Evidence of Township Mismanagement Continues to Grow

For the last 14 months — to the day (the Kernan-Shepard report was released December 11, 2007) — the Indiana Chamber and allies have touted local government reform and pointed out the absurdities in our no longer viable township system. Today, Chamber President Kevin Brinegar presented new information in his testimony on Senate Bill 512.

Consider the following. Is this really how we want our taxpayer dollars spent?

  • The trustee who doubled her own salary — without authorization — and gave her husband (the deputy trustee, of course, who didn’t know he had that role) a 63% increase
  • Or the one who altered 46 checks (with a nearly $21,000 price tag) and overpaid himself by more than $15,000, all while being in office for 22 months
  • How about the trustee who paid himself an entire year’s salary and 12 months of rent for keeping his office in his home — all on January 1

Reports of nepotism have been rampant. Some, however, don’t bother hiring family members. They just give themselves multiple jobs and taxpayer funds. One township board member doubled as township clerk and tripled her take as cemetery caretaker. Another added the roles of emergency assistance investigator and deputy assessor.

There are hundreds of examples of sloppiness, neglect and criminal behavior. Brinegar’s full testimony is available here. Read it for yourself, get mad and do something about it. 

County Government Reorganization Bill Moves to Senate Floor

Indiana Chamber-supported SB 506 (County Government Reorganization – Sen. Phil Boots) passed the Senate Local Government Committee 6-5 after being amended. It will now head to the Senate floor.

Those voting with the Chamber in support were: Phil Boots (R-Crawfordsville), Beverly Gard (R-Greenfield), Travis Holdman (R-Markle), Connie Lawson (R-Danville), Sue Landske (R-Cedar Lake) and Lonnie Randolph (D-East Chicago).

Those against were: Jean Breaux (D-Indianapolis), Jim Buck (R-Kokomo), Tim Lanane (D-Anderson), Mike Young (R-Indianapolis) and Richard Young (D-Milltown).

This bill reorganizes structure of county government to one of two models – either a single county executive (instead of three commissioners) with the legislative duties transferred to the county council or having a combined county commission that would have a county manager to carry out the county executive duties. It also makes changes to locally originated reorganization procedures and creates the Office of Local Government Technical Assistance.

This will be the first Kernan-Shepard bill to go to the Senate floor, after a long and difficult committee hearing. The bill was changed with two added amendments. The first one stripped the original bill and added an additional county government model that resembles a town board and a mechanism for local choice to be made. It allows a two-week period for the current county commissioners to make one of three choices: 1) select the Kernan-Shepard model of county government with a single county executive and transfer legislative duties to the county council, 2) opt for a more rural county model with a five-person council that hires a county manager or 3) simply do nothing.  If the county commissioners do nothing, it triggers a voter referendum for them to make the choice between the two options. The second amendment exempted Lake County from the bill.

The Indiana Chamber organized supporting testimony and appreciates the many people from around the state who came to testify in support of various aspects of the bill. This will be very contentious in the full Senate, with many anticipated amendments to change its applicability. Moreover, many legislators feel that "their" county government is just fine and don’t see the need to change.

Call your Senator NOW at (800) 382-9467 to let them know you support SB 506 in its current form. The bill is scheduled for a second reading on the Senate floor today.

Enact Government Reform Now with Legislature’s Authority

Some legislators have announced their intentions of taking the road of less resistance to achieving local government reform by punting it to the voters for county-by-county referendums.

The Indiana Chamber strongly opposes such actions as it is fully within the authority of the Legislature to make all of the recommendations by the Kernan-Shepard Commission (except for the one concerning the constitutionally required election of certain county officials).

Why do legislators single out local government structural issues to go to a referendum? Primarily because it provides cover for their friends in local government at home and tends to make it less controversial. There are many reasons why there shouldn’t be voter referendums for the local government reform legislation.  For one, a county-by-county referendum would result in a hodgepodge of governmental structures, making things worse than they are now. Our voters elect legislators to represent them in the General Assembly and deliberate on hard issues and make tough decisions, not to pass the buck. Local government tends to be invisible to many citizens. To educate them on the nuances of Indiana’s complicated system of local government is a massive and costly process that can and should be avoided. The Chamber will be working with its allies to ensure referendums related to local government do not pass.

In Gov. Daniels’ recent State of the State address, he said, "The largest and most momentous of our opportunities lies in the area of governmental reform. The cost in dollars, confusion and just plain bad government of our 150-year-old system is by now completely beyond dispute. … The hour for action has arrived."

We encourage you to visit MySmartgov.org to learn more about the issues and what you can do. You can also locate and contact your legislators here.

* This is an excerpt from our weekly Legislative Report. Indiana Chamber members receive the full report each Friday during the General Assembly session.

Reporter: No Excuse for Indiana Legislature to Ignore Consolidation

WRTV6 reporter and blogger Norman Cox offered some very sensical commentary over the break, asking the Indiana legislature to "walk and chew gum at the same time" when it comes to consolidating government. Most notably, he believes the legislature should stop making excuses and actually work to implement the township consolidation put forth in the Kernan-Shepard report. He writes:

As soon as Governor Mitch Daniels announced his plan to reorganize county government and get rid of townships, a modified version of last year’s Kernan-Shepard report, House Speaker Pat Bauer immediately shot down the idea, saying that legislators need to spend all their time on salvaging Indiana’s economy, balancing the budget, and keeping critical state functions such as schools afloat. Why? Are our senators and representatives collectively unable to do more than one task at a time?

I suspect the real reason for deep-sixing any reform package is that too many members simply oppose the idea for various reasons. Because they once held the lower-level offices that would be eliminated. Because their friends and supporters now hold them. Maybe because they genuinely believe getting rid of the offices is a bad idea. But don’t use the economy as an excuse.

Chamber Issues Statement on Governor’s Reform Agenda

Governor Mitch Daniels discussed his hopes today to further push government reform in the upcoming legislative session, with Kernan-Shepard Report architects Joe Kernan and Randall Shepard in attendance. We’ve issued a press release in response, indicating our continued support:

When the Indiana Commission on Local Government Reform released its 27 recommendations one year ago (on December 11, 2007), the Indiana Chamber said, "This report places the emphasis exactly where it needs to be — on increased local government efficiency and reduced spending."

Kevin Brinegar, Indiana Chamber president, says today: "Nothing has changed. In fact, in these challenging economic times it’s more important than ever for Hoosiers to demand that the General Assembly enact the recommendations of the Kernan-Shepard Commission so that we may all benefit from high-performing local governments, and for those local units to operate as cost-efficiently as possible.

"We’ve been encouraged by the discussion and the progress over the past year. Hoosiers made their preference for better local government clear at the polls in November when they voted to move the majority of the remaining tax assessing duties from the township to the county level.

"This is not strictly a business issue. It’s putting in place a structure that allows everyone easier access to libraries and other government services, as well as helping ensure the highest levels of public safety," Brinegar concludes. 

Indy Star Blasts Washington Township Board

We brought you this gem last week. Now, the Indy Star is weighing in with some strong words against the Washington Township board that voted to give itself a 60% pay increase. The Star rightfully also points out that this is just a microcosm of the entire township government problem:

Over protests from residents and with little discussion, the Washington Township Board last week handed itself a 60 percent pay raise, effectively reversing a pay cut the board accepted last year after the township fire department was merged with the city’s.

… Eliminating township government altogether is a prominent recommendation of the Indiana Commission on Local Government Reform, whose report last year has been driving high-level discussions about municipal efficiency. One major result already is the folding of township assessors into one countywide office. A new state law accomplished that for smaller counties; and Marion County, for one, approved a referendum this month abolishing the job of township assessor.

Can township government itself, and township boards, be next? Gov. Mitch Daniels, among others, hopes so, arguing convincingly that multiple redundant layers of local government waste money and impede service. As property assessing joins police and fire protection among countywide functions, the dispensability of outmoded township governance will become more obvious.

Defenders of that 19th-century vestige maintain that it keeps public servants closer to the public. Whether that’s worth higher cost and lower efficiency is debatable in any case. In the case of the Washington Township Board, close turns out to be more like in-your-face.

Again, if the board wanted to make a case about job duties changing and whatnot as justification for a raise, I’m sure most of us would be willing to listen. Probably still wouldn’t support it, but we’d listen. Yet the unwillingness to even listen to public input or discuss the matter with the media, as displayed by reporter Norman Cox’s original blog (linked in our first post), is the most alarming aspect of this. The government is not God; it should work for us.

Drama in Washington Township

So local TV reporter Norman Cox wanted to ask some questions about a pay raise the Washington Township Board members gave themselves (in a 4-3 vote) last night. Well, that didn’t go so well as the whole transparency thing kind of went down the ol’ commode:

Last night the township board’s Democratic majority rammed through a 60% pay raise for board members. They did so without speaking one word at the public meeting to justify it. They then refused to answer questions from the media or the public after the meeting.

I won’t post any more because you should really read Cox’s entire blog post if you want to start your weekend with a little disbelief. Oh, and you can watch an entertaining video as well.

Pay raise? Sure, we’ve earned it — just don’t ask us about it.

MySmartgov Enthused Over Assessor Referendum Results

Inside INdiana Business has the good news today regarding MySmartgov’s success on Election Day. Many voters in the state supported moving township assessing duties to the counties — a move that was encouraged by the Kernan-Shepard Report and supported by the Indiana Chamber.

Voters in 31 of the 43 townships where township assessors still existed called for uniform assessments and fair taxation yesterday by voting to eliminate township assessors.

“Voters across the state cried ‘Enough!’ loudly and clearly,” said Marilyn Schultz, executive director of MySmartgov.org, an organization formed to advocate for streamlined local government. “Their votes were a resounding call for change in the antiquated, redundant and unfair way that property has been assessed in Indiana for far too long.”

The decisive vote is an unambiguous sign to members of the General Assembly that Hoosiers want to update and streamline their local government, most of which was established to meet 19th-century needs. Lawmakers will be asked during the upcoming legislative session to enact additional reforms recommended by the Indiana Commission on Local Government Reform.

Continue reading

Vote “Yes” to Transfer Township Assessor Duties to County

We’ve sung the praises of MySmartGov before, but just want to reiterate the importance of the Township Assessor question by referencing the site, which outlines why this is such an important subject for taxpayers:

Until recently, property in Indiana was assessed by 1,008 township assessors in 1,008 different ways. Some assessors’ work may have been impeccable, but the taxpayers in their townships still may have been paying more than their fair share of taxes because of the less competent job by an assessor down the road.

In fact, a 2005 study by the Indiana Fiscal Policy Institute found that 80 percent of the townships did not meet international standards for uniformity. The assessments were well outside the accepted error rate of plus or minus 15 percent – that is, international standards say it is acceptable for a $100,000 house to be assessed anywhere from $85,000 to $115,000.

Our advice: You want to vote "Yes" on the ballot question, "Should the assessing duties of the elected township assessor in the township be transferred to the county assessor?"

But will you even be able to vote on this important initiative? Check here to see if your township will be voting on the matter.

Your Money, Their Politics — Not a Good Mix

Township employees want to keep their jobs. There’s no big surprise there. But the fact that township employees would willingly and knowingly break the law (they have to understand that, don’t they?) to accomplish that goal is not only ironic, but somewhat tragic.

MySmartgov.org writes about the t-shirts, signs and letters (all generated on the public’s time and/or dime) that are bad enough. The "special dues assessment," however, is basically picking the pockets of taxpayers to run a political campaign. Those taxpayers can make their own choices. They don’t need their money used to save the "level of government closest to the taxpayers" when two-thirds of those taxpayers don’t know who their township officials are and have never used their services.

The November 4 referendum question in 43 townships states: Should the assessing duties of the elected township assessor in this township be transferred to the county assessor? MySmartgov.org wants you to look at the facts and make up your own mind. That only seems fair.