It’s amazing what you come across when you’re playing on the Internet and scanning through local campaign finance reports.  For the record, I do have a life, I was just killing time before meeting up with friends for cocktails.

You come across the usual things; Greg Ballard raised more than $1.3 million in 2009, with about half the donations being between $250 and $750.  John Layton, Democratic candidate for Sheriff had $108,000 in cash on hand, etc. etc.   But there were also some other interesting tidbits.  For example…

• Up until December 2008 it looked like  County Auditor Billie Breaux was raising money for a run for Treasurer.
• Former City-County Councilman Ike Randolph still has City-County Council political action committee.
• Up until he got out of the race for Sheriff Kerry Forestal raised $88,000.
• Frank Anderson’s “exploratory committee” for something raised about $13,000.
• The fund raising arm of the Marion County Republican Party pulled in about $33,000 last year.   The Marion County Democrats fund raising arm didn’t do anything in 2009.
• And believe it or not, former Indy Mayoral candidate Jocelyn Adande still has a Mayor political action committee.  It’s empty, but still there.  Insert your own joke here.

Two big items from Tuesday, the Massachusetts Senate Race and Governor Mitch Daniels State of the State Address.  We’ll knock out Massachusetts first.

Massachusetts Miracle

Although it “sent shock waves” through political world, anyone who was paying attention to the dynamics of the race between Republican State Senator Steve Brown and Democrat Attorney General Martha Coakley saw brown’s victory coming.  Although Coakley originally had a 30-point lead, she lost by 5 points.

Frankly, I’m surprised she didn’t lose by more.  She ran a campaign that made Jill Long Thompson look like Karl Rove.  Between going on vacation after the primary, calling Boston Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling a Yankee fan, saying their are no terrorists in Afghanistan, taking the voters for granted and just being plain annoying were all factors.  Throw in an anxious electorate that’s concerned about their jobs.  And most importantly, a state that already has universal health coverage and its citizens don’t want to pay for another plan and this is what you get.

Who’s surpised?

State of the State

Times are tough, but they’ll get better and things are a lot worse next door.  That was the underlying message of Governor Mitch Daniels’ State of the State address.  Daniels spelled out the challenges the state has gone through, but also talked about how Indiana’s moves today were laying the foundation for a stronger recovery tomorrow.

The Governor did touch on jobs, saying he was working to create a climate that is attracting jobs as companies look to downsize and consolidate their operations.   He also praised lawmakers for passing tax caps, pushed for them to pass more government reform, and urged them to end social promotion for third graders who can’t read.

Overall, the Governor struck a tone of optimism, but he did not deny the serious of the state’s situation.  It will be interesting to watch how the year pans out for his agenda.

Here is the actual audio from the State of the City address as well comments from the Mayor afterwards and reaction from some members of the audience.

Ballard State of the City Address - 1

Ballard State of the City Address - 2

Ballard State of the City Address - 3

Ballard State of the City Address - 4

Ballard State of the City Address - 5

Ballard Post State of the City

State of the City Reaction

Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard delivered a “bricks and mortar” speech in his third State of the City address to the citizens of Indianapolis.

The speech, delivered at the Indianapolis Museum of Art, focused on the Mayor’s accomplishments in addressing city needs for the past two years and also spelled out where he wanted to take Indianapolis in 2010.

Ballard’s vision for Indianapolis; the livable big city in Indianapolis.   The following is a breakdown of the Mayor’s speech…

Public Safety

• The Mayor talked about public safety touting crime being down overall, by five percent since he took office and the number of criminal homicides in city limits proper being the lowest since 1993.
• He congratulated the efforts of former Public Safety Director Scott Newman and introduced the city to his current nominee Dr. Frank Straub.
• The Mayor talked about the city issuing out more than $3 million in crime prevention grants and reintroducing community policing.

Government Efficiency

• Ballard touted what he called an “honestly” balanced budget where the city and county is spending less than it is taking in in taxes.   And for the first time in Indianapolis history, the Mayor said the city has a rainy day fund.
• The Mayor pointed to several public-private partnerships which helped addressed city services such as the $7.3 million Lilly endowment grant for Indy parks.
• Abandoned calls to the Mayor’s Action Center were down 87 percent and the Mayor said the MAC line is actually returning phone calls; up to 30,000 by the end of last year.
• Ballard also called for the elimination of township government and the merger of township fire departments with IFD.

Economic Development

• Ballard said the city is using it’s legal authority to take back more than $5 million in abatements from Navistar for failing to create jobs as promised.
• He pointed to figures showing that Indianapolis had the 2nd lowest unemployment rate of the 13 largest metropolitan areas in the nation.
• Ballard states city receivied commitments to retain or bring more than 11,000 jobs to Indianapolis in 2009; the second highest in nine years.
• Tax abatements were less than 20 percent of the $157 million in incentives used to bring business to Indy.
• For the past two years for $1 in tax abatement the city has issued it received $17 in private investment; the strongest amount of return since stats were first kept in 2001.
• $1.5 million will go towards for the Indianapolis Convention and Visitors Association to attract more conventions and events to the city.

Education

• The Mayor’s Charter School Office is being turned into  the Office of Education Innovation to help improve charter schools.

“Urban” Issues

• The mayor says the city has spent millions fixing leaking pools in Center Township.
• The City of  Indianapolis partnering with Andre Carson’s Office to make sure the 2010 census is complete.
• The city has cleared a 200-case backlog of discrimination complaints.
• The promised the revitalization of City Market.

Sustainability & Infrastructure

• Ballard says the city has created more than 20 miles of bike lanes and will soon begin retrofitting 70 city-owned properties to make them more energy efficient.
• The Mayor alluded to a deal for the water company that would generate millions in revenue for the city, but said it must be in the best interest of the taxpayers.
• The Mayor stated the city needs to improve its mass transit, but that was not necessarily adding bus lines, but an overall plan which will improve the health of the local economy as well as make Indianapolis more economically competitive.

Franklin Township Schools are looking at charging students to play sports as a way to shore up its budget shortfall.

According my friends over at Fox 59, the school board is trying to cut nearly $7 million from its budget. The district is already looking at cutting more than 50 teaching positions and requiring students to pay for bus service.

The plan also calls for a user fee for students who want to play sports. A recent survey showed it could cost each student athlete $600 to play sports.

Franklin Township is going to be an interesting case study to watch.  While I don’t dislike high school athletics, I don’t think they are necessary for a good education as football, basketball, baseball and soccer can all be done at the league level and not necessarily done on the school district level.  Either way, this is going to be interesting to watch.

I still wonder though how much did Franklin Township look at consolidation, sharing resources with other schools and privatizing or outsourcing non-instructional school functions before going straight for the jugular of firing teachers and charging students to play football and ride the bus.

To be honest, it wasn’t Monday’s 75-23 vote in favor of putting property tax caps into the Indiana Constitution that surprised me the most.  What caught me off guard somewhat is the argument by House Speaker Pat Bauer that local governments hadn’t come out and made the case against property tax caps.  It was a point repeated by a number of House Democrats.

Now if you talk to the locals they will tell you a different story.    Matt Greller of the Indiana Association of Cities and Towns sent a letter to lawmakers challenging the argument they haven’t done enough.  Here’s an excerpt…

I am foremost offended that such an excuse could possibly be the justification for voting in favor of such an important and permanent policy.  This resolution forever ties the hands of future General Assemblies to react to any unforeseen economic reality and puts a level of specificity into our Constitution that is completely unprecedented.  A vote either in favor or against HJR 1 or SJR 1 should be executed only after great consideration, research of all facts, and serious personal reflection.

Not unlike the conversations at the Statehouse, the issue of property tax caps has dominated the focus of the Indiana Association of Cities and Towns (IACT) and its members for the past several years.  We have met with hundreds of legislators multiple times, testified in dozens of committee hearings, held press conferences, written many press releases, sought out countless editorial board meetings with newspapers statewide, formed alliances with like-minded organizations, and developed data models to show the negative impacts of the caps.

Additionally, we have communicated with anyone who would listen about the many Indiana city and town officials who have executed layoffs of public safety personnel and other vital municipal employees.  In addition to our efforts to communicate about the consequences of the Resolutions, we see the clips from newspapers all across the state.  They are both reporting on the severe budget cuts occurring at the local level and voicing a wide variety of concerns as they editorialize on the irresponsibility of placing the caps in the Constitution.

While I am simply flabbergasted at the notion that some in the legislature want to hear us complain even more about the pain of the tax caps, I must remind you that when these caps were first discussed we were told by lawmakers and state leaders that we needed to be more creative and do more with less and that you expected and in fact wanted us to make massive cuts.  Our local leaders have complied with state law and tried to do so as professionally and without blame as possible. 

I am foremost offended that such an excuse could possibly be the justification for voting in favor of such an important and permanent policy. This resolution forever ties the hands of future General Assemblies to react to any unforeseen economic reality and puts a level of specificity into our Constitution that is completely unprecedented. A vote either in favor or against HJR 1 or SJR 1 should be executed only after great consideration, research of all facts, and serious personal reflection.

Not unlike the conversations at the Statehouse, the issue of property tax caps has dominated the focus of the Indiana Association of Cities and Towns (IACT) and its members for the past several years. We have met with hundreds of legislators multiple times, testified in dozens of committee hearings, held press conferences, written many press releases, sought out countless editorial board meetings with newspapers statewide, formed alliances with like-minded organizations, and developed data models to show the negative impacts of the caps.

Additionally, we have communicated with anyone who would listen about the many Indiana city and town officials who have executed layoffs of public safety personnel and other vital municipal employees.  In addition to our efforts to communicate about the consequences of the Resolutions, we see the clips from newspapers all across the state. They are both reporting on the severe budget cuts occurring at the local level and voicing a wide variety of concerns as they editorialize on the irresponsibility of placing the caps in the Constitution.

While I am simply flabbergasted at the notion that some in the legislature want to hear us complain even more about the pain of the tax caps, I must remind you that when these caps were first discussed we were told by lawmakers and state leaders that we needed to be more creative and do more with less and that you expected and in fact wanted us to make massive cuts.  Our local leaders have complied with state law and tried to do so as professionally and without blame as possible.

Critics argue the Speaker used the locals as a shield in order to get his members political protection to vote for tax caps.  Regardless, what’s done is done and it’s time for cities and towns to get used to the brave new world that hath such people in it.

You would think that one of the last places a person would find racial issues would be the Indianapolis Chapter of the Indiana Democratic African-American Caucus.   That wasn’t the case on December 19th.

That was the day the group held elections for some tightly contested offices.  Who ran and who won is not important, what matters is that some black members of the group used its by-laws to exclude white members from voting.

My sources tell me that according to the by-laws, only members can vote, and the rules have been interpreted that only African-Americans can be members.  Whites can join the group, but only as associate members.  Associate members had voted in the past on issues, however at the election meeting of officers, the white members were told they could not vote because of their associate status and had to leave the room.   Of course there were some IDAAC members who wanted them to vote, but they were overruled.

All I can say about this is “wow”!  Had the roles been reversed and whites had told blacks they couldn’t participate in an organization they were members of, all holy you-know-what would break loose.  And in my opinion, it would be justified.  The same goes for here.

I’m not one to tell any organization how to run its internal affairs, but for an African-American organization to deny someone the right to vote because of skin color, that’s beyond the pale (pardon the pun).  If any group of people who should know better, it should be black folks.

I understand the historical roots of a lot of long-time black organizations and how membership traditionally was restricted to African-Americans, however in the 21st Century a lot of that has gone by the way side.  And for an organization that pushes for African-Americans to have full-inclusion in the political process, you don’t score points engaging in the same tactics that made the creation of your group necessary.