INDIANAPOLIS - With just two weeks remaining before the Indiana Legislature's adjournment deadline, hardball negotiations loom as state lawmakers try to hammer out compromises on a property tax relief package, three strikes immigration bill and other issues.

Last week was the deadline for the House and Senate to finish voting on each other's bills. That leads into conference committee negotiations, the two-week stretch run where groups of House and Senate lawmakers try to reach agreements on conflicting versions of bills. Bills not approved in identical form by both chambers by March 14 are dead for the session. Big differences still divide negotiators over the shape of Gov. Mitch Daniels' property tax relief package contained in House Bill 1001:

  • The House plan would by 2010 cut homeowners' property tax bills by an average 29 percent statewide. The Senate plan would cut bills by about 27 percent. Both plans would raise the 6 percent state sales tax to 7 percent.

  • The Senate plan requires referendums on major local government and school construction projects. The House plan exempts from referendums any school construction projects related to learning. Stadiums and other sports facilities, however, still would have to go through the voter-approval process.

  • The House plan eliminates township assessors, transferring their duties to the county assessor. The Senate plan allows local referendums to choose whether assessments are done at the township or county level.

  • The House plan caps homeowners' property tax bills at 1 percent of assessed value beginning in 2009, with limits of 2 percent for rental properties and 3 percent for businesses. The Senate version phases in those caps by 2010.

    "At this point, everything is on the table," Rep. Suzanne Crouch, R-Evansville, said. "I think that the conferees will be looking at everything that is in the bills and will actually be discussing and bargaining for just about everything."

    While House Bill 1001 would enact the 1 percent, 2 percent and 3 percent caps, the Legislature also is considering a separate proposal, SJR 1, to add those caps into the state Constitution so they would be harder to undo. The Senate version of SJR 1 would cap homestead taxes at 1 percent of assessed value, but the House version would cap taxes at 1 percent of household income and exempt government debt. House Democrats say that would protect senior citizens and those on fixed incomes, but House Republicans have blasted the plan.

    "To switch it to income tax, a totally different tax, to me seems totally ludicrous," Crouch said in explaining her "no" vote on SJR-1. Appearing on Friday's "Lawmakers" show on WNIN-PBS9, Crouch said it is unclear what would qualify as household income - whether a retired grandparent moving in with a family or a college student returning home for the summer would count.

    Crouch also expressed concern that if property taxes were tied to household income, that the amount of a homeowner's income could be part of the assessment record and thus a public document that anyone could look up.

    "There just were a lot of problems with that (income) proposal. For those reasons, I could not support it," Crouch said.

    "I voted against (SJR-1) in the Senate for the simple fact that I hate to open up the Constitution and make changes to the Constitution all the time," added state Sen. Bob Deig, D-Mount Vernon, on the program. "I think that's a sacred document, and we really need to preserve that."

    Daniels also has criticized the income proposal, but he has said passing the constitutional caps is crucial to his plan.

    "There aren't too many things that I think are absolute musts in this bill, but this is one," the governor said at a Thursday news conference.

    Senate Tax Chairman Luke Kenley predicted if lawmakers passed the rest of Daniels' plan but did not pass the constitutional caps and then adjourned, the governor would call the Legislature into a special session. Asked about it later, Daniels said: "I don't think it will come to that."

    In other legislative developments:

    Immigration

    The Senate and House each passed separate versions of the three strikes immigration bill. Under both, employers caught employing illegal aliens three times potentially could face the loss of their business licenses in Indiana, and the state police could play a greater role in enforcing federal immigration laws.

    The two versions have major differences over whether violations would be decided by a court or by administrative hearings of the Department of Labor.

    Business groups and activists for the Hispanic community complained the Senate version was too punitive and would encourage racial profiling. Border security advocates complained the House version didn't go far enough.

    Deig voted for the original Senate version.

    "It is a very tough issue, and you have emotions on both sides, and it's very tough to craft a good bill here," he said. "That's why it's so watered down right now, but it's a good starting point."

    Crouch voted for the House version, saying it was a good first step. The state is forced to deal with the immigration problem because of federal government inaction, she said.

    County executives

    The House approved a bill, Senate Bill 312, that would allow voters to decide if they want to retain the three-member County Commissioners or replace it with a single elected county executive, whose powers would be similar to a mayor.

    Gambling

    The Senate approved House Bill 1153, which would allow bars and taverns to offer low-stakes paper gambling games - pull-tabs, punch boards and tip boards - just as nonprofit fraternal organizations can. Now it must be reconciled with the House version.

    The Associated Press contributed to this story.

  • © 2024 courierpress.com, All rights reserved.