Showing posts with label city council meetings 2016. Show all posts
Showing posts with label city council meetings 2016. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 17, 2018

A 2016 reprise: "High atop Summit Springs with friends (and relatives) in low places."


There's a bureaucratic fix scheduled for this evening. The action is necessary to keep the campaign finance spigot pouring gravy to those porcine troughs.

They're in it for the money: Team Gahan and its Plan Commission's cowardly and abject capitulation to the Kelleys and their Summit Springs development atrocity continues tonight.

We've all been here before, and so from June 9, 2016 ...

---

ON THE AVENUES: High atop Summit Springs with friends (and relatives) in low places.

A weekly column by Roger A. Baylor.

---

But first …

A STATEMENT FROM OUR MAYOR

My fellow New Albanians, as your legally elected mayor I’m committed to making New Albany a fundamentally better place to live.

Lately there has been controversy about a development project called Summit Springs – retail, offices, living space and a hotel. It’s an unusually complicated situation, but I believe this development will contribute to the improvement of the city, and so I’m going to explain it to you.

In zoning-speak, Summit Springs is a Planned Unit Development (PUDD). It originated many years ago and was approved, according to the planning and zoning rules in effect at the time.

Then there were delays, and in the city’s view, the property’s owners (the Kelleys) lost the plot. The city felt they needed to seek approval a second time, owing to changed circumstances. They disagreed. This led to them filing a lawsuit against the city, and eventually, the judge ruled against us, making their development inevitable.

Precisely because there are valid concerns about the hilltop site for the second phase of Summit Springs, I decided as mayor that the city would be better off actively participating in the refashioned development project, rather than standing aside and doing nothing.

In my view, by virtue of partnering with the property owners and their development company, the city could more effectively enforce the terms stipulated by the PUDD. Moreover, with the city constructing the necessary access road, we could tie Summit Springs to State Street’s existing grid in a comprehensive way, ensuring traffic would be better controlled on this already busy thoroughfare.

This decision to create a “public-private partnership” was mine, and mine alone. Whether you agree or disagree, know that the buck stops with me. I possess the ultimate authority, and my department heads follow a script that I write.

Having said this, I also take full responsibility for a few missteps along the way.

Had the city won the lawsuit, the ultimate development plan may have turned out differently, but in case we lost, we needed to have a contingency plan of our own.

This is why it appears to some of you that we were spending money to fight the developer even as we were preparing for the possibility of joining the development. Actually, what we were doing was being prepared.

Consequently, it has been suggested that the city’s economic development director may have been overly zealous in taking part in preliminary discussions with the development company hired to build Summit Springs – before the lawsuit was resolved, and in conjunction with the development company’s owner, who happens to be the economic development director’s brother-in-law.

It was a mistake for me to ignore the conceivable conflicts of interest in this situation, and while I honestly believe there was no impropriety, it’s certainly true that appearances matter.

Furthermore, I’ve come to see that nepotism is a potentially serious matter, and as such, I’ll be appointing an independent board of review to examine all such cases in my administration, regardless of where this body’s investigation leads. The run-up Summit Springs will be included in this process.

Now, back to Summit Springs. The bottom line is that while our city council is justified in revisiting its planning and zooming ordinances so as to account for future developments, and should do so expeditiously, it cannot retroactively change the rules for Summit Springs.

I’ve met with the families on Fawcett Hill Road, and their two major requests – to keep their road from becoming a through-way, and to increase the depth of the green buffer between their homes and the Summit Springs development – are both reasonable and do-able.

Because the city is partnering with the Kelleys on Summit Springs, I like my chances of ensuring these requests are honored. I’ll see to it that they are, and that’s a promise. We’ll get it right.

Finally, not only are we obligated to follow the law with regard to the Summit Springs PUDD, and to safeguard those nearby residents of Fawcett Hill, but we must be mindful of our ongoing, city-wide difficulties with stormwater runoff. We’ve been doing our best, but we simply must do better.

It’s past time for a comprehensive, updated storm water master plan, and it will begin at Summit Springs. Ultimately, this revised master plan will include the usual proven engineering solutions as well as innovative “green” incentives for homeowners and businesses to do their little bit in restoring hydrological equilibrium to the city of New Albany.

Thanks for your time. I’m confident that the key to future success with projects like Summit Springs is a fundamental enhancement of communications with the public, because after all, your tax dollars are at stake. Call or e-mail me any time.

---

NA Confidential Department of Egregious Fiction Disclaimer:

“Yet again, you’ve been reading the words Mayor Jeff Gahan has not said, and will not say. These words are unlikely to be uttered, ever. Try to forget them. If you can’t forget, drink harder.”


---

The Courier-Journal’s Lexy Gross provides an excellent overview of Summit Springs in the context of Monday’s city council meeting (See also: Tighter development restrictions sought in New Albany, by Jerod Clapp).

Locals ask council for help to fight N.A. project

Some residents were disappointed to learn Monday night that the New Albany City Council probably won't take action against a disputed development project, despite acknowledging that city officials and the developer potentially violated a 2008 city ordinance in the process.

"It’s so clear this is not proper procedure," said resident Aaron Hellems, who has continuously fought the so-called Summit Springs project. "It’s so clear that no one really wants to step up to the plate and do anything about it. They feel empathy and understand we’re in a difficult position, but when it comes to saying this is wrong and needs to be corrected, no one is willing to take it up."

The development in question -- located off State Street in New Albany -- was last approved by the city's plan commission and council eight years ago. The planned unit development district, or the PUDD, was delayed because of economic conditions at the time, according to the city's counsel, Shane Gibson.

At some point early on, the city agreed it would pay for an extension of Daisy Lane, forming a public-private partnership with the developer ...

It was left to Dan Coffey to astutely quiz the 800-lb gorilla.

"When did we go from being in a lawsuit against (the Kelleys) to being a partner with them?" Coffey asked Gibson Monday.

Gibson, who as corporate counsel for the city has been privy to the location of so many dead bodies that he probably knows the mayor’s gym locker combination, simply ignored Coffey’s query.

Scott Blair noticed, and promptly followed up, asking Gibson this question a second time, and the attorney quickly copped a plea.

He said he didn’t know.

Well, of course he didn’t. No one in the city knew, either.

In March, no one knew that Summit Springs was about to rise from the dead. No one knew that when it did, the city already had executed a deft 180-degree turn, ditched a three-year lawsuit faster than a used condom, and claimed a piece of the action, boastfully deploying that most exhausted of bromides, “public-private partnership,” to explain the turnabout.

In a city where 25% of the inhabitants live beneath the poverty line, no one knew how important is was for us to have a high-end hotel property clinging to the side of a geological questionable hillside, with an exhilarating view of Louisville for those well-appointed visitors in town to see friends who’ve taken up residence at the “luxury” balsa bocce hutches known as Break Wind Lofts at Duggins Flats.

But everyone knew, at least once the clearcutting began on the hillside, owing to statutory pre-emptive bat breeding regulations understood by so few public officials that John Rosenbarger came close to unceremoniously botching them within the confines of his Ohio River Greenway fiefdom, before rushing chainsaws at the last possible moment to further denude a constantly eroding riverbank.

By then, the full frontal Summit Springs slope already had been timbered, and when the inevitable questions started being asked, Scott Wood stepped forward to take responsibility. On Monday, Gibson again stated that Wood acted alone, entirely removed from City Hall’s oversight.

You’ll recall Richard Nixon saying the same about the Watergate break-in.

It’s a surprise that Wood wasn’t fired –not because he approved a clear-cut explicitly prohibited by the PUDD in question, but because by doing so, his boss’s public-private cat was loosened from its restraining bag, and the city was forced to come forward with its hackneyed “another heroic Gahan victory for God and country” press release before the errors in spelling and syntax had been corrected by the third floor’s cleaning lady.

Coffey’s question again: "When did we go from being in a lawsuit against (the Kelleys) to being a partner with them?"

Indeed.

For how long a period was the city spending money to contest the development it subsequently joined, while at the same time spending money to plan the exact terms of its participation?

Until we know the answer, there is an ongoing and perfectly legitimate question about conflicts of interest, even if wasn’t obvious at first.

The city’s economic development director is David Duggins. His sister is married to Paul Wheatley, chosen by the Kelleys to develop their land. Duggins’ preferred model of old school, back slapping, golf course visiting, strip club patronizing, hundred dollar handshake “economic development” (with taxpayer expense account) is tailor-made for just this sort of abuse – as is Gahan’s refusal to learn the meaning of the word “nepotism.”

However, one thing is clear. A City Hall constantly prattling about its prowess in public-private partnerships should be able to guarantee implementation of the Fawcett Hill Accords.

By doing so, Jeff Gahan would at least spare these ignored residents the financial burden of engaging attorneys and waging a war of legal attrition, which is their only choice at present.

---

When I told this story to a local political old-timer and asked for his reaction, here is what he said.

“John Gonder lives up on Fawcett Hill Road, right?”

---

I’d like a double for two nights at the Vindictive Suites by B. J. Sheraton, please. Check in is at 4? That’s perfect. I have bocce at 6, followed by mocktails on the River Run mezzanine.

Can you call me a cab?

Say what?

That’s okay.

I’ll just beam myself up.

Tuesday, June 27, 2017

ASK THE BORED: BOW to Pastime, "Long distance runaround / Long time waiting to feel the sound."


We've given the Board of Public Works and Safety a whole laundry list of street grid topics to consider at this morning's meeting -- not that any of them read the blog, seeing as it would be quality of life heresy, punishable by forced recitation of the teachings of Chairman Nash.


Grid Control, Vol. 7: What will the Board of Works do to rectify HWC's striping errors on the north side of Spring Street, apart from microwaving another round of sausage biscuits?



As we wait near the very rear of the Great Gahan Prioritization Queue, let's consider this exchange at last week's BOW meeting. Here is the party of the first part, with the punch line to follow.


It's at least the second time that Pastime Grill & Pub has come before the bored seeking an exemption to "make noise" via evening entertainment, and the second time (at least) Pastime has been told there is no such exemption, even if it seemed to be so at the conclusion of city council actions last year ostensibly designed to update the city's noise ordinance (reprinted in full below).

October 11, 2016
ASK THE BORED: Irv's latest proposal for trucking safety, noise non-exemptions, and a probable date for the two-way streets vote.

September 1, 2016
Caesar absent, Coffey abstains, Rickard fumes and city council unanimously approves a noise ordinance upgrade.

August 22, 2016
Noise ordinance 2016: Surveying the bedfellows, parsing the decibels.

The simple fact is that last year's upgrade would have been more honest had it been titled "The Pastime Noise Ordinance Reboot."

Mind you, it isn't that the bar's residential neighbors don't have valid noise complaints. Rather, noise in our urban area is a fiendishly complicated issue given the revival of a downtown business district and the proximity of residents to activity, whether in older neighborhoods or upstairs above a bar or restaurant, as at Brooklyn and The Butcher and Gospel Bird.  

Did city council intend to give businesses like Pastime a handful of annual exemptions? Was Pastime being trolled? Was there a communications breakdown?

I don't know the answers, but the advice given to the Pastime representative by Mickey Thompson last week is absolutely priceless.


That's right, Mr. Rickard. Go have a nice chat with your councilman, Greg Phipps.

I'd like to be a fly on THAT wall.

---
Bookmark§ 96.01  REGULATING NUISANCES CREATED BY NOISE.
   (A)   It shall be unlawful for any person within the city’s corporate limits, to continue, or cause to be made or continued, any unreasonably loud, harsh or excessive noise which either annoys, disturbs, injures, or endangers the comfort, repose, health, peace, or safety of others, unless the making and continuing of the noise is necessary for the protection or preservation of property or the life, health, or safety of a person or persons. Any person who violates this chapter shall be subject to the penalties set forth in § 96.99.
   (B)   The following acts are hereby declared to be unreasonably loud, harsh or excessive noises in violation of this chapter, but the enumeration shall not be deemed to be exclusive:
      (1)   The sounding of any horn or other such audible signaling device on any automobile, motorcycle or other vehicle on any right-of-way, parking lot or other public place, except as a danger warning, for an unreasonable period of time;
      (2)   The use or operation of any radio, stereo, or other machine or device for the producing, reproducing or amplification of sound in any vehicle in such a manner as to create an unreasonably loud, harsh, or excessive noise, that disturbs the peace, quiet or comfort of others;
      (3)   The use or operation of, or allowing the use or operation of, any radio, stereo, musical instrument, or other machine or device for the producing or reproducing of sound in such a manner as to create an unreasonably loud, harsh or excessive noise which disturbs the peace, quiet, and comfort of others by creating or allowing a louder volume than is necessary for the convenient hearing of the person or persons who are voluntarily in the room, chamber, or vehicle in which any machine, device, or musical instrument described above is located;
      (4)   The use or operation of any vehicle in such manner as to produce any unreasonably loud, harsh or excessive noise, or to discharge into the open air the exhaust of any vehicle, except through a muffler or other device which will effectively prevent any unreasonably loud, harsh or excessive noises therefrom;
      (5)   The creation of any unreasonably loud, harsh, or excessive noise in connection with the loading or unloading of any vehicle, or by the operation of any such vehicle;
      (6)   The use of any mechanical loud speaker, amplifier, sound system, stereo or radio on any moving or standing vehicle for advertising, entertainment or any other purpose, in such a manner as to create an unreasonably loud, harsh or excessive noise; and
      (7)   The unreasonably prolonged continuation of animal noises, as provided in § 91.07.
   (C)   The standards which shall be considered in determining whether a violation of this section exists shall include, but not be limited to, the following:
      (1)   The volume of the noise;
      (2)   The intensity of the noise;
      (3)   The volume and intensity of background noise, if any;
      (4)   The proximity of the noise to a residential area, place of public accommodation, such as a hotel, motel, inn, campground and the like, health care facilities, churches or schools;
      (5)   The nature and zoning of the area within which the noise emanates;
      (6)   The density of inhabitation of the area within which the noise emanates;
      (7)   The time of day or night the noise occurs;
      (8)   The duration of the noise;
      (9)   Whether the noise is recurrent, intermittent or constant; and
      (10)   Whether any applicable exemptions apply.
(Ord. A-03-53, passed 8-21-2003; Am. Ord. G-11-42, passed 12-15-2011; Ord. G-16-08, passed 9-1-2016)  Penalty, see § 96.99
Bookmark§ 96.02  EXEMPTIONS.
   The following are exempted from the provisions of this chapter:
   (A)   Sounds emitted from authorized emergency vehicles;
   (B)   Lawn mowers, weed blowers, garden tractors, construction and repair equipment, go-carts, power tools, when properly muffled, between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m. only;
   (C)   Burglar alarms and other warning devices when properly installed, providing the cause for the alarm or warning device sound is investigated and turned off within a reasonable period of time;
   (D)   Events authorized by the Board of Public Works and Safety. However, there shall not be more than three events, totaling six days, in a calendar year authorized by Board of Public Works and Safety, granted to any individual or entity in a calendar year. Any additional annual exemptions will require Council approval;
   (E)   Noise associated with scholastic or athletic events;
   (F)   Sounds emitted for emergency purposes;
   (G)   Sounds associated with consumer fireworks permitted by state law under I.C. 22-11-14 et seq.;
   (H)   Sounds associated with the normal conduct of legally established non-transient businesses, organizations and governmental entities, when the sounds are customary, incidental and within the normal range appropriate for the use; provided, however, that, commercial enterprises shall not be entitled to this exemption between the hours of 10:30 p.m. and 6:30 a.m. on weekdays, and 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. on Fridays and Saturdays. However, it is noted that §§ 156.078(B)(7) and 156.078(C)(7) are applicable for light industrial use and heavy industrial use, respectively;
   (I)   Garbage collection between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m.;
   (J)   Sounds associated with equipment or animals lawfully utilized by disabled persons to accommodate their disability;
   (K)   Noise associated with an auction conducted by a licensed auctioneer;
   (L)   Noises resulting from any and all transportation, flood control, utility company maintenance and construction operations at any time on rights-of-way, and noises from situations which may occur on private real property, including in parking lots, deemed necessary to serve the best interest of the public and to protect the public’s health and well being, including but not limited to, street or hard surface sweeping or cleaning, debris and limb removal, removal of downed wires, restoring electrical service, repairing traffic signals, unplugging sewers, snow removal, house moving, vacuuming catch-basins, removal of damaged poles and vehicles, repair of water hydrants and mains, gas lines, oil lines, and sewers; and
   (M)   Noises from activities conducted on public parks or playgrounds and public or private school grounds, including but not limited to, school athletic and school entertainment events.
(Ord. A-03-53, passed 8-21-2003; Ord. G-11-42, passed 12-15-2011; Ord. G-16-08, passed 9-1-2016)
Bookmark§ 96.99  PENALTY.
   (A)   A first violation of any section of this chapter shall, upon conviction, be subject to a fine of $150 for the first offense. The date of the citation is the date for use to determine whether divisions (B) and (C) herein should apply.
   (B)   A second violation of any section this chapter by the same person or entity within a six-month period from the first violation shall, upon conviction, be subject to a fine of $300.
   (C)   A third or more subsequent violations of this chapter by the same person or entity within a six- month period from the first violation shall, upon conviction, be subject to a fine of $500 per violation thereafter;

(Ord. A-03-53, passed 8-21-2003; Ord. G-11-42, passed 12-15-2011; Am. Ord. G-16-08, passed 9-1-2016)

Monday, February 06, 2017

TONIGHT: Public hearing to discuss the sewer rate increase (and yes, it is an increase).

The city council agenda and packet was released last week, and the public hearing to discuss the sewer rate increase is tonight at 6:30 p.m.


Council president Pat McLaughlin has scheduled a second public hearing (the Blessings in a Backpack appropriation) for 6:45 p.m., with the regularly scheduled council meeting at 7. It isn't clear whether this is a provocation or poor time management, so consider coming out tonight and contributing your thoughts, and we'll make the hearing last.

Previously ...

---


Not only that, but shouldn't Gahan answer questions, too?

Shouldn't he attend and answer questions, of his own accord, springing from a deeply held desire for transparency and the exchange of information, and not being dragged to the meeting kicking and screaming, like a child seeking to avoid the dentist?

Sadly, we already know the answer. Maybe he'll come, anyway.

My biggest question is this: Seeing as one of the stated aims of these sewer rate increases is the city's ability to remove EPA limitations, thus allowing supposedly vital development projects, can we learn a little more about what these development projects entail?

What are they, and why the hurry?

Are they industrial? Retail? Luxury bocce-equipped housing?

Where are they to be located?

Finally: Why are the answers to such questions forever regarded as tantamount to state secrets, hidden so far underground that stacks of Bob Caesar's unsold Bicentennial books probably are being used like sandbag paperweights?

I urge readers to attend and to speak, whether Gahan shows his hide or not.

New Albany city council public hearing regarding wastewater rate change and the implementation of consumer price index is February 6.

NEW ALBANY CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING WASTEWATER RATE CHANGE AND THE IMPLEMENTATION OF CONSUMER PRICE INDEX

The New Albany City Council will conduct a Public hearing February 6, 2017 at 6:30 p.m. at 311 Hauss Square, 3rd Floor, Assembly Room 330, New Albany, Indiana at which persons may be heard concerning the proposed changes to rates, charges, and implementation of a consumer price index for the sewer utility user fees. The City Council will consider an increase in wastewater rates and charges effective July 1, 2017 or at a date set upon adoption of the rates and yearly thereafter. The proposed rates and charges are as follows: 3% increase in the monthly charges for all consumer categories and the implementation of a consumer price index yearly thereafter. Users of the sewage works for service of property located outside corporate boundaries may be entitled to petition the commission under section IC 8-1.5-3-8.3 et seq. to review and adjust the rates and charges imposed on the users if a petition under IC 8-1.5-3-8.2 or under IC 36-9-23-26.1 with respect to the same rate ordinance has not been filed.

Monday, January 30, 2017

Jeff Gahan pays himself around $11,000 each year to head up the sewer board. Shouldn't Gahan attend the city council rate increase hearing on February 6 and listen to public comments?


Not only that, but shouldn't Gahan answer questions, too?

Shouldn't he attend and answer questions, of his own accord, springing from a deeply held desire for transparency and the exchange of information, and not being dragged to the meeting kicking and screaming, like a child seeking to avoid the dentist?

Sadly, we already know the answer. Maybe he'll come, anyway.

My biggest question is this: Seeing as one of the stated aims of these sewer rate increases is the city's ability to remove EPA limitations, thus allowing supposedly vital development projects, can we learn a little more about what these development projects entail?

What are they, and why the hurry?

Are they industrial? Retail? Luxury bocce-equipped housing?

Where are they to be located?

Finally: Why are the answers to such questions forever regarded as tantamount to state secrets, hidden so far underground that stacks of Bob Caesar's unsold Bicentennial books probably are being used like sandbag paperweights?

I urge readers to attend and to speak, whether Gahan shows his hide or not.

New Albany city council public hearing regarding wastewater rate change and the implementation of consumer price index is February 6.

NEW ALBANY CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING WASTEWATER RATE CHANGE AND THE IMPLEMENTATION OF CONSUMER PRICE INDEX

The New Albany City Council will conduct a Public hearing February 6, 2017 at 6:30 p.m. at 311 Hauss Square, 3rd Floor, Assembly Room 330, New Albany, Indiana at which persons may be heard concerning the proposed changes to rates, charges, and implementation of a consumer price index for the sewer utility user fees. The City Council will consider an increase in wastewater rates and charges effective July 1, 2017 or at a date set upon adoption of the rates and yearly thereafter. The proposed rates and charges are as follows: 3% increase in the monthly charges for all consumer categories and the implementation of a consumer price index yearly thereafter. Users of the sewage works for service of property located outside corporate boundaries may be entitled to petition the commission under section IC 8-1.5-3-8.3 et seq. to review and adjust the rates and charges imposed on the users if a petition under IC 8-1.5-3-8.2 or under IC 36-9-23-26.1 with respect to the same rate ordinance has not been filed.

Wednesday, December 21, 2016

Phipps, McLaughlin pleasure mayor, oppose Blair's 6th district stormwater impact efforts, but the investigative measure passes council anyway.

The major story to emerge from last week's city council meeting was final approval of an ordinance establishing annual sewer rates increases.

Amid the inevitability, as we debated the suitability of pseudonyms like "bump" and "nudge," City Hall proved that in spite of perennially stunted bunker staff vocabularies, it can play the propaganda game adeptly:

Proactive Steps Taken to Protect New Albany Citizens


George Orwell would be so very proud. Proactive protection! Like a condom to guard against what's going to happen, anyway.

Safeguard residents and businesses against large sewer rate increases by assigning the Consumer Price Index for future rate changes.


In other words, we're safeguarding you against "increases" (not even bumps or nudges) by regulating rate "changes."

Timeless and masterful fecal matter from the business end of a male cow, although I'd like to know how much the imported ghostwriter cost. After all, they're nowhere near this clever, are they?

Okay, okay. I know, so on to Door Number Two.

Representatives of the usual engineering suspects and a handful of civic appointees were on hand at the council meeting to reiterate the municipal party line: As it pertains to stormwater, those Mt. Tabor area residents who insist on trusting their own two eyes instead of the mayor's should be ignored, and The Plan allowed to proceed.

And it probably will, but CM Blair's principled resolution carried, and there will be a stormwater study. It's a rebuke of sorts to the Dear Leader, but he can take heart in the unswerving loyalty of councilmen McLaughlin and Phipps.

Can someone loan me a bucket?

Echoing Hemingway's description of the bottle, a bucket is an agent of sovereign action. You can use it to bail stormwater runoff, vomit into it or toss it a timeserving functionary.

Study to look at Mount Tabor Road project impact on flooding in New Albany, by Elizabeth Beilman (N and T)

Despite city's stance, councilman checks on drainage effects of road project

NEW ALBANY — A stormwater study initiated by New Albany City Councilman Scott Blair will determine whether flooding will worsen for Mount Tabor Road residents because of a nearby road reconstruction, though project officials assure that it won't.

Blair, whose district includes the project area, brought the proposal to the council last week, when it passed with a 6-2 vote. Councilmen Pat McLaughlin and Greg Phipps voted against it.

"This has been a long-term issue," Blair said Tuesday. "A lot of folks who live in the Farmgate neighborhood have experienced flooding in their homes and their back yards."

Saturday, December 17, 2016

Yes, Virginia, it is a sewer rate INCREASE, in spite of what you may have read elsewhere.


The Courier-Journal came a bit late to coverage of New Albany's eleventh hour sewer ordinance, but once fully engaged, the Louisville newspaper correctly grasped the obvious.


Plain, simple, and in keeping with the real-world definition of the word "increase": To make greater, as in number, size, strength, or quality; augment; add to.

C-J reporter Madeleine Winer did not become immersed in semantics.

New Albany City Council approved increasing sewer rates for the third time in the last six years Tuesday night.

The council voted to hike sewer rates by three percent in a 7-1 vote Tuesday night. The rate increase would cover the city’s ongoing improvements to its sewer system and equipment costs as well as the debt it owes on bonds it has used for improvements in the past, city officials said.

The vote is still subject to review by the public and wouldn’t go into effect until next July if passed again by the council.

Bizarrely, almost to the very last gasp, the Jeffersonville News and Tribune -- which entirely missed the sewer ordinance's first reading, and apparently still operates with a bare minimum of editorial supervision -- continued its preference for obfuscating the increase with a series of euphemisms (settle down, Shane: "The substitution of a mild, indirect, or vague expression for one thought to be offensive, harsh, or blunt.")


That's right: An increase as structure change in large face, with "rates raised" coming in small print, although by this point, the ordinance had passed muster and it mattered very little.

Fascinatingly, for a while there, it was almost as though we were witnessing a wordplay competition among current and former newspaper staff members. How many different words can be substituted for the best and most obvious one, increase?

It is to the reporter Beilman's credit that she at least tried to explain. Have you noticed that the News and Tribune's upper management almost never participates in such exchanges on social media, though reporters invariably do?


A knight in shining armor rode to the rescue.


Tweeting on meeting night, reality began seeping into Beilman's dispatches, as it was revealed that the rolling CPI average could be 4% or higher on monthly bills; then again, "bump" and "nudge" are absent numerical thresholds.


Again to Beilman's credit, by the time the article was written, the euphemisms were dead and buried.


I remain bewildered. If the objective of a headline is to grab the reader's attention, then doesn't using the most accurate word (increase) achieve this at the bare expense of four additional letters (bump) and an added word (structure changes)?

In closing, here's a concise introduction to the relationship between journalists and politicians.

What is clear is that the relationship between journalists and politicians can have a significant impact on the functioning of a fair and just society. Politicians make decisions and take action on behalf of the public. Journalists scrutinise those decisions and report the implications to the public.

Tuesday, December 13, 2016

Bump? Hike? If sewer rates are higher, then that's an increase, by definition.


Tolling is about to begin. Interest rates are going up. Rental property registration and eventual inspection will provide a convenient pretext for property owners to raise prices.

So will sewer rate increases, however justified, even if they're modest, and whether or not they're tied to annual consumer price indexing, or established by the city council, which now proposes to abdicate its rate-setting responsibility via CPI mechanism.

The result will be more out-of-pocket costs for those least able to pay, something so consistently ignored by this top-down "beautiful people's" mayor that it's more difficult than ever to explain how he can continue to pretend being a Democrat.

We remain a city with many citizens living at or below the poverty line, a fact that dog parks and subsidized luxury housing does nothing to dispel.

The newspaper can't be bothered; the publisher (not newsman) is waging weird personal jihad on behalf of his foundation sinecure, and of course, there are more clicks to be derived from True Crime than sewer semantics.

There are numerous distractions elsewhere, but in the face of an effort by the mayor and his council allies to sneak through a sewer rate increase obscured by 40 pages of bonding legalese by means of two quick votes just before Christmas in the aftermath of Trump trauma ... well, it's too much for me.

Someone's got to be the adult dissident around here.

I remember when the self-described Potty Police would be on hand for meetings at the slightest suggestion of a rate hike, and yes, at the time I thought they often were crazed. However, there's no point in living without learning, and it makes sense to me now.

I've done my best to do what they'd have done, and try to spread the word about something that shouldn't be rushed this way. It isn't so much the amount of the rate change. It's the Gahanesque arrogance in the manner of passage, and the simple fact that the city council should be reviewing these rates on a consistent basis, yearly, not acquiescing in convenient last-minute ways to absolve themselves of responsibility.

When Gahan was a councilman, he'd have been out in front with denunciations. Now he's not just the mayor, but he's the salaried sewer board chieftain, too -- and if last week's meeting is any indication, Dan Coffey's back on the mayoral payroll. In 2008, Coffey would have been on full filibuster with a Bic ready to flick.

To repeat: The city council meets this Thursday (December 15) at 7:00 p.m. in the Romper Room on the third floor of the City County Building. At last week's meeting, administration and council proponents were not able to provide any concrete details as to the workings of this proposed CPI mechanism, and this is reason enough to detach it from the ordinance and submit it separately once these relevant details have been provided. 

Following are links to recent NAC articles, followed by contact information for city councilmen. Please make your views known to them.

Don't forget: Back door New Albany sewer rate increases are on tap at city council this Thursday. Are you down with this?


In a major victory for practical stenography, chain newspaper belatedly gets wind of sewer rate increases, helpfully regurgitates Jeff Gahan's talking points, reinforces status quo. Um, thanks.






Contact your council representatives before it's too late.

At-Large – David Aebersold (R), Voted FOR
(812) 944-9823, daebersold@cityofnewalbany.com

At-Large – David C. Barksdale (R), Voted FOR
(812) 945-1839, dbarksdale@cityofnewalbany.com

At-Large – Al Knable, MD (R), Voted AGAINST
(502) 386-5051, aknable@cityofnewalbany.com

1st District – Dan Coffey (I-D), Voted FOR
(502) 797-8347, dcoffey@cityofnewalbany.com

2nd District – Robert Caesar (D), Voted FOR
(812) 945-8744, rcaesar@cityofnewalbany.com

3rd District – Greg Phipps (D), Voted FOR
(812) 949-8317, gphipps@cityofnewalbany.com

4th District – Patrick McLaughlin (D),Voted FOR
(812) 949-9140, pmclaughlin@cityofnewalbany.com

5th District – Matt Nash (D), Voted FOR
(502) 718-4986, mnash@cityofnewalbany.com

6th District – Scott Blair (I), Voted AGAINST
(812) 697-0128, sblair@cityofnewalbany.com

Monday, December 12, 2016

Don't forget: Back door New Albany sewer rate increases are on tap at city council this Thursday. Are you down with this?


The city council meets this Thursday (December 15) at 7:00 p.m. in the Romper Room on the third floor of the City County Building. Annual sewer rate hikes according to consumer price indexing were tacked at the last minute onto an otherwise reasonable sewer project bonding ordinance, and received approval on the first two of three readings at last week's council meeting.

At last week's meeting, administration and council proponents were not able to provide any concrete details as to the workings of this CPI mechanism, and this is reason enough to detach it from the ordinance and submit separately once these relevant details have been provided.  

Given the mayor's zeal in increasing expenditures, do you really want him saying "trust us, we'll figure it out later" on something as important as guaranteed annual sewer rate increases?

Following are links to recent NAC articles, followed by contact information for city councilmen. Please make your views known to them.

In a major victory for practical stenography, chain newspaper belatedly gets wind of sewer rate increases, helpfully regurgitates Jeff Gahan's talking points, reinforces status quo. Um, thanks.






Contact your council representatives before it's too late.

At-Large – David Aebersold (R), Voted FOR
(812) 944-9823, daebersold@cityofnewalbany.com

At-Large – David C. Barksdale (R), Voted FOR
(812) 945-1839, dbarksdale@cityofnewalbany.com

At-Large – Al Knable, MD (R), Voted AGAINST
(502) 386-5051, aknable@cityofnewalbany.com

1st District – Dan Coffey (I-D), Voted FOR
(502) 797-8347, dcoffey@cityofnewalbany.com

2nd District – Robert Caesar (D), Voted FOR
(812) 945-8744, rcaesar@cityofnewalbany.com

3rd District – Greg Phipps (D), Voted FOR
(812) 949-8317, gphipps@cityofnewalbany.com

4th District – Patrick McLaughlin (D),Voted FOR
(812) 949-9140, pmclaughlin@cityofnewalbany.com

5th District – Matt Nash (D), Voted FOR
(502) 718-4986, mnash@cityofnewalbany.com

6th District – Scott Blair (I), Voted AGAINST
(812) 697-0128, sblair@cityofnewalbany.com

Friday, December 09, 2016

In a major victory for practical stenography, chain newspaper belatedly gets wind of sewer rate increases, helpfully regurgitates Jeff Gahan's talking points, reinforces status quo. Um, thanks.


Sorry, but you can't convince me that the News and Tribune's persistently hands-off, forgiving attitude toward Jeff Gahan's pants-on-fire municipal edicts DOESN'T have something to do with the sheer volume of advertising revenue contributed by New Albany ratepayers to the 'Bama-based newspaper via Gahan's propaganda commissariat.

Does this make me a conspiracy theorist? Yawn, but so be it.

One thing is absolutely certain: If I were to expend the elbow grease necessary to file public information requests with the city so as to learn the exact amount of advertising revenue aimed at CNHI's coffers, as was suggested to me by a newspaper staffer (naturally, the rag has no intention of telling us), the odds that the New Albany corporate attorney would honestly honor my request are less than zero.

Earth to News and Tribune: See Dalton Trumbo's quote, above. Report back to me if and when you get it. Thanks.

New Albany City Council mulls CPI-based sewer rate bumps; Ordinance to fund remaining EPA mandate projects, by Elizabeth Beilman (News and Tribune)

NEW ALBANY — The New Albany City Council will take a final vote Thursday on implementing annual automatic sewer rate increases in line with inflation.

The increases — measured by the urban consumer price index percentage change from year to year — are intended to prevent massive one-time bumps. If passed, the changes would be implemented in July.

"In the past, the rate has always been somewhat of a political negotiation," New Albany Mayor Jeff Gahan said. "That's not healthy for anyone. Suddenly, the residents experience a huge increase in the rates. The CPI will act as a way to protect the residents from exorbitant or huge rate increases."

Thursday, December 08, 2016

Ooh, ooh that SMELL: Jeff Gahan proposes arbitrary CPI pegs to raise sewer rates annually, when sewer rates already are illegally subsidized.


Jeff Gahan, who draws a salary as both mayor of New Albany and head of its sewer board, proposes that in the future, annual sewer rate increases are to be pegged to one or another variants of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) in a formula yet to be identified.

This vague mechanism appeared from nowhere, as appended to a sewer bonding ordinance, and was approved 7-2 in its first two readings, with a final vote coming next Thursday (December 15). As in previous years, city officials are stampeding the vote at year's end, citing tremendous urgency in solving problems no one knew existed until December.

Returning to the concept of pegging sewer rate increases to CPI-something, there is an obvious question that must be answered first: Is the current sewer rate legal?

Many of us believe it isn't. Randy Smith wrote the following in the spring of 2015, and it remains a must read for anyone seeking to understand the year-to-year mishandling of New Albany's sewer utility -- and did I mention that the mayor appointed himself to "run" the sewer utility?

(Bold text added)

Sewer Utility Still Draining Tax Dollars

 ... I had thought the (illegal sewer rate subsidy) chicanery had finally ended when I read last year that the subsidy had been removed. But just to make sure, I perused the city’s 2015 budget. There, to my astonishment, was yet another transfer of $570,000 from the income tax fund (EDIT) to the sewer utility.

I have written at length in the past about the illegality of this transfer. To be brief, while a city in Indiana can own and operate a municipal utility, the finances of that utility must be completely separated from other city funds. That is, the utility must stand on its own, without subsidies of any kind.

With this budget year, Jeff Gahan has in 11 budget years (as a councilman and as mayor) approved more than $10 million in transfers from city taxes to prop up the utility.

One might be of the opinion that using tax dollars to fortify the sewers is a good thing, but none of us are entitled to an opinion on this matter. State law is extremely clear. It’s illegal. (It happens to be illegal in Louisville, too, under a different state’s laws – ref: MSD.)

This misfeasance on the part of the mayor and council subjects the utility itself to the jeopardy of a taxpayer lawsuit to recover these millions of dollars.

However, illegality has become normal in New Albany. It’s not just the law-breaking that New Albany voters need to be aware of as they go to the polls. This transfer is possibly the single dumbest way to divert tax money and demonstrates innumeracy and financial incompetence on the part of the mayor and his advisors.

Also from Randy Smith, this week:

SEWER RATE INCREASE imminent in New Albany. But instead of taking responsibility for setting a legal rate, the city council has voted to begin an automatic rate increase pegged to some version of the Consumer Price Index (CPI). Final vote is on Thursday, December 15. That is not the legal way to set rates. CPI is not an economic variable - it's merely a statistic.

My information is that the wastewater utility needs a rate increase of $0.21 per billing unit, meaning even the lightest user would see a rate increase of about 2.8%. But no CPI will provide those funds, leading back to illegal tax subsidies for the heaviest users of the city-owned utility.

Contact your council representatives before it's too late.

At-Large – David Aebersold (R), Voted FOR
(812) 944-9823, daebersold@cityofnewalbany.com

At-Large – David C. Barksdale (R), Voted FOR
(812) 945-1839, dbarksdale@cityofnewalbany.com

At-Large – Al Knable, MD (R), Voted AGAINST
(502) 386-5051, aknable@cityofnewalbany.com

1st District – Dan Coffey (I-D), Voted FOR
(502) 797-8347, dcoffey@cityofnewalbany.com

2nd District – Robert Caesar (D), Voted FOR
(812) 945-8744, rcaesar@cityofnewalbany.com

3rd District – Greg Phipps (D), Voted FOR
(812) 949-8317, gphipps@cityofnewalbany.com

4th District – Patrick McLaughlin (D),Voted FOR
(812) 949-9140, pmclaughlin@cityofnewalbany.com

5th District – Matt Nash (D), Voted FOR
(502) 718-4986, mnash@cityofnewalbany.com

6th District – Scott Blair (I), Voted AGAINST
(812) 697-0128, sblair@cityofnewalbany.com

Sudden stealth sewer rate hikes reveal the breathtaking extent of Jeff Gahan's intellectual dishonesty. Isn't it time to hold Team Gahan and its toadies accountable?

Council Crackers: Final victory over Nawbany's EPA sewer nemesis is so crucial that Jeff Gahan stayed home and watched "Walker, Texas Ranger" reruns on DVD.

Wednesday, December 07, 2016

Sudden stealth sewer rate hikes reveal the breathtaking extent of Jeff Gahan's intellectual dishonesty. Isn't it time to hold Team Gahan and its toadies accountable?


As holder of salaried positions as mayor and head of the sewer board, shouldn't Jeff Gahan be the one -- THE ONLY ONE -- to explain why sewer rate increases have been artfully hidden in a rote bonding document ... why economic development concerns (and the city's inevitable subsidy of them) are at the heart of G-16-03 ... and why tender concern for the environment is the very last thing on the mind of a City Hall team that has cut more trees so far in 2016 than Weyerhaeuser?

Council Crackers: Final victory over Nawbany's EPA sewer nemesis is so crucial that Jeff Gahan stayed home and watched "Walker, Texas Ranger" reruns on DVD.

... Praised by its backers as one of the signal achievements of Gahanism in contemporary New Albany, the sewer ordinance came forward without the Genius of the Flood Plain present in the room to argue on behalf of its merits.

Significantly, Jeff Gahan is the mayor of this city. He appointed himself to the Sewer Board chair (a paid position), and also appoints the other members of the board, but if you were expecting leadership by example from Gahan -- something apart from the labored antics of subalterns, as with David Duggins' frat boy mugging or the vocabulary-deprived glowering of Shane Gibson -- then too bad for you.

On Monday it took an hour of desultory skirmishing before city officials finally conceded the central point, in that this desperate-haste-from-nowhere-ordinance is necessary because the existing EPA points cap will prevent planned developments in 2017.

Given that we all favor independence from the EPA, shouldn't we know more about the nature of these development plans?

As holder of salaried positions as mayor and head of the sewer board, shouldn't Jeff Gahan be the one to explain these plans, and why they matter?

Evidently not, because Gahan remained safely ensconced in the Down Low Bunker on Tuesday, as the city's Propaganda Commissariat went full frontal disingenuous (synonyms include insincere, dishonest, untruthful, false, deceitful, duplicitous, lying and mendacious):

At last evening’s City Council meeting, the City Council voted 7-2 in favor of bill G-16-03. If approved on final reading, this ordinance would authorize the construction of sanitary sewer projects that would eliminate the final remaining sanitary sewer overflows in the city.

As Bluegill succinctly observed with respect to the spin cycle:

And in today's City Hall PR announcement, not a single word about automatic annual sewer rate increases (or any rate increase at all).

To repeat: As holder of salaried positions as mayor and head of the sewer board, shouldn't Jeff Gahan be the one to explain these hastily inserted* CPI-pegged sewer rate increases?

Isn't it time at long last for Gahan to be held accountable? The Bookseller scores today's coda, and explains council's unfortunate culpability:

SEWER RATE INCREASE imminent in New Albany. But instead of taking responsibility for setting a legal rate, the city council has voted to begin an automatic rate increase pegged to some version of the Consumer Price Index (CPI). Final vote is on Thursday, December 15. That is not the legal way to set rates. CPI is not an economic variable - it's merely a statistic.

My information is that the wastewater utility needs a rate increase of $0.21 per billing unit, meaning even the lightest user would see a rate increase of about 2.8%. But no CPI will provide those funds, leading back to illegal tax subsidies for the heaviest users of the city-owned utility.

Contact your council representatives before it's too late.

At-Large – David Aebersold (R), Voted FOR
(812) 944-9823, daebersold@cityofnewalbany.com

At-Large – David C. Barksdale (R), Voted FOR
(812) 945-1839, dbarksdale@cityofnewalbany.com

At-Large – Al Knable, MD (R), Voted AGAINST
(502) 386-5051, aknable@cityofnewalbany.com

1st District – Dan Coffey (I-D), Voted FOR
(502) 797-8347, dcoffey@cityofnewalbany.com

2nd District – Robert Caesar (D), Voted FOR
(812) 945-8744, rcaesar@cityofnewalbany.com

3rd District – Greg Phipps (D), Voted FOR
(812) 949-8317, gphipps@cityofnewalbany.com

4th District – Patrick McLaughlin (D),Voted FOR
(812) 949-9140, pmclaughlin@cityofnewalbany.com

5th District – Matt Nash (D), Voted FOR
(502) 718-4986, mnash@cityofnewalbany.com

6th District – Scott Blair (I), Voted AGAINST
(812) 697-0128, sblair@cityofnewalbany.com

* As forwarded in the council's Monday meeting packet, ordinance passages pertaining to the proposed sewer rate increases were pasted in an entirely different font.

Tuesday, December 06, 2016

Council Crackers: Final victory over Nawbany's EPA sewer nemesis is so crucial that Jeff Gahan stayed home and watched "Walker, Texas Ranger" reruns on DVD.


(ASK THE BORED is off drinking this week, to return on the 12th of Never, or barring that, the 13th of December. Also, there are no links to local media coverage of Monday's council conclave, as no local media representatives attended.)

In a staged tableau achingly familiar to longtime council observers, an ordinance touted as the final heroic act in New Albany's quarter-century-long sewage control saga of "now we're complying, now we're not" (with federal regulatory edicts) was rushed pell-mell before council last night for two initial readings.

It was approved 7-2, and likely will receive final approval at next Thursday's second December meeting -- and by the way, apropos of nothing apart from Gahanesque imperatives of congenital secrecy, built into the ordinance is a mechanism for annual sewer rate increases tied to an as yet undisclosed sector of the Consumer Price Index, or CPI.

Praised by its backers as one of the signal achievements of Gahanism in contemporary New Albany, the sewer ordinance came forward without the Genius of the Flood Plain present in the room to argue on behalf of its merits.

Significantly, Jeff Gahan is the mayor of this city. He appointed himself to the Sewer Board chair (a paid position), and also appoints the other members of the board, but if you were expecting leadership by example from Gahan -- something apart from the labored antics of subalterns, as with David Duggins' frat boy mugging or the vocabulary-deprived glowering of Shane Gibson -- then too bad for you.

Here in New Albany, we're so very special.

Meanwhile, the 40-odd page ordinance has three central pillars.

1. It establishes bonding (up to $12.5 million) for a final phase of infrastructure initiatives that presumably will end the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) oversight of our sewage treatment network, and by doing so, free the city from remaining within a limit of yearly "points" allocated for various development projects (which were unidentified).

2. It refinances previous sewer bonds on more favorable terms to the city.

3. It establishes incremental annual sewer rate increases by tying these to the CPI, although the precise one of these indexes (there are many) or the mechanism itself is not stipulated.

As for the consumer price indexing, the best we can say is that it's a needlessly bureaucratic solution to a problem borne of political cowardice, in that it remains the council's responsibility to establish rates charged to the consumer, which will pay for the sewer system's operation without EDIT subsidies (although we still do this, illegally), and historically, this function has been the first can to be kicked down the road.

That's because in the past, any hint of a sewer rate increase would result in red-faced, pitchfork-wielding citizens clogging the 3rd floor corridor to the Down Low Bunker's safe haven.

However, in a supreme irony, the self-described Potty Police seem to have disbanded. Once an eagle, indeed. Not a single angry citizen attended last night's meeting to wag an ominous finger at impending rate increases. Of course, this might yet occur for the ordinance's final reading next Thursday, and if so, the Pee Party will face proud councilmen brandishing brand new magic shields: Don't blame us -- blame the CPI.

It isn't Remember the Alamo, but it will do in a pinch, while fleeing in abject terror.

Last night, kudos are due councilman Scott Blair, a banker, who commented at length on the complexity of the End of EPA sewer document, asking the necessary central questions: Why does something of this magnitude arise seemingly from nowhere, with implied urgency for approval during council's final two meetings of the year, without sufficient time to examine the details of the financial assumptions contained therein?

After all, amid various self-aggrandizing advertisements for his own essential role in the sewer system's victorious Long March, councilman Bob "Bicentennial Bookman" Caesar's introduction of the ordinance included repeated repetitive phrases of this general contradictory tone: There's no real hurry with this BUTDAMMITCAN'TWEMOVEANYFASTER?

The Green Mouse says: Caesar wants to be mayor someday -- and that'll make you move to Ireland quickerthanTrump.

It was only after an hour of debate that The Great Elongated and Exasperated Obfuscator, City Hall corporate attorney Shane Gibson, at last publicly conceded the precise reason for the urgency. It seems someone on Team Gahan finally looked at the needs of development projects slated for TIF-draining in 2017, and concluded that the city would not possess the necessary EPA sewer points even before the usual crony capitalism incentives are applied.

No points, no project ... and no project, no campaign finance beak-wetting. Something's up for 2017. We don't know exactly what, but it's why Caesar spent another evening carrying Gahan's jockstrap, and in turn, why Caesar's bicentennial shenanigans are being shielded by the oily operatives in Gahan's apparatus.

If Gahan could just tie sewer rates with paving contracts, and direct debit the contractors' creamy campaign finance rivulets -- then he really would be a genius, and I could have just stayed home and watched television, too.

Nostalgia.