1. HiLLary. (Yes, it is a double “L”)

2. Good for Gary Welsh, Abdul! He is a brilliant writer and rather than sit back and just bitch he is stepping up to MAKE A DIFFERENCE. How about putting you petty fight aside. I suppose we are supposed to sit back and accept the mediocre Carsons, Grays and such who can’t speak and don’t have an original thought of their own? I want better than that.

Gary Welsh’s going after the Carsons & Monroe Gray was acceptable, but he has gone a step further and has demonstrated that he’s just going after ANY black person newsworthy. I admired him for going after the bad guys until he showed me he just didn’t like black people at all.

Thank you for linking to that particular post and for the free publicity, Abdul. Yes, when I hear a Republican talking about raising taxes, I get a little upset, particularly when it came from someone who voted against last year’s county option income tax increase–about $30 million of which was to pay pension bond indebtedness. Now that the state has picked up that cost many of us think Republicans should be finding a way to roll back that tax. Isn’t that a Republican idea?

And Darla (Fedup), if you’r going to attack me, at least put your name to it. No, I don’t regret saying you were the wrong choice choice to serve as liaison for the Ballard transition team to Peterson’s administration. It has nothing to do with the color of your skin. Fortunately, others agreed with my observation.

Anyone who actually read the law knows that unless the legislature changes the statute, the city is stuck with the tax for a while.

The Ballard people can’t roll back the tax, but they can look for ways to reduce overall spending to lower the overall levy so less money is taken out of the property taxpayer’s pocket as a whole.

In Gary Welsh’s defense: as I recall, has never written unfavorably about Avachino Reeves, Jocelyn Tandy, Barbara Malone or Kent Smith… ;-)

One, I would hope that Daniel’s policies get at least some recognition for the states improved rating. Of course, the haters will always disavow.
Two, I applaud anyone who serves as a critic, yet is willing to jump into the fray. You too should be supportive of the jump. All views should be accepted.

OOOOOH! Republican catfight!

I believe it is time for Hillary to get out of the race. It is time for a Obama/Richardson ticket…and on to the debates with McCain/Romney.

Oye. If “Fedup” is Darla that says it all!

Willie Lynch tactics won’t work here Wilson.

You won’t get any of these black people to mistreat each other because ‘you’ draw distinctions publicly. That’s a 400 year-old trick that is still practiced in Indianapolis and only works on the ignorant and is only practiced by dinosaurs. Next you’ll mention that the lighter skinned is more intelligient.

You need to stop mentioning peoples names who don’t even associate with you. You are barking up the wrong trees.

Just because the guy can be objective and criticize the Republicans when they screw up doesn’t make him any less of a Republican. Good luck, Gary.

AND on the income tax?? I love the excuses about how state law must be changed, yadda, yadda, yadda.

When Bart said that last summer about property taxes, you all crucified him.

As far as I’m concerned, GIVE IT BACK, GREG!

1. Hillary is not in this for the best of the Democrat Party–she is in it for her. So regardless of what it would do to the Party, she will stay in.
.
2. Good for Gary. I am glad to hear he is putting his actions where his mouth is.
.
3. Gary, Ballard ran proposing to exchange property taxes for sales and income (some mix of those) while acknowledging that he is only an influencer in that arena. SO, why would he roll back an income tax rather than use it to lower property tax levies? That would be completely inconsistent with the mix of taxes that he believes is fair.

PIR,

I’ve noticed that little thing called the law tends to bother you from time to time. What a shame.

Joel, As long as he rolls a tax back I don’t care whether it is the income or property tax. The fact is we have been taxed twice now for the same pension debt. About $30 million a year from the COIT was being set aside to pay for the bonds which were supposed to be issued. In all, the state is picking up about $65 million of the city’s budgeted levies. On April 1, we all start paying another percentage point in state sales tax. At least some of the money raised by the COIT should be returned to the taxpayers and not spent. If these guys think they’re going to get by hiding behind the technical requirements of a state law, they better think again. If they don’t figure out a way to return some of this money to the taxpayers, they’ll be hearing from a lot of unhappy folks, including me.

Avachino Reeves, Jocelyn Tandy, Barbara Malone or Kent Smith…

Welsh is no friend to these three black eithers:

http://advanceindiana.blogspot.com/2007/11/star-is-full-of-political-goodies-today.html#links

http://advanceindiana.blogspot.com/2007/10/more-on-believe-it-or-not.html#links

http://advanceindiana.blogspot.com/search?q=kent+smith

http://advanceindiana.blogspot.com/search?q=sherron+franklin

Gary, How does using that tax to reduce my property taxes even more NOT translate to returning my money to me???? Don’t bother replying, that was sarcasm.

Hey Abbie, does this mean Mayor Gerg and Bobby Cock(run) and the Grand Ole Good Ole Boy Party will be voting to reverse the income tax increase Mayor Bart supported to pay for the Public Safety Pension??? Come, Abbie, address this on your show. No guts no glory.

Pension debt shift saves city $1 billion
State will assume cost as part of tax deal, but Indy will see funds cut
By Brendan O’Shaughnessy

March 18th, 2008 -IndyStar

A Indianapolis taxpayers will be able to avoid a $1 billion loan to cover the city’s pension debts after lawmakers handed the pension problem to the state.

Mayor Greg Ballard, speaking at a news conference Monday, hailed the reform plan the General Assembly passed as a major boon to Marion County taxpayers.
The state increased the sales tax by a penny and took over some perennial local budget headaches — pre-1977 police and fire pensions and health care for the poor — that together cost more than $65 million a year. The state also will pay for state-run child welfare and juvenile justice programs that cost property taxpayers about $80 million a year.

Despite shedding these expenses, the city and county will still need to cut spending because less money will be coming in. According to a city analysis, new property tax caps in the bill will mean city-county tax collectors would see $11 million less next year and $39 million less in 2010.

Ballard took credit Monday for lobbying the state to take over a pension debt that has drained money for years from efforts to bolster public safety. Some critics had said he was asking the state for too much. Now, he said, the city will no longer have to borrow $1 billion to pay off the pensions over the next 40 years.

“That will be returned to the taxpayers as property tax relief,” Ballard said. “It’s kind of a wash to city government, but it’s huge for the taxpayers.”

The city will still need to reduce its spending, Ballard said. He pointed to the pension pickup of $30 million as a big step toward his promise to cut government spending by $70 million in three years.

Councilwoman Jackie Nytes, a Democrat, questioned whether taxpayers would truly benefit when the costs of the pensions and welfare programs are simply shifted to another part of government.

“When he talked about cuts, he was talking about smaller, leaner government,” Nytes said, “not something that someone else pays for out of my other pocket.”

Council President Bob Cockrum, a Republican, said finding $40 million in cuts over the next two years will be a challenge.

“It’s too early to say whether we can find that money without a tax increase,” Cockrum said. “Filling a budget hole usually means service cuts or tax increases unless we can find some efficiencies.”

Really, you should probably avoid posting entire articles–it stretches the “fair use” part of the copyright code a bit thin. Also read what you post. Clearly Ballard has said that the tax increase “will be returned to the taxpayers as property tax relief.”
.
We have our answer to what Ballard intends to do. And it was exactly what he said he would do in the campaign.