Ballard's New Cricket Venue...Even the GOP is Fired Up

At a time where Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard is receiving even more scrutiny than normal because of the apparent power grab he is making via the General Assembly, you would think he would perhaps lay low for a bit.  But that is definitely not the case and even his own party seems upset at his dismissive attitude towards checks and balances.

Last week, Ballard announced that Indianapolis was going to be building a $6 million cricket venue.  The project had apparently already been in the works for at least two years, but the administration had been keeping it hush hush.  To make things even more interesting, the first announcement of the plans didn't come to the residents of the City of Indianapolis, or even to an audience here in the Good Ol' US of A.  Instead, when Ballard decided to make these plans public, he did it in Hyderabad, India.

Whhhhhaaaaaaa?!?!?!?!

That's right, Ballard kept plans to spend six million taxpayer dollars on the down low for years, and waited until he was halfway around the world to make the information public.  And he did so with some utterly suspect quotes, obviously planted in his head by whatever group convinced him this was a great idea.

Cricket is not exceptionally strong in the U.S. right now.  I need to change that.

When people from around the world think of cricket, I want them to think of Indianapolis.

Can't you just hear the ego flowing out of those statements?  HE needs to change that?  Are we to believe that Ballard is some huge cricket fan that has been secretly putting together these plans in some grand scheme to make the citizens of this country suddenly believe that cricket is God's gift to the sporting world?  And does he really believe that the way that will happen is by putting a handful of fields on Post Road?

The answers, of course, are a resounding no.  Ballard doesn't care about cricket.  And making this

announcement in India shows that he doesn't really care about Indianapolis, either.  I'd be willing to lay good odds that we are going to find out that the builders of this project are somehow well-connected to Ballard, and are going to profit a healthy amount because of it.

And now things are getting even more interesting for Ballard, as his own party is expressing dismay in what is going on.  According to an article in Monday's IBJ, the City-County Council plans to discuss the matter and request more information from the Ballard administration on it.

The Council knows it is powerless to stop the park at this point, but they are seeking some specific projections on its cost and potential revenue.  Republican Councillors Ginny Cain and Janice McHenry, and Democratic Councillor Pam Hickman are quoted in the article as having expressed specific concerns. Cain and Hickman both address the budget woes the parks are already facing...among which include potential lay offs and reducing maintenance.  McHenry, who serves on the Council's Parks Committee, noted that the administration never even bothered to bring the plan before them.

As you might expect, though, spokespersons for the administration are rushing to the plan's defense.  Public Works Director Lori Miser believes that the project will be a revenue generator for the parks department.  She also believes that maintenance can be arranged through public-private partnerships.

Um...a revenue generator?  Really?  Let's just pretend that the venue can fill 10,000 spectator events (and don't get me started on where those people are going to park in that area,) and that each person's presence generates $20.  That means that it will take 30 capacity events to just break even at this location.  And that's if there are zero costs involved, which is obviously not the case.

And public-private partnerships taking care of the maintenance?  Right.  Because the Ballard Administration has such a strong track record of those partnerships working out to the taxpayers' advantage.  **cough water company cough**  **cough parking meters cough**

The truth is, this is some idea that was spoon fed to Ballard by a person or persons that stands to make a lot of money off the deal.  Just like so many other of this administration's projects, an insider is ready to make a mint off of Ballard's corrupt management of the City.  I said I'd lay good odds to that fact, and I mean it.

In fact, my money's on the soon-to-be-richer insider being David Ladd.  The IBJ article closes saying,

Ladd, a former business acquaintance of Ballard's, said the mayor first raised the idea in 2009...
Ladd agreed to help.

Keep your eye on this one, folks.  Whatever news is allowed to surface is sure to point in corruption's way.

WISH TV Poll Shows Ballard with 11-Point Lead

WISH-TV just released a poll showing Mayor Ballard with a 44%-33% lead over challenger Melina Kennedy.  Libertarian Chris Bowen comes in with 2%, and the undecided vote comes in very high at 21%.  The poll had a 4.9% margin of error.

This poll very closely resembles the poll that Fox 59 received from the Ballard campaign.  I covered that poll and other aspects of the race in my Tuesday story "Kennedy Will Win...er, wait...No, Ballard Will Win...um, hold on..."

While this poll is not too far outside of the margin of error, especially when you add in the undecided votes, this is obviously horrible news for the Kennedy campaign.  Such an enormous apparent margin this many days before the election has the ability to possibly cause some Kennedy supporters to give up and not bother coming to the polls on Tuesday.

While I disagree with his position on this, that very possibility was something that Paul Ogden blogged on earlier Wednesday.

It will be very interesting to see how both campaigns react to this poll in the final days of what, before tonight, appeared to be a very close campaign.

Kennedy Will Win...er, wait...No, Ballard Will Win...um, hold on...

I was fully prepared to post my 2011 Indianapolis Mayoral prediction today.  My initial post was to declare my belief the Melina Kennedy would win the Mayor's race with 49% of the vote, Ballard coming in at 47%, and the remaining 4% going to Libertarian Chris Bowen.

With the lack of publicly available polls, I had to base my prediction on other things. First, the tone of the campaigns.  The Kennedy campaign seems to have gotten progressively nicer, while the Ballard camp seems to have gotten angrier lately.  Second, the lack of polls being released by the campaigns seemed to be an indicator of a tight race that neither side was willing to give up too much info on.


Third, there's a bunch of Republicans pissed off at Greg Ballard for things like the water company, the parking meters, the back-scratching of political buddies, etc.  While Bowen has ran a relatively quiet campaign and was excluded from most debates, I fully expected to see many Republicans either vote for him or take a pass on Mayoral voting altogether, rather than vote for Ballard or Kennedy. This, of course, would push Bowen's percentage up a bit.


There's been a sequence of news in the last day or so that has made me reconsider my position.  Twice.

First, word spread Monday of a couple of internal polls that Fox 59 had gotten a hold of.  One poll, from the Ballard campaign, was said to have been taken within the last week and indicated that he had a double-digit lead, 51%-39%, with Bowen coming in at 2%.  A second poll, from the Kennedy campaign, indicated that she had a 2-point lead that was within the margin of error.  Kennedy's poll was said to have been taken about two weeks ago.

Of course, both campaigns are likely to release polling information that shows them in the best light.  The fact that Kennedy's best shot at this was a two-week old poll that has her in a statistical dead heat with Ballard can't mean good news for the Kennedy campaign.  Abdul-Hakim Shabazz was quick to point out on his Indiana Barrister blog that those numbers are the exact same numbers released by Marion County Democratic Chairman Ed Treacy on September 23rd.  That coincidence is strong enough to make one doubt the validity of the Kennedy campaign statement that the poll given to Fox 59 is only two weeks old.

So, I began to rethink my initial prediction.  In light of this new information, I was willing to now say that Ballard was going to win re-election.  My new guess, based on that polling, was 52%-47%-3%. Ballard with a strong but not enormous win over Kennedy, and Bowen's numbers a little lower because of it.

OK, so I'm ready to run with this story now.  Right?

But wait...

This morning, Gary Welsh over at Advance Indiana wrote that early voting numbers are through the roof this year. According to his story, early turnout numbers are almost twice what they were at this time in 2007, and almost as high as last year's Congressional election year.

Traditional thinking would tend to indicate that is an incredibly strong sign for Kennedy.  Early voting is, as a rule, a Democratic stronghold.  While Republicans are now, at the last minute, trying to push their people for early voting, the Marion County GOP has been opposed to any expansion of the process this year.  It's all about votes when it comes to decision making for parties, so that opposition would lead you to believe Republicans are sure Kennedy and/or other Democrats favor strongly from early voting.

So let's sum this up.  Lack of polling results being released seems to be a slight favor to Kennedy.  But then some polling results are released but they are questionable but they seem to indicate a strong favor for Ballard.  But early voting results are through the roof which seems to be a good thing for Kennedy. (You get that?)

I guess I'll just split the difference and predict the race as 48%-48%-4%.  I wouldn't be at all surprised if we see a recount necessary on this one.

Ballard's Georgia Street Press Conference Doesn't Make Any Sense

The Mayor held a Friday Georgia Street press conference, one day after reports began circulating that he had asked for the name Georgia Street to, for now, remain unchanged. In it he announced the plans to erect pillars honoring thirty great Hoosiers.

Ballard also said that this great plan is why he was such a big supporter of changing the street's name. He said he just didn't feel right building an honor to history's great Hoosiers on a street named after another state.

On the surface, I think the Mayor's claim seems to make sense...but I don't buy it. Why would the mayor wait until after he conceded to keep the name to say why he had wanted it changed? Wouldn't announcing grand plans such as these be the first thing you did in the face of complete public disapproval over the issue? And definitely be something you did BEFORE backing down?

"Hi folks. I know there's a lot of people curious why I want to change the historic name of Georgia Street, a name that has been part of city since its inception. I wanna be clear to everybody that it has nothing to do with the Super Bowl or any of the NFL's wishes. We are proud today to announce that the incredible new look of Georgia Street is going to also serve as an honor to the lives of thirty of history's greatest Hoosiers.

"I would like to help add to the honoring of these great Hoosiers by also changing the name of Georgia Street to something more Indiana related. While Georgia Street is an important part of Indianapolis' long history, it just doesn't seem right to have this honor take place on a street named after another state. So, today I am asking for your support in changing this street's name to Hoosier Boulevard!"

That's all it would have taken. You present a plan and you support it with a reason. I'm not saying there would not still have been dissent, but there would have been a lot less of it.

By presenting the name change as an important part of a huge plan to honor our own, the mayor might've just been able to make it happen.

But that's not even close to what Ballard actually did. He promoted name change without rhyme or reason. We heard of Peyton Place and Hospitality Boulevard...cheesy names that Indianapolis doesn't feel represents its personality (and in hindsight do nothing to further the honoring of thirty great Hoosiers.)

Then, in the face of public outcry, the mayor finally backs down. And only then, after he concedes, does the mayor state what his thought process supposedly was from the beginning.

I just don't buy it. It doesn't make sense.