Published: January 22, 2008 04:59 pm            

LETTERS: Jan. 23, 2008

Deatrick: Mayor hasn’t justified city’s extra early spending



Throughout this vast country of ours, local governments have taken a lesson from the private sector and found ways to reduce spending and become more effective, unfortunately the New Albany City Council — with the exceptions of Steve Price and Diane McCartin Benedetti — have rubberstamped the England administration’s plan to add to the cost of local government through exorbitant salary increases and the creation of new bureaucratic positions that the Mayor has not made a solid case for.

The Council’s rationale: this was necessary to move the mayor’s agenda forward and this is progress. My question, what is the specific agenda and has a cost/ benefit analysis been done to justify the nearly $250,000 in new salaries and benefits?

What is most troubling to me is that all of this council campaigned on being fiscally responsible and now that they are sitting at the table and controlling the tax revenue available to the city, they hand it over to create these new positions and agree to salary raises without doing their due diligence asking those very questions that must be asked: what is the plan, what is the benefit and will the city become more efficient with this expenditure?

Meanwhile, our city’s infrastructure continues to crumble while we hand over tax revenue to pay for a top heavy administration the mayor and council seems to think is necessary in the name of progress. There is another name for the council’s recent action, it’s called a failure of leadership. Thank you Mr. Price and Ms. Benedetti for standing up for the taxpayers instead of the politicians.

— Tim Deatrick, New Albany



Farm Bureau property tax plan wants entire levies removed



Late September 2007, Indiana Farm Bureau unveiled for public consideration our proposal for Indiana property tax reform. A critical component of our plan is the removal of several entire levies from local property taxes and transferring their financial responsibility to the state.

What is a levy? In the world of Indiana taxes, the word “levy” means all taxes collected by a local government for a particular purpose. The levy size is determined by the government’s estimate of how much money it will need for that purpose over the upcoming year.

Once a levy amount has been determined, it is then divided across all the assessed property in the taxing area to get the tax rate. The tax rate is then applied to an individual parcel of property to determine how much tax needs to be paid. The taxpayer’s final property tax bill is the total of all the taxes his property gets charged for all the levies it helps support.

If money from sources other than property taxes is used to pay for part of the levy, then the amount of the levy to be collected from property taxes can be reduced. This is how the General Assembly has reduced the property tax burden in the past. It works for a while, but history has shown that such efforts are short lived. After a time, local officials feel pressure from the public to provide more services and again turn to increase property taxes to finance the new services.

However, if entire levies are permanently removed from property taxes to state funding sources, then local property taxes for that levy cannot grow back. This is why levy removal is an integral component of the Farm Bureau property tax plan.

The state also should assume responsibility for levies where the state dictates the expenditures to be made from the levy. Expenditures such as those for child welfare services, courts, and schools are often dictated directly by the state or are mandated by state laws. Sound public policy requires the responsibility for spending and paying to be linked.

The only way to assure that property taxes will not creep back up is to remove entire levies from property taxes and place the responsibility for those costs with the state. This, after all, is where the decisions to spend the money are made.

— Don Villwock, president of the Indiana Farm Bureau



Clarksville parent unhappy with school switch



On Jan. 15, 2008, the Clarksville Board of Education supported the educational inequality of low-income families for 50 of our Greenacres’ students that reside in Cambridge Square, River Chase, Old Towne Village apartment complexes and a few homes from Applegate Lane. The students who now attend Greenacres Elementary School will now be involuntarily shoved into a new school district and a new school, George Roger’s Clark Elementary or GRC.

Unfortunately, the basis of such a unanimous biased vote has yet to be determined, at least for the parents, leaving parents with a multitude of questions. The biggest question, “Why was my area chosen for redistricting?” This new transition would present new emotional and physical challenges for some, such as transportation, after-school options, peer relationships and overall adaptation of their child’s educational needs. This is even more challenging for impoverished families that may be already struggling, sometimes devastating for families. As if it isn’t difficult enough for any child to adapt to a new setting, the students that are forced to leave Greenacres will enter GRC and their community with a stigma. The perception that they were chosen to attend another school because of socioeconomic factors.

I challenge the board to support our low-income families that are struggling and need community support or at the very least support and advocate educational equality within our community. It’s hard to believe to move all students from specific apartment communities in Clarksville was the only ethically viable conclusion.

I was informed via memo when the Clarksville High School football team got into an altercation with an opposing team in 2007, yet I was never informed by Greenacres or the Board of this redistricting and that my child too would have to attend GRC next fall. So yes, shocking wouldn’t characterize the emotion I felt when I was informed via the media.

I’m still under the assumption that this took place during the PTO meeting I missed on Tuesday night. Fortunately, for the committee I was not there. I work a 9 to 5 job and attend a local university in the evenings. So for parents that do have evening classes and/or second, third shift jobs we were unable to attend. This should have no negative reflection or perception on how we value our child’s education. Furthermore, we might even value it more than some and we are reminded when such social suppressive injustices occur. The power of education and voting in our community.

— Leah Tate, Clarksville





Matthews: Why won’t elected officials listen to the people?



I believe there is overwhelming support from the people for the repeal of the property tax system, yet our elected officials at the State House continue to ignore the peoples’ plea. They say they can’t, they can’t, they can’t repeal this tax. Why?

The people of this state want the property tax system gone and they are willing to replace the revenue with other taxes. So what is the issue why politicians won’t listen to the people?

State Sen. Connie Sipes says she is still studying the issue. How long Connie does it take to determine that the property tax system just does not work? The assessment system is fundamentally flawed because it is based on the subjective view of an appraiser and it will always be flawed because this subjectivity is built into any assessment system. And Connie, isn’t the huge cost of appraising all the property and still getting the assessments wrong enough evidence to convince you that system must be replaced? So Connie, continue studying, but the answer is still the same. The property tax system must be repealed.

Rep. Jim Lewis, says he does not think there is a plan that can be developed to replace the revenue if property taxes are repealed. I have offered four times to take Jim through a plan that will work. This plan has been reviewed by Professor Craig Johnson of Indiana University and he says the plan will work. One of the creators of this plan is Chris Ruhl, the governor’s Director of Budget. He certainly knows it will work. I am a retired CPA and I know the plan will work. Jim, why don’t you think it will work?

As to Rep. Bill Cochran, he simply says he knows what is best for all of us. When we invited him to the Property Tax Rally on January 29 at Jeffersonville High School to hear the plan that could replace property taxes, he said he has no interest in being there. Unlike Connie, he says he does not need to study it further because he knows that the property tax system is a must for Hoosiers. It really does not matter that most Hoosiers do not agree with him because he knows what is best for us. Great!

Rep. Steve Stemler tells us he is for the repeal of property taxes. Steve, since you are with the people on this issue we need you to step up and take a leadership role in getting this tax repealed.

Rep. Terry Goodin says he is for repeal, but is not sure it can be done politically. We can send a person to the moon but we can’t get rid of the most inefficient unfair system of taxation ever created. Come on Terry, work for us.

Gov. Daniels told me personally that he is for the repeal of property taxes but thinks the timing is wrong. Well Governor, if the timing was ever right, it is now. We the people are respectively begging you to repeal this tax.

So why won’t our elected officials listen to the people? Why won’t they allow the people to vote for the repeal of property taxes? Why won’t they restore some faith in our government? You make your own conclusions.

— Kim Matthews, Jeffersonville

        

• Click to discuss this story with other readers on our forums.