Doctor, to the Spreadsheet, STAT!

BONUS: Eric Scott Campbell provides this useful analysis in Thursday's editions of The Tribune. I'm still not sure why Campbell believes that newly drawn council districts for the next election have any impact on voting or representation. It is possible that someone like Mr. Price would be less inclined to listen to people who can't vote for him in the next election, but I doubt it. He represents those precincts that elected him. His successor will represent those who elect him or her. What's the problem? Yes, tampering by the city council during an election year may have depressed turnout, but maybe that's what the council wanted all along. As I understand it, the plaintiffs were unable to get a court date prior to this election and unless the court overturns this one on Constitutional or statutory grounds, any new districts, whether drawn this month or imposed by a judge, will only affect the 2011 races.

Enormous props to the 202 wise souls in council District 1 who elected to follow the advice of Tribune publisher John Tucker and leave the ballot blank when faced with the choice of Dan Coffey or no representation at all. As much as Mr. Coffey may believe he acts in the best interests of his constituents, the evidence shows otherwise.

Ironically, the Republicans had a quite respectable candidate on Tuesday's ballot who met all the requirements to take on the incumbent: He lives in the First District, has the ability to reason, and had demonstrated a certain amount of discernment. As for life experience, he was well-traveled, educated, and familiar with the concept of learning. He was neither afraid to confront the future nor unwilling to consider ideas generated later than the administration of U.S. Grant. Alas, he chose to run for council at-large and went down to defeat.

Now, it's difficult to know how many of the "undervotes" recorded in Coffey's re-election were actually write-in votes for the beloved Skittles. But we do know that the undervotes in the District 1 council race (incumbent unopposed) dwarf the total of undervotes in all five of the other districts.

The First District, suffering under its last election day in its present configuration, is not irredeemable. It clearly is NOT "similar" to the Third District, as goes the theory put forward by Democrat Steve Price when challenged about his 98% plus voting lockstep with Mr. Coffey during the past four years. But it is demonstrably not without a certain number of informed voters.

It also, unfortunately, recorded the lowest turnout by percentage - 20.91%.

John Gonder, newly elected as one of three at-large council members, topped all his competitors in capturing the highest vote totals in 14 of the 34 city districts. Kevin Zurschmeide, incumbent but being elected also for the first time, was tops in 11 other districts and failed to demonstrate quite so much geographic strength. And Jack Messer returns to the council with the highest council vote, edging Gonder by one vote overall. Messer inherits a much-deserved position of leadership as a consequence of his first term excellence, outreach, and willingness to obtain consensus.

Speaking of consensus, the next four years will call for plenty of that if New Albany is to progress. And that goes for the whole citizenry, not just the elected representatives.

Randy Hubbard, the losing Republican offering for mayor, showed strength in about 1/3 of the city, but didn't have coattails at all. Jeff Gahan (D-6, Incumbent) lost two precincts of six. Rookie Diane McCartin Benedetti (D-5, Rookie) lost one precinct of five. No other Democrat lost a single precinct.

We'll be parsing the numbers again later. For those of you looking to 2011, we encourage you to stay logged in for more numbers.

The serious numbers aren't who got how many votes, but rather which precincts contain the richest veins of disillusioned voters - those registered but finding no compelling reason to cast a vote. Some say its the only way to send a message. The other way is to organize, advocate, and serve those who don't believe city government is relevant to their lives.

Imagine a 2011 election where twice as many people vote. Not because they are mad or sad, but because they believe that government can be effective. No vote total measured in 2007 will be at all relevant if 16,000 New Albanians turn out that November.

Coming soon: What to expect from the England administration and what to expect from the new council.

Democrats Earn First At-Bat

Hi, Randy Smith here. All4word for those of you who are long-time blog readers, contributors, and commenters.

Thank you to shadowna5 for allowing me to contribute tonight. Let me thank Linda Moeller, Bill Lohmeyer, Terry Ginkins, and Jimmy Hancock for granting me press access to the election board. I hope that we lived up to the practical standards of good journalism.

Journalism is, at root, journaling, and I believe that so long as you reveal your biases it is perfectly acceptable to editorialize while reporting. I hope, for my sake and for shadow5's, that the point of view wasn't too annoying to blog readers.

As it turned out, and as best as we can determine, NA Shadow Council provided the first and most accurate online results of the New Albany municipal elections.

An unexpected technical glitch almost prevented us from providing this service to the public. An unexpected technical glitch delayed the County Clerk's official site from providing preliminary numbers, too. Fortunately, everything came together and for those who simply had to know the results as they came in, NA Shadow Council was able to provide them.

As I told a number of people, I haven't enjoyed myself as much in 30 years. I hope our reporting was useful to you. I look forward to working with NA Shadow Council over the next four years to provide you with timely news and opinion on city council issues.

Thank you again to Linda Moeller and the Floyd County Election Board. You could not have been more gracious to us and to the other members of the press who relied on your outstanding accommodation of the media on election night.

Congratulations to Doug England, our next mayor. Congratulations to Jack Messer, John Gonder, and Kevin Zurschmeide, our returning and new at-large council members. Kevin and John are elected for the first time and Jack's leadership over the past four years was amply rewarded. Maybe someday I'll relate a neat story about the 4,106-4,105 margin for top vote-getter. In a third class city, that would make Jack the mayor.

We extend our personal congratulations to Bob Caesar, who will represent the 2nd District beginning in January. A massive improvement, to our way of thinking. Pat McLaughlin's victory is even sweeter. Pat lost by a narrow margin to incumbent Larry Kochert in 2003 and despite Kochert's attempts to screw Pat this year, McLaughlin won handily. We're equally pleased and happy to extend congratulations to Jeff Gahan, who, despite an inexplicable single-issue stance, has proved to be a true representative of all that is best for New Albany.

We're less enthused, but not totally dismayed by the victory of Diane McCartin Benedetti, or Diane McCartin-Benedetti, depending on who you consult for naming conventions. Undisclosed but adequately confirmed expressions by that council member-elect raise serious questions, but we look forward to seeing whether the new actual5 can live up to the standard set by shadow5's set of issues.

We've been made aware of a serious effort to help the returning 3rd District council member become a true champion of his constituents' interests. Let's hope Mr. Price can mature into an admirable representative for the true interests of those he represents. His victory met expectations.

Mr. Coffey, unopposed this election, remains an embarrassment to his district, his party, and to humanity. Should he evade indictment and conviction for despicable crimes, he will serve for the next four years and can be expected to vote consistently against the interest of his constituents.

Marcey, you did everything and more that anyone could expect in serving this community and navigating the dangerous waters of city government. Congratulations, Ms. Wisman, for your victory and reelection to the important office of City Clerk. Let us know how we can help you.

This will be the first of many requests this blog will make of the new council: Increase the budget, including the salaries, for the office of the City Clerk.

The Democratic victory, the second in two elections, lays the groundwork for a singular opportunity. Fail to achieve progress, and you won't have a shot at a third near-sweep. Republicans have lots of lessons to learn from this election and they will assuredly be trying to discern them.

Take full advantage of the opportunity, Dems, and start to work now. Don't wait until January. Now is the time to seize the reins and develop the program for the future. This time, there won't be any lectures from Uncle Dan, at least none that anyone will listen to. Gahan and Messer, in particular, won't waste a minute on taking advice from the increasingly isolated and irrelevant Mr. Coffey. I doubt that Mr. Gonder and Mrs. Benedetti will waste any time mining the "Bazooka Joe(r)" insights of the last-term council member from the former 1st District.

That leaves you, Mr. McLaughlin. With whom will you align yourself? The Coffey Clatch or the future? If even Mr. Price is prepared to abandon the failed policies of "Councilman Cappucino," mightn't you see the advantage of aligning yourself with the 21st Century instead of the 19th?

Live From the Election Board

Incumbent Jack Messer earned the highest total of votes in Tuesday's election for council member at-large with 4,106 votes tallied. Fellow Democrat John Gonder recorded one fewer nods, with 4,105. Republican Kevin Zurschmeide will join the pair on the nine-member council.

Three Democratic Party incumbents were returned to office along with newcomers Pat McLaughlin, Bob Caesar, and Diane Benedetti. Jeff Gahan, Steve Price, and Dan Coffey, all Democrats, return to office.

Doug England made easy work of his opponent and will be sworn in this January to a third term as Mayor of New Albany.

Eight Democrats will join incumbent Republican Kevin Zurschmeide on New Albany's City Council after edging Democrat James Hollis for the final at-large seat. Zurschmeide took 3,772 votes to Hollis's 3,632.


BULLETIN: The City Council lineup is set with incumbents Dan Coffey (D-1), Steve Price (D-3), Jeff Gahan (D-6), and Jack Messer (D-At-large) returned to office. Joining them will be John Gonder, the leading vote-getter in the at-large race, Diane McCartin Benedetti (D-5), and Bob Caesar (D-2). We await the cliffhanger between Zurschmeide (R-At-large) and Hollis (D-At-large). WNAS reports Zurschmeide edged Hollis.

The judge at Ekin Avenue is having problems closing the voting, so District 5 is still up in the air with precincts 9 and 10 still to report. Bliss is hanging in there.

Doug England (D) is the mayor-elect. Marcey Wisman (D) is returned as city clerk.

7:02 Italics means the counting is over in that race. As of the moment, Steve Price, Dan Coffey, and Bob Caesar are elected. The smell of a Democratic sweep is in the air...Mr. Gahan is in a fight, but safer than incumbent Republican Kevin Zurschmeide, who trail the third Democrat in the at-large race with only four precincts to go.

With 34 of 34 precincts reporting 100% of precincts

County Clerk Linda Moeller provides the preliminary but not quite "official" numbers, by precinct, for your analysis, at http://www.floydcounty.in.gov/2007electionprecinct.htm.

Our apologies for leaving "bad" numbers up for more than four hours. The "facts" were provided, but the margins were incomplete.

6:36 p.m. First "official" results are in, with 7 precincts reporting. WNAS reports that Doug England will return to the mayor's office by a 200-vote margin. But here are the early official numbers.

England with 56.86% of the vote out of 1,261 votes.
Gonder leads in the at-large race, followed by Messer and Hollis, all Democrats.
Coffey has 372 votes in D1
No votes yet for D2
Price 48.92%, Scharlow 47.84% with a margin of 4 votes.
Benedetti leads Bliss in D5 by 54.64% of the vote.
No reports in D4 or D6
Wisman leads with 63.86% of the vote.

This is with 18% of the precincts reporting.

6:28 p.m. We are waiting for the very first reports. Bob Snook says he expected to have all the results by now. Mr. Snook is here reporting to the Calumet Club for the Republicans...we had met before and he reminds me that John Gonder and Ruthanne Wolfe credit (blame?) him for their having met.

Great story being told as we wait. Chairman Lohmeyer is telling war stories from four decades ago.

In the context of close elections (the recent sheriff race, and perhaps tonight's races), Bill told us how he has personal experience with it all. Seems that 40 years ago this week Bill went on the radio to declare victory in the race for city judge, having defeated the late Basil (Bud) Lorch by 397 votes. Yet, on the way home in the car he hears that Mr. Lorch has been declared the winner.

We won't go into the details tonight, but the case of Lorch v. Lohmeyer went all the way to the Indiana Supreme Court where, by a 3-2 party line vote, Al Gore...oops, Bill Lohmeyer was denied a victory and Mr. Lorch assumed the office.

Linda Moeller, County Court Clerk, is the big cheese over this operation, along with the Election Board. That board consists of 2 Democrats and 1 Republican who, with the clerk run the election. Bill Lohmeyer is chairman, Terry Ginkins is the other Democrat, and Jimmy Hancock serves to keep things kosher for the GOP.

That board's composition is determined by how Floyd County voted in the latest election for Secretary of State. Last time out, Floyd voted for the Democrat and even though the Democrat did not win statewide, that sets the makeup of the local board. The last few elections were "run" by a majority-Republican board of election.

Linda, as could be expected, has been very good about welcoming the media into the fray. Although none of the accredited media nor this blogger are permitted into the inner sanctum, we have been made welcome.

Mrs. Moeller, of necessity, is not on the second floor, but rather in the lobby of the building to assist in the "recovery" of the ballots, etc.

We're counting down with the Election Board at the City-County Building. We'll again post from newest to oldest. One longtime observer of the election scene says the numbers are small enough to be different from the regular municipal race with an incumbent. Those are usually high numbers, by tradition to vote out the "bums" (his word, not mine).

Another expert who ought to know has indicated that our earlier prediction of 8,800 total voters may not be very far off.

In any case, it's no longer time for predictions. It's time for the counting.

Here's how it's going to work. First, the election board will direct its technical people to post partial results as they come in. Only later will we have precinct-by-precinct totals.

To join the party live, log on to http://www.floydcounty.in.gov/ for real-time results.

Live All Day Election Reporting

Late report: Precincts 5 and 6 (council District 3) vote at S. Ellen Jones School and are reporting a combined total of about 270 voters. Precincts 9 and 10 (council District 5) vote at Ekin Avenue Recreation Center and are reporting 335 voters combined. Each of these precincts contains about 1,000 residents.

We'll be shutting down at about 5:15 to prepare for rapid election returns. Not that it's a race, but The Tribune is promising a 6:30 report that will probably only give you the winners. I guess that's what counts, but we want the precinct numbers, too, for analysis.

4:13 p.m. These hour-old reports seem to confirm our expectations on raw vote totals and on trends vis-a-vis who is voting and who is not. A combined vote total, including absentee and early voting for 19A and 19B, which vote at the 4-H center, is 775 voters. That corresponds pretty well with our projections. Precinct 2 (Scribner Middle School) reports 104 voters, again in line with our overall vote total projection.

For the record, here are shadow5's endorsements, issued earlier this week.

For Mayor and City Council

For City Clerk

3:10 p.m. We'll be happy to eat our words later, but here's your T-3 hours prediction. It's based on statistical modeling and a surely faulty data set, but what should have been a blowout is turning into an extremely tight race for mayor. That won't help vulnerable incumbents like Jeff Gahan in District 6, either. The incumbent city clerk and the Democrats running at-large will be affected, too. As of this hour, we're predicting a victory by Republican Randy Hubbard by fewer than 100 votes. Unless the weekend anti-Hubbard literature dump demoralized natural Hubbard voters (or anti-England voters), GOP turnout should be "normal" and Democratic turnout severely depressed. We're eager for more information to refine this prediction, but we see it as 4,425 for Hubbard, 4,375 for England. That's 50.28% Red, 49.72% Blue. Getting out the vote in the next two hours is now a Democratic Party imperative.

3:05 p.m. Although it's just a stab in the dark, we're projecting a total vote in the neighborhood of 7,950 [Ed. that's live voting. Add 850 for early voting and absentees for a total of 8,800]. Not as bad as indicated a few moments ago, but still remarkably low. The voters are really turned off is the consensus opinion. Many people sitting this one out.

3 p.m. It's purely anecdotal, but it's starting to look like a record low turnout. That's a recipe for the bad guys to win. That's not to cast aspersions on anyone who wins, but the city is not served well by low turnouts. As we parse the numbers here at election central, it's starting to seem that the raw number of general election voters will be pretty close to the number of voters in the primaries. If that's true, the final tally is going to be embarrassingly low. In District 3, that bodes ill for the incumbent, who would ordinarily rely on straight-party voters to put him over the top. With a competitive race at the top of the ticket, a the barest beginnings of a Scharlow upset are in the making. That same low turnout works against Doug England and the other Democrats running citywide. The core Democratic precincts are staying home while the suburb-style parts of New Albany are voting at about twice the level. Could we be seeing a major restructuring of the party landscape?

2:36 p.m. Less than four hours of voting left and this just in: Precinct 6 (in the District 3 race between Scharlow and Price (and Keister)), a 1:30 report says 118 had voted. That precinct contains just under a thousand people, pegging the voting in the mid teens, by our guess. Again, you would think that a low turnout would favor the incumbent Democrat.

In related news from Jeffersonville, council members in that third class city (that's a legal designation) voted to raise the pay of elected officials just before election day. Here's an excerpt from Larry Thomas's report from the Evening News. "If ultimately enacted, the ordinance would up the mayor’s annual salary from $62,481 to $84,000, an increase of $21,519, or 34.4 percent. The clerk-treasurer’s salary would increase $8,956, or 15.4 percent, from $58,244 to $67,200. The City Court judge’s salary would increase 10.4 percent, or $5,674, from $54,326 to $60,000. Council salaries would increase from $9,762 to $13,350, an increase of $3,588, or 26.9 percent." Hmmmm.

1:05 p.m. With much more reliable reporting by this time of day, one of today's contributors was able to predict the total Democratic vote for mayor in the spring primary within just a couple of votes. It doesn't look like we'll have that kind of reliability today without a formal canvass of the voting places. Keep sending those reports in.

1 p.m. The Tribune reported online at http://www.newsandtribune.com/ that 42 votes had been recorded at precint 28A in District 6 (Jeff Gahan defends his seat against late entry Sam Anderson). And that was at 7:30 a.m. On that sketchy evidence, let's assume a heavy turnout at the margins of the city; I believe that is Gahan's home precinct, but also home to a slightly more affluent crowd that by conventional wisdom would be expected to vote for Republicans.

12:30 p.m. The Ekin Avenue Recreation Center is the polling place for precincts 9 and 10. Both were in District 5, where Dick Bliss contends with Diane McCartin-Benedetti for the open seat. P10 has been moved into District 3, however, if the recent city council ordinance is valid. Canvassing and campaigning is prohibited within 50 feet of the polling place, but the interpretation of the county clerk of that prohibition is that the measurement starts from the actual polling booth, permitting campaigners to work the steps and doorway. At least one reporter says that this exercise of free speech was harassing and intimidating and that the McCartin-Benedetti poll workers were aggressively hawking their candidate.

Noon
Report of light voting in precinct 5. At 11:30, 50 voters had passed through the polling place at S. Ellen Jones Elementary School. P5 is loaded with Scharlow voters, but the interesting thing is that we can probably personally name 50 people who will definitely vote and will definitely vote for Scharlow. It's counterintuitive, of course, but the low turnout might just mean that Price voters are staying home this time around. P5 contains 1,049 residents, so let's call it a 10% turnout so far.

11:42 a.m.
P16 - heavy turnout in District 2 (Caesar v. Harbison)
P3 - light turnout in District 3 (Price v. Scharlow v. Keister)

11:41 a.m. Call 'em in when you vote. or e-mail us your reports.

11:40 a.m. Since we don't have the registered voter numbers, we'll be going with residential population numbers from the 2000 census.

11:30 a.m. Harvesting from various sources, precinct 3 had recorded at least 56 voters by 10 a.m. P3 contains 1,500 residents. That's a light turnout in one of the Price v. Scharlow key precincts, the largest in District 3 and heavily Democratic. Light turnout would presumably favor Price.

9:45 a.m. Early indications are that turnout will be heavy in the New Albany Municipal elections today. We'll be passing on the tidbits of news we receive here at election central throughout the day and are planning to report election returns and commentary throughout the evening.

Send us your precinct voting totals during the day as you vote. Also, please feel free to report election irregularities to the precinct judge, the county clerk, and to us.

Precinct 16 reports more than 100 voters through the polling place as of 9:30. That indicates a surprisingly heavy turnout. According to the 2000 census, there are 1,184 residents in 16. We don't have the registered voter count, but let's assume it's 600 voters. That would mean that with more than 8 hours of voting time remaining, 16% of registered voters have turned out. That would not count early and absentee votes. Pretty impressive. Congratulations to the residents of precinct 16.

Wisman a Shining Light

While shadow5 has struggled with a few of the council races and required months to reach a conclusion regarding the mayoral race, the decision for city clerk was easy.

We're proud to issue an unequivocal endorsement of Marcey Wisman and we encourage you in the strongest terms to return her to office for another four years.

Wisman understands the role of her office and has been able to negotiate the piranha-infested waters that swirl the tiles of the third floor. The incredible demands on her time are hardly compensated by the salary this council will commit to the office. And faced with a woefully small budget, Wisman has upgraded the delivery of services, edged the office nearer to technological parity, and maintained dignity and admirable neutrality in her personal conduct.

Marcey's a mature but still relatively youthful public servant and we look forward to seeing what she can do if the new council comes to recognize the importance of her office. If readers have gained any confidence in this blogger's reliability over the past weeks, take this endorsement under advisement as you go to the polls.

Our strongest support in the 2007 elections goes to at-large council candidate John Gonder, a man who will be an essential part-time component in the public-private mix that will be required to move this city toward civic health. Wisman's full-time work will be equally essential. In those two races, we have no doubt whatsoever about our vote.

Anybody here seen my old friend Bobby?

Do you realize it has been 39 1/2 years since Robert Kennedy visited New Albany?

Shortly after his visit to Southern Indiana, Kennedy was killed in a hotel kitchen in Los Angeles. A lot of dreams died that night...dreams that were inspired by Bobby.

Bobby Kennedy was no saint. He was a tortured man, a complex man. But despite his flaws, he consistently articulated a vision of an America where the future was something to look forward to and not something to be dreaded.

I note that NA Confidential's "senior" editor issued his endorsement in the mayoral campaign today. Not unexpectedly, The New Albanian encouraged his readers to cast a vote for the Democratic candidate, Doug England.

One might ask, who cares?

Granted, it takes no small amount of ego to believe that others might care to know who you think they should vote for. But Mr. Baylor has, through his persistent reporting and commentary, earned the right to declare his endorsement.

This blogger, for one, will take that endorsement under serious consideration. It now appears to be a given that the traditional medium of journalism, The Tribune, will not be offering endorsements of any kind. This qualifies as a betrayal, in my point of view. Setting aside the fact that endorsements were promised, it is an abdication of responsibility for the principal organ of news reporting to decline to endorse a candidate.

Bobby Kennedy, love him or hate him, took a position. I believe Mr. Baylor harks back to a time when candidates were unafraid to express real opinions. In Mr. England, Mr. Baylor has found a champion who espouses many of his opinions, making the NAC endorsement completely understandable.

Who's Looking Out For Whom?

First of all, a hearty thanks to the folks at the library who hosted the mayoral candidates forums on Wednesday. A very healthy crowd turned out on the occasion of serial appearances by Republican Randy Hubbard and Democrat Doug England.

The forums provided sufficient material to report for days, and I don't envy the mainstream press who must pick and choose for tomorrow's editions.

Greg Sekula of the Indiana Historic Landmarks Foundation regional office was the question-reader. I put it that way because the forums were not moderated ones. Sekula clearly had a hand in the speech-like questions he read, but when the candidates failed to answer the questions, the reader failed to follow up and seek clarification.

The room was set up as if it were a television studio, with the questioner in a comfortable chair to the audience's left and the candidate under a spotlight to the audience's right. Neither candidate appeared to be comfortable with the setup. In such an obviously conversational setting, it was jarring to hear scripted questions, sometimes followed by scripted answers.

Hubbard raced through the questions in about 12 minutes (8 minutes of questions made his total time on "stage" about 20 minutes. England, of course, used the entire allotment of 45 minutes, and then some, but no one seemed to be bothered by that, since the Democrat never failed to have something interesting to say.

Truly, we could go on for hours with a play-by-play, and perhaps we'll revisit our notes at some future date. But for tonight, we'll try to drop a few tidbits. The forums were taped for posterity and perhaps someday before the election you'll be able to see them for yourselves, online.

Malaprops were at a minimum. Hubbard advocated "plagiarizing the Scribner Place model," but I think most people understood his meaning. England pointed out that "Veterans Parkway...gets all the foreplay in the papers." Again, no harm, no foul, and it is not our purpose to poke fun...unless it's really worth it.

Both candidates expressed a willingness to export our economic development tax dollars to the behemoth regional One Southern Indiana, and both promised the DNA members present that they would give them a handout, too.

England seemed to stumble (or maybe it just grated on my ears) when he said the perception in the region was that downtown (New Albany) is not doing anything right.

Hubbard walked a carefully noncommital line on all but a few issues, basically saying nothing of consequence, and if he veered close to making a commitment, he always came back with a caveat. In pledging his support to the Historic Preservation Commission, he backed quickly away from the pledge by introducing the idea that the HPC had perhaps not been reasonable in its decisions to date. On what Sekula called "rental licensing," Hubbard turned in his GOP credentials and proudly displayed his Mugwumpery. My favorite historian, Richard Amory, described mugwumps as politicians with their mugs on one side of the fence and their wumps on the other.

Where did the candidates differ?

England came out foursquare for a city court, part-time to begin with and possibly staffed by Circuit Court Judge Glenn Hancock until it begins to pay for itself. He rejected the idea of a full-time city attorney. Hubbard took the exact opposite tack, promising a full-time city attorney and rejecting the idea of a municipal court.

On traffic calming and reconfiguration of the notorious one-way traffic patterns in the city's core, Hubbard repeated his pledge to ask the people and asked for a feasibility study that has already been done...twice! In fact, he didn't actually answer the question because Sekula phrased it as "downtown" streets, giving Hubbard the opportunity to define downtown as from East 4th to West 4th.

England fully supported a return to 2-way streets and eloquently explained why it was critical to the rejuvenation of downtown.

England was articulate in explaining that investment property owners must be willing to accept regulation that includes inspections. Hubbard hemmed and hawed, bowing to the pleas of the much put-upon landlord class.

Neither candidate grasped the question about sprawl and tax preferences for building out and both jumped straight into the rental property problem. And neither candidate adequately understood the phrase "alternative means" of public transport. I believe what was meant by that was pedestrian- and cyclist-friendly concourses, local buses, etc. Hubbard seemed baffled by the mere idea (suggesting that cabs might be available to take people to and from Louisville, but it would be awfully expensive), but England didn't address the question, either.

A nice spreadsheet comparing the two's answers to Sekula's 18 questions could be created. I have the notes if anyone would like to make one. I'll be glad to post it here.

Little Fish

It's a pleasure to be a little fish, but while evading the sharks and barracudas, this "Nemo" can't help but wonder at the machine-like nature of New Albany politics.

Anyone paying attention will certainly have noticed that a remarkable number of "resignations" have been handed in, swamped by the self-proclaimed inevitability of a new England regime.

Let's call it the "English Restoration."

(From WikiEverything) The English Restoration, or simply The Restoration, was an episode in the history of Britain beginning in 1660 when the English monarchy, Scottish monarchy and Irish monarchy were restored under King Charles II after the English Civil War. The term Restoration may apply both to the actual event by which the monarchy was restored, and to the period immediately following the accession of Charles II.

The Protectorate, which had preceded the Restoration and followed the Commonwealth, might have continued if Oliver Cromwell's son Richard, who was made Lord Protector on his father's death, had been capable of carrying on his father's policies. Richard Cromwell's main weakness was that he did not have the confidence of the army. After seven months the army removed him and on 6 May 1659 it reinstalled the Rump Parliament. Charles Fleetwood was appointed a member of the Committee of Safety and of the Council of State, and one of the seven commissioners for the army. On 9 June 1659 he was nominated lord-general (commander-in-chief) of the army. However, his power was undermined in parliament, which chose to disregard the army's authority in a similar fashion to the pre-Civil War parliament. The Commons on 12 October 1659, cashiered General John Lambert and other officers, and installed Fleetwood as chief of a military council under the authority of the speaker. The next day Lambert ordered that the doors of the House be shut and the members kept out. On 26 October a "Committee of Safety" was appointed, of which Fleetwood and Lambert were members. Lambert was appointed major-general of all the forces in England and Scotland, Fleetwood being general. Lambert was now sent, by the Committee of Safety, with a large force to meet George Monck, who was in command of the English forces in Scotland, and either negotiate with him or force him to come to terms.
It was into this atmosphere that Monck, the governor of Scotland under the Cromwells, marched south with his army from Scotland. Lambert's army began to desert him, and he returned to London almost alone. Monck marched to London unopposed. The Presbyterian members, excluded in Pride's Purge of 1648, were recalled and on 24 December the army restored the Long Parliament. Fleetwood was deprived of his command and ordered to appear before parliament to answer for his conduct. Lambert was sent to the Tower of London on 3 March 1660, from which he escaped a month later. Lambert tried to rekindle the civil war in favour of the Commonwealth by issuing a proclamation calling on all supporters of the "Good Old Cause" to rally on the battlefield of Edgehill. But he was recaptured by Colonel Richard Ingoldsby, a regicide who hoped to win a pardon by handing Lambert over to the new regime. Lambert was incarcerated and died in custody on Drake's Island in 1684.

On April 4, 1660, Charles II issued the Declaration of Breda, which made known the conditions of his acceptance of the crown of England. Monck organised the Convention Parliament, which met for the first time on April 25. On May 8 it proclaimed that King Charles II had been the lawful monarch since the execution of Charles I in January 1649.[1] Charles returned from exile, leaving The Hague on May 23 and landing at Dover on May 25.[2] He entered London on May 29, his birthday. To celebrate "his Majesty's Return to his Parliament" May 29 was made a public holiday, popularly known as Oak Apple Day.[3] He was crowned at Westminster Abbey on 23 April 1661.[2]

The Cavalier Parliament convened for the first time on May 8, 1661, and it would endure for over 17 years until its dissolution on January 24, 1679. Like its predecessor, it was overwhelmingly Royalist and is also known as the Pensionary Parliament for the many pensions it granted to adherents of the King.

OK. Enough.

Who are the Cavaliers who expect to prosper under an England restoration?

What promises have been made to those who can "deliver" a bloc of votes? What have Doug and his courtiers promised to Danny Coffey? How about party turncoat Bill Schmidt, who can reliably deliver "absentee" votes with a sacramental blessing?

Or Glenn Hancock, judiciary luminary but previously an England confidante? Or Bill (and Steve) Lohmeyer, the senior of which presides over the Election Board? The Freiberger/Mills entente?

Don't get me wrong. Randy Hubbard has shown nothing in this campaign. It is pretty well established that he has no realistic desire to serve the city as its chief executive, and he's done everything possible to demonstrate that. His lack of enthusiasm has even given rise to speculation as to who might actually take office in the unlikely event of a GOP mayoral victory.

But Mr. England's clear confidence can't be completely unfounded. Imagine that both Ted Heavrin and Tom Pickett have pledged allegiance to the crown. What kind of promise brings that kind of synergy into play?

It's pretty ballsy to go around "firing" people before you've even won the election. But the England campaign seems to be doing so.

I understand party loyalty. Once incumbent Garner was ousted, it could be expected that the party elders would rally around the nominee.

But what do Warren Nash (past), Randy Stumler (present), and Dan Coffey (future) Democratic Party Chairmen have in common? Is support for England the only commonality?

In exchange for what? What promises have been made? And which will be kept? And most importantly, at what cost to the integrity of government?

This won't be a Regency. It's hard to believe it will be a Reformation. Is the Restoration an improvement, or the final throes of a corrupt machine?

Pander Bear?

The title's not original, but it is apropos.

Got home rather late to find that my spouse had received a mailing from the "Indiana Democratic State Committee, Daniel Parker, Chair."

Seems the staties want Doug England returned to office.

Point one in the flyer is telling. It reads:

Doug England knows property taxes are too high, and hea has a plan to make them fair and affordable.

Really, Doug? Property taxes are too high? Property tax collections cannot rise more than 4.4% per year under DLGF guidelines. A decently growing economy ought to provide an natural inflation of 3% and new investment ought to generate the remaining 1.4%. Perhaps there has been no new investment in New Albany over the past year. Perhaps property values aren't rising at least at the level of the CPI or the Social Security cost-of-living bump.

But all of that is unlikely. It's a safe assumption that property taxes did not rise over the past year. So who is Doug England trying to cuddle up to?

The fact is that all those who are howling about "property taxes [being] too high" are the ones who have been underpaying for years. "Trending" has finally caught up to them and now they are paying their fair share. You don't hear howls from people whose taxes went down because of trending. You don't hear howls from people who have, logically speaking, been overpaying for years to make up for the underpaying segment of the population. Only those WHO CAN AFFORD IT because their property VALUE has risen are complaining.

In other words, the lucky are screaming because they have been relying on the luckless to pay for them. Now that the tables have turned, they scream that property taxes are too high. And Doug England wants them to know he sympathizes with the lucky, not the luckless.

Or is he merely posturing and pandering to avoid discussing reality? Republican opponent Randy Hubbard mouths similar sentiments, but his campaign literature didn't assault me at home tonight. So Doug England gets the dart tonight.

District 5: Is This a Tough Choice, or Not?

The Fifth District, by all accounts, is the smallest of the six City Council districts. It is also, perhaps, the single most stable district in the city. You can't say that people have moved out. And the city has not grown over the past 20 years.

That means that the small size of the Fifth is part of a design. Is (was) its size part of an incumbent-protection racket? An objective observer would have to say yes.

At the relevant times (1992 and 2002), who were the incumbents in that geographical area? We know Larry Kochert (nominally a Democrat) was one of them. A Republican represented District 5 until 2004, and the man who represented it when it came time to redraw those districts was Dick Bliss, the Republican nominee this year.

Bliss, who lost his seat to the dynamic Beverly Crump in 2003, has questions to answer. What deal was cut to protect Kochert from the natural consequences of moving him into the Fifth? And what protection was offered in exchange? Bliss's failure to insist on fair districts is a failure that requires a defense.

Bliss, as a businessman and investor, has added greatly to the community. His family's travel agency and the recently acquired and renovated Calumet Club are small treasures for New Albany.

As a man, Bliss remains approachable and resolute in his opinions. He is thoughtful and if not progressive, at least in favor of progress (and there is a difference). It is important for Bliss to tell us his philosophical views regarding the role of government in achieving that progress. It's easy to suspect that Mr. Bliss thinks that government should step aside and let businesses do what it is they do and government do what it is they do.

That's pretty simplistic. It leads to unregulated commercial properties, lenient zoning, and the demolition of buildings that "get in the way." Conversely, it restricts government to building jails and paying cops. Under Bliss's watch, a lot of money was spent, but little of it was targeted to improving the prospects of the city. Yes, a jail was built. Yes, police and fire payrolls grew as a percentage of the city budget. What we want to know is if Dick Bliss "gets it." Will he support public investment over public spending (and there is a difference)?

On first blush, Bliss seems to be a nice guy who is rational and reasonable. His political philosophy may well be inconsistent with rejuvenating New Albany, or even with preserving what we have. On the other hand, he has put his money into the city and chosen to live and invest in its core communities. His personal integrity has not been questioned.

So a decision on Bliss comes down to politics. Are his politics something New Albany can live with? Does he represent his district? Can he represent the best interests of the city as a whole? Has the contribution made by his generation of public servants created confidence, or has it disqualified all who served in the 90s?

In short, the answer to the title question is "yes." D5 is a tough choice.

In that the writer is "shadowna5," I ought to have a decision made already.

Yet, I don't.

So what is the alternative to Dick Bliss? First-time candidate Diane McCartin Benedetti ran unopposed for the Democratic Party nomination. Friends tell me she is a nice woman, a soccer mom. Others tell me she, rightfully, loves and admires her brother, Gary "The Gary" McCartin, and relies on his advice and judgment.

While people I admire also appreciate the "contributions" the McCartin family has made to our community, the recent evidence is that the developer and his family, both as public servants and as supplicants to government, just don't get it. It would be difficult to expect Benedetti to renounce "the devil and all his works," and yet I'm not yet ready to write her off.

Fortunately, both Bliss and Benedetti have opportunities remaining to sway voters. Public forums remain. There is still time to ask and answer questions.

Here will be the defining question:

Mrs. Benedetti, do you agree with your brother that investing in downtown is a sucker's game? Do you believe that "hoping" for private investment in the city's urban core is nutso and that downtown is dead?

Mr. Bliss, do you agree with your party chairman, who said publicly that the Democrats have "saddled" us with Scribner Place? Is the only proper role of government the demolition of existing buildings so that existing businesses can have more parking?

Right now, I think I know the answers. I pray that what I think is untrue. While it can be argued that abstaining is foolish, and while a write-in vote at this late date is the same as abstaining, every voter has to live with herself.

Give me someone to vote for. Please.