Subscribe
Jobs
Cars
Real Estate
Apts
Classifieds
Shop
I think if I see another local politician or read another article or hear another newscast in which the speaker laments the fact that Indiana governments may have to cut spending because of the implementation of the property tax caps, I’m gonna scream.
What short memories officials and the press have. The reason for the tax reforms of 2007 and 2008 was to get government to cut spending, not find ways to avoid doing so. And there’s been plenty of notice to get the job done. Some taxing units have; others have been woefully negligent in their response to the people’s desire to cut taxes. Here’s what I am seeing, at least in the county and town where I live, as a response to the legislature’s mandate to reduce spending by local governments:
On June 22, the Department of Local Government and Finance, the agency charged with protecting taxpayers from government greed, issued a letter, available at its Web site, stating that the allowable growth quotient for taxpayer-funded entities for 2010 budgets is 3.8 percent. HEA 1001 initiated a review process by county councils of all county budgets. Huntington County Council completed that review in August and issued a letter that stated, “all units will remain within the 3.8 percent proposed budgets. And all units will remain within their Maximum Levy’s(sic).”
On Sept. 8, I asked the Roanoke Town Council in its budget hearing how it could justify an 8 percent increase in its budget and a 12 percent increase over maximum property tax levy in light of DLGF guidelines and the county council letter. One citizen asked how the council could justify any increase at all in light of economic conditions. Clerk-Treasurer JoAnne Kirchner began her annual song and dance about how the DLGF had told her to ask for higher than allowable limits to make sure she got every dollar possible from the people because everyone proposes budgets larger than they need so the DLGF can cut them. The whole town council followed her lead. So I decided to find out whether that was really true, since the press wouldn’t.
It isn’t. I got the Huntington County Council Tabular Budget Review sheets and, lo and behold, 10 of the 23 units have budgets that stay within the 3.8 percent DLGF increase guideline. These are Huntington County; Huntington City; all four libraries – Andrews, Huntington, Markle and Roanoke; four townships – Dallas, Huntington, Jackson and Salamonie. Three even reduced their budgets from 2009 to 2010. I take my hat off to these officials who understand that the people expect government to reduce and control spending.
Then there are the other 13 units. Five towns –Andrews, Markle, Mount Etna, Roanoke, Warren – and eight townships – Clear Creek, Jefferson, Lancaster, Polk, Rock Creek, Warren, Wayne, Union – don’t get it. They raised their budgets higher than 3.8 percent. These units need to be taken to the DLGF’s woodshed and have their budgets whacked hard. If this doesn’t happen, a very negative message will be sent to those units that try to follow the rules and don’t practice the lie that “everyone is asking for more than they need so they can get cut.”
Rumor has it the Huntington County Council is considering another raise in the local option income tax. I really hope it isn’t true. Sooner or later, the legislature is going to have to give the people back real authority through tax boards that keep local governments from overtaxing the people. If the caps won’t do it, if the DLGF won’t enforce the growth quotient, and if local politicians don’t get the picture, the only choice will be to have another tax revolt, and this time make it stick.
BRIAN W. SECOR Roanoke
