CONSTRUCTIVE COMMENTARY: Yes, Mills and Loop should debate, but can we leave the Illuminati accusations out of it?

Ah, the memories.

I can't help recalling the time in 2015 when the incumbent mayor had the opportunity to participate in Leadership SI's mayoral debate at New Albany High School, thus ensuring there'd be at least one session with all three candidates (yours truly and Kevin Zurschmiede) present, facing each other before the public.

I can remember all the prominent Democrats encouraging the mayor to do so, because the community could only benefit from such a gathering, and ...

Wait -- no, actually I don't remember.

That's because none of them did any such thing. Democrats were stone dead silent, and in the end, the two of us, Independent and Republican, had a conversation about issues, allowing the mayor's empty chair to speak for itself.

The point of this recollection is while I agree that the former sheriff Darrell Mills and current sheriff Frank Loop should debate, I'm unmoved by staged crocodile tears from undemocratic Democrats, who were perfectly willing to manipulate the debate schedule in 2015 to ensure the mayor would not be burdened with having to think on his feet.

What's more, for Mills to simultaneously reference his Leadership SI program participation while at the same time criticizing the organization with an unsupported inference that a relative of Loop's somehow is influencing Leadership SI's debate stance strongly suggests Mills wasn't paying close attention to the lessons being taught during his class days.   

In short, this strange press release linked below indicates a willingness on the part of Team Mills to (a) offer conspiracy theories about dark forces arrayed against it, and (b) throw both Leadership SI and IU Southeast under the bus in the process.

I find this attitude worrisome, but of course it's just my 'pinion. If NA Confidential had the resources, I'd offer to sponsor the debate, although only as governed by my own impeccable set of rules.

I've got nothing whatever against either candidate, both of whom are experienced. For the community's enrichment, Loop and Mills do need to debate, but for Mills to attack organizations and institutions for not undertaking the responsibility seems a rather petulant way to approach the ultimate goal.

Perhaps he needs to rethink this tactic. Let's hope the candidates come together and have that chat.

Mills' opponent continues to dodge debate ...

The lengthy process of trying to secure a debate for the benefit of the voters in Floyd County now continues. Mills was originally disappointed when he learned that Leadership Southern Indiana (LSI) was not going to sponsor a Sheriff debate this election cycle, as has been the case in previous elections. This was especially disappointing since both candidates for Floyd County Sheriff are graduates of the LSI program.

The Mills campaign was also concerned when it learned that a relative of the current Sheriff is a member of the LSI Advisory Board where they also serve on the organization’s community relations committee. This committee has been previously charged with running the logistics of LSI debates. The LSI Board of Directors issued a statement in late August stating that the organization will not host debates this year. Conversations between LSI and the Mills campaign reveal that the organization will likely continue to host debates again in the future, but for “capacity reasons” they are just taking a break from debates during this election cycle.

Based on his comments to the News and Tribune on August 28th, Sheriff Loop seemed open to a debate, but only with the two community groups who had already stated they were not interested in hosting a Sheriff debate this year. Loop said he would "absolutely" debate Mills. "I would be glad to entertain the possibility," Loop said. "I think somebody like a 1si (One Southern Indiana) or LSI (Leadership Southern Indiana) ought to put it together to make sure it is fair, but I would be glad to participate."

Ladies and gentlemen, allow me to rant in a unique way about the jail tax.

No one from the public attended the second reading and final vote for the tax Wednesday, although (county council president Brad) Striegel said he heard from some constituents who are against it.
-- from the article in the newspaper

For me, it comes down to this: if the primary aim of the criminal justice system is to incarcerate -- and America tends to incarcerate an absurd percentage of its own people -- then it's going to be necessary to constantly build and rebuild jails.

Personally, I find it revolting. So much of this has to do with drug abuse, which is an illness, and we're perpetually unwilling as a nation to examine the fundamentals of addiction and treat the disease rather than its symptoms.

Kindly note that as I'm writing these words, the 1% has amassed a few trillion dollars more, none of which is being tithed toward jails, disease or much of anything else apart from greed.

Sounds like a disease to me. Is there a vaccine?

In terms of coping with reality in the way we as a people seem to favor it, then yes, Sheriff Loop's plan for jail renovation is far less expensive then building fresh, and the tax enacted this week is relatively low.

Those county council members carrying the ball were doing so pragmatically. No one ever said it was going to be easy trying to square diametrically opposed conditions, and my guess is they understand the electoral implications, although to repeat, not one member of the public bothered to show up and speak.

Politics is about power, and in political terms, Adam Dickey predictably has released his bots-by-DNC-template attacks, with Republicans being savaged for raising taxes. Seems there might be as many fault lines in the local GOP as among Squire Adam's DemoDisneyDixiecrats, as some Republicans are joining in this fusillade on social media.

Others expressing support for the jail tax have written that they predicated their approval on efforts to cut fat before approving the tax, with these not being considered.

Just a thought, but all these Republicans might also be asking urban Democrats to explain a municipal budget that has doubled since Jeff Gahan took office, or helping to unravel the vast extent of mayoral influence peddling, or even taking to the airwaves to question the Gahan ruling clique's cozy arrangement to procure a job for councilman Matt Nash.

It would be mighty helpful in explicating Gahan's myriad ethical shortcomings if the occasional sign of a pulse dimly emanated from the right, and not only the left, where as the rare social democrat (lower case, please) in the room, I tire of waging a one-front war against Team Gahan's larcenous stupidity.

Here's the script. No charge; you can buy me a beer some time. Instructions for use: launch an offensive against Democratic Party corruption first, illustrating that Gahan's homegrown Anchor Nostra is costing each of us quite a lot more than $100 each year, and then take your chances with the jail tax response.

A purely sadistic week in New Gahania, and even more tales from Corruption Junction.

Alas, as one Republican sadly explained to me:

It's because our presumptive mayoral candidate is low energy and is surrounded by a bunch of low-lifes who can’t call the Democrats out because they do exactly the same thing.

Can't we all just get along and agree to topple the despot?

But I digress. As it pertains to the jail tax, what just about everyone on both sides of the aisle misses is the basic first-causes point, this being whether we need to incarcerate so many persons when numerous other strategies to address such behavior exist.

We're accepting the grassroots muck, then arguing about how best to keep the slime off our clothing. Down here in the mud flats by the river, it's quite likely a futile strategy.

Floyd County Council approves new jail tax, by Chris Morris

Move will generate $4.5 million a year

NEW ALBANY — The Floyd County Council raised taxes in 1992 to pay for a new jail. On Wednesday night, a different council voted to raise taxes to renovate that same jail.

By a 4-3 vote the council approved a new Correctional Rehabilitation Facilities ordinance that calls for a .002 percent payroll tax on Floyd County residents. The new tax will generate around $4.5 million a year to be used on jail expenses including staffing and construction costs associated with the $15 million renovation plan that was recently approved.

"It's hard to do, but it's the right thing to do," council Vice President Denise Konkle said after the vote. Konkle, Lana Aebersold, Dale Bagshaw and Leslie Knable voted in favor of the tax, while Brad Striegel, Tom Pickett and Cam Wright voted against ...

... Bagshaw said the costs to run government have increased like everything else over the past two decades, and while school taxes have increased during that time, county taxes have not.

"This can help pay the bond and other costs for the jail," he said. "That is why we did it."

And a day earlier:

Jail tax ordinance moves forward in Floyd County, by Chris Morris

NEW ALBANY — The Floyd County Council moved one step closer to creating a new jail tax Tuesday night.

By a 5-2 vote, an ordinance to create a .002 jail tax rate passed on first reading. The final vote will take place Wednesday at 6 p.m. at the Pine View Government Center since the vote did not pass by unanimous consent on first reading.

The new tax will generate around $4.5 million a year to be used on jail expenses including construction costs associated with the $15 million renovation plan that was recently approved. For residents making $50,000 a year, the new jail payroll tax will amount to around $100 a year, according to Auditor Scott Clark. The tax would kick in Oct. 1, 2018.

Lana Aebersold, Dale Bagshaw, Cam Wright, Leslie Knable and Denise Konkle voted in favor of the jail tax in the first reading, while Brad Striegel and Tom Pickett voted against. Only a majority vote of the council is needed Wednesday night for the tax to be approved.

"I've been struggling with this," Bagshaw said. "But I looked at this [needs] through the prism of public safety and infrastructure. This meets both in my opinion."

While no one wants to see a tax increase, Konkle said residents will be getting "a bang for their buck," with this ordinance. She said for just a minimal amount the jail will be renovated and be able to hold 100 more inmates, which will keep the county in compliance. She said it is also needed to shore up the budget.

"It may upset some people but the levy has not increased significantly enough to keep up with the growth in the community," Konkle said.

On Gahan's $10,000,000 City-County Building escape plan as a tactic to disrupt his ancestral enemies in county government.

The middle medallion is the Building Authority.

The New Albany-Floyd County Building Authority might just be the least transparent governmental organization in Floyd County.

It's almost impossible to find any information about the NA-FC Building Authority, on-line or otherwise.

However, this description of the Indianapolis-Marion County Building Authority conveys a sense of the beast in question -- and the era 1959-1962 is a close match for the construction of our building, which was the first such composite office to open in the state.

The Building Authority is an independent municipal corporation whose purpose is to serve the needs of local government in acquiring, financing, constructing, and managing building projects of a substantial nature. The Indianapolis-Marion County Building Authority is an independent body corporate and politic organized under Chapter 54 of the Acts of the Indiana General Assembly for 1953, now cited as Indiana Code §36-9-13-1, et. seq.

In the early 1950’s, various civic and governmental leaders in Marion County determined that an independent municipal corporation was needed to finance and construct a new city-county building to replace the then-obsolete and deteriorating Marion County Court House and the old City Hall on Alabama Street. The new structure would house City and County government, the police department and the Marion County courts. Previous experience had indicated that an independent, professionally-managed entity would best serve the long-term needs of local government for a first-class government office building.

Utilizing the 1953 legislation, the then-Marion County Board of Commissioners, the Marion County Council and the Common Council of Indianapolis in joint action in May, 1953, organized the Indianapolis-Marion County Building Authority (“Building Authority”). The Building Authority has the statutory power to construct, acquire, finance, operate and maintain land and government buildings for the use of eligible government entities in Marion County.

The first project of the Building Authority was to finance and construct the City-County Building on the site of the old County Court House. Construction was started in 1959 and completed in 1962. The City-County Building, under the management of the Building Authority, has provided space for the joint use of the City and the County since 1962. All bonds issued by the Authority for the construction of the City-County Building have been repaid. There is no outstanding debt on the building.

Since the construction of the City-County Building, the Building Authority has built and/or managed many properties for the City of Indianapolis and Marion County. The Building Authority has maintained a non-political operation since its inception in 1953.

Lately the NA-FC Building Authority is back in the news.

Judge's ruling may pave way for Floyd County jail renovations, by Chris Morris (All Tom May, All of the Time)

NEW ALBANY — Special Judge Vicki Carmichael's ruling late Tuesday may have opened the door for the proposed renovation to the Floyd County Jail to move forward.

The New Albany-Floyd County Building Authority and City of New Albany disputed the agreement signed in 1992 calling for the county to receive ownership of the jail once bonding was paid off. But Carmichael ruled the lease giving Floyd County deed to the property was valid.

With the deed, Floyd County can now bond the jail renovation, which with soft costs will be around $15 million. The plan is to add 110 beds to the current facility along with other renovations. Instead of having to pay $10 million in construction costs up front with funds from hospital sale proceeds, the Floyd County Council can now finance the project for up to 20 years.

The majority of the council has been reluctant to move forward with the plan due to concerns over costs and what it will do to the county's cash flow. "Can the county afford the project," is the question most asked by council members. Floyd County is staring at a $4.9 million budget deficit in 2018. By a 4-3 vote, the council rejected a recent proposal to fund the renovations with hospital proceeds.

But one of those members who voted no, Denise Konkle, said she would be prepared to move forward with the plan now if it can be bonded.

"Absolutely. It definitely changes my ability to move forward," Konkle said after hearing of Carmichael's ruling. "Now we have the ability to bond and not put such a strain on the county's cash flow."

This situation may or may not be settled.

Observing the situation from afar, it seems obvious that the city has joined with the Building Authority in pushing back against Floyd County government in the matter of jail improvements, by feeding the following conditions into the whirling maw of the Jeff M. Gahan Random Chaos Generator and Campaign Finance Divining Rod.

• Maggie Ridge, Myron Huth, Victor Megenity and Steve Bonifer are the four current Building Authority board members. A fifth one recently quit.
• Bonifer is Jeff Gahan's brother-in law, and the father of our local Democratic Party's vice president.
• At the council meeting of June 21, municipal corporate attorney Shane Gibson twice mentioned the figure of $9,000,000 as the city's investment in the current jail, which dates from 1992.
• The county says no, this isn't correct, and it owns the jail outright because Indiana statute says so. 
• The jail is completely separate from the City-County Building.
• The New Albany Police Department shares space with the Sheriff's Department, and would be staying put if the city departs for the Reisz Elephant panacea.
• In a 40-year contract dating to 1959, which since 2001 apparently is "year by year," the city agrees to pay the Building Authority not exactly rent as such, but half the yearly expenses and upkeep for the City-County Building. Currently the city's share comes to around $190K per annum.   
• Gibson believes the county would be happy to use the vacated space, but at present the city won't negotiate with the county about anything.
• The city says it needs more space, but has not considered options like remodeling the space it has. 
• The county says the city owns half the building, and would continue to owe for half the yearly expenses and upkeep even if Gahan evacuates for a new city hall at Reisz.
• The city says no, but reiterates that it owns half the jail.  
• County replies no ... and so on. 

Then there's this one:

• At a time when Sheriff Frank Loop's proposal for jail improvements is being hashed out by Floyd County's commissioners and county council, former sheriff Darrell Mills (D) is staging an electoral comeback in November.

I've probably left a few points out, but the gist should be clear.

All these feints, jabs, maneuverings and lawsuits are politically-motivated delaying tactics. The chess board might look different in January, allowing Gahan an advantage in negotiations with incoming sheriff Mills for the NAPD's co-habitation arrangement.

It also appears that Team Gahan might be building a case, in effect, that City Hall would owe nothing toward the City-County Building upon fleeing to Reisz, but rather the county would owe the city a buyout for the city's share.

You know, maybe $9 million or so.

It's perfectly clear that one of Gahan's chief goals with the Reisz Elephant office transfer is to disrupt city-county relations, both as prelude to this year's county elections and next year's city elections, when a centerpiece of his re-election campaign will be to depict county government as the "enemy" and himself as the only one who can save the city from dastardly uni-gov.

Most ranking Democrats already have consumed copious amounts of this Kool-Aid. It's impossible to have a chat with a single one of them without perfidious county government entering the conversation.

I'll describe Gahan's corruption: "Well, Seabrook's worse." 

I'll explain the idiotic Reisz expenditure: "Well, the county's worse."

I'll suggest that negotiations are a good thing: "Not with county. I'd trust a North Korean first."

It's amazing.

Surely the 800-lb gorilla perched nearby is the City-County Building's future disposition. Insiders have told me to expect lawsuits, and I see no reason to doubt this; Gahan's theory of disruption might well result in considerable acrimony and expense.

Politics in any size of pond is about power, and power is money, and so I submit that we're seeing a similar strategy of disruption in New Albany, as directed by Gahan. He intends to disrupt county government, but also New Albany's city council.

It doesn't require a PhD to see that since taking office, Gahan has seized every available opportunity to sever ties with county government. That's because Democrats are toast in the county, and at best, capable only of rearguard actions. To preserve the party's municipal system of patronage and keep the money flowing, the city power base must be fortified and walled off.

Let's summarize.

Moving city hall to a renovated 19th-century warehouse is about Gahan's colossal ego, first and foremost.

Next comes Reisz's unique utility to disrupt county governance.

Dead last is historic preservation, about which Gahan cares not one jot -- but the backroom Reisz deal yields Dear Leader permanent control of David Barksdale, who hasn't even put up a fight about it. If you're a sincere historic preservationist, there's nothing in any of this for you apart from being manipulated, and when it's over, discarded.

Meanwhile, speaking of historic preservation, here's an interesting article about the origins of the City-County Building, from which this post's introductory photo is drawn.

All of these elements, including columns from the old courthouse, combined to create a building that was respected enough to be listed among Indiana’s best new building architecture in 1963 ... the courthouse is undoubtedly modern, but at 57 years old it’s actually eligible to be listed on the National Register of Historic Places.