Deanna Martin, writing for the Associated Press, reports that Senator Long is indicating that the Governor’s local government restructuring plan would probably have to be voluntary to pass the Senate. Among other things, the restructuring plan calls for a unitary executive to replace the 3-person board of commissioners and calls for the county council to pick up a lot of the legislative duties currently performed by the board of commissioners.
Seems to me that the further one gets away from the capitol, the more important local government control becomes to people. As this debate progresses, I want people to pay attention to something — and I’ll pay attention myself. Let’s see how many people stomping up and down about how necessary and good mandatory local government restructuring is come from Indianapolis, and let’s see how many are from other places.
Indianapolis/Marion County already has county government a lot like that proposed under the restructuring and, perhaps just as importantly, state government sits in Indianapolis. So, when the State adopts legislation, it feels a lot less like mandates coming from a foreign power.
So, I want to see how many voices in favor of mandatory restructuring are coming from places not dominated by big cities, with functioning and influential boards of commissioners, and mostly out of the shadow of the Capitol City. My bias is that the Tippecanoe County Board of Commissioners has, in my opinion, been an excellent governing body since I moved out of Indianapolis to the Lafayette area. In that time, I recall one commissioner with whom I did not usually agree, but the other two balanced her out. I can’t imagine if that commissioner — or say a county level Blagojevich — took control of the unitary executive. For that matter, is the streamlined non-leadership of Mayor Ballard or the dysfunctional legislative body that is the City-County Council really being held up as a model of government for the rest of the counties? A mandatory model?
Let’s just say I have reservations at this point. I’ll need some convincing on the point of why I should prefer a mandate from the General Assembly for that model of government to replace what I have currently in Tippecanoe County. And voices outside of Indianapolis will probably be more convincing than those within.
While not opposed to serious consideration and even enactment of some of the provisions of consolidation (been in local government so been there done that) and going farther attempting to read through some of the many many many legislative bills proposed (this year as any) just can not get over the point—Indiana is by code a “home rule” state. But sure seems as if some believe the only ones knowing how to do the “right thing” are centered in the governor’s office and the General Assembly.
If they setup the proper style of checks and balances that provide for proper representation of the electorate, but still streamline the leadership structure and provide an avenue to hire qualified and competent people then consolidation can work.
I can get behind a county executive, but rather than an elected one, I would like to see a county board with one rep from each township hire a county executive that has training, either through education or experience, to manage the county. This person in turn hires qualified people, with approval of the county board, to fill the vital positions that serve the county.
This can lead to real professional groups, with real professional standards that insure that we have people that actually have a clue what they are doing rather than having what passes for our current standard of electable “qualifications”.
Currently, we have a system that typically forces us to chose someone that is connected/electable rather than allowing us to go out and find someone who is experienced in qualified to do the job. Example: County A has an assessor retire. Under the current system we usually get to choose between one of their relatives to replace them, or some county political part hack being “rewarded” for years of service. Wouldn’t county A be better off to advertise their job and interview a series of candidates that have experience as an assessor and some certification from a professional group that they are in good standing and have years of continuing education to do their job better?
Doug,
I have a post coming up tomorrow that puts an interesting twist on all this. I think you will appreciate it.
Looking forward to it.
If you mean by “people”, legislators and lobbyists and officials of interest, then who cares? Those groups only care to perpetuate the current system for their own benefit, not their constituents.
If you mean how many ordinary people are going to marching on their county seat demanding a continuation of local government as it currently exists today, OK.
But, I don’t see anybody getting ready to march down a street, unless they are related to, friends of, or beholden to the current system.
Actually Indiana is NOT a “home rule” state. Localities are strictly controlled from their ability to provide additional protections to its citizens to the right to tax. Most things have to go through the legislature — which also has rules to NOT allow laws that apply only to one locality. So, to get around that, the General Assembly has to do some mental gymnastics (and believe me they have trouble doing that) to write laws so they apply ONLY to the city they wish to help.
For instance, laws written to help Indy have to stipulate they apply to only metro areas with over X amount of population. We can see the influence of this in the way state senators were able to carve concessions out of Indy Mayor Bart Peterson as they tried to finish the job of creating one county system of police and fire converage.
As fr as applying this to Tippecanoe County — well, we’re a special case and should be allowed to create our own system. HA! Seriously though, name me another county that has two VERY different city populations – heavily blue collar on one side of the river and more transient, international on the other. In Fort Wayne, South Bend, Evansville, Terre Haute and even Richmond — populations are separated, but they don’t live in opposite cities. West Lafayette would never voluntarily surrender its sovereignty and uniqueness.
In addition, has anyone thought about the fact that Lake County people genuinely hate each other? Those politicians are nearly all Dems but try getting Hammond, Gary, Merrillville, East Chicago, Lake Station and Cedar Lake people together on anything— and stand back for the fall-out.
Rarely is there ever a one-size fits all solution. But the GA can’t craft anything else – easily.
One last point, since county governments tend to be dominated by Republicans, while the urban centers are controlled mostly by Dems.. is this also a covert way to tip control of those areas to Reps?
I’d settle for somebody marching on their county seat demanding their board of commissioners be replaced by a single individual; provided that person has a functioning understanding of how local government works currently.
“I want some of that Ballard-style magic running *my* county.”
Why should county government be run by two committees?
What, exactly, is the problem if you have one “county executive” balanced by a county council?
My experience with township government is that it’s a place where the less competent folks who want to be in politics go to play. I long for the release that consolidation will bring.
On issue of Indiana being a “home rule” state. States are considered either “home rule” (that is, local government control all things NOT addressed by the state) vs “Dillon’s rule” (local government have only the authority given them by state.
So legally is Indiana “home rule” or “Dillion’s Rule”? Comment appreciated by someone in the know.
Just a follow up if anyone stilling following this thread—IC 36-1-3-1 “Home Rule” passed in 1980 where in IC 36-1-3-1 abrogates “Dillon’s Rule” provisions.
Now reality–every time the legislature meets there is less “left” up to local government.
I’m curious as to where all of the “real professional groups” with “real professional standards” are going to come from, especially in more rural counties where the professional people are largely middle-aged and older, entrenched, and politically connected.
I am not convinced that local government reform, as currently proposed, will result in less cronyism and more efficiency. There will almost certainly be less accountabliity and probably minimal improvements in efficiency.
Also, why the move to get rid of Township Trustees? Is it because the constituency they serve is made up of people who tend not to have political influence? Is it because certain people want to make it harder for people they don’t like to access services?
They come form the same place they always come from, grassroots movement within a group to improve themselves. It won’t happen overnight, but the foundation is in place.
Rural school districts don’t have problems finding qualified superintendents, teachers or business managers/treasurers, but we have expected those people to have and pursue a basic education/training and continue that education/training for a long time.
The same structure will occur, it will just take a bit.
One small item I have not seen mentioned at all is the salary for all these “professionals” we’re going to hire. In our rural county, the Auditor, Treasurer, Clerk, Assessor and Recorder all make a bit over $15 per hour. One can obtain the salaries for Indiana county officials quite easily from the Indiana Association of Counties from the factbook they produce every year. Our three part-time Commissioners collectively make about the same.
The last time I checked, our Superintendent was receiving well over six figures with a very nice benefit package and golden parachute if the school board wants to ditch him before the contract runs out, like they did the last one.
If efficiency is what the GA is after, they should look to themselves and the DLGF, the state bureaucracy that currently micromanages much of county operations.
And another thing…
From a recent op-ed from the Indiana Policy Review on the Township Trustee question.
@Paddy: Thanks for the answer, but Superintendents often come from out-of-town. Maybe I’m forgetting someone, but I can’t remember the last time Richmond Community Schools hired a superintendent who was a local person. If not from out-of-town, the superintendent comes from the ranks of administrators already in the school system–often among the few educated professionals in a community.
Where would the county government get it’s “professional” staff? Indianapolis? The few people within the community who already have busy professional jobs?
Also, I’m not sure what foundation is in place for a grass roots movement to have professionals take over county jobs, elected or otherwise. When I left the county government a few years ago, the department I worked in seemed to be going backward in terms of getting educated people into jobs.
Not to brag, cuz I don’t think it is anything worth bragging about, but I have a law degree. My supervisor at the county barely had a high school education and had little interest in learning on the job. The person who replaced me didn’t have a bachelor’s degree and had nothing to recommend him for the position other than being buddies with my former supervisor. Only in jobs that absolutely required degrees, such as county health nurses and deputy prosecuting attorneys was there any attempt to get qualified professionals to fill county posts. I don’t see that changing if local government reform becomes a reality.
As I have said before, my tax bill for 2007 was 5408.50, my tax bill for 2008 has not been calculated yet, but in 2007 71.12 went to my township. Some savings, plus who is going to handle the dog tax? When dogs killed two of my sheep I went to the trustee with two appraisals from fellow farmers and received that amount from the township dogtax fund. Try that on a countywide level. Point being one size does not fit all!
Well, Larry, I’m sure that whatever you wanted was a waste of taxpayer time and money and could have been conducted via the internet or telephone. And remember, people in the parts of Indiana that really matter (apparently Indianapolis and Fort Wayne) don’t have sheep or sheep-killin’ dogs.
Seriously, I agree with you. One size does not fit all.