Nothing I love more than a pearl-clutching Republican. It’s chum in the water.
Louisville Metro Council Member Anthony Piagentini, who said, in his opinion piece for the Courier Journal, that Louisville must stop embracing mediocrity, then proceeds to blame Greenberg and the district for not handling the rollout of the now-defunct Louisville Tennis Center proposal well. In part, that isn’t untrue. Louisville shouldn’t embrace mediocrity, and Greenberg definitely mishandled his role in the debacle. But… and this is a royal but… Louisville shouldn’t be sold on an idea so clearly meant to benefit the stakeholders more than the community.
I’ve discussed the forces behind the Kentucky Tennis and Pickleball Center and who would directly and immediately benefit from this construction. How much straighter of a line can be drawn to the Bellarmine tennis coach being the person creating Kentucky Tennis and Pickleball Center, and proposing the project, not for Bellarmine, exactly, but for the community. Insert sarcastic air quotes as you see fit.
The proposal just happens to target an old tennis center and land that is directly across from Bellarmine University, which would have lockers and playtime there, of course. But it’s for the community. Again, insert air quotes as needed.
It’s the worst game of three-card monte I’ve ever witnessed, and with Piagentini putting himself in the middle of this fight, the suspense builds.
It’s not his district. His district is the far East End of Louisville, and we can be sure Piagentini isn’t really thinking about the health of the city as a whole, considering his votes, and several ethics convictions on funny money schemes.
It’s almost like Piagentini should keep his mouth shut because his loudness could be raising a lot of eyebrows in any ethics body paying attention, and for sure in the community. Man, what are you on about?
I do agree with him that Louisville shouldn’t embrace mediocrity, which makes me wonder what in his district is keeping him in his seat? We can elect better local politicians. Piagentini was convicted of ethics violations for negotiating personal pay while aiding the company in a bid for a multi-million dollar grant. And, with his Republican buddies propping him up to prevent his removal from the council the first time, why wouldn’t he feel emboldened to ignore the ethics rules again?
Piagentini could have let this proposal die on the vine quietly, but his attempts to rekindle a debate are telling. He claims to be worried that other investors won’t want to spend the time and money on projects in Louisville after this. With all of its missteps and messiness, I can’t see that this project rises to the level that would preclude other, more organized, and less obviously personal pet projects from looking at Louisville.
Courier Journal’s Joe Gerth said it well when he said that Piagentini is flailing all over the place, and when he asked, “What’s his real issue?” Piagenitini has several arguments in his op-ed:
- Louisville should reject mediocrity unless wealthy yet disorganized nobles are trying to bestow the game of Kings upon the peasants of the city.
- Business and other investors will stay away, because said peasants mistreated the wealthy and disorganized nobles who are trying to bestow greatness again through a game associated with rich folks, not regular folks.
- He is appalled that residents are rejecting said project by wealthy, yet disorganized nobles, calling it NIMBY-ism, ahem, “not in my backyard” -ism. He was sure that people only rejected projects helping the poors in neighborhoods like this.
That Piagentini is ‘appalled’ at the nerve of residents to have questions, ask for modifications, or to reject giving away public lands to a private organization run by the tennis coach of the University directly across from the park is laughable. He is shocked that the nobles didn’t get a chance to talk more to the peasants about the project. Yet, despite his surprise, Piagentini should realize that Greenberg is a politician, albeit not a great one, and that he gets nervous at the thought of tanking his next campaign before it starts.
Maybe Piagentini should pipe down and start thinking about his own campaign, or where he goes when his term is up in January 2027. Hopefully, he won’t be unopposed this time.
Nevertheless, I’m not sure raising cautionary flags to any potential ethics issues is a good look. But now I’m wondering, what is Piagetini’s stake in this?
