REWIND: Nobody listened to Eisenhower, either.

The following was originally published on November 19, 2007. Since then, some have taken to referring to my occasional cautionary utterances as alarmist. Granted, I don't always get it right but, given the region's current position vis-à-vis the Bridges Project circa 2010, I think I can live with that.

One Southern Indiana already has two public school systems, two colleges, four local governments, six banks, and the phone and electric companies represented on their board.

Rather than fostering inclusive, informed debate about the future of regional development from the grassroots up, however, they've fabricated a top down model, insinuating that their suggested course(s) of action are inevitable while providing little public explanation as to why their particular ideological choices are more (or less) beneficial to the region than any possible alternatives. They've yet to openly admit that plausible alternatives even exist.

If they're allowed to continue unchallenged, amassing consequential levels of financial and political support from a roster of executives with an inherent self-interest in protecting their own respective positions, 1SI could easily develop the power to dominate individual local governments, thereby lessening the degree to which public input matters and creating a situation in which our region's future would be decided by the appointed members of a private organization rather than elected public representatives.

Regardless of their intentions, that's dangerous.