I'll post in color to differentiate between articles that are referenced...
Let's take a look...I intend to write a series of articles about this subject and present viewpoints from around the state. This article caught my eye and so first, Debbie Lowe's article on the subject. Pertaining primarily to Senate Bill 512:
Kernan-Shepard report threatens township leaders
2008-11-12 / Front Page
Hershman A front page article in last week's Comet told about Deer Creek Township leaders' desire to divest the township of surplus taxpayer money. The township trustee expressed concern that if the State of Indiana mandates a change in county government structure, possibly the township level of government would be abolished. She expressed fear the township would lose control of the money accumulated over the years.
In July 2007, Governor Mitch Daniels appointed the state Commission on Local Government Reform. The commission, co-chaired by former Democratic Governor Joe Kerman and Supreme Court Justice Randall T. Shepard, made 27 recommendations to streamline local government. The report was released nearly one year ago on Dec. 11, 2007.
One of those recommendations was to eliminate township government.
State Senator Brandt Hershman said Monday he would warn township trustees and advisory boards the money in question is not "township" money.
"It is unfortunate that the Kernan- Shepard Report is viewed as a threat rather than an opportunity," he said. "Ultimately my concern is the apparent feeling is that this is "township" money, because it is really 'taxpayer' money."
Hershman said the report was an "honest attempt to evaluate the effectiveness of our government." He said it developed a "series of observations about Indiana government" which provided "an opportunity to talk about how things could be better" in Indiana.
Hershman said if local government structure would be changed and result in the dissolution of township government, township services and responsibilities would be assumed by another entity. However services would remain intact. He said taxpayers fund those services now and would continue to fund them.
"To empty township accounts will force leaders to go back to the taxpayers to pay for the services," he advised.
Hershman challenged taxpayers to name a business which has not changed to keep step with the times in the past 100 years due to competition. He said local government is the only business which has remained the same.
"Townships were created when it took a half-a-day by horse to reach the county seat," he explained. "That just isn't the case anymore."
Townships operate with structured budgets and spending plans, much like the ones with which the county council works. Townships receive money from property taxes via tax rates for a general fund, township assistance (formerly poor relief), fire fighting, parks and recreation, library, etc. State statute provides for the establishment of line items and the Indiana Department of Local Government Finance approves tax rates for them.
Each township is required by state statute to publish an annual financial report that details the financial history of the township for the previous year. All numbers presented in this article were taken from the townships' 2007 annual reports published in the Comet in the winter and spring of 2008.
According to "Here's Your Indiana Government," townships gener- ally function as "civil corporations for the administration of poor relief, assessment of taxable property and related functions."
The township trustee, with the consent of the township board, may purchase firefighting equipment and employ firefighters. The total township funds across the county for the line item "firefighting" to begin 2008 was $1,018,492.30 and in the line item "cumulative fire" was $451,297.95 for all townships in the county.
No two townships control the same amount of tax revenue and investments. The total amount at the end of 2007 for all townships combined in township assistance, formerly known as poor relief, equaled $326,518.31.
All townships contained $1,113,509.20 combined in their general funds at the end of 2007. Every township, except for Liberty Township, began 2008 with an amount in the tens of thousands of dollars. According to former township trustee and current county council member Ron Slavens, that number represents money available to the township to spend on any item budgeted.
"Townships suffered the same money woes as the council did," Slavens explained. "Most of them just managed it better."
Slavens explained some 2007 township property tax settlements were not received until after the first of January 2008, which skewed the amount of funds available downward on the annual reports.
Hershman said he was not convinced all of the recommendations in the report are needed. He said he did not anticipate all 27 would be addressed this year.
"But let's talk about it," he added. "Why shouldn't we examine these things?"
Hershman emphasized all changes to local government structure would be legislated according to state statute. He said bills are expected to be authored this year, introduced and then sent to committees. Bills with merit would be accepted into committee and then studied, which would include testimony received from local representatives about the benefits and pitfalls of the proposed bills.
Hershman said constituents can become and remained informed about the Kernan- Shepard report by accessing his Web site at in.gov/s7 and clicking on the "Kernan- Shepard Report" link. Hershman said his office distributes a survey at the first of the year to solicit input from taxpayers. He said he reads every personal response personally.
"I ask for their opinions because I want to hear them," he said.
He said he can be reached by E-mail via his web site and encouraged taxpayers to attend Third House Sessions. held in Monticello, for Carroll and White counties' residents. The meetings are held the third Saturday of the month at 9:30 a.m. at the Brandywine Complex, beginning in January.
"I consider the Kernan- Shepard Report a carefully considered effort and a framework for discussion and a very useful document," he concluded.
~~~~~~~~~~
I did email Senator Herschman and also went to his site to find that link. Not on the front page. That was disappointing. We as taxpayers know that township money stays in the township and is used for the township and we are quite concerned about giving that money to a wasteful central County government, particularly in Lake County.
I did find Senator Beverly Gard had these words posted on her site:
"...Five bills on local government reform are currently active in the State Senate. Two are awaiting amendment by the full Senate and could be voted on this week. Three others have received committee hearings and are awaiting committee action this week.
- Senate Bill 452 would change not only when municipal and school board elections are held, but who can serve on those governmental bodies. Elections for these officials would move to even-numbered, non-presidential election years. Statistics show voter participation more than doubles in fall elections vs. the spring primary. In addition, combining municipal elections with a general election would save a substantial amount of money.
An employee of a political subdivision would be prohibited from holding an executive or legislative office within that subdivision. Justification for the change in each case is because that elected official could influence and vote on his/her own pay, benefits and conditions of employment. On my legislative questionnaire 64 percent of respondents support this proposed change in the law.
Finally SB 452 would allow all Indiana counties to establish vote centers. Studies show vote centers, polling places where anyone could vote, regardless of which precinct they live in, would reduce costs while also encouraging higher voter turnout.
- Senate Bill 506 concerns the structure of county fiscal, legislative and executive responsibilities. The Kernan-Shepard Commission reports that Indiana is the only state in the nation that divides fiscal and other legislative policy making between two county entities, the board of commissioners and the county council.
A committee amendment would avoid a one-size-fits-all approach and would provide for a home rule decision. County commissioners would choose between three options:
While this gives counties a variety of options, some of us are concerned about theconvoluted process and the prospect of the state having too many counties with different governance models. More amendments are likely if this legislation moves forward.
- Having a county board of supervisors, which combines legislative, executive and
- fiscal responsibilities into one board with a hired county manager
- Electing a single county executive and giving the county council both fiscal and legislative responsibility or
- A referendum by voters to maintain the 19th century model of status quo or go to the board of supervisors model
- Senate Bill 512 would abolish offices of township trustees and township board members and transfer the duties and responsibilities to the county executive. In hours of testimony a parade of trustees explained to committee members the responsibilities of providing emergency poor relief and overseeing the township fire departments. My biggest concern is to make sure we successfully maintain our community volunteer fire departments. They provide an essential, valuable service that taxpayers could not afford to replace with paid, full time fire departments.
Much of the committee questioning centered on figures released by The Indianapolis Star that showed a statewide combined surplus of over $200 million for Indiana townships. The overall surplus reported for Hancock County was approximately $2.4 million for the nine townships. For its thirteen townships, Henry County showed a combined surplus of over $2.8 million. In several cases townships showed an overall surplus of more than 400 percent to overall spending of the township.
Blame cannot be placed on townships alone but on state policy and oversight that allowed this to occur. The issue of nepotism, the hiring of family members, by township trustees was also a concern of committee discussion.
The Senate Local Government Committee will amend SB 512 on Wednesday to, at a minimum, address issues of budget oversight and nepotism. Regardless of whether SB 512 eventually becomes law this year, the issue of the need for townships will continue to be discussed in the years ahead.Other reform issues include library consolidation, consolidation of school corporations with less than 500 students and election or appointment of some county office holders. A majority consensus seems to be emerging that those county officials should be elected – not appointed. Consolidation of some offices continues to be under discussion. These issues will be discussed in a future column.
It is anyone’s guess how these bills will look as the session progresses. While the discussions are not easy, they are necessary. All government needs to be scrutinized from time to time and these discussions are long overdue. How I will vote on final bill, probably not until the end of
April, depends on what the bills have in them at that time. What I won’t do, however, is vote to kill these proposals this early in the process. All legislators - not just a few committee members - need to be engaged in these debates."
So I am very glad that my Senator, Sue Landske, is the Assistant President Pro Tempore of the Senate, because she has been a great name in my area and she will have great influence over legislation. If I can get her opinion on this situation I will surely have her weigh in!
The Kernan-Shepard report states that We live in the only state in the nation that divides fiscal and other legislative policy-making between two county entities – the board of commissioners and the county council...
We also use the system of Township Trustees that keeps funds within the town and doesn't centralize poor relief and various other services. Kernan-Shepard seems to believe that, since Townships originated in the 1600's that such a system is not appropriate for the 21st Century. Really? The USA originated in the 1700's. You ready to give that up? Pasteurization and automobiles were invented in the 1800's. Shall we turn in our cars and give up on keeping milk in the refrigerator?
How many states have a balanced budget? Indiana does! Maybe the systems that we have in place enable bottom-up government that is more responsive to the people and proactive to meet their needs?
Kernan-Shepard promoters were asking voters, "Would you like to streamline government?" Gee, who doesn't think that sounds good? Would you like to cut your food bill in half? Sure! Okay, give me your spouse! Oops...maybe I don't really want that solution after all.
How would you like me to cut down your fuel costs? Great? Give me your car!!!
See, this is not all that simple. In theory the concept of streamlining government sounds good...until you realize it means centralizing, which is another step away from the people and another way THE STATE takes control over the people. Why don't we just forget county government and give all power to Indianapolis. In fact, let's forget Indianapolis and give Washington, DC full control over the entire nation in every area! That is the ultimate streamlining. How responsive will DC be to Butte, Montana? How about Cedar Lake, Indiana? Right now we have a township trustee who has made very good use of his office to systematically care for the food supplies, provide day care/preschool training for the small fry, make sure any expenditure has a record so that the office is self-auditing. He is looking to use the smallest amount of money to modernize the IT resources and allow people to access the network files when they are off-site.
In Lake County, Indiana, giving central control of anything to the County means disenfranchising every voter not tied to the Democratic Machine. Republicans might as well all leave and move to another county if the guys who turned Gary into a heap of foreclosed housing and failing businesses can have the controls to everything!
Please go ahead and show me why we should take Townships and make them irrelevant? In these times of economic hardships, it is the Indiana Townships that have conserved money and spent frugally and kept budgets within reason. We don't have our Townships bankrupting because they tend to be focused on their communities and they will not spend more than they have.
Yes, the money is not the Township's, it is the voter's money. Taking it away from Townships and giving to the County takes that money farther away and makes it less likely to come back.
SB 452 - Such a bad idea they should name it the "Edsel Bill."
As to vote centers where you do not need to be in the precinct to vote, that is surely something thought up to encourage voter fraud and confuse honest voters. Right now we have books that match voter to address. The ballot is specific to the precinct where the voter lives. Having county-wide ballots would be terribly unwieldy and trying to keep track of voters and match them to records would be a nightmare in a county-wide voter center world. Again, this seems to be a power grab by big government types trying to remove the government several steps away from the people and subtract accountability in the process.
Hoosier Pundit supplies this information:
Indiana 3rd-Fastest Growing, 3rd-Most Free State in USA
Indiana's economy grew at 4.6% in 2010, the third-fastest growing state in the union:
Also, the Mercatus Center rates Indiana as the third-most free state in the United States:
Obama and company have pooh-poohed this as impossible. Indiana came pretty close to that goal in 2010, even as the rest of the country remained mired in economic hard times.
If he were still in the presidential running, this would be quite a feather in Mitch Daniels' campaign cap (and it still could be, if he ends up on the Republican ticket as a vice presidential nominee).
5% growth, or something close to it, can be done. Indiana and a few other states prove that. The question is why Obama continues to think it's not possible.
A new report says that Indiana’s economic growth is third only to North Dakota and New York. The Bureau of Economic Analysis says the Indiana GDP grew at 4.6% in 2010.
Also, the Mercatus Center rates Indiana as the third-most free state in the United States:
#3 OverallConsider for a moment that Tim Pawlenty wants, under his economic plan, to have the American economy grow at 5% a year.
#13 Economic
#4 Personal
Obama and company have pooh-poohed this as impossible. Indiana came pretty close to that goal in 2010, even as the rest of the country remained mired in economic hard times.
If he were still in the presidential running, this would be quite a feather in Mitch Daniels' campaign cap (and it still could be, if he ends up on the Republican ticket as a vice presidential nominee).
5% growth, or something close to it, can be done. Indiana and a few other states prove that. The question is why Obama continues to think it's not possible.
