LEM: Louisville's Eccentric Mayor

Wow, there's a lot of great comments on this thread. I don't have the time to really dig into it right now, but I have two points:

1. I think that pretending that the automobile should be a part of our city's future going forward is a huge mistake. Going to Detroit this past weekend definitely reinforced that view. Seeing a huge city built entirely on one industry that happens to be failing was depressing. And Detroit is much like Louisville, in terms of sprawl, poor planning and lack of public transportation. Even if Louisville is a smaller city, we could definitely end up in a similar situation. Building more roads, bridges, strip malls and ugly tract homes -- ie. continuing the bad habits of the 20th Century -- is not gonna cut it.

2. Louisville is not in bad shape, financially. $20 million is a pretty sizeable deficit, but it's not nearly as bad as what other cities face. Detroit has a $400 million-plus deficit (about the same as the entire state of Kentucky). Philadelphia has something on the order of one or two billion, I forget which. The question then becomes how do we respond to the crisis? And I do believe that Abramson has responded in a very heavy-handed and myopic way, esp. regarding Otter Creek Park. The problem isn't entirely his fault, given the way our economy has tanked. However, Metro government is designed in a way that gives far too much power to one person, in my opinion, so in some sense it doesn't matter who is occupying the Mayor's chair.

Anyway I have much more to say but dinner's about ready.

h

[Robin Garr]

Robin would nip that in the bud.

He would? The only nipping that gets down around here involves particularly putrid spam, and harsh personal attacks on fellow participants. I don't nip much ...

p

[Robin Garr]

Oh, if this forum turned into poison pen content, I would guess and hope that the host would blow the referee whistle. If not, I better take cover before Marsha returns.

Well, no need to push the envelope and find out.

I did want to re-emphasize the point, though, that we're basically free to enjoy debate, even robust debate, under reasonably laissez-faire moderation in this forum, provided the Prime Directives about spam and over-the-top flaming are adhered to.

Since this is the "I love Jerry" thread, I'll have nothing to say except to say "Love is blind".

Since this is the "I love Jerry" thread, I'll have nothing to say except to say "Love is blind".

Dude, you give up too easily.

I'm curious as to what pro-Abramson people are thinking about these recent developments:

Cordish Failure Should Be Cause for Worry - The Ville Voice

Auditor Slams Metro Housing Department - The Ville Voice

Metro Parks Spent $600K on New Mowers - Save Otter Creek Park

Any thoughts?

Since this is the "I love Jerry" thread, I'll have nothing to say except to say "Love is blind".

Dude, you give up too easily.

I'm curious as to what pro-Abramson people are thinking about these recent developments:

Cordish Failure Should Be Cause for Worry - The Ville Voice

Auditor Slams Metro Housing Department - The Ville Voice

Metro Parks Spent $600K on New Mowers - Save Otter Creek Park

Any thoughts?

Oh Joel. I'm just smart enough to know where not to say certain things.

Oh Joel. I'm just smart enough to know where not to say certain things.

Well, that's kinda insulting. Anyway I didn't notice that this thread, or this forum, was limited to people just saying nice things only. I probably wouldn't bother to participate if that was the case.

pssssst, Joel.....I think he's on your side, dude.

This isn't about sides! I was kinda joking though I do think it is a little weird to just clam up. It's a discussion board, it's for, y'know, discussion.

And I'm still interested to hear what people who support Mayor Abramson have to say about what I posted above.

Well, I say that, while the mower item does sound extravagant, it'd be pretty easy pickings to go through the whole budget line by line and get all up in arms about everything that seemed frivilous at first glance. That's an ancient game that Democrats play when Republicans are in office and vice-versa. So that one's not exactly changing Jerry into a troll under a bridge in my book.

I already said Jerry's Cordish sins are among the things I do take issue with him over, so that news isn't changing my opinion, either. Please note that the first line in the story is "Critics of the Cordish Co. and the Mayor will be jumping on this one."

As for the corruption at the Metro Housing Department - deplorable. The Abramson administration has to take some responsibility for letting that situation get way out of hand - obviously audits weren't thorough enough or often enough. Does that make Jerry a crappy mayor and cancel out all the good things he's done for the city? Nah.

For me, politics isn't about supporting the person but the actual politics and actions of the politician. And so it's possible to support a particular politician in some things and not others. For me, the parking garage issue was a lot of noise about something not particularly significant. That said, the other issues are significant, but frankly I'm put off by the tone of the articles which tend to lead the reader too much to think in accord with the writer. I think there are better ways to address the issues than that, and so I tend to stop reading after the first indignant, outraged sentence. I'd rather read a thing that lets me come to my own conclusions.

frankly I'm put off by the tone of the articles which tend to lead the reader too much to think in accord with the writer. I think there are better ways to address the issues than that, and so I tend to stop reading after the first indignant, outraged sentence. I'd rather read a thing that lets me come to my own conclusions.

Hear, hear, Colleen!

Well, I say that, while the mower item does sound extravagant, it'd be pretty easy pickings to go through the whole budget line by line and get all up in arms about everything that seemed frivilous at first glance.

Actually it's not "easy pickings to go through the whole budget line by line" since the 2008 CAFR still hasn't been released yet. The information about the mowers came out of the Metro Parks budget, not the entire Metro budget. The public still doesn't know what's in that, because 2008 CAFR is about 2, maybe 3 months overdue at this point, with no explanation of the delay forthcoming. That means that the budget cuts announced in December are still basically on the word of the Mayor's, without any actual financial evidence to back it up.

For me, politics isn't about supporting the person but the actual politics and actions of the politician. And so it's possible to support a particular politician in some things and not others. For me, the parking garage issue was a lot of noise about something not particularly significant. That said, the other issues are significant, but frankly I'm put off by the tone of the articles which tend to lead the reader too much to think in accord with the writer. I think there are better ways to address the issues than that, and so I tend to stop reading after the first indignant, outraged sentence. I'd rather read a thing that lets me come to my own conclusions.

I agree with you to an extent, but to play devil's advocate for a moment: asking for politics that isn't driven by personality kind of ignores that, unfortunately, this is how politics work most everywhere. (And I'd say that we're lucky in America that our brand of personality-driven politics isn't as harsh or all-encompassing as other countries.) Additionally, if politics in Louisville can be said to be personality-driven, that's probably because there hasn't been that large an amount of, well, personalities involved in politics here! The fact remains that, no matter what you think of him or his politics, Mayor Abramson has been in power for an exceptionally long time. There really is no avoiding that, and even though I am a registered member of the same party as the Mayor, I personally don't think that's very healthy for any sort of government, large or small.

I didn't think the tone of the original piece on Broken Sidewalk that started the thread was that harsh, it seemed rather gentle and light-hearted while still poking fun. Nor did the two pieces I linked to on The Ville Voice; I'd say that overall that site is very pro-Abramson (which doesn't mean it's not critical from time to time). The last piece about the lawnmowers was from my own blog, but since that blog was formed about representing an activist group, the Friends of Otter Creek Park, it would be a little difficult to write objectively for it. Not to mention, I'm not sure what point objectivity would serve, as a representation of an ostensibly political (though strictly non-partisan) group. So I guess what I'm asking is for some example of what you're talking about, in regards to "articles which tend to lead the reader too much to think in accord with the writer"?