Category: Uncategorized

Defiance, Ohio

• Design Patches (maybe use image from http://defianceohio.terrorware.com/gallery/geoff/scott_nealy_mathew_baum_jon_rea_and_i_scotts_birthday_party)
• Distro
  • Write letters
  • Make T-shirt screen
• Web
  • Get information for “farm” show from Theo (Completed 2004-11-01)
• Songs
  • “Oh, Susquehanna” lyrics

Voting (completed 2004-10-31)

Boxcar Online

• Install/test updated replicator
• Secure Wireless AP at store
• Finish unit tests

Classroom Blog

• Send mom information about how to use wordpress. (completed 2004-10-26)
• E-mail mom article (completed 2004-10-26)
• Write and e-mail mom proposal. (completed 2004-10-26)

6 Dozen Cookies Animation

• E-mail Jad Re: Image Order (completed 2004-10-27)
• Make sample and send to Jad

F&R Website

• Start building Flash catalog

Wirless Network

• Build antennas

House

• Dumpster plastic for windows. Note: we can use some of the Bags Unltd. packaging for this.
• Seal floor of treehouse
• Clean gutters

http://www.overclockersclub.com/guides/sleeving_cable_guide.php
http://www.tokenasians.com/articles/rounding.html

I posted some information about Indiana voter rights and contact information if you feel your rights have been violated earlier. Here are some resources for everyone else:

1-866-OURVOTE (1-866-687-8683)

# Are you registered, but your name is not on the voting list?
# Have you been told you went to the wrong precinct, but don’t know how to find your correct voting place?
# Has someone tried to stop you from going to the polls, or tried to intimidate you?
# Has someone tried to “help” you fill out your ballot?
# Are you confused about the actual voting day?

We Can Help
Election Protection is a nonpartisan coalition of civil rights and civic organizations committed to protecting your right to cast your ballot. Our hotline (1-866-OURVOTE/687-8683) is an immediate, on-the-spot resource staffed by lawyers and law students trained to resolve your problem.

If you have any problems casting your ballot, call us. We can help!

1-866-MYVOTE1

is a toll-free telecommunications system that allows voters who are experiencing difficulty in the voting process to record (in English or Spanish) a brief statement of their problem, and transfer, at no cost, to their local county/municipal board of election. Voters can also call the Voter Alert Line to find their polling location. The Voter Alert Line is up and running, and thousands of calls have already been processed.

In response to the article suggesting scary Republican tactics at the polls that I blogged here. I’m posting some resources for voter protection for Indiana voters.

Below is some information from the Secretary of State’s web site. These are some of your rights as an Indiana voter and some contact information if you feel these rights have been violated:

Fail Safe Procedures

(when your name is not on the poll list)

If you are registered to vote but your name does not appear on the poll list, you are still allowed to vote if one of the following fail-safe procedures applies to you:

1. Certificate of Error – If your name does not appear on the poll list because of an error by the county, the county must issue a Certificate of Error before you are allowed to vote.

2. Written Affirmation – If you were at one time registered in this precinct, but your name does not appear on the poll list now, and you are willing to sign a written statement (or make an oral affirmation in the presence of the inspector or one of the judges) that you still live at the address in the precinct that county voter registration records show as your former address, then you may vote after making the statement or affirmation.

3. Receipt from Voter Registration – If your name does not appear on the poll list, but you have a receipt from a voter registration application form indicating that you applied to register at a voter registration agency while the registration period was still open (before the last 29 days before the election), and the county voter registration office does not have any record of receiving the voter registration application, then you may vote after the information on your receipt is recorded on the poll list.

Fail Safe Procedures

(when your name or address does not match what is on the poll list)

If your name is on the poll list but the name or address on the poll list does not match your current name or address, you may still qualify to vote if one of the following fail-safe procedures applies to you:

1. Moved within the precinct or name changed – If your name is on the poll list but you have moved within the same precinct or your name has changed, you may vote if you sign the poll book with the new address or new name (example: married name, change of name due to divorce or adoption).

2. Moved more than 30 days before the election but still live in the same county and congressional district –

If you moved more than 30 days before the election outside of the precinct to another precinct that is still in the same county and congressional district, you may vote at your old precinct one last time by signing an affidavit provided by local election officials or by making an oral affirmation of these facts in the presence of the precinct election board and then proceeding to vote.

3. Moved within the State of Indiana in the last 30 days before the election – If you moved outside of the precinct to any other precinct in Indiana within the final 30 days before the election, you may vote at your old precinct one last time by signing an affidavit provided by local election officials.

4. Moved outside the State of Indiana in the last 30 days before a presidential election – If you moved from an Indiana precinct to a new residence outside of Indiana and moved within the final 30 days before Election Day, you may vote at your old precinct one last time by signing an affidavit provided by local election officials. However, you may only be given a ballot to vote for president and vice-president.

Unless you qualify to use one of these fail-safe procedures, you are committing a felony if you vote at a polling place that you know is not your legal polling place.

How to cast a Provisional Ballot

What is a provisional ballot?

A provisional ballot allows you to cast a vote if you believe you are registered to vote in a precinct but your name does not appear on the precinct’s poll list (or if you have been challenged as not qualified to vote in your precinct). Your provisional ballot will be kept separate from the other ballots cast in that precinct. After the polls close, the county election board will decide whether you were qualified to vote in that precinct and whether your ballot should be counted. You will be able to contact your county election board after Election Day to find out whether your ballot was counted, and if it was not counted, why not.

There are several situations in which you may use a provisional ballot as a voter:

1. Your name does not appear on the poll list AND you do not qualify to vote by using one of the “Fail Safe” provisions highlighted separately on this form.
2. Your name appears on the poll list AND you do not qualify to vote by using one of the “Fail Safe” procedures highlighted separately on this form.
3. Your name appears on the poll list, but you have been challenged as not eligible to vote at the precinct for some reason.
4. Your name appears on the poll list, you are identified as being required to present additional documentation to the county voter registration office, but you are not able to present this documentation to the poll workers.
5. An order has been issued by a court extending the hours that the polls must remain open.

How do you cast a provisional ballot?

Generally, the same rules and procedures that apply to casting a traditional paper ballot apply to casting a provisional ballot, but there are some special procedures that are similar to casting an absentee ballot:

1. You must mark the provisional ballot privately, unless you are entitled to assistance and request it.
2. You enclose the provisional ballot inside a provisional ballot secrecy envelope provided for this purpose (Form PRO-2) and seal the envelope.
3. You return the sealed envelope, with the ballot inside, to the inspector.

Please note: If you have a spoiled provisional ballot, the spoiled ballot must also be returned to the inspector before you can receive a replacement provisional ballot.

Other Voter Protections

Voters Needing Assistance – If you need assistance at the polls because you are disabled or cannot read or write English, you have the right to receive assistance to cast a vote in every election. The person assisting can be a poll worker or someone you choose. However, your employer or union representative cannot assist you. The person you choose must fill out an affidavit before assisting you to vote.

Accessible Polls – You have the right to a polling place that is accessible to a person with disabilities.

Traveling Voting Boards – If you are confined due to illness or disability, you have the right to vote absentee at your place of confinement before a traveling absentee voting board.

Spoiled Ballots – Your ballot is “spoiled” if you vote for too many candidates running for the same office or if you vote by mistake for a candidate for whom you did not intend to vote. If you spoil your ballot, you may return the spoiled ballot to a poll worker and receive another ballot in order to cast a vote in that election.

Waiting at the Polls at Closing – If you have begun the process of voting, or are waiting in the chute to begin the process of voting, before the closing of the polls at 6:00 p.m., you have the right to cast a vote in that election.

Challenged at the Polls

If you are challenged at the polls, you have the right to sign an affidavit affirming that you meet all of the voting qualifications and the right to then vote. You may be challenged at the polls by another voter who believes that you do not meet all of the requirements to vote. If you are willing to sign an affidavit affirming that you do meet all the

requirements, you can vote.

If you knowingly vote at an election when you are not authorized to vote, you are committing a felony and can be fined up to $10,000, jailed for up to three years, or both.

Instructions for mail-in registrants and first time voters

If after January 1, 2003 you submitted an application to register to vote by mail and have not previously voted in a general election (or a special election for federal office) in the county, you must provide additional documentation to the county voter registration office prior to voting. The identification documentation required may be either (1) a current and valid photo identification or (2) a current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, or government document that shows your name and address (at the address shown on the your registration). Identification documents may be submitted in the mail with the registration application or by mail or in person at the county voter registration office at a later date prior to the closing of the polls at 6 pm on election day. The documentation requirement does not apply to an absent uniformed services voter or overseas voter or to an individual entitled to vote an absentee ballot under federal law due to a determination by the election division that a permanent or temporarily accessible poling place cannot be provided for that individual or for any other reason under federal law.

Who to contact if your rights have been violated

If you feel your rights have been violated or if you have been witness to any form of voter fraud, please contact any of the following local, state, or federal offices:

Indiana Secretary of State

Indiana Election Division

Direct (317) 232-3939

Toll Free (800) 622-4941

Indiana State Police

Criminal Investigation Division (317) 232-4338

Federal Department of Justice

Civil Rights Division (202) 307-2767or (800) 253-3931

Public Integrity Section, Election Crimes Branch (202) 514-1421

I got forwarded the following article from the Herald-Times. This is scary and fucked up. Keeping elections up to board is fine, not discussing your tactics and motivations is shady.

Voters may face challenges
Monroe County GOP plans to check on voters at polls
By Katy Murphy, Hoosier Times
October 31, 2004

Republicans in Monroe County plan to assign challengers to the polls on
Tuesday, GOP county Chairman John Shean said Saturday.

“We’re going to have people trained to look for people who might not be
properly registered,” he said.

The news distressed Monroe Democratic Party Chairman Dan Combs, who fears
the challenges will target low-income and homeless voters.

“If it happens, it will be appalling,” he said. “It is really the lowest
technique there is.”

Earlier in the week, Shean said he planned to conduct an audit of the
12,000-some newly registered voters before deciding whether to use
challengers.

“If we believe that there is a real potential for voter fraud, then we
will probably have challenges,” he said on Thursday.

That evening, however, Shean said he had not begun the audit and that he
had not determined how party activists would go about looking for “red
flags.”

Shean would not comment Saturday on the methodology to be used to identify
potentially invalid voters, such as non-U.S. citizens.

“I’m not going to discuss that,” he said. “I don’t see the wisdom in
divulging all of that to a reporter.”

Poll challenging is not a new practice, but it has come into prominence in
many swing states across the country amid an exceptionally tense and
polarized presidential election.

Republicans, who are organizing the bulk of the challenge campaigns, tend
to see it as a way to protect the integrity of the system, while Democrats
say it is merely a way to suppress the vote of low-income or minority
voters.

While the presidential race is hardly close in Indiana, many state and
local races are competitive and contentious. Kip Tew, chairman of the
Indiana Democratic Party, said Democratic volunteers and attorneys will be
stationed in polls statewide, especially in parts of Marion County, to
counter what he sees as vote-suppression efforts.

Combs earlier in the week dismissed the practice by local Republicans as
unlikely. On Saturday, he said he had heard rumblings that low-income and
homeless voters who list the Shalom Center or other shelters as an address
will be targeted.

“The people most susceptible to challenges are new voters, low income
voters,” he said.

While the Democrats don’t plan to challenge voters on Tuesday, Combs said,
they do plan to post poll watchers and pollbook holders at each site. The
party’s volunteers are equipped with cellular phones, he said, which they
will use to contact party lawyers if anything out of the ordinary is
taking place.

Combs said the Democratic volunteers would not interfere with voting or
any challenges made, but that they will follow challenged voters outside
and make sure they were given provisional ballots.

Indiana law gives any citizen the right to challenge the election process.
It also entitles each political party to station at each polling site a
partisan challenger who is credentialed through the party chairperson. In
Monroe County, the clerk receives a list of challengers and other party
volunteers on Election Day.

When someone has reason to believe that a voter is under 18, lives out of
the district or isn’t a U.S. citizen, among other qualifications, they
fill out an affidavit provided by the election staff that indicates their
suspicion.

In Monroe County, bipartisan election staff (a Republican inspector; and a
judge and a clerk from each party) would then give a challenged voter a
counter-affidavit, in which he or she swears to be a legitimate voter.
Then the person casts a provisional ballot, and the county’s bipartisan
election board must decide by Nov. 8 whether it should be counted.

That process would likely require the voter — and the challenger — to
return to the election offices later that day or week and present evidence
to the election board, said Steve Hogan, the board’s president. Depending
on the number of provisional ballots cast, that could mean that close
elections might remain open for nearly a week.

While many Democrats, like Combs, see challenging as a suppression tactic,
Republicans who support the practice say it is important for the system’s
validity.

“We know that voter fraud can and does happen,” Shean said. “I agree: I
want everyone who’s qualified and registered to vote, to vote — once.”

He added, “I don’t accept the premise that properly registered voters
might be intimidated that there might be a challenge at the polls. It’s
typically only those who are breaking the law that are intimidated by the
process.”

Clarence Gilliam, president of the Monroe County chapter of the National
Association for the Advancement of Colored People, expressed concern that
voters will become intimidated if confronted. He said his organization
advises voters to stay calm and “see what the remedy is” in the event of a
challenge.

“It’s going to be very important that every vote counts,” Gilliam said.

Although registered voters cannot be required to show identification at
the polls, Gilliam recommended that people bring a photo ID and proof of
address, such as a utility bill, bank statement, or a number of other
documents.

Monroe County Clerk Jim Fielder, the nonpartisan member of the election
board, initially downplayed concerns about challengers. But later, he
said, “That would certainly complicate things a great deal if we had a
major challenge campaign this fall. Hopefully, that will not be the case.”

Here is a summary of the races and some of my perspective based on things that I’ve seen and read.

These pages have some good information on candidate’s positions for statewide races:

http://www.vote-smart.org/
http://www.issues2000.org/states/in.htm

I compiled this list which should reflect, pretty closely, the ballot. The list is based on info from http://www.co.monroe.in.us/clerk/Candidates.html :

* = I’m pretty sure this race will be on the ballot for me. If you live in Bloomington, you can use this tool to see a sample ballot for your precinct.
~ = Point I think is interesting but doesn’t have a positive/negative connotion
+ = I somewhat agree with this
– = I somewhat disagree with this
-> = sub-point
(i) = incumbent

State and Federal Offices

• President & Vice President *

Republican: George W. Bush & Dick Cheney
Democrat: John F. Kerry & John Edwards
Libertarian: Michael Badnarik & Richard V. Campagna
Independent (Write-In): Lawson Mitchell Bone
Independent (Write-In): Ralph Nader & Peter Miguel Camejo
Democrat (Write-In): John Joseph Kennedy
Green (Write-In): David Cobb & Patricia LaMarche
Socialist (Write-In): Walt Brown & Mary Alice Herbrt

• US Senator *
  • Republican: Marvin Scott
  The following information is from a summary of Scott’s voting record, public comments found here. He pretty much sucks.

  -Supports “traditional marriage”.
  -Wants to discontinue affirmative action programs.
  -Supports the death penalty.
  -Opposes taxpayer funding of abortion.
  -Supports NAFTA, GATT, FTAA, etc.

  • Democrat: Evan Bayh (i)

    The following perceptions are from his record summary found here. Seems like pretty party line Democrat.

    -Voted yes on Iraq war.
    +Wants to expand stem cell research.
    +Voted no on banning military base and overseas military abortions, and no on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime (although he did vote for banning partial birth abortions).
    +Voted NO on increasing penalties for drug offenses.
    -Wants to broaden use of the death penalty for federal crimes.

  • Libertarian: Albert Barger

• Governor & Lieutenant Governor *

  I couldn’t find many compelling issues in this race. It’s a close one (last reports I read cited a statistical tie). I think it’s pretty partisan, there’s nothing to distinguish Kernan from the average Democrat and Daniels worked as part of the Bush administration, so you know the general tone of many of his policies.

  • Republican: Mitch Daniels & Becky Skillman

    -Former director of the White House Office of Management and Budget. This blog offers some criticism of his job there.

  • Democrat: Joe Kernan & Kathy Davis

    +Has come out as opposed to constitutional ban on gay marriage, although hasn’t come out in support of gay marriage.

  • Libertarian: Kenn Gividen & Elaine Badnarik

    +As far as I know, the only candidate to come across strongly against I-69 New Terrain.

  • Independent (Write-In): Velko Kapetanov

• Attorney General *

  Indianapolis Star article about this race.

  • Republican: Steve Carter (i)

    -Supports death penalty. This article talks about policy ideas dealing with strengthening death penalty cases (i.e. making the evidence in the convictions more solid).
    -Supports consitutional ban on gay marriage (see this article).

  • Democrat: Joseph H. Hogsett

    This article talks about Hogsett’s platform.

    -Supports death penalty.

  • Libertarian: Aaron T. Milewski

Superintendent of Public Instruction *

When I saw this position on the ballot, I was a little confused. It seems it is an oddity, with similar positions in other states being appointed by the Governor. Both candidates agree that the governor should appoint the position, but Williams says that, if elected, she will resign, forcing the governor to make an appointment. The Indianapolis Daily Star is critical of this, preferring legislative action to remedy, in their endorsement of Reed. There is another Indianapolis Daily Star article about the race here. From the article, it seems like there are few policy differences. Of course, partisan politics play into this race with Williams being more critical of No Child Left Behind. However, if the position is ultimately appointed, which is what both candidates want in the long run, this will be a factor anyway. I guess the real question is whether one supports the kind of pro-active (or reckless depending on your perspective) that Williams is taking to pushing legislative action on the issue of how the Superintendent of Public Instruction position should be decided.

• Republican: Suellen Reed
• Democrat: Susan Williams
• Libertarian: Joe Hauptmann

• US Representative – District 4
  • Republican: Steve Buyer

    This is all based on http://www.issues2000.org/IN/Steve_Buyer.htm

    He’s pretty much a standard Bush conservative.

  • Democrat: David Sanders

    All this is from http://www.vote-smart.org/npat.php?can_id=MIN13544

    ~Wishy-washy on abortion issues. At least not firmly pro-life
    +Wants to eliminate funding for national missle defense.
    +Willing to “slightly increase” taxes on wealthy.
    +Pro civil-unions though doesn’t respond on gay marriage.
    +Would eliminate federal death penalty.
    +Would vote support medical marijuana, adds “The execution of the war on drugs is biased, ineffective, and far too costly.”
    +Affirmative action
    +Seems pretty pro-environment. Says he would urge the US rejoining the Kyoto treaty.
    ~Party line Democrat on national security, war in Iraq in terms of criticizing Bush administration policies. At least he’s doesn’t seem rabidly nationalistic.
    

  • Libertarian: Kevin R. Fleming

• US Representative – District 9 *
  • Republican: Mike Sodrel

    Do you think that Baron Hill looks bad? The only info I could find on Sodrel’s position came from his campaign website (http://www.mikesodrel.com/values.asp). Sodrel seems to really suck. My take on the whole thing is that Baron Hill is not great at all, but a lot of really scary people seem to be supporting Sodrel and his campaign rhethoric really wants to make him seem ultra-conservative. It looks like I’m begrudgingly voting for Hill.

    Update (2004-10-30): The Herald Times had an article today talking about the attack campaign on Hill’s “liberal” record. Apparently it comes from a 527 Organization (tax-exempt political group) called Citizens For Truth headed by Bud Bernitt. They just did a big media buy of billboards and radio spots trying to attack Hill’s “liberal” agenda. You can see the right-wing website at http://www.whereisbaron.com/

  • Democrat: Baron Hill (i)

    –This page has lots of good information on Hill’s record – I feel like it inidcates that he’s spinelessly liberal. Voted yes to sending troops to Iraq, yes to banning partial birth abortion and to banning minors from traveling out of state for abortions. Voted to prohibit gay adoption in DC.
    –This page, from a former Green Party candidate for Hill’s post sums up why Hill is so lackluster.
    +At least he voted against constitutional ammendment banning flag burning. He’s getting a lot of flack from the Positive Progress people.
    +Sodrel’s attack page at http://www.mikesodrel.com/dyk.asp makes Hill look pretty good in comparison.

    The following are in reaction a recent Herald times article. These are attacks made by Soder’s campaign manager Kevin Boehnlein, though the had the opposite of their intended effect on me:

    +Voted against Bush tax cuts
    +Against constitutional ban on gay marriage
    +Voted against ban on partial birth abortions (this seems inconsistent with information I found above. I dunno)
    +Supports allowing people to import cheaper drugs from Canada.

    I read got this information from a 2004-10-30 Herald Times article:

    +Voted against pledge protection act.

  • Libertarian: Al Cox

• State Senator – District 37

Republican: Richard D. Bray
Democrat: Kristin Szczerbik

• State Senator – District 40 *

  I couldn’t find much information on this race. No real strong info on Simpson’s website. Cassiday doesn’t seem to have one.

  • Republican: R. Dale Cassiday
  • Democrat: Vi Simpson (i)

    ~Was running for governor at one point and got some press for that. However, I couldn’t find any other information about her, really, on the web. Being a state senator, she must have a voting record, but I couldn’t quickly find a summary of that.

    The following impressions are from questionaire answere found at this web site. Apparently, Cassiday didn’t respond. My overal impression is one of general apathy. She seems to have a pretty standard Democratic platform.

    +Would “slightly increase” funding for health care and education.
    ~Wimps out on question of civil unions, gay marriage.
    +Supports alternatives to incarceration for non-violent offenders, alternate sentancing, and community corrections (this web site gives an example of what one community means by “community corrections”.
    +Opposes abstinance-only sex-ed.

• State Senator – District 44

  Republican: Brent Steele

• State Representative – District 46

Republican: To Be Announced
Democrat: Vern Tincher

• State Representative – District 60 (my notes are in response to this candidate forum)
  • Republican: Paul Hager

    ~In candidate forums, says he’s fiscally conservative, socially liberatarian
    +Supports collective bargaining for public employees, unfamiliar with “card check”
    +Crime rates in Indiana are getting lower, why are we locking more people up? Wants systematic prison reform but doesn’t discuss specifics. Treatment > incarceration.
    +Blogger: www.paulhager2004.com/
    ~Top legislative priority: mandatory 5-year sunset on all new Indiana laws
    +Gay Marriage: Government should get out of the marriage business.
    +Faith: US is not a theocracy. Important to keep distant between state and church.

  • Democrat: Peggy Welch (i)

    – Seems like a “security mom”
    ~Labor: Supports collective bargaining for public employees, but doesn’t want security related employees to be allowed to strike. Doesn’t really seem to know what a “card check” is.
    ~Crime: active in alternate sentancing programs, correctional facilities. Wants alcoholism treatment programs, halfway house programs for those leaving the criminal justice system. Need further look at alternative sentancing and to have more input from local jurisdictions about this.
    -Top legislative priority: Tax reform. Wants more business friendly taxes. Wants reduced property taxes. Listens to constituents who don’t want to pay for schools with property taxes (wtf?).
    – Gay Marriage: Disagreed with walk-off following gay marriage amendment debate, but supports constitutional ammendment banning gay marriage (wtf?)- Faith in politics: Open about faith in politics. It influences her consideration of legislation.

• State Representative – District 61 * (my notes are in reaction to this candidate forum)
  • Republican: No Candidate
  • Democrat: Matt Pierce (i)

    +Energize Indiana initiative = home grown economic development rather than attracting outside businesses with subsidies.
    ~Fund education
    ~Environmental protection (but what’s his record)
    ~Consumer watchdog
    +Supports collective bargaining for public employees, supports card check as better option union elections.
    +Crime: Dismayed about spending lots of money for putting people in prison but not for drug rehab or helping people with mental illness. Supported training for police to recognize individuals with mental illness.
    +Top legislative priority: Tenents rights – landlords have to tell tenents before entering property
    +Gay Marriage: Angry about hypocracy of moving from economic issues to gay marriage. Opposes constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. Didn’t seem to come out strongly in support of gay marriage/civil unions, however.
    +Faith: Seperation between church/state impt.

  • Libertarian: Nicholas Blesch

    +Crime: Wants sentencing reform, particularly for victimless crimes/first-time offenders/mentally ill
    -Top legislative priority: reduce property taxes, remove invoice tax
    +Gay Marriage: Not an important legislative issue. Ammendment was stupid. Banning gay marriage is just as bad as allowing it in terms of respecting faiths. Supports gay marriage. Government should get out of marriage.
    +Faith: US is not a theocracy. Important to respect other faiths.
    +New Terrain I-69: opposes.

County Judicial Offices

My perspectives on these candidates comes from watching the candidate forums available here:
http://stream.hoosier.net:8080/ramgen/LeagueofWomenVotersCandidateForumJudge20041014.smil

The fact that 2 of these races are uncontested, I think, shows that there’s not much difference between the candidates. In this case, that’s a good thing. I think that all these candidates are pretty much on the same page. They favor treatment and rehabilitation over punitive measures. They seem more interested in fairness and making the courts function well than in politics.

• Judge of the 10th District Circuit Court, Seat 1
  • Democrat: E. Michael Hoff

    +Talked about prison overcrowding as issue in introduction.
    +More people are representing themselves so they demand more services/support from the courts.
    ~Community Mediation:
    ->Can be a problem for low-income people who can’t afford private mediators. Likes program that uses certified mediators who are IU law school students to provide mediation services at no cost. Trying to increase use of this program.
    ~New Jail/Jail Overcrowding: Need different type of facility, where people can hold jobs, be involved with family, but still be held accountable for crimes. But serious drug/alcohol problems interfere with this. Need more resources to address these problems and make jail alternatives more workable. Otherwise, bigger jail might be the only option.
    +Detterence vs. Punishment vs. Isolation vs. Rehab.: Likes that Monroe county courts are a education/treatment/rehabilitation-based system. Not a punitive system and “it shouldn’t be”. Most of the successes in the courts come from treatment.

• Judge of the 10th District Circuit Court, Seat 4
  • Democrat: Mary Ellen Diekhoff

    ~Important thing is to engage people in the legal system. “When people get a ruling, they may not like it, but if they understand it, then at least they’re part of it.”
    ~Community Mediation: Gives victims the opportunity to understand why crimes were committed. Lots of room for increased use of mediation in small claims court. She finds mediation solutions much more effective than other options because parties feel like they participate more fully and receive more answers from each other.
    +New Jail/Jail Overcrowding: “If you build that jail you will fill that jail.” Likes drug court because it addresses underlying causes of crime. Says it’s a more strenuous, accountable program for participants but has shown remarkable success. Wants to create more alternative types of courts. Stresses need to address underlying issues and not just the types of crimes they’re comitting.
    ~Detterence vs. Punishment vs. Isolation vs. Rehab.: Important to look at the history of an individual to determine which of these theories shouldbe the dominant one and which alternative options can be employed. Important to focus on individuals and avoid across the board assumptions about cases.
    +Detterence vs. Punishment vs. Isolation vs. Rehab: Important to treat “people as people” in the system, regardless of their criminal history.

• Judge of the 10th District Circuit Court, Seat 7
  • Republican: Jeffrey A. Chalfant
    ~Community Mediation: Also supports using more mediation, esp. IU mediators mentioned above.
    ~New Jail/Jail Overcrowding: There is an upcoming court reorginization which creates 3 criminal courts. Hopefully this will help people move through system. Notes that the majority of the 70% figure mentioned by Galvin (noted below) are people awating trial for parole violations. Specifically these cases need to be resolved fast.
    +Detterence vs. Punishment vs. Isolation vs. Rehab.: “Deterrence doesn’t work.” Wants to have a seperate court to divert mentally ill from criminal justice system. Views that as a form of rehab. Only after rehab. has been exhausted should we look to punitive measures. Victims need satisfaction. (I like that argues that this is satisfied by giving the victim a voice in the courtroom and by communicating with the prosecution rather than in the harshness of the penalties)
    +Detterence vs. Punishment vs. Isolation vs. Rehab.: Treatment options in department of corrections is limited. Need to transition people from department of corrections.

  • Democrat: Stephen Galvin

    ~Background, for last 15 years, is working with child abuse/neglect cases (moved to this from being a public defender/trial lawyer because he found that work unfulfilling). Also with county treasurer, commisioner, council, auditor. “I spend part of my day dealing with children’s issues and the other part gaurding the county’s money”.
    ~President of board of local homeless shelter (Martha’s House)
    ~Community Mediation: Example = monroe county family court. Wants to include mediation in proposed Domestic Violence court.
    ~Proposes new Domestic Violence court.
    ~New Jail/Jail Overcrowding: 70% of people in jail are awaiting trial. “Justice delayed is justice denyed”. Need to move these cases through system, prioritize them. There is an upcoming court reorginization which creates 3 criminal courts. Hopefully this will help people move through system.
    ~Detterence vs. Punishment vs. Isolation vs. Rehab.: With regard to domestic violence cases – many times defendents don’t use these resources. This drags cases out, leaving families in “limbo”. Wants domestic violence court to expedite these cases. Will unify drug, other issues with the domestic violence charge. This will better serve these goals.

County Offices

• Auditor
  • Republican: Pat Jeffries

    ~Former county treasurer.

  • Democrat: Sandy Newmann

    +Professional accountant, degree in accounting technology.
    ~There is an automated system to manage accounts. The auditor’s job is to detect errors in the automated system.
    ~Herald-times endorses.

• Treasurer

  Republican: Barbara M. Clark
  Democrat: No Candidate

• Coroner

  Republican: No Candidate
  Democrat: David W. Toumey

• Surveyor

  My impressions of these candidates come from watching these two videos from the Farm Bureau forum:

  http://stream.hoosier.net:8080/ramgen/mtcSFarkas.smil
  http://stream.hoosier.net:8080/ramgen/mtcEnright.smil
  

  • Republican: Steven “Vic” Farkas (i)

    ~Land surveying degree from Vincennes Univ.
    ~Claims budget for surveyor’s office increased from 43,000 in 1997 (when Kevin Enright took office) to 90,000 in 2001 (when Farkas took office). When he took office in 2001, claims that the office was poorly equiped (cites 8.5 x 11 only copier when surveying docs are 8.5 x 14, no surveying software on office computer).
    ~Started adding GIS data, posting it to county web site.
    ~Cut budget by ~10%.

  • Democrat: Kevin Enright

    ~Professional surveyor, certified by American Congress of Surveying and Mapping
    ~Degree in Civil Engineering from Indiana State, IUPUI
    ~Former county surveyor 1996-2000.
    ~Claims he’s first county surveyor to meet state mandates (purpetuation of survey monuments in Monroe county, 5% anually. What the hell does this mean?)
    ~Claims that in the past, the county surveyor’s education role to the public has not been addressed.
    ~While surveyor, moved office to bigger space, brought in computers with GIS software and personal who understand GIS.
    +May 15, 2002 – Lake Monroe Resevoir filled up. Cites Herald-Times article that shows engineers at The Point (a development) putting sand bags around the sewer lift system (this site defines it as “System that is forced to utilize a pump to lift sewage when the drainage system of a building is lower than the public sewer where it is connected. “) . Enright says it is a bad idea to put sewage into the resevoir of our drinking water. This article seems to explain some of these concerns. Then Planning director Susan Fernandez put a stop to this. Positive Progress (scary pro-development group) opposed this and started throwing around rhethoric about the government wanting to take away property rights. Now Positive Progress has control of the county plan comission. The county surveyor has a seat on the comission and Kevin Enright claims that he will stand up to environmental threats to lake Monroe. Shawnee Bluffs development project (the term for this, I guess is a PUD – planned unit development – you can find some definitions of this here) wants to put in sewer system for increased development on the lakefront. As a compromise, past regulations created Zone 4, along RT 46 where PUDs were allowed. Positive Progress wants to rezone to allow more development. Enright argues that this development endangers Lake Monroe and the drinking water.
    +Critics argue that (I would assume because of above environmental concerns, although it wasn’t clear from the question) that when he was surveyor, he followed other agendas rather than doing his job, surverying work. Enright counters by saying that his duty is to protect the safety and wellbeing of community. He says that the purpose of zoning is to balance property rights with the need to prevent someone’s property from having a negative impact on one’s neighbors.

• County Commissioner (District 2)

  Mike Englert is pushing to make the Shawnee Bluffs development on lake Monroe a big issue in this race. The latest news that I gather is that Poling, as well as a number of other Republican candidates have now also come out against this. An article on this is available here.

  • Republican: Joyce B. Poling (i)

    -Background in real-estate development
    ~Apparently, based on Poling’s comments in the Farm Bureau forum, Englert criticizes her for not completing work on a youth residential treatment center. Poling said that they’re waiting on a study that explores funding options. Poling is quoted on this center as a priority in this article following the 2000 election.
    ~Water: taking action on rule 13. Wastewater comittee formed.
    +County funds: In response to Englert, mentions that county commissioner can’t raise taxes – has to work with county council, finance board, city.
    ~Manufacturing: look to life-sciences for the future. Manufacturing development not realistic because don’t have the ability to buy large amounts of land needed for manufacturing.
    ~Tax abatements: Notes that comission doesn’t give abatements, it’s the county council. Seems satisfied with existing documentation of abatements.
    +Priorities: Juvenile treatment center, overcrowding in justice system (administrative building and jail).

  • Democrat: Mike Englert

    +Involved in tree-sit actions in the past to protest Canteberry appartments. His Republican opponents like to poke fun about this.
    +Director of the Center for Sustainable Living (which, if I’m not mistaken is the blanket organization for the Community Bike Project). Also involved with a number of other non-profits: Indiana Forest Council, WFHB …
    +Strong conservationist agenda
    +Wants to offer subsidies to companies that make products from recycled materials
    +Juvenile treatment center: Project can be funded by money saved not having to send children to other facilities outside of community.
    +Also need to think about adult rehab. center as an option to alleviate jail overcrowding.
    +Supports living wage for county employees and demanding that businesses that receive tax abatements pay a living wage.
    +Water: Conservation district around Lake Monroe. Strenghten watershed protection ordinance so it’s based on “science not speculation”.
    +County funds: planned reorg. of judicial resources in county may help. Look to grants. Many financial issues due to unfunded state and federal mandates. Willing to increase income tax if needed.
    +Can’t rely on big manufacturing, Crane for much longer. Of Crane Navel Base, says “How much longer can this country base it’s economy on killing other people?” Put increased focus on high-tech jobs (cites city’s technology park) and small and mid-sized businesses. Kitchen incubator project. Supports Bloomington life-sciences partnership.
    +Tax abatements: Only give to businesses creating well-paying jobs with benefits. Argues that county gives away too many abatements to companies who would move here anyway. IU students drive economy and businesses will be attracted to that. High quality of life attracts business. Says that current enforcement not enough.
    +Priorties: Juvenile treatment, jail overcrowding, solid-waste district (esp. recycling), seek solution ideas from other communities.

• County Commissioner (District 3)
  • Republican: Jeff Ellington

    ~Currently on county council, at large
    ~Juvenile treatment center: Funding – take extra existing county funds allocated for psychiatric care to pay DOC bills.
    -Opposes county living wage ordinance, but says living wage is important.
    +Water: On planning comission, implemented strong water protection ordinance, voted against development proposal on Lake Griffey.
    -Funding: Doesn’t support fiscal home rule. Seems pretty anti-tax.
    +Funding: Welfare department hasn’t had time to collect for services sicnce they’re overburdened.
    -Funding: Support tax abatements. Crane Navel Base is crucial.
    +Tax abatements: Only if there are more jobs. Explains that tax abatements work by increasing tax burden on a yearly basis (pay 0% first year, then pay 10% next year, etc.)
    ~Critical of Kiesling for her alleged lack of leadership on the solid waste district (landfill).

• Democrat: Iris Kiesling (i)

  ~Endorsed by Herald-Times.
  +Campaign largely financed by small donations from individuals. Opponents campaign is financed by large corporations.
  ~Juvenile treatment center: Need community dialogue about this. Explore how to reallocate existing county funds to help fund.
  ~Living wage important, but shouldn’t be government restrictions dictating this.
  ~continue to work on Rule 13 and Rule 5. Look at treatment of water from houses/businesses as part of this issue.
  +Funding: One problem is that there is no fiscal home rule. General assembly must okay tax increases. As a result Monroe County is faced with expanding services using the same amount of money.
  ~Manufacturing jobs: Keep existing manufacturing jobs, esp. “advanced manufacturing.” Of course, try to recruit anybody who wants to do business in Monroe county. Still, the future is in life-sciences.
  ~Tax abatements: Abatements one of the few tools that Monroe County has to attract businesses. She tries to explain abatements noting that they’re only for improvements on property/infrastructure. In terms of regulations cites living wage should be a requirement. Says there is current documentation of abatements and follow-up.
  ~Keisling counters criticism about solid waste district by saying she was not soley responsible and that at the time, county government was controlled by Republican majority.

• County Council, At-Large

  These impressions are in response to this canidate forum.

  • Republican: Andy Dodds

    ~Corrections: Wait to see if judicial re-org works.
    ~Raising income tax to fund corrections development: Says that it costs $700,000-$1 million to run a treatment center like the one proposed. Current costs for treatment are $500,000. Concerned about that gap. Facilities in other counties are under-utilized so can’t count on individuals coming in from other counties as funding source.
    -Raising income tax to fund corrections development: Against raising this tax. Notes that inventory taxes may be increased anyway as the state tries to make up for the inventory tax.

  • Republican: Leasa (Siscoe) Farkas

    -Corrections: Disagrees with Henegar’s statement (see below). “Unless they’re waiting for trial, or to have a hearing, they do need to be in our jail.” Current system works for deciding who should be in jail and who shouldn’t.
    -Raising income tax to fund corrections development: “I don’t like the sound of rasing taxes”. Would consult taxpayers about tax increase issues.

  • Republican: Randy May

    -Corrections: Reorg. might help. Willing to look into work-release, but he says that many have told him that those in jail need to be there.
    ~Raising income tax to fund corrections development: Look first to cutting costs and mismanagement (cites solid waste district).

  • Democrat: Warren Henegar

    +Zoning board appointments: No special interests. No developers, probably no environmentalists. Knowledge of county.
    +Corrections: The majority of people in jail aren’t menace to community. When in jail they’re a huge expense. We need to find another place to house them. If you build a bigger jail, you’re going to fill it.
    +Raising income tax to fund corrections development: Would seriously consider increasing taxes. Calls Monroe County “under taxed”. Angrily challenged county residents to take risks to address problems. Argues that the budget is already tight.

  • Democrat: Sophia Travis

    +Only candidate to mention minority issues, underrepresented populations, diversity in her opening statement at the LWV forum.
    +Zoning board appointment: No real-estate, land developers. Someone who has environmental background. Knowledge of historical preservation.
    +Corrections: Keep mentally-ill out of jail.
    ~Raising income tax to fund corrections development: We’re at maximum levy so a discussion of tax increases isn’t relevent. The important thing to do is to reallocate resources and a juvenile treatment center is a good example of this.

  • Democrat: Michael Woods

    +Corrections: Some in jail don’t need to be there. Keep mentally ill out of jail by training law enforcement to recognize mental illnes and divert them to other social services.
    ~Raising income tax to fund corrections development: As last resort, but look for other funding sources. Would not consider permanent tax increase but would consider raising taxes temporarily to fund a juvenile treatment center until the resources could come back into the county. He explains that one of the primary reasons given for building the facility would be to save money (because of transporting juveniles to other facilities). He argues that increasing taxes would defeat this goal. However, if the facility was a comprehensive one that offered unique services that could attract resources to the county, a temporary tax increase might be appropriate.

School Board Offices

MCCSC *

This race has been dominated by talking about “slates” of candidates. Since the school board race is a non-partisan race, candidates have been forced to align themselves by other means, I guess. In this case, a “slate” involves candidates with similar policy perspectives getting support and endorsement from the same people. It might also suggest a more narrow motivation for running. It is important to note that all candidates deny the existence of such a “slate” or “counter-slate”.

The Herald-Times in a 2004-10-28 article summarizes the perceived “slate” and the “counter-slate”. The “slate” is perceived as

Githens, Brewington, Sallee, and Boyd (who is no longer running).

They tend to have a somewhat adversarial relationship with the administration and current superintendent John Malloy. On the other hand, the “counter-slate” is comprised of candidates

Wanzer, Muehling, Grossi, Sabo-Skelton.

I get the impression that they are mainly grouped together by their exclusion from the “slate” group. The latter group tends to be more supportive of the current administration. I don’t really know much about John Malloy or the current administration, but I did find a quote that I like from John Malloy weighing in on the No Child Left Behind initiative in this IDS article:

“The No Child Left Behind Act sets a tone of failure for schools, and more importantly for school children. We are all for accountability and continuous improvement, but we need to make it fair for all schools and students,” Maloy said. “It does not account for where kids start when they enter our education system, especially those of high risk and those living in high poverty. In this case, even progress doesn’t matter.”

This quote echoes sentiment by my mom, who is deeply critical of No Child Left Behind policies and their disconnect with the reality of education and lives of many children.

Special education is an important issue in this race, though an ambiguous one. Grossi and Wanzer were members of a MCCSC work group that issued a report on special education. Githens and Brewington were part of the Concerned Parents Group which offered up a counter-report arguing that the MCCSC report doesn’t realign special-ed resources fast enough.

You can view video of these candidate’s at a candidate forum here. Unless otherwise noted, my comments are in response to these videos. This forum is really interesting because many of the questions posed to the candidates come from students.

• District 2
  • Michael Allen Brewington

    +Classroom Overcrowding: Hire more teachers, make use of classroom aids.
    ~Changes: Strategic Plan important.
    -How to make district pass No Child Left Behind: Talks about certain tests and their effectiveness.
    ~Change/Keep: Strategic Plan/…
    -School Choice: No Child Left Behind mandates this if anual yearly progress not met.
    ~Childhood Obesity: More healthy items in snack machines. Sweat Everyday initiative. Fitness trails at school.

  • Sue Wanzer

    ~Endorsed by Herald-Times.
    +Cites gifted/talented & special-ed as priorities.
    +Wants to reduce or eliminate fees for extra-curricular programs.
    +Classroom Overcrowding: make sure to prioritize smaller class sizes for elementary education
    ~Classroom Overcrowding: build new schools.
    +Textbook Fees: “Abhorent.” Want to get rid of these fees. Need to push state legislature for eliminating this.
    ~Student input into teacher hiring: Challenges student council to get involved.
    ~Changes: Needs strategic plan.
    +Changes: Also, make further progress on faculty initiated changes already initiated like more rigorous curriculum, more 1-on-1, more learning communities. Need to look to educators for direction on this.
    +How to make district pass No Child Left Behind: NCLB is unfair to MCCSC because of it’s diversity. Calls it a “flawed law”, but we still have to deal with it. Get direction from teachers.
    ~First priority for school funds: Money should follow students. More teachers, certain programs.
    +Change/Keep: Build more schools to reduce overcrowding/academic progress
    +Redistricting: Okay, but it will be less controversial if you make sure all schools are equitable.
    ~School Choice: Wants education to be “public”. Choice = where people move.
    ~Childhood Obesity: More PE. Healthier vending, menu items.
    +Childhood Obesity: Said that in the past PE was cut because of funding issues. Now it seems there is a need to catch-up. Advised people to remember this lesson when considering cutting art/music programs.
    ~More money for Special-Ed?: (Seemingly in response to Sallee’s comments). Some money for special-ed does come from general fund. Special-ed already improving (cites test scores). Would put extra funds to helping other students with “special needs” (but, from the way it was phrased, aren’t classified as special-ed)
    ~Sleeping late: A question was asked about starting school later for high-school students because adolescents need more sleep. Most candidates thought this was a good idea. Wanzer offered the caveat that the current system is largely dictated by bussing logistics.

• District 4
  • Penny B. Githens

    +Classroom Overcrowding: ask teachers for input, collect data to analyze.
    +Textbook Fees: Notes that currently fees are being challenged by state supreme court. Need to challenge the legislature.
    ~Student input into teacher hiring: Probably some legal limitations to this and that would dictate the degree of student involvement.
    ~Changes to school system: strategic plan for district first priority.
    ~How to make district pass No Child Left Behind: Needs to get funding from federal gov’t for this. Look to other districts for guidance.
    +First priority for school funds: Early reading. Better value than for remediation.
    +Change/Keep: More input from staff/staff, diversity.
    ~Redistricting: Can’t give reaction without hearing report, community review. Non-issue if schools are equitable (though this doesn’t mean same amt of funding).
    +School Choice: Difficult management issues (if implemented as lottery or similar system). Supports transfers for individually valid reasons.
    ~Childhood Obesity: Increased activity. Mentions Charlotte, NC program where every elementary school student and teacher has to run or walk a mile each day. Mentions California schools that put Dance Dance Revolution in lunch room.
    More money for Special-Ed?: Other districts are outperforming MCCSC in terms of ISTEP scores. Every student (not just special ed. needs learning style assessment). Professionalize special-ed department (e.g. add behavior specialist to staff).
    ~Sleeping In: Science says this is a good idea, but logistically difficult.

    The following impressions are from the League of Women Voters voters guide (2004-10-28)

    -States meeting annual yearly progress goals under No Child Left Behind as a primary concern.

  • Jim Muehling

    ~Classroom Overcrowding: Hire more teachers, but if there aren’t the resources for that, try re-districting.
    +Textbook Fees: Against textbook fees. Not opposed to user’s fee for extracuriccular, but need to offer assistance for students who can’t meet those fees.
    +Student input into teacher hiring: wants to leave ultimate decision up to principal, department. Students could be involved in interview process and offer input about what qualities were important to them in a teacher.
    ~Changes: Look to teachers, students first for input on this issue.
    ~How to make district pass No Child Left Behind: Calls it a good idea, but underfunded.
    ~First priority for school funds: “point of learning”.
    ~Change/Keep: Increase interaction & cooperation between board and superintendent/…
    ~Redistricting: Neccessary decision. Will have to make schools equitable.
    +School Choice: Opposes. Better to make schools equitable. Allow some choice at secondary level to allow students to choose different academic opportunities that might exist at other schools.
    +Childhood Obesity: Incorporate movement throughout curriculum. E.g. do physical activity and then write about it.
    ~More money for Special-Ed?: Program has made good progress. If additional funds are available and there are demonstrated needs, then that would be closely considered.
    ~Sleeping late: Logistically difficult. Would make it hard for workign parents to enforce truancy.

    ~Endorsed by Herald-Times.

    The following impressions are from the League of Women Voters voters guide (2004-10-28)

    +Lots of volunteering, including Rhino’s All-ages club
    +Says, “reducing the gap between groups is critical. The disparity between white, black, Hispanic students as well as those receiveing free and reduced lunches is unacceptable and must be dealt with.” He was the only candidate to address these issues.
    ~No overt statement on this, but I got the impression that he views No Child Left Behind as a potential challenge to quality education rather than something that should be closesly adhered to.

• District 5
  • Teresa Grossi

    ~Classroom Overcrowding: gather information from a variety of sources. Look at what other schools are doing. Getting more funding not really an option.
    +Textbook Fees: Partner with other districts to form collective voice to lobby legislature.
    +Student input into teacher hiring: Yes to students serving on hiring committees. In other districts where this has been done, there has been a positive reaction.
    ~First priority for school funds: Strategic plan.
    +Change/Keep: Greater flexibility in school day and year to facilitate teachers/Great teachers and administrators.
    +School Choice: Opposes. Esp. for elementary this creates management difficulties. Allow some flexibility at secondary level (e.g. allowing students to go to Ivy Tech, IU, etc.)
    +Childhood Obesity: partner with families because this issue goes beyond schools.

  • Phillip Sallee

    +Classroom Overcrowding: This problem is related to lack of available funds. Community needs to reprioritize funding education. Also needs to elect legislatures that fund education.
    -Student input into teacher hiring: collective student input on general preferences. No to single student or board of student liason to committee.
    ~Changes to school system: Current system works well. Maybe needs adjustments but not an overhaul.
    ~How to make district pass No Child Left Behind: Un(der)funded mandate. It’s not possible to comply without adequate funding.
    +First priority for school funds: Teachers.
    ~Change/Keep: Look ahead further (in years) for planning/?
    ~Redistricting: “impossible job”. Each school has it’s own culture and identity. Shouldn’t take that identity away.
    +School Choice: Opposes. Present transfer policy works.
    ~Childhood Obesity: More PE. Increase nutrition in school lunches.
    +Childhood Obesity: Remove soft drink machines.
    ~More Money to Special-Ed?: Special-ed is self-funding because school district receives state and federal funding. If there are extra dollars, they should go to transition of special-ed students into normal classroom.

• District 6
  • Lindsay Boyd

    -No longer running, though his name is still on the ballot. There is an outstanding lawsuit that contends his residency eligibility. If he still wins, there could be some ugly legal wrangling.

  • Lois Sabo-Skelton

    ~Student input into teacher hiring: Ability for other teachers to work with candidate more impt. than student input.
    +Classroom Overcrowding: Get more funding.
    ~Changes to school system: Smaller classrooms, more 1-on-1, seminar classes.
    +How to make district pass No Child Left Behind: Not enough funding to meet all these goals. Need to look at students and decide which priorities are more important.
    +Change/Keep: making classes more accessible to student/Art programs (keep and protect – maybe even expand and do arts in education, interdisciplanary ed.)
    +School Choice: making schools equitable makes this a non-issue.
    +Childhood Obesity: Family, community involvement neccessary.

    ~Endorsed by Herald-Times.

RBB

Richland Seat
Carl E. Harrington
Robert Pate
Janice B. Stockton

Bean Blossom Seat
Jimmie Dale Durnil

At-Large
Edwin E. Macatangay

Public Questions

• Judicial Retention Question – Indiana Court of Appeals, District 5
  “Shall Judge John T. Sharpnack be retained in office?”

  ~90% of respondents to an Indiana State Bar Associate questionaire responded that he should be retained. See more at this blog article.

Ratification of State Constitutional Amendments

• Question #1

  “Shall Article 10, Section 1 of the Constitution of the State of Indiana be amended to allow the General Assembly to make certain property exempt from property taxes, including (1) a homeowner’s primary residence; (2) personal property used to produce income; and (3) inventory?”

  There’s an article about all 3 questions here. It note some compelling arguments about why it might not be such a good idea:

  In a news release, Rep. Woody Burton, R-Greenwood, said the measure creates opportunities and risks.

  “Those who could potentially benefit from this constitutional change are homeowners and some businesses that have a lot of income-producing property and inventory. Those who could be potentially harmed are farmers and anyone owning large parcels of land and renters/landlords because of the possible shifting of property taxes from homes, business equipment and inventory onto other real estate.”

  Economist Morton Marcus urged voters to defeat the amendment in a recent column, asking why residential property should be treated differently if it’s occupied by renters instead of owners; why blind but not other disabled people should get exemptions; or why manufacturers’ equipment would be exempt but not farmers’ land.

  “The property tax mess has been created by a legislature that seeks to buy votes by favoring specific groups,” his column said. “It’s just politics at its worst, and we should not endorse it by giving constitutional authority to the General Assembly to do whatever it wishes.”

  All three party representatives (Democrat, Republican, Libertarian) at the issues forum I went to this past Wednesday said they support a “Yes” to this question as they see it as aiding economic development.

• Question #2

  “Shall Article 6, Section 2 of the Constitution of the State of Indiana be amended to allow the General Assembly to establish a uniform date for the beginning of the terms of the county offices of clerk of the circuit court, auditor, recorder, treasurer, sheriff, coroner, and surveyor?”

• Question #3

  “Shall Article 5, Section 10 of the Constitution of the State of Indiana be amended to specify: (1) which state official acts as governor when the office of governor and the office of lieutenant governor are both vacant; and (2) the deadline for the General Assembly to meet when either the House or the Senate cannot assemble a quorum within forty-eight (48) hours after both offices become vacant?”

This was on /. and seems like an interesting perspective:

http://worldchanging.com/archives/001450.html

I went to a local politics forum at the Indiana Union Wednesday night. Kevey, Bz, and Steven all happened to be there too, probably as a testament to Bz ferreting out what’s going on. It was a really disheartening experience. From living in Bloomington for a year, it seems like the political structures work pretty well. I don’t hear too many complaints and the town seems prosperous enough (although some of the new development of luxury apartments for college kids, and the retail to support these things, makes me think that it’s a little too prosperous). However, this panel discussion featuring county party heads (I think) from the Democratic, Libertarian, and republican parties ended up being nothing but political cheap shots and party-line ideology with very little mention of the reality of the issues or even specific candidates and their positions.

Even though the party representatives didn’t delineate the issues, one could get some idea about some of the issues that are on the political radar for central Indiana and the buzzwords related to them. Here is some of the things that candidates mentioned.

• Labor and the right of various groups to organize
• Sewage Treatment in Monroe county (Shawnee Bluffs)

  Bloomington gets its water from Lake Griffey (or is it Lake Monroe, or both. I really need to figure this out). Apparently, there are new developers building homes at the shores of this lake. Some developers want to have their own (presumably private) water treatment plant for these homes. I don’t know if these are connected, but the Democratic representative warned of mismanagement of water treatment leading to sewage being dumped into the lake (e.g. the water supply)

  Update (2004-10-29) – The body of water in question is definitely Lake Monroe. County Surveyor Kevin Enright’s statement at the Farm Bureau forum is pretty illuminating about this.

  Here is a message board thread that has some debate about the issue: http://talk.assmotax.org/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic=4326&forum=10&start=0

  Here is a Herald-Times article that summarizes the issue pretty well and gives some of the county comissioner’s perspectives on it.

• Bloomington (or is it also Monroe County Jail too) overcrowding.
  • Mentally Ill in Prison

    This issue actually came up in relation to a candidate – Democrat Michael Woods who is an Indiana University Law School student running for the County Counci, At-Large office. He argues that many in jail are mentally ill and that they are better served by other programs/social services than by sitting in jail and contributing to overcrowding. He advocates training law enforcement to recognize the mentally ill so they can divert these individuals from the jail system into social services. Sounds good to me.

• Taxes
  • Training Tax

    This is a tax on businesses. The libertarian candidate described funds going to retrain workers who had lost their jobs. I tried to google for this and couldn’t find any information on a “Training Tax”. I did find mention of a “Training Tax Credit” which goes to businesses to help them recover the costs of providing additional job-skills training for their workers. The libertarian objected to this tax because she argues that while all businesses (including small ones) have to pay into these funds, large corporations use most of the funds.

  • Inventory Tax

    Both this tax, and the property task were cited by both the Republican and Libertarian candidates as being the main reasons for lack of business growth (and attracting businesses) in Indiana. They argue that an antiquated tax code and too much paperwork make businesses go to neighboring states.

  • Property Tax
• Energize Indiana

  This is a Democratic proposal that a lot of candidates at the state level cite. The Democrats argue that manufacturing jobs that have traditionally been a big deal to Indiana are not only being lost to neighboring states, but to other places in the world because they can be filled at a much lower cost. Traditionally, argue the democrats, business development has involved tax abatements, or tax breaks, usually to large corporations, to attract them to come to Indiana. However, when these manufacturing jobs are being quickly lost from Indiana, the democrats argue, why subsidize these companies. The Energize Indiana initiative argues that economic development should come from state partnerships with Universities to develop a home-grown, high-tech industry in Indiana.

• Education
  • Tuition Increase Caps for Higher Education
  • Private lenders for student loans
  • Charter schools/school choice
• State Budget Spending Cap

  The democrats argue that the republicans, in the interest in minimizing taxes, have put a spending cap on the state government which effectively creates a zero-sum tradeoff between prisons and education. Because there is no new money, if you want to increase funding for prisons, you have to decrease funding for education.

• I-69 New Terrain

  The Republican candidate for governor supports this, the current Democratic governor approved the route suggest by the federal government, but the Dems seem unwilling to accept responsibility for the plan. The Dem. party spokesperson argued that no Dem. candidates advocate this at the local level.

  This road has been characterized as a “NAFTA highway”

  It is important to note that the route has already been chosen by Federal comissions. This ads a certain sense of inevitability to the whole thing and some suggest that the issue has now become how to make the I-69 extension as unobtrusive as possible. As one forum panelist said, “building big roads means losing small town character.”

  This issue has been categorized as an issue that is only a hot one for central Indiana. Other parts of Indiana already have to deal with the reality of this road and are, therefore, much more apathetic to it. This categorization came in direct response to claims that the Democratic governor’s support of this had hurt his popularity.

  The Libertarian gubenatorial candidate, Kenn Gividen is the only candidate that opposes I-69 New Terrain. He argues that instead of routing it through central Indiana where it’s unwanted, it would be better to use a route that followes I-70 and I-41. This route goes through counties that want the road. He also argues that funds that would be used for the I-69 project would be better used going toward the maintenence of existing roads.

• Transportation
  • Area 10

    I think that this is a pretty marginal issue, but it’s often on the county budget chopping block. It’s a bus for rural county residents that has a set route, but will diverge to pick up county residents directly from their home.

  • Truck Toll Lanes

    The liberatrian candidate argues that this is a solution to improving transportation in Indiana. It will decrease traffic, fund road maintenence, and help establish Indiana as a trucking/logisitics hub (which the Libs. seem to think is the future of economic development in Indiana)

  • Tax reform as factor

    Some argue that the current tax structure limits funds available for road improvements. I think that this is a similar argument as the previously mentioned example about trade-offs between prisons and education.

• Development

  Update (2004-10-29): I found this article (here are parts 2 and 3 of that article) that does a pretty good job of introducing development issues and the players in them in Bloomington.

  Both the Rep. and Lib. panelists categorized Bloomington as being anti-business. This seemed more a matter of oppinion or perception and wasn’t really backed up by any kind of figures. The Dem. representative countered this by saying Bloomington is at the top of the state in terms of jobs and economic development. An interesting exchance was when an audience member questioned the Rep. and Lib. claims by citing all the new apartment buildings and college-related businesses that have been popping up in Bloomington as signs of economic development (she didn’t say this explicitely, but I detected a sense that she saw this as maybe a little too much development). There wasn’t a strong response to this question from either the Rep. or the Lib.

  The Rep. and Lib. want to change regulation and taxation to attract businesses to the region.

  The Dem. panelist argues that much of the economic development will come from businesses that support the IU community.

  The Dem. panelist frequently noted the need to encourage high-tech industry growth.

  The Dem. panelist made frequent reference to the idea that the current policy of managed growth and focussing on quality of life issues is what will attract continued growth to the region

• Social Services

  Reps. and Libs. argue that the private sector should play a greater role in providing social servies. The Dem. panelist argued that currently, the private sector isn’t stepping up to the plate.

• Positive Progress

  In a question about the inflamitory, partisan nature of the rhethoric in the forum, the Dem. panelist argued that this wasn’t the case before a group called Positive Progress came to prominence in Bloomington. The Dem. panelist characterized the group as wanting to remove zoning laws. I think this is insane. Smart use of zoning, as I’ve come to understand, is one of the best tools for building strong, liveable communities and makign productive, managed growth. The sierra club categorizes them as a “a rabid pro-development group”. I don’t know his role, but the name Jeff Brantley comes up a lot when I google for Positive Progress. Positive Progress, or those behind it, are involved in this election by a highly publicized media buy which involves billboards categorizing Baron Hill, the Democratic candidate for US Representative – District 9 (and the incumbent) as supporting flag burning (among other things). I don’t know much about Baron Hill, but this ridiculous opposition, to me, seems grounds enough for him to get my vote.

• County Landfill (solid waste district)

  Update (2004-10-30): This is an issue that gets a lot of press. I don’t really understand the history of it or the implications of the landfill closing this year. Here’s a message board post that cites a recent Herald-Times article about it and might offer some insight.

I’ve always wondered about this. You can link your project’s release names with CVS’ internal revision numbers for files.

https://www.cvshome.org/docs/manual/cvs-1.11.17/cvs_4.html#SEC48

In the Status Bar on the main timeline, click the Edit Multiple Frames button. (It looks like two dark overlapping squares)