Recent storms have exposed a problem that Northwest Indiana can no longer afford to ignore. Prolonged power outages are not simply an inconvenience. They raise serious questions about infrastructure, preparedness, regulatory oversight, and the responsibility of those entrusted to protect the public interest.
Let us begin with an important distinction. Mayors do not have the authority to direct NIPSCO to make infrastructure investments, change its rates, or alter its maintenance practices. Those responsibilities fall largely within the authority of the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission (IURC), the Governor, and the Indiana General Assembly. That does not mean local leaders should remain silent. It does mean that accountability must be directed toward everyone who has had the authority to influence these decisions.
It is also important to recognize that local officials are not powerless simply because they cannot directly regulate NIPSCO. I, along with members of the Gary Common Council, sponsored a resolution formally placing NIPSCO on notice regarding excessive delivery charges, the growing burden of utility rates on residents, and the company’s failure to adequately protect the people it serves. That action reflects the responsibility local officials must advocate for their constituents, raise concerns publicly, and demand accountability even when the ultimate regulatory authority rests with the state.
That raises a fair question about the officials who have represented Northwest Indiana over the years. What was done during their time in office to address aging electrical infrastructure, vegetation management, reliability, and utility rates? These are not new concerns created by the latest storm.
The mayor has been right to call attention to weaknesses in NIPSCO’s infrastructure. However, the conversation should not begin and end with the current administration or any previous mayoral administrations. The deterioration of critical infrastructure is a long term issue that has crossed political and administrative boundaries.
I want to take a moment to acknowledge and appreciate those who have responded with action. Thank you to Governor Mike Braun and to the federal, state, and local officials who came into Northwest Indiana prepared to assist, bringing resources and personnel to communities dealing with the consequences of this storm. In a crisis, government is at its best when officials put aside political differences, come to the affected communities, identify the needs, and help deliver solutions. That kind of response deserves recognition.
This moment also requires something more than political ego or self promotion. Residents who are without power, facing damaged homes, disrupted businesses, spoiled food, and uncertainty about when normal life will return are not looking for political or religious theater. They need leaders who are willing to roll up their sleeves, work with one another, listen to residents, and actually do the difficult work required to solve problems. Leadership during a crisis should be measured by results, not by who receives the most attention or who can claim the loudest credit.
There is another question that deserves serious public attention: What emergency preparedness mechanisms are currently in place within the City of Gary to protect residents. Does the city have a comprehensive emergency response plan? Are there established procedures for communicating with residents, coordinating with NIPSCO and emergency management agencies? These are not questions intended to assign blame. They are questions every community should be able to answer before the next emergency occurs, rather than after it has already begun.
There is also a legitimate concern about the relationship between regulated utilities and the elected officials who oversee the laws and policies affecting them. When an individual has been employed by a utility and later holds public office with responsibilities involving that industry, reasonable questions about independence and public accountability are unavoidable. Those questions should not be dismissed as personal attacks. They are questions the public has a right to ask.
The same principle applies to campaign contributions. Utility companies, like other corporations and organizations, participate in the political process. Campaign finance reports can tell the public who is receiving financial support and from whom. That information does not automatically establish wrongdoing, but it does make transparency and accountability especially important when elected officials are making decisions that affect utility customers.
This is also not a question of race. Residents deserve reliable electricity regardless of the community in which they live, their political affiliation, or their background. The fundamental question is whether every community receives the infrastructure investment, maintenance, and attention necessary to provide dependable service.
For too long, many residents have accepted utility problems as something they simply have to live with. The latest storm has made that increasingly difficult to defend. When families are left without electricity for extended periods, businesses are disrupted, food is lost, heating and cooling systems stop functioning, and residents are forced to confront the consequences of infrastructure decisions that were made years before the storm arrived.
Accountability should not depend on which politician we support. A genuine supporter can defend an elected official while still demanding that official answer difficult questions. Loyalty should never require abandoning judgment. At the same time, criticism should be fair, factual, and offered with the same measure of grace that we would want extended to ourselves.
There are elected officials who have consistently raised concerns about utility costs and reliability, and there are others whose voices have been less visible. Residents should pay attention to both. We should know who speaks when there is no camera present, who casks difficult questions before a crisis, and who continues asking them after public attention has moved elsewhere.
The storm has passed, but the underlying problem has not.
Northwest Indiana needs more than restored electricity. It needs a serious public conversation about whether our infrastructure is adequate for the future and whether our elected and regulatory leaders are prepared to demand the accountability residents deserve.
The next major storm will come. The only question is whether we will be better prepared when it does.
Darren Washington is an at-large member of the Gary Common Council.
More Top Picks Best Portable Radios