Today's Tribune column: "Only sissies catch and release."

Ifuns they come back with a mess of EDITs and TIFs, maybe they kin put 'em in a Cajun cooker top o' the new parkin' gay-rodge.

BAYLOR: Only sissies catch and release

SOUTHERN INDIANA — It was dawn’s earliest light in the damp cold of an Ohio Valley winter morning, and down in the muddy creek bottoms of Falling Run, a smudgy tableau was lifting, sketched in drab shades of brown and gray.

Invisible waterborne contaminants gurgled past an exposed mound of illegally dumped tires. Nearby, where imperceptibly decaying rubber met an abandoned wooden packing crate, rustlings in the dead leaves gradually betrayed the presence of three shivering, huddled forms, two of them clad in Army surplus desert camouflage.

The third, smaller and mannequin-like, was perched on an empty plastic milk jug, wearing a straw hat and wielding an unlicensed Dobro®.

TWANG!

“A hunting we will go, a hunting we will go,

Heigh ho, the Mayor must go, a hunting we will go.”

TWANG!

From below a scarlet, grease-smeared doo rag, Councilman Cappuccino glared at his ventriloquist’s dummy.

“Be vewwwy quiet! We’re hunting EDITs.”

Coffey refuses to name names; pumpkin patch freezes solid; NA council completes another session.

It appears that the Gang of Pour was not represented at last night's council meeting, putting us into the same category of zombie-like irrelevance as every last one of Steve Price's long-suffering, utterly ignored constituents. Fortunately, the Tribune's Daniel Suddeath is well paid to endure the indignities. Here is his report:

New Albany City Council passes $1.7M to balance 2010 budget; Annexation passes while preservation commission abolishment turned away.

... Councilwoman Diane McCartin-Benedetti sponsored the measure, and said she did not support the administration’s original proposal because it did not include a repayment of the EDIT funds that would have been spent on public safety.

“I think EDIT — economic development [tax] — needs to be used for economic development,” she said.

Facts, not jihads: More required reading on sewers.

Randy Smith boils down his sewer series to talking points ...

To make a long story short

I’ll admit it. I write “long.” I try to be careful with my writing and I try to be complete. When I write about public policy matters, I choose my words carefully, try to address even the most esoteric of possible objections, and strive to accommodate readers who may just now be paying attention.

Accordingly, sharing facts and opinion with a wider audience is often prevented by the sheer length of what I write.

So, let’s try to boil my recent 5-part essay into its essence, shall we? Here are the elements.

... and explains why certain EDIT-based "relief" proposals stem from intended cultural jihads, not the hard facts about the sewer utility.

A sewer fix we can accomplish now

Let’s be clear about one thing right off the bat. I would not fault any city council member for calling “time out” when asked to increase the $5.04 per unit sewer rate by another $1.81. There’s nothing insignificant about that.

But when any council member tries to blind us from the facts with irrelevancies, personal grievances, and boogeymen, I call foul.

Leak the plans, win a hundred bucks.

At his new blog, Dan Coffey wrote:

Also, there are those that want to use the EDIT money for a $12 million parking garage and a multi million dollar city hall. I feel we should use our resources to fix the problems at hand before we bond millions of dollars that we do not have.

Fair enough.

Note that the two sentences express very different ideas. The first implies that EDIT money will be spent on one or both conjectured projects. The second sentence expresses the viewpoint that if such projects actually were on the table, other ideas would be better. However, the impact of the second sentence is dependent on the implications of the first being true.

Are there spade-ready concrete proposals for a parking garage and/or city hall? If so, shouldn't we be able to locate them?

I have a hundred dollars for the first person who can provide written proof that any such proposal, either for a parking garage or a city hall, actually exists.

I won't ask for the copies of the city council ordinance approving one or both, because we all know that hasn't happened. Barring any such evidence, we can assume that while Coffey is not lying outright, that he is using scare tactics with no basis in fact. If such evidence exists, then he's nailed it. Which is it?

Tribune editorial board signs names, troglodytes remain anonymous.

The Tribune editorial board speaks ...

TRIBUNE EDITORIAL: Support safety even at a tough cost

Grant the mayor his request. Use some of the EDIT money for public safety this year and next. Then, when the city does annex, if the extra tax base does not cover the two budgets, then look at layoffs or cutbacks.

... and so do the anonymous character assassins.

No, we are dealing with a group of lazy, fat cops who only care about themselves.

When you have an opinion like that, small wonder you hide. Anyone for a classic Thursday night on the horizon? We may want to rent the video equipment for this one, wear our furry Ceausescu issue caps, and pretend we're in the Carpathians ... except that pastrami hails from Bessarabia.

Rubbing the wrong way: It's not dark in here for lack of lamps.

There was a press conference yesterday to formally announce the $6.7 million Neighborhood Stabilization Program grant awarded to New Albany for work in the S. Ellen Jones neighborhood. Despite some coordination issues (with the presser, not the program), it’s encouraging when group rubbing leads to an actual genie appearance.

We know the drill: The City will purchase and renovate approximately forty homes, build up to 10 new units, and then sell them at affordable prices. Even with administrative costs and price incentives, a substantial portion of the original financial allotment will be returned to the City at the time of sale to be reinvested for the same purpose in accordance with federal guidelines, allowing the process to be repeated on an incrementally smaller scale.

With the hiring of local firms and the purchasing of goods from local suppliers, the money will cycle through our local economy many times over. Property values will rise, jobs will be sustained and created, the neighborhood will, in fact, become more stable, and the revenue generated by those activities will aid in curtailing budget shortfalls in various levels of government.

The significance of the dollar amount was rightly touted in the Tribune as being “worth about half of New Albany’s annual city budget.” Its potentially transformative magic has been extensively discussed and sufficiently aahed. Like I said, it’s encouraging.

Here’s what’s not so encouraging: With the proper initiative, we could have done it or something similar on our own. The City Council sat on $5 million in reserves this year. With our additional annual influx of EDIT funds in 2010, our stash will be roughly equivalent to the NSP grant amount. The genie’s lamp has been in our hands the whole time. What’s missing is the foresight and political will to use it, largely from a City Council who typically blames the mayor for their lack of engagement anyway.

If we take in approximately $2 million in EDIT funds annually and $6.7 million is enough to renovate, build, and sell 50 homes to single family owners, we could replicate an NSP-style model, moving from neighborhood to neighborhood, every three to four years with purely local dollars. Does anyone think 50 totally new or correctly renewed homes in their neighborhood might make a difference?

What happens when the funds returned to the program via sales provide financing to complete another conservatively estimated 15 or 20 homes in the same neighborhood? What if the neighborhoods were approached in a row, with the second right next to the first and so on, extending the pattern? Does 130 total home renovations within a mile or so sound appealing?

What would the revenue capture do for our tax base? What would a more stable neighborhood do for our school achievement scores? Our crime rates? Might the private market respond with increased confidence and investment, especially if they knew more improvements were coming?

To be clear, I’m not suggesting that every last slice of EDIT funding be given over to home renovation. What I am suggesting is the scale and multiplicity of return that would be possible if the council took a sincere interest in revitalization and fiscal sustainability, actually using their time to learn about and seek investment opportunities and best practices that would benefit the city over the long term instead of engaging in the often purposeful ignorance to which we’ve become accustomed.

Even if a partial but sufficient EDIT amount were pledged each year to deal with the most egregious and/or visible properties in a systematic way, remarkable improvements could be made in conditions well beyond the properties themselves.

It doesn’t take magic. It takes intellectual honesty and earnestness. And that no one has granted them.

7th visitation: EDIT for police. Nay to 2nd reading ... but "yes" to the amended (reduced) 3rd reading.

INTRODUCTION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: READING

A-09-09 Additional Appropriation Ordinance from the E.D.I.T. Fund for the Police Department (2 & 3 Zurschmiede)

Well, here it is.

No discussion

No: Caesar, Price, McLaughlin, Gahan, Gonder
Yes: Benedetti, Messer, Zurschmiede, Coffey

Defeated in the 2nd reading.

Messer: Would like to amend the ordinance to $500,000, which would allow for some restaffing.

Benedetti seconds, and a vigorous discussion ensues. Messer mentioned money previously approved but not spent. Coffey says he's been urging to put "police in the pipeline." Coffey compares levels of interest in police, hazardous sites, etc.

Price: Everyone told me 5 wouldn't do it. "I don't play poker ... I don't like politics," when you wait until the last minute to do this ... that's wrong ... "I don't play poker." Upset that he previously asked if 5 would do, but everyone said no. Now he's hurt.

Coffey: "Y'all mind if the chief says something?"

Chief Crabtree: States his case. 13 officers can retire at any moment.

Price: "Hurts the reputation of the department when it says in the paper" that an "officer is eating breakfast" and "I don't even know if it's true ... "

Huh?

Crabtree: Entitled to lunch. Every department allows breaks. "There's no such thing as Robo-Cop."

Haub: "Not an issue of playing politics," but if you remember 2008 and the original presentation, and the DEA's criticism. The city has to grow up and show it's serious about fighting crime. The department has stepped up and followed the DEA's recommendations, but the council has to help meet the other condition: Increased manpower.

Erika and her gnarled friend now stand up and glare toward the chair.

Haub continues. The sheriff pocketed the drug seizure money recently, not the city police.

Price: "If I was a policeman, I'd vote for you."

Haub: Louisville gets money for drug interdiction, NA gets nothing. "I'm not trying to call your bluff."

Price: eyeyeyeyeyeyeyeyeyeyeyfiveeyeydoiteyeyey

Pat McLaughlin: "I don't buy it either."

Acrimony.

Council votes for the amendment: Caesar flips, and the amendment passes 5-4 against.

Final vote on the original wording. Now and only now Caesar asks: Where does the money go if approved.

Now he asks. Before the third reading. Seriously.

Now the council starts talking about when and how the money would be spent.

Price: What is we have to make cuts later?

More acrimony.

KZ: How much notice do the retirement guys have to give?

Crabtree: None.

Coffey: Call for the vote.

Vote, 3rd reading

Caesar flips again from 1st and 2nd readings, and on the 3rd, the council approves the EDIT funding reduced by half. 5-4, Caesar making a majority.

Finished at 10:35 pm. Erika is very unhappy.

A-09-09 ($ from EDIT to the police department) defeated 5-4.

The first reading of A-09-09, an additional appropriation from EDIT to the police department to hire new officers, was defeated 5-4.

Previously, a resolution to do this passed 5-4. Changing his vote was 2nd district councilman Bob Caesar. He explained this to me afterward by saying that the reasoning behind a resolution is very different from the reasoning behind an ordinance, although he did not explain the difference.

No Caesar
No Price
No McLaughlin
Aye Benedetti
No Gahan
No Gonder
Aye Messer
Aye Zurschmiede
Aye Coffey

Fails to pass on first reading, 5-4 against. 2nd and 3rd readings next time.

I'm having a beer now.

Will the Real "Economic Development" Please Stand Up?

Friday afternoon I stopped by the Bankstreet Brewhouse for a liquid pick me up prior to going home.

It had been a long week what with truck drivers, freight brokers, and Common Council meetings and I needed to unwind a bit. At least that was the original intent.

But alas, it wasn’t to be.



I had no more sat down & ordered a beer when I happened survey the room to see CM Gahan at the small bar behind me.

Now being one whose Mamma taught me that it was impolite to holler at people across the room I invited him to join me. My BAADDD!

He began the conversation by asking my position on the proposed hiring of more policemen.

I said that I agreed with the plan and he responded that he didn’t think it was either sustainable or necessary.

“The statistics don’t support the need for ten additional officers!” was Jeff’s position.

Huh??? Whose statistics??

About this time John Gonder who had been talking to Roger a short distance away, joined in the conversation.

He agreed with Gahan that the plan was neither necessary nor worth the money at this time.

This as always led into a heated discussion about the use (proper or otherwise) of EDIT funds.

“They are for economic development, not employee salaries!” said Gahan.

“They shouldn’t be used for either new officers or the Sewer Utility!” responded Gonder.

“So John” says I, “are you going to lead the charge to take the $875K of EDIT funds out of the Sewer Utility’s hands?”

No response.

Gahan offered on the one hand that the Sewer Utility was rolling in dough and didn’t need a rate increase.

“OK!” I say,” Then let’s take the EDIT monies away and see! If they can stand alone without being propped up, I’ll shut up about rate increases!”

“But they need those dollars to pay for the ongoing projects!” responds Jeff.

“Time out Jeff!!” I retort “You can’t have it both ways! Either they need the Edit funds to operate or they don’t!”

“Don’t put words in my mouth” says Gahan. “I can think of no better example of economic development than that which has gone on in the Charlestown Road corridor. Those EDIT funds helped to build the infrastructure that made all that possible.”

CM Gonder at some point in this exchange offered that he thought using said funds to forgive a tap in fee on occasion was a good thing but not to construct the entire system while the landowners/developers get off scot free.

By now my beer is getting warm and the conversation is getting even hotter so I turned back to the job at hand and they both finished their business and left.

Reflecting on this exchange over the weekend a few questions came to mind for your consideration.

Is there an election this fall that I didn’t hear about??

What is this elusive animal called Economic Development?? Can anyone me a simple definition of what that term entails?

Can any two people from either the private sector or government agree on that definition?

In the end, who benefits from it?

Lastly, my favorite unanswerable query.

Can someone please explain how providing infrastructure improvements to landowners/developers at subsidized rates makes more economic development sense than does providing safe, clean, crime free neighborhoods for average people to invest and live in?

I gotta go eat pot roast fresh out of the oven but please continue the discussion.


I’m anxious to see the answers!