August 7, 2025 • 34 mins
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
So like, what's the deal?
Speaker 2 (00:01):
Now?
Speaker 1 (00:02):
The Republicans are so proud of the thing that Vance
is asking him to do that they're doing it behind
closed doors. Is that the deal? I guess because we don't.
Now we heard a room. Okay, let's reason. It's kind
of the case, Joe, I'm rob. That's Casey, the vice
president is supposed to be here today, and I was
anticipating some big hullaballoo to try to get downtown. And
(00:23):
in fairness, it's always a hullabaloo to get downtown. But
it was no more or less a hullabaloo than normal
than it normally is, right, And then you're trying to
figure out, Okay, when is he going to be here?
Because Adam Wrenn had reported we love Adam Wrenn because
he you know what he said about me.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
Oh, you're the most powerful person in Indiana.
Speaker 1 (00:42):
Politics, powerful broadcaster in the state. Let's not overgragerate.
Speaker 2 (00:45):
Okay, there we go.
Speaker 1 (00:46):
Adam ren of Importantville newsletter Politico said that he reported
what he said. It not me, you know, I'm very modest.
Speaker 2 (00:55):
No, wait, what was it?
Speaker 1 (00:56):
Most powerful, the most powerful broadcaster.
Speaker 2 (00:58):
Broadcaster got it?
Speaker 1 (00:59):
Okay, And I was very embarrassed when he said that. Anyway,
the fault this is he reported last night that there
was no disclosure on when Vance was going to be here,
and Braun's public calendar now it's essentially been wiped clean.
So I think we were anticipating, Hey, they're so proud
of this redistricting plan where they're going to try to
(01:20):
rig the electoral map to get them another one or
two seats in the US House of Representatives, that they'll
do this out in public. The Flanders boys are supposed
to be there, Rod and Todd and Braun, And now
I guess it's we were told by reliable source ten
thirty ish was the time he's supposed to be here, correct,
(01:40):
And now I guess it's all going to be behind
closed doors and nothing says we're super proud of what
we're doing by just not letting anybody see what's going on.
Speaker 2 (01:48):
Well, I've been hearing that there's going to be a
sit in at the state House people who are not
in favor of this, but discussions with the Vice President
are expected to be explorator.
Speaker 1 (01:59):
You've done a in? You ever sat in on anything?
Speaker 3 (02:02):
CA?
Speaker 1 (02:02):
Have you ever sat in on anything? Ever sat down
in public.
Speaker 2 (02:05):
For a cause.
Speaker 1 (02:07):
I don't think so you ever sat down in public
for a cause? Casey, not for a cause.
Speaker 2 (02:13):
I mean i've well, I guess the property tax rally
and you were sitting for a part of that, sure, yeah,
but I don't know.
Speaker 1 (02:20):
If you were sitting. Yeah, I will count that you
were sitting down in public and it was a cause. Yeah,
So I guess I have two sat down in public
for a cause. I also one time I had general assembly,
which are floor seats to a Springsteen concert in Louisville.
You have to get there like nine hours early for that.
Speaker 2 (02:36):
That was your cause.
Speaker 1 (02:37):
And so I while standing there to get in, I
was in line.
Speaker 2 (02:40):
I sat down for many years in Northern Indiana, I
participated in roof Set, which was an event for a
good cause. It was to raise funds for the prevention
of child abuse.
Speaker 1 (02:53):
We love that. And that was on a roof.
Speaker 2 (02:55):
Yeah, it started on the roof.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
Is a roof in public? Oh?
Speaker 4 (02:59):
It?
Speaker 1 (02:59):
Were you sitting on the roof.
Speaker 2 (03:01):
Sitting on the roof, like sleeping on the roof, living
on the roof, broadcasting on the roof.
Speaker 1 (03:04):
You're like James Taylor, You're up on the roof.
Speaker 2 (03:05):
Yeah, up on the roof, but they did move it
down off the roof. Okay, Eventually.
Speaker 1 (03:12):
Somebody the YouTube chats that they're going to put good
old Diego up front for the photo up. There's no
way they're letting Morales anywhere near that guy, right, there's
no way.
Speaker 2 (03:21):
Well, they'd have to give him a booster. Right, there's
no way. He Seedi advance is very tall.
Speaker 1 (03:26):
We want to make sure Diego is here all right, So, uh,
I have not changed my opinion on this, which this
is wrong. Nikki Kelly is going to join us at
ten point fifteen. Nobody knows Indiana government like her. She's
going to lay out while this may not even be legal,
like period screwed the actual rights or wrongs of it,
(03:47):
that Indiana may not even legally be able to do it.
But again I come back to look at the time
Braun is getting even if he doesn't do anything, Casey,
even if he does, look at the time he is
giving to exploring a special session versus how he handled
the calls for a special session with the property tax reform.
(04:09):
I'm doing that.
Speaker 2 (04:10):
There's no point right and here it's not gonna be
worth my time.
Speaker 1 (04:14):
He's spending all sorts of time pondering a special session.
Speaker 2 (04:17):
It does seem like he's more motivated about this idea
than the property tax relief idea.
Speaker 1 (04:22):
Sure because his adult supervision is telling him, well, let's.
Speaker 2 (04:25):
Let's think about this. One affects millions of Hoosiers. One
affects him, Yes and ah, you have or his friends.
Speaker 1 (04:33):
Whether you meant to do it or not, you have
led me into my next point which I wanted to make,
which is coming up at nine p thirty. We are
going to have Austin Banta on our program. He is
the mayor of Portage, Indiana, and he is going This
post teammate has gone viral. It's been shared hundreds of
times about how he is alleging that Ed Soliday, who
(04:55):
heads up utilities in the House of Representatives in the
state of Indiana, sent him message threatening to withhold future
increases in funding over Austin bond to the mayor Portage
being critical of the IURC and the continued utility rate
increases as people are seeing and they need to reform
that commission. And I believe Solida has confirmed the message
(05:17):
with sin I don't even think you have to say
allegedly anymore. And we'll get to Austin on that later.
But what that is is a glimpse into how dare
you challenge me? I am here for me. I am
the great and powerful Oz. I will do whatever the
hell I want to do. And that's essentially what Rod
and Todd, the Flanders boys and Braun, that's what they're doing.
(05:37):
When it was property taxes, when it was helping you
screw off. That's a waste of time. Oh sweet Daddy,
Trump wants us to do something and it might get
us another player on our team. Well, we'll move heaven
and earth to make that happen.
Speaker 2 (05:51):
Yeah, welcome to town, Vice President. So other states that
are considering redistricting Texas, they could possibly gain five seats.
Speaker 1 (06:00):
Now, let's set real quick. Let's talk about the difference though,
and maybe we'll get into this Nikki Kelly at ten fifteen.
Let's talk about the difference between Texas and Indiana. I'm
not saying it's right for Texas. We have a census
every ten years, we work off of that, but at
least Texas can claim due to horrific governance in blue states,
mass migration into their state over the last five years,
(06:23):
they can say we've had millions of people come in.
That's what they're using as their crush. Again, I'm not
saying that's right. We do it every ten years. You'll
get your extra people when you always got your extra
people in a perfect world. But at least they can
say we're doing this because we have had a flood
of people into our state. We know where they're moving,
and we believe that the representation is not right. Again,
(06:43):
it's a stretch, but at least they can say that.
Indiana can't say that they're doing it for no reason
other than trying to rig the electoral process.
Speaker 2 (06:51):
That's it.
Speaker 1 (06:51):
If they do it period, full stop.
Speaker 2 (06:53):
Another state that's considering it, Florida, they could potentially gain
three to five seats, Ohio two seats, Missouri one seat,
and Indiana won to two seats. So when you put
them all together, the Republican Party, let's see what is
at ten, eleven, twelve, thirteen, fourteen, fifteen seats.
Speaker 1 (07:10):
Okay, So now let's talk about the other side of this.
Somebody made a point on this yesterday to me that, okay, right,
is that the way the census works correctly. If I'm wrong,
they count illegal immigrants. This was a huge fight in
Trump's first term about whether they had to count because
they asked for persons in the House, I think is
on the census. They don't ask for legal persons. And
this was a huge hay Rube when Trump and Trump's
(07:33):
first term. What that's a great description, isn't it. Yeah,
it's a big it's a big fight. And the courts,
i think, said you have to count, which is ridiculous,
but you have to count legal immigrants in the census.
There's people who say, well, I'm fine with these states
doing this because cal plays like California and New York
have getting extra people for years because their representation the
(07:57):
population of the state. They haven't been enforcing the rules
and the laws. We're just evening out the game. That
may be so, but we have now just opened Pandora's box.
And by the way, on the Democrat side, did you
see the well fed fellow, what's his name, the governor,
the well fed Gollinois of Illinois. Yeahtzker Pritzker. He was
(08:18):
on one of these underachieving late night shows as a
Colbert and even Colbert was pointing the map out to
him and is like, dude.
Speaker 2 (08:27):
Yeah, He was joking that a kindergarten class could have
drawn the state's district map.
Speaker 1 (08:32):
Like, there's one district that is like pencil thin, little
Jimmy Buffett reference here for you, Kevin, a pencil thin mustache.
Casey's bowling along as I was saying it, and it
just runs across the state. It's like, what what possibly
do the people where that district starts and what it ends?
What do they have in common? That's the point of
the districts. You're supposed to have like minded people, like
(08:54):
minded topography, like minded industry, agriculture, whatever said, even do
we have audio of this?
Speaker 2 (09:02):
We do, Cobert even he couldn't ignore how completely insane
all of the districts looked is the.
Speaker 5 (09:08):
Districts in Illinois. Take a look at this. Look at
look at seventeen. Here it does that. Then it comes
up here and it sneaks around there and goes all
the way up here and then goes right over there
like that. And look at look at look at this
one kind of goes whoop up there. It's like the
stinger on a scorpion down here?
Speaker 2 (09:26):
Is this common for all states to do?
Speaker 1 (09:29):
We handed it over to a kindergarten class and let
them decide, okay, And that's the non partisan group that
does this guy, and that's our independent commission. You know
that is Yeah, I mean, look so because all it's
a it's a joke. It's a joke.
Speaker 2 (09:45):
It's a big joke.
Speaker 1 (09:46):
But it's a joke on both sides. So for the
people are like, you're so mean to the Republicans, why
don't you be mean to the Democrats? I just did.
It's all ridiculous. The electoral system in this country is
a complete joke. But here's the other fascinating thing. Yeah,
we're and I know we got two break we're led
to believe. Look at these districts and the shenanigans that
take place at these districts. But if you questioned in
twenty twenty, hey, the male in balloting thing, like it
(10:08):
seemed like it was kind of open for you know,
some potential shenanigans. Well you're just some we didn't land
on the moon conspiracy person.
Speaker 2 (10:16):
You're listening to Kendall and Casey. It is ninety three wibc.
Speaker 1 (10:22):
Hey news splash, what's that? And I don't know who
needs to hear this because I sometimes I think people
are well meaning. I just think they're weak and they
don't think it through. If you don't care enough about
your kid to let them roam the streets of a
dangerous major metropolitan city at night and commit violent acts
and have access to weaponry to do it, the chances
(10:44):
are a fine or the threat of a fine. It
ain't gonna make no difference.
Speaker 2 (10:48):
Yeah, that's true. So the Indianapolis City, the City County Council,
the Republicans, they proposed adding some fines to help enforce
the curfew ordinances. Violation though a written notice to parents. Oh,
it's like this, you don't get where your kid? Kid is?
Are you going to care that you're getting a written notice?
Speaker 1 (11:08):
So it's like the speeding cameras, the camera things. Now,
isn't the first one a warning on those? That's exactly
what it is. Hey, you don't know where your kid
is and he goes out and commits an act of violence,
you're gonna get a written warning.
Speaker 2 (11:19):
We're gonna write you up, and then the next put
gen time out.
Speaker 1 (11:22):
Serious fine, Okay, So what after that? Okay, so you
get a written word. First act of Shenanigan's is a
written warning Okay, then.
Speaker 2 (11:29):
What then the second violation is a five hundred dollars fine.
Speaker 1 (11:33):
No, this is just a proposal. It hasn't been enacted, right, correct, Okay?
Speaker 2 (11:36):
And then the third violation of fifteen hundred dollars okay,
or more or more.
Speaker 1 (11:40):
I'm gonna I'm going to take a or more. We're
just making it up. It's however we feel.
Speaker 2 (11:45):
Third violation okay, case not.
Speaker 1 (11:48):
To label anyone, not to put any you know, anybody
in a box. But what do you think are the
odds that if you're just letting your youth or child
roam the streets of a dangerous metropolitan city unattended, not once,
but twice, if the first time didn't do it for you.
Speaker 2 (12:10):
If you're with the written notice, if.
Speaker 1 (12:12):
You need the written notice, right, okay, that's one thing,
it's bad if you need the written notice. Two, if
you'll do it twice, do you think one that the
find is gonna make any difference? And to that they'll
pay it or be able to pay it. Let's just
say the quiet part out loud.
Speaker 2 (12:26):
Yeah, that will they pay it?
Speaker 1 (12:27):
Nothing to those people?
Speaker 2 (12:29):
Yeah, I understand what they're doing. I mean they're trying
to you know, emphasize the need for parents to pay
more attention where your kids are and if you don't,
it's going to start costing you money. So I think
the intention is good will. The execution matter.
Speaker 1 (12:43):
See the problem is when I have a poppers jail.
If we had a poppers jail, that might make some difference.
Where if you're owed, like say you lost a will
lawsuit to a duel or you just keep you know whatever,
and you couldn't pay that back, then until you get
on a plan to pay that back, you got to go,
you know, to the pokey somewhere or something that didn't
exist like that doesn't that is not a thing. It
(13:04):
doesn't occur. So these okay, you're gonna find them. Who's
gonna collect You're gonna send Guido over. Hey, it's time
to pay up. And what if they don't then what
the answer is nothing. We already don't have enough bed,
enough place to put these people. This is ridiculous because
you can't force people to be parents. You cannot force
them to be parents.
Speaker 2 (13:23):
Okay, So counselor Josh Bain, he said that the ordinance
aims to add consequences. That's the thing. Either do it
or or what are you gonna give? Okay, we're gonna
find you, and we.
Speaker 1 (13:34):
Like Baine Bane's actually gonna be on with us tomorrow
too to discuss this, because maybe we're missing some angle
on it. But you know, Abdula has talked about this before,
and I hope I'm not, you know, mischaracterizing what he's saying,
but I think maybe he's used verbage similar to this.
(13:55):
These kids are gonna get the message when you give
him a swift kick up the back side. That's what
they'll understand. These parents, Sorry, if you're on multiple occasions
letting your underage child roam, this is not Mayberry. You know,
this is not small town USA. This is Indianapolis, Indiana,
(14:16):
with at or near record homicide numbers every single year.
If on multiple occasions you're letting your kid just roam
the streets, you're kind of a zero. Look, I'm sorry.
Maybe you have to work a second job, maybe a third.
I'm not saying that every person is a zero, but
for the vast majority of this, it's not simply well,
(14:37):
Martha was out working too many jobs to provide for kids,
and she couldn't keep an eye on everybody. A lot
of these is there's no father involved. In many cases,
they don't want to be around, or if they are,
they're not engaged. I mean, this is ridiculous to think
that these people are gonna pay this or be held
accountable to pay it. It's just they're just throwing things
out at this point.
Speaker 2 (14:58):
Okay, So the proposal is going to be a introduced
in committee next Monday, Full City County Council votes expected
in September, after summer's over.
Speaker 1 (15:07):
And well they're not even voting on it until hey,
because here's what they'll do. This is why they're doing it.
It'll be winter and then they'll be like, see, the
kids were off the streets. Totally work.
Speaker 2 (15:15):
It works right exactly.
Speaker 4 (15:17):
Now.
Speaker 2 (15:17):
If passed, the finds are going to go into effect
in September, and if the finds go unpaid violations will
be referred to the accounty prosecutor and proceed them. Yes,
because his hands aren't full with other things.
Speaker 1 (15:35):
You're gonna go get these parents. Okay, we got to
take a break when we come back. This is an
unbelievable story. So Austin Bonta is the mayor of Portage, Indiana.
That's the region and by the way when I talked
to him yesterday. This is how powerful our uh our
reach is. I called and he was like, I was
in a meeting, but I had to know if it
(15:55):
was the Rob Kendall who was calling all the way
up in Portage. This is an incredible story. He is
the mayor of Portage and he well, I think the
guy kind of confirmed it. I don't know if you
have to say allege. He has produced text messages from
Ed Soliday, who is the big head honcho on the
house side of utilities, threatening to withhold future increases in
money to the city of Portage over this mayor being
(16:18):
critical of the I U r C and a utility rate.
Utility there in Portage and utility right next an unbelievable story.
Austin will join us next.
Speaker 2 (16:30):
It's Kennel Casey on ninety three WYBC.
Speaker 1 (16:41):
He did a state representative power one tried a strong
arm of mayor over his criticism of a utility. Let's
make some sense of it. It's Kennell A. Casey show.
I'm Rob Casey's here. Join now on the WIBC hotline
by Austin Bonta. He is the mayor of Portage and
He had a fascinating post on Facebook the other day
(17:04):
alleging that Representative Ed Soliday, who is the chairman of
the Utilities, Energy and Telecommunications Committee in the Indiana House
of Representatives, essentially threatened to withhold money from his city
over his criticism of a utility. Mayor Bonta joins us
now Austin, Hello, Hey, how are you all right?
Speaker 2 (17:24):
So?
Speaker 1 (17:25):
Did I get that right? That essentially you were critical
of a local utility? Nipscoe is their name? Is that correct?
Speaker 3 (17:33):
Nipscoe is the one that services northwest Indiana, including Lake
in Porter County, Porter County being where my city, Portage
is located.
Speaker 1 (17:41):
Yeah, so what they're an electric company.
Speaker 2 (17:43):
Right, electric?
Speaker 3 (17:45):
I guess yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1 (17:46):
And so you're kriognamroung you at your constituents in the
Portage area had seen a large increase in utility rates
over the past couple years, or a proposed utility rate increase.
Speaker 3 (17:59):
So there was a very recent spike a number of
people having bills going from you know, two hundred a
month to five hundred dollars a month. It took a lot,
by surprise. I was even in conversation with like a
church for example, yesterday their bill this month went up
by four thousand dollars, which they were not prepared for.
You know, a lot of people didn't realize how big
the Nipsko hike was going to hit them. So what
(18:21):
happened is that actually, earlier in the year, our city
council had done a believe with a unanimous resolution that
was sent to the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission essentially asking
not to approve the latest Nipskoe hike. And let me
see here.
Speaker 1 (18:41):
Yeah, so so just so high level Austin for our
audience again, Austin BoNT is our guest. He's the mayor
of Portage. These utility rates are hitting your constituents. You
and your city council said, this is out of control.
It's got to stop. We gotta fight this. You send
this to the i I U r C, who is
in charge of approving rate hikes. Is that right?
Speaker 3 (19:00):
So that's the history of what happened. What happened more
recently last week on Monday, July twenty eighth, I did
a pretty long Facebook post. I'm kind of known for
doing that, and what I wanted to do was I
wanted to explain to residents because We've had so many
call into city Hall or come into city Hall because
a lot of people have a misconception that the city
(19:20):
government has some regulatory over authority over their electric bill,
and we do not. It's a common thing that if
somebody has got a problem with their electric bill, they
might call city Hall, and then we got to explain
who to actually call. We've had so many of those
complaints and quite frankly, people being scared, you know, call in.
I did a Facebook post originally last Monday explaining two things.
(19:43):
One is that even though I completely understand the concern
and frustration and fear that some people have over this,
I had to explain that the city government, local government
does not have that authority when they're doing a rate hike.
That's controlled by the iu RC. The second thing I said,
as I mentioned that there is what I believe to
be a growing movement in Indiana to get some legislation
(20:06):
passed maybe next year, to either add some elected members
to that board. I've also heard proposals to make the
entire board an elected body, and of course that might
come with its own regulations ideas about who can run.
But very shortly after I made that post, online Representative
Edmund Soliday of the fourth District, which we are not in.
(20:28):
The City of Portage is not in the fourth district.
He sent me a tech message. It's kind of made
some huge assumptions about my views and my reasons for
thinking that we need that. But it ended with and
I'll want to make sure I quote this exactly. He said,
I promise I will work hard to make certain your
city never gets any revenue increases. So to clarify, he
(20:50):
never threatened to take away or withhold existing funds. That
would certainly be frightening if an attempt like that were
to happen. But the actual text was a promise to
work hard to make certain never get any revenue increases.
So I guess whatever he can do to stop our
city from getting money going forward.
Speaker 1 (21:05):
Well, okay, So, so Soliday represents the area up there.
He's not technically your represented there in Portage, but he
represents the area, and he's the head of the of
the of the utilities right he.
Speaker 3 (21:16):
Is in the state legislature. He is the chairman of
the Utility, Energy and Telecommunications Committee and a very I
would say certainly a very influential member of the state liature.
I've been told by a number of people. Yeah, that's
the guy that you don't want to make mad.
Speaker 1 (21:32):
Okay, so but what is But what is he mad about?
He's mad that you say what that you said? Hey,
the utility rates are kind of out of control to
think most normal people would think, and we need some
new way of policing. Like, that's what he is mad
at you about.
Speaker 3 (21:47):
That's what bothers me about it. I mean, it looks
like to me that it's to put it simply, if
you're mad at me for saying that the rates are
affecting people in a negative way, I don't know what
to tell you. There's me and what I took from
it is, do not publicly criticize the iu RC or
do not advocate for reform to it, otherwise I will
(22:09):
go after you. And that really is my trouble here.
And it's like I told the city council, you know, recently,
for a member of the state legislature to have a
personal disagreement with me, or a disagreement with me over
a political view, go after me all you want, but
to take it out on a city, our funding, our
public safety, literally, the operations our people count on because
(22:30):
you disagree with me about a state level issue. I
just can't that's not acceptable.
Speaker 1 (22:35):
Real quickly, before Casey EPs in here, reintroduce our guest.
Austin BoNT is our guest. He's the mayor of Portage.
We're talking about this text message that he received or
said he received from Ed Soliday. He oversees utilities in
the state of any in the House of Representatives threatening
to essentially not give any additional money new money over
what they currently have to the city of Portage because
(22:56):
the mayor opposed massive utility increases.
Speaker 2 (23:00):
I'm curious two questions. What did Nipsko say was the
reason for the rate increase? And where do you go
from here?
Speaker 3 (23:08):
Yeah? So, I mean Nipsko they proposed the increase based
on a number of different factors, and I want to
make clear I do not believe I'm the person qualified
to comment on what a rate should be. Not trying
to back out of that. I mean as a resident,
I'm very concerned about the rate increases and how they happened.
But to me, this is really uh. Nipsko's given no
(23:28):
statement about this issue, you know, by the way, But
to me, what's really the concern. Here is a member
of the state legislature threatening to use any authority he
has to go after a whole city over a political
opinion of one's city official. Again, if this had to
do with a response to an action taken by my city,
it doesn't appear to be based on that resolution that
(23:50):
the city council passed. It seems to be very much
based on my statement. I just think we've got a
serious issue in Indiana. If people can be okay with
that happening, you know what I mean.
Speaker 1 (24:00):
Well, and we've talked about the Soliday guy before he's
nine million years old. We've talked about all the boneheaded
decisions he's made. And I think this is the thing, Austin.
You're entitled to whatever opinion you want on utilities or
a government body, which the IURC is. You're entitled to
think they're great. You're entitled think they're awful. You're an
elected person. Your job is to advocate for your citizens.
And for him to send that sort of message to you,
(24:24):
essentially threatening, like you said, future funds to your city,
that is gross beyond belief.
Speaker 3 (24:30):
And I will add he has confirmed to the local
media as of last night, that he did send the
tech a he's got. I was very disappointed by his statement.
He said that that was a quote as the cuff remark,
and he should not have been taken literally. And as
I said last night, I just don't know how to
take that metaphorically or figuratively. I don't know how to
(24:54):
take I promise I will work hard to make sure
you get no increases. I just don't know how to
take that as a as a metaphor.
Speaker 1 (25:02):
Well, and it wasn't, and then I'll that case happen here.
But it wasn't just one sentence. He wrote multiple paragraphs
to you. How could you say, don't take it literally?
He wrote, I'm looking at the thing that you posted
on It was formatted.
Speaker 3 (25:13):
I mean that took some effort. That was the list.
That was a voice text. I don't think it was
I that's not that doesn't that looks very well like
ridden like I wanted to make sure I got each
point to you.
Speaker 2 (25:23):
Bostin. You haven't spoken to him since this, have you? No?
Speaker 3 (25:27):
And actually we have not spoken to each other a
great deal. Even when he sent me the text, he
was not somebody in my contact list. So when I
first read that message. I had to call some people
who I just knew to be more connected in let's
say County wy area, you know, politics, And I basically said, hey,
if I gave you a number, could you look that
number up and tell me if it's somebody in your context,
(25:48):
and multiple times confirmed that that was at Soliday. Then
I went and confirmed it another way to get you
an idea. This happened not this Monday, but last Monday.
So when I get a threat to the city, I'm
not going to call somebody and try to negotiate that
threat down. If this had been a personal attack or
threat against me, that's kind of a different story and
(26:09):
a more private story. Right If he had said, Hey,
I'm going to move to the city of Fortage and
run against you in the next election, or hey, I'm
gonna go after your reputation, that can be something that
I would take as a personal thing. At least that's
my view of it. It's the fact that he made
it about our cities funding that after talking with the
number of people, we decided I wouldn't be being a
(26:29):
responsible mayor if I didn't disclose that to my city
council and to the public that this threat was made
against us.
Speaker 1 (26:36):
Yeah, Austin, I think my new favorite local elected official
because you did the right thing, which is just expose
these people. These people at the state House are dirty,
rotten people. And that's awesome that you put this out.
There's been hundreds and hundreds of people share this. Even
though you're all the way up in Portage. It ended
up on our radar and that's awesome. Man. You got
to fight fire with these fire with fire with these dudes,
(26:58):
and that's awesome that you exposed. And thanks for being
with us today.
Speaker 3 (27:01):
Hey, appreciate you guys for giving me the opportunity to
speak and of course clarify the situation r end but
also state that actions like this from a member of
the state legislature it's just totally unacceptable.
Speaker 2 (27:12):
You're listening to Kettel and Casey on ninety three WIBC.
Speaker 1 (27:21):
So you got some data that shows the public is
very aware of what's going on with the Epstein stuff.
Speaker 2 (27:27):
Yeah. So it was a new survey, that survey that
came out and let me just see if I can
find who did it. This was a ledger in collaboration
with three thirty eight Canada, and it just sounds main media, all.
Speaker 1 (27:40):
Those people involved, it has to be legitimate.
Speaker 2 (27:42):
So they said, eighty four percent of Americans are aware
of the Epstein case, forty five percent believe Donald Trump
is involved on some level, twenty nine percent disagree, twenty
six percent are unsure, seventy seven percent when all government
documents related to it released.
Speaker 1 (27:58):
Okay, what was the number again? Were the numbers again
that you just read?
Speaker 2 (28:02):
Eighty four percent are aware of the case.
Speaker 1 (28:04):
Uh huh.
Speaker 2 (28:04):
Forty five percent believe Donald Trump was involved on some level.
Speaker 1 (28:08):
Okay, So eighty percent are aware of the case, forty
percent believe Trump was involved in some level.
Speaker 2 (28:13):
And what's seventy seven percent want all the documents released?
Speaker 1 (28:17):
Okay, all right, one the other the are aware and
what the documents released? Totally check those. Okay. Now, when
you say Trump was involved, I wonder what that actually means.
You get this in polling a lot where it's sort
of this open ended question. I don't think that forty
percent of the public thinks Trump was on Epstein Island. Now,
(28:38):
is Trump involved? Does involvement mean he's involved in a
cover up? I would certainly be open to hearing that
and hearing that argument and buying that this behavior over
the release has been ridiculous. Was he involved in the
sense of was he involved with Epstein? Like I knew
him and went to events with him. Absolutely, we know that,
we now know they cross paths on numerous occasions. But
(29:00):
I think that's a massive stretch to say that Trump
was in any way involved in any sort of illegal
activity with Epstein. I don't think there's been any proof
of that.
Speaker 2 (29:09):
Well, the line is almost half of respondence, forty five
percent believe Donald Trump was involved, while twenty nine percent disagree.
Twenty six percent are unsure.
Speaker 1 (29:18):
So they're saying he is essentially covering this up now
because he was involved in some capacity.
Speaker 2 (29:25):
Involved somehow, some way. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (29:28):
I don't know about that, but the number the eighty
percent are aware, I would certainly believe, and the seventy
seven percent want all the stuff released totally agree. The
problem with all of this is we need the public
to be as passionate as they are in Epstein and
all these other issues. This is the problem, right, It
gets media coverage, it's salacious, it's obviously just an abhorrent thing,
(29:53):
and so the public engages he'd engage in all the
other stuff they did we'd have a much better government.
Speaker 2 (29:59):
The interesting thing about this poll is that it says
seventy seven percent when all government documents related to the
Epstein case released, strongest support among Democrats eighty five percent, Okay,
eighty five percent when all documents released. Why didn't they
do it well?
Speaker 1 (30:16):
And the answer is clearly, they're like, I think too
many let me ear phrases. I think to many people
they believe that the answer is clear, and that is
that there's stuff they don't want to get out, that
there's information, whether it is that he he being Epstein
was acting as some sort of agent for a foreign
government in some capacity that we have a relationship with,
(30:39):
whether it is that there are high profile people that
would be foreign leaders potentially that we have relationships with,
that could be in trouble, high ranking business people that
are potentially major financiers of various campaigns, and cause you
don't know, it could be a mixture of all of
the things. But this is not normal behavior. There's no
(31:02):
person walking the planet who is sympathetic to Jeffrey Epstein.
There's no reason to not just take the biggest colossal
dump on this guy imaginable and put all the information
out unless there's someone or something you're protecting.
Speaker 2 (31:15):
So Donald Trump was asked about this yesterday at the
White House and he said a dirty words.
Speaker 3 (31:22):
Hosting a gatherer in the evening, having responded to the Epstein.
Speaker 1 (31:25):
Situation, is he working on what? He hosting some.
Speaker 3 (31:28):
Kind of gathering atom advisors the sevening to talk about
how to respond to the Epstein situation.
Speaker 2 (31:34):
I don't know.
Speaker 1 (31:34):
I could ask you that question. I don't know of it.
Speaker 4 (31:38):
But I think here's the man, right.
Speaker 1 (31:40):
I saw a reporter today and it's completely fake news.
We're not meeting to talk about the Epstein situation.
Speaker 3 (31:47):
And I think the reporter who reported it needs to
get better sources.
Speaker 1 (31:51):
Look, the whole thing is a hoax.
Speaker 4 (31:53):
It's put out by the Democrats because we've had the
most successful six months in the history of our country.
And that's just a way of trying to divert attention
to something that's total both. Okay, yeah, please.
Speaker 3 (32:08):
I knew.
Speaker 1 (32:09):
Okay, So again, he is his own worst enemy. Epstein
is not a hoax. Jeffrey Epstein is not a oax.
He was a real human being who actually lived. What
Jeffrey Epstein did is not a hoax. He really did
traffic young women for sexual abuse. We know that unless
(32:30):
you think all of these women and the evidence that
was presented, he why was he in a prison cell
when he allegedly killed himself? Why was Gilaine Maxwell convicted?
If none of this happened, It's not a hoax. And
so he demeans and really takes away any effective arguments
he might have when he calls it a hoax. It
(32:51):
is not a hoax. And this is what makes people
so in rage. And then to act like you're trying
to distract us from how successful are administration is as
though you're Reagan circa eighty four and it's morning again
in America. It's not. Some things are better in this country.
The border is being an Immigration is so much better.
(33:11):
He's doing a great job with that, but everything is
still super expensive. We're hearing all sorts of reports now
about jobs not going well. Foreign policy is still largely
a mess. Some things are a little better, but like
it's not. This is not some great administration that's humming
along and everybody's back to work. I mean everybody is working,
(33:33):
but I mean in terms of the job's numbers, et cetera,
Like this is not great right now. And so for
him to say that and then always play the victim,
it gets a little tiring.
Speaker 2 (33:44):
So there was a report yesterday somebody came out and
said that JD Vance was meeting with some high level
people including Pam Bondie and how they were going to
start addressing everything with Epstein. And as you just heard,
JD Vance came out and said, you know, that's bad information.
That meeting is never happening. It was never going to happen.
Of course, we all know JD Vance was busy packing
(34:06):
his bags because he's here in Indianapolis today.
Speaker 1 (34:10):
Scheduled to be He could be here right now.
Speaker 2 (34:12):
Maybe he is. Well there's a big, dark black tarp
in front of the Governor's office, so you don't know, and.
Speaker 1 (34:20):
Nothing says we're on the up and up like a
big giant tarp and going behind closed doors. Am I right?
Speaker 2 (34:26):
Big material curtain is what it is.
Speaker 1 (34:30):
It's just these people are exhausting.
Speaker 2 (34:33):
Well, we're going to continue to talk about Donald Trump
because he had an announcement yesterday about chips and semiconductors.
You're listening to Kendall and Casey. It is ninety three
WYBC yours
So like, what's the deal?
Speaker 2 (00:01):
Now?
Speaker 1 (00:02):
The Republicans are so proud of the thing that Vance
is asking him to do that they're doing it behind
closed doors. Is that the deal? I guess because we don't.
Now we heard a room. Okay, let's reason. It's kind
of the case, Joe, I'm rob. That's Casey, the vice
president is supposed to be here today, and I was
anticipating some big hullaballoo to try to get downtown. And
(00:23):
in fairness, it's always a hullabaloo to get downtown. But
it was no more or less a hullabaloo than normal
than it normally is, right, And then you're trying to
figure out, Okay, when is he going to be here?
Because Adam Wrenn had reported we love Adam Wrenn because
he you know what he said about me.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
Oh, you're the most powerful person in Indiana.
Speaker 1 (00:42):
Politics, powerful broadcaster in the state. Let's not overgragerate.
Speaker 2 (00:45):
Okay, there we go.
Speaker 1 (00:46):
Adam ren of Importantville newsletter Politico said that he reported
what he said. It not me, you know, I'm very modest.
Speaker 2 (00:55):
No, wait, what was it?
Speaker 1 (00:56):
Most powerful, the most powerful broadcaster.
Speaker 2 (00:58):
Broadcaster got it?
Speaker 1 (00:59):
Okay, And I was very embarrassed when he said that. Anyway,
the fault this is he reported last night that there
was no disclosure on when Vance was going to be here,
and Braun's public calendar now it's essentially been wiped clean.
So I think we were anticipating, Hey, they're so proud
of this redistricting plan where they're going to try to
(01:20):
rig the electoral map to get them another one or
two seats in the US House of Representatives, that they'll
do this out in public. The Flanders boys are supposed
to be there, Rod and Todd and Braun, And now
I guess it's we were told by reliable source ten
thirty ish was the time he's supposed to be here, correct,
(01:40):
And now I guess it's all going to be behind
closed doors and nothing says we're super proud of what
we're doing by just not letting anybody see what's going on.
Speaker 2 (01:48):
Well, I've been hearing that there's going to be a
sit in at the state House people who are not
in favor of this, but discussions with the Vice President
are expected to be explorator.
Speaker 1 (01:59):
You've done a in? You ever sat in on anything?
Speaker 3 (02:02):
CA?
Speaker 1 (02:02):
Have you ever sat in on anything? Ever sat down
in public.
Speaker 2 (02:05):
For a cause.
Speaker 1 (02:07):
I don't think so you ever sat down in public
for a cause? Casey, not for a cause.
Speaker 2 (02:13):
I mean i've well, I guess the property tax rally
and you were sitting for a part of that, sure, yeah,
but I don't know.
Speaker 1 (02:20):
If you were sitting. Yeah, I will count that you
were sitting down in public and it was a cause. Yeah,
So I guess I have two sat down in public
for a cause. I also one time I had general assembly,
which are floor seats to a Springsteen concert in Louisville.
You have to get there like nine hours early for that.
Speaker 2 (02:36):
That was your cause.
Speaker 1 (02:37):
And so I while standing there to get in, I
was in line.
Speaker 2 (02:40):
I sat down for many years in Northern Indiana, I
participated in roof Set, which was an event for a
good cause. It was to raise funds for the prevention
of child abuse.
Speaker 1 (02:53):
We love that. And that was on a roof.
Speaker 2 (02:55):
Yeah, it started on the roof.
Speaker 1 (02:57):
Is a roof in public? Oh?
Speaker 4 (02:59):
It?
Speaker 1 (02:59):
Were you sitting on the roof.
Speaker 2 (03:01):
Sitting on the roof, like sleeping on the roof, living
on the roof, broadcasting on the roof.
Speaker 1 (03:04):
You're like James Taylor, You're up on the roof.
Speaker 2 (03:05):
Yeah, up on the roof, but they did move it
down off the roof. Okay, Eventually.
Speaker 1 (03:12):
Somebody the YouTube chats that they're going to put good
old Diego up front for the photo up. There's no
way they're letting Morales anywhere near that guy, right, there's
no way.
Speaker 2 (03:21):
Well, they'd have to give him a booster. Right, there's
no way. He Seedi advance is very tall.
Speaker 1 (03:26):
We want to make sure Diego is here all right, So, uh,
I have not changed my opinion on this, which this
is wrong. Nikki Kelly is going to join us at
ten point fifteen. Nobody knows Indiana government like her. She's
going to lay out while this may not even be legal,
like period screwed the actual rights or wrongs of it,
(03:47):
that Indiana may not even legally be able to do it.
But again I come back to look at the time
Braun is getting even if he doesn't do anything, Casey,
even if he does, look at the time he is
giving to exploring a special session versus how he handled
the calls for a special session with the property tax reform.
(04:09):
I'm doing that.
Speaker 2 (04:10):
There's no point right and here it's not gonna be
worth my time.
Speaker 1 (04:14):
He's spending all sorts of time pondering a special session.
Speaker 2 (04:17):
It does seem like he's more motivated about this idea
than the property tax relief idea.
Speaker 1 (04:22):
Sure because his adult supervision is telling him, well, let's.
Speaker 2 (04:25):
Let's think about this. One affects millions of Hoosiers. One
affects him, Yes and ah, you have or his friends.
Speaker 1 (04:33):
Whether you meant to do it or not, you have
led me into my next point which I wanted to make,
which is coming up at nine p thirty. We are
going to have Austin Banta on our program. He is
the mayor of Portage, Indiana, and he is going This
post teammate has gone viral. It's been shared hundreds of
times about how he is alleging that Ed Soliday, who
(04:55):
heads up utilities in the House of Representatives in the
state of Indiana, sent him message threatening to withhold future
increases in funding over Austin bond to the mayor Portage
being critical of the IURC and the continued utility rate
increases as people are seeing and they need to reform
that commission. And I believe Solida has confirmed the message
(05:17):
with sin I don't even think you have to say
allegedly anymore. And we'll get to Austin on that later.
But what that is is a glimpse into how dare
you challenge me? I am here for me. I am
the great and powerful Oz. I will do whatever the
hell I want to do. And that's essentially what Rod
and Todd, the Flanders boys and Braun, that's what they're doing.
(05:37):
When it was property taxes, when it was helping you
screw off. That's a waste of time. Oh sweet Daddy,
Trump wants us to do something and it might get
us another player on our team. Well, we'll move heaven
and earth to make that happen.
Speaker 2 (05:51):
Yeah, welcome to town, Vice President. So other states that
are considering redistricting Texas, they could possibly gain five seats.
Speaker 1 (06:00):
Now, let's set real quick. Let's talk about the difference though,
and maybe we'll get into this Nikki Kelly at ten fifteen.
Let's talk about the difference between Texas and Indiana. I'm
not saying it's right for Texas. We have a census
every ten years, we work off of that, but at
least Texas can claim due to horrific governance in blue states,
mass migration into their state over the last five years,
(06:23):
they can say we've had millions of people come in.
That's what they're using as their crush. Again, I'm not
saying that's right. We do it every ten years. You'll
get your extra people when you always got your extra
people in a perfect world. But at least they can
say we're doing this because we have had a flood
of people into our state. We know where they're moving,
and we believe that the representation is not right. Again,
(06:43):
it's a stretch, but at least they can say that.
Indiana can't say that they're doing it for no reason
other than trying to rig the electoral process.
Speaker 2 (06:51):
That's it.
Speaker 1 (06:51):
If they do it period, full stop.
Speaker 2 (06:53):
Another state that's considering it, Florida, they could potentially gain
three to five seats, Ohio two seats, Missouri one seat,
and Indiana won to two seats. So when you put
them all together, the Republican Party, let's see what is
at ten, eleven, twelve, thirteen, fourteen, fifteen seats.
Speaker 1 (07:10):
Okay, So now let's talk about the other side of this.
Somebody made a point on this yesterday to me that, okay, right,
is that the way the census works correctly. If I'm wrong,
they count illegal immigrants. This was a huge fight in
Trump's first term about whether they had to count because
they asked for persons in the House, I think is
on the census. They don't ask for legal persons. And
this was a huge hay Rube when Trump and Trump's
(07:33):
first term. What that's a great description, isn't it. Yeah,
it's a big it's a big fight. And the courts,
i think, said you have to count, which is ridiculous,
but you have to count legal immigrants in the census.
There's people who say, well, I'm fine with these states
doing this because cal plays like California and New York
have getting extra people for years because their representation the
(07:57):
population of the state. They haven't been enforcing the rules
and the laws. We're just evening out the game. That
may be so, but we have now just opened Pandora's box.
And by the way, on the Democrat side, did you
see the well fed fellow, what's his name, the governor,
the well fed Gollinois of Illinois. Yeahtzker Pritzker. He was
(08:18):
on one of these underachieving late night shows as a
Colbert and even Colbert was pointing the map out to
him and is like, dude.
Speaker 2 (08:27):
Yeah, He was joking that a kindergarten class could have
drawn the state's district map.
Speaker 1 (08:32):
Like, there's one district that is like pencil thin, little
Jimmy Buffett reference here for you, Kevin, a pencil thin mustache.
Casey's bowling along as I was saying it, and it
just runs across the state. It's like, what what possibly
do the people where that district starts and what it ends?
What do they have in common? That's the point of
the districts. You're supposed to have like minded people, like
(08:54):
minded topography, like minded industry, agriculture, whatever said, even do
we have audio of this?
Speaker 2 (09:02):
We do, Cobert even he couldn't ignore how completely insane
all of the districts looked is the.
Speaker 5 (09:08):
Districts in Illinois. Take a look at this. Look at
look at seventeen. Here it does that. Then it comes
up here and it sneaks around there and goes all
the way up here and then goes right over there
like that. And look at look at look at this
one kind of goes whoop up there. It's like the
stinger on a scorpion down here?
Speaker 2 (09:26):
Is this common for all states to do?
Speaker 1 (09:29):
We handed it over to a kindergarten class and let
them decide, okay, And that's the non partisan group that
does this guy, and that's our independent commission. You know
that is Yeah, I mean, look so because all it's
a it's a joke. It's a joke.
Speaker 2 (09:45):
It's a big joke.
Speaker 1 (09:46):
But it's a joke on both sides. So for the
people are like, you're so mean to the Republicans, why
don't you be mean to the Democrats? I just did.
It's all ridiculous. The electoral system in this country is
a complete joke. But here's the other fascinating thing. Yeah,
we're and I know we got two break we're led
to believe. Look at these districts and the shenanigans that
take place at these districts. But if you questioned in
twenty twenty, hey, the male in balloting thing, like it
(10:08):
seemed like it was kind of open for you know,
some potential shenanigans. Well you're just some we didn't land
on the moon conspiracy person.
Speaker 2 (10:16):
You're listening to Kendall and Casey. It is ninety three wibc.
Speaker 1 (10:22):
Hey news splash, what's that? And I don't know who
needs to hear this because I sometimes I think people
are well meaning. I just think they're weak and they
don't think it through. If you don't care enough about
your kid to let them roam the streets of a
dangerous major metropolitan city at night and commit violent acts
and have access to weaponry to do it, the chances
(10:44):
are a fine or the threat of a fine. It
ain't gonna make no difference.
Speaker 2 (10:48):
Yeah, that's true. So the Indianapolis City, the City County Council,
the Republicans, they proposed adding some fines to help enforce
the curfew ordinances. Violation though a written notice to parents. Oh,
it's like this, you don't get where your kid? Kid is?
Are you going to care that you're getting a written notice?
Speaker 1 (11:08):
So it's like the speeding cameras, the camera things. Now,
isn't the first one a warning on those? That's exactly
what it is. Hey, you don't know where your kid
is and he goes out and commits an act of violence,
you're gonna get a written warning.
Speaker 2 (11:19):
We're gonna write you up, and then the next put
gen time out.
Speaker 1 (11:22):
Serious fine, Okay, So what after that? Okay, so you
get a written word. First act of Shenanigan's is a
written warning Okay, then.
Speaker 2 (11:29):
What then the second violation is a five hundred dollars fine.
Speaker 1 (11:33):
No, this is just a proposal. It hasn't been enacted, right, correct, Okay?
Speaker 2 (11:36):
And then the third violation of fifteen hundred dollars okay,
or more or more.
Speaker 1 (11:40):
I'm gonna I'm going to take a or more. We're
just making it up. It's however we feel.
Speaker 2 (11:45):
Third violation okay, case not.
Speaker 1 (11:48):
To label anyone, not to put any you know, anybody
in a box. But what do you think are the
odds that if you're just letting your youth or child
roam the streets of a dangerous metropolitan city unattended, not once,
but twice, if the first time didn't do it for you.
Speaker 2 (12:10):
If you're with the written notice, if.
Speaker 1 (12:12):
You need the written notice, right, okay, that's one thing,
it's bad if you need the written notice. Two, if
you'll do it twice, do you think one that the
find is gonna make any difference? And to that they'll
pay it or be able to pay it. Let's just
say the quiet part out loud.
Speaker 2 (12:26):
Yeah, that will they pay it?
Speaker 1 (12:27):
Nothing to those people?
Speaker 2 (12:29):
Yeah, I understand what they're doing. I mean they're trying
to you know, emphasize the need for parents to pay
more attention where your kids are and if you don't,
it's going to start costing you money. So I think
the intention is good will. The execution matter.
Speaker 1 (12:43):
See the problem is when I have a poppers jail.
If we had a poppers jail, that might make some difference.
Where if you're owed, like say you lost a will
lawsuit to a duel or you just keep you know whatever,
and you couldn't pay that back, then until you get
on a plan to pay that back, you got to go,
you know, to the pokey somewhere or something that didn't
exist like that doesn't that is not a thing. It
(13:04):
doesn't occur. So these okay, you're gonna find them. Who's
gonna collect You're gonna send Guido over. Hey, it's time
to pay up. And what if they don't then what
the answer is nothing. We already don't have enough bed,
enough place to put these people. This is ridiculous because
you can't force people to be parents. You cannot force
them to be parents.
Speaker 2 (13:23):
Okay, So counselor Josh Bain, he said that the ordinance
aims to add consequences. That's the thing. Either do it
or or what are you gonna give? Okay, we're gonna
find you, and we.
Speaker 1 (13:34):
Like Baine Bane's actually gonna be on with us tomorrow
too to discuss this, because maybe we're missing some angle
on it. But you know, Abdula has talked about this before,
and I hope I'm not, you know, mischaracterizing what he's saying,
but I think maybe he's used verbage similar to this.
(13:55):
These kids are gonna get the message when you give
him a swift kick up the back side. That's what
they'll understand. These parents, Sorry, if you're on multiple occasions
letting your underage child roam, this is not Mayberry. You know,
this is not small town USA. This is Indianapolis, Indiana,
(14:16):
with at or near record homicide numbers every single year.
If on multiple occasions you're letting your kid just roam
the streets, you're kind of a zero. Look, I'm sorry.
Maybe you have to work a second job, maybe a third.
I'm not saying that every person is a zero, but
for the vast majority of this, it's not simply well,
(14:37):
Martha was out working too many jobs to provide for kids,
and she couldn't keep an eye on everybody. A lot
of these is there's no father involved. In many cases,
they don't want to be around, or if they are,
they're not engaged. I mean, this is ridiculous to think
that these people are gonna pay this or be held
accountable to pay it. It's just they're just throwing things
out at this point.
Speaker 2 (14:58):
Okay, So the proposal is going to be a introduced
in committee next Monday, Full City County Council votes expected
in September, after summer's over.
Speaker 1 (15:07):
And well they're not even voting on it until hey,
because here's what they'll do. This is why they're doing it.
It'll be winter and then they'll be like, see, the
kids were off the streets. Totally work.
Speaker 2 (15:15):
It works right exactly.
Speaker 4 (15:17):
Now.
Speaker 2 (15:17):
If passed, the finds are going to go into effect
in September, and if the finds go unpaid violations will
be referred to the accounty prosecutor and proceed them. Yes,
because his hands aren't full with other things.
Speaker 1 (15:35):
You're gonna go get these parents. Okay, we got to
take a break when we come back. This is an
unbelievable story. So Austin Bonta is the mayor of Portage, Indiana.
That's the region and by the way when I talked
to him yesterday. This is how powerful our uh our
reach is. I called and he was like, I was
in a meeting, but I had to know if it
(15:55):
was the Rob Kendall who was calling all the way
up in Portage. This is an incredible story. He is
the mayor of Portage and he well, I think the
guy kind of confirmed it. I don't know if you
have to say allege. He has produced text messages from
Ed Soliday, who is the big head honcho on the
house side of utilities, threatening to withhold future increases in
money to the city of Portage over this mayor being
(16:18):
critical of the I U r C and a utility rate.
Utility there in Portage and utility right next an unbelievable story.
Austin will join us next.
Speaker 2 (16:30):
It's Kennel Casey on ninety three WYBC.
Speaker 1 (16:41):
He did a state representative power one tried a strong
arm of mayor over his criticism of a utility. Let's
make some sense of it. It's Kennell A. Casey show.
I'm Rob Casey's here. Join now on the WIBC hotline
by Austin Bonta. He is the mayor of Portage and
He had a fascinating post on Facebook the other day
(17:04):
alleging that Representative Ed Soliday, who is the chairman of
the Utilities, Energy and Telecommunications Committee in the Indiana House
of Representatives, essentially threatened to withhold money from his city
over his criticism of a utility. Mayor Bonta joins us
now Austin, Hello, Hey, how are you all right?
Speaker 2 (17:24):
So?
Speaker 1 (17:25):
Did I get that right? That essentially you were critical
of a local utility? Nipscoe is their name? Is that correct?
Speaker 3 (17:33):
Nipscoe is the one that services northwest Indiana, including Lake
in Porter County, Porter County being where my city, Portage
is located.
Speaker 1 (17:41):
Yeah, so what they're an electric company.
Speaker 2 (17:43):
Right, electric?
Speaker 3 (17:45):
I guess yeah, yeah.
Speaker 1 (17:46):
And so you're kriognamroung you at your constituents in the
Portage area had seen a large increase in utility rates
over the past couple years, or a proposed utility rate increase.
Speaker 3 (17:59):
So there was a very recent spike a number of
people having bills going from you know, two hundred a
month to five hundred dollars a month. It took a lot,
by surprise. I was even in conversation with like a
church for example, yesterday their bill this month went up
by four thousand dollars, which they were not prepared for.
You know, a lot of people didn't realize how big
the Nipsko hike was going to hit them. So what
(18:21):
happened is that actually, earlier in the year, our city
council had done a believe with a unanimous resolution that
was sent to the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission essentially asking
not to approve the latest Nipskoe hike. And let me
see here.
Speaker 1 (18:41):
Yeah, so so just so high level Austin for our
audience again, Austin BoNT is our guest. He's the mayor
of Portage. These utility rates are hitting your constituents. You
and your city council said, this is out of control.
It's got to stop. We gotta fight this. You send
this to the i I U r C, who is
in charge of approving rate hikes. Is that right?
Speaker 3 (19:00):
So that's the history of what happened. What happened more
recently last week on Monday, July twenty eighth, I did
a pretty long Facebook post. I'm kind of known for
doing that, and what I wanted to do was I
wanted to explain to residents because We've had so many
call into city Hall or come into city Hall because
a lot of people have a misconception that the city
(19:20):
government has some regulatory over authority over their electric bill,
and we do not. It's a common thing that if
somebody has got a problem with their electric bill, they
might call city Hall, and then we got to explain
who to actually call. We've had so many of those
complaints and quite frankly, people being scared, you know, call in.
I did a Facebook post originally last Monday explaining two things.
(19:43):
One is that even though I completely understand the concern
and frustration and fear that some people have over this,
I had to explain that the city government, local government
does not have that authority when they're doing a rate hike.
That's controlled by the iu RC. The second thing I said,
as I mentioned that there is what I believe to
be a growing movement in Indiana to get some legislation
(20:06):
passed maybe next year, to either add some elected members
to that board. I've also heard proposals to make the
entire board an elected body, and of course that might
come with its own regulations ideas about who can run.
But very shortly after I made that post, online Representative
Edmund Soliday of the fourth District, which we are not in.
(20:28):
The City of Portage is not in the fourth district.
He sent me a tech message. It's kind of made
some huge assumptions about my views and my reasons for
thinking that we need that. But it ended with and
I'll want to make sure I quote this exactly. He said,
I promise I will work hard to make certain your
city never gets any revenue increases. So to clarify, he
(20:50):
never threatened to take away or withhold existing funds. That
would certainly be frightening if an attempt like that were
to happen. But the actual text was a promise to
work hard to make certain never get any revenue increases.
So I guess whatever he can do to stop our
city from getting money going forward.
Speaker 1 (21:05):
Well, okay, So, so Soliday represents the area up there.
He's not technically your represented there in Portage, but he
represents the area, and he's the head of the of
the of the utilities right he.
Speaker 3 (21:16):
Is in the state legislature. He is the chairman of
the Utility, Energy and Telecommunications Committee and a very I
would say certainly a very influential member of the state liature.
I've been told by a number of people. Yeah, that's
the guy that you don't want to make mad.
Speaker 1 (21:32):
Okay, so but what is But what is he mad about?
He's mad that you say what that you said? Hey,
the utility rates are kind of out of control to
think most normal people would think, and we need some
new way of policing. Like, that's what he is mad
at you about.
Speaker 3 (21:47):
That's what bothers me about it. I mean, it looks
like to me that it's to put it simply, if
you're mad at me for saying that the rates are
affecting people in a negative way, I don't know what
to tell you. There's me and what I took from
it is, do not publicly criticize the iu RC or
do not advocate for reform to it, otherwise I will
(22:09):
go after you. And that really is my trouble here.
And it's like I told the city council, you know, recently,
for a member of the state legislature to have a
personal disagreement with me, or a disagreement with me over
a political view, go after me all you want, but
to take it out on a city, our funding, our
public safety, literally, the operations our people count on because
(22:30):
you disagree with me about a state level issue. I
just can't that's not acceptable.
Speaker 1 (22:35):
Real quickly, before Casey EPs in here, reintroduce our guest.
Austin BoNT is our guest. He's the mayor of Portage.
We're talking about this text message that he received or
said he received from Ed Soliday. He oversees utilities in
the state of any in the House of Representatives threatening
to essentially not give any additional money new money over
what they currently have to the city of Portage because
(22:56):
the mayor opposed massive utility increases.
Speaker 2 (23:00):
I'm curious two questions. What did Nipsko say was the
reason for the rate increase? And where do you go
from here?
Speaker 3 (23:08):
Yeah? So, I mean Nipsko they proposed the increase based
on a number of different factors, and I want to
make clear I do not believe I'm the person qualified
to comment on what a rate should be. Not trying
to back out of that. I mean as a resident,
I'm very concerned about the rate increases and how they happened.
But to me, this is really uh. Nipsko's given no
(23:28):
statement about this issue, you know, by the way, But
to me, what's really the concern. Here is a member
of the state legislature threatening to use any authority he
has to go after a whole city over a political
opinion of one's city official. Again, if this had to
do with a response to an action taken by my city,
it doesn't appear to be based on that resolution that
(23:50):
the city council passed. It seems to be very much
based on my statement. I just think we've got a
serious issue in Indiana. If people can be okay with
that happening, you know what I mean.
Speaker 1 (24:00):
Well, and we've talked about the Soliday guy before he's
nine million years old. We've talked about all the boneheaded
decisions he's made. And I think this is the thing, Austin.
You're entitled to whatever opinion you want on utilities or
a government body, which the IURC is. You're entitled to
think they're great. You're entitled think they're awful. You're an
elected person. Your job is to advocate for your citizens.
And for him to send that sort of message to you,
(24:24):
essentially threatening, like you said, future funds to your city,
that is gross beyond belief.
Speaker 3 (24:30):
And I will add he has confirmed to the local
media as of last night, that he did send the
tech a he's got. I was very disappointed by his statement.
He said that that was a quote as the cuff remark,
and he should not have been taken literally. And as
I said last night, I just don't know how to
take that metaphorically or figuratively. I don't know how to
(24:54):
take I promise I will work hard to make sure
you get no increases. I just don't know how to
take that as a as a metaphor.
Speaker 1 (25:02):
Well, and it wasn't, and then I'll that case happen here.
But it wasn't just one sentence. He wrote multiple paragraphs
to you. How could you say, don't take it literally?
He wrote, I'm looking at the thing that you posted
on It was formatted.
Speaker 3 (25:13):
I mean that took some effort. That was the list.
That was a voice text. I don't think it was
I that's not that doesn't that looks very well like
ridden like I wanted to make sure I got each
point to you.
Speaker 2 (25:23):
Bostin. You haven't spoken to him since this, have you? No?
Speaker 3 (25:27):
And actually we have not spoken to each other a
great deal. Even when he sent me the text, he
was not somebody in my contact list. So when I
first read that message. I had to call some people
who I just knew to be more connected in let's
say County wy area, you know, politics, And I basically said, hey,
if I gave you a number, could you look that
number up and tell me if it's somebody in your context,
(25:48):
and multiple times confirmed that that was at Soliday. Then
I went and confirmed it another way to get you
an idea. This happened not this Monday, but last Monday.
So when I get a threat to the city, I'm
not going to call somebody and try to negotiate that
threat down. If this had been a personal attack or
threat against me, that's kind of a different story and
(26:09):
a more private story. Right If he had said, Hey,
I'm going to move to the city of Fortage and
run against you in the next election, or hey, I'm
gonna go after your reputation, that can be something that
I would take as a personal thing. At least that's
my view of it. It's the fact that he made
it about our cities funding that after talking with the
number of people, we decided I wouldn't be being a
(26:29):
responsible mayor if I didn't disclose that to my city
council and to the public that this threat was made
against us.
Speaker 1 (26:36):
Yeah, Austin, I think my new favorite local elected official
because you did the right thing, which is just expose
these people. These people at the state House are dirty,
rotten people. And that's awesome that you put this out.
There's been hundreds and hundreds of people share this. Even
though you're all the way up in Portage. It ended
up on our radar and that's awesome. Man. You got
to fight fire with these fire with fire with these dudes,
(26:58):
and that's awesome that you exposed. And thanks for being
with us today.
Speaker 3 (27:01):
Hey, appreciate you guys for giving me the opportunity to
speak and of course clarify the situation r end but
also state that actions like this from a member of
the state legislature it's just totally unacceptable.
Speaker 2 (27:12):
You're listening to Kettel and Casey on ninety three WIBC.
Speaker 1 (27:21):
So you got some data that shows the public is
very aware of what's going on with the Epstein stuff.
Speaker 2 (27:27):
Yeah. So it was a new survey, that survey that
came out and let me just see if I can
find who did it. This was a ledger in collaboration
with three thirty eight Canada, and it just sounds main media, all.
Speaker 1 (27:40):
Those people involved, it has to be legitimate.
Speaker 2 (27:42):
So they said, eighty four percent of Americans are aware
of the Epstein case, forty five percent believe Donald Trump
is involved on some level, twenty nine percent disagree, twenty
six percent are unsure, seventy seven percent when all government
documents related to it released.
Speaker 1 (27:58):
Okay, what was the number again? Were the numbers again
that you just read?
Speaker 2 (28:02):
Eighty four percent are aware of the case.
Speaker 1 (28:04):
Uh huh.
Speaker 2 (28:04):
Forty five percent believe Donald Trump was involved on some level.
Speaker 1 (28:08):
Okay, So eighty percent are aware of the case, forty
percent believe Trump was involved in some level.
Speaker 2 (28:13):
And what's seventy seven percent want all the documents released?
Speaker 1 (28:17):
Okay, all right, one the other the are aware and
what the documents released? Totally check those. Okay. Now, when
you say Trump was involved, I wonder what that actually means.
You get this in polling a lot where it's sort
of this open ended question. I don't think that forty
percent of the public thinks Trump was on Epstein Island. Now,
(28:38):
is Trump involved? Does involvement mean he's involved in a
cover up? I would certainly be open to hearing that
and hearing that argument and buying that this behavior over
the release has been ridiculous. Was he involved in the
sense of was he involved with Epstein? Like I knew
him and went to events with him. Absolutely, we know that,
we now know they cross paths on numerous occasions. But
(29:00):
I think that's a massive stretch to say that Trump
was in any way involved in any sort of illegal
activity with Epstein. I don't think there's been any proof
of that.
Speaker 2 (29:09):
Well, the line is almost half of respondence, forty five
percent believe Donald Trump was involved, while twenty nine percent disagree.
Twenty six percent are unsure.
Speaker 1 (29:18):
So they're saying he is essentially covering this up now
because he was involved in some capacity.
Speaker 2 (29:25):
Involved somehow, some way. Yeah.
Speaker 1 (29:28):
I don't know about that, but the number the eighty
percent are aware, I would certainly believe, and the seventy
seven percent want all the stuff released totally agree. The
problem with all of this is we need the public
to be as passionate as they are in Epstein and
all these other issues. This is the problem, right, It
gets media coverage, it's salacious, it's obviously just an abhorrent thing,
(29:53):
and so the public engages he'd engage in all the
other stuff they did we'd have a much better government.
Speaker 2 (29:59):
The interesting thing about this poll is that it says
seventy seven percent when all government documents related to the
Epstein case released, strongest support among Democrats eighty five percent, Okay,
eighty five percent when all documents released. Why didn't they
do it well?
Speaker 1 (30:16):
And the answer is clearly, they're like, I think too
many let me ear phrases. I think to many people
they believe that the answer is clear, and that is
that there's stuff they don't want to get out, that
there's information, whether it is that he he being Epstein
was acting as some sort of agent for a foreign
government in some capacity that we have a relationship with,
(30:39):
whether it is that there are high profile people that
would be foreign leaders potentially that we have relationships with,
that could be in trouble, high ranking business people that
are potentially major financiers of various campaigns, and cause you
don't know, it could be a mixture of all of
the things. But this is not normal behavior. There's no
(31:02):
person walking the planet who is sympathetic to Jeffrey Epstein.
There's no reason to not just take the biggest colossal
dump on this guy imaginable and put all the information
out unless there's someone or something you're protecting.
Speaker 2 (31:15):
So Donald Trump was asked about this yesterday at the
White House and he said a dirty words.
Speaker 3 (31:22):
Hosting a gatherer in the evening, having responded to the Epstein.
Speaker 1 (31:25):
Situation, is he working on what? He hosting some.
Speaker 3 (31:28):
Kind of gathering atom advisors the sevening to talk about
how to respond to the Epstein situation.
Speaker 2 (31:34):
I don't know.
Speaker 1 (31:34):
I could ask you that question. I don't know of it.
Speaker 4 (31:38):
But I think here's the man, right.
Speaker 1 (31:40):
I saw a reporter today and it's completely fake news.
We're not meeting to talk about the Epstein situation.
Speaker 3 (31:47):
And I think the reporter who reported it needs to
get better sources.
Speaker 1 (31:51):
Look, the whole thing is a hoax.
Speaker 4 (31:53):
It's put out by the Democrats because we've had the
most successful six months in the history of our country.
And that's just a way of trying to divert attention
to something that's total both. Okay, yeah, please.
Speaker 3 (32:08):
I knew.
Speaker 1 (32:09):
Okay, So again, he is his own worst enemy. Epstein
is not a hoax. Jeffrey Epstein is not a oax.
He was a real human being who actually lived. What
Jeffrey Epstein did is not a hoax. He really did
traffic young women for sexual abuse. We know that unless
(32:30):
you think all of these women and the evidence that
was presented, he why was he in a prison cell
when he allegedly killed himself? Why was Gilaine Maxwell convicted?
If none of this happened, It's not a hoax. And
so he demeans and really takes away any effective arguments
he might have when he calls it a hoax. It
(32:51):
is not a hoax. And this is what makes people
so in rage. And then to act like you're trying
to distract us from how successful are administration is as
though you're Reagan circa eighty four and it's morning again
in America. It's not. Some things are better in this country.
The border is being an Immigration is so much better.
(33:11):
He's doing a great job with that, but everything is
still super expensive. We're hearing all sorts of reports now
about jobs not going well. Foreign policy is still largely
a mess. Some things are a little better, but like
it's not. This is not some great administration that's humming
along and everybody's back to work. I mean everybody is working,
(33:33):
but I mean in terms of the job's numbers, et cetera,
Like this is not great right now. And so for
him to say that and then always play the victim,
it gets a little tiring.
Speaker 2 (33:44):
So there was a report yesterday somebody came out and
said that JD Vance was meeting with some high level
people including Pam Bondie and how they were going to
start addressing everything with Epstein. And as you just heard,
JD Vance came out and said, you know, that's bad information.
That meeting is never happening. It was never going to happen.
Of course, we all know JD Vance was busy packing
(34:06):
his bags because he's here in Indianapolis today.
Speaker 1 (34:10):
Scheduled to be He could be here right now.
Speaker 2 (34:12):
Maybe he is. Well there's a big, dark black tarp
in front of the Governor's office, so you don't know, and.
Speaker 1 (34:20):
Nothing says we're on the up and up like a
big giant tarp and going behind closed doors. Am I right?
Speaker 2 (34:26):
Big material curtain is what it is.
Speaker 1 (34:30):
It's just these people are exhausting.
Speaker 2 (34:33):
Well, we're going to continue to talk about Donald Trump
because he had an announcement yesterday about chips and semiconductors.
You're listening to Kendall and Casey. It is ninety three
WYBC yours
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!