Indianapolis Star endorses Scott Keller

This is how a campaign manager likes to start his day! The Indianapolis Star's editorial board has joined The Greater Indianapolis Chamber of Commerce, Metropolitan Indianapolis Board of Realtors, Indiana Fairness Network, the Hoosier Environmental Council, Firefighters’ Local 416 and a host of others in endorsing Scott Keller for Indianapolis City-County Council. The newspaper is giving their nod in local races all week.

District 16
Scott Keller is one of the more astute members of the council, and easily the most independent.

Winner of a razor-close race against incumbent Karen Celestino Horseman in 2003, the Republican defied his party in helping forge major new policy on public smoking, gay rights and police consolidation.

He knows his Near-Downtown district well and warns it will be devastated if property taxes aren't rolled back. He favors greater reliance on sales taxes. He also wants to see more police on the streets and, not surprisingly, less partisan bickering on the council.

Keller faces thoughtful newcomers in Democrat Brian Mahern and Libertarian Paul Dijak-Robinson. Bearer of a prominent political name, Mahern places abandoned houses at the top of his to-do list and advocates close study of regional approaches to government costs. Dijak-Robinson calls for an end to two-party domination and reduced reliance on tax abatements. Success may be in both men's future, but District 16 should stick with its bipartisan voice.

All of the neighborhood associations in the district are also endorsing Scott. The challenger's democratic primary opponent is even endorsing Scott! Click here to read some of the endorsements volunteered by area leaders.

Alex Blaze | October 30, 2007 2:01 PM
Reply to this comment

Last nights voter forum between the candidates for Dist 16 went very well. Organizers from NESCO, Englewood Church and the League of Women Voters should be commended.
All the candidates did an excellent job. That being said, there were 3 not so little things I notice about, shall I say, Brian's performance. 1st. Was the over all performance. It was warm and fuzzy and oozing with "I'm right there with you"s. But instead of going into real detail about HIS plan, he went on with the performance. He also made many references about the past, and how its so much more important than the future. He wanted to dwell on why Dist 16 wasn't the Utopia it should be and he knew where to put the blame. We all know that if Brian were burdened with incumbency, he would also be looking to the future as a way to further the accomplishments of the past term.. He attacked Scott's record without actually calling to attention any real records. He attributed any dissatisfaction in any area of life in Indianapolis to a need to replace those in charge. I wonder if he also meant that of his fellow Democrats who control the council and ultimately create the dissatisfaction he speaks of. (Note: I do not think there is that dissatisfaction.)
The 3rd thing that I thought was problematic, was his answer to a question that I had posed.. I asked if elected, would you commit to serving the full term of office. Both Scott and Paul (Lib), said one word. Yes. Brian gave a very sloppy tap dance around the issue, and attributed his not being able to say yes or no, to not knowing the future regarding any calamitous bodily harm. Knowing fully well, no one would question him why he left office if he was seriously injured or God forbid died, he simply said he couldn't say. Which answered MY question, but my question was meant to inform the public, who might not be aware of rumors that it has been discussed that if Rep. John Day retires or leaves his seat early, Brian would be a top choice for that seat. (which would mean he would have to leave the council before the end of his term.) I think its important to know when voting, that a candidate is entertaining the idea of leaving the office early. If he did that, the council seat would be filled by precinct committeemen, and not the voters. In an emergency or other real reason this is not so problematic for me, but when you go into the race knowing that might be the situation.. It makes a difference. Let the voters decide.
Most of you know me. I am a triple dog D Democrat. I have been a huge fan of the Mahern family in politics for nearly 17 years when I first moved to Indy (nearly half my life). Brian's dad delivered a speech to the few hundred people at the small pride event (it used to be tiny) In, I think it was 1992 or so.. Louis Mahern was running for Mayor of Indy and he spoke to Pride and said he supported our struggle for civil rights. That was unheard of back then. Ever since then, I have stood behind the Mahern family. Last nights "fireside Chat" was heartwarming, but those 3 issues make a difference.
Scott was not nearly as warm and fuzzy, but he has a track record behind him of bipartisan cooperation AND massive community involvement. He as been very active on the council as well as the community at large and has co sponsored many bills. Many bills in which the writing was aided by the residents of Dist 16 themselves.
I was very upset to see Brian attack Scott on his lack of ability to get things done for the district, especially since he knows Scott is one member of a 29 member council, and every one of them are fighting for their share of the city's extremely limited resources. Since taking office 4 years ago, the amount of resources focused on dist 16 is massive in comparison to the way it used to be. Call it the natural evolution of Downtown spread or the efforts of Scott, but either way, to deny the progress on the near eastside or sever Scott from any of that progress is reckless and if you ask me, beneath the Mahern name.