Government merger supporters say opponents resorting to fear tactics

A leader of the group spearheading the campaign against consolidation countered that disagreements over the Plan of Reorganization's intent can be attributed to the document's vagueness. That ambiguity, Bruce Ungethiem said, is a major reason voters should reject consolidation in Tuesday's referendum.

The week's lively exchanges stemmed from a series of assertions made by Citizens Opposed to Reorganization in Evansville and a prominent elected supporter. A flier that dropped in mailboxes this week sparked the fuse that started the fire.

"Did you know? Article 10.3.1 of the Reorganization Plan says 'the' Transition team, made up of your current City and County officials can authorize your Taxes to go up as soon as 60 days after the election?" states the CORE mailer.

"Nonsense," said attorney Ted Ziemer Jr.

"They're trying to scare people that their taxes can go up within 60 days if consolidation passes (in a referendum Tuesday), and obviously that's nonsense," said Ziemer, a leader in pro-consolidation group Yes! for Unification.

Article 10 states that within 60 days after approval of consolidation, city and county governments must form a board to plan for the transition from the two existing local governments to a single consolidated government. The Transition Board would include all nine members of the City Council, all seven County Council members, the mayor of Evansville, two of the three County Commissioners and any other individuals selected by board members.

The segment of Article 10 that CORE cited does include among the Transition Board's duties "adopting tax levies, tax rates and a budget for the Combined Government for its first year of operation, as provided in Indiana Code 36-1.5-4-7(1)."

But 36-1.5-4-7 states that the work is to be done "in the year before the year" that participating political subdivisions merge.

That would be 2014, as a consolidated Evansville-Vanderburgh County government would not take office until January 2015.

"The Transition Board would start meeting in 2013," Ziemer said. "Let's assume they met on Jan. 1, 2013, within 60 days after the election. They could start talking that day about what tax rates are going to be — but the tax rates can't be set until 2014, and they wouldn't go into effect until 2015."

It would be difficult at any rate to know how high to raise taxes, if at all, a full two years before a new government began its work.

The Indiana Department of Local Government Finance, the county auditor and financial analysts engaged by consolidation planners have said projecting assessed values, budgets and property tax levies that far in advance would be virtually impossible.

Ungethiem said the reorganization plan's vagueness left anti-consolidation activists to decipher it as best they could.

"What we indicated is that the Transition Board could start that process within 60 days of (consolidation) being passed — and that is what the plan says," he said. "We didn't say when that would actually become effective, because the plan didn't say when it would become effective. The state statute apparently says that, but the plan doesn't say that."

'A scare tactic'

Addressing a debate audience at the University of Southern Indiana on Oct. 17, County Treasurer Rick Davis imagined a heavy snowfall blanketing Vanderburgh County.

Under a consolidated government, Davis charged, the snow plows would go first to city streets.

"That's where the population center is. And folks who live in the county are going to be paying for services that they're not going to receive," he said. "That is the human element of politics, folks."

The assertion aroused indignation in Mayor Lloyd Winnecke, a consolidation supporter who shared the stage with Davis that night. Winnecke, who rarely employs strong language against opponents, let loose afterward.

"That argument is just a scare tactic," the mayor said. "That's what it is; it's no more than that."

Winnecke, who has said he would seek the office of mayor in a consolidated government, said the chief executive would be obligated to serve the entire county, not just Evansville.

"To say, 'We're not going to get to you on whatever (county-maintained) road until after we get everything in the city done,' it won't fly," he said.

Mike Duckworth, the county's highway superintendent and a former head of city government's Division of Transportation Services, said the political calculation Davis imagines is implausible.

"There are major thoroughfares and snow routes in the county that enable people to get to hospitals, enable emergency responders to get to places that," Duckworth said. "If it's ignored, would cause a problem.

"If you would take all the county equipment and put it inside the city for not only snow removal but for right-of-way mowing, fallen tree removal, for any kind of maintenance — if you just did that according to work that needs doing in the city, where the most population was, this would become a quagmire. A lot of people who work in the city live in the county, and they have to get to and from work."

Vanderburgh County's estimated population in 2011, the latest year a U.S. Census Bureau estimate is available, was 180,305. Of that number, 117,825 are estimated to be in the city.

Davis is not backing down from his original statement.

"What if I told you it already happens now?" he said.

Davis cited the Computer Services Department, which provides information technology and support to city and county governments.

"County officeholders feel that Computer Services pays more attention to the city than the county," he said. "Why is that? Because the chief information officer (who oversees the joint department) answers to the mayor, who's a full-time officeholder, and the three County Commissioners, who are part-time and have other jobs.

"If I have a computer problem, it's not going to take as much precedence as somebody who has the mayor as their direct report."

Both sides miss

Consolidation advocates saved their strongest words for a charge aired by CORE in a television commercial unveiled 10 days ago. Government merger, the ad says, would "increase the number of appointed bureaucrats that will control our local government."

"The claim is a blatant lie," said a statement issued by Yes! afterward. "The number of appointed officials following reorganization will not increase at all. Although some titles will change, such as changing the title of 'Director of Communications' to 'Public Information Officer,' the plan creates no new appointed positions. The number of appointees will remain the same."

But neither group can state with certainty whether a consolidated government's elected officials would try to create new appointed positions. The merged government's Common Council and mayor would not even be elected until 2014.

The reorganization plan states the mayor would appoint a deputy mayor, a finance director "and such other department directors and deputy directors as required for the efficient operation and management of the Combined Government."

"Kind of open-ended, isn't it?" Ungethiem said. "Is it one or 10? How many czars do we get in this new form of government?"

Ungethiem said the new mayor could appoint new officials "without council approval." But any budget proposed by the mayor would have to include such new positions and would have to be approved by the 15-member Common Council.

Yes! also leaves out important details.

As the group's statement notes, a consolidated government's deputy mayor, director of budget and finance and public information officer would not be new positions. Only the titles would be new: The job descriptions correspond to those of Winnecke's chief of staff, city controller and director of communications, respectively.

What would be new is the spreading of the tax burden of paying for the three high-profile positions from city property taxpayers to all taxpayers in a consolidated government.

"There's (an estimated 62,000-plus) people in Vanderburgh County who aren't currently under the form of government that we have in the city," Ungethiem said.

Consolidation supporters acknowledge that county-only taxpayers currently get no benefit from the three mayoral staff positions, but say they would in a consolidated government.

Becky Kasha, chairwoman of the citizens committee that crafted a consolidation proposal in 2010 and now a leader in the Yes! campaign, admitted the group does not know whether a new mayor would try to create new jobs.

"But we know the plan of reorganization itself does not require or call for any new appointments, and that's what we were saying," Kasha said.