There has been a great deal of talk concerning upcoming budget shortfalls. Mayors from different cities mention that their local governments will lose millions of dollars and as a result will have to cut services.
Hammond Mayor Thomas McDermott Jr. has said there is no way his city can shed $21 million overnight without affecting police and fire protection.
As a homeowner in Hammond, I am deeply concerned. What will happen to the police and fire protection? Will we have enough police and firemen?
I took my car and headed to Hammond City Hall where I picked up a copy of the city budget. The budget has eight sections and there is a bunch of numbers. So I started at the beginning. There is a budget estimate page with fund names, such as a General Fund, Debt Service Fund, Fire Pension, Police Pension, and so on. Each of these funds included a dollar amount. The total dollar amount for the budget is $109,988,393.00 for the 2008 budget. That sure is a lot of money; I had to double check the amount so I added all those numbers. When I totaled the numbers I was shocked to find that the real amount is $110,184,213.00. I added those numbers again, and again, I arrived at $110,184,213.00. The budget didn’t add up.
I started to get more curious about this budget. I looked at every page and as I went through the budget, questions started to pop up. Where are the take-home cars? I know there are over 90 take-home cars, but they aren’t in the budget. What about gas for vehicles; that isn’t in the budget. The self-insurance fund is not listed in the budget. The Mayor has a photographer, and the Mayor has a television show. Where are all these items? In fact, I counted 25 city departments and funds that were not included in the budget. Again, the budget didn’t add up.
Now the question is, how are these departments funded, and what are the true costs?
I turned to the State Board of Accounts, and they sent me a financial report for the City of Hammond. It is called the Annual City and Town Financial Report. The report that I received is for the Fiscal Year ending December 31, 2006.
There are 13 parts to this Financial Report. I turned to Part 1-Statement of Receipts, Disbursements, Cash Balances & Investment Balances. I discovered the City of Hammond had receipts of $195,443,208.70 for the year ending 2006.
The budget for 2008 shows a budget total of $109,988,393.00, but Hammond has receipts over $195,443,208.70. This is a difference of 85 million dollars. The budget again didn’t add up.
Hammond Mayor Thomas McDermott Jr. has said there’s no way his city can shed $21 million overnight without affecting police and fire protection.
Where did the Mayor of Hammond get the money for the following items?
1) $13,000,000 for a clubhouse for Lost Marsh Golf Course
2) Lost Marsh Golf Course. The cost to operate the golf course is close to $2 million a year.
3) $55,000 for the Mayor’s photographer
4) $900,000 commission for the Mayor’s father in the Cabela’s store deal
5) $100,000 to Purdue University for an endowment for the Mayor’s father
6) $1,500 for health care per employee per month for City Departments
7) $432,192 for Festival of the Lakes
8) $250,000 for a legal aid clinic
9) $65,000 for campaign workers
10) $10,000,000 in raises since the 2005 budget. In fact, some employees received $15,000 raises this year (Police Chief & Fire Chief).
11) The Mayor’s salary is $95,000 per year. The Governor’s salary is also $95,000.
12) There are a total of 9 Pages of Financial Assistance to Nongovernmental Entities as listed in the Annual City and Town Financial Report of 2006. Here are some items from that list:
a) $50,500 Hammond YMCA
b) $60,000 Running Rebels
c) $70,000 Parents as Teachers of Hammond
d) $350,000 St. Margaret Mercy
e) $20,000 The Laura Austin Passmore Guild
f) $40,300 Towle Community Theatre
g) $50,000 United Neighborhood Inc.
Can Hammond shed $21 million dollars from their budget and save the Police and Fire departments?
What do you think?
Thursday, February 14, 2008
MAYORS AND BUDGETS
Posted by
Team Hammond
at
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
SCARE TACTICS
Our local elected officials must be working overtime trying to convince the citizens that property tax reform is bad for us. They would have you believe with their scare tactics that we will have no fire or police protection, and people will die! Let's put a guilt trip on the homeowners for wanting to keep their homes!
If Mayor McDermott is so worried about this 1% cap and the loss of millions of dollars, why is he talking about building a new city hall? Or for that matter, what about the $13 million revenue bond the Port Authority floated to build a new banquet hall at Lost Marsh Golf Course? If the city is in such bad financial shape, why don't we just sell the golf course to a private interest and be done with it? It's never made money in all the years it's been open anyway.
And if Fire Chief Hamm is so worried about having to cut firefighters, why doesn't he give back the $15,000 raise he just received as a show of good faith?
It's time the good people of Hammond started asking why it is the Civil City takes in over $52 million in casino revenue annually, yet the city is in debt to the tune of at least $110 million. The city should not be broke! We should be in the black. Where has all that money gone to?
The way to reduce property taxes in Hammond is by selling the golf course (the city should not be in the golf course business anyway), nix the banquet hall and new city hall, cut out all excessive spending (mayor's photographer at a salary of $55,000 a year), and have the mayor take his share of the annual casino revenue and pay off all the city's debt.
The city can and should live within its means. Essential services don't have to be cut. Our elected officials are trying to take the heat off them by laying the guilt trip on us!
Posted by
Team Hammond
at
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
COUNCIL VOTES TO FUND HEALTH DEPARTMENT
At Monday night's Hammond City Council meeting, a majority of the city council voted to fund the Hammond Health Department with casino gaming money. Voting in favor of this funding was Councilman Homero "Chico" Hinojosa, Councilwoman Kim Poland, Councilman Anthony Higgs, Councilman Robert Markovich and Councilwoman Joann Matanovich. Voting against the funding were Councilman Dan Repay, Councilman Mark Kalwinski, and Councilwoman Kathy Pucalik. Councilman Al Salinas was absent from Monday night's council meeting and did not vote.
However, Mayor McDermott has said he will veto any measure to keep the health department under local control. It would take six votes from the city council to override the mayor's veto.
Councilman Hinojosa had approached the mayor about keeping the city's health department intact until the whole issue could be resolved because the county does not have a clearcut plan on
taking over the city's health department.
At the present time, the Lake County Health Department is offering limited services to Hammond residents. Susan Best, Lake County Health Commissioner, has made it known that Hammond will not receive any additional services. Councilman Hinojosa has said he will continue the fight to keep the city's health department because it provides services the county will not. Currently, there are 190 children in Hammond that are not attending school because they are not inoculated.
Posted by
Team Hammond
at
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Sunday, February 10, 2008
SCHOOL BOARDS SHOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE
How do we expect kids to respect our constitution when those who are making decisions on the school board level disrespect it with their actions? School board members and wayward superintendents should be held accountable for this blatant waste and misuse of our tax dollars. Davy Crockett's final words of his famous speech can be applied directly to this situation. Read them again. I don't know how many times I've heard it said by these educrats, "But, it's for the children!" Poppycock! The overpriced roof jobs are not for the children. In fact, it takes away from real education. Money that could be spent on books and teachers are being wasted to line the pockets of lawyers, lobbyists, and an Ohio roofing manufacturer.
Better yet, the government should get out of the education business and turn it over to the private industry. Parents could keep their tax dollars and send their children to private schools where educational standards are much higher anyway. Property taxes could then be eliminated, and people who don't use the school system would not be forced to pay for it. Here's a novel idea from a worthy organization called Separation of School and State. I've already pledged my support.
Davy Crockett was right, and we should be shouting his sentiments from the rooftops of every superintendent's office in the state. If I were a betting woman, I would wager my last dollar that not one superintendent or school board member would spend their own money the careless and reckless way that they are spending ours. They need to be reminded, "It's not yours to give!" We, as taxpayers and parents, should adopt the attitude of Horatio Bunce. We should refuse to vote for any man or woman who abuses his or her power. It's time to start holding the mismanagers to account.
"Now, sir," concluded Crockett, "you know why I made that speech yesterday. "There is one thing which I will call your attention, "you remember that I proposed to give a week's pay. There are in that House many very wealthy men - men who think nothing of spending a week's pay, or a dozen of them, for a dinner or a wine party when they have something to accomplish by it. Some of those same men made beautiful speeches upon the great debt of gratitude which the country owed the deceased--a debt which could not be paid by money--and the insignificance and worthlessness of money, particularly so insignificant a sum as $20,000 when weighed against the honor of the nation. Yet not one of them responded to my proposition. Money with them is nothing but trash when it is to come out of the people. But it is the one great thing for which most of them are striving, and many of them sacrifice honor, integrity, and justice to obtain it."
From Welcome To My Tea Party
Sunday, February 10, 2008
Posted by
Team Hammond
at
Sunday, February 10, 2008
Thursday, February 7, 2008
THE HOWEY REPORT: "THERE'S A REVOLUTION UNDERWAY IN INDIANA AND IT'S ABOUT TO HIT THE SCHOOLS."
Indiana’s tax revolution coming to education
By BRIAN A. HOWEY
INDIANAPOLIS - I heard the news today, oh boy. Michigan City Schools could lose $1.4 million in 2009 if Gov. Mitch Daniels’ cap’n'cut tax reforms pass. Indianapolis schools could lose $14 million. South Bend could lose $6.84 million, Hammond $13 million, Gary $8.2 million. Wayne County schools could lose $1.2 million in 2010.
Centerville Supt. Phil Stevenson told the Richmond Palladium-Item, "It’s a killer." It knocked the wind out of me. It’s just another blow for education."
And yet this plan passed the Indiana Senate. It voted 41-7 for Senate Joint Resolution 1 on the constitutional caps for property taxes. It voted 47-1 on SB12 on the circuit breakers. Similar legislation passed the Indiana House 93-1. So is the governor and the legislature sticking the shiv into public education?
What I didn’t understand is how public schools could be losing all this money when the House legislation, for instance, calls for the state to fund 100 percent of school operation and transportation costs. Currently, the state funds 85 percent and your local property taxes pay for the remaining 15 percent. If the state is paying 100 percent of the operational costs, how come we are hearing about teacher layoffs?
"The governor’s plan provides that the remainder of school operating and transportation costs are picked up by the state," said Daniels spokeswoman Jane Jankowski. "The figures the school corporations are discussing are the effects of the circuit breakers on remaining spending from property taxes once the plan is implemented. The latest Legislative Services Agency report on the Governor’s plan as introduced shows collectively that the impact to school corporations is about $153 million less statewide once the circuit breakers are fully implemented in 2010.
"The shortfalls come in places like debt service and capital projects," Jankowski adds, "Even with that circuit breaker impact, schools will still have 7 percent more in 2010 than in 2007." The governor’s plan does not include an offset to the cap for schools. Limiting local government and school spending is one of his core plan elements. Or as he described it to the Association of Indiana Counties, taxpayers don’t need to be funding "exploding scoreboards and edgeless swimming pools."
"The plan includes the ability for schools to move money among funds, so school corporations will be able to use operating and transportation dollars to manage the circuit breaker," Jankowski explained. Budget Director Ryan Kitchell told HPI, "The governor has been pretty clear that what he wants to try and achieve is a tax cut. We want to take care of schools. We’re going to pay for all the school costs, the bus drivers, the fuel. One thing we think is real important is in all these different funds, you’re locked in. There might be $10 million in one fund and we wanted to reduce some of the barriers. There will be a lot more flexibility there. We think it will help them manage and not just squeeze."
Andrew Norris, policy analyst for Senate Republicans, explained, "School districts must continue to pay their debt service obligations, which means any loss in funding due to implementation of the circuit breakers will force school districts to make cuts to their capital projects fund. The superintendents do not want to see their ability to build new schools impaired by a lack of funding due to the circuit breakers. They are also not in favor of the governor’s plan to offset any losses by transferring monies from other funds, namely the operating and capital projects funds."
The Indiana State Teachers Association opposes the state assuming 100 percent of the general fund. It says that property taxes have been a stable funding source, economic forecasts are predicting an economic slowdown, and 950 schools have not made the Adequate Yearly Progress mandated by the Bush administration’s No Child Left Behind. "Demanding more of students while providing less instructional support is unfair, especially for students most in need of additional assistance," said ISTA Executive Director Warren Williams.
"School general fund property taxes are not the cause of the current property tax issues," said the ISTA’s Nathan Shnellenberger.
There are points where the ISTA appears to approach the governor’s perspective. It advocates separating school construction projects into "learning facility" and "auxiliary facility" components, and urges "local units of government to collaborate on the construction and use of auxiliary school and community facilities.
"In my school district, taxpayers are paying for a $14 million swimming pool (it was originally proposed at $20 million) while there is a YMCA across the street that just went through major renovation. Daniels is asking school districts to start sharing football and basketball stadiums. He is urging districts to consolidate, as did the Kernan-Shepard Commission. There is legislation, for instance, that would pool school construction blueprints so that each new school project doesn’t start from scratch. A middle school in Lawrenceburg might just look like one in Auburn. "I understand the logic behind having a common set of blueprints to use, and I think that would save money, and in many cases that would be reasonable," ISTA’s Schnellenberger said.
Derek Redelman of the Indiana Chamber of Commerce explains that the ISTA wants to control the general fund rates. "That hits right at the problem with property taxes," he said.. "They’ve seen the property tax as the guarantee for the amount of money. They could get whatever money they needed. Taxpayers are saying, ‘We’re not going to take that any more."
Redelman predicts that when the caps pass (and they almost certainly will), "the immediate focus will be on cutting teachers." When Daniels was asked recently about teacher cuts, he responded by asking why would teacher cuts be the first option?
"Everyone focuses on teachers," Redelman said, adding that half of school employees in Indiana are not teachers. "Why not the janitorial staff or assistant superintendents? If schools end up facing cuts, we’ll see story after story about teacher cuts," he said.
There’s a revolution underway in Indiana and it’s about to hit the schools.
From Howey Politics Indiana
Thursday, February 7, 2008
Posted by
Team Hammond
at
Thursday, February 07, 2008
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
PROPERTY TAX REFORM & REFERENDUMS UP FOR COMMITTEE VOTE FEBRUARY 19
Referendums on all major local government building projects, including projects for growing school districts, will most likely be included in the property tax reform package now being considered in the Indiana Senate.
Senator Luke Kenley, Chairman of the Senate Tax and Fiscal Policy Committee, has said the Senate will make alot of changes to the legislation passed by the House. Kenley also said a key change will be to restore the referendum proposal giving voters the final okay on any new major building projects including growing school districts.
Lobbyists for teachers and schools testified for five hours on Tuesday, February 6, in support of the amendment exempting all classroom-related projects saying the existing petition and remonstrance system is adequate and all that is needed. Kenley said the public has lost confidence in the government's ability to make these kinds of decisions, and referendums are needed to give the voters a direct voice in municipal building projects.
The Senate will continue debating changes to House Bill 1001 before Kenley and his committee vote on February 19. The bill will then move to the full Senate for debate. All changes made by the Senate must be approved by the House. If they cannot agree, the bill will move to a joint House-Senate committee who must then hammer out a final version before the legislative deadline of March 14.
Other changes the House made to House Bill 1001 include increasing the earned income tax credit for the working poor from 6 percent to 9 percent and doubling the renter's deduction on state income taxes from $2,500 to $5,000. It is unlikely the Senate will keep the earned income tax credit increase in the current legislation. Kenley and Senator Robert Meeks, Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, both feel the earned income tax credit will have to wait until next year when the new state budget is crafted. Part of the reason is the state's current fiscal position is not very good at the moment. Tax collections have been slumping, and the state has taken in $43 million less this fiscal year than was expected. The Senate will continue to look at the renter's deduction because Kenley feels help for renters is tied to property taxes.
Posted by
Team Hammond
at
Wednesday, February 06, 2008
FLIP: THIS STATE HOUSE
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.
Why should legislators keep their seats while Hoosiers lose their homes? The answer to Indiana's property tax crisis is for citizens to "flip" as many seats as possible, come May and November; again and again, election cycle after election cycle, until we have people in government who aren't familiar to any of the lobbyists.
All incumbents, belong on the "Git List." We can't do any worse than the current crop, who has steered us straight into the perfect storm and tax increases, coded as tax relief. There is absolutely no reason to vote anyone back into office.
Who exactly, has consistently and actively taken a public stand for open process, and an open floor vote, in both houses, for repeal? Many, so called supporters for repeal, have been ineffective, as they cave to special interests, and "leaders" who threaten them with dollars for their districts (House), or committee chairmanships (Senate). Sounds a bit clubby doesn't it; for people who are so busy making "tough decisions" and doing "grownup work?" What does it take to get the decoder ring?
The best hope for Hoosiers, regardless of party affiliation, is to register and vote in record numbers; to flip incumbents out of offices, where their presence actually makes life worse for the people they refuse to "represent." Flip voters, will organize and be the first fifty or one hundred, to vote at select polling sites, passing out literature and encourage fellow voters, to flip: this state house.
When IN doubt, flip 'em out!
The Indiana Voter's League
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Posted by
Team Hammond
at
Wednesday, February 06, 2008
Blunt Proof of the Feasibility to Permanently Abolish Property Tax
Media Contacts:
Melyssa Donaghy 317-938-8913
Max Katz 765-409-6669
www.HoosiersForFairTaxation.com
BLUNT PROOF OF THE FEASIBILITY TO PERMANENTLY ABOLISH PROPERTY TAX.
Hoosiers For Fair Taxation, Senator Delph, Representative Noe, Representative Elrod and many other legislators along with Stop Indiana, attorney John Price, Eric Miller's Advance America, and the Statewide Taxpayer Alliance know that property tax abolishment, without substantial increases in sales tax and income tax, is realistic and possible. The economist Dr. Bill Styring's 2/2/2 Plan demonstrates that the state of Indiana can completely replace property tax without changing the state's current spending habits.
Dr. Styring's plan does not account for positive changes in Indiana's economy that will undoubtedly follow the elimination of property tax such as heavy real estate investment and increased consumer spending due to increased statewide disposable income. The real estate investment in Indiana alone would cause such an economic boom that it could likely end our abandoned property and foreclosure crisis. Property tax elimination would also likely cause a surge in Indiana's population as more people locate to Indiana to take advantage of real estate purchase opportunities without the burden of property tax. With the population surge would come more sales and income taxes.
The General Assembly does not have to adopt a specific plan until the year 2011. In the meantime, we recommend that the General Assembly approves the 27steps outlined in the report prepared by the Sheperd Kernan commission. While the Governor's commission cannot forecast the savings to the state once the plan is implemented, there is no doubt that the savings would be substantial--perhaps equivalent to the the entire property tax burden currently placed on Indiana's homeowners because our legislators have not had the political will to liberate Indiana's governing structure and her taxpayers from the 19th century.
Our citizen networks will work to replace all legislators who do not support property tax repeal in the November 2008 election.
The 2/2/2 Plan, to replace property taxes in Indiana based upon the latest revenue forecast (07/08 fiscal, estimate):
1) Current IN sales tax (state level rate of 6%): $5.601 billion2% increase would yield an additional $1.867 billion
2) Current corporate profits tax: ~$2 billion
2% increase would yield an additional $.286 billion ($286M)
3) A 2% statewide average of the COIT would yield $2.705 billion to cover local civil units of gov.
By adding these three together ($1.867 billion + $.286 billion + $2.705 billion), a total of $4.858 billion is realized; enough revenue to replace property taxes.
PROPERTY TAX HISTORY PREPARED BY DR. BILL STYRING
Indiana has a 70-plus year history of attempts to lower property taxes by raising other, non-property taxes. In every case these have failed miserably. The new taxes, or higher rates on old taxes, remain in place. And, in short order, property taxes rise back to their old levels, poised to roar even higher.
--1933. General Assembly imposes two new taxes: an individual gross income tax and a corporate gross income tax. The morgue of the Indianapolis Star indicates that the political leadership at the time said this was for property tax relief (1933 was the pits of the Great Depression, and people were losing their homes. Home prices declined by over 40% in the 1929-1933 period). Property tax relief was nonexistent. The state used the money to bail out the state's own finances.
--1963. General Assembly imposes a new sales tax at a rate of 2% and changes the 1933 individual gross income tax (from 1933) to an adjusted gross income tax (the one we have now) at a rate of 2%. Again, the ostensible reason was for property tax relief and again little PTR was forthcoming.
--1967. Those 1963 tax changes were raising more money than projected. The GA decides to give back 8% of sales and income tax revenue to local government for property tax relief. Local units spent the money. No PTR.
--1973. Gov. Otis Bowen launches the most determined PTR offensive yet. The sales tax goes to 4% and a new corporate supplemental net income (profits) tax is imposed. Strict property tax levy controls are imposed. It works... for a time. By 1980, property taxes adjusted for inflation are some 30% lower than in 1973. When Bowen leaves office the levy controls are relaxed. By the end of the decade, property taxes (adjusted for inflation) are back to 1973 levels. The doubling of the sales tax rate from 2% to 4% remains in place, along with the new corporate SNIT.
--2002. More fiddling with the sales tax in the hope of property tax relief. The results of this are obvious, or we wouldn't be debating the current property tax mess. All of this suggests that unless the property tax is totally ripped up by constitutional amendment, the assessment and collection mechanism dismantled, it will grow back. The PTR-inspired hikes in other taxes remain. That is our history. It is a terrible deal for taxpayers.
2. A vote in the 2008 legislative session for a constitutional amendment to repeal property taxes does not amend the constitution. It merely starts the amendment process. Amendments must be passed by two consecutively elected General Assemblies, then submitted to a referendum. Thus any amendment passed by the '08 Assembly must be passed by either the 2009 or 2010 legislatures, then submitted to the voters at the 2010 general election. The General Assembly does not need to decide on a "replacement revenue" package until the 2011 session.
3. What might such a "replacement revenue" package look like? The particular answer will come from the 2011 General Assembly and cannot be determined now (if for no other reason than forecasting state level taxes and property taxes out that far would be a most unreliable exercise. No one need be locked into any particular plan just yet. However, as an illustration that a replacement plan is feasible and less scary than many fear (we don't need to be talking about a 12% or 13% sales tax ... in fact, we should not be), consider just this one possibility.
Local sales taxes are generally very bad policy, for a whole host of reasons too numerous to mention in this short sketch. Sales and corporate taxes are best levied at the state level. It happens that roughly a 2% increase in the sales tax and a 2% increase in the corporate profits tax roughly take care of school propertytaxes. The loss of local control by the state assuming school property taxes is minimal. About the onlylocal control left is on building projects.
For local civil units, a statewide average increase in the individual adjusted gross income tax of about 2% suffices to replace local civil government property taxes, higher than 2% in some units, less than 2% in others.
Thus, a "2-2-2" plan~2% sales and 2% corporate profits at the state level for schools and a 2% average on personal income taxes for civil units—is about what would be needed. This is merely a ballpark projection to 2011.
There may be better plans, it's really a policy question for the General Assembly: do you want to make the trade of something like this in exchange for no-property-taxes-forever-on-anything? Everyone understands "zero."
4. Are there "practical problems? Of course. The two identified are how to make the civil government transition from a property tax base to an income tax base, and how to handle debt backed by property taxes. Without elaborating, the former can be handled using locator software (Map quest-type programs). The debt problem might be handled by treating the current state paid PTRC's as in lieu of property taxes (which they are) and paying PT-backed debt service from each unit's own PTRC.
Conclusion: Total elimination of the property tax via constitutional amendment is the only way to give property tax relief that will stick. The other tax action necessary to achieve this goal—in 2011-are large but not so scary as "a 13% sales tax." They are feasible. The question is for the General Assembly. Are we going to once again go down that 70-odd year path of failed PTR policies or are we going to rip the property tax up by the roots?
Posted by Hoosiers For Fair Taxation on Friday, January 4, 2008.