Five takes a look at Three

It's not my job to "shadow" events in District 3, but I can't quite resist commenting on what I've heard coming out of the "major" party campaigns going on over there.

Though I couldn't make it, friends reported some of the comments made by the candidates at the Muir Manor candidate's forum, moderated by Greg Phipps. From what I am told, all but a handful of the attendees were members of the East Spring Street Neighborhood Association. (what's going on with their acronym, ESNA? Doesn't the name dictate 2 esses?)

Mr. Price showed something by just appearing. The Spring Streeters are almost uniformly fed up with Steve Price. It would be hard to characterize that group as either Democrat or Republican, but for the most part they are progressive in the best sense. They believe in a government that is responsive to its constituents, and they believe that government SHOULD be a vehicle for accomplishing community-shared objectives.

Mr. Price seems to believe that the "opinions," however uninformed, of his friends should have more weight than the informed, well-researched, and strongly expressed opinions of voters who aren't his friends. I know, from their ill-researched and knee-jerk, reactionary opinions as expressed in public, that Price's friends have no allegiance to facts. During the forum (which turned into a debate between the SS folk and the sitting council member) it was again brought up that Price doesn't worry about facts. It seems that he mistrusts facts and according to the newspaper of record's reporting, let's "rumor" control his voting behavior.

One person who was there told me that Price expressed that he was for the "common man." I may be taking a wild guess here, but I think that the third district's representative thinks that anyone who uses big words is trying to fool him. One audience member implored Price to consider that considering the advice, if not the wishes, of people who think beyond one level (and use big words like "accountability") might make him a better councilman.

Another correspondent said that Steve Price convinced her to vote for Scharlow with his repeated emphasis that we shouldn't repeat the mistakes of the past. Like recruiting Your Community Bank and its other tenants by building a municipal parking garage. Like making a leveraged public investment to bring about a YMCA/Aquatic Center in downtown ($130,000 in payments each year for 17 years=$1.91 million in exchange for a $20 million+ facility, albeit one that will not directly generate taxes). Mistake, according to this woman? Electing Price again.

Republican opponent Brenda Scharlow wasn't perfect. In many ways, according to observers, her solutions were as simplistic as Price's. Yet, Price has proved to be unwilling to learn. Maybe Scharlow will be more willing to listen. Experience as a cheerleader is hardly a plus, but in the context of the forum, and as a distinct counterpoint to Mr. Price's ongoing campaign to vilify and slander the city itself, her promise to lead cheers for New Albany might be worth a vote.

Scharlow, in a folksy way that exceeded the typical Price aphorisms, compared her solution as a mother of seemingly dozens to the Price Theorem: The lady said that when faced with a tight budget, she chose to expand the revenue side of the equation. Price would cut the expenditures. The same people, aided by new investment, could eat healthy salads under Scharlow's professed plan. The same people, adopting a bunker mentality, untrusting of new ideas, would, under the Price Theorem, settle for macaroni and cheese, and be destined for cheeseless macaroni in a few years, then sawdust-enhanced macaroni, then...day-old bread?

Let me be clear. Based on his performance, Steve Price should not be returned to office. But he is, as his supporters insist, not a bad guy. It is (remotely) possible that he could someday serve his city. But first, he needs to understand that doing the job of a councilman is not supposed to be easy. There will be ideas that are hard. George Bush complained that his job was hard, but all he did was complain. Price's default reaction is to distrust and vote against any idea he doesn't understand.

It may not be a compliment, but I think Steve Price is smarter than George Bush. His instincts are more compassionate, certainly. His concern for the welfare of his constituents is exceedingly higher than the son of the man "born on third base, thinking he had hit a triple" (Thank you, Molly).

But performance counts, too. Price has failed to perform. He has failed to grow. Rather than assert himself, he has relied on bad advisors (the Schmidts, Dan Coffey, and a few non-public personalities who also deny the facts).

Here's something telling. One phone caller told me that Steve Price said something like "I'm not Dan (Coffey's) drinkin' buddy!" I don't even know if Price "drinks." But Roger Baylor pointed out that Price voted exactly the same way as Coffey on more than 98% of council votes.

Helen Spudich is quoted in the paper to the effect that Price won't listen to the EssEssers. She's right. Perhaps he could have been an effective representative for the growth of this city. But he chose the wrong advisors.

In all fairness, Price presented himself early as someone who could not be talked to. He reacted negatively to ideas he couldn't understand. More critically, he didn't try to understand those ideas. The willingness to take a phone call isn't enough. As Charlie Harshfield is reported to have said, "you didn't hear a word I said." And it is reported that Price replied, "That's a fair statement."

You get no credit for taking calls if your mind is already made up and you can't or won't listen to a constituent.

Scharlow may have flaws, as do all of us. But Price needs to sit out the next four years. If he can understand that MOST people have little interest in hurting the city and that ALL input is valuable, then maybe in 8 or 12 years he can present himself again as a candidate.

It would be dismissive to "endorse" Scharlow's candidacy without advancing some of her campaign planks. And it would be equally unfair to ignore the flaws in her platform.

Shadowna5 leans left, frankly far left, compared to the average New Albanian (not Roger Baylor, but the 38,000 or so others who claim or decline the appelation). "Endorsing" a Republican takes consideration. But Scharlow has demonstrated a clear understanding of the importance of strengthening our city's core. She and her family have invested their fortunes there over the years and continue to do so. It remains to be seen if she is any more capable of understanding nuance than Price. It remains to be seen if she is any more capable of resisting the importations of her party's "Old Guard."

BUT...

Expanding the pie is the only way out of our 30-year slide. And Brenda Scharlow clearly understands that. She can be relied on to seek out the community's benefit over her own. She will not shrink from debate (I know that from personal experience). From the vantage point of Shadowna5, she is not perfect. But she is an improvement.

At Wednesday's forum, according to one reporter, Scharlow boasted that she is impatient. She reportedly said that she was aware of, and dissatisfied with, the fact that things move exceedingly slowly. When asked if that was acceptable, she declaimed that she was not one to remain passive at the prospect of inertia.

From the vantage point of District 5 (as it is currently organized), that's enough to earn an endorsement. We in D5 (or 5D, as "councilman3d" Maury Goldberg would put it), that's enough to gain our endorsement.

Mr. Bliss (R-Approachable) and Mrs. McCartin-Benedetti (D-Unknown) would be well-advised to address that quite-important quality in a candidate.

NEXT UP: D1, the easiest endorsement ever.