Team Hammond member Jim Sheehan went to the Indiana Department of Education to find the answers.
In a report dated December 31, 2007, the School City of Hammond's outstanding principal debt is $250,687,940.60. The school city's outstanding interest debt is $112,605,685.62. The grand total for both principal and interest debt is $363,293,626.22! These are the figures the School City of Hammond submitted to the Indiana Department of Education; they are not exaggerated or embellished.
And this does not include the $75 million for the new high school, the $30 million to renovate Gavit, or the $70 million bond interest (which they don't like to talk about).
Add the $175 million for the new high school and Gavit remodel, and the school city is looking at debt of $538,293,626.22. That is more than a half billion dollars of debt the Hammond taxpayers will have to pay for. And pay for a very long time!
How could School Superintendent Walter Watkins and the School Board of Trustees sink the school city in even more debt?
If you are against the proposed new high school, sign the remonstrance petitition and help defeat this outlandish project. There are 3 criteria to signing the petition: (1) you must be a Hammond homeowner, or (2) you must be a registered voter in Hammond, or (3) you may live elsewhere but own and pay taxes on property in Hammond. If you meet any of these criteria, you may sign the remonstrance.
Call Mary Ellen Slazyk at 933-7170 if you would like to sign the petition. The legal notice for the high school was published in the Times on Friday, May 30, 2008. We have 30 days from that date to get the required number of signatures for the remonstrance turned in. Please get your signature in as soon as possible.
And after June 30, 2008, any new high school building projects over $20 million will have to be voted on by a referendum. That's why the push for the new high school is in before this new provision of House Bill 1001 takes effect.
Friday, May 30, 2008
CUTTING THE FAT FROM HAMMOND'S BUDGET
Mayor McDermott talks a good game about he's helping the taxpayers of Hammond by cutting the city budget and reducing the tax levy. If that were really true, the proposed 2007 tax rate for the civil city would not have increased by 39% over the 2006 tax rate. If he was really committed to reducing spending, the tax rate would be less not more.
If Mayor McDermott needs help with cutting the fat from Hammond's budget, here are some suggestions to help him out:
1) Eliminate the mayor's photographer at an annual salary of $50,000/year. Everyone has already seen enough pictures of the mayor to last a lifetime.
2) Eliminate the United Neighborhoods Inc. Department. This is a redundant department. The city already has a department called Neighborhoods Incorporated which performs the same functions. The mayor eliminated the Health Department because it was a redundant service so too, should this department be eliminated.
3) Eliminate the Mayor's television show. It is paid for with taxpayer money.
4) Eliminate the Legal Aid Clinic. Another redundant service that needs to be eliminated.
5) The city has 90 take-home cars. Eliminate all non-essential vehicles.
These suggestions are just for starters. We have many more ideas on how to cut the fat from the city's budget and help the taxpayers.
And by the way, did the Mayor really think the citizens of Hammond were so gullible as to believe that by shifting the Sanitation and Recycling Departments to the Sanitary District, he was actually saving us money by taking those two departments out of the city budget? Most people have seen their water bills increase by $120 a year. Will our property taxes go down by that much or more?
If Mayor McDermott needs help with cutting the fat from Hammond's budget, here are some suggestions to help him out:
1) Eliminate the mayor's photographer at an annual salary of $50,000/year. Everyone has already seen enough pictures of the mayor to last a lifetime.
2) Eliminate the United Neighborhoods Inc. Department. This is a redundant department. The city already has a department called Neighborhoods Incorporated which performs the same functions. The mayor eliminated the Health Department because it was a redundant service so too, should this department be eliminated.
3) Eliminate the Mayor's television show. It is paid for with taxpayer money.
4) Eliminate the Legal Aid Clinic. Another redundant service that needs to be eliminated.
5) The city has 90 take-home cars. Eliminate all non-essential vehicles.
These suggestions are just for starters. We have many more ideas on how to cut the fat from the city's budget and help the taxpayers.
And by the way, did the Mayor really think the citizens of Hammond were so gullible as to believe that by shifting the Sanitation and Recycling Departments to the Sanitary District, he was actually saving us money by taking those two departments out of the city budget? Most people have seen their water bills increase by $120 a year. Will our property taxes go down by that much or more?
2007 PROPOSED TAX RATE FOR HAMMOND
As published in the Times on May 3rd and the Post-Tribune on May 10th, the following is the proposed 2007 tax rate for Hammond. The tax rate is broken down by the different taxing units. The 2007 rate is also compared with the 2006 rate along with the percentage increase.
COUNTY
2006 Rate .0999
2007 Rate 1.0046
Increase 14.8%
TOWNSHIP
2006 Rate .0676
2007 Rate .2425
Increase 258.7%
CORPORATION
2006 Rate 1.9940
2007 Rate 2.7711
Increase 39%
SCHOOL
2006 Rate 2.1874
2007 Rate 3.5091
Increase 60%
LIBRARY
2006 Rate .2142
2007 Rate .2440
Increase 13.9%
SPECIAL DISTRICTS
2006 Rate .2050
2007 Rate .3112
Increase 52%
Taxing units always ask for more because once the tax rate is set for the year, they cannot come back and ask for more money. What should set up red flags for taxpayers, however, is these proposed rates for 2007 are all increases. Some of the increases, especially for the township and the school corporation, are pretty substantial. WHERE ARE THE SPENDING CUTS?
These rates for 2007 are only proposed. We hope the DLGF will be looking out for the taxpayers, and the final rates for 2007 will be substantially less. We would like to see the 2007 rates lower than the 2006 rates. Yeah, right! Wishful thinking!
COUNTY
2006 Rate .0999
2007 Rate 1.0046
Increase 14.8%
TOWNSHIP
2006 Rate .0676
2007 Rate .2425
Increase 258.7%
CORPORATION
2006 Rate 1.9940
2007 Rate 2.7711
Increase 39%
SCHOOL
2006 Rate 2.1874
2007 Rate 3.5091
Increase 60%
LIBRARY
2006 Rate .2142
2007 Rate .2440
Increase 13.9%
SPECIAL DISTRICTS
2006 Rate .2050
2007 Rate .3112
Increase 52%
Taxing units always ask for more because once the tax rate is set for the year, they cannot come back and ask for more money. What should set up red flags for taxpayers, however, is these proposed rates for 2007 are all increases. Some of the increases, especially for the township and the school corporation, are pretty substantial. WHERE ARE THE SPENDING CUTS?
These rates for 2007 are only proposed. We hope the DLGF will be looking out for the taxpayers, and the final rates for 2007 will be substantially less. We would like to see the 2007 rates lower than the 2006 rates. Yeah, right! Wishful thinking!
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
DANIELS FIXED THE PROPERTY TAX GLITCH IN LAKE COUNTY
Last week Governor Daniels ordered $9.8 million in property tax rebates be paid to residents of Lake County who had been denied the money because of the county's existing 2% circuit breaker. Because they had already received a property tax cut, the money was scheduled to be sent to the cities of Whiting, East Chicago, Hammond, and Gary.
The order clarified differing interpretations of the rebate law from 2007. Daniels opted to send the money to homeowners instead of local government. Good call considering the cities that would have benefited. Griping the loudest was Jim Bennett, the financial adviser for the City of East Chicago. He had this to say:
"Well, (Daniels is) running (for re-election), isn't he?" said Jim Bennett, the financial consultant for East Chicago, who said the second round of rebate checks will cost the cash-strapped city $1.3 million it can ill-afford to lose.
"Our tax collections were horrible, and this just further puts us in the hole," Bennett said.
Nice, the old "he's running for reelection" argument. East Chicago invented that tactic. Don't forget, this is a city that used to trade new sidewalks and driveways for yard signs before everyone went to prison.
True, they're going to get absolutely whacked by property tax relief since their rate is more than three times the state average. They have a budget of almost $70 million for a population of just over 30,000. With that kind of annual spending East Chicago should be a gem, but it's not. It's a city full of working class Joe's who have had the privilege of working tough jobs their entire lives to help pay their political leaders the highest tax rates in the state.
Starving that city of the money that feeds the political machine should be praised. In fact, they should give all of their money to their citizens, it would be a nice payback for the half-century they spent wasting it on political patronage.
From Frugal Hoosiers
May 28, 2008
The order clarified differing interpretations of the rebate law from 2007. Daniels opted to send the money to homeowners instead of local government. Good call considering the cities that would have benefited. Griping the loudest was Jim Bennett, the financial adviser for the City of East Chicago. He had this to say:
"Well, (Daniels is) running (for re-election), isn't he?" said Jim Bennett, the financial consultant for East Chicago, who said the second round of rebate checks will cost the cash-strapped city $1.3 million it can ill-afford to lose.
"Our tax collections were horrible, and this just further puts us in the hole," Bennett said.
Nice, the old "he's running for reelection" argument. East Chicago invented that tactic. Don't forget, this is a city that used to trade new sidewalks and driveways for yard signs before everyone went to prison.
True, they're going to get absolutely whacked by property tax relief since their rate is more than three times the state average. They have a budget of almost $70 million for a population of just over 30,000. With that kind of annual spending East Chicago should be a gem, but it's not. It's a city full of working class Joe's who have had the privilege of working tough jobs their entire lives to help pay their political leaders the highest tax rates in the state.
Starving that city of the money that feeds the political machine should be praised. In fact, they should give all of their money to their citizens, it would be a nice payback for the half-century they spent wasting it on political patronage.
From Frugal Hoosiers
May 28, 2008