The Facts

About partisan elections of people who carry out administrative duties:

Is there a Democratic or a Republican way of recording a deed, surveying a piece of property, cutting a check or investing the public’s money?  Is there a Democratic or Republican method of assessing the worth of your home for property tax purposes?

We don’t think so.  We believe that professional expertise is the only qualification that citizens should expect when it comes to filling these non-policymaking positions.

But when a voter goes into the polling booth now, he or she pretty much knows only that one candidate for auditor is a Republican and the other is a Democrat.  Is that really the criterion by which we want these selections made?

And does this make sense? Is this smart government?

We don’t think so. Unfortunately, individuals who hold these offices are most qualified at getting elected to public office.  Electing the most professionally qualified individuals is quite accidental. And if the elected surveyor, auditor, treasurer, assessor or recorder turns out to be a disaster, citizens have to wait until the next election to “fire” him.

These positions should be filled – and vacated – by a single elected county executive, with candidates for these ministerial functions meeting very specific qualifications. In other words, they should be hired and fired just like individuals who work for private companies. Citizens still have a say at election time when they can hold the county executive responsible for the way the county has been governed over the previous four years.

About township assessors:

A 1901 National Tax Conference surmised that “the principle defect in the Indiana property tax system, according to the Indiana delegates, was the elected township assessor, but this was expected to be corrected.”

But the 2003 Statewide Property Tax Equalization Study by the Indiana Fiscal Policy Institute found “systematic inconsistencies” were still occurring in assessments across Indiana townships.  Property was assessed at 30 percent below market value in some townships and 30 percent above market value in others. Sometimes such discrepancies occurred in the same township.

The issue at hand is not “good” or “bad” township assessors; it is the lack of equal assessment practices. Assessing property in 1,008 ways – a different method in each of Indiana’s townships – cannot achieve uniform results.

Does this make sense? Is that smart government? We don’t think so. Only uniform assessing procedures can achieve equity.

Township officials administer state law and have no legal authority to do otherwise. By law, they carry out state law and perform functions set forth by state regulation. Consequently, they do not represent those who voted them into office.

The 2008 legislature saw fit to remove assessing duties from 965 townships, reassigning them to county assessors and ensuring a more uniform assessment procedure. The legislation, however, did not change the method in the state’s 43 largest townships. Lawmakers decided that voters should say whether they want to continue inequitable assessments that result from a multitude of assessing officials and methods or whether they want to shift responsibilities to the county assessor.

The township assessment system is broken beyond repair and results in too many taxpayers paying more than their fair share of taxes. This is the lynchpin of reforming property taxes, an issue that has been front and center in Indiana for many years.

About libraries:

Indiana doesn’t have too many libraries; it only has too many library systems: 238 separate ones, each with its own infrastructure, accounting systems and management.  Grant County has eight public library systems.  Benton, Lake, Elkhart, Hendricks and Kosciusko Counties each has six. Six more counties have five systems each, and many more have three or four systems.  Of the 238 systems, 95 serve a population of fewer than 5,000 residents.

And yet nearly 400,000 Hoosiers have no library at all.

Does this make sense? Is this smart government? We don’t think so. We think it makes more sense for the 72 stragglers to follow the lead of the 20 counties that have countywide library systems, achieving economies of scale that save money and ensure every citizen can use the library.

It costs an average of $3.68 for a library to circulate a book, CD or DVD in Indiana. In some systems, it costs more than $10 to circulate a single item! If the six library systems in Lake County, for instance, could create a countywide system and achieve the statewide average, Lake County taxpayers would save more than $9.5 million annually.  That’s a 38 percent savings from what taxpayers are paying for the duplication and overlap that now exists.

Just imagine the statewide savings if all 92 counties followed suit.

About coroners:

Although the primary duty of a county coroner is to determine the cause of death, Indiana law does not require coroners to have medical training. About the only qualification is that the person must know how to get elected.

But in 2006, Indiana was made the laughing stock of the country when one of its coroners, who previously worked in law enforcement, incorrectly identified a body in a horrific traffic accident in Northern Indiana. The young woman who was pronounced dead actually lay in a coma, while her family buried the wrong body. Meanwhile, a family of strangers kept vigil over the injured woman, not realizing their loved one was buried in another person’s grave.

More recently, the City-County Council in Indianapolis had to suspend the pay of the elected county coroner because he failed to pass a state required test.  In private life, he is a chiropractor.

Does this make sense? Is this smart government? We don’t think so.

If the elective coroner ‘s office were abolished in favor of a professional administrator who answers to the county executive and county council, five or seven counties could band together to fund a medical examiner’s office.  Citizens would get better service at no additional cost.