Recent events have demonstrated a new low for the ethically challenged administration of Carmel mayor Jim Brainard and beg the question if City Hall is for sale.
First came a series of “Health, Wellness, Nutrition and Weight Loss” seminars by Dr. Greg Chernoff at City Hall, featuring Brainard as a keynote speaker and his book, Carmel ‘round about right, as a prize giveaway to attendees. In what can best be described as strong evidence of a quid pro quo, the 65-year old mayor recently underwent radical facelift surgery — presumably by Dr. Chernoff or his associates — to alter his appearance and attempt to give him a more youthful and camera-ready appearance in the rumored expectation of a role in a future Hallmark Channel movie production to be filmed on location in Carmel. 
Now comes evidence that the official City of Carmel website is being used to feature available commercial properties throughout the city.
The official City of Carmel web site is managed not by a city employee, but by the husband of Nancy Heck, Carmel’s Community Relations and Economic Development Director, through the web-hosting vendor that employs him. Through this arrangement, Jim Brainard can attempt to deflect any criticisms of content on the web site as the work of a third party. Yet, City Hall insiders confirm that the mayor himself directs or at least is aware of everything posted to the web site – that nothing is permitted to be posted on it without his knowledge. Why would the Mayor knowingly allow a $2.775M building site for a Residential Property, Valinet Woods, for sale appear on a City webpage? This has to be illegal and is most certainly highly unethical.
Perhaps coincidentally, Central District councilor Bruce Kimball has recently announced on social media that he is completing coursework to obtain a commercial real estate license. This, on top of at-large councilor Jeff Worrell as an active participant in a real-estate investment group registered as Breakfast Club, LLC. That group has been involved in real estate transactions that have raised questions of whether inside knowledge from Worrell’s roles as councilor and appointee to the Carmel Redevelopment Commission have been used in these transactions, despite his insistent denials.
Don’t believe the mayor can be so daring as to direct the of use your taxes to pay for official City of Carmel platforms to host the marketing of private properties? Think again.
Quoted in a January 17. 2020 article by Kurt Christian of the Indianapolis Business Journal (“Some Carmel residents want more input on public art choices“) regarding calls for greater citizen input in the selection, purchase and installation of public art works, Brainard’s arrogance and utter contempt for citizen participation within Carmel becomes apparent as he equates public art with public safety and water quality:
“We don’t run the police, we don’t run the fire department and we don’t determine water quality by committee,” Brainard said. “You apply human judgment, and every four years, you stand before voters and they determine whether you’ve done a good job or not.”
He goes on to say,
“When we design a bridge, a road, we’re using professionals. Professional consultants. Art is no different.”
What the mayor doesn’t say – for fear of significant public backlash – is that in fact many decisions made by his office and at his direction are influenced by his deep-pocketed donors, listed on his campaign finance reports. Copies of these reports may be found online at the campaign finance reports website of the Hamilton County Elections Office – look under the ‘B’ folder, then under the subfolder ‘Brainard_Jim’ for reports listing his donors. These individuals and corporations donate generously to the mayor’s campaigns in an expectation of a quid pro quo, often in the form of the mayor using his nearly unilateral powers to direct funds and approvals to favored projects. Among them are many developers and real estate brokers that are in a position to profit personally and handsomely from Brainard’s administration.
Jim Brainard’s donors profit at taxpayer expense, with the mayor’s reelection fund in turn receiving a perpetual infusion of cash to continue this unbroken cycle.
