West Siders Against Annexation

www.core2012.net is up and running full blast, educating the voters as to the real purpose of reorganization (consolidation) of Evansville and Vanderburgh County Governments.

Thank you faithful followers, we urge you to check the new web site, as it is full of factual information that will help you sort out the “wheat from the chaff” in this fall’s election.

To find out where your candidate stands on the reorganization issue in the primary election, we will post our candidate inquiry results Wednesday May 2 at www.core2012.net

We are underway, looking for support from all of the community, to educate, inform, and advise the voting public on the issues with “consolidation” in the upcoming referendum.

We have a general meeting at the Fam Bureau Insurance office, Diamond ave, next to Donut Bank.  Thursday April 19, 6:00PM.   Everyone is invited.

Come listen, learn, contribute, volunteer.

Our web site is under contruction, but is accessible: www.core2012.net.

Citizens Opposed to Reorganization in Evansville has officially opened a campaign to educate the citizens of Vanderburgh County as to the pitfalls of consolidation/merger/reorganization.

Our grass roots organization is looking for volunteers to carry our message to all citizens that reorganization is not in the best interest of the people of Vanderburgh County.  Reorganization is self-serving, rewarding those in power with more power, promoted by the power-seekers to satisfy their thirst for more power.

Economic development is the catch phrase.  There have been many studies on this subject, and not one of the studies have shown increased economic development.  In fact, it has been just the opposite.

An excerpt from Louisville Courier-Journal newspaper:  “The 2003 merger of Louisville and Jefferson County governments has failed to bring more jobs and economic development to the city, according to a University of Louisville report published this month. The city-county merger also has failed to bring a more efficient government to residents, according to the report, by urban and public-affairs professor Hank Savitch.”

“The report claims economic development “has not accelerated but moved downward” and that the decline cannot be blamed on the economy. “The decline is not just a product of the national recession that began in 2008, but had beset post-merged Louisville while the nation was in the midst of economic growth,” the report says.”

“Savitch’s report says promises of a more efficient government also fell short. He writes that the cost of running metro Louisville is not substantially different from the combined costs of running separate city and county governments.”

The full article can be found at: http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20111124/NEWS01/311240063/Report-Louisville-Jefferson-County-merger-fails-deliver?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|News

The web site for core2012 will be up an running soon.

Have you heard even one good argument in support of consolidation?

In past consolidation histories of other cities and counties, it seems that certain players are always proponents.

City politicians, like the Evansville City Council, stand to gain political power.  They also favor consolidation because it is something new, a way to create a shake-up in hopes that something good might pop out of it, and so they can take credit for it.  It will serve as camouflage for the city’s ailments, for a while at least.

County politicians, like the Vanderburgh County Commissioners, are more often mixed about it.  Some see that their constituents will be paying higher taxes for no change in services, and they oppose it.  But more often, other county politicians see their potential to gain political clout as a city-county leader, and so they tend to support the idea.

The risks to both city and county politicians are minimal.  If things improve, they grab the credit.  If things remain the same or negative things happen, they point to other factors.  In either case, this all takes months or years to unfold.

Finally, the mainstream media nearly always supports consolidation.  In fact, the Evansville Courier-Press is a particularly blatant example of that.  The reason is simple – consolidation serves to magnify their importance county-wide, which could lead to increased circulation.

Does all of this sound familiar?

We’ve read a lot of studies about past consolidations, in cities like Louisville, Tallahasse, Lexington, Nashville, Athens, and Jacksonville.  All these studies conclude the same thing.  Consolidation is pursued for political reasons, i.e. special interest gains.

Consolidation is not pursued for civic benefit. If it were, there would plenty of factual data to support it, because lots of cities have tried it.  The fact is that ACROSS THE BOARD, every study we’ve read shows that consolidation results in either no effect or a decline in efficiency, economic development, services, and taxpayer satisfaction.

Don’t let consolidation happen to Evansville and Vanderburgh County.  It is only being pursued for the wrong reasons.  There is no historical support in its favor.

Is it any wonder why the rural residents do not want to become a part of the City/County reorganization?  Read the C&P, and City-County Observer’s take on the City Council voting to buy a “PIG-IN-A-POKE”  Earthcare idea for 4.8 MILLION of the City taxpayers money.

With all the uncertainties associated with Earthcare’s proposal to bring their idea to Evansville, all the unanswered questions on patents, technology, financing, re-payments, customers, and orders as posed by CPA Friend, O’Daniel and McGinn, and an attempt to table the issue until further vetting could be done, the measure was passed, and Earthcare is 4.8 MILLION DOLLARS richer. 

Don’t push that “PIG-IN-A-POKE” off onto the rural residents.  Any wonder why we oppose reorganization?  The City needs our tax money to cover their bonding capacity. 

Thanks, but no thanks, we do not want to be a part of YOUR City.

From the City-County Observer…………..”IS IT TRUE that the Evansville Bond Bank has a little over 11 Million dollars in its account?….that about 4 million dollars is committed to a water and sewer project? …if we round off the above figures to 11 million and 4 million that would leave the Bond Bank account with about 7 million dollars?…that if the Mayor and the President of GAGE get their way to loan 5 million dollars to a proposed start-up company that would leave the Evansville Bond Bank with only about 2 million dollars in this account?…that if this is this correct this a prime example of “bad public fiscal policy”?…that we wonder what can be accomplished with the remaining $2M if trouble comes calling which in a town that can’t mow its grass or assure that the contents of a toilet will find its way to the treatment station is a guarantee?…”

You don’t have to read between the lines to see where your tax money is going if CONSOLIDATION passes- – -YES, to help the city build its bonding capacity.

As the Publisher of CCO writes today, to fund the Earthcare fiasco, every taxpayer will find $43 fewer dollars in their wallets.  Kind of puts it in perspective.

Thanks CCO

After reading of the $79 million deal with Johnson controls, and most recently the $5 million deal your Mayor put together for some kind of whiz-bang technology that has no patent, is it any wonder why the City wants us to be consolidated with them? MONEY !!  They need our money so they can float more bonds, toss an extra million or two  to renovate the McCurdy, several $40K’s for feasibility studies for hotels, $250K to cover the losses at the Centre, $700K to let Roberts rot to the ground. etc., etc., etc. OH don’t forget the firetrucks that are also on their last legs, with no money to purchase new ones.  Not to worry, we will just lease new ones, and lease new ones, and lease new ones, without ever having a nickels worth of equity.  Just like running up a credit card debt, and the payments cannot even meet the accumulating interest.  

The City is running out of bonding capacity, and the only way to increase that is to increase their tax base and population base.  PRESTO, they will just consolidate.  Lipstick on the same old Pig, but now called consolidation, not annexation.

Advocates of merging city and county governments hide behind their arguments of economic development, efficiency, streamlining government agencies, and costs savings,  but consolidation is also a way for the advocates to chase more selective or narrow benefits for themselves.(1)

City-County consolidation is not about efficiency, but fundamentally about political losers trying to be winners and the current winners trying to prevent this turn of events   (1)

(1)(Fieock, R.C. 2006, City County Consolidation Efforts)

Thanks, but no thanks to Chairman Kevin Mahan of Government and Regulatory Reform committee, for strangling and refusing to bring to a hearing SB174.  This bill corrects so many flaws in the original law on merging of governments.  Woe be the governments that plan to merge under the current law, that they fall into the same pile of garbage that we have in Vanderburgh County.  Voter threshold is required in this SB174.

Has the Chamber of Commerce influenced Mahan to keep the bill in his pocket?  Something is amiss when 69,000 rural residents are disenfranchised by a Chairman who lives in Harford City, IN (Grant and Blackford Counties) and the Vice Chairman, Tim Wesco, who lives in Osceola.

Many letters have been written to this committee, with no responses.  Phone calls are not returned.  We are being ignored.  Flood their boxes with e-mails demanding this bill have a hearing.  Previous posting list the addresses of the committee members, or write me and I will provide them.

Dear Members of Government and Regulatory Reform committee

Soon you will be asked to vote on SB174, Local Government Reorganization. This bill seeks to make changes to the original IC 36.1-5 (Government Modernization).  We are especially excited to see voter threshold being required on a referendum, giving equal weight to the minority rural residents on whether to consolidate city and county governments.  Rural residents in Vanderburgh County are outnumbered 2 to 1 by City residents.  Our strong objection to the current SB174 is to the effective date of December 31, 2012.   In order for Vanderburgh County to have a voter threshold, we are urging you to move the effective date to July 1, 2012, thus allowing our county the same opportunity to accept or reject consolidation as other counties in Indiana

Senator Lawson authored SB174, and steadfastly opposes changing the effective date, even after receiving dozens and dozens of letters requesting the change.  A member of our group testified before her committee as to why the date should be changed, but to no avail.  Our Senator Tomes supports the July 1, 2012 date, but his requests have been ignored.  Representatives Bacon, Crouch, McNamara and Riecken have listened to our concerns, and have said they support us and will do what they can to get the date changed.  But it all rests with Senator Lawson.  Why is she so staunchly defending the later date, when all other bills become effective July 1, 2012? Does she have a grudge against Vanderburgh county?  Many letters have been sent to Senators Lawson and committee members, with absolutely no response.  Why are we being ignored?

The members are: Mahan (31), Wesco (21), Heaton (46), McNamara (76), M. Smith (59), Truitt (26), Wolkins (18), Candelaria/Reardon (12), Bartlett (95), Reske (37), Stemler (71), & Sullivan (97).  e-mail: h##@iga.in.gov

For convenience, you can cut-and-paste these addresses into your mailer address box: