Break Me Off a Piece of That. bup,bup,bup

As promised, I'll be providing a brief recap of Thursday's council meeting. The dominant topic for the evening was the animal control ordinance, which passed on first reading. Mr. Coffey, the designated "sponsor" for the ordinance, sought unanimous approval to proceed through three readings but failed to persuade all of his fellow council members that the ordinance was so cut-and-dried that it needed no study or deliberation.

One suspects that a final approval AFTER the elections fit the desires of the council in any event. After much muddled discussion of drugs, pit bulls, rottweilers, feral and other uncorraled cats, and carp (expensive and delicately beautiful carp, mind you, but carp nonetheless), plus a tutorial in dog-fighting "conventions," spillover from Metro Jefferson County's dramatic animal control ordinance, and "corner fights," the ordinance passed 9-0 on first reading.

In many respects it was a night of education, admittedly a rarity in the third floor assembly room, a room whose city occupants show regular disdain for the "E" word. Ominous, secret, expert knowledge was conveyed by Professor Coffey about where you can lay bets on dog fights and how failing to pass an animal control ordinance will invite slumlords, meth labs, and blissed out minorities bent on ruining our neighborhoods. Funny, Coffey has never seemed concerned about other initiatives that might stop the ruin of our neighborhoods, but he did have to demonstrate his superior knowledge of all things "thug." But we already knew that.

Anyway, the ordinance will pass, but two weeks from now instead of immediately. Those seeking protection from angry "pet" owners can claim, prior to the election, that no final ordinance has been passed, while those seeking protection from animal-rights folk and other good government types can say they voted "for" the ordinance. My own cat animus has no champion...except for the koi kommandos.

Seriously, that last was just for entertainment. I (shadow5), like Beverly Crump (real5), favor the ordinance. I just don't care for the theatrics. Really, I love koi. I just never realized that a koi pond might cause my property tax assessment to rise by five figures.

Oh, the council voted 7-2 to pass the Schmidt plan for newly drawn districts. Crump voted in favor of the flawed DOA plan. She also voted (along with Messer and Zurschmeide) to settle the lawsuit with the plaintiffs. I have to admit that were I in her seat, I would have done the same thing.

Please remember the names of Coffey, Price, Schmidt, Crump, Gahan, Blevins, and Kochert when the city has to come up with as much as $200,000 to take care of the mess they created. Only Coffey will be an elected official for sure, and only Price and Gahan might be in office, but all 7 are responsible for this irresponsible act and breach of their fiduciary duty.

Bev, who exclaimed "just don't call ME after December 31st," has a better excuse than 6th District council member Jeff Gahan, who inexplicably rejected a settlement of the case.

I spent the post-meeting hours at a venue that included among its attendees two of the plaintiffs in the district boundaries lawsuit. Some speculated that Gahan, genuinely concerned that the Republican nominee in Tuesday's election might have real horsepower, cast his vote to ensure that there would be no additional anti-Gahan party treason generated by his Democratic colleagues.

It's a bad bargain, Jeff. They will betray you, anyway. And you've lost any respect I might have held for your integrity. Count this as an endorsement of Sam Anderson, whoever he might be. Anything beats the hypocrisy shown by Mr. Gahan over the last 18 months in the equal protection lawsuit. Mr. Gahan's platform is clearly "Constitution, Schmonstitution." I believe Gahan is a smart man. I had believed he was an honorable man. But I cannot support his reelection.

Mr. Gahan, you might remember, was the council president who said "We have more important things to deal with" than the clearly unconstitutional inequity and inequality of voting districts. I guess that's still his stance.

But, you will ask, what does the header on this entry have to do with any of that? Well, beyond the fact that the council "broke it off" in the dorsal canal of the taxpayers Thursday night, the title refers to a piece of campaign literature that found its way into the old mailbox today.

A killer, nay, devastating flyer, destined to be the final nail in the Hubbard coffin, compares Randy Hubbard to a "cheese-eating surrender monkey." Mr. England's supporters fired a mortal blow with this piece of mail that positively kills the Hubbard campaign. Game, set, match. "Don't mess with our troops and hope to get elected" is the clear message, and the Hubbard cohort is helpless to defend at this late date.

Ironically, today was the day that new evidence of Mr. England's naked lust for votes was revealed, making it even harder to rationalize casting a vote for the English Restoration. Still, it seems inevitable that Doug England will be our next mayor. May as well get used to it.

Practice Makes Perfect

We'll be doing a trial run tonight in shadowing the legislator from the 5th District. Won't the council president be surprised at how many attendees would be eligible to deliver the invocation tonight?

And Peter Vogt and his pals ought to be pleased at how their case is strengthened this evening.

We'll report what we see and hear in Friday's posting.

The Future is Now

It has apparently become acceptable to treat politics as trivia, or its equivalent, sports. What a revolting development.

In sports it is reasonable to think that each team is giving its best, and that all the competitors are working toward a singular goal - victory. While we might be critical of a team's performance, or a single player's ability to execute the play, we never question their intention and desire to win.

In politics, it is a mistake to think that when issues and personalities clash, everyone is acting with the same basic set of good intentions.

And when a neighbor or relative tells us they simply don't care about sports, we rarely make an issue of it. As much as we might enjoy playing or watching amateur, college, or professional sports, we would never demand or expect that everyone share our enthusiasms.

Far too many of us treat government in the same way we treat sports. Too many of us consider politics and government as irrelevant to our lives in much the same way that curling or rugby are to the vast majority on this planet.

A friend of mine insists that a refusal to get involved in "politics" is both immoral and illogical. He says it's immoral to sit on the sidelines and watch while harm is done and illogical to blissfully pay taxes without demanding accountability and responsible government.

Cattle farmers rarely give money to PETA. 21st Century conservatives rarely donate to the ACLU. Jews don't support the Klan, and Tony Stewart fans don't buy Jeff Gordon merchandise.

So why do ordinarily sensible people abdicate their rights to self-government out of boredom or disgust while still sending in their tax payments?

The mission of this blog is to assert the lunacy of such a stance. Government, in particular city government, is not sports. It is not trivia. It is not a TV show. It is important and it is critical that we each become involved.

We are about to experience a city election that is shaping up to have the lowest level of participation in history. A good argument can be made that this is hunky-dory with the candidates. It certainly makes it easier to keep the good old boys club closed when most of the people couldn't care less who gets elected.

Over the next few years, in whatever small way we can rid New Albany of the attitude that politics is for "sleazy people," we will. By shadowing the votes of the incoming city council, we hope to demonstrate how "who" we elect affects our lives.

At a time when buffoons range all around us declaring that our property tax levies are too high - when those buffoons know that there is no objective reality to their claim - it is more important than ever to speak the truth. For so long as the buffoons believe they can get away with their diversionary and divisive untruths, we're in the drink. An educated voting public won't fall for such flim-flammery. It's our job to educate that voting public in time for the 2011 elections.

Don't give up on 2007. It will be important to elect the best in order to offset the damage we are sure to suffer during the next four years. We surely don't want to spend the better part of the next decade repairing that damage. Think of the few bright lights running for city council this year as our preventive maintenance. It will take a strong majority in 2011 to right the ship, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't recruit (elect) some people to keep bailing.

"Let the judge decide"

As told to me, that's what Donnie Blevins had to say at Thursday's city council work session.

My spouse's sister-in-law's grandson's favorite uncle's buddy reports that council attorney Jerry Ulrich did everything but arm wrestle his clients in trying to persuade them their best course of action would be to settle the case over council districts. Mother Nature apparently expressed her displeasure with the council's chosen path, too.

That case is over. The citizens suing for a fair election have won. Unless there is a settlement, the judge is going to hand the whole mess over to the winning party and allow them to submit their own plan. Just as long as that plan meets the law's requirements, the judge will approve it, order it, and the council will be forced to pass it.

Why would the council give up that chance to avoid a trial defeat? The newspaper said Bill Schmidt complained that the plaintiffs keep modifying their terms for settlement. Isn't that what's supposed to happen in a negotiation?

District 1: It's Simple

We should be discussing the the impending ascension of Theresa Timberlake. At this point, there is no question but that the margin of the incumbent's "victory" in the Democratic Party primary (or as even self-professed D's might phrase it, "Democrat" party) consisted of fraudulent voters and others coerced or defrauded into casting their votes under the compulsion of the corrupt D1/D2 "machine."

Instead, we gaze into a grotesquely gerrymandered Westendia district where no one steps up to challenge the "grease-my-palm" incumbent, Dan Coffey. Not a write-in, not a Republican...no one steps up to challenge.

Considering that Mr. Coffey has never topped 1,000 votes in his two previous elections, why wouldn't someone challenge him? There is a palpable vulnerability and evident fear that emanates from the man, and yet, his re-election is a foregone conclusion. Were Coffey in any way formidable, it might be explainable. But he is palpably weak.

So, again overstepping the stated charge, shadowna5 opines on the election in another district.

Our recommendation: Abstain! It's a treasured tactic of the cowardly "Gang of Four" mentality. Why shouldn't the electors in District 1 adopt it? For those Republicans and Democrats completely dissatisfied with the choice, vote for the mayoral and at-large candidates of your choice, but leave the ballot blank on District 1. It's a foregone conclusion that Coffey will be the next councilman. A pending felony investigation may prevent him from taking office, but the only way for the voters to send a message is to suppress the vote totals for Coffey.

We'll be watching closely to see how many D1 voters leave that slot blank. As a man with no shame, Coffey can be counted on to ignore the clear import of the sum of those who reject him (after all, even one vote puts him back into office). A write-in is ineffective in that no one has stepped forward to file for acceptance of a write-in election. Coffey WILL be back. But the city will know that his only legitimacy comes from a tainted primary and a gerrymandered district.

If Coffey can avoid a felony conviction by pleading out to a lesser charge, he will have "earned" a state pension when he completes his tenth year as a councilman. That gives Keith Henderson two years to deprive him of it, and nothing we can do can make Henderson do his job. But, in all honesty, if the city, at the cost of a nominal pension, can rid itself of the stench of Coffey, it will be worth it.

Remember, ladies and gentlemen, this is the guy who promised to file suit against citizens seeking to enforce YOUR constitutional rights to equal protection. D1 voters, express your disgust with such intimidation tactics, such efforts to suppress the constitutional rights of all New Albanians. Leave your ballot blank when it comes to the District 1 race.

BONUS QUESTION: Did Brenda Scharlow (R), the GOP candidate for the District 3 seat, really say she supports a Greenway that despoils Silver Creek, rapes the Loop Island wetlands, and requires 4-wheel vehicular passage along the Floyd County portions of the federally-funded Greenway? Did no one ask her about the GOP platform that insists that the city remain in the city-county building, paying rent, when it is clear that a "City Hall" would be more cost-effective? And are my lying ears deceiving me when I hear that no one at the recent forum challenged Scharlow on the Republican platform plank that "Democrats have 'saddled' us with public investment in Scribner Place?" Aren't those pretty important issues that Mrs. Scharlow has failed to address?

BONUS QUESTION 2: Can any readers verify that Mr. Coffey abused his position to disrupt the community event put on by Destinations Booksellers on Thursday? Rumor has it that Coffey caused the C-SPAN bus visit to be "rousted" by city officials, even though all proper permits had been issued. Was this a retaliation against one of the owners of the store because he is a plaintiff in the redistricting lawsuit?