Indiana legislators are taking their most serious look yet at the long-overdue need to eliminate bloated, inefficient township government, but a bill that emerged from the House this week would create the worst of both worlds.

The House voted to give voters in each of the state’s 1,006 townships the power to determine whether each individual township will survive. The concept would create a ridiculous patchwork of areas where there are townships next to non-townships. The hodgepodge would wipe out efficiencies to be gained by replacing townships with countywide fire districts and a county-centered poor relief system. Instead, the bill would create a system almost destined to fail, with county governments taking over the township duties haphazardly.

Supporters touted the township-by-township referendum as the ultimate in democracy. “Let the people speak, and abide by what the people say,” state Rep. Bill Crawford said.

Don’t be fooled. The General Assembly has seldom hesitated to control local government.

Counties that want restaurant or hotel taxes, for example, must go begging to the General Assembly, which has never based those local taxes on local referendums. No, the township question is a political hot potato, and the referendum is nothing more than a path for lawmakers to avoid taking responsibility for a controversial decision.

With more than 4,000 politicians statewide elected to township offices, most wanting to hold on to their little pieces of turf, reform-minded legislators face a formidable lobby. Those township officials tout small government close to the people, but they say little about their common practices of hoarding unspent tax revenue, high costs of administration or using public money to rent office space from themselves.

One positive element of the bill would restrict township officials from employing direct relatives, a common practice in many townships. But if lawmakers are determined to settle the issue by referendum rather than making the hard decisions, they should at least make the referendums on a countywide basis, so county governments can create an orderly and efficient system to replace townships.

Veteran state Rep. Jeff Espich expressed that very concern, saying: “I am all for empowering people, but I am concerned about a hodgepodge.”

A separate bill that cleared the Senate Committee on Local Government would eliminate the three-member boards in each township – without referendums – but retain the trustees.

The Indiana Chamber of Commerce has long cited the inefficiencies of township government, and the Kernan-Shepard Commission on Local Government reform recommended eliminating townships.

But such a change may well not happen with one single act of the legislature. Reform may take years, with incremental steps, or – like the change to daylight-saving time – repeated attempts until political will, public demand and a powerful advocate unite.

This year, the township issue could well head toward a House-Senate conference committee. If nothing else, the prohibition on now-rampant township nepotism should become law. With luck, lawmakers will accomplish much more.