Commissioner Stephen Melcher has advised the City County Observer that he will not support consolidation unless a Rejection Threshold is adopted allowing the people of the county to give Consent of the Governed.
Hallelujah!!! One name (Abell) that won’t make it to my Wall of Shame on the fridge and another that will be immediately removed. That leaves just two that will remain for infinity; Whinecke and Tornado!
This is truly excellent news! I congratulate both these public servants for coming to the realization that it does not matter who elected you to office. What matters is that you were elected to ensure that governing is done in a fair manner and that including Rejection Threshold is the only fair way to hold a vote on consolidation.
Take that and choke on it, Mr. Chamer of Horrors pompous CEO!!!
Even with a rejection threshold, let’s not totally ignore the Evansville voter’s capacity (and history) to make very questionable decisions.
These two shouldn’t be given full latitude putting in a rejection threshold – especially if this deal is a total piece of garbage.
By the way, when you say they need, “to ensure that governing is done in a fair manner”? Ensure what?
-Secret backroom deals, with theft of taxpayer dollars?
-Mysterious, secret bidding processes?
-Or, outright corrupted ones?
-Linda Durham, anyone?
-Weaver political firings?
-Remember the Mayor’s – Aztar management change?
-Remember the Opus one Booze crew?
Would these two really do us good to simply nip this whole process in the bud?
Spent the afternoon Wednesday reading the 49 pages from the commission on consolidation. While I am for Consolidation, I cannot support this plan! To many problems with it, gives Mayor too much power, the merger of the law enforcement agencies, the number of new districts, no Rejection Threshold. And the list goes on!
I wonder if the County Commissioners (Winnecke, Abell, and Melcher) actually can amend the 2010 resolution already passed by the County Commissioners (Tornatta, Winnecke, and Melcher) wherein the rejection threshhold was disallowed. The resolution preceeds and is not necessarily a part of the reorganization plan crafted by the reorganization committee. This is a leqal question for the various attorneys to answer, and may even go to the state level to resolve.
However, what the statements by Melcher and Abell may raise is the spectre of the two of them voting against the plan, regardless of modifications, if the rejection threshhold is not added back into the referendum process. Do they have the political guts to follow through on that option? Time will tell.
Whether they can or cannot amend it is, in the big picture, nothing more than a matter of semantics. If they can amend it, consider it done and rural voters will most likely kill consolidation.
If they cannot amend it and they stick to their guns, they will simply refuse to approve it and it will never come to a vote. At any rate, either consolidation is DOA already or it will most likely die a quick death in a FAIR vote.
Your reasoning is correct … in a perfect world. Unfortunately, Planet Politics is a most imperfect world.
Yeah, I know. I know that any form of celebration is premature but, at least, this appears to be a step in the right direction. On an even more promising note, it appears that last nights meeting and todays announcements make it appear some politicians are actually listening for a change so there may be hope for the future.
There’s already talk of a petition campaign to force the issue. The “Ther Side” will not give up easily.
IIRC, the LoWV took longer than expected to get the 5% needed to start this sham of a process rolling. What makes the Dark Side optimistic that they could get 10% in a timely manner?
Yes, they nearly didn’t make their deadline for submitting about 2,600 signatures.
But I don’t quite get what you mean about the Dark Side getting 10%.
10% of what and for what purpose exactly?
If the County Commissioners/City Council tandem rejects the consolidation plan, it can still go to referendum if the consolidationists can collect 10% of the registered voters’ signatures.
Thank you. I had forgotten that part of the statute.
Seems that since CCO published Commissioner Abell’s “clarification,” that the article above these comments has been radically edited to include only Melcher’s clear position. Or am I imagining this radical edit?
Either way, as I said in previous comments, Planet Politics is a most imperfect world. Oh, and it changes colors on an almost hourly basis, it seems.
Just as the fix was in when a certain city executive somehow “persuaded” members of the Vanderburgh County Commission to assist him in pinching our local homestead exemption, the fix was in when it was somehow decided by all the members of the County Commission to do away with the rejection threshold for voters who live outside the incorporated limits of the city of Evansville.
Does that sound like representative government to you?
The Indiana Dept. of Revenue reported Vanderburgh county food and beverage tax revenue for 2010 at $33. Million. If you were really concerned about local government efficiency would you be wasting that revenue over the next 20 years on an unneeded downtown arena, or would you use it to upgrade a deteriorated city infrastructure?
The use of F&B revenue for the arena will have a very limiting effect on future projects regardless of the necessity of those projects, but it goes deeper than that: I personally do not believe that F&B and AZTAR revenue will be sufficient to meet future debt service on the arena project. That will necessitate dipping into County Option Income Tax (COIT) revenue to make up any shortfall, as raising property taxes to meet the shortage is supposedly off the table.
When we hit the years where the interest paid on the bonds for Dr. Bertram’s school construction and renovation program, and Mayor Weinzapfel’s arena project are at their highest rates, there will be a revenue crisis the likes of which we have not seem before unless, in the interim, some significant jobs are brought to this community.
__
Hence, the desparate rush for consolidation so the incompetent political crooks can have a whole lot more pockets to pick.
Hallelujah!!! One name (Abell) that won’t make it to my Wall of Shame on the fridge and another that will be immediately removed. That leaves just two that will remain for infinity; Whinecke and Tornado!
This is truly excellent news! I congratulate both these public servants for coming to the realization that it does not matter who elected you to office. What matters is that you were elected to ensure that governing is done in a fair manner and that including Rejection Threshold is the only fair way to hold a vote on consolidation.
Take that and choke on it, Mr. Chamer of Horrors pompous CEO!!!
Even with a rejection threshold, let’s not totally ignore the Evansville voter’s capacity (and history) to make very questionable decisions.
These two shouldn’t be given full latitude putting in a rejection threshold – especially if this deal is a total piece of garbage.
By the way, when you say they need, “to ensure that governing is done in a fair manner”? Ensure what?
-Secret backroom deals, with theft of taxpayer dollars?
-Mysterious, secret bidding processes?
-Or, outright corrupted ones?
-Linda Durham, anyone?
-Weaver political firings?
-Remember the Mayor’s – Aztar management change?
-Remember the Opus one Booze crew?
Would these two really do us good to simply nip this whole process in the bud?
Spent the afternoon Wednesday reading the 49 pages from the commission on consolidation. While I am for Consolidation, I cannot support this plan! To many problems with it, gives Mayor too much power, the merger of the law enforcement agencies, the number of new districts, no Rejection Threshold. And the list goes on!
I wonder if the County Commissioners (Winnecke, Abell, and Melcher) actually can amend the 2010 resolution already passed by the County Commissioners (Tornatta, Winnecke, and Melcher) wherein the rejection threshhold was disallowed. The resolution preceeds and is not necessarily a part of the reorganization plan crafted by the reorganization committee. This is a leqal question for the various attorneys to answer, and may even go to the state level to resolve.
However, what the statements by Melcher and Abell may raise is the spectre of the two of them voting against the plan, regardless of modifications, if the rejection threshhold is not added back into the referendum process. Do they have the political guts to follow through on that option? Time will tell.
Whether they can or cannot amend it is, in the big picture, nothing more than a matter of semantics. If they can amend it, consider it done and rural voters will most likely kill consolidation.
If they cannot amend it and they stick to their guns, they will simply refuse to approve it and it will never come to a vote. At any rate, either consolidation is DOA already or it will most likely die a quick death in a FAIR vote.
Your reasoning is correct … in a perfect world. Unfortunately, Planet Politics is a most imperfect world.
Yeah, I know. I know that any form of celebration is premature but, at least, this appears to be a step in the right direction. On an even more promising note, it appears that last nights meeting and todays announcements make it appear some politicians are actually listening for a change so there may be hope for the future.
There’s already talk of a petition campaign to force the issue. The “Ther Side” will not give up easily.
IIRC, the LoWV took longer than expected to get the 5% needed to start this sham of a process rolling. What makes the Dark Side optimistic that they could get 10% in a timely manner?
Yes, they nearly didn’t make their deadline for submitting about 2,600 signatures.
But I don’t quite get what you mean about the Dark Side getting 10%.
10% of what and for what purpose exactly?
If the County Commissioners/City Council tandem rejects the consolidation plan, it can still go to referendum if the consolidationists can collect 10% of the registered voters’ signatures.
Thank you. I had forgotten that part of the statute.
Seems that since CCO published Commissioner Abell’s “clarification,” that the article above these comments has been radically edited to include only Melcher’s clear position. Or am I imagining this radical edit?
Either way, as I said in previous comments, Planet Politics is a most imperfect world. Oh, and it changes colors on an almost hourly basis, it seems.
Just as the fix was in when a certain city executive somehow “persuaded” members of the Vanderburgh County Commission to assist him in pinching our local homestead exemption, the fix was in when it was somehow decided by all the members of the County Commission to do away with the rejection threshold for voters who live outside the incorporated limits of the city of Evansville.
Does that sound like representative government to you?
The Indiana Dept. of Revenue reported Vanderburgh county food and beverage tax revenue for 2010 at $33. Million. If you were really concerned about local government efficiency would you be wasting that revenue over the next 20 years on an unneeded downtown arena, or would you use it to upgrade a deteriorated city infrastructure?
The use of F&B revenue for the arena will have a very limiting effect on future projects regardless of the necessity of those projects, but it goes deeper than that: I personally do not believe that F&B and AZTAR revenue will be sufficient to meet future debt service on the arena project. That will necessitate dipping into County Option Income Tax (COIT) revenue to make up any shortfall, as raising property taxes to meet the shortage is supposedly off the table.
When we hit the years where the interest paid on the bonds for Dr. Bertram’s school construction and renovation program, and Mayor Weinzapfel’s arena project are at their highest rates, there will be a revenue crisis the likes of which we have not seem before unless, in the interim, some significant jobs are brought to this community.
__
Hence, the desparate rush for consolidation so the incompetent political crooks can have a whole lot more pockets to pick.
Comments are closed.