Annexation Possibilites Rears Its Ugly Head Again

17 03 2015

On the third edition of Tri-States Voices, the four At-Large City Council candidates, Adams, Burton, O”Daniel, and Weaver, were asked questions on how to correct the financial woes of the City of Evansville, and unanimously they all thought ANNEXATION is one way.  Nothing about cost cutting measures, or putting an end to the reckless spending of the current administration.  This puts the voters between a rock and a hard place – the current city council have  voted for all of the Mayors spendthrift ideas, except for the “doggie park”.  The new medical center could have gone out on Burkhardt Road at no cost to the City, but instead, the Mayor wants to throw another load of taxpayers money into the defunct downtown. We won’t even discuss the Motel 6 project.

Keep this in mind when you go to the polls in May!!!



SB330 Assigned to Government & Regulatory Reform

5 03 2015

SB330 has been sent to the House and was assigned to the Government & Regulatory Reform Committee.  Members are: Chairman Mahan (H31), Vice Chair Lucas (H69), Harman (H17), Kirchhofer (H89), McNamara (H76), Miller (H48), Olthoff (H19), Truitt (H26), Riecken (H77), Bartlett (H18), Harris (H2), Errington (H95), Wolkins (H18).

This bill is not too bad, at least giving property owners a chance to deny annexation by NOT signing a petition by the City to agree to annexation.

……or, 75% of the assessed valuation. This sentence allows big box stores to agree to annexation ( as was done on the East Side Phase I in 2009) even if 51% of the residential property owners do not agree to annexation.  We have written many of the Senate and House members expressing our desires to have this removed from the bill.  While the bill is in committee, it can be amended, but you must let the legislators know what you want done.  WRITE YOU LEGISLATOR!!!!!



SB330 Annexation Bill Sent to House

2 03 2015

SB330 has been sent to the House for consideration.  Representatives Negele (H13) and Truitt (H26) are sponsors of the bill.  We have written the sponsors, requesting they amend SB330 to remove lines 1-4 on page 6 of the bill, namely, “or,  75% of the assessed valuation“.  This sentence  goes against democratic principles of one person, one vote.  It would allow a City to cherry-pick its annexation sites to include big box stores that will not go against annexation, thus easily acquiring the 75% of assessed valuation.  Even if a majority (51% or more) of  the residential property owners refuse to sign an agreement to be annexed, the assessed valuation could override the will of the people.

Have you sent an e-mail????

To be continued………….



HB1561 is DEAD – SB330 Moves to House

28 02 2015

The rural voters of Vanderburgh County can rejoice, as HouseBill 1561 is dead.  Although amended several times, there was language in this bill that is not in the best interest of rural residents.  No need to go into details, as this is now a mute point.  SB330 earns our support, although we have issues with some of the language, this bill tightens the restrictions on un-wanted annexations.

(1) requires the annexing entity to gather signatures from 51% of the property owners before annexation can take place. YES

(2)annexation can take place if 75% of the assessed valuation agree to annexation.  Big Box stores can over-ride the vote of the majority of property owners rejecting annexation. NO

(3) If the annexing entity gathers 51% of the signatures from property owners, they must submit the signatures to a local court.  Neither the city nor the landowners would incur attorney fees unless landowners who do not voluntarily sign, file a  lawsuit against annexation. As long as the courts are a normal part of an annexation process, the scales are tipped in favor of municipal government. YES

(4) Requires 6 months of outreach, and a beefed up fiscal plan that cannot be amended without consent of landowners. YES

This bill has now been passed to the House.  The House has an opportunity to make changes.  House sponsors are Randy Truit (H26@iga.in.gov) and Negele (H13@iga.in.gov) We urge everyone to take a few minutes and write these representatives expressing changes you would like to see made to SB330



CORE2012 Running Strong

3 07 2012

Thanks to everyone who has visited our web site.  WSAA remains a viable but idling organization, ready to step up when the “Reorganization Plan” is defeated in November.  We expect to be faced again with annexation in the future.  We beat them once, and we are ready to stand up for taxpayer rights and fight the politicians again if needed.

Visit core2012.net and learn what the facts are in the reorganization plan, and it is not good.  EVERY TAXPAYER will suffer from the political folly that is meant to be a take-over of all of Vanderburgh County, and make the Mayor a King.

Please vote NO in November.



New Organization Opposed to Reorganization

24 04 2012

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



Citizens Opposed to Reorganization in Evansville

16 04 2012

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

13 04 2012

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.



Supporters and Reasons

31 03 2012

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.



City Buys A PIG-IN-A-POKE

27 03 2012

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.