Decatur Referendum - There Are Strings Attached

Now that Decatur Township voters approved a property tax increase to bail out the School District from its own flagrant fiscal mismanagement, there are a few things the District needs to do for the Community in return.

First, recognize that this tax increase will harm some very real people; maybe even, one of your neighbors.  We have a community of modest means.  Some of our elders already decide between spending on food and spending on medication.   The home they live in was purchased at a price far lower than the assessed value upon which the tax rate is applied.  We have families, with and without kids in school, that just make ends meet and have struggled to keep their home through the Great Recession.  We have renters in similar situations, whose rent will rise to accommodate the tax hike.

Remember their very real sacrifice each time you spend a penny of that new money.

Second, spend the new money only on the new circuit breaker impact coming next year.  That is what the community was told it was for.  Not raises, not all expense paid trips to extra conferences, not new carpeting - just the upcoming fiscal shortfall.  It would not be honorable to spend it in any other fashion than for the reason broadcast to the voters.

Third, counter the ill effect of our tax rate compared with our neighboring communities, by actually improving the education delivered to Decatur's children.  A "D" school system in a Township with a high tax rate will not attract the move up homes and the basic retail that we desperately need.  The least you can do is improve the education to a "B" District level, if not an "A".  The community deserves it.  More importantly, every child deserves it.  Even a child who earns all As is more challenged and learns more in an "A" district than in a "D" district.

I am impressed with Dr. Matt Prusiecki, the new Superintendent, and like some of the ideas he has shared with me; they are forward thinking and worth a try.   I trust Decatur school's CFO, Kirk Farmer, to be a good steward of our tax dollars.   So, it is possible, if these two are given the chance, to provide children with the education they deserve while keeping our fiscal house in order.

Fourth, don't expect this tax increase will be renewed in seven years.  Use every tool available to bring down the debt payment as quickly as possible.   State law allows refinancing for an extra 10 years, which will lower the principle and likely the rate as well.  It's not perfect, but the debt is overwhelming for a community our size.  Sell the extra real estate.   New state law demands that in 2015, our TIF district must get a sunset date applied to it.  It is possible the TIF could be gone before these seven years are up; in any case, the timing will be close.

Fifth, it is time to seat a new school board.  Three of the five seats are up for election in November.  It is time to sweep out those who voted for every debt increase and tax increase our community could not afford, who voted for every golden parachute, ungodly raise, and purchase of  unnecessary property.  It is high time to seat a new board who will honor the community's sacrifices.  It is time to seat a board who will stop the excuses and improve our school system

Decatur School Referendum - Other Matters to Consider

There are some points that don't fit neatly in a discussion of the pros and cons of the upcoming May 6 Decatur School District Referendum to increase property taxes by almost $0.3 per $100 of assessed value to help the District dig out of its financial mess.  Some of these are 'in the weeds', but hopefully you'll wade in anyway.

Here are some of them:

1) Dr. Prusiecki, the new Superintendent, is demonstrating a respect for transparency and fiscal responsibility.  I've had two chances to talk with him at least briefly, and I find I trust him the more I get to know him.  I like his ideas about education, especially his respect for parents and his clear interest in putting the District's emphasis on what is best for the kids.  He is now the caretaker of the school system.  He did not cause the fiscal problems he must deal with.  Our District has a chance to improve the quality of education delivered to Decatur's children with him at the helm.  Further cutbacks only make that more difficult.  He seems to be actively listening to the community as he goes about with his presentation.  The last time I heard him, he said he has asked the CFO to obtain appraisals for the excess property the District owns; setting the stage for that property's potential sale.

2) Kirk Farmer, the CFO of the District, is the person who convinced me that a new day just might be dawning for the District when he took over the finances back in 2011.  He convinced me with his transparency, willingness to share public records, and the fact that he lives in Decatur and is one of us.  Farmer has been working diligently to dig us out of the financial hole we are in, and that is no mean feat.  But, he needs more time.  As you'll read below, other factors have caught up with the District finances and with each passing year his task becomes harder and harder to do.  Passing the Referendum would give a bit of ease back into paying the bills - not much ease, but a bit.

3) Make no mistake about it, the various taxing units are at war with one another in their attempt to push the property tax cap/circuit breaker penalties off on each other.  Witness this year's move by the City to expand the IMPD taxing district from the old City limits to the entire County.  The whole reason was to lower tax rates in the old City and raise them in the rest of the County - thereby pushing the tax cap/circuit breaker penalty outward.

4) With our tax rate topping 4%, a large fraction of property in Decatur is hitting the tax cap maximums.  Estimates last year, when the rates were lower, suggested that 2/3rds of Decatur properties were at the caps.  That means that when another taxing unit increases the amount of money they want to raise through property taxes, it hits the School District's bottom line.  In the curious world of tax cap math, one dollar increase in another budget causes a 50 cent decrease in the amount of money the School District can collect.

5) Between 2013 and 2014, 5 of the 7 taxing units who charge property taxes in Decatur raised their tax rates - this despite the fact that the total assessed value rose, so they clearly were increasing their tax levy (the total amount of taxes they were charging).  Only the School District and IndyGo lowered their tax rate.  Most of the increases were single digit, but the Decatur Township rate rose 25% and the City tax rate rose 41%.  Again, every dollar increase from another taxing unit causes a 50 cent decrease in the amount of revenue the School District can collect.

6) The debt problem is high and long term.  The district has 6 outstanding bonds, some of which do not get paid off until 2028.  Additionally, the district is paying on short term loans (the District was living off loans for a while; $2.5 M still owed).  The short term loans should be paid off in 2016 - so there is some bit of relief coming.  The payment due on the bonds rises from $13.4 M this year to $14.5 M in 2019, when it levels off for a couple of years before dropping just below $11 M from 2023 through 2028.  In 2016 the terms of the bonds will allow the District to refinance them, hopefully at a lower rate.  The legislature extended the opportunity for the District to extend the term of the bonds by 10 years - not ideal, but still it would lower the payment due and help the District make ends meet.

7) With some help coming by 2017, there are two ways of looking at the Referendum - either make the District struggle with finances for two more years through operating budget cuts, or, let them get over this hump in a way that leaves the District at its current operating levels.

8) If we vote for the Referendum, would the District use the money only to get through the worst of the crisis, or would they get used to the extra money come 2017 and become dependent upon it?  I still have deep concerns about continuing this tax increase for more than 7 years.  I think our community can bite the bullet as far as quality growth is concerned for a short period.  But, if we go beyond the short term, I fear we will never recover and we won't really get a chance to attract that move-up housing, basic retail, and good hometown jobs that everyone else in Marion County has.

9) The best I can tell, a provision in Senate Bill 118, that would create a sunset date for all old TIF districts, made it into law.  The Legislative Services Agency analysis states that an exception for the Consolidated Downtown TIF was created, but I cannot find that exception in the final version of the bill (see page 28).  More on this bill later, at it makes substantial changes in the oversight of the Metropolitan Development Commission.  If this did get into law, then the Airport TIF, including the Ameriplex portion, would have to sunset by June 30, 2025 unless the City floats new bonds with a longer term by July 1, 2015.  That is a long way away, but the future finances of our Township and its schools could be a bit brighter than it was.

This all brings us back to the start.  The most important thing about this Referendum is that it reflect the will of the Decatur community.  For that to be the case, everyone should show up on May 6 and vote.  And, for that to happen, everyone who is 18 years or older should be sure to register to vote before the April 7 deadline.  Links to easy, online registration are in the sidebar of this blog.  I hope to see you at the polls on May 6.

Decatur School Referendum - Reasons to Vote NO

There are reasons to vote against the upcoming May 6 Referendum to increase property taxes in Decatur by nearly 0.3 dollars per $100 assessed value.

1) Former Superintendent Don Stinson and the School Board knew full well that the massive debt they were loading onto our community would get caught up in tax caps and thereby require using operating funds to cover the shortfall.  They were fine with that - so let them live with it. 

2) The whole idea behind the tax caps was to make governmental units more responsible with their budgets and the amount of debt they accumulate.  If they have to make cuts, so be it.

3) The second intergenerational obligation we have is to our elder community members.  Even if you and I can afford another $50 to several hundred dollars a year, those living on a fixed income may already be in a bind.  They would have bought their homes long ago, when the costs were much lower.  With each passing year, the value of their homes have risen and along with that the property taxes due grew.  I know I would feel a lot better about this referendum if we could somehow carve out the senior citizen population - myself excluded - and forego any rise in their property tax rate.

4) The Decatur School District still owns well over one hundred acres of excess property.  More than one person has suggested to me that they sell it, even if they must take a loss.  If things are really desperate, then sell the land.

5) The district cut $12 million from their budget over the past few years, and I trust that number.  Yet, the list of cuts presented by Dr. Prusiecki suggests more might be done.  When I saw his presentation (see sidebar of this blog for a link to the PowerPoint), he offer a two-page list of cuts.  Many were from the 'Fiscal Restructuring' of a few years ago.  Only, not everything that was supposedly cut back then was actually cut.  Take the first item on the list - 7 administration positions supposedly cut. They included 4 administrators from the Central Office, one elementary principal, and two high school 'directors'.  There may have been two real cuts in the Central Office, but it is hard to tell if they have been replaced - as of now there are at least 14 administrators in the Central Office (folks under specific contract).  Certainly the Elementary Principal position was filled immediately and by this point in time the two High School Directors positions are once again filled.

A jog through the District website shows one Principal, 5 Directors, 1 Athletic Director, and 1 job-unspecified Administrators at the High School.  Beyond that, there are 8 Principals and 12 other Administrators through the rest of the District's school buildings.

6) I am extremely concerned about the impact of a higher tax rate on our community's ability to attract move up homes and much needed commercial retail.  The tax rate just over our borders is much lower, as I noted in earlier posts. 

7) Even if we could weather 7 years of higher taxes, what happens after that?  Will the district just absorb the tax increase and become dependent upon it, even as the State Legislature offers other means of lowering the cost of our debt or eases the effects of property tax caps or TIFs?

8) There are a couple of legislative items currently still in action at this year's Legislative Session that could help.  One is to give the District the ability to refinance its bonds for 10 extra years, once they are eligible in  2016 due to the bonds' own terms.  That would lower the principle and interest due, thereby lowering the tax rate which in turn lowers the number of properties hitting the tax caps.  The other would cause the Ameriplex TIF (part of the Consolidated Airport TIF) to sunset by 2025 at the latest.  The bonds owed by that TIF will be fully paid off by 2021 - so conceivably it could sunset in the last year of a 7 year referendum.

If there were to be only one 7-year referendum, it would be less destructive to our community's future than if it were to be rolled over again and again and again.

Those are the reasons to vote no that leap to mind.

[edited to  note: I thought the PowerPoint presentation by the Superintendent was posted on the website.  However, I cannot find it.  I'll post a link if I can]

Decatur Schools Referendum - Arguments For a YES Vote

There aren't many arguments in favor of voting for the May 6 Decatur Schools Referendum - but they are strong ones.

1) The kids didn't do anything wrong.  The adults were the ones who were fiscally irresponsible and overspent our ability to pay.  It seems to me that there are two intergenerational obligations - and one of those is for the community to nurture its children with at least an good education.  It is an debatable point whether Decatur is delivering on that - it surely is not providing a great education.

Still, an additional $2.5 million cutback next year does entail proposed changes that would increase class sizes.  Small, neighborhood schools and small class sizes are the only two constants in delivering quality education to children.

2) Cutbacks that include closing at least one more elementary school would not help Decatur attract the type of development we so desperately need.  Move up housing and common commercial retail is lacking.  Schools that by and large delivers a C - D caliber education (see table below) is a real hindrance in attracting those folks who will choose where to live, and where to spend according to the quality of public education available in the district.  Closing another school does not seem as if it would help improve the quality of education available in Decatur.

SCHOOL NAME	School Grade 2013
Decatur Central High School	C
Gold Academy	F
Blue Academy	C
Decatur Middle Sch	D
Stephen Decatur Elem Sch	D
Valley Mills Elementary Sch	D
Decatur Discovery Academy	D
West Newton Elementary School	B
Liberty Early Elementary School	C

Just looking at the average grade scores for abutting school districts in 2013 (which I calculated from the data provided by the Indiana Department of Education), where A = 4.0, B = 3.01 to 3.99, C = 2.01 to 2.99, D = 1.01 to 1.99, and F = 0.01 to 0.99:

Plainfield            3.96 (B)
Mooresville        3.61 (B)
Perry Tnsp          3.17 (B)
Wayne Tnsp       1.92 (D)
Decatur Tnsp      1.92 (D)

The rest of the school districts in Marion County got average grades for their schools of:

Franklin Tnsp         3.81 (B)
Speedway               3.45 (B)
Lawrence Tnsp       3.02 (B)
Washington Tnsp    2.99 (C)
Warren Tnsp           2.98 (C)
Beech Grove           2.86 (C)
Pike Tnsp                2.66 (C)
IPS                          1.70 (D)

 It may seem like a digression, but the lackluster school performance in Decatur is a real negative to a young couple with school aged children trying to decide where to call home.  Cutbacks would increase class size and thereby make it more difficult for teachers to be as effective as one would want them to be.

I really cannot think of any other reasons to vote YES in the May 6 referendum.  But, as I noted in the beginning, they are powerful reasons.

Decatur Schools Referendum - Register to Vote [edited]

To vote in the May 6 Referendum, you must be a registered voter in a Decatur Township precinct.

Although this is the Primary Election, you do NOT have to declare a party in order to vote on the Referendum.  There will be a Democrat ballot, a Republican ballot, and a non-partisan ballot available and it is your choice which one is given to you.

If you never voted, or, if you moved or changed your name since last voting, you must register to vote before midnight, April 7, 2014.  Any new voter must be at least 18 by November 4, 2014, and be a US Citizen.  [edited to add comment of alert reader -- if you are not 18 by May 6, you may NOT vote on the referendum.  You can vote for either Democrat or Republican primary contestants if you will be 18 by November 4.]

I have heard all sorts of stories from folks who came into the polling location on Election Day, who swore they were registered by the BMV or someone at a Fair, but whose registration never made it into the books.  Those folks only had one option - vote a provisional ballot and bring proof of registration to the County Election Board - likely their vote did not get counted.

New rules make getting registered in a voter registration drive quite tricky.  The best way to be sure your registration gets properly put onto the voter rolls, is to go to the Marion County Voter Registration office in person (City-County Building, 1st Floor), print off a registration form from the State's website and mail it in to the Marion County Voter Registration office yourself, or sign up online.

The easiest of these ways to register is on the State's website : www.IndianaVoters.com

On the home page you can check to see if you are registered at your address and with your current name, you can register to vote in Indiana, you can change your registration to reflect the fact you changed your address or name, you can find your polling place, and you can preview the offices and names on the ballot.

All you will need is an Indiana Drivers License or ID Card with your current address on it.

#1 Register to vote.

#2 Check that your registration got into the system -- or -- that it is current and up to date.

Do both before April 7.

Decatur Schools Referendum - Calculating the Cost to You

Because the May 6 Referendum would fix a specific extra tax rate, you can get a pretty good idea how much passage of the referendum would cost you.

The extra rate requested is 0.2986 dollars per $100 of assessed value.  Assessed value is the amount of money the City/County thinks your house and property are worth.  That will likely creep up over the next 7 years - which is the length of time the extra tax would be in effect.  If the school system got the referendum and it wanted it in year 8 as well, then it would have to put another referendum on the ballot in 2021.

Here's how you get a good estimate of the cost to you by using a little math and your last property tax bill.

Pull out your last property tax bill (pay 2013) and look at the long page titled "Special Message To Property Owner". 

In Table 1: "Summary of Your Taxes", locate line 3. "Equals subtotal of net assessed value of property". 

In the far right column of Line 3, under the heading "2013", is the important dollar value for your property that is used in this calculation.

Multiply that important dollar value by 0.003 - I used a calculator for mine.  The resulting number is the extra dollars you would have to pay if the referendum is passed. 

The School District hired a firm to run some sample homestead property taxes and calculate the extra dollars for variously valued residential property.  Here is their results (I calculated and added the column "Percent Increase in Tax Bill"):

Home Value                   Extra Tax Dollars Owed        Percent Increase in Tax Bill
$76,900                                            $50.85                                    7.4%
$92,500                                            $79.93                                    8.6%
$110,200                                        $116.65                                   10.4%
$175,000                                        $233.70                                   13.4%

Now, if you own homestead property larger than one acre, you will find that the extra tax you calculated is higher than shown in these examples, because the value of that extra land does not get any deductions.  By following the calculation method I noted above, you'll get a better representation than by using the table supplied by the District.

Rental residential property and farmland have a property tax cap of 2%.  So, increasing the tax rate by 0.3% would increase the tax bill by 15%.

Commercial and industrial property have a property tax cap of 3%.  So, increasing the tax rate by 0.3% would cause an increase in those tax bills by 10%.

Decatur Schools Referendum - Accountablility

I don't know how I will vote on the May 6 Referendum that would increase property taxes for the benefit of the Decatur School District (MSD Decatur Township). 

I do, however, know that I resent having to make this decision.

How did we get to this point? 

Why, of course, through unrestrained, extravagant, spending by former Superintendent Don Stinson, his #1 guy, Jeff Baer, and the Decatur School Board - primarily former member Don Huffman and current members Larry Taylor, Judy Collins, Cathy Wiseman, and Dale Henson.

Most folks are aware of are all the new school facilities.  What most do not realize is that in 2002 a respected accounting firm, Umbaugh and Associates, analyzed the ability of the community to handle various debt loads.  That year the total debt stood at $25.5 Million.  They concluded that by 2010, Decatur Schools could grow the debt to $80.9 Million and the community would be in a good position to afford the taxes.  Instead, our 'trusted' leaders sank us in $266.7 Million in debt by 2009.  This is a crushing debt load - one we continue to pay dearly for to this day.  It is also the primary cause of any need for passage of the upcoming Referendum.

To pay for all the School Building projects, we were told our property taxes would rise the equivalent of a weekly meal at McDonalds.  Instead, our taxes more than doubled.  Thank goodness for the property tax caps that protected us from the full brunt of our wayward School Board.

Not content with all that rubber stamped, irresponsible spending, the School Board also went on a property buying spree. They bought the old Concentra Building (Southwest Pavilion) across Kentucky Avenue from the High School and hundreds of acres of land for which there was no immediate need.  In most instances, they did not get the two appraisals required by State Law in order to protect the taxpayers from malfeasance.  In one case they got a single appraisal and then paid 40% more for the property - another clear violation of State Law.

But, they didn't care.  Somehow the taxpayers were just the chumps at the other end of the debt.

The District took out a short term loan, usually paid back once tax money is distributed by the State.  But, they didn't pay the loan back when they got the tax proceeds.  Instead, they spent the tax money and only paid interest on the loan.  That was until the stuff hit the fan and they could no longer stay on that course.  So, they floated new debt to pay off the short term loans.

Still not content, they raised Administrator salaries with abandon.  Most Administrators saw their salaries double, the Superintendent saw his more than triple.  This caused the escalation of Administrator salaries in Marion County and Central Indiana - as the Superintendents manipulated their Boards and the situation to grow their salaries over that puny District in Decatur Township.  Every grossly exaggerated salary at the administrator level directly impacts how many teachers can be hired and thereby class size.

By 2009, Central Office expenses had ballooned to over 10% of all General Fund expenses - far outstripping other Marion County Districts.

Hyperinflated salaries weren't enough, either. 

Golden parachutes, above and beyond the tidy nest eggs the District already paid for, were devised for 5 'retiring' Administrators.  The total added up to nearly a Million Dollars.  Even today, they also either receive free health insurance or its cash equivalent until they and their spouses reach the age of 65 and qualify for Medicare.  The cash equivalent this year is over $19,000 per family.  Money that could be used better, for sure.

In the case of the loans and golden parachutes, Superintendent Stinson acted unilaterally - meaning without the approval of the Board.  Both times, when the actions were aired in public, the Board retroactively approved his actions.

I could add to this the hiring of relatives, catered meals before each Board meeting, and other small extravagances engaged in by the Board.  I could go on about the redistricting, causing the need to transport children to the opposite ends of the Township instead of to their closest elementary school, driven by the fact that poor school performance threatened the receipt of federal funds linked to 'No Child Left Behind'.

Since its peak, debt has been going down and, of all the excess property, at least the Concentra Building (Southwest Pavilion) has been sold.  Current debt load is just shy of $140 Million.  Still, this leaves our community with the highest tax rate for School debt of any District in Marion County, and much larger than our nearest neighbors in Hendricks and Morgan Counties.

Looking at abutting School Districts, the school debt tax rate for 2014 is  (dollars per $100 assessed value):

Decatur           1.4766     (1.7752 if referendum to increase by 0.2986 had been approved for this year)
Wayne            1.3787
Perry               0.5048     (0.6287 if you include tax approved by referendum)
Mooresville     0.3411
Plainfield         0.6862

Other tax rates for school debt in Marion County for 2014 are:

Franklin           1.1289
Lawrence         0.3040
Pike                  0.2700    (0.2893 if you include tax approved by referendum)
Warren             0.8858
Washington      0.1725
Beech Grove    1.4243     (1.7743 if you include tax approved by referendum)
IPS                    0.4297     (0.5087 if you include tax approved by referendum)
Speedway         0.0856

That's how we got to this point, where now the community must weigh the pros and cons of approving an additional property tax through a referendum.  Is it throwing good money after bad, or will it mend what the School Board broke?

A friend recently asked me how much the School Board members make.  I don't know the current amounts, but they generally get about $2000 per year plus a some amount for each meeting they attend - perhaps amounting to $5000 per year each.  My friend suggested that the least the Board could do is forsake any compensation for as long as they remain Board Members.  That makes a lot of sense to me.

I'd also like to see each of the four active Board members who are responsible for our financial mess, Taylor, Collins, Wiseman, and Henson, stand up in a public meeting and apologize for putting us in these straits.  How else can we be sure they will not just spend the new money with the same lack of fiscal responsibility they spent all the other money we taxpayers have sent their way.

The least they can do is have the common decency to not run for election again.

Decatur Schools Referendum - Preamble

With this entry I am starting a series on the May 6 Decatur Schools Referendum.  The District administration says that a $ 0.2986 per $100 net assessed value addition to the property tax bills would generate about $3.85 million per year for them. 

I have not made up my mind on how I will vote on this measure.  I do, however, see many issues that the community needs to discuss, as each voter decides their position.  Harm can come from this referendum.  Harm can come if it is not approved.

It will take a few entries to lay out what I see as the issues.

The next entry will be on accountability and how we find ourselves in this predicament.  Next I will show taxpayers how to easily figure what this referendum would cost you a year and how to register to vote and be sure you are registered in time for May 6.  I'll follow that with individual entries addressing the arguments 'for' the referendum, arguments 'against', and issues that do not neatly fall in either camp but should be considered.

It is important to mention that there is a new Administration in Decatur.  Dr. Matt Prusiecki, Superintendent, and Kirk Farmer, CFO, have been transparent and happy to share whatever numbers and information I have requested.  This is a breath of fresh air, for sure.  I am positive that this transparency and accessibility applies to each resident of our community.  If you want to avail yourself, there is information on the District website, phone numbers, an FAQ section (which I will post as a link in the sidebar to this blog), and a list of referendum presentations by Dr. P. 

I am sure I will leave things out.  Feel free to add your own thoughts and points of view in either the comments section or by sending them on to me at hadenoughindy@gmail.com.

This referendum is very important, no doubt.  If you do nothing else, be sure you get registered and be sure you vote on May 6.  You don't get to voice an opinion on May 7 if you don't vote on May 6.

City-County Council Meets Tonight

The Indianapolis-Marion County City-County Council meets tonight and takes up a couple of interesting Proposals.

According to today's Star article by Francesca Jarosz, the current thought is to send the smoking ban back to committee to buy more time to get the votes needed for passage. This is a very difficult Proposal (#371) to get passed given, especially, the role that Mayor Ballard has chosen to play in the debate - a closed door pronouncement against the Proposal meant to shield him from actually having to take a public stand. So much for leadership. I have heard a book on the subject touted by some business people. Perhaps someone should give it to the Mayor as a holiday gift?

But, other interesting Proposals are also on tonight's agenda - which can be found on the Council website. Prop 303, introduced a couple of months back by Councillor Ed Coleman, which would require the internet posting of all contracts with the City or County government, passed out of the Rules Committee this month with a 8-0 'do pass' recommendation. (It should be noted that no Municipal Corporation would be required to do the same through this Proposal; presumably because the Council does not have legal power to require it.) Testimony at the committee was that it will cost $34,000 for 2010 for initial implementation and posting of the backlog of contracts and $7,000 each year thereafter. In the plus column for this one, the Ballard administration is on board with the Proposal. Chris Cotterill, Corporate Counsel and soon to be Chief of Staff to Mayor Ballard, testified that, although the language of the Proposal does not strictly require it, they intend to post all contracts that are still active, even if the contract was signed prior to January 1, 2008. Councillors on the Committee include Republicans Lutz, Cockrum, Malone, Pfisterer, and Plowman, and, Democrats Sanders, Grey, and Mansfield.

Also passing out of that committee the same night with 'do pass' recommendations was Prop 256, introduced by Councillor Sanders, Plowman, and both Maherns, which is a Special Resolution that "calls upon the hospitality industry to reduce the negative impact of outsourcing jobs on the community". This proposal was first introduced back when the hospitality industry was hiding behind the skirts of the same workers in order to beg for more public money to subsidize their room rates to conventioneers. The Proposal passed out of committee with Councillor Cockrum abstaining, since his son works for White Lodging, which is building the new Marriott hotel downtown. Cockrum seems to be splitting hairs - abstaining on a Special Resolution that only seeks to influence, but not abstaining on raising taxes to increase funding to the CIB and ICVA, the latter of which uses tax dollars to subsidize the room rates of downtown hotels, thus enriching folks like Councillor Cockrum's son.

And for a trifecta of interesting Proposals passing out of the Rules Committee in one night, was Prop 417, which is another Special Resolution, introduced by Councillors Malone, Pfisterer, B. Mahern, Lutz, Smith, and McHenry. Prop 417 requests that the General Assembly enable the Council to have a binding review of all Township budgets. With the tax caps coming in, the taxing authority of the individual entities in Marion County must begin to be coordinated, in my view. Even if this exact corrective action is not the final mechanism, it does lead us down the path of discussing exactly how to coordinate the property tax levies of all these taxing entities. This passed out of committee with a unanimous 'do pass' recommendation.

Other interesting Proposals up for a final vote of the full Council tonight, I'll just cut and paste from the agenda:

PROPOSAL NO. 413, 2009 (General Ordinance)
INTRODUCED: 11/09/2009
BY: Councillors Brown, Scales and Speedy
REFERRED TO: Public Safety and Criminal Justice Committee
DIGEST: amends the Code to clarify the definition and violation of animal at large, to expand the definition of serious injury, to specifically provide for court-ordered forfeiture and/or destruction of an animal if serious injury to a person results from the animal chasing or approaching a person in an aggressive manner while at large, and to change the reference to serious bodily injury to serious injury in the section on owner responsibility for animal attacks
COMMITTEE ACTION: 11/11/2009 Do Pass 6-0

PROPOSAL NO. 419, 2009 (General Resolution)
INTRODUCED: 11/09/2009
BY: Councillors McQuillen and Nytes
REFERRED TO: Municipal Corporations Committee
DIGEST: approves the purchase, construction or acquisition by the Indianapolis-Marion County Building Authority of all or any portion of the Wishard Hospital project and a proposed lease or leases between the Building Authority and the Health and Hospital Corporation to finance all or any portion of the Wishard Hospital project
COMMITTEE ACTION: 11/23/2009 Do Pass As Amended 6-1

Interesting Proposals to be introduced tonight - again by my eye - include:

PROPOSAL NO. 427, 2009 (Fiscal Ordinance)
INTRODUCED: 11/30/2009
BY: Councillor Pfisterer
REFERRED TO: Administration and Finance Committee
DIGEST: provides for additional appropriations and transfers in the 2009 Budget for various city and county agencies affecting various city and county funds to provide for continued operations and services of agencies

Included, among other things, is the 2009 Parks budget transfer of $200,000 from 'personal services' (wages) and $150,000 from 'internal charges' to 'other services and charges', which includes outsourcing contracts. This one deserves scrutiny.

PROPOSAL NO. 428, 2009 (Fiscal Ordinance)
INTRODUCED: 11/30/2009
BY: Councillor Pfisterer
REFERRED TO: Administration and Finance Committee
DIGEST: reduces 2009 appropriations for various city and county agencies

Over $5 million reduction total. Cuts throughout the City and County agencies.

PROPOSAL NO. 457, 2009 (General Resolution)
INTRODUCED: 11/30/2009
BY: Councillor Mansfield
REFERRED TO: Rules and Public Policy Committee
DIGEST: approves a request of the Metropolitan School District of Washington Township to certify its public question referendum to the County Election Board for the May 2010 election

"For the next seven calendar years immediately following the holding of the referendum, shall the Metropolitan School District of Washington Township impose a property tax rate that does not exceed eight cents ($0.08) on each one hundred dollars ($100) of assessed valuation and that is in addition to the school corporation's normal tuition support tax rate?"

PROPOSAL NO. 458, 2009 (General Ordinance)
INTRODUCED: 11/30/2009
BY: Councillor McQuillen
REFERRED TO: Rules and Public Policy Committee
DIGEST: amends the Code with respect to the number of committee meetings for which a councillor may be compensated in any calendar year

This one you should read for yourself to see all the manner of compensation the Councillors get. Not saying its not deserved pay, but it is very detailed in its construction. The change from the status quo appears to be an increase in the maximum number of committee meetings for which a Councillor can be compensated - increasing from the current 40 to a new maximum of 50 committee meetings.

The Council is not slowing down just because of the Holidays. That is for sure.

IBJ Editorial is Spot On

I was just listening to the IBJ podcast for November 9, when Chris Katterjohn, IBJ's editor, began reading the IBJ editorial from last Friday, titled "Tough love from taxpayers fed up with school spending". It was spot on. I had to pull it down and provide a link here.

Across Indiana, in more than a dozen different school districts over the past year, taxpayers have sent a message to administrators: We are no longer giving you a blank check.

That's how it begins. A couple of paragraphs down it puts everything in proper perspective:

There’s no doubt such rejections have created difficult decisions for many school districts, but that is exactly what the new law was supposed to do—force administrators to examine their budgets and start making smarter decisions about spending.

I'll leave it to you if you are intrigued enough to finish it. But, it was brilliant.