Indiana

State of the City Redux

By Abdul Hakim-Shabazz

One way I tend to gauge how well elected officials are doing is by listening to their critics.  If their critics have nothing good to say about them, then that probably means they’re doing ok.  Such is it with Greg Ballard and his critics.

Now before we go any further, let me say this so some of you don’t have to.  “Abdul, you and the Mayor are friends and you will never write anything critical of him anyway so why should we read what you have to say?”  Two things, first you don’t have to read anything I write so you can stop here and go back to YouTube.  Second, you may disagree, which is fine, but unlike a lot of other people who scribble on the Internet, I have the distinction of actually being in the room when these things usually happen and talking to people before and afterwards.  So with that all out of the way, let’s talk about the State of City.

First, did Greg Ballard use an oratory style worthy of King or Obama?    No, of course not.  He was a bit monotone and somber, but it was a delivery more in line with the serious challenges facing this city.  The latest two major challenges, need I remind you, are a direct result of actions taken by the people who used to run this place; the Lucas Oil Stadium operational deficit and Indianapolis Waterworks bond fiasco which is leading to increased rates.

Second, did the Mayor spend time pointing towards the “small stuff”?  Yup, he sure did, because you know what, it’s the small stuff that makes a city livable.  Can they always do a better job?  Yes.  But I think they’ve done okay over the past year and you will see things stepped up in Year Two.

Third, the vision thing.  The biggest criticism, and I would argue only, Democrats have of the Mayor is that he has no “vision” and he failed to spell one out in his address.  No offense to my Democratic friends, but for some of them, their idea of “vision” is building something somewhere that you have no idea how you’re going to pay for it so you leave it for someone else to fix or you announce some grand scheme that gets a lot of media attention in the short run and falls by the wayside once the lights and cameras go away.   I think this city has enough of that “vision” for a while and for these times Indianapolis is better off with someone who will work to make the trains run on time.

Overall, I gave the Mayor a “B” on his speech.  I liked the content, but the delivery could have been better.  It’s not a bad way to start out your sophomore year, but like I tell my students, it’s not how you start the class that matters, it’s how you finish.

Full post as published by Indiana Barrister on February 22, 2009 (boomark / email).