Monday, January 19, 2009

For the sake of progress and civility, Dan Coffey must be censured by the city council.

The facts are undisputed.

Last Thursday evening, Dan Coffey, who is New Albany’s council president, first refused to permit a citizen to speak during the meeting time allotted for it, and then afterward both verbally and physically accosted another citizen in a public place.

Both citizens are taxpayers. Imagine that, and note how it is so conveniently forgotten by the troglodytes who typically rush to the defense of such tactics.

In correspondence over the weekend, several friends and readers contributed opinions on these events, ranging from the hope that correction will come from within the same council that acquiesced in elevating Coffey, to the view that diplomacy should be allowed to run its course, and including the sensible advice that we all begin wearing wires around the clock and posting hidden cameras in preparation for the next “60 Minutes” (if not YouTube) moment.

Coffey’s behavior was so wrong, and on so many levels, that the metaphors with New Albany’s crippling primitivism would be obvious to cavemen with far better manners than Coffey’s, although they might yet elude New Albanians accustomed to congenitally low standards of office holding.

And, it’s hardly the first time for such disgraceful displays, to which I can personally attest. Once upon a time roughly a year ago, Coffey paused from grandstanding during a council meeting to duck low behind Bob Caesar’s chair, look right at me, and mouth the words, “I’ll kick your ass.”

I'm quite sure he would try, and this, my friends, is the man that Jeff “he who would be king” Gahan regards as suited for a position of leadership in a city of 37,000 people. I believe that in this context, Gahan is an accessory to last Thursday’s civic embarrassment. He has enabled the boorishness and helped place it in a position to make us all look like dullards.

Why put us through it, Jeff?

How does this help us shed our reputation as laughing stock?

Recall that in essence, Coffey is council president because Gahan bizarrely finds the unthinkable to be somehow useful according to the hidden master political strategy that Gahan has never once been willing to share with those members of the community who by all rights should be Gahan’s natural political allies, but who have been summarily abandoned during his speedy descent into the dark side.

Gahan might sincerely believe that Coffey has something constructive to offer, or maybe his intent has been to neutralize Coffey with just such a damaging fall, but I believe that either way, the events of Thursday, January 15 are sufficient to question Coffey’s suitability for office and the veracity of Gahan’s judgment in back-room maneuvering.

You can rationalize it any way you like, but if you believe that Coffey serving as president removes him from a position to inflict mischief, this belief has already been proven wrong. If you believe that he can be co-opted for your own gain, you’re quite likely to be disappointed, too. Coffey serves Coffey, and he has been doing it for so long that his most recent ill-tempered bullying seems little more than par for the degraded course he’s always played.

Fish gotta swim, birds gotta fly, and Coffey gotta dispense self-aggrandizing malice. In some ways, it’s a yawner ... unless, of course, you're the one actually being threatened by an elected official who apparently didn't get the memo and doesn't think that human decency -- not to mention rule of law -- applies to him.

Speaking personally, I’ve spent two years mortgaging my life in order to expand or business into a downtown that has been moribund for most of my adult life. I’ve chosen to do this for two reasons. First, I believe it will be successful, and we’ll make a profit. Second, I want to do my bit to get us through an open window of opportunity and make downtown live again. It’s a risk, but also an opportunity, and I’m not the only one who sees it.

I’ve tried to talk other people into taking the same chance … and then they see the council president hiking his leg and urinating on free speech. I volunteer my time to two economic development entities, and then the same council president tells me that the only way for me to participate properly is to run for council; otherwise, I’m to have no say.

Granted, Coffey isn’t the council representative for the precinct where the new business will be located, but his closest sycophant, Steve Price, is.

To top it off, Gahan, the council representative for the area where my existing business is located, has spent the past year consistently acting against my personal and professional interests, and recently enabled the ascension of the council member who’s now doing the former president’s territorial pissing for him.

And … consider that if the current council president lacks the basic self-restraint to control his anger, avoid physical contact and refrain from verbal threats directed at a private citizen in a public place, why should I or anyone else put personal safety and business investment dollars at risk by locating anywhere close to his sphere of influence?

Rational people will recognize that without investments made by business owners like me, there is no hope whatever of Coffey’s (or Price’s) neighborhood ever improving, and yet he harbors such depths of ignorance that it’s a deal he’s willing to accept … and, in perhaps the most delicious irony of all, this elected official who works tirelessly to frighten away anyone in a position to bolster the local economy serves on the Redevelopment Commission.

Damned right I’m concerned.

This time, Coffey needs to answer for his transgressions, and in a big way. Permit me this opportunity to call for his removal as council president and a formal censure on the part of his colleagues, who by doing so might yet indicate to the rest of us that they support progress in the city of New Albany.

It is long past the time to end Coffey's habitual bullying in and out of the council chamber, isn’t it?

10 comments:

  1. WOW!!
    Correct me if I am wrong, but is it not true that a private citizen can be a more effective advocate for positive change by remaining a private citizen, and not encumbered by the reigns of political office?
    And secondly, is it not true that His Coffeyship in fact works FOR those he bullies and threatens?
    (I still recall his proclaimation that a$$hole smokers should not have ANY rights, and he doesnt give a damn about "those people")
    Damn near makes a fellow miss the good old days of King Larry!

    ReplyDelete
  2. "...and then the same council president tells me that the only way for me to participate properly is to run for council; otherwise, I’m to have no say."

    Would anyone be surprised to learn that this is the SECOND CURRENT Council member to say this?

    ReplyDelete
  3. No Mark it would not as I was present at both occassions where those words were uttered.

    By two seperate individuals I might add!

    ReplyDelete
  4. With people like this in charge, I'm actually beginning to wonder if settling down in New Albany was the right thing to do...

    ReplyDelete
  5. @bayernfan that question has been seriously discussed the last few weeks in our household as well.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Redevelopment commission members have a statutory duty to investigate redevelopment strategies and “afford a maximum opportunity for rehabilitation or redevelopment of areas by private enterprise.” Can anyone think of instances where a member has failed in this duty?

    IC 36-7-14-2
    Declaration of public purpose; opportunities for redevelopment by private enterprise
    Sec. 2. (a) The clearance, replanning, and redevelopment of areas needing redevelopment under this chapter are public uses and purposes for which public money may be spent and private property may be acquired.
    (b) Each unit shall, to the extent feasible under this chapter and consistent with the needs of the unit as a whole, afford a maximum opportunity for rehabilitation or redevelopment of areas by private enterprise.

    IC 36-7-14-11
    Duties of commission
    Sec. 11. The redevelopment commission shall:
    (1) investigate, study, and survey areas needing redevelopment within the corporate boundaries of the unit;
    (2) investigate, study, determine, and, to the extent possible, combat the causes of areas needing redevelopment;
    (3) promote the use of land in the manner that best serves the interests of the unit and its inhabitants;
    (4) cooperate:
    (A) with the departments and agencies of:
    (i) the unit; and
    (ii) other governmental entities; and
    (B) with:
    (i) public instrumentalities; and
    (ii) public corporate bodies;
    created by state law;
    in the manner that best serves the purposes of this chapter;
    (5) make findings and reports on their activities under this section, and keep those reports open to inspection by the public at the offices of the department;
    (6) select and acquire the areas needing redevelopment to be redeveloped under this chapter; and
    (7) replan and dispose of the areas needing redevelopment in the manner that best serves the social and economic interests of the unit and its inhabitants.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Greetings, satirist. I notice your profile is not available.

    Please be aware of this blog's reality-based policy with respect to comments. To forestall the abuses of anonymity as witnessed too frequently hereabouts, we require that you identify yourself to the senior editor (see Roger's profile for e-mail address). We'll honor your screen name so long as we know who you are, and your privacy will be respected.

    Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  8. can a councilperson be removed and or censored?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Can an entire city government be removed? The answer is yes!

    ReplyDelete
  10. ok start with the main problem doug england

    ReplyDelete