REWIND: Stand united, fall divided (2009).

Way back on February 12, 2009, I used one of my earliest Tribune guest columns to discuss one of many elemental dysfunctions afflicting New Albany: The steadfast and puzzling refusal to unify and organize as a means of achieving shared goals.

It's been two years, and unfortunately, this congenital failure to grasp the merits of rowing together is once again rearing its self-harming head in the form of economic development entities bizarrely reluctant to support what's best for the whole city, in the form of an independent small business alliance to facilitate localization, as opposed to what rewards individuals within their own bureaucratic fiefdoms.

I'm running for council at large, and while it's true that there may be little traction for an individual office holder who attempts to tackle the miasma, it remains that one of my campaign slogans is, "Zero tolerance for non-cooperation among non-profit economic development entities." Read into it what you will ... and I hope some of you do. Whether elected or defeated, I will continue to use the closest bully pulpit to promote the virtues of cooperation and decry the foolishness of small-pond thinking. Thank you for your patronage.

---

BEER MONEY: Stand united, fall divided.

By ROGER BAYLOR Local Columnist

A neighborhood forum was held last night. According to the planned agenda, topics were to include:

· Current experiences and problems in the city
· Ideas for improving quality of life
· City and neighborhood safety
· Code enforcement
· Proactive neighborhood involvement
· Future vision for the city and neighborhoods
· Street concerns

Over the past five years, probably a half-dozen neighborhood forums have been held, and the agenda list of hot button issues has been examined in exhaustive detail.

At various junctures during this time, individuals arrayed in small groupings throughout the city have diligently pursued their own solutions to selected flashpoints, whether by campaigning, petitioning government bodies, or enlisting legal assistance.

While there is general agreement among neighborhood activists as to problems and solutions, few tangible gains have resulted in spite of persistent efforts. The ongoing credit crunch, an economic turndown, and state government’s eagerness to starve municipalities of funding all have contributed to the stalemate.

Other impediments have been partially addressed with the ballot box, as in the genetic propensity of New Albany’s ruling elite to favor passivity and lowest common denominators rather than aggressiveness and the principled raising of community standards.

However, these are little more than glib excuses. My words today are written prior to the most recent neighborhood forum, but my fondest wish for a positive step forward remains a renewed commitment to grassroots unity, and a recognition that defeating the New Albany Syndrome requires cooperation, solidarity and inter-dependence as necessary preconditions for neighborhood progress, and not as bogey men to be feared by residents and manipulated by our congenital ward heelers.

---

Recently I had the pleasure of chatting with Mark Webb, an Indianapolis attorney who serves the Brewers of Indiana Guild as legal advisor and part-time legislative liaison.

I refrain from using the word “lobbyist” in describing Mark’s function, although I shouldn’t. There is nothing intrinsically unsavory about businesses banding together to advocate for their shared interests by hiring someone adept in relevant legalities and procedures. Such a person helps us stay informed so we can navigate the murky regulatory and statutory swamplands.

The key point is this: How many small Indiana breweries standing alone can afford to have representation in such a way?

The obvious answer: Maybe one, perhaps two, but to pool the resources of 25 or more Indiana breweries is to facilitate the retention of a point man like Mark.

With him, the Guild has a knowledgeable professional who voices our collective concerns to the legislature and state bureaucracy – and we all share his expenses. Our viewpoint no longer is the lone voice of a single brewery, but the massed chorus of an economic entity. That, too, is why the legislators and bureaucrats have an interest in listening to what Mark has to say to them.

It isn’t one. It’s many.

And this is why politicians pay closer attention when any well-organized lobby group like Reclaim Our Culture Kentuckiana (ROCK) turns out its foot soldiers at a public meeting. Collective action implies weight of numbers, and weight of numbers catches the attention of those whose continuing employment depends on votes.

There’s a catch of sorts: Once the Indiana brewers have made a democratic decision pertaining to a policy or position, it becomes my responsibility as an individual member to maintain solidarity with the collective will of the whole.

For instance, Mark informed me that the Guild will not take a public stance on smoking legislation currently being debated in Indianapolis. Personally, I’d like to see us do so, but a decision has been made based on membership input, and I fully support it. We’ll our save ammo for other, more important, targets.

In order to enjoy the bigger picture benefits of collective action, we all may be obliged to surrender a smidgen of autonomy and subordinate a few bits of personal need in order to succeed at larger objectives.

----

So, what does any of this have to do with the city’s neighborhoods?

My analogy should be clear, and surely nothing I‘ve written today should surprise anyone who understands that at an elemental level, human social existence is political in nature, and politics is about power and how power will be distributed. That’s why there are political parties, labor unions, the NRA and the AARP, all of which act in the knowledge that a greater share of influence comes from disciplined organization, which represents the weight of numbers, forming a stronger collective voice to get the point across to those not inclined to listen otherwise.

Many folks have spent years seeking to revitalize New Albany’s neighborhoods, searching for workable solutions to the problems like those discussed at neighborhood forums. There have been answers, and herculean efforts toward rallying property owners, cleaning streets and alleys, making residential blocks safer, demanding the city enforce its own codes, and transforming New Albany into a place where residents are proud to live, not numbly resigned.

The dooming problem is that simple unity across neighborhood boundary lines both real and imagined has been unattainable, and with sporadic exceptions, the toil has been rendered piecemeal.

Worse yet, there has been a tendency toward parochial self-aggrandizement on the part of egotistical and underachieving local politicians, who thrive on dire warnings against what supposedly can’t be done, rather than doing something.

Isn’t their inveterate, manipulative obstructionism the very best evidence that without disciplined unity, we can’t hope to reclaim New Albany’s neighborhoods?