"Transparency promotes trust," thunders local chain newspaper's editorialists -- unless THEY'RE the ones avoiding transparency.

Mike Moore kicked off the year in a blatant fit of sheer greed, and it wasn't very pretty.

The Jeffersonville mayor's inelegantly stage-managed bid for a 30% raise was so egregious that even our local chain newspaper took note, and rightly mounted the soapbox in protest.

Naturally, later this year at the annual shill ceremony concocted by its corporate master, the News and Tribune will win an award for best coverage of municipal events occurring just outside the office door, before adjourning to attend mocktail party for Alabama pensioners.

Just as predictably, in New Albany our City Hall expended six full months in a coordinated effort to rebuff "sunshine law" public information requests before being called on the carpet and fined by a judge.

Nope, not a peep from the principled editorial team at the News and Tribune.

It's worth repeating that one of the information requests spurned by New Albany's spigot-smothering city functionaries sought clarity about the amount of money spent each year by City Hall via its contract with ProMedia for purely discretionary advertisements, often thinly-veiled mayoral campaign ads, with this money flowing to places exactly like the News and Tribune.

Not one of the three links in this chain of taxpayer cash -- city, contractor or newspaper -- will tell us the answer to a simple question: Exactly how much money is involved?

Where's the transparency in this situation, exalted newspaper editorialists?

Thankfully one of these links, city government, is subject to Indiana state law pertaining to the necessity of honoring information requests, and yet instead of obeying the law, it threw a tantrum and delayed compliance until after the election, and only when forced to do so by the judiciary.

If the newspaper won't call out this sort of behavior, who will?

NT Editorial: Transparency promotes trust

THE ISSUE: Integrity in office

OUR VIEW: Mayor Moore and Councilman White fell short of expectations on salary scenario.

 ... The people deserve leaders who are transparent and forthcoming, and who follow procedures when it comes to doing the people's business.

The mayor should go ahead and veto his own raise, which might help part the clouds of controversy shadowing this entire episode.

The City Council will vote on the 2021 salary ordinance in early December. We suggest revisiting a pay raise then.

— The News and Tribune Editorial Board members are Publisher Bill Hanson, Editor Susan Duncan and Assistant Editor Chris Morris

Team Gahan whiffs on appeal in criminal justice center lawsuit. How much were the legal fees for THIS frivolity?

"Although the city of New Albany argued holdover tenants should not be given “another bite at the apple,” the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed its original ruling that continued occupancy of the criminal justice center maintains the terms and conditions of the lease even after the agreement as expired."

Beware. Dear Leader lost a match to the despised county government, and in a fit of pique he now might try to TIF Greenland.

COA continues terms of justice center lease in Floyd County (August 15, 2019; Marilyn Odendahl, The Indiana Lawyer)

Although the city of New Albany argued holdover tenants should not be given “another bite at the apple,” the Indiana Court of Appeals affirmed its original ruling that continued occupancy of the criminal justice center maintains the terms and conditions of the lease even after the agreement as expired.

The southern Indiana city raised its holdover arguments in a petition for a rehearing in City of New Albany v. Board of Commissioners of the County of Floyd, New Albany Floyd County Indiana Building Authority, 18A-MI-1627.

A dispute arose between the parties over the criminal justice center. In 1992, the county entered into 15-year lease with the building authority, allowing the county to lease the center while the city sublet space from the county. The lease included a provision that allowed the county to request the title of the property at the conclusion of the agreement.

Ten years after the lease expired, the county demanded the title but the building authority refused. The Court of Appeals, in a May 22 decision, ruled the building authority lacks the statutory authority to agree to such a provision.

However, the appellate panel unanimously agreed the county could still exercise its purchase option contained in the 1992 lease. Because the county continued to occupy the justice center and pay its share of the operational costs under the terms of the lease long after it had expired, the county could still acquire title by buying it from the building authority.

The city asked for a rehearing on that ruling. In part, the city argued the language in the lease limits the purchase option only to the time prior to the expiration of the agreement.

“Holdover tenancy is not intended to give lessees another bite at the apple,” the city asserted in its petition for rehearing. “It is designed to promote stability in tenancies. The policy that purchase options do not survive expiration is consistent with this interest.”

Very interesting: "Court Says Using Chalk On Tires For Parking Enforcement Violates Constitution."

We have all been here before.

Council Monday: No Sharpies for selective tire marking, and no answer for why tires are being selectively marked.

A bizarre election-year case of selectively enforcing the city's largely ignored 24-hour overnight parking ordinance.

For now, I'm just leaving this here. Based on a few things I've seen in the past month, we may also be dealing with a "prolific chalker" in New Albany. We've since ruled out "Sharpiers," right?

Court Says Using Chalk On Tires For Parking Enforcement Violates Constitution, by Matthew S. Schwartz (NPR)

The next time parking enforcement officers use chalk to mark your tires, they might be acting unconstitutionally.

A federal appeals court ruled Monday that "chalking" is a violation of the Fourth Amendment.

The case was brought by Alison Taylor, a Michigan woman whom the court describes as a "frequent recipient of parking tickets." The city of Saginaw, Mich., like countless other cities around the country, uses chalk to mark the tires of cars to enforce time limits on parking.

By the time Taylor received her 15th citation in just a few years, she decided to go after the city — and specifically after parking enforcement officer Tabitha Hoskins.

Hoskins, Taylor alleged in her lawsuit, was a "prolific" chalker. Every single one of Taylor's 15 tickets was issued by Hoskins after she marked a tire with chalk, and then circled back to see if Taylor's car had moved. That chalking, Taylor argued, was unconstitutional.

"Trespassing upon a privately-owned vehicle parked on a public street to place a chalk mark to begin gathering information to ultimately impose a government sanction is unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment," Taylor's lawyer, Philip Ellison, wrote in a court filing ...

Finally tackling "the hypocrisy at the root of the big-time college sports system."

There's nothing inherently wrong with the notion of college athletics, even if the system makes a mockery of any sensible notion of "student" athlete, because America is irony-free .... but ONLY if the human beings actually creating the megabuck value are remunerated fairly. This has not been the case for decades, and whatever might be done to change it, should be commenced immediately.

Delicious commentary is here:

With Judge’s Rebuke, a System Built on Hypocrisy Is Wobbling, by William C. Rhoden (NYT)

... Representatives of these power conferences complain about allowing athletes a share of the revenue. They want it both ways: The rich universities want to break from the pack and set up their own rules, but they object to sharing the revenue with the athletes who generate the wealth.

Wilken’s ruling put a price on the cost of doing business.

The judge's decision is here:

N.C.A.A. Must Allow Colleges to Pay Athletes, Judge Rules, by Ben Strauss and Marc Tracy (NYT)

In a decision that could drastically reshape the world of college sports, a federal judge ruled on Friday that the N.C.A.A.'s decades-old rules barring payments to college athletes were in violation of antitrust laws ...

... Advocates for student-athletes declared it a major victory.

“The decision goes behind the curtain of amateurism and says there’s nothing there,” William Isaacson, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said. “It’s a remarkable step forward for decency for college athletes.”

Pence takes to his bunker as Indiana's gay marriage ban is ruled to be unconstitutional.

Meanwhile last evening, the N and T reported that the home county of Indiana's attorney general would grudgingly accede to modernity.

Duh -- of course Greg Zoeller will argue against it. That's what he's paid to do, but what's worth remembering that he's in the employ of a dullard governor who represents the narrow interests of the GOP fundamentalist cabal. Zoeller's merely a hired hand in this instance, although there is a precedent of sorts for principle over ideology. Anyone remember Indianapolis native William Ruckelshaus?

Weddings begin as judge throws out Indiana's same-sex marriage ban, by Jill Disis and Cara Anthony (Indy Star)

A federal judge ruled Wednesday that Indiana's ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional, immediately allowing same-sex couples across the state to receive marriage licenses.

U.S. District Judge Richard Young did not issue a stay on his ruling. However, a spokesman for Attorney General Greg Zoeller, whose office represented the state, said they "will quickly ask for a stay of today's ruling pending appeal."

HJR-3: Silent Ron must vote as early as next Monday.

(3:45 p.m. update -- apologies; I got my committees/full Senate mixed up. I've amended the header. The measure will go up for a vote without the civil union clause restored)

As today's 1:30 p.m. appointment with HJR-3 voting destiny approaches, State Senator Ron Grooms is terrified, even as the inexorably marginalized bigots take yet another one on the chin in Kentucky.

Kentucky Gay Marriage Ban 'Practically' Over, Says Congressman John Yarmuth, by Phillip Bailey (WFPL)

Democratic Congressman John Yarmuth is predicting the end of Kentucky's gay marriage ban now that a federal judge has ruled a key provision unconstitutional.

Might as well send Silent Ron another e-mail. I'm pulling for him to reach down deep and do the right thing, but he probably needs as much help as he can get.

It's not every day you wake up knowing that you can change the course of history. Today is one of those days.

The Senate will vote on HJR-3 at 1:30. By tonight, we'll know if we've stopped the amendment from going to the ballot in November.

Your Senators is considering, right now, how they'll vote today. Click here to urge them to vote NO on HJR-3 -- this could be your last shot:




http://freedomIN.org/LetsMakeHistory
The next time you hear from us today, I'm hoping we'll be sharing some great news -- that we succeeded in blocking a divisive ballot campaign in the fall.

Let's do this,

Megan Robertson 
Freedom Indiana

C-J: "New Albany again rebuffed in battle against adult bookstore."

Thanks to P for the link to the C-J, which I don't always see. He wrote:

"Did you see this? What a sad waste of our resources to have fought such a losing battle. Hope ROCK chipped in for our losing attorney fees."

Right on, brother, but I suspect Reclaim Our Culture Kentuckiana is too busy wielding Tony Dungy as a fundraiser for the ongoing anti-Theatair X theocrat's designer jihad to bother much with Cleopatra's, or whatever it's called now.

Note that the most interesting part of the article excerpted below is the comments section.

New Albany again rebuffed in battle against adult bookstore, by Harold J. Adams (Courier-Journal).

The City of New Albany must decide whether to keep fighting following another loss in its long-running battle to shut down an adult bookstore.

The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last week denied the city’s request that the full court reconsider a September ruling by a three-judge panel blocking the city from closing New Albany DVD.

Smackdown by Harrah's: Rustic Frog you'll be again.

The Tribune's Daniel Suddeath describes one of the biggest legal no-brainers in recent memory, a federal judge’s decision that there is no c-r-e-a-t-i-v-i-t-y in “Rustic Frog.”

Heck, we knew that already, but apparently Harrah’s has no sense of humor when it comes to identity theft.

II Horseshoe in New Albany required to change name following casino complaint.

A federal judge ordered II Horseshoes Gentleman’s Club to be renamed following a complaint filed by Harrah’s License Co., the parent company of Horseshoe Southern Indiana Casino and Hotel in Elizabeth.

The New Albany club — located at 1720 Old River Rd. — switched its name from Rustic Frog to II Horseshoes last year when it became an adult entertainment venue.

Judge Sarah Evans Barker declared club owner John Mattingly violated trademark laws by using the name and the Horseshoe Casino symbol, which she described as a distinctive logo with the mark of a gold horseshoe.

Now the real fun begins. With the city council prepared to improve property values and keep the gallery seats open by approving a new adult cabaret ordinance, the redubbed gentlemen’s club vows to file its own lawsuit against the city, which means that it surely can’t be long before someone connects the dots between smut and the sewer system … and we’re using EDIT funds to pay legal fees.

At least our casino commuters won't be misled on their way to Harrison County.

Stunning redistricting vindication: City council “failed to comply” with agreement to settle.

The C-J’s beat reporter provides the facts, followed by a link to the NA Shadow Council blog commentary. The Tribune’s coverage will be added when it is published.

Will the same dysfunctional council cabal that has botched this process from the outset heave one final Hail Mary pass prior to the Gang of Four’s forthcoming dissolution?

Stay tuned. The plaintiffs certainly are.

60-day extension granted on redistricting; Judge: New Albany still out of compliance, by Dick Kaukas (Courier-Journal):

The New Albany City Council made "a good-faith effort" but failed to comply with an agreement to settle a lawsuit seeking to realign the city's voting districts to make their populations more equal, a federal judge said yesterday.

U.S. District Judge John Tinder in New Albany, ruling from the bench, extended the period for council compliance by 60 days. By then, Tinder said, the council should file notice of what it had done to meet the agreement's terms.

The plaintiffs in the lawsuit, filed in May 2006 demanding that boundaries of the city's six voting districts be redrawn, would then have 15 days to indicate whether they were "satisfied, or the effort fell short," Tinder said.

----

7:30 p.m. update: Tribune coverage was limited to a desultory sidebar bearing an extremely misleading headline that isn't archived on line. Shrug. We'll give it a pass.

----

For the next six months (seven?), at NA Shadow Council.

News that emerged from 121 East Spring Street late on Tuesday, December 4th, in the YOOL 2007 is most heartening. Congratulations to the citizens and their counsel who finally petitioned for justice to be done. From all reports, that ideal was achieved in the ruling of the presiding judge for the Southern District of Indiana.

Will the defendants in Vogt v. City of New Albany dare to come back in 60 days with the very same boundary-drawing? Is Anna Schmidt that compelling an authority that the legislative body of this city would risk even more expense in trying to defend a patently unlawful apportionment?

Potpourri: Silvercrest "saved"; wine shipping laws; redistricting.

The end of summer holiday was uncharacteristically rich in news items.

Silvercrest, in New Albany, to house seniors (News and Tribune).

The endangered Silvercrest site has been purchased by local developer and Southeast Christian stalwart Matt Chalfant, who sees senior citizen housing as its future. Area preservationists are both relieved and wary; Chalfant’s previous record as a developer is long on cornfield conversions and short on adaptive re-use. It is as yet uncertain whether religious litmus tests will be required for lodgers.

Ind. Decisions - "Court stomps Indiana wine shipping laws" (Indiana Law Blog).

As Indiana’s wholesalers babble nonsensically and pose grim (and unrealistic) scenarios of Internet alcohol sales to minors, there’s been another welcome chink taken out of the armor of their diminishing monopoly: “Two years after wine lovers thought markets had been opened to them, a federal court in Indiana may have finally kicked down the doors.”

Hearing set on New Albany district borders (Courier-Journal).

Under pressure from a federal lawsuit and after years of delay, the New Albany City Council is finally taking steps to redistrict itself. A public hearing to get residents' views on redrawing the boundaries of the six districts from which council members are elected has been set for Sept. 14.

In other words, having been forced into compliance at the point of a court edict, city council president Larry Kochert now emits bountiful sweetness and light with regard to redistricting. Isn’t it funny how federal mandates tend to focus one’s concentration on matters previously deemed unimportant?