (particularly in terms of growth), George Mouser has come closer than anyone.
Thank you for your support Roger, Daniel and Mark.
Mark, you know I typically don't use the talking points or tag lines. Again, I thank you for realizing that I may not be perfect, but I am willing to discuss issues.
I am willing to admit to mistakes. As a human, I will continue to make them; nevertheless, I must strive to grow because of these experiences and incorporate what I have learned to become a better person and a better leader for this county.
I can give you vision for the growth of this county if that is what you desire.
We, as a county, must invest in the current infrastructure and have developers work on revitalizing urban areas.
This serves a two-fold purpose of urban revitalization and prevention of sprawl into the county. We cannot allow perfectly good buildings to set vacant while we build new ones--it just doesn't make sense fiscally or environmentally.
During my time at the University of Evansville, we often discussed urban decay and continued sprawl.
I joined Develop New Albany last year to improve the downtown New Albany area, but also prevent the sprawl of development into the county. I have lived almost half my life in the city and half in the county.
Both sides want the same thing, they just don't know how to achieve it. I know how to work with both sides to get this achieved.
bluegill,
I was just getting ready to ask you, "who has?". And I won't disagree with your own answer.
Like you, I need to find something to hang my hat on when determining who to vote for. Thinking and a willingness to engage has been such a rare commodity around here, that I see Larry as big step up. Perfect? No. Neither is Obama, who I also support.
This would have all been much easier, Larry, if you would've said that months ago, especially when I asked you about it face to face.
The question is now about what you propose to do as a council member to slow or stop sprawl and encourage the adaptive reuse of existing infrastructure.
As I've mentioned previously, that's what I, as a voter, want to hear from candidates.
Only Mr. Mouser has addressed any of that so far.
By the way, if you think DNA is against sprawl, you may want to check again.
My purpose in joining DNA was to revitalize the downtown area--I live here and I want to see it come back to what it should have been all along.
I would definitely encourage the county commissioners to develop a much more comprehensive zoning ordinance.
Also, the plan commission really shouldn't hand out as many variances as it does. We need to work with them to let them know we want to smart growth--not growth for growth's sake--and smart development and not development for development's sake.
I tried to go to the DNA web site to see if we (I'm a board member) are against sprawl, but the site seems to be down.
Obviously hacked by the terrorists.
Well, I'm against sprawl. Whatever happened to The Gary, anyway?
Larry, you haven't lost my support either, I can accept your explanation of your "socialist agenda" comment. You certainly deserve credit (as does Daniel) for voicing your views and standing behind them here.
I just hope in the future that you will avoid that kind of labeling!
Thank you Andy.
It is difficult when you are the only person or you are vastly outnumbered.
I could have pandered to the audience in hopes to win you over; however, I feel that all of you deserve better.
I tried to go to the DNA web site to see if we (I'm a board member) are against sprawl, but the site seems to be down.
You might also want to check on the organization's stance on township assessors. Mike Dalby says you're against them.
http://www.news-tribune.net/opinion/local_story_300022531.html
Of course, he also says you're for the Bridges Project and no one has said otherwise, so...
I don't know that DNA has ever taken a position on sprawl. To my knowledge, we never have supported an urban growth barrier, “smart growth” land use plan, etc.
We have not tried to push people away from outlying areas but instead try to give people a reason to be attracted to the urban core.
Whether conscious of the fact or not, DNA's goal of making the urban core more attractive, livable and active is consistent with the goals of New Urbanism.
http://www.cnu.org
http://www.developna.org
I don't know that DNA has ever taken a position on sprawl. To my knowledge, we never have supported an urban growth barrier, “smart growth” land use plan, etc.
Why not? The national organization the local branch seeks to represent certainly does. In comparison, the Jeffersonville Main Street organization has hosted several smart growth conferences and recently won a state award for its "Buy Local" campaign.
We have not tried to push people away from outlying areas but instead try to give people a reason to be attracted to the urban core.
DNA is a member of One Southern Indiana, an organization that, on behalf of its membership, regularly advocates sprawl inducing projects. Without a statement to the contrary, it's arguable that DNA supports pushing people to the outlying areas at the expense of the urban core.
Whether conscious of the fact or not, DNA's goal of making the urban core more attractive, livable and active is consistent with the goals of New Urbanism.
Larry said:
"This serves a two-fold purpose of urban revitalization and prevention of sprawl into the county. We cannot allow perfectly good buildings to set vacant while we build new ones--it just doesn't make sense fiscally or environmentally."
It doesn't seem at all unreasonable to me that the organization that claims through use of the Main Street moniker to represent such thinking might say something along those same lines. As it is, 1SI speaks for them, often touting the opposite.
Is it really good defense to suggest that they don't consciously know what they're doing?
I do not believe association by DNA with a broad based, multifaceted organization like 1SI is necessarily evidence that DNA supports all 1SI positions.
Whether or not DNA is a “Main Street Program” is easy to determine as certification is conferred by the state and DNA is certified as such.
As an individual interested in seeing less sprawl and more downtown revitalization, I’m certainly open to suggestions of how those the goals can be best met, whether by DNA or by other organizations.
Dan, as an aside, one thing we (DNA) might do is not be afraid to take stands on matters that pertain to our mission. The bully pulpit is a good thing. Too often we're worried about who might be offended rather than what the principles at stake really are.
Actually, one of the best things we can do is have discussions like this in public, with non-members. Helps keep the blood flow.
To echo the New Albanian to some extent as I was writing while he was posting:
I do not believe association by DNA with a broad based, multifaceted organization like 1SI is necessarily evidence that DNA supports all 1SI positions.
I think the total lack of response to 1SI positions is.
I was told DNA couldn't take stances on local issues out fear of being viewed as political or offensive to some group or demographic who was never quite identified. Does it make sense, then, to allow another organization to represent DNA politically in local matters?
It's also true that DNA has fostered a double standard concerning what constitutes politics and what doesn't.
I'll ask again: Why is it not allowable to talk about sprawl or to even give the possible appearance of aligning with anti-sprawl organizations but it's perfectly fine to align with One SI, who regularly takes the opposite political tact?
If the goal is to stay out of politics, then do so. However, when the organization rejects some "political" groups and supports others, it's making political decisions, sending political signals, and declaring political preferences.
To then claim that the group is apolitical as an excuse to avoid some issues, as has been the case, is just silly.
Whether or not DNA is a “Main Street Program” is easy to determine as certification is conferred by the state and DNA is certified as such.
My buddy has a certificate he got online saying he's a minister. When he figures out what religion he represents and starts preaching regularly, I might take him seriously.
Beyond that, the Indiana Main Street organization is known for being conservative, often watering down the national message (including the bit about sprawl).
As an individual interested in seeing less sprawl and more downtown revitalization, I’m certainly open to suggestions of how those the goals can be best met, whether by DNA or by other organizations.
I and others have made many suggestions over the past few years both in and out of DNA as to how that situation might be improved. Good luck with that process at DNA. Perhaps you'll get a better response than I did. I'm relatively sure not talking about it won't lead to improvement, though.
I'd also suggest that DNA might find others in the region who are "interested in seeing less sprawl and more downtown revitalization". If they could identify DNA as a group that educates and advocates on their behalf, there's real potential for them to become more involved.
What some of those folks tend to see now is a continuation of the status quo. The 1SI membership and associated silence just reinforces that.
Has anyone here ever read Sinclair Lewis's "Babbit"?
All of them perceived that American Democracy did not imply any equality of wealth, but did demand a wholesome sameness of thought, dress, painting, morals, and vocabulary.
This is NOT directed at anyone in particular. Rather, I quote it to illustrate that forever and perhaps always, Americans crave respectability as defined thusly.
To an extent, any civic organization confers respectability on its members, and is bound accordingly.
To advocate a position on anything is to risk losing a vote (where have we heard that one before?) or offending a member.
Me? I get restless. I believe that conservatism in general (in terms of disposition and politics) involves staking one to a position that will not move, with the resulting starvation of the intellect owing to an absence of philosophical sustenance.
Not sure what any of this has to do with the thread, but ... sometimes I wonder whether I'm wasting my time trying to roust the inert. Sometimes not.
Is it beer thirty yet?
An organization intent on revitalizing an urban area would be well served to join an organization such as the local chamber of commerce.
That does not necessarily mean that the organization espouses all of the political leanings of said chamber.
Since it has been stated that the organization is apolitical, you can, therefore, assume they do not espouse the views of the chamber.
Since it has been stated that the organization is apolitical, you can, therefore, assume they do not espouse the views of the chamber.
Then that should be true of any group that DNA could bring to town or affiliate with and not just 1SI. It's not according to the board, hence the double standard. Hence the silly apolitical routine.
If I read you right, you labeled conservatives as intellectually inert. Is that not a more grievous label than anything I said?
I classify myself as more conservative than not, and I think that I am intellectually capable enough to discern arguments for positions and come to a conclusion of my own.
If we want to attract innovators and early adopters, we have to send welcoming messages to them.
Up for Adoption
I've said it repeatedly. Our marketing consultants said it repeatedly. Experts across the country have said it repeatedly.
We'll either listen and respond accordingly or we won't. Not sending messages is not an option. We send them whether we consciously choose to shape them or not.
I'm in favor of taking control of our image. David Ward ring a bell?
Sorry, Larry, but at some point we all call them like we see them.
Conservatism can be an intellectual movement.
It has been, previously, and I respect it for erudition when merited even if I disagree with the content.
In the current climate, it's an excuse to regress to darkness, or at best, stay rooted to business as usual. In New Albany, it's the impulse to retain the devil we know, and it's killing our chances of making up time.
What was that Einstein quote earlier?
In this local election, I guess you could call me progressive because I am offering new ideas that will help us climb out of the status quo that we have clung to so readily for too long.
DNA is the only New Albany based, private organization whose mission is to promote New Albany economic restructuring, historic preservation and good design. I’ve been to every DNA board this year and never once have we discussed a policy which prompts sprawl; our sole focus is the betterment of the city. If we should be more proactive in campaigning against sprawl, that’s an argument I’m willing to entertain.
To say that some association by DNA with 1SI means DNA is pro-sprawl is like saying that my subscription to the Wall St. Journal (which I presume has endorsed McCain) means I agree with every item on the McCain platform. I do subscribe to the Journal and I will be voting for Obama.
I cannot recall once in a board meeting that we have discussed 1SI. We did approach 1SI to see if they wanted to participate in an application for New Markets Tax Credits, something which clearly would encourage city vs. greenfield development. If 1SI wants to contribute to the application, I will not refuse their assistance on ideological grounds. In the past year, that NMTC application offer has been DNA’s sole interaction with 1SI, to my knowledge.
DNA cannot say that it has been 100% apolitical; we advocated for the Scribner YMCA to locate downtown instead of on Charlestown Road. But, right or wrong, we historically have very much limited our political involvement. To say that one is not apolitical does not mean one must take a position on all political issues.
If your goal is the betterment of the city, or to fight sprawl, I don’t see how fighting DNA is the answer. Instead, I hope that all concerned citizens who want a healthier city to join (or rejoin) the organization.
"I believe that McCain would provide much better military leadership during time of war than Obama."
Check Colin Powells endorsement of Obama last week for refutation.
I’ve been to every DNA board this year and never once have we discussed a policy which prompts sprawl;
Which makes it all the more interesting that DNA would seek membership in an organization that does.
If we should be more proactive in campaigning against sprawl, that’s an argument I’m willing to entertain.
That's a plausible answer, but one that puts you at odds with the DNA executive committee of a year ago.
To say that some association by DNA with 1SI means DNA is pro-spraw...means I agree with every item on the McCain platform. I do subscribe to the Journal and I will be voting for Obama.
This is a poor analogy. Joining a local political organization like 1SI is hardly comparable to subscribing to a national newspaper.
If the editor of the WSJ shows up in Southern Indiana, starts lobbying our governments and voters to take certain courses of action, and announces that you support those actions, then the situations would be similar.
I cannot recall once in a board meeting that we have discussed 1SI.
Interesting. When the DNA board voted to join 1SI over my lone dissenting vote (Roger was absent so I can't speak for him), the specific argument used to justify membership was to ensure that DNA would "have a seat at the table", giving voice to the board's concerns in regional development matters.
I cautioned that not using that voice would lead to the very same type of assumptions about agreement and affiliation with outside groups that the board seemed to fear at the time.
I was assured that the voice would be used, even if it was contrary to the general majority thinking at 1SI to make sure that membership didn't imply blanket endorsement. Quite frankly, I didn't believe it.
Now you're telling me that the board has discussed nothing about 1SI in the time since then. Given the earlier assurances, what am I to conclude other than DNA has either found nothing to disagree with 1SI about or that they've chosen to continue membership in an organization that they know little about and may or may not actually support?
How is either one of them good for DNA or the city?
We did approach 1SI to see if they wanted to participate in an application for New Markets Tax Credits, something which clearly would encourage city vs. greenfield development.
And, if I'm not mistaken, you related to me that 1SI turned you down.
DNA cannot say that it has been 100% apolitical;
Which speaks to my point about a double standard: The apolitical stuff only comes out when some members of the board don't want to deal with a particular issue. If the board thinks one issue is worth their time and another isn't, they should just say so instead of cajoling other board members and avoiding the press.
There should also be a uniform process by which the entire board considers issues and whether they merit further action. A few, select private phone calls in lieu of open communication among all board members is a great way to regress the organization to the very type of dysfunction that nearly killed it in the first place.
If your goal is the betterment of the city, or to fight sprawl, I don’t see how fighting DNA is the answer. Instead, I hope that all concerned citizens who want a healthier city to join (or rejoin) the organization.
I've never fought DNA and am not doing so now. They can do whatever they want. I can agree or disagree.
What I am doing is questioning whether the organization, which receives local tax dollars (although, admittedly, a small amount), is using them to benefit the city in the best way possible.
That's fair game, especially now that another organization who also seeks tax dollars is telling me what they think.
I actually think the organization would improve and could be more successful if it were to take up a more serious process of self-examination, including some of the more difficult questions about its principles and purposes.
I tried to encourage that from the inside. That didn't work, so now I'm trying from the outside. If I didn't care about the organization or was trying to fight them, I wouldn't be trying at all.
Honestly, I wish I had the good sense to just forget about it. According to my own self-examination process, though, that seems to be a personal weakness.
With that said, I'm not asking that DNA take a stance on every political issue. 1SI says DNA supports the Bridges Project and the elimination of township assessors. Do they or do they not?
If the board hasn't even discussed them, it may want to reconsider it's apparently problematic relationship with a group that publicly announces DNA's positions without so much as consulting them.
If that's not a legitimate concern, should everyone else assume it's cool to start announcing their personal opinions as that of the DNA board?
Wow. Wonder what an open thread about the coroner race will bring out?
Know any good dead people we can ask? I wonder who they're voting for.
Remaining races, including Coroner, Recorder, Treasurer, Surveyor, Dist. 72 state rep and 9th district Congress are going up tonight.
41 comments? Egads ... and all of them from people with names. How is it possible?
I don't usually read blogs, but since the election is so close, I thought I would see what you guys are talking about. I don't think it should be a surprise to anyone that a Republican candidate is voting for a Republican for President. I am getting tired of defending the Republican party and the national issues when I would really like to debate the local issues with the 5 other council candidates in a public forum. The problem is that our race runs at the same time as the Presidential race and we get ignored. You have to go to the back of the ballot to even find our names.
The people you elect to the county council are the ones who will make the decisions about your local income taxes and your property taxes. I have had to fight to keep the income taxes low and if you don't elect someone to keep tabs on Larry McAlister, local income taxes will go up and soon. He plans to bring it up again at our next meeting. So show up at a county meeting every once in a while and see who participates and is informed and who is not.
Dana,
Floyd County's tax rate is already very low compared to other parts of the country and even other parts of the state. The lack of funds often shows.
Given that we are constantly beleaguered with money problems so severe that they sometimes hamper the delivery of basic services, why is raising the local income tax a bad idea?
I've e-mailed the address listed on Dana Fendley's web site and asked if she actually posted.
Roger, that sounds very much like Dana's writing style.
Just as a note, I would like it to be known that I will do whatever this county needs to survive and remain viable.
With the reduction in income from the reduction in property taxes, we may need to look into the Local Option Income Tax (LOIT).
I find it hard to believe that we will be able to cut 2.4 million dolloars from our 13 million dollar budget by 2010.
I appreciate you saying so, Larry. A lot of people wouldn't.
Dana Fendley has confirmed that her comment above comes from her. I thought it prudent to check.
Another item about the LOIT: the tax is only $00.25 for every $100.00 of income.
"HE'LL RAISE YOUR TAXES!" might whip up the Republican zombie vote, but I expect more from Mrs. Fendley. She's better than that.
Bluegill, I believe we generally agree on what land use policies should be adopted. The disagreement is over tactics that should be used by DNA. For good or bad, DNA as an organization is not going to take wide political stances any time soon. DNA is placing its focus elsewhere.
Unfortunately, there is no organization in Southern Indiana educating the public, organizing at the grassroots, and suggesting model ordinances and policies for intelligent land use. I wish there was an organization that brought to 1SI clear, best practices which have been adopted by more forward thinking Chambers of Commerce.
Land use is not on the radar of most Floyd and Clark Co. voters. Maybe we need an organization, one that has a web site, sends out a regular newsletter, tells locals about success stories in other cities, lets concerned voters know when relevant ordinances are up for a vote, and articulates specific smart growth policies.
If you want to help create such an organization, I’ll be the first to join. I’ll also be happy to help draft the bylaws and charter. Seriously.
Dan,
There's a movement afoot to create such a group in Jeffersonville. I'll keep you updated.
Unfortunately, my other questions about purpose and process remain unanswered and I fear a general unwillingness to discuss pertinent issues and an absence of real planning to deal with specific desired outcomes will keep them that way.
It would be interesting to know what you think the focus of DNA is and whether or not you could get other board members to reach consensus on the topic, outside of a very vague, amorphous notion of bettering downtown which, in terms of actual strategy, implementation, and measurement, means very little.
If you check the Tribune today, it looks like the Mayor is putting pressure on the county council to impose the LOIT tax. It is on the agenda for the November meeting after we voted it down in September. So, I take offense at the statement that I just used taxes to whip people up. I think that it is the wrong time to raise taxes when we haven't tried anything else to save money. A reduction in government spending should be tried before taxes go up.
Dana, I think they were joking with you on that comment. They have a tendency to keep tongue firmly planted into cheek around here.
I think that we can reduce spending to a certain extent; however, I do not know if we can eliminate 2.4 million dollars in two years. With the restructuring of the property tax system, that is the estimated loss of revenue to our 13 million dollar budget.
Then, we have to consider what we will do for the youth shelter, additional police officers required, and the jail. Hopefully, the new court will help alleviate the pressure on the jail so we can focus on the other issues while remaining cognizant of future jail expansion needs.
Post a Comment