Consolidation opponents say electing mayor, council at same time could yield supermajority

Opponents argue higher taxes will result from the Plan of Reorganization's provision to elect a consolidated government's mayor and all 15 Common Council members to the same non-staggered terms. The plan calls for concurrent partisan elections for all 16 positions in 2014 and every four years thereafter.

County Treasurer Rick Davis, a leading consolidation opponent, pointed out elections in 2006, 2008 and 2010 were characterized by national "waves" of support for one or the other major party's candidates. That left the other party to suffer election losses at all levels of government.

The 2006 and 2008 "Democratic wave" elections swept aside local Republican officeholders, right down to then-Knight Township Trustee Jim Price in 2006. The 2010 Republican wave election wiped out local Democratic candidates.

Davis, a Democrat, said a similar wave of support for one party at the time of a consolidated government's elections could result in higher local property taxes, given the entire 15-member Common Council and the mayor would be on ballots at the same time. After that, he said, a new partisan supermajority unrestrained by any significant opposition could drive up taxes with higher spending.

"You can look at recent history to see how one-party rule affects your budget," Davis said of city budget increases under a City Council dominated 8-1 by Democrats.

But consolidation supporters say Vanderburgh County's political complexion — a solidly Democratic city electorate and a solidly Republican electorate outside the city — precludes the possibility of separate and distinct Common Council districts succumbing to a political "wave" for the same party.

County Commissioner Joe Kiefer, a longtime leader in the move for consolidation, said the Democrats' strength in city-based Common Council districts would be offset by Republican strength outside the city to produce a politically mixed body.

"Under a countywide system, you would obviously have much better checks and balances — much better," said Kiefer, a former member of the City Council and the County Council.

There is evidence to support both theories, although it is by no means conclusive.

City government spending has increased significantly since Democrats achieved an 8-1 supermajority on the City Council in 2007 elections, while the more evenly divided County Council has actually reduced county government spending in the same period.

In 2008, the year after Democrats won their 8-1 majority and overwhelmingly re-elected then-Mayor Jonathan Weinzapfel, the City Council budgeted $225.29 million in city government expenditures for 2009. This year, with the 8-1 Democratic majority still intact but a Republican mayor in office, city government projects it will spend $254.28 million in 2013.

The Vanderburgh County Council, which has had a 4-3 Republican majority during the same period, budgeted $87.29 million in county government expenditures in 2009. This year, the County Council has $86.95 million in requested or projected total budgeted amounts for county government in 2013. The figure is lower primarily because of reductions in debt payments.

Davis raised the specter of a consolidated government's Common Council being dominated by 13 members of the same party with a mayor of that party as well.

"Now you've got all these people watching the kitty, all these people who are presenting budgets to the council, and a mayor who would present the budget, all of the same party. What's going to keep them from just going crazy? The budgets will increase," he said.

"It's the human element, I'll call it, when you have people of the same party in control. They're not going to call one another out. They're not going to be a watchdog."

But whether city government's four-year spending increase is solely or even partially attributable to the Democrats' supermajority is a matter of conjecture.

Kiefer, a Republican, says it is a moot point because the partisan configuration of a consolidated government's Common Council would be practically guaranteed not to tilt overwhelmingly in favor of one party.

The 2010 off-year elections offer hard evidence that voters outside the city limits are markedly more Republican than in-city voters.

In a year in which Republicans throughout Indiana swept to victory on a wave of disenchantment with Democratic President Barack Obama and the Democratic Congress, the local GOP under a new chairman employed what party activists called their most sophisticated get-out-the-vote operation in years.

Republicans ousted Democratic incumbents in races for county prosecutor, county commissioner and assessor.

But none of those GOP candidates won majorities within city limits. Democrats won the battle of straight-ticket voters in city precincts by a margin of 5,635 to 5,370.

The three winning Republican candidates prevailed because they won about 60 percent of the vote outside the city.

The mix of 12 prospective Common Council districts and three at-large seats suggests some would be favorable to one or the other of the two parties, and others would be more competitive.

While six Common Council districts would strongly resemble current City Council wards, two of the other new districts would be entirely or almost entirely outside the city.

Two additional districts whose lines would be partly in the city's politically competitive North Side also include significant portions of heavily Republican Center Township and part of Knight Township. The majority of one West Side district's population would fall inside politically competitive Perry Township, and a second such district would include significant portions of lightly populated Union Township.

The other three Common Council seats would be at-large, meaning elections to fill them would be decided by all voters countywide.

"It's so much more evenly distributed when you go to a countywide race," Kiefer said.