Just when you thought you had all the information you needed on something, more good gossip comes along.  This time it involves Libertarian City-County Council member Ed Coleman.

Coleman apparently was part of the attempted coup Monday night to defeat Ryan Vaughn as Council President.  What’s funny about that is I discovered that Republicans were ready to start out the new year by making peace with Ed, who left last February, by offering him some committee assignments and allow him into their caucus.

That all went south when Ed not only participated in the coup, but also reportedly bragged about it to several other Councilors about what was going to happen that night.   What happened that night is that Ryan got elected President and the coup went south.

Once the Republicans found about it they rescinded their offer.  As one put it to me yesterday, “He’s a member of a minority party so let the minority give him a committee assignment.”    Joanne Sanders has told me in the past that Ed is not a member of her caucus so any committee assignment is out of the question.

Although I like Ed personally, this is about the most politically stupid thing I’ve ever seen him do.  He had the perfect opportunity to have more influence and craft policy if he would have just kept his mouth shut.  Instead, he’s back to square one, which is having nothing.

And on a sidebar, Monday night’s attempted divide and conquer really only brought more unity to the Council Republicans as they’ve had some come to Jesus meetings with some members who felt they were being ignored and are taking steps to rectify that situation.

2010 should be an interesting year.

While most Marion County politicos were watching County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi not run for a third term and Helen Marchal announce her candidacy, there was some interesting movement on the Democratic side of the equation.

Candidate David Orentlicher filed paperwork showing he had more than $183,000 in cash on hand in his race for prosecutor.   Greg Bowes had about $4,500.   Party favorite Terry Curry had not filed yet, but campaign sources say his reports will likely show less than $80,000 on hand.   I called Curry’s campaign on Friday, but no one has gotten back with me.

Shortly after I posted this information on my blog and Twitter feed, Democrat Terry Burns immediately jumped up to comment that most of Orentlicher’s money came from a handful of donors and those weren’t “real contributions.”   When I asked Orentlicher about that he told he had more than 125 donors.  Which is true, while there about six donors who gave Orentlicher $25,000 or more 99% of the rest of the donations were in the $75-$500 range.

In addition, the campaign finance experts I spoke with all said that Orentlicher’s fundraising puts him in a very strong position because by raising very large contributions he can show other donors that he can raise money and isn’t wasting anyone’s time.   Obviously he’s had an impact on the County party and is scaring someone, otherwise Burns (who won’t breathe unless Chairman Ed Treacy gives him permission) would not have chimed in so quickly on both my blog and Twitter feed.

Now I am not saying that Orentlicher even has a chance at winning slating, those cards were stacked a long time ago.   However, if he does decide to buck the party establishment and run his own race against the slate, his access to cash would make him an extremely formidable opponent.

Stay tuned.

Although the filing deadline isn’t until Wednesday,  January 20, some 2010 candidates have already filed their annual financial reports.   Here’s a snapshot of some of them…

County Prosecutor

David Orentlicher

• Raised – $184,200.
• Spent – $448.00
• On hand – $183,751.

Greg Bowes

• Raised – $7,167
• Spent – $2,636
• On hand – $4,531

Terry Curry

• No report filed yet.

Sheriff

Mark Brown

• No report filed yet.

John Layton

• No report filed yet.

Bart McAtee

• Raised – $175,858 (More than $60,000 was already in hand)
• Spent – $86,304.
• On hand – $89,554.

Dennis Fishburn

• Raised – $5,350
• Spent – $200
• On hand – $5,150.

Any early thoughts?

The third time will not be a charm for Marion County Prosecutor Carl Brizzi.   Brizzi informed me a few moments ago that he would not seek a third term in office.

Running instead will be Brizzi’s Chief of Staff  Helen Marchal, who has spent 12 years in the office as a prosecutor.   She is resigning her job to avoid conflicts with the Hatch Act which forbids government employees from engaging in campaigning if their job is federally funded.

Brizzi did not say how much of a role his relationship with embattled financier Tim Durham played in his decision,  however prior to the Durham controversy he had told me he was leaning against running for a third term for family reasons.

The prosecutor’s office has put up a letter on its website saying he will not seek a third term.

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.

Usually the elections to run a legislative body are pretty mundane; not so much in Indianapolis.

Although Monday night’s election of Republican Ryan Vaughn seemed pretty nonchalant on the surface, there was actually an attempted coup behind the scenes.  The original plan, hatched by Democrats my sources tell me, was to elect Barb Malone President and Libertarian Ed Coleman Vice-President.  My sources tell me Democrats approached Christine Scales to overthrow Vaughn’s nomination.  A move insiders say was not only plain stupid, but would have been a  slap in the face to the Republicans and those who wanted smooth government.  Instead, the vote came down to Vaughn, Mary Moriarty Adams and Ed Coleman.   Vaughn won with 15 votes, Moriarty Adams got 11 votes and Coleman got 3 votes.

When approached about his support for the Democrats my sources tell me Coleman’s  response was “What has the Republican Majority done for me-why should I help them?”

In addition there was also infighting on the Democratic side over who they should support for Council vice-president.  The nominees were Marilyn Pfisterer, Barb Malone and Jackie Nytes.  Pfisterer got 14 votes, while Malone came in second, Nytes third which led to a second round of voting since there was no clear majority.  Some Democrats had hoped Nytes would have dropped out clearing the way for them to elect Malone, but instead Malone withdrew, clearing the way for a Pfisterer victory.

What a way to start a new Council year.  Whomever thought of this should be taken out and beaten with a stupid stick.

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.