West Siders Against Annexation

Thank you loyal readers for your continued readings of our posts.  We have been dormant for a few weeks, but are now ready to tackle the consolidation (Pig-In-A-Poke) issue once again.

The new Mayor has fortified himself with the likes of Steve Schaefer, who admittedly helped write the law allowing communities to consolidate, slanting it so it becomes more difficult to defeat the issue once it has reared its ugly head.  Then you have Joe Kiefer, who was instrumental in pushing the ill-fated Vandi-Gov some years ago.  We cannot forget the members of the City Council who did not have the guts to stand up and allow a voters threshold, Friend, Mosby, Adams, McGinn, Robinson, and Commissioners Abell, and Winnecke.

This is going to be a long fight, and we will be available to make Powerpoint presentations to groups who want to learn about the real effects of consolidation, and not the smoke and mirrors of past and current administration members. If you are interested in joining our group to get the Pig-In-A-Poke defeated, we can use your help.

Consoldiation is not at the fore-front in the news as the year ends, but look for things to heat up mid-year.  We will be ever vigilant to breaking news as it happens, but for the time being, we will take some time off.

Best wishes for the New Year.  Keep checking in for new developments as they  happen.

Thanks for visiting your informational web site.

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

If memory serves correct, Louisville was one of the cities the Consolidation Committee and supporters visited and gave rave reviews on that city’s consolidation.

Thanks to City-County Observer for bringing this news to the forefront.

We need to take a second hard look at this topic of voter threshold as it pertains to the Plan for Reorganization between Vanderburgh County and Evansville (also known as “consolidation”).

As it stands now, a simple majority of votes countywide will be required to consolidate.

If a voter rejection threshold had been implemented, a majority of votes inside city limits AND a majority of votes outside city limits would be required.

The Plan as it is currently written specifically prohibits a voter threshold.  You can look it up right here.  Take a good look at the 5th paragraph of the Introduction.

The paragraph starts with the words, “As required by the Act,…”, referring to the Government Modernization Act (Indiana Code 36-1.5).  But if one takes a look through the “Act,” it actually contains NO PROVISIONS that address the topic of voter threshold.   “As required by the Act,” is a meaningless clause, a hollow attempt to legitimize the paragraph.

The paragraph goes on to disallow a voter rejection threshold with respect to the consolidation issue.

Why?  Why do you suppose the authors of this plan would specifically write a paragraph that bans voter thresholds?

We’ll proffer a guess.

The authors of the Plan knew that consolidation is a losing proposition for non-city residents in Vanderburgh County.  They knew that consolidation will result in higher taxes without additional value for those residents.  In short, they knew that, if a voter threshold exists, non-city county residents could and probably would vote it down.

The Constitution of the United States directly addresses this topic of voter threshold.  The Constitution recognizes that areas of higher population should not be allowed to bully around areas of lower population.  Article One of the Constitution does this by creating a House, based on population, and a Senate, based on geography, requiring both to pass a bill before it is made law.  In essence, the concept of voter threshold – the requiring of approval based on both population AND geography – is built into the very fabric of the Constitution.

The Plan authors, however, in their zeal to have their plan passed, penned a provision that expressly prohibits equal representation for the city and the county (i.e. residents outside city boundaries).

To take the indignation to a higher level, your elected officials, i.e. the Evansville City Council and the Vanderburgh County Commissioners failed to edit this statement out of the current Plan during a review process this summer.  Why?  The only reason cited, reported by the Courier-Press’ Richard Gootee on September 13, 2011, was that “the entire reorganization process would be forced to start over if officials decided to include it.”

What are we to conclude?  Our city and county leaders chose to do something unfairly because it would have taken too much effort and time to go back and do it right?

We are reminded that consolidation, if passed, will be practically irreversible.  The people of Vanderburgh County deserve to have the consolidation process performed properly and fairly.  That our leaders are ignoring, or even prohibiting, a basic tenet of the Constitution, effectively silencing the voice of non-city residents, is an outrage, and seems startlingly unjust to this author.

We therefore urge you to read the Plan, and take special note of the 5th paragraph in the Introduction.  Ask yourselves why that paragraph even exists.

The omission of something called “voter thresholds” in the consolidation approval process is, in a word, an outrage.

Not only are voter thresholds omitted, they are expressly prohibited by the 5th paragraph of the Introduction of the proposed Plan of Reorganization.

Why?  Why would that paragraph be included?  We’ll proffer a guess.

The authors of the Plan knew that consolidation is a losing proposition for non-city residents in Vanderburgh County.  They knew that consolidation will result in higher taxes without additional value for those residents.  In short, they knew that non-city county residents would vote it down.

Voter thresholds would have required a majority of the city residents AND a majority of the non-city residents to pass this.  Getting city dwellers to pass it will be difficult enough (afterall, the entire plan is certainly very poorly thought out).  But getting non-city residents to pass it will be almost impossible.

The Constitution of the United States directly addresses this topic of voter thresholds.  The Constitution recognizes that areas of higher population should not be allowed to push around areas of lower population.  Article One of the Constitution does this by creating a House, based on population, and a Senate, based on geography, requiring both to pass a bill before it is made law.  In essence, the concept of voter threshold – the requiring of approval based on both population AND geography – is built into the very fabric of the Constitution.

The Plan authors, however, in their zeal to have their plan passed, penned a provision that expressly prohibits equal representation for the city and the county (i.e. residents outside city boundaries).

To take the indignation to a higher level, your elected officials, i.e. the Evansville City Council and the Vanderburgh County Commissioners, bent to internal pressures and failed to edit this statement out of the current Plan.  That our leaders are ignoring a basic tenet of the Constitution, effectively silencing the voice of non-city residents, is truly an outrage, and smacks either of corruption or of incompetence.

The prohibition of voter thresholds in Evansville’s Nov 2012 vote on consolidation goes against the very fabric of the Constitution of the United States.  It is an outrage and it is unjust.

We urge you to read the Plan, and take special note of the 5th paragraph in the Introduction.  In November 2012, remember to vote this thing down.  And when you vote tomorrow (November 8), consider voting against those leaders who’ve allowed this outrage.

If you watched the city council debates, or if you read the paper on where most candidates stand, the common denominator is “No New Taxes”.  That just sounds so warm and fuzzy,smooth  and consoling, knowing the city residents will not be faced with new taxes.  But, where will money come from to do all the things the candidates are promising?

From the City-County Observer, Oct 28, 2011….. ”Councilman John Friend stated that the City of Evansville is pretty much at its credit limit with only a $3 Million margin remaining so General Obligation Bonds are really not an option for any of the many infrastructure projects that Evansville is in need of?…that means that only sustainable and cash generating projects that pay for their own maintenance are possible in the near future?”

We think the city of Evansville is pursuing consolidation for this primary reason: they are out of bonding capacity.  Consolidation EQUALS new taxes.  It is nearly a certainty that a consolidated government will issue new and higher taxes on tens of thousands of rural county residents.  And when it becomes apparent that city services are over-strained with the new county-wide load, then new and higher taxes are ultimately expected for everyone.

If you like the idea of shoveling more money into the city’s government, then CONSOLIDATION is an answer.  But we see it as a wolf in sheep’s clothing, a Pig-In-A-Poke.  Think about that as you go to the polls in November 2011, and 2012.

The final edition of the Consolidation Plan is available at: www.evansvillegov.org/index.aspx?page=2290
Click on “Revised Plan v5 with modifications”

The reading is laborious and dull, but this may be your next government.  Every voting citizen should make this a “Must Read” to understand what you will be voting on in November 2012.

In the coming year, we are planning workshops and neighborhood association meetings to dissect and explain in plain language, just how this new form of Government will look, and how it will affect every taxpayer, urban and suburban.

Pig-In-A-Poke – thought you bought a gold mine, but only got the shaft

We understand that consolidation might sound good.  A combination of governments into one.  That sounds leaner, right?  That sounds more efficient, right?

Well, it only sounds good.  The reality is that the consolidation plan currently going to referendum is poorly written.  City councilmen and county commissioners have as much as admitted so, but many of them now hide behind the idea that “the people should be given a chance to vote on this.”

The problem is that the plan defines very little.  The only firm results:

• the creation of a single governing body led by the Mayor,
• a large increase in the population taxable by the combined government
• a large increase in the burdens placed on city service providers

These prospects should scare any Vanderburgh County voter.  They scare us.  Two years ago, the city of Evansville faced strong opposition trying to annex rural areas of Vanderburgh County.  Now they’re back trying the same thing using a different method.  Make no mistake, CONSOLIDATION WILL ANNEX ALL OF VANDERBURGH COUNTY INTO EVANSVILLE, subject to singular rule and increased taxation.

The plan supports the concept of Big Government.  Consolidation throws increased money at our local government and then asks the government to manage more of our lives.  Since when does that work?  It is widely agreed that governments are notoriously poor managers of our money.

We see nothing about the current consolidation concept that will improve life or jobs or the economy in Evansville or Vanderburgh County.  Precious resources within our county need to be applied to the private sector, and not funneled in increasing amounts into government.

If you haven’t figured it out yet, we oppose the current consolidation plan.  It is poorly written legislation and should not be in front of voters.  If a plan were written that assigns accountability to match tax increases with specific service improvements, we might be much more receptive.

Pig-In-A-Poke – “caveat emptor” – let the voter beware.

Grass roots efforts have begun to organize and get the message out to all voters.  If you have an interest, or if you are part of a group looking for more support to defeat the P-I-P, let us know.  Voters of City and County  must band together, as it will take a county-wide effort  to inform of the people of the City and the rural residents of how they will be affected by consolidation.  

Consolidation is BIG GOVERNMENT, designed to suck more money out of the taxpayers to satisfy the ever increasing appetite of Evansville City government.  Evansville continues to crumble from within, with bad investments, poor management, threat of costly legal action from EPA, streets that are falling apart, and good old boy politics.  Vote for the P-I-P, and it will be “business as usual”, except the Mayor will be Lord and King of all of Evansville AND  Vanderburgh County, free to create his (or her) own little fifedom, and all the little fifes will follow his orders.  The checks and balances (Vanderburgh County Council and County Commissioners) are no longer in place, giving the King free reign to spend your tax dollars as he dictates.

Think about it!!!!!

Pig-In-A-Poke – a deal or offering (referendum) that is foolishly accepted by the public without being examined first

As expected, the City Council OK’s the P-I-P, by a greater margin than expected.  We predicted 5/4, but some arm twisting caused Robinson, Walker, and Friend to go with the flow, contrary to their expressed public comment that they could not support the P-I-P in its present form.  Although nothing was changed, they voted to put it on a referendum.  Same lame excuse, “give the voters a chance to decide”, rather than do their duty as elected officials and kill this P-I-P.

We will continue to inform the voters of the pitfalls associated with the P-I-P, and fight to see that it is defeated in November 2012.  Stay informed.